MTC Interpretation Guide + Checklist (PDF)

A Material Test Certificate (MTC) is the manufacturer’s documented evidence that delivered material conforms to the purchase order and the standards referenced by the project spec. Interpreting an MTC means verifying PO and item match, heat numbers, test results, signatories (e.g., EN 10204 3.1/3.2), and traceability into your vendor dossier—without inventing criteria.

New to raw material inspection? Start with the structured course: Raw Material Inspection Training.

 

What an MTC Is — and Why It Matters

An MTC (Material/Mill Test Certificate) states conformity to the order and shows the test results required by your project spec. It is the anchor for traceability (heat → lot → piece), acceptance “as per” the referenced standard/edition, and release. A clean MTC saves time at receiving, FAT, and final dossier close-out.

Typical applies-to: plates, bars, forgings, castings, and material used in valves, pressure parts, and fabricated items.

 

EN 10204 Types (quick overview)

• EN 10204 defines inspection certificate types (e.g., 3.1, 3.2). 
• 3.1: issued by the manufacturer’s authorized inspection representative with heat/batch results. 
• 3.2: adds independent validation by the buyer’s inspector and/or an officially designated body, when ordered. 

Need the full comparison and when to specify 3.2? See EN 10204 3.1 vs 3.2: Differences Explained.

 

Anatomy of an MTC (what to read first)

Read top-to-bottom; confirm identity, scope, and evidence before the numbers.

1. Header & document control
   Manufacturer name/site, certificate ID/rev, date, page count, attachments list. 
2. Order & product block
   PO number/line, customer name, project, product form/grade, size/dimensions, quantity. 
3. Identification & traceability
   Heat/batch numbers, cast/lot; where applicable: piece numbers or tag/serial mapping. 
4. Test results (as required by the project)
   Chemical composition; mechanical properties; impact/hardness; NDE results if specified.
   Each test should cite the correct standard/edition your project references. 
5. Standards referenced (by edition)
   Procedures or test methods must list the standard and year/edition required by the PO/spec. 
6. Signatures/stamps (certificate type dependent)
   3.1: signed by the manufacturer’s authorized inspection representative.
   3.2: signed by the manufacturer and buyer’s inspector and/or official body (as ordered). 
7. Footnotes & attachments
   Lab identifiers/accreditation notes, calibration references, and any annexes listed in the attachments table.

 

Acceptance phrasing you’ll reuse: “Accepted as per <standard/edition> referenced by the project spec.” Do not restate numeric limits inside your report unless your spec explicitly requires them.

 

MTC Verification Checklist (Receiving)

Use this checklist to approve Material Test Certificates (MTCs) against your PO and the standards/edition referenced by the project spec. If you’re new to the process, the structured hub is the Raw Material Inspection Training.

Checklist — horizontal (desktop)

Item	What to verify	Evidence to capture	Acceptance reference (wording)	Status
PO & item match	PO number/line, customer, project, delivery quantity	PO copy; delivery note; packing list	“Accepted as per order/project spec.”	☐
Product identity	Form/grade/size match the order	Datasheet/drawing refs; mill description	“Accepted as per order & drawing.”	☐
Heat/batch numbers	Heats on MTC appear on delivered items	Photo of heat stamps/tags; receiving IR	“Traceable heat → items per spec.”	☐
Certificate type	EN 10204 3.1 or 3.2 as ordered	3.1: manufacturer sign; 3.2: + buyer/official body	“Type per PO/ITP.”	☐
Test results present	Chemical, mechanical, impact/hardness, NDE (if applicable)	MTC pages; annex list	“Results as per standard/edition referenced.”	☐
Standard & edition	Methods cite the correct standard/year	Marked clauses/editions on MTC	“Edition as per project spec.”	☐
Lab & calibration	Lab identity/accreditation; instrument calibration linkage	Lab note; calibration refs (IDs/dates)	“Lab/cal per procedure.”	☐
Document control	Cert ID/rev, date, pages, attachments	Front page; attachment table	“Controlled per supplier procedure.”	☐
Corrections	No hand edits; revisions reissued	Versioned reissue if any change	“Reissued per doc control.”	☐
Attachments list	Annexes exist and are included	Attachment table ticked	“Complete per annex list.”	☐
Traceability map	Heat → lot → piece/tag mapping	Heat map table (see below)	“Mapped to tag/serial.”	☐
Dossier indexing	MTCs filed and cross-referenced	Dossier index row created	“Filed per dossier index.”	☐
Acceptance line	Your conclusion uses correct phrasing	IR note with clause/edition	“Accepted as per <standard/edition> referenced by the project spec.”	☐

 

Need a refresher on certificate types? See EN 10204 3.1 vs 3.2: Differences Explained.

 

Checklist — vertical (mobile/narrow)

Field	Value
PO & item match
Product identity (form/grade/size)
Heat/batch numbers
Certificate type (3.1/3.2)
Test results present
Standard & edition
Lab & calibration
Doc control (ID/rev/date/pages)
Corrections/reissue
Attachments list
Traceability map linked
Dossier indexed
Acceptance (as per <standard/edition>)

 

Traceability Map (heat → lot → item/tag)

Keep this table in your receiving IR and final dossier. Every record must tie to a single tag/serial.

Heat Map — horizontal (desktop)

Heat / Batch No.	Product form & grade	Size / Spec note	Qty received	Piece / Tag / Serial	MTC Ref (ID / page)	Delivery Note	IR Ref	Status
H12345	Plate S***		12	TAG-P001…P012	MTC-001 / pp.1–3	DN-045	IR-RCP-021	☐
H67890	Forging A***		4	TAG-F201…F204	MTC-002 / pp.1–2	DN-046	IR-RCP-022	☐

Heat Map — vertical (mobile / narrow)

Field	Value
Heat / Batch No.
Product form & grade
Size / Spec note
Quantity received
Piece / Tag / Serial
MTC Ref (ID / page)
Delivery Note
IR Reference
Status	☐ Conform ☐ NCR

Photo & file naming (keeps audits painless)

• Photos: PO-Item-Heat-Tag-Seq.jpg → 450123-V001-H12345-TAGP003-01.jpg 
• Certificates: PO-Item-MTC-Heat-Rev.pdf → 450123-V001-MTC-H12345-Rev0.pdf 
• Index: add one line per heat with page pointers (e.g., “MTC-001 p.2: chemistry; p.3: mech.”) 

ITP integration (one line to paste)

“Receiving — Hold (H): Verify MTC type (EN 10204 3.1/3.2) and heat mapping. Acceptance as per <standard/edition> referenced by the project spec. Records: MTC, heat map, photos, IR.”

Planning inspection points across your PO? Use the cross-pillar template once: Vendor Inspection ITP Template.

 

Red Flags & Fixes (fast triage on MTCs)

Red flag	Why it’s risky	What to do (keep acceptance phrasing)
PO / item mismatch	Wrong material could be accepted	Request a corrected MTC that matches PO/line/drawing; re-index in dossier.
Heat numbers don’t match delivered items	Breaks traceability	Re-map heat → lot → piece/tag; fix labels; attach updated heat map to IR.
Certificate type wrong (3.1 ordered, 3.2 needed)	Non-compliance to order/ITP	Obtain 3.2 with proper signatures/witness notes as per PO/ITP; do not accept ad-hoc upgrades without buyer approval.
Missing signatures/stamps (3.2)	Independence not demonstrated	Have the buyer’s inspector and/or officially designated body sign as ordered or reissue the certificate.
Partial test results / wrong standard edition	Acceptance basis unclear	Re-test or re-document as per the standard/edition referenced by the project spec; attach method references.
Handwritten edits on a signed MTC	Document control compromised	Reject edits; request re-issued, version-controlled MTC; cite doc control procedure.
Lab accreditation/calibration is missing	Evidence credibility weak	Add lab accreditation or calibration references per procedure; list instrument IDs and expiry.
Mixed heats in one line	Ambiguous mapping	Split MTC lines per heat; update packing/delivery and tag list accordingly.

Rule: never invent numeric limits. Your acceptance line should read: “Accepted as per <standard/edition> referenced by the project spec.”

 

FAQs — MTC Interpretation

1) What is an MTC?
A Material (Mill) Test Certificate evidence conformity to the purchase order and lists required test results, with acceptance applied as per the standard/edition referenced by the project spec.

2) Which standard defines certificate types?
EN 10204 (e.g., 3.1, 3.2) defines inspection certificate types and signatory expectations.

3) What’s the difference between 3.1 and 3.2?
3.1 is signed by the manufacturer’s authorized inspection representative. 3.2 adds independent validation by the buyer’s inspector and/or an officially designated body, as ordered.

4) Do labs need accreditation?
Follow your project procedure. If accreditation is required, reference it on the MTC and attach evidence; instruments used should have valid calibration.

5) Can one MTC cover multiple heats?
Yes, if each heat is separately listed and traceable. Prefer one line per heat and a clear heat→piece/tag map.

6) What if the MTC cites the wrong edition?
Ask for re-documentation or re-test as per the correct edition referenced by the project spec. Note changes in the dossier index.

7) How long should we keep MTCs?
Follow contract/regulatory retention. File MTCs in the final dossier, cross-referenced to delivery notes and tag/serials.

8) Where can I see 3.1 vs 3.2 examples?
See EN 10204 3.1 vs 3.2: Differences Explained for signatory roles and use cases.

 

Download: MTC Receiving & Verification Checklist (PDF)

Filename: MTC_Receiving_Checklist.pdf

• PO/Item/Heat mapping: ready tables to connect heat → lot → piece/tag and index them in your dossier. 
• Signatory cues: quick prompts for 3.1 vs 3.2 signatures/stamps and document control. 
• Acceptance phrasing: pre-filled “Accepted as per <standard/edition> referenced by the project spec” lines for clean IRs. 

CTA: Download the MTC Receiving & Verification Checklist (PDF) and use it at your next receiving inspection.

 

Raw Material Inspection — Training

Build a repeatable receiving workflow for EN 10204 certificates and MTCs, with risk-based checks and traceability that survives audits. Join Raw Material Inspection Training — practical labs, acceptance language, and dossier assembly aligned to what your projects reference.