STO ATP issue

[Former Member]

Hi All,

currently in my company the ATP for STO's has been turned off for 2 reasons:

1) If the stock is kept in one storage location (ABCD) and the ATP is looking at EFGH (based on master data etc), then obviously, deliveries will not be created even if stock exists in ABCD.

2) in a double STO process, the delivery documents will be created a week early (to get the export related documents in place). However, stock may or may not be available in the virtual shipping plant(in a DOUBLE STO scenario) and therefore deliveries may not be created. Today, because ATP is turned off, these virtual shipping sites can create the delivery in advance whether or not there is stock.

How ever the users in the plant are having issues with non availability of stock even though the delivery says the stock is confirmed.

Do you guys think we can turn on the ATP and still over come such issues

Thanks in advance.

[Shiva_Ram · Accepted solution]

In my opinion, you need to activate ATP check.

ATP check confirms the quantity based on the existing stock or incoming stock. This way, the commitment made to the customer is fulfilled.

On analyzing the point 1, in t.code OVZ9, you can uncheck No.Stor.loc inspection field. By this way the system checks the stock at plant level and not at storage location level. So based on the stock on other storage locations, the quantity can be confirmed in the sales order.

By the way, are the users entering the storage location details in sales order or is it fetched through user exits?

Regards

[Former Member · Accepted solution]

Thanks Shiva.

Please note that this is strictly for STO's only. So, as far as my knowledge is concerned (correct me if i am wrong), ATP is done only at the delivery level for STO's. Hence we control this through the ATP field in item category for deliveries.

So, for the first issue: do u think if i uncheck the 'Stlocation required' field, it can be resolved?

The sloc is automatically determined when a delivery is created for the STO. So no, the users are not entering anything manually.

Any thoughts on the second problem we have here?

Thanks/Aryan