Auditor States "Shall have Procedure for Disposition of Records"

[RoxaneB]

Re: Auditor States 'shall have procedure for dispostion of records"

Joel, ISO 9001:2000 Section 4.2.4 states:

A documented procedure shall be established to define the controls needed for the identification, storage, protection, retrieval, retention time and disposition of records

Stating a retention time does not equate to the method of disposition. If your procedure states that the method of disposition is at the record manager's discretion (i.e., what Carol X does), that should suffice. It meets the intent of the standard.

If you want a system that goes above and beyond the requirements (no insult intended to Carol, honest!), you will clearly establish, define and implement controls for each record.

 

[AndyN]

Re: Auditor States 'shall have procedure for dispostion of records"

Whoa, hang on.............disposition doesn't mean disposal..........It means "what is going to happen to them! Not all records should be disposed of, some might be kept in archive - that's a disposition. Just like it says in the 'control of non-conforming product' (reworked, down graded, accepted 'as is' etc)..........you wouldn't automatically scrap (dispose of) non-conforming product, especially until someone in authority has decided.

The same is true for records.......... Not that you'll rework etc records, of course.......

Some of the folks here need to re-evaluate what some of the ISO 9001 requirements actually say..............

Andy

 

[RoxaneB]

Re: Auditor States 'shall have procedure for dispostion of records"

Whoa, hang on.............disposition doesn't mean disposal..........It means "what is going to happen to them! Not all records should be disposed of, some might be kept in archive - that's a disposition.

Very valid point, Andy.

I often forget that and it's no wonder as our system for controlling records retention info as an active document, retention info as an archived document and disposal methods.

 

[Crusader]

Re: Auditor States 'shall have procedure for dispostion of records"

Whoa, hang on.............disposition doesn't mean disposal..........It means "what is going to happen to them! Not all records should be disposed of, some might be kept in archive - that's a disposition. Just like it says in the 'control of non-conforming product' (reworked, down graded, accepted 'as is' etc)..........you wouldn't automatically scrap (dispose of) non-conforming product, especially until someone in authority has decided.

The same is true for records.......... Not that you'll rework etc records, of course.......

Some of the folks here need to re-evaluate what some of the ISO 9001 requirements actually say..............

Andy

I FULLY agree with you!! But I lost that battle with the registrar and ended up with the "disposed" wording in my procedure. I started a thread on this specific topic awhile back and it was a huge debate as I recall.
Here it is:
http://elsmar.com/Forums/showthread.php?t=11473&highlight=disposition+disposal

 

[CarolX]

Re: Auditor States 'shall have procedure for dispostion of records"

If you want a system that goes above and beyond the requirements (no insult intended to Carol, honest!), you will clearly establish, define and implement controls for each record.

None taken, Rox
- what is important is the Joel understands the minimum requirement - and I am always for keeping it to a minimum - mandatory at my company. But others may need, as you do, to go above and beyond.

 

[Coury Ferguson]

Re: Auditor States 'shall have procedure for dispostion of records"

Whoa, hang on.............disposition doesn't mean disposal..........It means "what is going to happen to them! Not all records should be disposed of, some might be kept in archive - that's a disposition. Just like it says in the 'control of non-conforming product' (reworked, down graded, accepted 'as is' etc)..........you wouldn't automatically scrap (dispose of) non-conforming product, especially until someone in authority has decided.

The same is true for records.......... Not that you'll rework etc records, of course.......

Some of the folks here need to re-evaluate what some of the ISO 9001 requirements actually say..............

Andy

Andy, I guess it falls under selective reading and I was just as guilty of it. You are right. It states "disposition" not disposal. That is why I decided to delete my reply.

......................................................................................................

Trojan,

In addition, what do you define as dispositioning documents/records once they are obsolete? Do you dispose of the obsolete documents/records? Are the obsolete documents/records placed into archive? If they are Customer's records/documents, how is that handled?

 

[RoxaneB]

Re: Auditor States 'shall have procedure for dispostion of records"

None taken, Rox
- what is important is the Joel understands the minimum requirement - and I am always for keeping it to a minimum - mandatory at my company. But others may need, as you do, to go above and beyond.

Thanks, Carol. I honestly was at a loss on how to type that without making it sound like I was insulting your system. I wasn't doing that but the brain just couldn't think of any way to type it ... but it knew enough to prompt the fingers to type the 'no insult' part. Thanks for understanding!

And that, folks, was Roxane's "touchy-feely moment of the day". I've hereby met my one-hug-a-day quota.

 

[silly girl]

Re: Auditor States 'shall have procedure for dispostion of records"

Okay, some clarification here - we do have a retention column on our matrix: record, owner, and retention (years). The auditor is stated, we must have in our procedure, disposal of records. How they will be discarded? I was always instructed, retention periods once achived, a decision must be made with how to dispose or other. Other to include keep, place off site, etc.

No where does it state in ISO how we must dispose. Just disposition.

And thanks for welcomes...looking forward to the forums.

Joel - Trojan Battery Company

Another thing to think of - if you have some definition of how this decision is made it may save some headaches. When it comes time to 'disposition' the records will this person know enough to make the best choice - i.e. perhaps they should be shredded? Maybe recycling is OK? Storage in off-site archive? Without some definition of the criteria, people are left to make their own decisions...and they may not have enough information to make the right choice.

Silly Girl

 

[AndyN]

Re: Auditor States 'shall have procedure for dispostion of records"

I FULLY agree with you!! But I lost that battle with the registrar and ended up with the "disposed" wording in my procedure. I started a thread on this specific topic awhile back and it was a huge debate as I recall.
Here it is:
http://elsmar.com/Forums/showthread.php?t=11473&highlight=disposition+disposal

Part of the issue is that QS-9000 actually stated in 4.16 disposal (in parenthesis, after the word disposition), but then I guess it's because the auto industry always wanted to get rid of the evidence.....................

Andy

 

[Crusader]

Re: Auditor States 'shall have procedure for dispostion of records"

Part of the issue is that QS-9000 actually stated in 4.16 disposal (in parenthesis, after the word disposition), but then I guess it's because the auto industry always wanted to get rid of the evidence.....................

Andy

Yes, QS did say that. But when we transitioned to ISO 9001, we still had to keep the disposal / disposed word in the procedure. ARGHH!

That's it. I am revising it and removing the "D" word. I'll take my chances. I can put up a good fight.