DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY

HEADQUARTERS

8725JOHNJ. KINGMAN ROAD FORT

BELVOIR, VIRGINIA 22060-6221

April 17, 2017

MEMORANDUM FOR DISTRIBUTION

SUBJECT: Defense Logistics Management Standards (DLMS) Supply Discrepancy Reporting (SDR) 

Process Review Committee (PRC) 17-01 Meeting, March 16, 2017

We are forwarding the attached minutes of the DLMS Supply Discrepancy Reporting 

PRC 17-01 Meeting for your information and action as appropriate.

The Enterprise Business Standards Office points of contact are Ms. Ellen Hilert, (703) 

767-0676, DSN 427-0676; or email ellen.hilert@dla.mil, and Mr. Ben Breen, (614) 692-2317, 

DSN 850-2317; or email benjamin.breen@dla.mil. 

Heidi M. Daverede

Program Manager

Enterprise Business Standards Office

Attachment

As stated

DISTRIBUTION: 

ODASD(SCI) 

ODASD DPAP (PDI) 

SDR PRC

Supply PRC Primary/Alternate 

Attendees
Page 1

DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY

HEADQUARTERS

8725JOHNJ. KINGMAN ROAD 

FORT BELVOIR, VIRGINIA 22060-6221

April 17, 2017

MEMORANDUM FOR RECORD

SUBJECT: Defense Logistics Management Standards (DLMS) Supply Discrepancy Reporting

(SDR) Process Review Committee (PRC) 17-01 Meeting, March 16, 2017

Purpose: The Enterprise Business Standards Office hosted the subject meeting at Defense 

Logistics Agency (DLA) Headquarters and via Defense Collaboration Services (DCS) for 

remote participants. The SDR PRC webpage, 

https://www.dlmso.dla.mil/Programs/Committees/Supply/supplyPRC.asp, contains 

hyperlinks to the list of attendees, the meeting agenda, and additional briefing materials. The 

meeting agenda contains hyperlinks to related material in each of the topics listed. 

Brief Summary of Discussion: Ms. Ellen Hilert, SDR PRC Chair/DOD SDR 

Administrator, and Mr. Ben Breen, Alternate SDR Administrator, facilitated discussions 

during the SDR PRC 17-01 meeting. The Action Item Tracker contains the resulting action 

items. The SDR PRC webpage noted in the previous paragraph contains the latest version of

the Action Item Tracker (Enclosure 1). Action item due dates are identified in the Action 

Item Tracker. Action items are due within 30 days from the SDR PRC 17-01 meeting

minutes publication unless otherwise noted.

Review of Meeting Topics:

a. Welcome (Agenda Topic 1). Mr. Breen provided opening remarks with emphasis on the 

DLMS mission. Mr. Breen introduced Ms. Heidi Daverede, Enterprise Business Standards 

Office Program Manager, who welcomed participants. The Enterprise Business Standards Office

mission is to develop and manage the business rules that implement DOD supply chain policy, 

the DLMS information exchange infrastructure, and the procedures that guide the publication of 

the DOD logistics supply chain manuals (DLM 4000.25 series).

b. Security Cooperation Enterprise Solution (SCES) ERP SDR Interface Status Update 

(Agenda Topic 2). Mr. Mike Hooper, contractor support to SCES, provided an overview of the 

SCES SDR system interface. The SCES program management recently transitioned from 

Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA) to DLA and Mr. James Johnson is the new 

Program Manager. DSCA retains functional responsibility. The new team is working program 

objectives including systemic SDR functionality for Foreign Military Sales (FMS) customers 

supported by International Logistics Control Offices (ILCO) users. (Reference System View 

(SV-1 Chart, Agenda Topic 2) SCES is a DSCA Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) tool 

replacing five legacy systems used in Foreign Military Sales (FMS). Key goals include Standard 

Financial Information Structure (SFIS) and DLMS compliance.
Page 2

Mr. Hooper provided a brief overview of Approved DLMS Change (ADC) 1092, DLMS SDR 

Interface with the SCES. This ADC supports implementation of the information exchange for 

Security Assistance SDRs by establishing an interface between DOD WebSDR and SCES for the 

Navy deployment of SCES. This ADC also documents the SCES SDR process for the initial 

Navy deployment, upon approval of the Limited Deployment Decision (LDD). At LDD, the use 

of the DLMS 842 implementation conventions will be limited in functionality, but is the baseline 

for future improvements that will leverage SDR transaction functionality and content.

Mr. Hooper briefed details surrounding an ongoing a six-phase pilot project with the Navy that 

began in June 2016. The SCES team has begun testing of the SDR interface documented in 

ADC 1092 with WebSDR. SCES plans additional testing of Navy SDR process flow based upon 

approved business rules where the ILCO will send the SDR to the Navy for action with Product 

Data Reporting and Evaluation Program-Automated Information System (PDREP-AIS) as the 

receiving system. PDREP then routes the SDR reply through WebSDR back to SCES and the 

ILCO originator. SCES will match the SDR to the return authorization to support the credit 

process within the SCES ERP. SCES team anticipates similar interfaces with other Services 

going forward. 

Closing comments accentuated the effort by the SCES Program Management organization to 

become fully DLMS compliant and to engage the DLMS Program Office for all transactions, 

particularly Product Quality Deficiency Reports (PQDR). Ms. Daverede welcomed SCES team 

involvement and expressed hope for more DLMS Program Office involvement with the SCES 

programs, specifically its governance process.

Ms. Hilert inquired about future SCES plans for expansion involving other DLMS functionality

such as the requisition, billing, and order management transactions, and bringing new countries 

into the system (for example, Australia as a possible test case). Mr. Brent Pearlstein, SCES, 

explained that most FMS customer systems are limited and can only take in legacy MILS data. 

Mr. Hooper mentioned that the Security Cooperation Information Portal (SCIP) would not 

implement DLMS because the system is limited to legacy MILS data.

c. SDR Functional Process Year-in-Review Presentation and Discussion (Agenda Topic 

3). Mr. Breen provided an overview of PDCs/ADCs, DOD initiatives impacting SDRs, latest 

developments for WebSDR interfaces, metrics and open action items. Mr. Breen discussed key 

issues including the importance of accuracy in SDR content to enable reliable trend analysis and 

metrics. Mr. Breen emphasized the importance of integrating the SDR process with existing 

receiving systems to reduce double entry between applications/systems and eliminate “swivel 

chair” logistics, where the user has to enter the same data in multiple systems. An integrated 

SDR process is key toward achieving more complete and accurate data content.

Mr. Breen noted that new WebSDR interfaces with Component SDR systems are in varying 

stages of planning as indicated by the dotted lines on the SDR Information Exchange Integrating 

Component SDR Applications Slide 9. These Component SDR systems will increase 

interoperability by establishing a DLMS interface through DAAS and WebSDR. These system 

interfaces include DSCA SCES, Army Information Systems Security Program Application 
Page 3

(ISSPA), and Global Combat Support System-Army (GCSS-A), each in varying levels of full 

integration.

The status of Army DLMS WebSDR interface discussion focused on the Army Logistics 

Modernization Program (LMP) interface. Pending future enhancements include incoming reply 

transactions to LMP, attachment functionality and generation of new SDRs for Army depot 

receipts. Mr. Breen also briefed the status of the Army WebSDR interface for ISSPA

Communication Security (COMSEC), and GCSS-Army (GCSS-A) and each system’s level of 

progress. 

GCSS-A has an internal SDR functionality, but does not support DLMS SDR requirements (e.g., 

no outgoing transactions; code lists are incomplete). Discussion is underway to document the 

interface requirements with an eventual goal of full DLMS compliance.

The planned ISSPA interface is limited for COMSEC materiel receipted by the Army at 

Tobyhanna, PA. The DLMS Program Office recommended the Army pursue upgrading LMP 

functionality to better support discrepant receipt processing with integrated creation of SDRs 

rather than a unique interface supporting COMSEC. However, the Army is drafting a PDC to 

document ISSPA and its very limited capabilities. 

Mr. Breen provided an overview of ADC 1160, Procedures for Recommending and Authorizing 

Credit for Validated SDRs, Associated Reply Code Revisions, and Required Use of the Reason 

for Reversal Code in Issue Reversals. DLA Distribution implemented the revised SDR reply 

codes, but the expansion of the reason for reversal codes is awaiting prioritization at DLA. (See 

Action Item 1)

Ms. Hilert explained the purpose and implementation status of ADC 1161A, Update Uniform 

Procurement Instrument Identifier (PIID) Numbering System, clarifying its impact on WebSDR. 

During development of the proposed change, the WebSDR team first identified a gap with the 

Electronic Document Access (EDA) web service that WebSDR uses to capture contract-related 

information for inclusion in SDRs and use in management reports and queries. Under the new 

rules, receipts and SDRs carry the PIID call/order without citing the base contract number. As a 

result, WebSDR loses visibility of the base contract number, which is needed for management 

reports and queries. It was hoped that the EDA web service would be upgraded during PIID 

implementation to provide visibility of the base contract number (contract reference number), but 

it does not. Mr. Bruce Propert, ODASD (Defense Procurement and Acquisition Policy (DPAP))

expressed support for such an update to the EDA web service under an existing Engineering 

Change Proposal (ECP) to correct functionality associated with the PIID. Upon implementation 

of the revised web service, the DLMS and DAAS WebSDR teams will take action to restore 

visibility of the base contract number in the WebSDR database.

Mr. Breen provided an overview of ADC 1169, DLA Distribution Center Denial Scenarios 

Associated with Product Quality Deficiency Report (PQDR) Exhibits. Ms. Hilert explained that 

this process change will support the overall goal to track PQDR exhibit within PDREP by the

PQDR Report Control Number (RCN) as a byproduct of DLMS logistics transactions. These 

transactions are copied to PDREP and the inclusion of the PQDR RCN facilitates visibility. Ken 
Page 4

Carr, PDREP, will confirm that PDREP implemented the capability to accept DAAS-furnished 

copies of the receipt and shipment status containing the PQDR RCN for exhibit status (refer to 

ADC 1007/1007A) (See Action Item 2) 

Mr. Breen provided an overview of ADC 1174, WebSDR Process Enhancements and 

Administrative Updates including SDR Reply Screen and Management Report Functionality, 

New/Revised Reply Codes, and Standardized Identification of the Submitting Customer, which 

documents various changes needed to improve data quality and support the user community. 

This change also modifies guidance for restricted special characters. Ms. Merita Briggs, USAF,

and Ms. Linda Miles, USAF, stated the USAF is aware of new Reply Codes 609/610 and will 

instruct USAF users on updates. Mr. Breen mentioned the intent to replace the work-around 

formatting issue whereby the PDREP Department of Defense Activity Address Code (DoDAAC)

is used to identify the submitter in place of the submitting customer DoDAAC. Mr. Carr 

recognized the issue and committed to an update in near term. (See Action Item 3)

Mr. Breen provided an overview of ADC 1181A, Implementing the Cause Code for SDRs and 

Developing a Data Exchange Between WebSDR and Past Performance Information Retrieval 

System-Statistical Reporting Next Generation (PPIRS-SR NG) for Contractor Noncompliance 

SDRs. This ADC requires all Components to assign a cause code identifying contractor 

noncompliance (when applicable as the reason for the discrepancy) on the final SDR reply by the

inventory control point (ICP). ADC 1181A, is a high priority change with high visibility within

ODASD(SCI) and DPAP.

Mr. Breen provided an overview of ADC 1202, Processing of Advance Shipment Notice (ASN) 

for Certificate of Conformance (CoC) or Alternate Release Procedures (ARP) and Edit Blocking 

Inappropriate SDR for Missing Quality Assurance Representative (QAR) Signature (Discrepancy 

Code D4). This change establishes a new edit in the DLA Distribution Standard System (DSS)

to prevent creation of an SDR with Discrepancy Code D4 when ARP or CoC indicators are 

present. (See Action Item 4)

Ms. Anita Smith, Air Force Security Assistance Command (AFSAC) SDR Application (SDR-A),

expressed concern for potential impact to FMS customer shipments when shipments are missing 

QAR signature and will provide examples. (See Action Item 5) She explained that shipments 

are frustrated waiting on QAR signature before shipments can be exported per US Customs 

requirements. Ms. Marlyce Cook, U.S. Army Aviation and Missile Command (AMCOM), and 

Rob Reyes, USAF Packaging Specialist, reported ARP QAR signature delays and will provide 

additional examples. Ms. Hilert assured PRC members that the Defense Contract Management 

Agency (DCMA) is working to improve timely QAR signatures. On a related note, AMCOM 

and USAF requested DCMA ensure senders attach paper copies of the receiving report to the 

packaging as required by Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) to 

prevent further delays.

Ms. Hilert provided the status of PDC 1175A, Procedures for Turn-In of Partial Small 

Arms/Light Weapons (SA/LW) to DLA Disposition Services and SDR Procedures for 

Associated Discrepancies, it is due to be released soon and replaces PDC 1175 in its entirety. 

This change clarifies SDR business rules for the turn-in to DLA Disposition Services for 
Page 5

reutilization or demilitarization of partial/incomplete weapons by the weapon national stock 

number (NSN). Rob Reyes, USAF, requested clarification on when turn-in materiel is 

suspended. Ms. Hilert explained DLA Disposition Services would not formally process a receipt 

until the missing parts list discrepancy is resolved. Instead, the materiel is segregated pending 

resolution. Additionally, SDRs will go to the turn-in activity’s SDR system or email account

with an info copy to the generator. 

Mr. Breen provided the details surrounding draft PDC 1249, Revised Procedures for Assignment 

of Materiel Returns Document Number. This change revises rules for document number 

assignment for directed returns coming into DLA Distribution. Main impact is on DLA 

Distribution for “ship-in-place” scenarios that cannot re-use the same document number used for 

the original receipt to the owning Service for the materiel return to the source of supply. 

Mr. Breen provided the details surrounding draft PDC 1250, which standardizes SDR duplicate 

criteria. This change will require adoption of standard duplicate SDR rejection logic among all 

DOD SDR systems to prevent rejections of “valid” SDRs and eliminate inconsistent business 

rules. Yolanda Johnson, TACOM SDR lead, confirmed that Army LMP SDR system has already 

relaxed their duplicate criteria for selected SDR document types to reduce the number of 

rejections until all systems have fully implemented the standardized criteria.

Ms. Hilert discussed reports from customers at Fleet Readiness Centers (FRCs) who identified a 

procedural and accountability gap for reporting/resolving total nonreceipt discrepancies under 

Direct Turn Over (DTO) procedures. Under DTO procedures, DLA Distribution does not

perform kind, count, and condition, and DLA Distribution does not receipt the materiel into DSS 

inventory. In these cases, the local distribution center accepts the shipment on behalf of the 

customer and sends an updated supply status to the customer alerting them that their materiel has 

been delivered. The FRC uses this status as a basis for their internal receipt, but then the materiel 

goes missing before it gets it to the FRC customer. DLA Distribution will develop guidance for 

distribution centers and draft a PDC to document short-term and long-term procedures that 

address how to notify the receiving depot to investigate for the missing materiel. Ms. Daverede

suggested that Passive Radio Frequency Identification (pRFID) might be helpful in this scenario. 

Ms. Hilert stated additional research would be necessary regarding use of pRFID.

Mr. Breen spoke briefly about the regular ongoing DLA/Service Suspended Asset Integrated 

Project Team (IPT) meetings where DOD-wide Component representatives work together with 

DLA Distribution and DLA J3 to discuss and resolve SDRs/Storage Quality Control Reports

(SQCR) for suspended assets located at DLA Distribution Centers. DLA is shifting the focus to 

high dollar and aged SDRs/SQCRs. Metrics show that there has been an increase in DOD 

suspended stock levels for Condition Codes J, K and L. Greg Pigg, DLA Distribution, provided

a separate brief during agenda Topic 6. (See Action Item 6)

d.DLA Distribution Centers SDRs for Requisitioned Materiel (Topic 4). Mr. Breen 

provided highlights of the discussion sheet regarding an ongoing operational issue between Navy

and GSA involving a scenario requiring submission of two SDRs when DLA distribution receipts 

requisitioned materiel on behalf of the Navy retail customer. The distribution center reports the 

discrepant receipt to the owner (Document Type 8 for distribution center receipt); the owner 
Page 6

must then prepare another SDR for the source of supply (Document Type 6 or 7 for customer 

SDR). While the two SDRs carry much of the same data, they are not identical in content and 

the owner should never forward the first SDR (using current Reply Code 504 forwarding 

process). Ms. Hilert provided background details of the previous functionality in PDREP to 

handle this scenario systemically with minimal intervention and the decisions regarding BRAC 

SDR routing and DSS functionality that determined the current state of the multiple SDR 

process. Mr. Breen discussed the current issues and problems encountered when the Navy 

forwards the SDR via Reply Code 504. Mr. Breen requested the Navy work with Mr. Carr 

(PDREP) to see if PDREP could do a mass ticket to create the Type 6/7 SDR to GSA based on 

the original Type 8 SDR sent to Navy rather than manually creating these SDRs (there are over 

2000 SDRs currently backlogged). Mr. Carr stated PDREP could accomplish this task and will 

work with Mr. Moslak, NAVSUP, on the details. Mr. Xavier Villarreal, DLA HQ, volunteered 

to establish a Continuous Process Improvement (CPI) event to find proposed solutions. The CPI 

initiative will explore two proposed solutions focusing on redesigning the process to reduce 

manual intervention (See Action Item 7). One option leverages the current DSS BRAC process 

and requires establishing new rules and system updates that would permit the distribution center 

to send the SDR directly to the source of supply for action and to the owner for information. The 

other option would leverage the existing 504 forwarding process correctly to forward the SDR 

from owner to source of supply. Tom Moslak, NAVSUP SDR lead, believes the increase of 

suspended stock at time of receipt is isolated to DLA Distribution Center Yokosuka Japan

(DDYJ). Mr. Moslak also stated the Navy has received SDRs where the only discrepancy was 

Z3 (No PMR) and the materiel was suspended he will forward examples. 

e. DLA Distribution Suspended Stock Presentation (Agenda Topic 6). Mr. Greg Pigg, 

DLA Distribution, provided an overview of the status for suspended assets in Supply Condition 

Code (SCC) J, K and L, located within DLA Distribution Centers. He reported current 

suspended stock is valued at approximately $1.9 billion. Mr. Breen questioned why DLA 

Distribution Center DDS2 and DDJC had such a large volume of SDR/SQCRs where disposition 

was received but the distribution center had not taken action. Ms. Cook replied that when the 

owner/manager requests additional information from the distribution centers so they can provide 

final disposition, they often do not receive a timely response. Mr. Carroll requested an additional 

metric showing the dollar values associated with the suspended stock with open SDRs/SQCRs on 

Slide 9. (See Action Item 6 from above) Mr. Carroll committed ODASD(SCI) to providing 

senior level focus on this issue by engaging the Comprehensive Inventory Improvement Plan 

(CIMIP) working group, which reports to the Supply Chain Executive Steering Committee 

(SCESC). Ms. Jan Mulligan, ODASD(SCI) chairs the CIMIP work groups and Mr. Carroll will 

ask her to invite Ms. Jennifer Smith, DLA J3, DLA Distribution, and the DLMS Program Office

to brief this topic to the CIMIP (See Action Item 8). In summary, Ms. Daverede encouraged the 

group to focus adequate resources to ensure reducing the total volume/value of suspended stock. 

f. Update on HAZMAT Packaging Working Group Initiative (Topic 7). In response to 

Government Accountability Office (GAO) Report and Congressional tasking directed by the 

Secretary of Defense, the SDR Working Group provided a report to the Senate Committee on 

Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed Services on the DOD's transportation of 

hazardous materials including the root causes of discrepancies. DLMS Program Office made 

instrumental procedural updates within DLM 4000.25 and implemented performance 
Page 7

measurement tools to ensure that HAZMAT documentation and packaging discrepancies 

attributed to the shipper are reported using SDRs. SDR-related actions including system 

enhancements under ADC 1153 (includes implementation of HAZMAT Indicator (reports and 

replies) and new documentation-related discrepancy codes) (See Action Item 9). Another 

DLMS requirement implements policy and system upgrades for use of SDRs in vendor 

evaluation/performance (ADC 1181A). ADC 1181A meets the GAO request to incorporate 

vendor non-compliance HAZMAT discrepancies into the PPIRS-SR-NG metrics for 

accountability. Ms. Jennifer Smith also stated that the DLA specific HAZMAT Working Group 

are actively working depot and distribution center level issues to reduce the number of 

HAZMAT SDRs and to quickly respond and resolve frustrated shipments originating from DLA. 

DLA has taken steps to improve vendor contract clauses regarding the HAZMAT packaging 

requirement to vendors. 

g.WebSDR Canned Report for No PMR SDRs (Agenda Topic 8). Mr. Breen, provided an 

overview of ADC 1221. DLA Distribution Centers will submit an informational SDR using 

Discrepancy Code Z3 (distribution center receipt; not due-in) and Action Code 3B (discrepancy 

reported for corrective action and trend analysis; no reply required) for receipts lacking a PMR 

when no other discrepancies are noted. Additionally, WebSDR will generate monthly reports 

listing SDRs by Component containing Discrepancy Code Z3 and email to a Component SDR 

leads. Component leads should use the monthly reports to identify process gaps and begin 

providing PMR as needed.

 

Ms. Hilert reiterated the importance of submitting PMRs for new procurement materiel, while 

also mentioning there are some known gaps for returns and maintenance receipts. Ms. Miles 

reported receipt of no PMR SDRs for inbound DVD shipments resulting from Air Force 

requisitions submitted to DLA. Ms. Hilert advised that the requisitioning system is responsible 

for submitting the PMR and not DLA. USAF reported that DLA Distribution is not matching 

receipts to submitted PMRs for selected DVD shipments causing the distribution center to post 

the receipt into the wrong owner account; Air Force will provide examples. Ms. Briggs, USAF 

SDR Lead, will send email to Ellen Hilert and Bob Carroll with specific focus on USAF materiel 

inducted incorrectly under DLA ownership. (See Action Item 12 comments column) DLA 

Distribution receiving uses a standard operating procedure when it cannot identify the materiel 

owner upon receipt. (See Action Item 10) 

h.Standardize DCMA Investigations for SDRs (Agenda Topic 9). Mr. Phil Wedgie, 

DCMA, discussed updates outlined in ADC 1181A that are applicable to DCMA as an action 

activity. DCMA QARs use Form 1227, to convey the finding of investigation to the Action 

Point for PQDRs. Mr. Wedgie stated the Form 1227 is the basis of the SDR questionnaire that 

DCMA will use to communicate the investigation results when DCMA when investigating

SDRs. Mr. Wedgie briefed the contents of Form 1227, and requested all Components review the 

DCMA SDR response template for reporting results of DCMA investigation to the source of 

supply and provide feedback to SDR PRC chair. It is important to note that DCMA QARs can 

only provide disposition and on a reported discrepancy when it has performed the inspection

and/or acceptance. Ms. Hilert commented that the QARs should never respond to an SDR

information copy sent to DCMA. Additionally, she explained that WebSDR automatically sends 

information copies to PDREP, inclusive of all SDRs reflecting a DCMA contract administration 
Page 8

office. DCMA should use these to monitor trend analysis for vendors. Mr. Wedgie advised 

participants that DCMA QARs would require documentation, photographs, and other relevant 

evidence to perform an investigation on the reported discrepancy. Mr. Breen and Ms. Hilert both 

stressed the capability for users to upload relevant files to WebSDR for transmission to PDREP 

to facilitate DCMA access. Mr. Reyes, USAF, inquired about how the process would work when 

SDRs are for depot level reparables (DLRs) shipped from contractors on a document contract 

number rather than a contract number. The DLMS Program Office took an action to explore 

leveraging the existing contract number field or the newer contract reference number field (not 

yet implemented for materiel returns), and develop of new guidance under a DLMS Change. 

(See Action Item 11)

USAF, AMCOM with other SDR PRC members inquired and discussed DLA/ICP charges for 

“special inspections” billed back to the Services/DLA. The Components voiced frustration that 

DLA Distribution charges the owner for requested photographs. DLA Distribution will draft a 

white paper providing special inspection details and distribute to SDR PRC members upon 

completion (See Action Item 12). Ms. Briggs and the DLMS Program Office will consider 

drafting a PDC documenting requirements for immediate capture of photos upon receipt (rather 

than as a result of a special inspection). A separate discussion ensued regarding DLA 

Distribution unauthorized use of locally assigned local stock numbers for receipt of unidentified 

materiel. The DLMS Program Office referred DLA Distribution to current MILSTRAP rules 

that require coordination with the owner prior to use of an LSN. Without this coordination, the 

receipt and SDR will fail in automated systems. (See Action Items 13, 14, 15, 16, and 17) 

i. PDREP ADC 1181A System Impacts (Agenda Topic 10). Mr. Ken Carr, PDREP Deputy 

Program Manager and AIS Program Manager, briefed the interoperability/system plans, updates,

and impacts of ADC 1181A for PDREP AIS. The upgrades will enable users to input the cause 

codes on SDRs, communicate cause codes to PPIRS-SR-NG for vendor non-compliance scores,

and be available to the DOD acquisition community for source selection. PDREP-AIS is 

essentially a repository for PPIRS-SR-NG supplier past performance data that provides objective 

evidence of material quality and timeliness performance. PDREP and the associated AIS is also 

the central Department of Navy (DON) database used to report, collect, retrieve and analyze 

contractor/supplier performance. Mr. Carr reviewed the high-level process flow among Navy 

systems and indicated that the PDREP team anticipates being ready for the ADC 1181A target 

implementation in November 2017, but this will be dependent upon further clarification of core 

requirements. Mr. Carr also discussed the upgrades to PDREP to allow DCMA to receive action 

copies of SDRs and notify DCMA action points. DCMA and NAVSUP will work with the 

PDREP team to incorporate enhancements to the SDR module as needed. The DLMS Program 

Office offered to assist with any questions regarding the PDREP program changes. (Action Item

18) 

Mr. Carr discussed short and long term list of programming priorities for SDRs and stated that 

the PDREP programming team is pursing completion of eight DLMS changes including ADC 

1181A. PDREP is tracking DLMS change requirements and actively participating in 

Configuration Management Board (CMB) group discussions with PDREP customers NAVSUP 

and DCMA to prioritize requirements. Mr. Carroll, Ms. Hilert, and Ms. Daverede emphasized 

that ADC 1181A is an OSD priority. The DLMS Program Office will provide a list of minimum 
Page 9

expectations for November. (See Action Item 19) In turn, PDREP agreed to provide a plan 

outlining steps with target dates. Mr. Wedgie added that biggest challenge for DCMA is updates 

to their internal policy and training staff on new policies resulting from ADC 1181A changes. 

The main requirements are implementation of cause codes and the interface updates 

incorporating DCMA as an action activity. A question about stop and start time stamps within 

programming came up, but Ms. Hilert stated that date and time stamps were not required. (See 

Action Item 20) 

j. DLMS Compliance Level Tracking (Agenda Topic 11). Mr. Dale Yeakel, DLMS 

Program Office, presented an update on the DLMS implementation status and DLMS 

compliance. OSD is actively supporting the approaching 2019 DLMS Compliance deadline and 

initiated the DLMS Implementation IPT with participation from all Component leads. The Navy 

has developed a disciplined process for tracking DLMS change status and impacted transactions 

and systems; the Navy offered to demonstrate their process for the IPT.

k.DLMS Change Status Review (Agenda Topic 12). Mr. Paul Jensen, DLMS Program 

Office, provided an overview on the DLMS Change Status Review tool on the DLMS Website 

and how the Components can use the tool for managing DLMS enhancements. The DLMS 

Change Status Report provides a user-friendly tool to track the status of DLMS Changes. Ms. 

Daverede requested that Components actively provide feedback to the DLMS Program Office on 

progress towards implementation of DLMS changes. 

l. Wrap-up, action items, plan next meeting. The DLMS Program Office thanked all 

attendees for their participation, enthusiasm, and continued support. In addition to ensuring that 

Components are responsive to individual SDRs, Component leads should apply focused attention 

on using SDR metrics to identify process problems/negative trends in order to improve logistics 

support for all. Components should provide a response to the open action items within 30 days of 

publication or as otherwise noted. Open action items are attached to the SDR PRC 17-01 

Meeting Minutes for reference. Follow-on meeting date to be determined.

_________________________________ _______________________________

Ellen Hilert Ben Breen

SDR PRC Chair SDR PRC Alternate

___________________________________

Heidi M. Daverede

Program Manager

Enterprise Business Standards Office
Action Item Tracker – SDR PRC 17-1 (March 16, 2017)

Attachment, SDR PRC 17-01 Meeting Minutes

Page 1

No Reference Action Item Responsibility Target 

Due Date

Status Notes

1. SDR PRC 

17-1 

Minutes 

§ c.

Page 3

DLA Distribution to 

provide 

implementation 

status of issue 

reversal reason 

codes per ADC 

1160 to the SDR 

PRC chair

DLA 

Distribution

30 days 

from

publication 

of meeting 

minutes

Open Dennis 

Amrhein is A/I 

owner

2. SDR PRC 

17-1 

Minutes 

§ c.

Page 4

PDREP team to 

confirm 

implementation of 

the PQDR RCN 

data element and 

tracking 

functionality to 

include use of 

receipt and/or 

shipment status.

NAVSUP/PDR

EP Program 

Office

30 days 

from

publication 

of meeting 

minutes

Open Ken Carr, 

PDREP is A/I 

owner. 

Reference is 

ADC1007/1007

A

3. SDR PRC 

17-1 

Minutes 

§ c.

Page 4

PDREP team to 

provide the 

implementation 

time line for 

replacing use of

PDREP system 

DoDAAC with the 

submitting 

customer DoDAAC. 

NAVSUP/PDR

EP Program 

Office

30 days 

from

publication 

of meeting 

minutes

Open Ken Carr, 

PDREP is A/I 

owner. 

Reference is 

ADC 1174
Action Item Tracker – SDR PRC 17-1 (March 16, 2017)

Attachment, SDR PRC 17-01 Meeting Minutes

Page 2

No Reference Action Item Responsibility Target 

Due Date

Status Notes

4. SDR PRC 

17-1 

Minutes 

§ c.

Page 4

DLA Distribution to 

provide 

implementation 

status of DSS edit 

blocking creation of 

SDRs for missing 

QAR signature 

when shipment 

indicates CoC or 

ARP to the SDR 

PRC Administrator.

DLA 

Distribution

30 days 

from

publication 

of meeting 

minutes

Open Dennis 

Amrhein is A/I 

owner

Reference 

ADC 1202

5. SDR PRC 

17-1 

Minutes 

§ c.

Page 4

Air Force (AFSAC) 

to provide 

examples of 

missing signatures 

in iRAPT report 

that result in 

suspended stock to 

the SDR PRC 

chair.

Air Force 

(AFSAC)

30 days 

from

publication 

of meeting 

minutes

Open PRC chair will 

forward to 

DCMA (Phil 

Wedgie)

6. SDR PRC 

17-1 

Minutes 

§ c.

Page 5

DLA Distribution to 

provide Dollar 

value chart similar 

to Slide 9–11 in 

Topic 6: 

SDRs/SQDRs with 

Disposition (Total 

Count), 

SDRs/SQDRs 

without Disposition 

(Total Count), and 

Total Count of 

Open SDRs w/o 

Disposition > 55 

Days

DLA 

Distribution

30 days 

from

publication 

of meeting 

minutes

Open Provide chart 

to SDR PRC 

chair for Bob 

Carroll, 

ODASD(SCI)
Action Item Tracker – SDR PRC 17-1 (March 16, 2017)

Attachment, SDR PRC 17-01 Meeting Minutes

Page 3

No Reference Action Item Responsibility Target 

Due Date

Status Notes

7. SDR PRC 

17-1 

Minutes 

§ d.

Page 6

DLMS Program 

Office to provide 

list of SDR PRC 

representatives to 

DLA J316 (Xavier 

Villarrueva)

DLMS Program 

Office 

30 days

from

publication 

of meeting 

minutes

Open Initial 

Information 

sent 3/17/17; 

need to follow 

up to ensure 

information 

provided meets 

J316 needs. 

8. SDR PRC 

17-1 

Minutes 

§ e.

Page 6

Add DLMS 

Program Office, 

Jennifer Smith 

(DLAJ3), and Greg 

Pigg (DLA 

Distribution) to be 

sent invitation for 

Comprehensive 

Inventory 

Improvement Plan 

(CIMIP) meeting 

discussion on 

suspended stock at 

DLA Distribution 

Centers

ODASD(SCI) TBD 

based 

upon 

CIMIP 

meeting 

schedule

Open Bob Carroll to 

follow up with 

CIMIP 

leadership

9. SDR PRC 

17-1 

Minutes 

§ f.

Page 7

Components to 

provide 

implementation 

dates for the 

Hazmat Indicator 

Army (LMP), 

DLA (EBS and 

DSS)

30 days 

from

publication 

of meeting 

minutes

Open Refer to ADC 

1153. 

Identified as 

optional, but 

recommended 

by DLMS 

Program Office 

to support 

GAO data 

requests.
Action Item Tracker – SDR PRC 17-1 (March 16, 2017)

Attachment, SDR PRC 17-01 Meeting Minutes

Page 4

No Reference Action Item Responsibility Target 

Due Date

Status Notes

10. SDR PRC 

17-1 

Minutes 

§ g.

Page 7

Air Force to send 

examples of DVD 

shipments coming 

in with no PMRs. 

These are Air 

Force contract 

shipments, shipped 

by DLA but the Air 

Force has issued 

PMRs under an FB 

DoDAAC. 

Air Force

(Linda Miles)

30 days 

from

publication 

of meeting 

minutes

Open Merita Briggs 

to send 

explanatory email to Ellen 

Hilert and Bob 

Carroll with 

specific focus 

on AF owned 

and managed 

materiel being 

inducted under 

(incorrect) RIC 

= SMS
Action Item Tracker – SDR PRC 17-1 (March 16, 2017)

Attachment, SDR PRC 17-01 Meeting Minutes

Page 5

No Reference Action Item Responsibility Target 

Due Date

Status Notes

11. SDR PRC 

17-1 

Minutes 

§ h.

Page 8

DLMS Program 

Office to develop 

additional guidance 

regarding how to 

identify a contract 

number when the 

controlling number 

for the shipment a 

document number 

but contractor 

noncompliance 

may be the cause 

of the discrepancy 

(e.g. shipment from 

DLA Distribution, 

but sealed 

packages retain 

original contract 

number and 

contain wrong item; 

repair contractor 

shipment on a 

document number 

is discrepant.) 

Interface with EDA 

for contract data 

needed so 

WebSDR can 

obtain CAO 

DoDAAC and use if 

forwarding to 

DCMA is required. 

Requires PDC.

DLMS Program 

Office

120 days 

from

publication 

of meeting 

minutes

Open DLMS Program 

Office to 

consider 

leveraging 

existing data 

field Contract 

Reference 

Number.
Action Item Tracker – SDR PRC 17-1 (March 16, 2017)

Attachment, SDR PRC 17-01 Meeting Minutes

Page 6

No Reference Action Item Responsibility Target 

Due Date

Status Notes

12. SDR PRC 

17-1 

Minutes 

§ h.

Page 8

Air Force to 

consider drafting a 

PDC to improve 

handling of 

unidentified 

materiel and 

documenting 

SDRs.

Air Force N/A Open

13. SDR PRC 

17-1 

Minutes 

§ h.

Page 8

DLA Distribution to 

draft a white paper 

for the SDR PRC 

documenting the 

“special 

Inspections” 

attachment (e.g., 

photos) process for 

WebSDR. The 

white paper needs 

to address the

billing associated 

with those special 

inspections.

DLA 

Distribution

30 days 

from

publication 

of meeting 

minutes

Open

14. SDR PRC 

17-1 

Minutes 

§ h.

Page 8

All Components to 

review the DCMA 

SDR response 

template (Form 

1227) as a method 

of reporting results 

of DCMA 

investigation to the 

source of supply, 

and provide 

feedback to SDR 

PRC chair. 

All 

Components

30 days 

from

publication 

of meeting 

minutes

Open PRC chair will 

forward to 

DCMA (Phil 

Wedgie); 

Reference DD 

Form 1227 

questions in 

SDR PRC 17-

01 Refer to 

topic 9 brief.
Action Item Tracker – SDR PRC 17-1 (March 16, 2017)

Attachment, SDR PRC 17-01 Meeting Minutes

Page 7

No Reference Action Item Responsibility Target 

Due Date

Status Notes

15. SDR PRC 

17-1 

Minutes 

§ h.

Page 8

All Components to 

update SOPs to 

ensure source of 

supply 

representatives ask 

submitters to 

provide evidential 

matter (e.g., 

photographs, 

documents) prior to 

forwarding SDR for 

DCMA 

investigation. 

Submitters will 

need to provide

evidential matter as 

attachments to 

WebSDR to allow 

visibility and 

forwarding to 

PDREP.

All 

Components

90 days 

from

publication 

of meeting 

minutes

Open Reference is 

ADC 1181A

16. SDR PRC 

17-1 

Minutes 

§ h.

Page 8

DLMS Program 

Office to provide a 

DCMA and DPAP 

list of contacts who 

can address 

missing or delayed 

QAR signatures in 

iRAPT.

DLMS Program 

Office 

30 days 

from

publication 

of meeting 

minutes

Open PRC chair will 

forward to 

members

17. SDR PRC 

17-1 

Minutes 

§ h.

Page 8

DLMS Program 

Office to review 

time standards for 

DCMA response 

(final) after interim 

reply indicating 

DCMA 

investigation is 

ongoing.

DLMS Program 

Office

90 days 

from

publication 

of meeting 

minutes

Open
Action Item Tracker – SDR PRC 17-1 (March 16, 2017)

Attachment, SDR PRC 17-01 Meeting Minutes

Page 8

No Reference Action Item Responsibility Target 

Due Date

Status Notes

18. SDR PRC 

17-1 

Minutes 

§ i.

Page 8

DLMS Program 

Office to provide 

DoDM 4140.01 

(DLMS authority 

document) and 

contact information 

for PRC members 

to PDREP 

Programs

DLMS Program 

Office

30 days 

from

publication 

of meeting 

minutes

Closed Sent 3/16/2017

19. SDR PRC 

17-1 

Minutes 

§ i.

Page 8

DLMS Program 

Office to provide 

PDREP Program 

Office with required 

implementation 

dates relative to 

specific SDR 

functionality in ADC 

1181A. Specific 

target dates to 

include when 

DCMA is to 

process actionable 

SDRs. 

DLMS Program 

Office

30 days 

from

publication 

of meeting 

minutes

Open What specific 

functionality 

must be 

included by 

November 1, 

2017? What 

are the target 

implementation 

dates for 

longer-term 

requirements?
Action Item Tracker – SDR PRC 17-1 (March 16, 2017)

Attachment, SDR PRC 17-01 Meeting Minutes

Page 9

No Reference Action Item Responsibility Target 

Due Date

Status Notes

20. SDR PRC 

17-1 

Minutes 

§ i.

Page 9

Army, Air Force, 

and PDREP 

Program Office to 

provide status 

update to SDR 

PRC chair with 

regard to their 

status toward 

meeting 

implementation 

target of November 

1, 2017 for adding 

cause codes to 

SDR replies to 

facilitate tracking 

contractor 

noncompliance in 

PPIRS-SR-NG.

DLA to provide 

status on adding 

functionality for 

outgoing SDR reply 

with contract 

noncompliance 

cause codes for 

“info only” SDRs 

Army, Air 

Force, PDREP 

Program 

Office, DLA

30 days 

from

publication 

of meeting 

minutes

Open Reference is 

ADC 1181A