Manage a Supplier Deviation Request for an Out-of-Spec Lot
Share
A supplier deviation request begins with a known departure from a controlled requirement. It is not evidence that the lot is acceptable, and it is not permission to ship. The request gives authorised functions enough information to decide whether specifically identified nonconforming product may receive a limited disposition.
This guide addresses a one-time or temporary exception for an out-of-spec lot. It does not change the drawing, approve a permanent supplier process change or close corrective action. Those decisions need their own controlled routes. For decisions made before a supplier is selected, keep the broader supplier-selection process in a separate record.
Describe the exact departure from the requirement
Copy the requirement exactly enough to identify its source. Record the part number, drawing or specification, revision, purchase order and the relevant characteristic or clause. Then state the actual condition with units, measurement or test method, sample size and observed range. “Dimension slightly oversize” hides the information needed for engineering and quality review.
A useful description could state that drawing revision D requires a bore of 80.00 to 80.10 mm, while the contained lot includes measured results from 80.11 to 80.14 mm using an identified method and instrument. The example is illustrative; an actual submission must use verified data and the governing requirement. Photographs may support a visual condition, but they do not replace measurements when the departure is dimensional.
Identify where and when the condition was detected. State how many pieces were checked, how many failed, and whether the stated affected quantity comes from full inspection, sampling or an estimate. Record work in progress, finished stock, goods in transit and previously shipped material that could share the condition. A deviation request should not narrow scope simply because the supplier has not yet traced the rest.
The Parker supplier quality manual is one company-specific example that distinguishes a written request from prior authorisation to ship and says an approved deviation does not become a permanent engineering change. Its form and authority rules apply to that customer context, not automatically to KTSU or another buyer.
Keep the reason for the request separate from the cause of the nonconformance. A delivery shortage may explain why the supplier seeks consideration, but it does not explain why the process produced the departure. If root cause is not yet confirmed, label it open. Record current containment and the corrective-action reference without claiming the deviation closes either item.
Choose the request type according to the applicable procedure. Some organisations distinguish a concession for product already made from a planned temporary deviation before manufacture. Others use one form for both. Preserve the real timing and state rather than changing the label to fit a preferred workflow. Product already made remains nonconforming unless an authorised disposition says otherwise.
Define the affected quantity and duration
A defensible exception has a hard boundary. List the lot, batch or serial numbers, purchase order, shipment reference and exact quantity requested. Reconcile that quantity with contained stock, work in progress, transit and prior shipments. If individual serials are unavailable, use the traceability unit that both parties can identify and explain how the material will remain segregated.
State whether the request is one time or temporary. A one-time disposition normally ends when the listed units are consumed or rejected. A temporary permission also needs an expiry condition, such as a date, quantity, named production run or restoration event. When both time and quantity are used, say which event ends the approval first.
The 2025 Rockwell Automation supplier quality manual provides a current company example of lot-based deviation requests, written approval before shipment, and identification and segregation of accepted nonconforming product. It also describes a narrowly defined time option in its own process. That option should not be copied into another contract as a universal duration.
Mark and segregate the affected product according to the authorised instructions. The physical label, electronic lot status, packing documents and deviation record should identify the same scope. A label on one pallet is insufficient if loose pieces can be moved into unmarked containers. Protect the link through repacking, consolidation and partial shipments.
Identify other parts, tools, lines and customers that may share the cause, but keep them outside the requested disposition unless explicitly listed. An investigation can have wider scope than an approval. This prevents a finding about a common process from silently expanding permission to unrelated orders.
Account for product already shipped or in transit. The Terumo supplier quality manual, in its medical-device context, gives an example of containment considering in-house, in-transit and previously supplied material. The reusable principle is to trace every location before declaring the affected quantity complete; the medical requirements themselves are not transferred to undercarriage parts.
If the lot or quantity remains unknown, keep the request unresolved. “All stock on hand” is unstable unless the record fixes a count and time. A new production lot created after submission cannot inherit approval merely because it shows the same measured condition.
Review evidence and approval authority
Technical evidence should address the mechanism by which the departure could affect fit, form, function, durability, safety, assembly, service and downstream processing. The relevant questions depend on the characteristic. A cosmetic finish variation, a hardness result, a hole position and a material substitution require different evidence. Do not use a generic risk score as a substitute for that connection.
Ask for traceable inspection or test results, the method and sample identity, and any comparison with conforming product. Check whether the sample represents the most adverse condition in the requested lot. When analysis depends on assumptions about loading, mating parts or service environment, state those assumptions and identify who can confirm them.
Review alternatives as well as the requested use-as-is disposition. Sorting, rework, repair, return or scrap may control the risk differently. Record why an option is feasible or not and whether it creates new requirements. A repair that changes the controlled design or process needs the applicable authorisation; calling it rework does not make it conforming.
Keep delivery pressure in the commercial column. A production stop or late shipment can influence the business decision, but it is not technical evidence that a departure is harmless. Show the delivery effect openly so authorised decision makers can weigh it without confusing urgency with conformance.
Identify the functions required to approve the request under the contract and customer procedure. Engineering may assess technical effect, quality may control nonconforming product, and purchasing may manage the commercial order. The exact authority differs by organisation. A supplier signature, buyer acknowledgement or informal email cannot replace the specified written disposition.
The Accuride supplier resources page illustrates a customer process requiring a written deviation request and response before nonconforming material is shipped, while rejecting verbal approval. Parker and Rockwell publish similar boundaries in their own manuals. These examples support the need to verify authority; they do not identify the approver for another buyer.
The final disposition should say approved, approved with conditions, rejected or more evidence required. It should reference the request version, affected scope and expiry. Conditions might require additional identification, inspection, restricted use or records with the shipment. Each condition needs an owner and a point at which compliance will be checked.
Maintain the shipment block until every required approval and condition is recorded. Approval to evaluate samples is not approval to ship the lot. Approval of a commercial price adjustment is not engineering acceptance. If records conflict, use the most restrictive current state until the authorised functions issue one controlled disposition.
Close the exception without changing the design by accident
Track consumption of the approved quantity and stop at the first expiry condition. Record the units shipped, scrapped, reworked or remaining. If the approval ends on a date, confirm how work in progress made before that date is treated. If it ends by quantity, reconcile partial shipments so unused permission cannot be applied twice.
The Vertiv supplier quality manual offers a company-specific example of temporary authorisation limited by quantity or time, followed by return to the original or superseding specification and identification of product under deviation. Use the concept of an explicit expiry boundary while following the actual customer’s current procedure.
Identify the first conforming lot after the exception and preserve evidence that it returned to the controlled requirement. Connect that lot to the completed corrective action or process restoration as appropriate. Receipt verification should be able to distinguish the last deviation lot from the first conforming lot without relying on memory.
Dispose of unused or remaining affected stock when the deviation expires. Do not assume that material approved but not shipped remains approved indefinitely. The closure record should show its location, quantity and authorised outcome, including any rework or destruction evidence required by the agreement.
Repeated requests for the same condition need escalation. A series of one-time approvals can become an uncontrolled design change. If the parties intend to alter the requirement or production baseline, route that proposal through drawing, specification or product/process change control. Keep the deviation history linked, but do not edit it into a permanent approval.
| Case | Requirement and actual condition | Affected scope | Evidence and authority | Disposition |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Normal | Controlled clause and measured departure are stated with method and units | Part, revision, lot, serials, quantity, PO and expiry reconcile with contained stock | Risk evidence and alternatives were reviewed; all required written approvals and conditions are present | Release only the listed units, mark them as required, then verify the first conforming lot and close |
| Missing | Request says “minor defect” without the requirement, actual value or detection basis | Quantity is estimated and in-transit material is not traced | Delivery urgency is supplied, but technical evidence or an authorised disposition is absent | Keep product contained and shipment blocked; request the missing evidence and scope |
| Conflict | Inspection report identifies one revision while the request cites another | Approval lists one lot, but packing documents list two or the quantity exceeds the limit | Supplier status says approved while the controlled customer record says pending | Stop release, reconcile identifiers and obtain one disposition from the specified authority |
Closure belongs to a named owner and a controlled record. Link the request, evidence, approvals, shipment identification, quantity reconciliation, first conforming lot and corrective-action reference. The exception is complete only when every affected unit has a disposition and later production is demonstrably governed by the original requirement or a separately approved permanent change.