Totally confused over changes to issue numbers - Quality & procedures manuals

M

mrigger

#1
Hi,

Hope someone can help me out with this. As a company, we recently implemented a QMS with the intention of achieving ISO 9001:2000 registration, which duly happened at the end of November. As the appointed management representative (in addition to all my other duties!), one of my tasks is ensuring that the quality & procedures manuals are kept up to date.

This is where I have hit a little problem. As a result of some of our internal audits, some minor changes had to be made to some of the documented procedures. No problem with this, and the relevant sections of the manual were changed & reissued, with the next issue number (in this case issue 2). Where I am totally confused is what I need to do with the document register and table of amendment within the manual. I know that these have to be updated to indicate the new issue number of the modified procedures, but as a result of this do these documents themselves have to be reissued?

I know that this is probably a stupid question, but this is all new to me, and I hope that I have explained my problem clearly enough. Thank you in anticipation of your assistance.

Regards,

Mark
 
Elsmar Forum Sponsor
D

D.Scott

#2
Welcome to the Cove Mark. There is no such thing as a stupid question so keep on asking.

I am concluding that these procedures are kept in a manual which is controlled by a revision date and recirculated each time a change is made. I assume your procedure for control of documents states this is how your procedures will be controlled.

If your procedures can be removed from the manual and used as stand alone documents, you need to control the individual document. Each document should have its own revision level. Your manual register should reflect the revision level of each document. Hopefully, when you change a procedure, all you have to do is re-issue that procedure (with a new revision date) and a new register page (showing the current revision date of the procedure).

Just a comment. It sounds like you are maintaining an amendments section of the procedure manual. You may find it easier to track revisions on the procedure itself and eliminate the amendment page. Another thought is, you could maintain your documents electronically and eliminate the manual entirely.

Dave
 

Paul Simpson

Trusted Information Resource
#3
Hi,

Hope someone can help me out with this. As a company, we recently implemented a QMS with the intention of achieving ISO 9001:2000 registration, which duly happened at the end of November. As the appointed management representative (in addition to all my other duties!), one of my tasks is ensuring that the quality & procedures manuals are kept up to date.

This is where I have hit a little problem. As a result of some of our internal audits, some minor changes had to be made to some of the documented procedures. No problem with this, and the relevant sections of the manual were changed & reissued, with the next issue number (in this case issue 2). Where I am totally confused is what I need to do with the document register and table of amendment within the manual. I know that these have to be updated to indicate the new issue number of the modified procedures, but as a result of this do these documents themselves have to be reissued?

I know that this is probably a stupid question, but this is all new to me, and I hope that I have explained my problem clearly enough. Thank you in anticipation of your assistance.

Regards,

Mark
Short answer is it depends what your document control procedure says! Here are a couple of options:

  • If your procedure says the amendment record is a controlled document then it needs to be identified at each revision to show that it has been changed - e.g. by upissuing it from 1 to 2
  • If it is a record then it needs to be identified each time a new record is created (i.e. a new amendment is recorded), perhaps by a date of update and the superseded record stored (in accordance with your records procedure)
  • If it is a form then there will be field to be entered each time the form is completed and, once completed the form will become a record.

Hope that helps!
 
J

J-F. G

#4
Short answer is it depends what your document control procedure says! Here are a couple of options:

  • If your procedure says the amendment record is a controlled document then it needs to be identified at each revision to show that it has been changed - e.g. by upissuing it from 1 to 2
  • If it is a record then it needs to be identified each time a new record is created (i.e. a new amendment is recorded), perhaps by a date of update and the superseded record stored (in accordance with your records procedure)
  • If it is a form then there will be field to be entered each time the form is completed and, once completed the form will become a record.

Hope that helps!
Hello,

First of all I must inform you that this is my first message on Elsmar Cove Forums, and I am by no means a very reliable source as we are in the process of setting up all of our documented procedures.
Our registrar is scheduled for a document review in April 2008.
So our documentation system has not been verified and approved yet.
Maybe someone can tell us if what we are doing is ok.

We are a small machine shop (27 employess) manufacturing parts for aerospace OEMs. We are in a similar situation, i.e. we have documented procedures that need to be updated as a results of internal audits.
The way we have organised it is like this.

We make the changes/amendments directly in the body of the documents and record the changes in the change log table and submit the document for review. All the changes are incorporated in the document, we only issue new revision when the document is reviewed and modified for adequacy.

The clause we have in our document control procedure says something to the effect of:
-All revisions, changes and amendments must be reviewed and approved for adequacy.
-When changes and amendments are required prior to re-issuing a new revision of the document, these changes shall be made directly in the body of the document and then listed, recorded and explained in the change log section (table). The prefered method is to identify the changes using the is/was method, for example.

Revised 5.3

Was
5.3 do X

Is
5.3 do Y

I think this meets the requirements of section 4.2.3 however I am not sure about the fact that changes are made directly in the body of the spec and then explained in the change log, i.e. do you need to re-issue a new revision when changing the content of the document. AS9100 does not appear to say so and our document control procedure neither.

Our revision history is done by keeping the older revision of the file.
Our changes/amendment history is done by recording the is/was in the change log table within the controlled document.
Our system consists of electronic word processing files.

Thank you. /jf
 
Last edited by a moderator:
#5
Hello,

First of all I must inform you that this is my first message on Elsmar Cove Forums. And I am by no means a very reliable source as we are in the process of setting up all of our documented procedures.
Our registrar is scheduled for a document review in Arpil 2008.
So our documentation system has not been verified and approved yet.
Maybe someone can tell us if what we are doing is ok.

We are a small machine shop (27 employess) manufacturing parts for aerospace OEMs. We are in a similar situation, i.e. we havedocumented procedures that need to be updated as a results of internal audits.
The way we have organised it is like this.

We make the changes directly in the body of the documents and record the changes in the change log table and submit to document for review.

The clause we have in our document control procedure says something to the effect of:
-All revisions, changes and amendments must be reviewed and approved for adequacy.
When changes and amendments are required prior to re-issuing a new revision of the document, these changes shall be made directly in the body of the document and then listed, recorded and explained in the change log section (table). The prefered method is to identify the changes using the is/was method, for example.
Revised 5.3
Was
5.3 do X
Is
5.3 do Y
Welcome to the Cove - and please relax! Everyone gets to have 'first post nerves'!

I'm not sure from the last few lines in your post what the "5.3 do X" represents.

In most cases the simplest approach is the best. I advocate (with success) the use of a "document change note" which looks after a lot of the recording of the reasons for changes, approvals etc. instead of burdening documents with that detail. Then, a simple revision numbering system 00, 01, 02, 03 etc or A, B, C etc is all that is really needed.

For a small shop, it appears you have a more complex system that really required. Also, it reads more like some else wrote it, not what I'd expect for a small shop, too.

BTW - weekends are slow here - I was munching on my breakfast while stopping by here!

Let me know if you want to take a look at the DCN.....
 
J

J-F. G

#6
Hello Andy,

Yes you are correct on all points.

Yes I would like to take a look at a "document change note", i have never seen one.

We did write our own procedure but have read others and have tried to reproduce the formal "style" which may not have been a great idea.

An example of our change log follows
(sorry the table does not keep the proper format)

Change log
-----------------------------------------------
ID Date Reason for change or comments
1 2007/10/29 Revised 5.3
Was
5.3 do X
Is
5.3 do Y


Thanks again. / jfg
 
Last edited by a moderator:
#7
Glad to be of help. I'm still not sure what the log entry refers to! It looks like a drwg dimension change, not a QMS document change, however, the point is not the content of the chnage, but the mechanism. The DCn and associated procedure are posted elsewhere on the Cove.

I'll try to look them up (later on this weekend) and link them here or you can search in the attachments area of the site.
 

Jen Kirley

Quality and Auditing Expert
Staff member
Admin
#8
Welcome jfg,

I do not see anything wrong with your description of change.

I have seen a simple method that works well. On the cover page of each document, a table is placed that shows this change information. When a new change is made, that is added to the table. There might be a limit--that is, after five the earliest one could be dropped off. Dropping it off is only possible if you keep an archived copy of the old document, away from access of the new revision, and plainly marked "superseded" or some such.

As an auditor I have seen your method (5.3 do Y) and prefer it to the more generic "revised inspection techniques in 5.3". However, it's only fair to point out that the generic description has passed muster with our registrars.

So, I would apply the method that best suits the need. If it's a critical clause and the change can be described in a short paragraph or less, be specific. That should help make sure people can get things done properly. That's the main goal, after all.
 
J

J-F. G

#9
Welcome jfg,

I do not see anything wrong with your description of change.

I have seen a simple method that works well. On the cover page of each document, a table is placed that shows this change information. When a new change is made, that is added to the table. There might be a limit--that is, after five the earliest one could be dropped off. Dropping it off is only possible if you keep an archived copy of the old document, away from access of the new revision, and plainly marked "superseded" or some such.

As an auditor I have seen your method (5.3 do Y) and prefer it to the more generic "revised inspection techniques in 5.3". However, it's only fair to point out that the generic description has passed muster with our registrars.

So, I would apply the method that best suits the need. If it's a critical clause and the change can be described in a short paragraph or less, be specific. That should help make sure people can get things done properly. That's the main goal, after all.
Hello Jennifer and thank you for the welcome message.

This method is simple and always keeps the latest approved (by the required authorities) changes incorporated in the body of the document with changes loged in the change log table on the front page.

I have had comments though from co workers that everytime we change the body of the procedure we need to issue a new revision. I told them that I could not see anywhere in AS9100 a requirement stating that a new revision should be issued everytime a change is made to the content in the body of the document. But I may be mising something.

Have a great week. /jf
 
Last edited by a moderator:
#10
J-F:
You're correct, AS9100 won't tell you how to do something like revision control, just that you have a procedure for revision control.
I'd tend to agree with your co-workers. If you make a change to the body of a document, it becomes a different version, so you should re-issue it. There's nothing to stop you rolling up changes - using the DCN I talked about earlier - and put them into one change, but, in effect, changes = revisions.

One thing with document control; K.I.S.S.........:lol:
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
Ajit Basrur 20 British Words That Mean Something Totally Different in the U.S. Coffee Break and Water Cooler Discussions 38
B Terminating an Internal Audit - Area totally out of control Internal Auditing 41
J How to get Minitab to totally disregard empty cells Using Minitab Software 3
Antonio Vieira Totally against written procedures! Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 39
J MD Directive vs EMC Directive - Totally excluded (for both emissions and immunity)? ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 1
S Bogus ISO certification?? Entire systems totally ineffective or missing ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 10
D Essential performance, accompanying documents....confused IEC 60601 - Medical Electrical Equipment Safety Standards Series 4
D Software as risk control - Confused on one aspect of IEC 62304 IEC 62304 - Medical Device Software Life Cycle Processes 20
E European Weld Callouts - Confused with the "/C" and the "a2" portions Various Other Specifications, Standards, and related Requirements 7
R Still confused on OPRP and CCP in an ISO 22000 Catering Business Food Safety - ISO 22000, HACCP (21 CFR 120) 3
S Pressure from Directors - confused! ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 6
R ISO 9001 Implementation in the Bus/Coach Industry - Confused and Help needed ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 6
A Confused about Document Levels and Quality Manual ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 4
J Confused about application of ISO 13485 - Manufacturer of Medical Equipment & Device ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 14
T TS 16949 Process Audit Help - Confused Process Audits and Layered Process Audits 8
K So confused with AQL - How does AQL (Acceptable Quality Level) fit with my company AQL - Acceptable Quality Level 7
N ISO 9001 Implementation - I am still confused on where to start ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 19
J Certification Audit - Confused Newbie Questions ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 15
T Confused on Work Instruction Requirements ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 10
C Confused with 7.4 Purchasing - We provide a "service" which is our "product" ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 9
M Confused about Writing Procedures ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 9
B Gage R&R Spreadsheet Results - Confused as to what the results mean Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 28
B IEC 60601-1: EMC problems: Confused about 915MHz ISM band in Europe IEC 60601 - Medical Electrical Equipment Safety Standards Series 3
Q Confused: IEC 60601-1-2:YYYY and Required Compliance Dates IEC 60601 - Medical Electrical Equipment Safety Standards Series 4
S Confused: Accreditation / Certification? General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 13
K An MR (Management Representative) who's as confused as he* Career and Occupation Discussions 14
M Confused about Control Plan and PFMEA Retention Period Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 2
K Developing a PFMEA - Confused about Potential Failure modes FMEA and Control Plans 7
H Confused over the notion of "offline (engineering) analysis" Statistical Analysis Tools, Techniques and SPC 3
I Confused on PPAP re-submission - Help on PSW (Part Submission Warrant) APQP and PPAP 3
T Confused by chapter numbering scheme in new standard (IEC EN-60601-2-37:2007) IEC 60601 - Medical Electrical Equipment Safety Standards Series 1
C CAP for Medical Device Class Is product - Slightly confused - ISO 13485 ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 3
A Confused - Medical Device Reports and Corrections/Removals 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 3
Wes Bucey FWIW: FDA confused? US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 3
M Confused about measurement of software - Section 7.6 of ISO 9001 ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 6
WCHorn ISO/IEC 17025 Registrars - I'm confused about "accredited" registrars for ISO 17025 ISO 17025 related Discussions 18
M Predictive Maintenance - Confused about what can be considered predictive maintenance IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 8
W Confused under what ISO 9001 clause would I place my Quality Process? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 4
J Confused about Calibration Tolerances of Plug Gauge, Ring Gauge & Snap Gauge General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 4
S PPM vs. DPMO - Confused on how to use Six Sigma 2
A Still Confused About "Controlling Suppliers Records" AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 3
Q Confused about the machine capability index Cmk Capability, Accuracy and Stability - Processes, Machines, etc. 1
C Confused with Regression Analysis - What about the P-value? Six Sigma 2
B I am confused, which Cmk value should I take and use? Statistical Analysis Tools, Techniques and SPC 6
N Confused by calibration concepts - Seeking help with the basics General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 9
D Confused about registration scope - Engine accessories supplier IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 3
K Level 1, Level 2 Very Confused ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 13
D Confused over product=service=transport Service Industry Specific Topics 2
S Confused about the TS 16949 Deadline - Presumably a Big 3 mandate? IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 4
D Strategies for Going In Blind - My employer is probably confused why I'm here Misc. Quality Assurance and Business Systems Related Topics 11

Similar threads

Top Bottom