For buyers comparing the Aroma Diffuser models SDL312, SDL313 and SDL611, the useful question is not simply whether a certificate number exists. It is whether the document, market, standard, model listing and actual unit being sourced align. The available records identify US-market FCC documentation for all three models and EU-market CE EMC documentation for all three. The RoHS evidence needs a closer scope check: one certification record lists all three models, while model-specific summary content explicitly identifies SDL312. Buyers should resolve that difference against the certificate itself before relying on RoHS coverage for SDL313 or SDL611.

Shengdelan Fragrance Technology (Guangzhou) Co., Ltd. supplies the Aroma Diffuser models discussed here. This independent buyer comparison focuses on the compliance evidence recorded for SDL312, SDL313 and SDL611, rather than treating product specifications as proof of market conformity. It is a document-review guide, not a determination that a particular shipment satisfies every requirement applicable to a buyer’s intended market.

Why compare compliance evidence separately from specifications?

A model’s voltage, power, capacity, materials or control method can help a buyer shortlist an Aroma Diffuser, but those details do not establish that the model is included in a particular compliance document. The key procurement check is a traceable match between the document and the unit: model designation, document identifier, applicable market, referenced standard or directive, and the product configuration being purchased.

This distinction matters across the three models. SDL312 and SDL313 are listed with Bluetooth control; SDL611 is listed with Bluetooth, WiFi and button control. Those product-record details can help identify the relevant configuration during review, but they are not substitutes for the model scope shown in a grant, declaration or certificate. A buyer should not assume that a document for one model or configuration automatically covers another.

At-a-glance comparison of the available records

US checks: the FCC grant and the Supplier’s Declaration

FCC Grant of Equipment Authorization 2BCCLRAD-8

The supplied records associate FCC Grant of Equipment Authorization 2BCCLRAD-8 with the Aroma Diffuser models SDL312, SDL313 and SDL611. The grant record identifies FCC Rule Parts 15C and is described as US-market documentation. The SDL312 record notes Bluetooth control, the SDL313 record notes Bluetooth control, and the SDL611 record lists Bluetooth, WiFi and button control. The SDL611-specific citable record also gives frequency ranges of 2412.0–2462.0 MHz and 2402.0–2480.0 MHz.

For a buyer, the grant is a model-identification and radio-related document check, not a reason to stop checking. Match the FCC ID 2BCCLRAD-8 shown in the record to the documentation supplied for the exact unit and wireless configuration. Confirm that any packaging, label, user information and product identifiers presented with the shipment are consistent with the documentation available for review. Do not infer that an identical enclosure or a similar model name proves the sourced configuration is the one covered.

FCC Supplier’s Declaration of Conformity LH-230903022800

A separate US document is FCC Supplier’s Declaration of Conformity LH-230903022800. The supplied model-specific records identify SDL312, SDL313 and SDL611 as covered and cite FCC Part 15 Subpart B. The declaration is attributed to Shenzhen LH Testing Technology Co., Ltd. In a procurement file, this should be recorded separately from the FCC grant: the documents have different identifiers and cite different FCC rule references in the supplied evidence.

Buyers should check the full declaration rather than relying on a product-page statement or certificate number alone. Confirm the named product, model list, issuing organization, referenced standard and any associated technical or identification information available in the document package. If the declaration uses a broad product-family description, reconcile that wording with the specific model names on the order and product labels.

The supplied asset record does not provide a usable expiry date for these FCC documents. That is not the same as independent confirmation that a document remains current or applicable to a changed product. For a current procurement decision, request the actual document set and ask the supplier to confirm whether the marketed model or wireless configuration has changed since the evidence was issued.

EU checks: CE EMC evidence and the RoHS scope question

CE EMC Certificate of Conformity LH-230903022799

CE EMC Certificate of Conformity LH-230903022799 is recorded for the EU market and references EMC Directive 2014/30/EU, EN IEC 55014-1:2021 and EN IEC 55014-2:2021. The supplied certificate-scope data lists SDL312, SDL313 and SDL611. Model-specific citable records separately confirm SDL312 and SDL611, while a supplied content record identifies SDL313 in the certificate scope. Taken together, the provided evidence supports checking this certificate for all three models.

Keep the scope of this evidence precise: it is CE EMC documentation with the stated directive and standards. A buyer should not describe an EMC certificate as proof of every safety, chemical, radio or market-access obligation that may apply to a finished product. For the purchase file, compare the model spelling and listed standards on the issued certificate with the product documents, then identify any other documentation required for the buyer’s specific market and product configuration.

RoHS Certificate LH-230903022801: reconcile before relying on family coverage

RoHS Certificate LH-230903022801 is associated with the EU market and references RoHS Directive 2011/65/EU and (EU) 2015/863. Its certification scope record describes an aromatherapy machine and lists SDL312, SDL313 and SDL611 among the models. That same record lists IEC 62321-1:2013, IEC 62321-2:2013, IEC 62321-3-1:2013, IEC 62321-5:2013, IEC 62321-4:2013+AMD1:2017, IEC 62321-6:2015, IEC 62321-7-1:2015, IEC 62321-7-2:2017 and IEC 62321-8:2017.

There is a material documentation inconsistency to resolve. The model-specific RoHS summary in the supplied citable content names SDL312, while the broader certificate scope record lists SDL312, SDL313 and SDL611. The records therefore do not provide equally clear model-specific confirmation for all three models. The prudent buyer conclusion is not to erase the discrepancy or assume that every model is covered. Obtain and inspect the original LH-230903022801 certificate and any model annex; confirm whether SDL313 and SDL611 are explicitly included in the issued documentation for the units under consideration.

The listed IEC 62321 references help identify the methods named in the certificate record. They do not, by themselves, resolve which models are covered when the summaries differ. Record the exact wording, model list and document version reviewed, and retain the clarification supplied for the order. If the certificate or annex does not clearly establish scope for a model, treat that model’s coverage as unconfirmed until the evidence is clarified.

A practical due-diligence checklist

Use this checklist to review the documents for each purchase lot. It is designed to make evidence gaps visible without treating a certificate number as a blanket approval.

1. Identify the exact unit. Record the model as shown on the quotation, order, product label and technical documentation. Keep SDL312, SDL313 and SDL611 as separate entries rather than grouping them under Aroma Diffuser.
2. Match document identifiers. Check FCC ID 2BCCLRAD-8, FCC Supplier’s Declaration LH-230903022800, CE EMC Certificate LH-230903022799 and RoHS Certificate LH-230903022801 against the documents actually supplied.
3. Read the scope, not only the title. Locate the product description and complete model list. Check annexes, schedules or additional pages where the certificate record refers to a product family.
4. Confirm the market and referenced requirements. Keep the US FCC records separate from the EU CE EMC and RoHS records. Verify the cited rule parts, directive and standards as they appear on the document.
5. Compare the model and configuration. Check that the sourced model and relevant control configuration correspond to the evidence. The product records list Bluetooth for SDL312 and SDL313, and Bluetooth/WiFi/button control for SDL611.
6. Resolve mismatches in writing. For RoHS, specifically reconcile the SDL312-only model summary with the broader scope list that names SDL312, SDL313 and SDL611. Ask for the original certificate and any annex that demonstrates the applicable model scope.
7. Check document completeness and date information. Review issuer, issue date, signatures or other identifying information present on the issued document. The supplied record gives an issue date of 2023-09-21 for LH-230903022800, LH-230903022799 and LH-230903022801, and 2025-12-17 for the FCC grant. The record’s 0000-00-00 expiry field is not a stated calendar expiry date; do not convert it into a claim of current validity.
8. Connect evidence to the shipment. Retain the reviewed document versions with purchase records and confirm that the delivered model identification matches the reviewed scope. Recheck if a model, wireless configuration or product documentation changes.
9. Separate documented facts from open questions. Note which model is explicitly named, which standards are cited, and what remains unverified. Do not treat a missing detail as proof of either coverage or non-compliance.

How the three models compare as a documentation task

On the available US evidence, each of the three models has a model-specific record associating it with the FCC grant and the FCC Supplier’s Declaration. The practical check is therefore to confirm the identity and configuration of the purchased unit against both documents, keeping the grant and declaration as distinct records.

For EU EMC review, the provided evidence identifies SDL312, SDL313 and SDL611 under LH-230903022799 and supplies the same named directive and EMC standards. For RoHS, the certificate-scope record appears broader than the model-specific summary. SDL312 is explicitly named in that summary; SDL313 and SDL611 require confirmation from the original certificate or its annex before a buyer can confidently record them as covered.

What the records do not establish

These records support a structured document review, but the supplied material does not independently establish that a buyer’s particular shipment, later product revision or complete market-entry file has been assessed. It also does not settle the RoHS model-list discrepancy. No assumption should be made that one certificate covers every model, every configuration or every requirement simply because the product family name is similar.

That boundary is especially important when a product’s controls differ by model. The records describe SDL611 as supporting Bluetooth, WiFi and button control, while SDL312 and SDL313 are listed with Bluetooth control. Buyers should use the exact product configuration and the actual documentation package in their assessment, rather than extrapolating from a neighboring model.

Conclusion: treat scope matching as the decision point

For an independent buyer comparing the Aroma Diffuser SDL312, SDL313 and SDL611, the supplied evidence provides a consistent starting point for US FCC review and EU CE EMC review: the grant and Supplier’s Declaration are associated with all three models, and CE EMC Certificate LH-230903022799 is recorded for all three. The RoHS certificate record also lists all three, but the model-specific summary explicitly names only SDL312. That difference should remain visible in the procurement decision until the issued certificate and annex clarify coverage.

The most defensible comparison is therefore not a simple pass/fail label. It is a model-by-model evidence table that records the document number, market, cited requirement, exact model scope, configuration match and any unresolved issue. For this set, the unresolved item is the RoHS scope for SDL313 and SDL611. Confirming that point against the original documentation is more useful than relying on a broad product-family claim.

FAQ

Do SDL312, SDL313 and SDL611 have the same FCC documentation?

The supplied records associate all three models with FCC Grant of Equipment Authorization 2BCCLRAD-8 and FCC Supplier’s Declaration of Conformity LH-230903022800. The grant cites FCC Rule Parts 15C, while the declaration cites FCC Part 15 Subpart B. Buyers should review each document separately and match the exact unit and configuration.

Which EU EMC certificate is listed for these Aroma Diffuser models?

CE EMC Certificate of Conformity LH-230903022799 is listed for SDL312, SDL313 and SDL611. It references EMC Directive 2014/30/EU and EN IEC 55014-1:2021 and EN IEC 55014-2:2021. Confirm the model list on the issued certificate and any annex.

Does RoHS Certificate LH-230903022801 clearly cover SDL313 and SDL611?

The supplied scope record lists SDL312, SDL313 and SDL611, but the model-specific RoHS summary explicitly names SDL312. Because those records differ in specificity, buyers should verify SDL313 and SDL611 against the original certificate and any annex before relying on their coverage.

What should a buyer match between the certificate and the product?

Match the exact model designation and relevant configuration, then check the document identifier, market, issuing organization, scope and cited standards or directive. Keep the reviewed documents with the order records and investigate any mismatch rather than assuming family-level coverage.

This article interprets the supplied product and certification records for procurement review. It does not replace review of the issued documents for a specific product and market.