The new puck has a larger edge radius where the support expects a flat contact. Quality is checking its drawing identity; I have kept it separate from the earlier stock.

Has quality confirmed whether that radius belongs to an intended revision? That decides whether you have wrong stock or a new tooling requirement, rather than a reason to compensate the pickup point.

Intended part revision. The existing support was never assessed for it. Tooling is reviewing the new contact geometry, with the current job limited to identified earlier stock after its checks.

Does the stock issue instruction distinguish those revisions at the bench? Someone will otherwise choose the familiar puck name and bring the new geometry back to the old support.