M
So, based upon the collective guru-like opinions of the Cove, may I conclude that in the eyes fo ISO 9001:2000 (and appropriate Registrar), the following would be an acceptable process.
1) State in the doc control procedure that
" Engineering shall maintain an electronic directory of all valid drawings available for production, including at least the date last revised, and revision number. All non-electronic forms of engineering design documents are considered uncontrolled and can be considered for reference only. If an engineer, designer or drafter has a printed copy of such a document it is their responsibility to verify the current revision level when the document is used to make design decisions. These documents may or may not be stamped 'uncontrolled' or 'for reference only' "
2) Adequacy and effectiveness of this system will be determined if/when this system proves to be a root cause of a problem.
To be honest, I am feeling a little uneasy (or conservative). The safest process is to control the paper copies but I understand the cost vs. benefit concept. Should the paper copies be at least stamped to identify there (uncontrolled) status?
Perhaps I need a leap of faith. This was a finding by our corp QA internal audit and they believe (strongly) that if the paper copies are deemed necessary to the performance of work, than they should be controlled. I am looking for sound reasons either to:
A) Convince Eng. to control them, or
B) Convince Corp. that, although their opinions are welcome, there is no justifcation (by the ISO standard, or previous problems) that require change to the system beyond that of describing the system in the doc. control procedure (text above).
Any further thoughts on this are welcome!
1) State in the doc control procedure that
" Engineering shall maintain an electronic directory of all valid drawings available for production, including at least the date last revised, and revision number. All non-electronic forms of engineering design documents are considered uncontrolled and can be considered for reference only. If an engineer, designer or drafter has a printed copy of such a document it is their responsibility to verify the current revision level when the document is used to make design decisions. These documents may or may not be stamped 'uncontrolled' or 'for reference only' "
2) Adequacy and effectiveness of this system will be determined if/when this system proves to be a root cause of a problem.
To be honest, I am feeling a little uneasy (or conservative). The safest process is to control the paper copies but I understand the cost vs. benefit concept. Should the paper copies be at least stamped to identify there (uncontrolled) status?
Perhaps I need a leap of faith. This was a finding by our corp QA internal audit and they believe (strongly) that if the paper copies are deemed necessary to the performance of work, than they should be controlled. I am looking for sound reasons either to:
A) Convince Eng. to control them, or
B) Convince Corp. that, although their opinions are welcome, there is no justifcation (by the ISO standard, or previous problems) that require change to the system beyond that of describing the system in the doc. control procedure (text above).
Any further thoughts on this are welcome!
Last edited by a moderator:
Consider the Engineering Department to be your Customer....keep 'em happy. Talk with them.