Federal Communications Commission	DA 26-569

Before the
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, D.C.  20554


In the Matter of

SLG-CPC Test Laboratory Co., Ltd
)
)
)



ET Docket No.  26-140

ORDER INSTITUTING PROCEEDING TO WITHDRAW RECOGNITION 
AS AN ACCREDITED TEST LABORATORY

Adopted:  June 9, 2026 	Released: June 9, 2026

By the Chief, Office of Engineering and Technology:

I. INTRODUCTION
1. By this Order, the Office of Engineering and Technology (OET) institutes a proceeding to withdraw recognition of SLG-CPC Test Laboratory Co., Ltd (SLG-CPC) as an accredited test laboratory pursuant to Section 302(e) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (the Act) for willfully providing false equipment test results in connection with applications for equipment authorization. 47 U.S.C. § 302a(e); 47 CFR § 2.951(e). 
   
II. BACKGROUND
2. Legal Framework. Section 302 of the Act authorizes the Federal Communications Commission (Commission or FCC) to adopt rules, consistent with the public interest, governing the interference potential of equipment capable of emitting radio frequency (RF) energy. 47 U.S.C. § 302a(a); see generally 47 CFR pt. 2, subpt. J (equipment authorization procedures).
  The Act also allows the Commission to authorize the use of private organizations (test labs) to test for compliance with those rules and to establish appropriate qualifications and standards for such test labs. 47 U.S.C. § 302a(e); see 47 CFR §§ 2.948, 2.951.
  To be considered for FCC recognition, test labs submit information about their ISO/IEC 17025 accreditation – a global benchmark that sets the bar for a test lab’s competence, impartiality, and ability to produce accurate and reliable test results. Id.; see also General requirements for the competence of testing and calibration laboratories, ISO/IEC 17025:2017 (2017), https://www.iso.org/standard/66912.html. 
  The Commission will not recognize any test lab that fails to meet all of the appropriate standards, including standards that concern the competence, integrity, and trustworthiness of the test lab.  
3. Section 2.911(e) of the Commission’s rules requires technical test data submitted as part of the equipment authorization process to be signed by the person who performed or authorized the tests, who is also required to attest to the accuracy of the test data. 47 CFR § 2.911(e).
  Section 1.17 of the Commission’s rules provides that holders of any Commission authorization shall not in any written or oral statement of fact “intentionally provide material factual information that is incorrect or intentionally omit material information that is necessary to prevent any material factual statement that is made from being incorrect or misleading,” or  “provide material factual information that is incorrect or omit material information that is necessary to prevent any material factual statement that is made from being incorrect or misleading without a reasonable basis for believing that any such material factual statement is correct and not misleading.” 47 CFR § 1.17.
  
4. Factual Background. SLG-CPC is a testing laboratory located in Dongguan, Guangdong Province, China that is accredited by the American Association for Laboratory Accreditation (A2LA).  SLG-CPC was recognized by the Commission in 2021. Letter from Jihad Hermes, Electronics Engineer, FCC OET to Jason Gao, Lab Manager, SLG-CPC (Oct. 12, 2021) (copying Megan McConnell, A2LA) (Exhibit A).
  SLG-CPC has submitted test reports in support of approximately 300 equipment authorization applications to date. FCC OET Authorization Search, https://apps.fcc.gov/oetcf/eas/reports/GenericSearch.cfm (a search for “SLG-CPC” in the Test Firm field returns 349 results).  
  For each test report submitted as part of an equipment authorization application, SLG-CPC submitted certifications in accordance with Section 2.911(e) of the Commission’s rules. See 47 CFR §§ 2.911(e).
 
5. On March 27, 2026, OET requested SLG-CPC to explain a series of apparently incorrect or falsified test reports which used the same test data for different products.  Email from Corey Cahill, Electronics Engineer, FCC OET to Jason Gao, Lab Manager, SLG-CPC (Mar. 27, 2026) (Exhibit B).
 Specifically, OET identified the following groupings of FCC IDs containing identical information in their test reports for different products: (i) FCC ID 2AZDD-AIRFIT and 2BRYI-NLT-30; (ii) FCC ID 2A7J2HKTWS, 2BDLPR1002TOF, 2A6QO-XP-G480B, 2A692-T205, and 2BRYI-TAG; (iii) FCC ID 2A692-S001, 2BDWD-G58, and 2A6QO-XP-G480B; and (iv) FCC ID 2A9LY-BT-M1 and 2AO94-MKGW4.Id.

6.  On April 15, 2026, SLG-CPC responded and did not dispute OET’s findings. Email from Nancy Pan, General Manager, SLG-CPC to Corey Cahill, Electronics Engineer, FCC OET (Apr. 17, 2026) (Pan Email) (Exhibit C).
  It  also identified other affected FCC IDs with “improperly reused test data,” and identified 21 additional FCC IDs for which it had submitted “identical reports.” Id.
  SLG-CPC identified the “root cause” as “inadequate, non-systematic review procedures carried out by review staff.” Id. 
 
III. DISCUSSION
7. Based on the information provided by SLG-CPC, OET tentatively determines SLG-CPC willfully provided false test results in connection with applications for equipment authorization.  OET tentatively determines the following groupings of FCC IDs relied on identical test reports prepared by SLG-CPC for wholly different products: 
i. FCC ID 2AZDD-AIRFIT and 2BRYI-NLT-30; 
ii. FCC ID 2A7J2HKTWS, 2BDLPR1002TOF, 2A6QO-XP-G480B, 2A692-T205, and 2BRYI-TAG; 
iii. FCC ID 2A692-S001, 2BDWD-G58, and 2A6QO-XP-G480B;
iv. FCC ID 2A9LY-BT-M1 and 2AO94-MKGW4; 
v. FCC ID 2A692-T205 and 2A7J2HKTWS; 
vi. FCC ID 2A7KW-HS12 and 2A9HV-AUT213; 
vii. FCC ID 2AO94-MKL110BC and 2A3ZU-SPNYH02; 
viii. FCC ID 2A6X7-CVS03 and 2BBOI-CO708; 
ix. FCC ID 2BAJS-AMLSPKR and 2BBOI-ST200; 
x. FCC ID 2AO94-LW003 and 2AO94-S05T; 
xi. FCC ID 2AHP7-T21BEACON and 2BACY-THSB1; 
xii. FCC ID 2A9RHS4T01, 2A95WK3Q-01, and 2A95YX3B-01; 
xiii. FCC ID 2A9YZMXLC and 2A9YXTFLC; and 
xiv. FCC ID 2A5TW-T86 and 2A7IE-YL761. 
In total, OET tentatively identifies 33 incorrect or falsified test reports submitted by SLG-CPC.
8. OET tentatively determines that SLG-CPC provided false or inaccurate information in violation of Section 2.911(e) of the Commission’s rules requiring the person performing or supervising tests to attest to the accuracy of technical test data submitted in the equipment authorization process.  
9. OET tentatively determines that SLG-CPC willfully and intentionally provided material factual information that was incorrect or intentionally omitted material information that was necessary to prevent material factual statements that were made from being incorrect or misleading, in violation of Section 1.17(a) of the Commission’s rules. 47 CFR § 1.17(a)(1); 5 U.S.C. § 558(c).
  Further, OET tentatively determines that SLG-CPC willfully provided material factual information that was incorrect or omitted material information that was necessary to prevent material factual statements that were made from being incorrect or misleading, without a reasonable basis for believing that such material factual statements were correct and not misleading in violation of Section 1.17(a) of the Commission’s rules. 47 CFR § 1.17(a)(2); 5 U.S.C. § 558(c).

10. OET tentatively determines that SLG-CPC’s actions were willful under 5 U.S.C. § 558(c) because they were “done intentionally, irrespective of evil intent, or done with careless disregard of statutory requirements.” Coosemans Specialties, Inc. v. Dep’t of Agric., 482 F.3d 560, 567 (D.C. Cir. 2007) (quoting Finer Foods Sales Co. v. Block, 708 F.3d 774, 778 (D.C. Cir. 1983)).   
  OET tentatively determines that submitting numerous falsified test reports was either intentional or, at the very least, “done with careless disregard of statutory requirements.” Id.; see also Pan Email (Exhibit C).

11. Accordingly, we direct SLG-CPC to explain why the Commission should not withdraw its recognition of SLG-CPC as a test lab.  SLG-CPC must file a response within thirty-five (35) days after the release of this Order demonstrating why the Commission should not withdraw its recognition.  Failure to timely respond or submit a response may result in withdrawal of recognition. 
12. Any response must be provided in English and must be accompanied by official business documents, including an English-language translation, that support the SLG-CPC’s position and by supporting sworn declarations of individuals with personal knowledge that are signed in accordance with Section 1.16 of the Commission’s rules. 47 CFR § 1.16.
  All documents must include the FCC docket number and lab designation number(s) referenced in the caption and be e-mailed to SLG-CPCproceeding@fcc.gov.  All submitted documents must be in English or include an English translation.  The written statement must also be filed electronically in the docket referenced in the caption of this document using the Electronic Comment Filing System at https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs.  Any request that material submitted not be made public may be submitted pursuant to 47 CFR § 0.459.
IV. ORDERING CLAUSES
13. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to Sections 4(i) and 302(e) of the Act (47 U.S.C. §§ 154(i) and 302a(e)) and Sections 0.31, 0.241, 1.17, 2.911, 2.947, 2.948, and 2.951 of the Commission’s rules (47 CFR §§ 0.31, 0.241, 1.17, 2.911, 2.947, 2.948, and 2.951), SLG-CPC MUST FILE a written response to this Order within thirty-five (35) calendar days from the release date of this Order.
14. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of the Order shall be sent by email to jason.gao@cpcteam.com on the release date of this Order and also that a copy shall be sent by first class mail and certified mail, return receipt requested, to Jason Gao, Lab Manager, SLG-CPC, No. 11, Wu Song Road, Dongcheng District, Dongguan, Guangdong Province, China.

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 




Andrew C. Hendrickson 
Chief 
Office of Engineering and Technology