Do "Reference Only" documents have to be physically marked/labeled?

[BradM]

Good morning!

We control our technical data in the following way:
Proprietary ? Controlled by Engineering on-line
OEM OHM ? The latest version is controlled by Engineering and stored in a specific type of green binder.

Ok, so it sounds like you have a good system of controlling your documents.

Occasionally the floor may print/copy some or all of a document to mark up. This is now obviously uncontrolled.

Why are they marking them up? Are they making documents that they will submit for revision? If so, why not mark on them exactly what they are?

My question is does this copy need to be marked as ?Reference Only?? I was thinking of amending my document control SOP, and post some signage to the effect of ?Only the On-line version or copies in the green binders are controlled, all other copies are considered uncontrolled and should be used as Reference Only?.
Is this adequate or do they need to be stamped?

I have certainly shuffled enough papers to have my own set of goods and bads for reference only stamps. The problem is it is such a vague term. What does that mean, reference only?

I would tend to favor stamping something uncontrolled copy, dating it, signing it, and destroying at the end of that day.

I just think most people just grab whatever stamp is in the drawer and stamp documents. If one can procure an accurate set of stamps that actually reflect their purpose and use them consistently, they serve a purpose.

 

[BradM]

Oops! I posted right after you!

A reason for ?Reference Only? documents is that a technician may mark up a schematic to include wave forms at a specific test point; this is not part of the official Technical Data Package, but rather a troubleshooting aid. Once the document is marked up it is no longer controlled.
I agree that we want to minimize reference only documents as much as possible, but in some cases they may be required
I think I have heard that the initial approach ? an SOP, and perhaps signage, that states that any document outside a specific set of circumstances (On-line or in specific type of book), should be considered uncontrolled and is therefore reference only is adequate.
If I?m out to lunch, please let me know ? I would rather hear it here then from registrar

Well... I'm still trying to figure out what they are writing down, and why. I'm no auditor, but if I was, I would be really interested in what they are writing on that uncontrolled copy, and then what they are using those values for. If they matter, I would think they need to be documented in a more formal matter.

 

[Jim Wynne]

A reason for ?Reference Only? documents is that a technician may mark up a schematic to include wave forms at a specific test point; this is not part of the official Technical Data Package, but rather a troubleshooting aid. Once the document is marked up it is no longer controlled.

That last bit is wrong, I think. If markups are being used to change specifications and there's no control over the markup process, that's a problem. Someone scribbling notes on a copy of a drawing or schematic doesn't change anything. Anything (with regard to specifications) that doesn't match the "master" controlled copy is what you want to watch out for. It's not uncommon in mechanical inspection for a person to measure some dimensions and write the result on a copy of a drawing, then later toss the scribbled-on drawing out after it's served its purpose.

I agree that we want to minimize reference only documents as much as possible, but in some cases they may be required

It's not a question of minimizing "reference only" documents; the question is whether you use the designation "reference only." This is your choice, but I can tell you that it's often a red flag for auditors. It's often used as a catch-all for things that people really have no control over, but should.

I think I have heard that the initial approach ? an SOP, and perhaps signage, that states that any document outside a specific set of circumstances (On-line or in specific type of book), should be considered uncontrolled and is therefore reference only is adequate.
If I?m out to lunch, please let me know ? I would rather hear it here then from registrar

It all boils down to a matter of personal preference so long as the criteria for document control in 4.2.3 and 4.2.4 (ISO 9001:2008) are satisfied.

 

[Mallya]

To deal with reference only documents and at the same time to prevent unintended use it's very difficult, if is necessary to have them the only way to prevent unintended use-please control them!. Otherwise it will become a smoking gun to any smart auditor.

 

[dgriffith]

Oops! I posted right after you!



Well... I'm still trying to figure out what they are writing down, and why. I'm no auditor, but if I was, I would be really interested in what they are writing on that uncontrolled copy, and then what they are using those values for. If they matter, I would think they need to be documented in a more formal matter.

Here, the print/drawing is often what the engineer/customer desires. Often that can't be done and the print will be "redlined" with changes. If the engineer/customer agrees with the changes, they notate the print/send concurrence and then the redlined drawings go to drawing control, are incorporated into the controlled drawing, and it becomes a new controlled drawing.

 

[BradM]

Here, the print/drawing is often what the engineer/customer desires. Often that can't be done and the print will be "redlined" with changes. If the engineer/customer agrees with the changes, they notate the print/send concurrence and then the redlined drawings go to drawing control, are incorporated into the controlled drawing, and it becomes a new controlled drawing.

Thanks for the post and the clarification. In that case, I definitely don't see that stamping those documents "For Reference only" would be beneficial. Possibly a "Draft" or "Proposed Draft" with a job number/signature/ date spot might be more productive, IMO.