6 replies to this topic

[carine]

Hi all, 

 

Regarding  the documents control list,  for example in HACCP Manual, it includes has Product Description, Flow Chart, Hazard Analysis etc.   would u pls advice whether we are required to list out all document details in the control list , or is it sufficient to list the HACCP manual only?  

[GMO]

It depends if it's one document or not. Personally I have always document controlled them as separate documents. Either approach I believe is valid as long as they're controlled.

[cookinmaple]

My control list only has the Document Title, Document Number, Version Number, Issue Date, and Last Revision Date. 

 

Each of my documents has a revision log attached. The revision log details changes made, dates, who revised it, and who approved them.

[Bingo67]

Cookinmaple do you keep a master list everytime a chnage is completed? I have a master list with document number (etc) but not attched to each document. But I am considering changing to your way.

 

Pros & Cons?

 

How will this be affected by SQF 10?

[cookinmaple]

My Control List is my Master List. My procedure states that whoever approved the revision must update the control (master) list. Annually, the control (master) list is reviewed to ensure its accuracy. 

 

I have no pros or cons to mention, as this works fine for us. I will add that only 2 people have the authority to approve revisions, which prevents random people from changing the list. 

 

I haven't looked into how SQF10 will affect this, since the final version of 10 isn't available yet.

[jfrey123]

How will this be affected by SQF 10?

 

Too early to say how Edition 10 will change as it isn't formally released yet.  However to be clear, current SQF 9 expects you to have a register of all documents including forms.  Not expressly mentioned in code but called out in the formal guidance documents:  SQFI | Code Document

 

I'm not in charge of the document control for any of my sites.  Last time I did maintain a FSQMS manual, I had a document register in it with the Document Number and Document Title only.  I loathed the idea of changing the register to show the date of each Program/Policy/SOP because it meant I had to include the register itself in the change request forms and reprint/replace them each time.  This was in the SQF 7 days, and auditors didn't love that I lacked the revision dates on the register, but also couldn't fault me when each SOP/Program document had a thorough revision history built into it.  The register told them where the documents were, the documents themselves showed their own history and dates and I was flawless at connecting the dots back then.

[GMO]

I have to admit I'm personally a fan of having the revision details on the log itself. Just so that you can see as a summary why documents have been reviewed and changed. On the document, when you have a procedure which has gone through 20+ revisions it can just get a bit lengthy. Also it's useful to see overall I think whether there are a range of reasons why documents have changed. It's not a big deal though.

 

 

But ultimately as long as it's recorded either on your document log or on the document itself then it complies with most standards I believe and that's the point.