I'm not aware of any sort of certification that ASTM does on a producer.  Each ASTM standard carries specific documentation requirements, certificates of conformance, material test reports, product markings, etc.  Look at the standard you are interested in and it should tell you what sorts of documentation is to be available to prove the material meets the standard.

Thanks Ajh for your reply. But if any steel mill produces a fake or say test certificate of some incompetent laboratary then how can a buyer is satisfied by the material having ASTM stamp.

I guess anything can be faked if it's worth enough to do it.  ASTM standards tend to have language in them that permits the purchaser to inspect at the manufacturer's location if desired.  Also you can always cut a sample (I work with steel standards) and have your own independent testing done on the material.
Bottom line, you have to work with suppliers who understand what you need and have developed a trusting relationship with.  If you find someone who is intentionally falsifying documents, don't do business with them, and let everyone know why.

ASTM always require that the manufacturers Trade mark is stamped on the material.
This makes them liable in case of problems.

The buyer is responsible for enforcement, there is no "ASTM Police."
If you are buying to an ASTM you have hte right and obligation to inspect enough to make sure that you are getting what you asked for.

If you are not in North America, Say in Europe or in Gulf, then you must have come accross 3.1B or 3.1C certification. This certification solve your problem.

You may refer to EN, DIN or ISO (All the three are essentially the same).

It appears you are a purchaser or the user who is afraid that the supplier would cheat you with spurious supply.

These certification standard caters to such needs.

You have to decide as what kind of inspection documentation you require. If it is oK for you to have a basic compliance certificate than go for 2.1, if you want all properties to be certified by a competent lab (With in the manufacturer's works) then you go for 3.1 B. If you do not beleive the manufacturer then go for 3.1C , where in you can appoint a third party to go and inspect and certify.

It all depends on what you want (How paranoid you are)

Eabrar,

Watch out with the standard EN10204 (the 2.1, 3.1.B and 3.1.c. certificates referred to by bmoorthy).  This standard and certificates only state that the material was sampled, tested and inspected according the specification of the material which you have ordered.  So NOT manufactured!!  I have been told that european standarisation body wanted to change this standard to incorporate the manufacturing, but the steel manufacturers oppose to this.  Probably because of legal implications.  Don't think this is not important; as a surveyor I've come across some (luckily not much) examples in which the manufacturer did not do the correct heat treatment mentioned in the specification.

I have a problem for piping where our supplier replace the hydrostatic testing by eddy current according to ASTM 312.
Is it availab?

Many thanks

ASTM has no formal audit procedure for material producers.  Customer tend to take it on faith that the mill (or other type of producer) is doing the right thing.  For the most part, they are, though I've run into some surface quality issues with steel plate.  (Surface quality is part of ASTM A 6 which is referenced by many steel standards, but it's not reported on the mill test report and the mills aren't that assiduous about inspecting it.  For example, they never flip the plate over, so fully 50% of the surface is uninspected even though they issue a report stating that all requirements are met.  Not as big a deal as, say, strength.)

ASTM standards, like any other standards, are simply lists of requirements.  Someone issuing a report saying the material meets a certain ASTM standard is doing exactly that--stating that they've run the tests required by the standard and that the requirements were met.  That statement is as reliable or as unreliable as any other statement that producer might make, and a signature and notary stamp has the same effect on that piece of paper as it would on any other.

There is a similar issue with the AWS A5.X standards for welding consumables.  AWS doesn't audit the electrode manufacturers, and customers generally don't send out independent inspector or auditors either.

Hg

Offsite, A312 allows ET in place of hydro.  If you want hydro instead you must specify it.

ASTM specifications are the minimum requirements for products.  They also require that the purchaser provide specific information/requirements.

Are you a meterials user?
Are you a member of ASTM?  Membership costs less than one of the books, and then they give you one.  You don't have to attend the meetings, just vote on the ballots.

It is your responsability to know what you are buying.  That is why the specs contain inspection statements.
If you have doubt, require 10204 3.1.c.  This requires third party testing to at least verify the required chemistry and properties.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Corrosion never sleeps, but it can be managed.
http://www.trenttube.com/Trent/tech_form.htm