This is a question that is open to debate. I will give my slant.
Let us take the example of a programme submission (as part of a quotation) for a compensation event which takes up some free float along a path of activities. It shows how - to quote clause 62.2 - the “remaining work is altered by the compensation event” and therefore “the alterations to the Accepted Programme”.
Note the word “alterations” in the above text, so if the Project Manager accepts the quotation, then there is a fairly strong implication that he or she has also “accepted” “the alterations to the Accepted Programme” and therefore that the current Accepted Programme is updated / altered in part as a result. I would go along with this conclusion and Glenn Hide has actually written an article coming to the same conclusion.
However, it is not explicitly stated and others might disagree, although without doing any research I am not aware of any author who has come to a different conclusion. What Glenn did say was that in the 4th edition, he would like it to be more explicitly stated which I also agree with.
So if we take your question where you submitted a completely revised whole Programme as part of your quotation, it ‘alters’ the whole of the current Accepted Programme, so while it might not be in the strict contractual sense a new Accepted Programme (assuming the PM accepts it), it effectively is.
In future, I suggest you submit a new whole programme both under 62.2 and the second bullet point of clause 32.2. That way, there can be no doubt that on acceptance it becomes the new Accepted Programme.