Quarantine inventory: reconcile location and release status
Treat physical location and permission to use material as separate facts. Record the observed location, reconcile its movement history, and apply a material decision only to its defined population. Moving a held container onto an available-stock rack does not release it.
In this guide
Four containers share a lot; their locations and decision scopes differ.
Lot RM-731 has four containers. A count finds container C-731-02 on rack A-12 even though its last recorded location is quarantine Q-04. Decision QD-731 covers C-731-01 only. Rack names are location labels, not evidence of material status.
Scroll across to see every column →
| Container | Recorded / observed location | Decision evidence | Next work |
|---|---|---|---|
| C-731-01 | Q-04 / Q-04 | Covered by QD-731 | Record any authorised relocation separately |
| C-731-02 | Q-04 / A-12 | Awaiting assessment | Resolve the unrecorded movement; preserve the hold |
| C-731-03 | Q-04 / Q-04 | Awaiting assessment | Continue the assigned assessment |
| C-731-04 | Q-04 / not found | Awaiting assessment | Record missing observation and investigate whereabouts |
One container has a decision permitting the defined use, one has a location mismatch, and one was not found. Applying QD-731 to every container with lot number RM-731 would extend the decision beyond its stated scope.
Download this example as CSVReview output and next actions
There are two physical count exceptions and three containers outside QD-731. Correcting a location record cannot close the material assessments, and extending QD-731 cannot explain the missing container.
Warehouse owner
Identify and handle C-731-02 under the site’s held-material procedure.
Evidence needed: An attributable observation and any actual relocation evidence; its hold remains independently visible.
Count investigator
Trace C-731-04 using accepted moves, open transfers and physical follow-up.
Evidence needed: Its whereabouts are established or the unresolved exception is assessed without inventing a transfer.
Material decision owner
Review affected allocations and actual use separately, and retain QD-731’s named coverage.
Evidence needed: The assessment identifies the containers and work actually covered; no lot-wide status expansion is inferred.
Open the filled review worksheet
RM-731 count exceptions and decision coverage
This is a fictional worked assessment to adapt to your procedure and actual evidence.
Source pack
- Container identities, the observed count and the preceding recorded locations.
- QD-731’s actual scope, movement history and any allocations or uses during the discrepancy period.
- Decision coverage
- QD-731 covers C-731-01 only. The shared RM-731 lot reference does not extend it to the other containers.
- Location mismatch
- C-731-02 was recorded at Q-04 and observed at A-12. Its material assessment is still outstanding.
- Unchanged assessment
- C-731-03 remains at Q-04 awaiting assessment.
- Not found
- C-731-04 has no confirmed observed location. A not-found count does not establish disposal.
Decisions and exceptions
Scroll across to see every column →
| Situation | Response | Consequence |
|---|---|---|
| Held container observed at A-12 | Resolve location and follow the physical handling procedure | Its material-use status remains awaiting assessment |
| QD-731 covers C-731-01 only | Apply the conclusion within that scope | Other containers remain outside the decision |
| C-731-04 is not found | Keep the count exception open and investigate | Do not create an unsupported disposal or transfer |
Record the discrepancy before changing the location.
Create an observation for C-731-02 at A-12, retaining the preceding recorded Q-04 location. Establish the physical identity using your site’s identification procedure. Do not attach an unlabelled container to C-731-02 just because it is the missing object expected nearby. A not-found result for C-731-04 is also an observation, not proof of disposal or consumption.
Inspect accepted moves and any uncompleted transfers for C-731-02. A move that was planned but never executed does not explain an observed position. If a supported move happened earlier and was recorded late, retain both the actual event time, where established, and the later recording history. Avoid inventing an exact movement time from the count time.
Apply the decision to its named population.
Read QD-731’s scope before changing status. In this example it covers C-731-01 only. That is a fact of the illustrative decision, not a recommendation that every organisation makes material decisions container by container. Your record model must express the actual unit of decision: lot, container, quantity or a defined subset.
If a decision covers a lot, define how the covered container population is established and what happens when a new container is received or created later. Expanding an existing decision to newly linked containers may be wrong. Retain the assessed population, applicable evidence and responsible conclusion so the scope can be reproduced.
Coordinate physical containment and the electronic record.
Follow the site procedure for a held container found on an available-material rack. That may involve identification, physical segregation or an authorised move. Record the action and its destination against C-731-02. Changing a field in Seal is not evidence that someone has actually moved the container.
Check planned allocations and any supported use records for the affected container over the relevant period. A reservation is an intention; actual dispensing or consumption is an event. Give the responsible team those distinct populations so it can assess whether the discrepancy affected work already performed.
Bound the affected-use review with the movement evidence.
For a fictional extension, suppose C-731-02 was positively observed at Q-04 at 08:00 and found at A-12 at 11:20. The movement happened somewhere between those observations; 11:20 is discovery time, not a proven transfer time. Retain both observations and search movement, allocation and actual-use records for the container across that interval, extending the search if earlier evidence is uncertain.
Separate work that might use the container from work that actually did. An allocation can identify a batch that needs a readiness check, while a supported consumption event identifies executed work for the material decision owner to assess. If a movement split the container, follow its children and downstream use as well. Searching only the lot name or only current allocations can miss that history.
Record the query scope, time basis, returned identities and owner for each affected item. An empty search proves only that no matching record was found in that source and interval. It does not prove that no physical use occurred when movement recording is already in question. Close that gap with attributable operational evidence or keep the assessment unresolved.
Scroll across to see every column →
| Evidence found | What it means | Next owner action |
|---|---|---|
| B-731-A allocation at 09:00; no execution evidence | Planned use requiring a readiness review | Production owner confirms whether any material was physically used |
| B-731-B addition at 10:15 explicitly names C-731-02 | Executed work within the uncertain movement interval | Material decision owner assesses that batch and linked evidence |
| QD-731 names C-731-01 only | The existing decision does not cover this container | Retain C-731-02’s unresolved use assessment |
| No accepted move explains Q-04 → A-12 | The transfer history is incomplete | Warehouse owner resolves the physical handoff without inventing its time |
Questions this example raises
Does a move out of quarantine change material status?
A recorded or physical move establishes a location change. The permitted-use status needs its own supporting decision. The workflow should make both visible so a rack label cannot substitute for quality evidence.
Does a lot decision cover every container received later?
Check how the decision defines its covered population and handles later receipts or splits. A shared lot reference should not silently widen a previously assessed scope.
Inspect the proposed record fields
Download the proposed field list
Start from the Warehouse management blueprint. The fields below are a proposed design for this case, using Seal’s documented field types and references.
Container
Identify the object whose location and permitted work are being assessed.
- Container IDText
- One identity for C-731-02, independent of its rack or display label.
- Material lotReference
- RM-731; a shared lot does not replace container-level scope.
- Recorded locationReference
- The current location supported by the accepted movement history.
- Use statusSelect
- For example awaiting assessment or permitted for a defined use.
- Status decisionReference
- The actual decision supporting that status.
Count observation and movement
Preserve what was found before resolving why it differs.
- Count scopeText / References
- The locations and containers included in this count.
- Observed containerReference
- C-731-02 when positively identified; leave an unknown object unresolved.
- Observed locationReference
- A-12 for the count observation, separate from the prior Q-04 record.
- Observed at and byTime & date / User
- The time of the count and the person who made the observation.
- Movement evidenceReference
- Any later-established movement record explaining the discrepancy.
Scoped material decision
Define exactly which containers and uses the reviewer has assessed.
- Covered containersReference, multiple
- C-731-01 only for QD-731.
- Permitted workText
- The work allowed by the decision, including any stated conditions.
- Assessment evidenceReferences
- The evidence the responsible reviewer used.
- Review conclusionText / Select
- A retained conclusion that can be checked against the scope.
Seal can connect container observations, movement events and quality decisions so warehouse and quality teams work from the same evidence. The fictional case below shows why those relationships matter when one container appears on a released-material rack and only part of its lot is covered by a decision.
Configure independent location and use-status controls.
In Seal, give Container records separate Reference and Select fields for location and use status. Connect count observations, movement events and decisions through References. Use a dedicated decision Template with its own review requirements so a routine location correction cannot stand in for the material assessment.
A proposed movement-completion Check can require an identified container, actual source and destination, event evidence and any authorisation your procedure calls for. A separate use decision can verify the covered population and evidence. If an external warehouse or ERP performs stock allocation, confirm which connection conveys status and how that system acknowledges it; a local Select value alone is not an external allocation control.
Configuration references
The record design above is illustrative. These product documentation pages explain the Seal capabilities used in it. They open in the signed-in Seal platform.
Acceptance tests
Download these acceptance cases
These are proposed acceptance tests for the configured workflow. They describe expected behaviour to verify, rather than results of a customer implementation.
Changing a rack does not release material
Input: Correct C-731-02’s location from Q-04 to A-12 using supported evidence.
Expected: The location history changes through the correction; its use status and missing decision remain visible.
A shared lot does not widen a decision
Input: Apply QD-731 to the lot view while it names only C-731-01.
Expected: The view distinguishes covered and uncovered containers. C-731-02 is not presented as covered.
The missing container is found later
Input: Record a later positive observation of C-731-04 at a different location.
Expected: The original not-found observation is retained and linked to its resolution instead of being overwritten.
Apply this to your records
Use one location discrepancy and follow the physical container through its movement and use history. Keep decision coverage separate from rack labels and location corrections.
Download the blank working review
Write your working notes here
Notes stay in this tab and are not submitted. Download them before leaving to keep a copy. Use record references to identify your evidence.
Identify the container and material lot, recorded location, last supported physical location, current observation and discovery time. State the timezone and interval in which an unrecorded movement may have happened; do not substitute discovery time for transfer time.
Record who established the container’s actual location and controlled its access under the procedure. Identify the recorded status and any external-system acknowledgement separately. A field update is not evidence that material was physically moved.
List the containers or other explicit population covered by the applicable quality decision. Compare this container, later receipts and any split children with that scope. Record which required assessments remain open.
Retain the source queries, interval and returned identities. Separate planned allocations from supported additions or other actual use. Follow split children and downstream work; document why an empty query may not establish absence of physical use.
For each affected batch/container, record the responsible owner, evidence and next action. Resolve missing movement facts through attributable evidence. Preserve the earlier mismatch and the actual scope of any later material decision.
Unanswered sections remain marked ‘Not recorded’ in the download.
Evidence needed to finish
The assessment identifies the physical object, its observed location, applicable decision coverage and the work potentially affected. Uncertain movement or use remains assigned for resolution. Correcting a rack reference cannot substitute for a material-use decision.
Review the evidence with neil
Review the RM-731 count against movement history and material decisions. Separate confirmed locations, mismatches and not-found observations. Check QD-731’s exact population and identify any allocation or actual-use records for C-731-02. Prepare the warehouse and quality follow-up list with evidence links; do not infer release from rack names or widen the decision scope.
Review the proposed output against these deliverables:
- A container-level comparison of location, use status and supporting decision.
- Separate planned allocations and actual use for the affected container.
- The unresolved location and decision questions with responsible follow-up.
Configure this process with Seal
Use a representative source record and an exception your current process struggles with. We can work through the record design, review responsibilities and connection requirements with you.
Discuss this workflow with Seal