Re: Stamping Documents with ‘For Reference Only’
FWIW the use of "reference only" is generally when a document is superseded but the old edition is marked up. Just in case people want to go back to look at "what we used to do."
The standard identifies those documents as "obsolete." Since the term "obsolete" is not specially defined in the standard, we use a common dictionary meaning, and Merriam-Webster defines "obsolete" as "no longer in use or no longer useful."
The standard requires you to prevent the unintended use of obsolete documents. If you retain them for any purpose (including future intended use), they must be suitably identified. Marking it "reference" is certainly
a way to identify it, but IMHO seems much less obvious than just marking it "obsolete."
Marking a document obsolete does not prevent it from being used, just from being mistaken as current. Like the MW definition, the standard recognizes that, just because something is no longer used, doesn't mean it cannot still be "useful," in which case it needs to be controlled because it could be used - usually for reference (IOW comparison) purposes.
An organization may have a general understanding about what "reference" means based on efforts to define it that way, but it sort of goes against the grain: "reference" is not defined, addressed or sanctioned in any part of the standard, its annexes or guidance documents, while the concept of an "obsolete" document is. Also, MW does not provide any definition that would clearly endorse using "reference" to identify information as inaccurate or outdated, actually, some definitions indicate the word may imply just the opposite.
(but does the document need to be controlled after the move is completed?) it will depend on the situation
I agree that it would be up to the organization to determine if it was valuable to keep obsolete versions of the blueprint, but if they did, they would still need to control them per the requirements for obsolete documents. This is so everyone will know what is current and what is not, even when all those originally involved have left to go on to bigger and better things, including that great management system in the sky.
It may not even need to be controlled by the organization at all if there is a contractor performing the work.
Even if it is a contractor's document, it still needs to be controlled. It certainly meets the definition of a document that requires controlled per 4.2.1d and the standard requires documents of external origin to be suitably identified and their distribution to be controlled.
If you mean that a contractor does not need have access to a controlled document: If the contractor's work can impact the management system, they need to have access to the same accurate, authorized and current information that an employee does, so they would need to be referring to a controlled document.
BTW, I don't ever think I have seen a blueprint that didn't have a date on it and a form of identification, which would be an acceptable way to demonstrate control (if the document is current).