DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY

 HEADQUARTERS

 8725 JOHN J. KINGMAN ROAD

 FORT BELVOIR, VIRGINIA 22060-6221

June 4, 2021

MEMORANDUM FOR DISTRIBUTION 

SUBJECT: DoD Discrepancy/Deficiency Reporting Process Review Committee (PRC) 21-01 

Meeting, May 12, 2021

This memorandum forwards the minutes of the DoD Discrepancy/Deficiency Reporting 

PRC 21-01 Meeting for your information and action as appropriate.

Purpose: Defense Enterprise Business & Data Standards (DEBaDS) hosted the subject virtual 

meeting via Defense Collaboration Services (DCS) for remote participants. Meeting 

documentation: A list of the meeting agenda, briefing materials, and the Action Item Tracker are 

available on the Discrepancy/Deficiency Resource webpage: 

https://www.dla.mil/HQ/InformationOperations/DLMS/Archives/sdr/

Brief Summary of Discussion: Mr. Ben Breen, DoD Discrepancy/Deficiency Administrator,

facilitated discussions during the SDR PRC 21-01 meeting. The Action Item Tracker contains 

the resulting action items. Action items are due within 30 days from the DoD 

Discrepancy/Deficiency Reporting PRC 21-01 meeting minutes publication unless otherwise 

noted.

Meeting Topics:

a. Agenda Item 1 - Welcome, Administrative, & Introductions. Mr. Ben Breen provided 

opening remarks with an emphasis on the DEBaDS mission. Mr. Breen introduced Mr. Tad 

DeLaney, Director, DEBaDS, who welcomed participants. The DEBaDS mission is to develop, 

publish, and maintain interoperable information technology standards for the business systems of 

the DoD Supply Chain to facilitate auditability and support reform initiatives of the Department. 

Mr. DeLaney announced that the office was in transition and expressed appreciation for the 

members’ patience.

b. Agenda Item 2 - WebSDR Metrics and SDR Standard Response Timeframes. 

Mr. Breen briefed attendees on the recently Approved Standards Change (ADC) 1359 which 

documents the revised response time standards for all supply discrepancy report (SDR) document 

type codes. 
2

In addition to the revised time standards, Mr. Breen proposed some enhancements to the 

metrics within DAAS WebSDR application. The proposal included new status codes that will 

help aggregate SDRs by status and therefore, provide more accurate reports via the 

application. The status codes available today are not well defined and do not capture the 

different stages in the process. In addition, Mr. Breen explained some of the benefits of this 

change. First, the proposed status category realignment employed by WebSDR automation 

will not only assign a clearly defined internal code number but will also allow users to search 

the status of each SDR record by user defined SDR status codes using the existing reports 

application functionality. For example, the current category for an open record is only found 

by choosing the option for Open/Awaiting Disposition, whereas the proposed status and code 

for open will state Open/Awaiting Disposition – Status Code 1, is interpreted to mean that no 

disposition/status reply codes have processed, or a reply was used to indicate forwarding or 

interim response. (Reference DEBaDS brief slide number 6). Secondly, customers will have 

better visibility and the ability to query select records by enhanced, more exact, status codes 

eliminating the ambiguous status categories in use today.

Mr. Breen discussed adding SDRs with Action Codes 1H/3B (Info only/trend analysis) into 

the closed status based on the fact there is no need for a response. Mr. Breen also questioned 

whether SDRs with Action Code 1B (material being retained) should be included into this 

category. Mr. Troy Brown, DLA, inquired about the differences between Status Code 1 and 

Status Code TBD regarding follow ups. Mr. Breen clarified that Status Code TBD would 

apply after the 55 days and the submission of the SDR follow-up. Lastly, this change would 

encompass the ability to calculate SDR timeframes based on the original creation date. The 

intent is to create visibility of timeframes in coordination with the proposed status codes. 

(Reference DEBaDS brief slide numbers 7, 8 and 9).

Mr. Nate Wurst, ODASD(Logistics) inquired about the SDR Metrics and asked if those 

calculations would be automated in WebSDR. Mr. Breen replied that the application will 

calculate the metrics and provide the results in the form of reports. The intent is to have an

exportable report output that captures the creation dates, and the systemic response time for 

each record. One example, based on the response time, the system would show the date DLA 

Distribution processed the completion notice and if it was within the standard timeframe. The 

application will continue to support Microsoft Excel files or other alternative form of output. 

Mr. Wurst also noted that users would be able to see overall SDR performance over time if 

other than the standard timeframes. Mr. Breen agreed and noted the desire is to see the 

extrapolation of submissions against the timeframes, providing visibility of performance 

trends as a Department against the life cycle events.

Mr. Breen also discussed the specifics regarding unprocessed or rejected records that failed 

for reasons other than missing data or information. In these cases, no record is established in 

WebSDR prior to the rejection and a control number is not assigned. In response to additional 

feedback, Mr. Breen clarified that these failures are captured in WebSDR metrics behind the 

scenes and reports are available for review from the DAAS WebSDR team. 

Additionally, Mr. Breen summarized the WebSDR automated capability to process storage 

quality control reports (SQCR) using the DoD WebSDR platform at DAAS. The SQCR will 
3

be included as SDR Document Type 5 (SQCR) and will be processed through WebSDR. 

These SQCR reports will have the same level of granularity as the SDR records. 

Conclusion: The SDR community leaders will provide input to confirm the final approach. 

DLA provide input and feedback during the discussion. Once all components provide 

feedback, DEBaDS will draft a Proposed Standards Change (PDC) to document the proposed 

status codes. 

Action item 1: Provide coordinated feedback as to moving the SDR Action Code 1B 

(Materiel being retained) to an information only SDR status category. All Components.

Action item 2. Provide coordinated feedback regarding status categories (per briefing slides)

for SDR/SQCR in WebSDR metrics. All Components.

c. Agenda Item 3 - Constructed Document Number Update. Mr. Steve Nace, DLA 

Headquarters (HQ) briefed attendees regarding the ongoing issue pertaining to the use of 

constructed document numbers and specifically requesting credit. Mr. Nace began by explaining 

the problem statement: “Referencing constructed document numbers to provide credit results in 

the inability of purchaser or seller to trace credit back to an actual purchase order, resulting in 

auditability issues for both parties.” Mr. Nace provided a review of the current supply lifecycle 

flow. He also stated that the use of the constructed document number for the receipt of materiel 

creates problems across the supply life cycle, which may result in unmatched payments/funds

where credit is first approved and then processed back to the customer via an SDR/PQDR 

response. Post credit issues include improper account assignment once the credit has been issued 

back the owning component, or results in an unmatched transaction which cannot be processed 

(Reference slides 11 through 16).

Mr. John Beale, USAF, inquired about the process where receivers research and determine that 

the original document number is missing and how they overcome the deficiency at the time of 

receipt. Mr. Beale recommended that the original document number be documented by the 

receiving activity on the stock screening report details supporting the user with the PQDR 

submission once identified or requesting that the original document number is outstanding. 

Steve Nace noted the concerns and reiterated that the flow briefed in today’s meeting is DLA 

specific and that other Component’s processes vary and may process more PQDRs than DLA. 

Mr. Nace acknowledged the lack of and the need for a document number validation process. He 

noted that going forward, the DoD should develop a document number validation process to 

address the financial and audit concerns mentioned when using a constructed document number.

Mr. Breen reiterated the need for the constructed document number for submission of 

SDR/PQDRs, but under the specific condition that users are aware that no credit would be 

provided. The original document number is required to properly issue credit to the owning 

customer. Army recommended that when an original document number is identified after the 

discrepancy/deficiency has been closed, that it can be reopened and processed until correct owner 

has received their credit due. The community agreed that proposed solutions include a process 

for reopening closed discrepancies is needed. Mr. Christopher Parker, Navy Product Data 

Reporting and Evaluation Program (PDREP-AIS) team, also commented about the handling of 
4

closed SDRs and SQCRs and wanted confirmation that the original records are to be cancelled 

and resubmitted once the original document number was identified.

Conclusion: The proposed way ahead to eliminate the issues associated with the use of 

constructed document numbers will begin with a DLA drafted proposed standards change. This 

change will begin by disestablishing the issue of credit when a constructed document number is 

used on an SDR/PQDR in place of the original document number. The change will continue the 

use of constructed document number when the original cannot be located. The continued use of 

constructed document number provides a methodology to capture future trend analysis and will 

require services/components to inform SDR/PQDR submitters of the inability to issue credit for 

constructed document numbers. DLA and DEBaDs will formally coordinate the proposed 

change with the DoD Components to include the DoD financial communities before approval. 

The target completion date for this change is September 2021. (Reference slide 15).

Action item 3: Discuss and identify the proper manner to handle PQDR/SDRs if the original 

document number is identified after the SDR/PQDR has been closed. Determine if the original 

record is cancelled and a new report submitted with the original document number for SDR and 

PQDR. All Components.

d.Agenda Item 4 - DLA Warehouse Management System (WMS) Update to Transmit 

Storage Quality Control Reports (SQCRs). Mr. Greg Pigg, DLA Distribution briefed the 

status of the DLA WMS systemic transmission of SQCRs (Reference slides 17, 18 and 19).

The current state of the DLA WMS planning and implementation schedule includes the 

planning/development phase for initial launch (post testing) at DDCT (Corpus Christi, TX)

tentatively scheduled for September 30, 2021.

The future state of the WMS planning and implementation schedule also includes processing care 

of supplies in storage (COSIS) development with the projected completion date of July 1, 2021. 

The projected go-live at DDCT only is September 30, 2021, if the Services are ready by this 

time. Once DDCT is live, all other sites will still operate on the existing DSS/separate 

transaction platform. As the remaining DLA sites transition to WMS, they will transmit the new 

SDR transaction for SQCRs. Cutover plans for current open records are still in discussion. 

Mr. Breen provided additional comments regarding the current SQCR backlog/workload and 

how it will be addressed once WMS is operating at full capacity. Ms. Erin Fowles, DLA WMS 

Program Manager, conveyed that the current DLA DSS activity addressing routing identifier 

code (RIC) will not be used for WMS addressing. The main concern with the open workload of 

SDR/SQCRs will be addressed by eliminating RIC SL3. Ms. Tanya Green, DLA Inventory 

Management stated that this topic will be discussed offline in a separate meeting.

Action item 4. Set up a follow-on meeting with DLA HQ/DAAS WebSDR to discuss how to 

handle open SDR/SQCRs once a DLA Distribution site transitions to WMS. DEBaDS, DAAS, 

and DLA WMS team.

e. Agenda Item 5 - Wrap Up. Mr. Breen thanked all attendees for their participation and 

continued support. Components provide responses to the open action items within 30 days of 
5

publication or as otherwise noted. Open action items are attached to the DoD 

Discrepancy/Deficiency Reporting PRC 21-01 Meeting Minutes for reference. Follow-on 

meeting date to be determined.

The Enterprise Business Standards Office points of contact are Mr. Ben Breen, email 

EBSO.SDR@dla.mil

THOMAS A. DELANEY

Director, Enterprise Business Standards Office

DISTRIBUTION:

ODASD(Logistics)

OASD(A, DPC)

OUSD(C)

DLMS Supply PRC

Attendees