PBO is telling me that I have to create one shortage annex for every single serial numbered item on my Property Book. Is this true?

So I am currently deployed to Afghanistan, and my company is attached to SEAL Team 2. Needless to say, they have rather "different" approach when it comes to property. I am also an infantry company commander so I freely admit that my property knowledge is more limited than say an FSC or Mech company commander.

My company will be RIPing soon so we are getting all of our TPE ready to transfer to the new unit. Their PBO is insisting that we have to create shortage annexes by serial numbered item; meaning if I have 48 MBITRs, I have to create 48 seperate shortage annexes. I have done 4 change of command inventories in the past (3 as an XO and 1 as a commander) and every commander, including myself, wanted to see shortage annexes by like item; meaning that using the same example of 48 MBITRs, I would have 1 shortage annex refecting the shortages for all 48 MBITRs. So the end item description would be PRC-148 MBITR, and quantity would be 48, and the alpha column would reflect the quanity of each BII piece on hand(ie 48 handmics, 48 antennas, 48 spare batteries).

Using a even better example (and more time consuming) with our 16 RG-33's. By my preferred method, there would be 1 shortage annex for reflecting the on hand BII/COEI for all 16 trucks. This would allow the incoming commander to put all 16 trucks on-line, have the TC for each truck layout out all the BII/COEI in front of the truck, and then the incoming commander can call out "fire extinguisher!" and everyone holds up their fire extinguisher, and if their are 14 fire extinguishers on the shortage annex, then there better be 14 fire exinguishers being held in the air. This way the commander would not have to conduct the same inventory 16 different times. It also prevents people from shifting BII on the first item inventoried, down to one of the last like items being inventoried (essentially pulling one over on the commander).

Now I'm not here to argue over the preferred technique for conducting property layouts. Everyone has their preferred techniques and there is a million different ways to do things to reach the same endstate. What I really want to know is if by regulation, my preferred method is allowed, or have I been doing it wrong for the past 7 years?