We had a consultant helping us get ready for our ISO Registration Audit. He stated in his report that the red tag itself had no part number or revision marking on the red tag form. He stated that the red tag is a form and needs to have a part number and revision. I have been through audits in different companies and I never heard of this requirement. Can anyone tell me if this is true and I need to have the part number and revision?

We had a consultant helping us get ready for our ISO Registration Audit. He stated in his report that the red tag itself had no part number or revision marking on the red tag form. He stated that the red tag is a form and needs to have a part number and revision. I have been through audits in different companies and I never heard of this requirement. Can anyone tell me if this is true and I need to have the part number and revision?


Mike:

Welcome to the Cove!!!

Do you have unique lot numbers, or some other way to identify the tagged parts?

What we do is use orange marking tape (the kind the surveyors use) to mark a pallet of material when its status is questionable. That triggers a Material Review Report (MRR), which notes the lot number of the material (and the grade, and usually the location, which we can often tell from the lot number, as well). The control of the material is through the orange tape, which is changed to paint (an "X" in both cases, on 2 sides of the pallet, by the way) if it is found that the material is nonconforming.

If you have this type of information (lot, problem descript., etc that we have on the MRR) on your red tag, I can see your auditor's point, however, assuming that the information is needed for final disposition.

There is no specific requirement that I know of for control of red tags, but for some processes I could see where it might be needed.

Hope this helps.

Craig

4.2.3 says that documents required by the quality management system shall be controlled. If you specify in your system somewhere that you have to use the tag, then it must be controlled. If your system allows you to use alternative methods to identify the material and record the information on it, then the form doesn't require control.

Deja vu all over again...

I remain of the opinion that forms do not have to be controlled unless they act as a WI. If it is only a piece of paper with convienient places to record data, where does ISO say it must be controlled?

Example:

My WI says record the lot number, date, defect type, and inspectors name on a red tag to be attached to the defective product.

My red tag looks like this (except it red):

Date: _____________

Lot number: ___________

Defect type: _____________

Name: ________________

Why do I need to rev. control this tag? Maybe I want to make the line for defect type 2 lines -- now I need to do a revision for no good reason. No harm can come from this, so why control it?

Auditors, what say ye?

We had a consultant helping us get ready for our ISO Registration Audit. He stated in his report that the red tag itself had no part number or revision marking on the red tag form. He stated that the red tag is a form and needs to have a part number and revision. I have been through audits in different companies and I never heard of this requirement. Can anyone tell me if this is true and I need to have the part number and revision?

I am assuming that your use of the term "part number" would be form number, such as QF 001 (for Quality Form 001). That being the case, the standard says documents have to meet certain requirements. Form numbers and revision dates are not necessarily required. You must identify the documents (the tag can be identified by the name, color, shape or what ever). You must also make sure the revision status of the document is also identified. This can also be through various means.

In my opinion, the form does not need a number and rev level, provided you indicate how you are going to make sure folks know what the form is and you have a way to ensure the folks are using the correct version of the form.

I agree with db a little here :agree: . The only other comment I would make is if you have two red tags in the facility used for two different things - they need to be identified and controlled in a manner that prevents unintended use. Also, IMO if you are using the red tag to record quality information, like the nonconformance of the product of any other information that might be used later during CA then you would want to ensure that the information is correct and that the tag is asking for the correct informantion, thus revision control would assist in this. It is still a mater of getting the individual to record the info correctly on the correct tag.

4.2.4 Control of Records
Records shall be established and maintained to provide evidence of conformity to requirements and of the effective operation of the Quality Management System. Records shall remian legible, readily identifiable and retrievable. A documented procedure shall be established to define the controls needed for the identification, storage, protection, retrieval, retention time and disposition of records.

This is the requirement - how you meet it is up to you. However the interpretation of this requirement can be very different from auditor to auditor.

We had a consultant helping us get ready for our ISO Registration Audit. He stated in his report that the red tag itself had no part number or revision marking on the red tag form. He stated that the red tag is a form and needs to have a part number and revision. I have been through audits in different companies and I never heard of this requirement. Can anyone tell me if this is true and I need to have the part number and revision?
Hello Mike and Welcome to the Cove,

I assume you are using this as a quick ID for non-conforming material. For example - we use red tags when sorting thru large parts to identify between good/bad. We then use a non-conforming material report to detail the problem. What are you using it for? If it is for this purpose, IMHO control is not required. In other words, if it is used only for identification, it does not require control.

CarolX

...if you have two red tags in the facility used for two different things - they need to be identified and controlled in a manner that prevents unintended use.

Very good point. We wouldn't want to use the wrong reg tag now would we? That possibility had not even crossed my mind. Good thinking! :agree:

Very good point. We wouldn't want to use the wrong reg tag now would we? That possibility had not even crossed my mind. Good thinking! :agree:Wow! Talk about separating flyspecks from pepper. The consultant may be a little more anal-retentive than I'm used to, but he is correct and incorrect in the same breath.

The tag, itself, could be termed a form and may need to be identified, but the "control" aspect is a completely different topic.

It seems many of us are making a presumption that further info is completed on the red tag [what info is unimportant for our discussion] and then the nonconforming product is parked in a segregated area until final disposition (pass more intensive inspection, rework, scrap, etc.) I'd probably bet money that's true.

IMO: The document itself (the tag) is merely a label and not a controlled document. The controlled document would be the inspection report, the MREB finding, the traveler, etc. Whatever information is added to the label is really referring to one of those controlled documents. If the tagged object is ultimately disposed of, I'm pretty sure no one reclaims the original red tag as a "record" because it would be obsolete. [once the material is scrapped, it no longer fits the description on the tag. If you add info to the tag, you have violated the concept of not altering or modifying a record.]

If it were my organization, I would have a work instruction that says
"use a red piece of paper or tape on suspect material to add ready visual identification as suspect material. Complete a form which describes the material and suspected material defect in sufficient detail for retrieval and examination by MRB before making a decision on final disposition."

If your organization has a document number and revision level for a blank shipping label (before adding all shipping info), then you probably should have one for your red tags (and green tags for good material.) If not, I can't see any auditor making a valid case for a nonconformity in document control.

...We wouldn't want to use the wrong reg tag now would we?
Yes, I remember a particularly nasty incident a few Decembers ago when all of our Christmas presents were sent to the nonconforming hold area because they had red tags on them... :rolleyes:

Wow! Talk about separating flyspecks from pepper.

If it were my organization, I would have a work instruction that says
"use a red piece of paper or tape on suspect material to add ready visual identification as suspect material. Complete a form which describes the material and suspected material defect in sufficient detail for retrieval and examination by MRB before making a decision on final disposition."


Could the tape or paper be 1" X 1", 2' by 2', 6 yd X 7yd? Wouldn't you mention the specific form number? Aren't MRB's a thing of the past? A carry over from the old Mil Spec days? What's sufficient for details? Like a two page document? Just flicking off the flyspecks! ;)

Could the tape or paper be 1" X 1", 2' by 2', 6 yd X 7yd? Wouldn't you mention the specific form number? Aren't MRB's a thing of the past? A carry over from the old Mil Spec days? What's sufficient for details? Like a two page document? Just flicking off the flyspecks! ;)Sure, the tape can be whatever is necessary. Are you calling an individual L.E.D. lamp into question or a Gondola railroad car filled with steel ingots? How big a tag or label do you need to warn someone against using it while it is under suspicion?

MRB a thing of the past? I'm not sure what everyone else's organization terms the function, but more often than not, the suspicion that material may not be conforming is subject to review and a determination of disposition. We call the person or persons making that review an MRB.

So, if I have one suspect L.E.D. lamp (wrong color? bent lead?), my organization may just scrap it and eat the 4-1/2 cents rather than spend more money writing up paper. If I have 120 tons of suspect ingots, somebody above the rank of incoming inspector determines the disposition. We choose to continue to call it a Material Review Board. So does the FAA. In fact, all through the 90's, under the 1994 edition of ISO, we didn't even use red tags, we just segregated the suspect material in a locked pen with its original paperwork until the applicable MRB group was notified and actually "reviewed" the situation to make an ultimate pass/fail/rework/return/scrap decision. We did this with incoming material as a matter of course. We only did it with our own production when there was ANY question by the initial person whether the material was usable. Sometimes we sent samples to a customer for HIS MRB to make a decision before we scrapped some things.

Mom always said, "Waste not, want not!" So we constantly make value judgments about incoming and outgoing material. If it isn't fit for use for one customer (case is wrong shade of green?), maybe we can sell it someplace else or salvage the insides and put it in a case of the right color. In our organization, that function of determining disposition is called MRB.

Mom always said, "Waste not, want not!" So we constantly make value judgments about incoming and outgoing material. If it isn't fit for use for one customer (case is wrong shade of green?), maybe we can sell it someplace else or salvage the insides and put it in a case of the right color. In our organization, that function of determining disposition is called MRB.

:topic: Cause and Corrective Action can just involve two responsible people, call them what you want. It can be as difficult as you choose to make the process. I asked that question about MRB's here in the Cove and was told that it was "a carry over from those mil-spec days" and hardly used anymore. Kind of like an Antique Car Show. ;) I was drawn into this discussion by your reference to separating fly specks from pepper, which preceded your fact filled post. Not surprisedly, that's what we do here. Just never saw it put so colorful. I would definitely choose pepper over fly specks. We all know what they are... :smokin:

:truce: There are a million ways - well maybe not a million ways, but a lot of ways to describe this tag thing. The fact of the matter is no one is right and everybody is wrong!!! I mean there is no right or wrong opinion here. Company culture dictates peoples responses and methods. To control or not control that is the question!!!!!!!!!

As I have stated in a different thread - A well controlled monster is better than an uncontrolled monster. JMHO. :ko:

In addition to the "Quarantine" area, red usually means something's wrong. I have seen Receiving personnel question parts with some kind of red tag on them and find out somebody sold us a skinny chicken. We hung red tags on anything that required further investigation. It keeps people away. I've seen the quarantine area wide open and people rifling through the parts because there were not enough parts to finish with what they were doing. Who had the key? Shipping and Receiving Supervisor. Production Manager asks the S&R Supervisor to open it up so he can "assist" in dispositioning material. Makes the "on the spot" determination that they can "live with it". Sometimes there is a lag between receiving and the official "MRB" ;) action. Tag it red immediately, (Receivers can do this) pending action. At least when the production burglars come around they know that the parts are classified as "non-conforming" for something. I like red tags...part numbers, Supplier, PO #, quantities, etc., all that good stuff you need to make that important call. JMHO