What belongs in the register?
Record a difference between the issued requirement and the supplier's actual offer: an alternative component, omitted auxiliary, changed format coverage, different test basis or buyer-side responsibility. A missing answer is an open clarification, not confirmation that the requirement is met.
Keep the original requirement and the proposed response in separate fields. Identify the RFQ, drawing or sample revision and the supplier quotation revision. If no requirement exists yet, record an unresolved input first; do not invent a specification simply to complete the row. This register supports a procurement decision, not engineering approval by itself.
Minimum fields for a useful deviation row
| Field | What to record |
|---|---|
| ID and source | Unique issue ID, RFQ clause, drawing/sample revision and quotation reference |
| Requested versus offered | Original requirement alongside the exact alternative, exclusion or unanswered point |
| Affected scope | Machine, bottle format, auxiliary, interface, document or service |
| Consequences | Supplier's stated effects on output basis, format parts, utilities, price, schedule and support; unknowns remain open |
| Evidence and reviewers | Required drawing, component data, written clarification or test; named technical and purchasing reviewers |
| Decision and follow-through | Disposition, decision reference/date, revised document reference and any remaining verification |
Three examples: the difference matters more than the label
The following are hypothetical quotation-review examples, not actual Allot Tech projects or approved alternatives. They show what to ask next, not whether a particular substitution is technically acceptable.
| Difference | Why it remains open | Next request |
|---|---|---|
| Offer gives a 500 ml output reference; the buyer also needs 1.5 L | The reference does not establish output or format parts for 1.5 L | Request the actual bottle/cap basis, proposed output, change parts and test conditions for that format |
| Cap feeder appears optional although the requested boundary included cap feeding | Equipment price and supplying responsibility are not on the same basis | Confirm inclusion state, price adjustment if any, supplier and connection boundary |
| A different PLC model is proposed as equivalent | The word equivalent does not establish the required functions or interfaces | Request the exact proposed model and relevant compatibility, software/support and document implications for technical review |
Do not confuse accepted with verified
An accepted alternative records a decision by the designated reviewer. It does not prove that the changed machine was built, documented or tested as agreed. Track these steps separately so a closed commercial question does not hide an outstanding technical check.
| State | Meaning |
|---|---|
| Open / clarification requested | The response or evidence is incomplete |
| Alternative proposed | A defined alternative awaits review; no approval is implied |
| Accepted / incorporation pending | The recorded decision still needs the agreed quotation, drawing or agreement revision |
| Verification pending | Required document or test evidence has not yet been accepted |
| Closed for the stated review stage | The recorded decision and evidence satisfy that stage; later tests remain separately visible |
| Rejected / superseded | Retain the reason and link to the replacement record rather than erasing the history |
Close the loop before comparing the final offer
Ask the supplier to return the updated document references and identify any resulting price or schedule change. Do not assume a revised total includes a requested auxiliary or that silence accepts an alternative. Reconcile the open register with the same quotation revision used in the comparison.
Where verification depends on factory or site testing, carry the item into the relevant test plan and record the responsible party. An approval email, revised drawing and FAT result are different evidence types. Keep each linked to its actual scope; project engineering and contractual decisions remain with the appointed reviewers.
Questions to close before purchase
Is a deviation the same as a defect?
No. During quotation review it is a recorded difference or unresolved response against the requirement. Its acceptability must be reviewed; the register alone does not establish a defect or approve a change.
Can an equivalent component be accepted from the brand name alone?
No. Request the actual proposed model and relevant function, interface, documentation and support implications. The designated technical reviewer decides whether the evidence supports the project requirement.
When can a deviation be closed?
Define the review stage. Record its decision, supporting evidence and incorporation into the applicable documents. Keep any later factory or site verification separately open until its agreed evidence is accepted.
Should a new quotation erase the old deviation log?
No. Preserve the issue ID and prior references, link the new quotation revision and mark superseded responses clearly. This allows reviewers to see what changed and which items still need a decision.
What you should leave with
- A traceable row for each requirement difference.
- Separate proposal, approval, document-incorporation and verification states.
- A copyable request for the evidence needed to close an open item.
Continue the buyer decision workflow
Compare Water Bottling Machine Quotations on Equal Scope
Compare water bottling machine offers using one bottle/output basis, a scope matrix and explicit gap costs. See a hypothetical A/B comparison and decision rules.
Compare Water Bottling Machine Quotations on Equal ScopeBought-Out Component and Brand Verification
Confirm motors, drives, PLC, HMI, sensors, valves and other bought-out components by function, brand, model and substitution rule.
Bought-Out Component and Brand VerificationWater Bottling Machine Technical Agreement Checklist
Review a water bottling machine technical agreement: formats, output basis, equipment scope, drawing revisions, responsibilities, FAT and open deviations.
Water Bottling Machine Technical Agreement ChecklistWater Bottling Machine FAT: Checklist and Test Records
Prepare a factory acceptance test for water bottling equipment with agreed samples, test conditions, output records, deviations and shipment-release decisions.
Water Bottling Machine FAT: Checklist and Test RecordsLast reviewed: 2026-10-02. Technical values and equipment availability are project-specific unless explicitly identified as catalog-reference information.