cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Purchase Req's slotting in CO09 on Wrong Date

Former Member
0 Kudos

I have a situation where PurReq's that are transferred from ECC to SCM are displayed in CO09 on the wrong date at the receiving location.  It looks to me like the system is not respecting the GR Processing Time on the Stock Transfer Purchase Req record in ECC. 

For Example:

In this example you will see that the PurReq exists at the receiving location in ECC (MD04) on 9/26 and in SCM (CO09) on 9/25.  We have a delivery date of 9/25 and the system should add the GR Processing Time of 1 day to slot the record in MD04 and CO09.  MD04 correctly shows the record on 9/26 (9/25 + 1), but CO09 shows it on 9/25.

MD04                       CO09

PurReq - 9/26          PurReq - 9/25

Information from the PurReq in ECC

Delivery Date 9/25

GR Processing Time - 1

Can someone assist with this issue?  Should we be using a userexit to force SCM to use the GR Processing Time?

Thanks in advance!

Accepted Solutions (1)

Accepted Solutions (1)

RahulHanda
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

Hi Ryan,

I would first recommend you to go through SAP note

1893237 - Everything about transaction Co09


Though, did you do CCR for the same?


Regards

Rahul

Former Member
0 Kudos

Rahul - Thanks for the quick response.  I have reviewed the note that describes CO09.  Also, CIF Delta / CCR does not show any inconsistencies.

Any reason why that SCM (CO09) would slot the PurReqs on a different day?  As I mentioned it looks like it's not respecting the GR Processing Time.

Former Member
0 Kudos

Ryan,

Here are two of many OSS notes that touch upon your question

http://service.sap.com/sap/support/notes/1822406

http://service.sap.com/sap/support/notes/1016806

There are lots of other reasons that can contribute to perceived and real inconsistencies between planning data in ECC (MD04) and GATP data in SCM (CO09).  Log onto OSS and look around.

Best Regards,

DB49

Former Member
0 Kudos

DogBoy, Thanks so much for the information the first note you provided clearly explains what's going on.

Answers (0)