I have created SR 3-41987700991 for this issue.

Hello @User_GGAJ6 ,

I hope all is well with you over there ;o)

Thanks for your latest post into the PeopleSoft ESA Community, where the Expenses module queries can be raised.

The page link, and the instructions you shared, are from my own experience, the correct ones, and the ASCII format file for the CONUS/OCONUS Per Diem Rates on 2026 Fiscal Year should be available there. I am able to download the 2025 year:

August is usually the month when the DoD - GSA provides the new Per Diem Rates, but they do not come into effect until October 1st for the Fiscal Year 2026. As the same ASCII file is available for 2025, it is my assumption that in the coming weeks, the 2026 Fiscal Year option should be enabled. It may be just a matter of a bit more time.

I will leave it to other customers though to reply with their experiences, and if they have been able to get such files from some other place.

I hope that the information provided has clarified all your doubts. Should you have additional related questions, do not hesitate letting us know. On the contrary, if all your queries, and doubts have been successfully addressed, please make sure to mark 'YES' on the 'Did this answer the question? Yes-No' link. This will enable other Community Users to quickly identify the solution suggested, and see that this post has been successfully
answered.

Have an excellent day!

Pere Taulé

Hello @Otto Schmid ,

I hope all is well with you over there ;o)

Please, find here below my feedback:

1. The AWE tool, pages, and features, are owned by the FIN Enterprise Components module. However, the configuration data gets seeded from all respective FSCM modules. So the ERApproval, TAApproval, CAApproval, TRApproval, TJApproval, and their respective User Lists are owned, and delivered by FIN Expenses module.
2. The limited changes allowed was a decision by the FIN Expenses Development team, as they are the ones that own the data delivered. Note that back in FSCM 8.9 version, the AWE tool was in its infancy, it was extremely limited, and was not able to cover all possible scenarios within FIN Expenses module. As such, the seeded data was considered as System Delivered Data, and to compliment it, a whole series of set up pages were delivered on top of that, those pages are owned and supported by FIN Expenses module, ad it would be the place customers should set up their requirements, (Approver Types, Approver Profiles, Approver Lists, Approver Assignments, Privilege Templates, Refinement Templates, Transaction Definition, etc…).

To my knowledge, the SCM Purchasing, and FIN Expenses modules were the very first ones in FSCM 9.2 product line to adopt AWE. Since then, AWE has come a long way, and many other modules have gradually been adopting it. As the AWE tool became more flexible and configurable, those modules did not have to adopt the approach from FIN Expenses, and allow all configuration straight into AWE pages.

You are correct, only the person who raises the Community Post has the chance to mark it as answered. If you have more questions around such functionality, do please go ahead and raise new posts. We will be happy to assist. If those require further troubleshooting, we suggest then a Service Request, where we can host calls, and Zoom sessions if needed.

Have a great weekend!

Pere Taulé

Hi Pere,

Correct on the fluid expense workcenter page I would like it to load in that space to the right of the grouplet list. On the Links page you showed in your screenshot I added a new line and clicked the Define link. I selected a Link Type of "Menu Item", then clicked Select Menu Item.

I selected the fluid Create Expense Report through this path: Root > Fluid Structure Content > Fluid Pages > Travel and Expenses > Create Expense Report (in our environment I had to select the "Include hidden Crefs" for the Fluid Structure Content folder to display).

I clicked the Activate Link Settings and saved. After navigating to the fluid Expense Workcenter the link shows up but when I click on it, the page does open but not within the workcenter. It appears to leave the workcenter and open the new page within the same browser tab/window, which is not the same as the other classic links where it remains within the workcenter allowing the user to stay on the workcenter page while they create their claim. The same thing happens on the My Expense Reports and My Wallet fluid page links.

Hi @Pere Taule-Oracle

Thank you very much for your detailed explanation on how FIN Expenses Workflow relates to AWE. I missed the section “Setting up approvals and audit rules” under Expenses. I have some questions:

1. When you state that “the FIN Expenses Development team made the decision to consider the configuration delivered in the below navigation paths as SYSTEM DELIVERED DATA” it sounds that this config was delivered by the AWE team?

2. When you state that “Allowed and supported changes on the set up of ERApproval, TAApproval, CAApproval, TRApproval, and TJApproval, along with their respective User Lists (Application Class), are very limited” – was this a decision made by the Expenses Team or the AWE Team?

It sounds that when AWE was created (by the AWE Team) in version 8.9, the Expenses Team was not too impressed by what was delivered in AWE and took the decision to develop comprehensive Expense Workflow capability . While this is an admirable unfolding of events, it means that the User configuring Expenses Workflow now needs to understand how Expenses Workflow interfaces with AWE Workflow. Thankfully, the Expenses Workflow PeopleBooks documentation is quite comprehensive so this should not be too much of a stumbling block.

I spent some time working with the HR Recruit Team configuring Job Opening and Offer Workflow and AWE integration was seamless. This is probably because the Recruit module was developed in parallel with AWE (or thereafter)? This would have negated the problem of retrofitting AWE as seems to be the case with the FIN modules.

It seems that the different FIN Teams are at vastly different stages of integrating AWE. As you mention, it seems that the FIN Expenses Team was very proactive. On the other hand it seems that the Asset Team has been very slow in doing so.

I see that SaraH223 has already marked this post as having been answered, so there is no need for me to do so. I presume in any case that only the person initiating the question can set it to ‘answered’.

Looking forward to obtaining more clarity from you in the future!

Regards

Otto