I've always found that it's easier to separate (management of) quality system docs from product docs. This is especially important to consider when discussing record retention.
I wouldn't recommend naming names for approvals - just stick to roles. That way if the people change, you don't have to rev the doc.
I've never been a big fan of a document list. It's pretty common practice (but not required). To me, it's always been more a trap for not keeping updated. But if it works for you, it's fine.
You say you're a spec developer but you have a considerable amount of manufacturing documents (e.g., routers) described. May not be necessary. You don't need to define your CM's procedures / documents; only ensure that they comply with regulations. There is an 'interface' with the DMR & DHRs so you have to address those; but you shouldn't need to go deeper.
I did see a rather humorous typo in 6.1.6: you said documents would be on the "sheared" intranet. I don't know if your intranet has gotten too wooly and needs shearing.
