Custom ETO Quotation Specialist

We need to output HTML fragment with sections: headings using

for sections like About the role, Responsibilities, Requirements, Qualifications, Skills, Benefits, Pay, Schedule. Only include sections that have real specific content. We need to parse the posting. First, the job title is given: "The Custom ETO Medium-Voltage (MV) and Low-Voltage (LV) Product & Application Quoting Specialist". We should not repeat job title as heading. We need sections: - About the role: likely the introductory paragraph(s) describing role. - Responsibilities: the "What will you do:" bullet list. - Requirements/Qualifications: The "What qualifications will make you successful:" includes education, experience, abilities. Could be split into Requirements and Qualifications? The instruction says we can have sections like Requirements, Qualifications, Skills. We need to decide based on content. - Skills: maybe the abilities like communication, analytical judgment, etc. - Benefits: The "What's in it for me:" bullet list (high-impact role, mentor, autonomy, collaborative culture). Also later "Our Total Rewards..." includes benefits details. So we need Benefits section. - Pay: The pay range: "For this U.S. based position, the expected pay range is USD 101,600 - USD 152,400 per year." Also mention includes base pay and short-term incentives. So we have Pay. - Schedule: Not mentioned; no schedule info. So we should not include Schedule. We must not include boilerplate like EEO, legal, application instructions, etc. Remove cookie/navigation/legal/EEO/equal-opportunity/scam-warning boilerplate, duplicated lines, and application instructions. We need to preserve all substantive information; do not invent or summarize away detail. We need to use

for section headings. Use

• for any list of duties/requirements/benefits, and

  for prose. We need to output only HTML fragment. Let's extract content. First, introductory paragraph(s) before "What will you do:": "The Custom ETO Medium-Voltage (MV) and Low-Voltage (LV) Product & Application Quoting Specialist is a product-aligned technical expert responsible for developing accurate, complete Bills of Materials (BOMs), pricing, and feasibility assessments for high-complexity custom and engineer-to-order electrical equipment. The role focuses on Ad Hoc and built-from-ground-up solutions where deep product knowledge, manual configuration, and cost development are required beyond the capabilities of standard catalog tools, selectors, or automated configurators. Operating under the direction of a Lead Quoting Specialist (LQS), the specialist receives a defined product or application scope within a larger project. Assignments may include MV switchgear, low-voltage motor control centers, low-voltage distribution and overcurrent equipment, protection and control automation, power quality systems, or other complex MV/LV applications. The specialist may concentrate on one product family or support multiple categories based on experience and business needs." That's the About the role. Now Responsibilities: after "What will you do:" there is a list with headings: Scope Review & Feasibility Assessment, BOM Development, Configuration & Costing, BOM Submission, Handoff & Quality. Each has bullet points. We need to capture all bullet points under each heading as list items. Could flatten into a single list? The instruction: Use

  • for any list of duties/requirements/benefits. It doesn't forbid nested headings? Probably we can keep subheadings as

    ? But only allowed headings are

    for section headings. We could keep each responsibility heading as a

    inside the Responsibilities section? But that would be multiple

    inside a section, maybe okay. However they said use

    for section headings (e.g. About the role, Responsibilities, Requirements, Qualifications, Skills, Benefits, Pay, Schedule). So only top-level sections should be

    . Inside we can use

    or

    • . For subheadings we could use or just plain text. Probably better to keep as

      Scope Review & Feasibility Assessment: then

      • ... etc. Thus Responsibilities section:

        Responsibilities

        then maybe a

        describing? Then each responsibility heading as

        ...:

        then
        • items. Let's extract bullet points: Scope Review & Feasibility Assessment: - Review assigned scope packages, including one-line diagrams, specifications, RFQ documents, relay schemes, customer standards, and project narratives. - Confirm scope boundaries, assumptions, applicable product categories, and required deliverables before beginning BOM development. - Evaluate technical feasibility; identify non-standard configurations, special ratings, specification conflicts, undefined parameters, and items requiring engineering escalation. - Proactively communicate questions, risks, and scope ambiguities to the LQS and support Tender Manager-led Category A, B, C, and D projects. BOM Development, Configuration & Costing: - Build complete, itemized BOMs using Ad Hoc and manual methods when standard selectors or ACE configurators are unavailable or insufficient. - Select and configure equipment from specifications, one-lines, relay diagrams, control requirements, and customer standards. - Provide accurate descriptions, quantities, configurations, and pricing for all line items within the assigned scope. - Perform manual costing for custom or ETO content and document assumptions, clarifications, exceptions, and exclusions. BOM Submission, Handoff & Quality: - Deliver completed BOMs to the LQS in the required format and within established deadlines, clearly identifying open items and pending reviews. - Support BOM consolidation by resolving scope gaps, overlaps, configuration questions, and pricing issues; revise deliverables when scope, addenda, or customer requirements change. - Cross-check BOMs against project documents and verify compliance with applicable NEC, NEMA, ANSI, IEEE, IEC, and customer-specific requirements. - Maintain clear documentation and revision history and escalate technically infeasible configurations or unresolved conflicts promptly. Now Requirements/Qualifications/Skills. The text: "What qualifications will make you successful:" then bullet-like sentences: - Associate or bachelor degree in Electrical Engineering Technology, Industrial Technology, or a related field, or an equivalent combination of education and hands-on technical experience. - At least three years of experience quoting, configuring, or applying complex MV and/or LV electrical distribution equipment, with deep working knowledge of at least one in-scope product category. - Ability to interpret complex one-lines, relay protection schemes, RFQ specifications, and customer engineering standards, with experience developing manual BOMs outside standard configurators. - Strong written communication, documentation, analytical judgment, attention to detail, priority management, and collaboration with LQS, application engineering, tender engineering, product engineering, and manufacturing teams. - Preferred experience includes five or more years in relevant MV/LV products or applications, familiarity with Schneider Electric product lines and ACE tools, and knowledge of NEC, NEMA, ANSI C37, IEEE, and IEC standards. We could split into Requirements (mandatory) and Qualifications (preferred) or Skills. The instruction allows sections Requirements, Qualifications, Skills. We need to decide based on content. We could have: - Requirements: education, 3 years experience, ability to interpret..., strong written communication etc. (these are mandatory) - Qualifications: preferred experience (5+ years, familiarity with Schneider Electric product lines and ACE tools, knowledge of standards) - Skills: maybe the abilities like communication, analytical judgment, etc. But those are already in requirements. Alternatively, we could combine Requirements and Qualifications into one section "Requirements" and another "Skills". But we need to avoid thin sections. Better: Have a section "Requirements" for mandatory items, and a section "Preferred Qualifications" for preferred items. But the allowed headings are Requirements, Qualifications, Skills. We could use "Qualifications" for preferred, and "Skills" for abilities like communication, analytical judgment, etc. However the abilities are also listed under qualifications. Let's think: The instruction: "Use

          for section headings (e.g. About the role, Responsibilities, Requirements, Qualifications, Skills, Benefits, Pay, Schedule)." So they expect those as possible sections. We can include any of those that have real content. Thus we can have: - Requirements: education, 3 years experience, ability to interpret..., strong written communication etc. (these are mandatory) - Qualifications: preferred experience (5+ years, familiarity with Schneider Electric product lines and ACE tools, knowledge of standards) - Skills: maybe we could list specific technical skills: interpreting one-lines, relay protection schemes, etc. But that overlaps. Maybe better to have Requirements (education + experience), Qualifications (preferred experience), Skills (communication, analytical judgment, attention to detail, priority management, collaboration). That seems reasonable. Let's extract: Mandatory: - Associate or bachelor degree in Electrical Engineering Technology, Industrial Technology, or a related field, or an equivalent combination of education and hands-on technical experience. - At least three years of experience quoting, configuring, or applying complex MV and/or LV electrical distribution equipment, with deep working knowledge of at least one in-scope product category. - Ability to interpret complex one-lines, relay protection schemes, RFQ specifications, and customer engineering standards, with experience developing manual BOMs outside standard configurators. - Strong written communication, documentation, analytical judgment, attention to detail, priority management, and collaboration with LQS, application engineering, tender engineering, product engineering, and manufacturing teams. Preferred: - Preferred experience includes five or more years in relevant MV/LV products or applications, familiarity with Schneider Electric product lines and ACE tools, and knowledge of NEC, NEMA, ANSI C37, IEEE, and IEC standards. Skills: maybe we could list the soft skills: Strong written communication, documentation, analytical judgment, attention to detail, priority management, collaboration. But those are already in mandatory. Could move them to Skills. Alternatively, we could have Requirements (education + experience), Qualifications (ability to interpret..., strong written communication...), Skills (preferred experience...). Hmm. Let's decide: We'll do: - Requirements: education and years of experience. - Qualifications: ability to interpret..., strong written communication..., etc. - Skills: preferred experience (5+ years, familiarity with Schneider Electric product lines and ACE tools, knowledge of standards). But the preferred experience is more like qualifications. However it's okay. We need to ensure we don't create thin sections. Each should have substantive content. Let's draft:

          Requirements

          • Associate or bachelor degree in Electrical Engineering Technology, Industrial Technology, or a related field, or an equivalent combination of education and hands-on technical experience.
          • At least three years of experience quoting, configuring, or applying complex MV and/or LV electrical distribution equipment, with deep working knowledge of at least one in-scope product category.

          Qualifications

          • Ability to interpret complex one-lines, relay protection schemes, RFQ specifications, and customer engineering standards, with experience developing manual BOMs outside standard configurators.
          • Strong written communication, documentation, analytical judgment, attention to detail, priority management, and collaboration with LQS, application engineering, tender engineering, product engineering, and manufacturing teams.

          Skills

          • Preferred experience includes five or more years in relevant MV/LV products or applications, familiarity with Schneider Electric product lines and ACE tools, and knowledge of NEC, NEMA, ANSI C37, IEEE, and IEC standards.
          But the Skills section only has one item; maybe thin. Could combine Qualifications and Skills into one? But we need to avoid thin sections. Perhaps better to have only Requirements and Qualifications, and put skills inside Qualifications. Then we don't need Skills section. Let's see: The instruction says "Prefer a few substantive sections over many thin ones." So we should avoid creating a Skills section with just one bullet. So we can omit Skills