Budget supplement in project-Inactive

[former_member195427]

Hello Friends,

Just to ask what does 'Budget supplement in Project' suggests in logs of change document in status management, Does it has any direct correlation with AVAC control on our budget.

The case is, I found -ve values against one WBS, and there is no inconsistency in the actual-commitment values. No one has deactivated AVAC , I check CE type etc. but I am still finding the reason that why system did not checked tolerance of budget against this WBS.

The change logs in the screen shot points on statement 'Budget supplement in Project' 'Inactive' . Can someone help me to understand what exactly it mean, can there be a case where by changing supplement values, I get -ve values in available budget count of WBS?

Kindly share your views on it.

Thanks in advance.

Regards

Saurabh

[Former Member]

Hi Saurabh ,

Please below OSs note

450223 - "Save without checking" within IM budgeting/budget distribtn

[former_member195427]

Hi Preeti,

Thanks for your reply, we are not using IM here.So, this not is not applicable to us.

Regards

Saurabh

[former_member195427]

Hello Friends,

Just to add further, please see the screen shot of S_ALR_87013558 report which shows negative available budget against WBS A/0014-1200 . All budget,actual,commitment values are proper and correct , all configuration,master data settings are proper and in place,no AVAC deactivation happened,no price variation in MIGO-MIRO then why negative values are there?

I raised an OSS and I was suggested to run budget correction program BPDIST03 , but I am not convinced as why should I run it when I see all my values proper and correct (they are actually posted correctly during budgeting,supplement,actual-commitment postings).

Kindly suggest your views on it.

Regards

Saurabh

[sammar81]

Hi Saurabh,

Can you check in CJ30 for budget analysis what's contributing to the negative values.. Also check for the report BPFCTRA0.

is there a test run for the correction program suggested by SAP?

Let us know how it goes..

Cheers

Sammar

[former_member195427]

Hello Sammar,

I have checked AVAC analysis log which does not show me any value which gives rise to -ve budget. See

screenshot:

Only two potential GRN values are there 625.xx and 35699.xx  which does not give me any clear idea of -ve values.

No , there is no test run for it, Let me know if you find out something more.

Thanks .

Regards

Saurabh

[sammar81]

Hi Saurabh,

The two entries which are in the screen shot are made with value type 11.. which is statistical postings..

I think that's the reason system didn't stopped you going over your limit of budget..  And is showing Negative value in balance as these are adding to assigned value column of the report.

I will check if I find anything else..

[former_member195427]

Hi Sammar,

This statistical CE is created with category 90. And it is applicable for budget check.

Regards

Saurabh

[sammar81]

Hi Saurabh,

Then I would be tempted to go with the solution provided by SAP.. Not finding anything which can cause this issue.

[former_member195427]

Thanks Sammar,

You have indeed helped a lot.

Finally, I have found the root cause of issue with help of our FICO guy, It's very unconventional way which was causing this discrepancy. I would like to explain it as follows:

(I found the root cause of this inconsistency. It is not related to budget inconsistency)

What happened is:

User created PR on 03.03.2014 for asset purchase, they did not mention WBS in PR (WBS was not mandatory earlier in PR for account assignment cat. A).A PO for this PR is created accordingly. Next month,we implemented budget control for CAPEX projects (and maintained WBS as mandatory field in PR/PO for category A). Last month the did service entry(ML81N) for those PR->PO by mentioning WBS in it and posted SES. That gave rise to actual cost of WBS without giving budget exceeded error and thereby making WBS available budget as -ve figures.

When I reproduce the same in testing client,I found the same thing which I explained above. Now, here the question is in such case why system is not giving budget exceeded error during service entry sheet posting.Our tolerance limits settings check 'all groups' for AVAC and all related configuration is proper and in place.

Please suggest a workaround to deal with this situation.

PS: SAP has forwarded the OSS issue to "component PS-COS-BUD for further analysis" . Waiting for their response on it.

Best Regards

Saurabh

[sammar81]

Hi Saurabh,

Please check if this note helps you in understanding the current behaviour..783161.

For the workaround I guess you need to add the commitment  values to the Older PO's against the WBS and then reconstruct the AVAC.  Give it a try..

Cheers

Sammar

[former_member195427]

Hi Sammar,

Thanks for your reply.I read the note suggested by you. But I think the issue can be addressed better with the implementation of SAP notes 46209 & 696362.

I am check on it..

Regards

Saurabh

[former_member252544]

Hi Saurabh,

Check SAP note 46209 (No availability control for Goods Receipt) which will help you in understanding system behavior.

Regards,

Sachin.

[sammar81]

Hi Saurabh,

Is the WBS where you have negative values lower in the hierarchy of WBS? Sometimes system does allow you to post values if superior wbs has budget. which results in negative value in budget at that level.

Second point would be are there any exemption cost elements?  I am not sure if supplementing from one wbs to other would allow negative value.. need to check that scenario..

cheers

sammar

[former_member195427]

Hi Sammar,

Yes the said WBS is in lower hierarchy.But it will happen only if WBS has no budget, once we assign a non zero against lower level WBS it will be checked against AVAC limits of its own budget.Correct me if I am wrong.

Secondly,we have not maintained any exempt cost elements from AVAC. Also, If we transfer supplement from one WBS to other with negative value, it will check budget availability at receiver WBS at first stance and later it will increase budget value in sender WBS and subsequently it will nullify a corresponding budget value from receiver WBS.

I am still searching for the root cause.

Thanks.

Regards

Saurabh

[Former Member]

yes, if you have decreased the budget supplement

[former_member195427]

Hi Anand,

Agreed, But in that case system must generate one document (to be viewed from CJ3B). In our system, no negative supplement was posted.

Thanks