Product and package
Make the production basis identifiable.
- Raw-water evidence attached
- Product targets and review owner named
- Bottle, cap, label and pack files listed
- Reference output and formats defined
A structured request for comparable technical proposals
A useful request for quotation gives every supplier the same design basis and asks for the same response structure. The downloadable CSV worksheet on this page turns project assumptions, confirmed data, open questions and responsibility boundaries into reviewable fields.
Direct answer
Include document control and project location; source-water evidence and product targets; bottle, cap, label and pack data; required good output and operating schedule; available utilities and building constraints; equipment, control and service boundaries; documentation, testing and handover requirements; and a clear supplier-response format. Use the downloadable CSV as a working register rather than filling unknowns with guesses. Mark each entry as confirmed, provisional, supplier to propose or not applicable, attach supporting drawings and analyses, and issue the same controlled revision to every bidder.
System focus 01
Begin the CSV with a project identifier, buyer contact, installation country and site, issue date, response date, currency and document revision. State whether the request covers a feasibility budget, a technical proposal or a firm commercial offer, because the expected evidence differs. Name the attachments and use one file revision for all suppliers. Define how bidders should mark compliance, deviation, exclusion, option and missing information. Ask them to preserve row identifiers so answers can be compared without reinterpreting free-form proposals. Unknown buyer inputs should remain visibly open with an owner and due date; a guessed value can silently drive unsuitable treatment, capacity, utility and layout choices.
System focus 02
Attach representative raw-water analysis with sample source, date and relevant operating context instead of naming a treatment train in advance. Describe each intended product, but leave project-specific regulatory and label determinations to qualified review. Record available source flow, seasonal uncertainty, pretreatment already present, expected sanitation duty and discharge constraints. Ask the supplier to state the proposed process, design assumptions, usable product-water output, recovery basis, tanks, pumps, treatment consumables, monitoring points and hygienic handover to the filler. The RFQ should distinguish a desired result from a buyer-prescribed method so suppliers can explain their engineering basis without making unverified compliance promises.
System focus 03
Provide drawings and available physical samples for each bottle or preform, neck finish, cap, label and secondary pack. Identify which format is the reference for capacity and which additional formats need change parts or separate verification. Define output as accepted bottles or packs at a named handover point over a stated operating window, not simply the fastest machine rating. Record whether bottles are blown onsite, purchased or supplied from retained equipment. Ask bidders to return capacity by format, change-part scope, material assumptions, replenishment method, expected interface controls and any sample quantities required for engineering and testing. Keep unapproved future formats outside guaranteed comparisons.
System focus 04
Attach a scaled plan showing columns, doors, floor levels, drainage, hygiene zones, existing equipment and available installation area. In the CSV, list electrical conditions, compressed-air levels and quality, water services, cooling, ventilation, drainage and environmental conditions at defined connection points. Ask for normal and peak demand separately where relevant, along with connection size or location information needed for coordination. Divide the project into supplier equipment, required auxiliaries, buyer-side utilities and buildings, retained machines, installation work, piping, cabling and controls integration. A responsibility field for every interface is more useful than a broad claim that the line is complete.
System focus 05
Use the final CSV fields to request equipment identity, materials where relevant, drawings, manuals, parts lists, software or recipe backup arrangements, recommended spares and consumables. Define the intended factory and site test objectives, reference materials, measurement method, responsibility and open-item process without inventing acceptance values not established by the project. Ask suppliers to separate core equipment, mandatory auxiliaries, options, packing and freight, site services and exclusions. Request a delivery plan as supplier-entered information rather than publishing a promised lead time. Require assumptions and deviations to be listed against the original row so technical and commercial reviewers can reconcile the same scope.
RFQ release gate
A complete issue package distinguishes confirmed inputs, open questions and fields the supplier must propose.
Make the production basis identifiable.
Show where each responsibility begins and ends.
Require answers that remain comparable.
The downloadable CSV is a project data register, not a substitute for engineering, regulatory, financial or legal review. Keep unconfirmed information visibly provisional.
Editable buyer worksheet
Collect water, bottle, output, pack, factory, utility, scope, test and acceptance inputs before requesting comparable proposals.
Buyer questions
Use these answers as a project-planning starting point. Final equipment and performance remain subject to the confirmed brief.
No. Confirmed facts should be complete, but genuine unknowns should remain marked with an owner and required response. A visible open item is safer than an invented input.
Yes. Issue the same controlled revision and attachment set, preserve row identifiers and require responses in the same fields so differences remain traceable.
Usually it should provide water evidence and required outcomes, then ask each supplier to explain the proposed route and assumptions. A prescribed process is appropriate only when the buyer has a confirmed engineering basis.
No. It organizes inquiry data and supplier responses. Qualified technical, commercial, legal and regulatory review is still needed before requirements become contractual.
Issue a numbered revision or clarification to every active bidder, identify changed rows and attachments, and require suppliers to confirm which revision their proposal uses.
Deep technical guides
Each guide answers one narrower project question and links the result back to complete-line scope.
The bottle and pack format matrix gives every bidder one controlled definition of the SKUs the bottled water line must run. It connects container geometry and material to closure, label, code, secondary pack, pallet and required line performance.
Capacities, process routes, layouts, utilities and equipment shown on this site are decision frameworks and reference examples. They are not a final specification, performance guarantee or offer. Confirmed scope and performance are defined in the signed technical and commercial agreement.
Allot Tech project desk
Share the source water, bottle, target output, pack format, factory status and destination. We will use them as the basis for a project-specific configuration discussion.