I have the replenishment system set to transfer and a transfer-from code setup. On the planning tab I have reordering policy set to Max Qty. My problem is when I carry out the plan it gives me a transfer for every line on the requisition worksheet even though they are all transferring from the same location. Is there a way to change this? I will have 100 transfers every week for every location 
Thanks.
Why are you using max quantity in this example then, it makes no sense. Why not use reorder point with a reorder cycle set for coverage. Setting the reorder cycle may work for you now, but the max will refill back to the max on every trigger, hence (probably) your supply profile.
I understand and agree with what you are saying, but why would it create a transfer for every line? I tried changing the reordering policy and it does the same thing with everyone. So say I have two items on the worksheet
AB123 - wants me to transfer 5 more
CD321 - wants me to transfer 4 more
I agree with the number so I click carry out plan, then it creates two transfers. One with 5 of AB123 and one with 4 of CD321. Both transferring from 102 to 101. What I would like it to do is one transfer with two lines. It works that way with purchase orders. it doesn’t create 2 PO’s to the same vendor.
Thoughts? Maybe I’m missing something or have some deep hidden checkbox that I haven’t seen yet to check
Sorry I thought you meant per item, different items should always go on the same transfer order, trouble is I no longer have access to the software, but my distant memory tells me there is a parameter setting for this in the same way there is a vendor one. Sorry not looked at the software in quite a while so I can help you no more.
Does anyone know where that might be?
Can someone test this on their system? Setup two item SKU’s with replenishment of transfer and see if it creates two separate transfer orders instead of one.
I’m using 5 SP1
I’m searching through the codeunits and it doesn’t look like it supports placing all items on the same transfer. Can someone else confirm this before I go modifying the code? Thanks.
Turns out there was a bug in codeunit 333 that a hotfix took care of.
A bug they worked in then - you could do it in 4