Non-compliance by test house: What to do?

[JamesGarry]

Hello all,

Three questions to amuse you at the tail-end of a week.

a) What horror stories do you have of test-houses/labs taking your hard-earned money and giving you non-compliant test certificates?

b) What did you do when you found that the test cert' wasn't up to scratch?

c) Any thoughts as to how the humble end-user can easily and cheaply validate the test cert given by a test-lab?

More info?:
a) I'm slowly mastering C177 and have found some shockers out there - no mention of uncertainty, whole swathes of required data missing, etc. As for c), it's beyond ASTM or ISO's scope to police standard implementation, but would a free checklist of 'must-have' points be something that could solve the grossest errors?

Disclaimer: I sit on an ASTM committee, and am looking to 'level-up' the standards and their implementation, at least for C177.

[Ajit Basrur]

A quick bump - any answers ?

Thanks in adavnce

[JamesGarry]

I'll part-answer one of my own questions then:

Yesterday, four days after posting my questions, I received my copy of ASTM Standardization News. Page 24-25, describes a new initiative from ASTM to have a register of firms that are validated by ASTM (in some way) as providing compliant data.

I'll have a look at the service and report back. Meantime, as for horror stories, I'm all ears, no names, no pack drill needed.

[JamesGarry]

So, in answer to my own post, ASTM's 'Supplier's Declaration of Conformity Program' is primarily for manufacturers of articles. It allows a manufacturer or supplier to have ASTM certify that their items are made/tested in the manner as described.

It still doesn't resolve the problem of test-houses that basically don't do what they should.

BTW, I've found half a dozen test labs around the world, some of which are nationally-famous institutes, that disregard black and white mandatory aspects of tests I am familiar with. I'm so tempted to name and shame.