How is a variation handled by PSA that they currently don't have listed

[ALR-bishop]

When Lemke was with SCD it was easy to send him variant cards and get a response on whether he would recommend it. His definition for inclusion
over time narrowed to exclude recurring print defects ( like the Herrer and Bakep) for new listings. And he removed some listed variations, like border gaps from later editions. He decided only intentional changes in a card by the manufacturer should be included. But he realized it is sometimes impossible to tell an intentional change from a defect that occurs in early runs and disappears

It was harder to get recognition under his replacements, Fluckinger and Bartsch. Maybe because variants did not interest them as much as Bob, or maybe
SCD cut back on resources for the print edition.

Rich Klein has some influence on variant listings on COMC, and he may have insight on who to contact at Beckett. They may be more lenient given their recognition of the 61 Fairly with a green smudge in the baseball on the back, which PSA then adopted .

Fact is there is not now nor likely ever will be a standard accepted hobby definition of what constitutes a variation