Sustainable IT Procurement Guidelines

Purpose

This guideline directs campus activity to ensure that sustainability factors are integrated into the procurement of information technology (IT) assets and services using University of Waterloo resources.

Recognizing the significant environmental and social impacts of IT systems upstream of the University, during their use in support of Waterloo’s mission, and downstream of their use, it is important for the institution to have a clear and consistent approach to reduce harm, manage stakeholder and brand risks, and support a quality IT environment consistent with Waterloo’s values.

Related policies, procedures, and guidelines

This guideline is informed by:

• Policy 11: University Risk Management
• Policy 17: Quotations and Tenders
• Policy 53: Environmental Sustainability
• Procedure 1 – Contracts and Agreements – Excluding Research
• Life Cycle Costing Guideline

Scope

This guideline applies to all IT procurement activities conducted using University funds where the expected contract value is equal to or greater than $100,000, where the vendor is supplying IT equipment or services across any combination of the following product categories:

• Desktop, laptop, and tablet computers
• Televisions, monitors, and other displays
• Printing and imaging equipment
• Servers and switches
• Mobile phones
• Enterprise software

Principles and requirements articulated in this guideline can be voluntarily applied to other IT purchasing categories, including peripherals, computer components, and other communications or networking equipment, but are not required at this time.

To support transitional activities, it is expected that initial phasing of this Guideline will focus on systems and procurement led directly by Information Systems and Technology (IST) and by Print and Retail Solutions. By 2026, requirements of this Guideline will extend to faculties and other academic support units. It is expected that this guideline will go through a process of continuous improvement, as indicated in Section 8, and as such this will be intended to be a living document.

For clarity, it is expected that evaluation of sustainability criteria is completed during the overall contract setup phase, not by individual purchasers.

Accountability

IST – Supports integration of requirements within the development of RFP documentation, as well as review of submitted materials. Co-leads biennial review of the guideline.

Sustainability Office – Co-leads biennial review of the guideline and supports research and advice for IST, Procurement, and other departments as necessary and appropriate in the design of RFP questions and interpretation of responses.

Procurement & Contract Services – Supports all departments initiating procurement processes to align with all institutional and compliance requirements, and provides advice to units making purchases. Supports biennial review of the guideline.

Other units making large IT Purchases – Integrate requirements from this guideline into the development of RFP documentation and review of submitted materials, within scope.

General principles

1. Flexibility: Recognizing that different parts of the University have different technology needs, outcomes of this Guideline should enable flexibility in how units or individuals can achieve the purpose of the guideline.
2. Shared responsibility: This Guideline should apply to all parties making IT procurement decisions on behalf of the University, as outlined in Section 3 – Scope;
3. Credibility: This Guideline should align with best practices for sustainable IT procurement, and position the University of Waterloo as a leader in sustainable IT;
4. Adaptability: As technology innovation and sustainability standards and best practices rapidly evolve, the Guideline should be modular and specific enough to allow updates and review.
5. Lifecycle costing: Consistent with principles and requirements of Policy 53, Policy 17, and the Life Cycle Costing guideline, Waterloo should seek to optimize value for money over the total life of IT procurement, not solely on first/acquisition costs.

Requirements

Hardware purchases

Criteria	Computing	Displays	Printers	Servers	Phones
Carbon footprint	Must	Must	Must	Must	Must
EPEAT Silver	Must	Must	Must	Should	Must
EPEAT Gold	Should	Should	Should	Should	Should
Energy Consumption	Points (TEC)	Points (AEC)	Points (Sleep power)	Points	n/a
Recycled content	Points	Points	Points	Points	Points
Warranty	Min (3yr) + points	Min (2yr) + points	Included in contract	Min (2 yr) + points	Min (2yr) + points
Repairability	Points	Points	Points	Points	Points
Battery Life	Warranty minimum + Points	n/a	n/a	n/a	n/a
Takeback program	Points	Points	Points	Points	Points
Takeback program -cartridges	n/a	n/a	Must	n/a	n/a
Reporting & data	Must	Must	Must	Must	Must

Evaluation criteria - Hardware

Criteria	Description	Measurement
1. Carbon footprint	The vendor should be able to provide an environmental product declaration (EPD) aligned with ISO 14040	Inclusion of EPD declaration with lifecycle carbon footprint measured in total kg CO2-e
2. EPEAT Silver/Gold	The vendor should be able to provide proof of EPEAT certification	Link to EPEAT database reference or certification documentation; Silver should be minimum, extra points for Gold
3. Benchmark energy consumption	The vendor should be able to provide information about the benchmarked energy efficiency/consumption for products	Points allocated for rated kWh for a product under specified workload, as specified for various product types
4. Recycled plastic content	The vendor should be able to define and validate the percentage of recycled plastic content in purchased products	Points allocated for percentage of plastic recycled content, with alignment to either EPEAT standard or TCO;
5. Warranty	The vendor should be able to offer a minimum warranty period to ensure quality and support	Suggested mandatory requirement for minimum warranty period, with points for additional
6. Durability & Repairability	The vendor should be able to describe its process for repairing failed devices, including turnaround times for fixes and loan options	Support program
7. Battery Life	For laptops only, the vendor should be able to describe the longevity of its battery	Number of recharge cycles tested with 80% battery capacity retention; Suggested minimum requirement of 500 and higher points for more); test report in compliance with IEC EN 61960 testing standard
8. Takeback program	The vendor should provide and be able to describe their end-of-life takeback program to ensure responsible recycling, refurbishing, and repurposing of assets	Points allocated for having a takeback program and associated processes, including detail on product recovery uses/ destinations
9. Takeback program – cartridges	For printers only, the vendor must offer a takeback program for cartridges and a description of the end-use	Mandatory requirement
10. Reporting and data	The vendor must confirm that they are able to provide an annual report summarizing purchases throughout the year that meet the above criteria, including any changes to criteria over the year (i.e. new products not originally in bid).	Mandatory requirement with confirmation of annual reporting abilities for EPDs, EPEAT, takeback program weights & destination

Software purchases – Cloud Solutions

Criteria	Description	Measurement
1. Energy efficiency	The vendor should be able to provide a metric of the energy intensity and efficiency of data centres and processing facilities used by/for University of Waterloo as part of the contract	Points can be allocated between the best and worst-performing respondents based on average annual ekWh per unity of storage/activity
2. Carbon footprint	The vendor should be able to provide a metric of the greenhouse gas intensity of its data centres and processing facilities used by/for University of Waterloo as part of the contract	Points can be allocated between the best and worst-performing respondents based on average annual kg CO2-e per unit of storage/actions; Vendor must follow GHG Protocol guidelines for calculation of emissions inclusive of all Scope 1 & 2 emission categories.
3. Reporting and data	The vendor must confirm that they are able to provide an annual report summarizing the energy consumption and carbon footprint as indicated in the RFP process	Mandatory requirement with confirmation of annual reporting abilities for energy and greenhouse gas emissions

Process

While each procurement process is unique, the following process should generally be followed:

1. Identify which elements of procured equipment and services have requirements as listed above
2. Consider the allocation of points to sustainability as part of the overall scoring of the RFP, either as a separated section or with points included as part of the overall scoring profile. To make the criteria above meaningful, it is suggested that sustainability requirements have at least some minimum weighting in the overall scoring – for example between 5-10% of available scoring linked to sustainability criteria – whether or not those are listed separately or integrated as part of general requirements.
   1. Note: If supplier corporate disclosure requirements are also included as part of the scoring, this could be slightly higher (i.e. 15%)
3. Review RFP submissions and make final decisions consistent with predetermined criteria
4. Conduct annual reporting consistent with relevant requirements

Review

Each project utilizing the guideline will be encouraged to provide feedback to IST and the Sustainability Office. This feedback will be informal to reduce transactional costs, but can be an ad-hoc follow-up about any challenges encountered, opportunities for process/substantive improvement, and key outcomes.

The guideline will be reviewed biennially by IST, the Sustainability Office, and Procurement and Contract Services. This will include evaluation of outcomes from any contracts undertaking an in-scope procurement process to understand aggregate achievements. For example, the percentage of procured products/services that met various requirements of the guideline. The review will also include a summary of feedback received from stakeholders – internal and external to understand trends and successes.

Terms and definitions

CO2-e – Carbon dioxide equivalent is the most common unit of measurement for greenhouse gas emissions, usually measured in kilograms or tonnes

EnergySTAR - A certification framework for energy efficiency overseen by the US Department of Energy. The certification involves standardized testing and verification for a range of consumer devices. EnergySTAR requirements are built into EPEAT certification as well.

EPD – Environmental Product Declarations are typically brief product overviews that list various environmental performance characteristics. Modern EPDs will usually have at least a greenhouse gas emission figure in a unit appropriate to the product (i.e. per device, per quantity of consumable, etc.)

EPEAT - Previously the “electronic product environmental assessment tool”, epeat is one of the most common certification programs for a range of electronic devices, with several tiers of certification from bronze through gold. There is increasing rigor at each phase, and the framework covers multiple “cradle to grave” aspects of sustainability.

GHG Protocol - This is the most widely used corporate reporting standard for greenhouse gas emissions, to ensure comparability and consistency with how organizations share their emissions. Important for this guideline is ensuring companies reporting energy-related emissions for hardware/software are following this reporting standard.

Greenhouse gas emissions – Are various types of gases that trap heat in the atmosphere, leading to increasing temperatures. These include most commonly carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, and various other gases. They are typically represented in units of carbon-dioxide equivalent (CO2-e).

Lifecycle Costing – The financial process of evaluating all costs associated with the purchase of a product or service, not just the initial “sticker price.” This could include things such as maintenance, energy, consumables, disposal. For the purposes of this guideline, and in connection with Waterloo’s Lifecycle Costing Guideline, this is adding costs borne directly by the University of Waterloo, not externalities (such as the Social Cost of Carbon).

IEC EN 61960 – This is a testing standard for lithium ion and other similar battery types, which can help ensure reported duty cycles and charging capacity are measured consistently.

ISO 14040 - This is an ISO standard for lifecycle assessment, which sums the total environmental impact of a product or service over its entire life, from extraction of resources through manufacturing, transportation, use, and disposal. While this ISO standard is process-driven rather the prescriptive, the standard can help ensure that companies reporting on the carbon footprint of a product are doing so holistically.

Scope 1 & 2 – These are two types of emissions within the GHG Protocol corporate standard for accounting of greenhouse gas emissions. They refer to, respectively, emissions directly released by the company (for example by burning fuel), as well as emissions from energy that is purchased by the company (for example buying electricity that was created from a gas power plant)

TCO Certified – TCO is a multi-attribute sustainability certification that includes auditing and verification. It can be accepted as an alternative to EPEAT certification.

Appendix A - Request for proposal (RFP) questions

Hardware purchases

The following are examples of language that can be added to RFP documents, as well as examples of expected responses and documentation provided.

Carbon footprint

RFP language: Please provide an environmental product declaration for all major products associated with the RFP, and confirm that these can be provided for products procured in the future.

Expected responses:

• The vendor will likely provide a list of PDFs or other digital files that are environmental product declarations (EPDs), which have a description of the product and its total lifecycle carbon footprint. This should include at minimum greenhouse gas emissions associated with the production and manufacturing of components, and expected use of the product under typical conditions. Other information about the product may also be included on the EPD, but the minimum is greenhouse gas emissions.
• The vendor may alternatively provide a website that has links to all EPDs for all products it sells, or a searchable database. In this case UW staff may need to manually confirm that all procured products are on this list.
• Note for reviewers: at this stage, the overall carbon footprint is not specified as a requirement. The team leading the procurement may elect to award higher points to products/proponents with significantly lower carbon intensity, which should be determined as part of the RFP design and points weighting within a questionnaire. The requirement is simply that all respondents provide the documentation.

EPEAT Silver/Gold

RFP language: The University of Waterloo has a stated preference for EPEAT Gold or higher, with a minimum of EPEAT silver. Please provide the certificate or other proof/documentation for EPEAT Silver or higher certification for all products that are required to be certified, and confirm that future products procured through this contract will also be EPEAT certified.

Expected responses:

• The vendor will likely provide a PDF or other document outlining the EPEAT designation for each product.
• It is important to note that the product is EPEAT certified, not the vendor. They should provide certification for each product or major product line (some may have a certification across an entire series/line of products).
• The guideline requires at minimum EPEAT silver within designated hardware types, per Section 6.1. The department/unit leading the procurement could elect to assign additional points or other stated preference for EPEAT Gold or Platinum, at their discretion.
• Note that some vendors may instead provide a link to the public EPEAT website that has a searchable database of makes/models meeting the EPEAT criteria under various categories of purchase: https://epeat.net/. If there is concern about documentation provided from the vendor, it can be cross-referenced against this EPEAT database.

Benchmark energy consumption

RFP language: Please provide proof of EnergySTAR certification and the expected energy consumption of the products within this RFP, under normal working conditions.

• For computers and tablets, please use the Typical Energy Consumption (TEC) metric from EnergySTAR, in benchmarked kWh, for each product.
• For televisions and monitors, please provide the Average Energy Consumption or Total Energy Consumption metrics from EnergySTAR, respectively, in benchmarked kWh, for each product.
• For Printers, please, please provide the Power In Sleep metric from EnergySTAR, in Watts, for each product.
• For networking equipment, please provide third-party tested documentation indicating typical energy consumption.

Expected responses:

• The vendor should provide a table with each model number associated with the purchase, its expected TEC in kWh, and the link to the associated EnergySTAR product finder page which can be used to verify the energy value provided, depending on the product type.
• Note that this guideline does not require a specific energy efficiency to be achieved, only for the data to be provided. The procuring department may elect to award points to more efficient devices as appropriate, or may choose to consider energy consumption as part of a lifecycle cost analysis of overall value-for-money, where the energy component of a procured product is likely to have a material impact on lifecycle costs. If conducting a lifecycle cost analysis, the procuring department may choose to utilize the University of Waterloo Lifecycle Costing Guideline. If no value is provided, zero points may be awarded.

Note: There will be differences between tested energy efficiency and real-world consumption. The point is to be made aware of significant differences in efficiency between potential product options.

Recycled plastic content

RFP language: Please state the amount of recycled plastic that is included in applicable products, as a percentage of total plastic content. Recycled plastic percentages should be reported in alignment to either EPEAT or TCO standards;

Expected responses:

• Depending on the number of products being procured, the vendor may provide a single percentage value for the amount of recycled plastic (if this is common across all product lines), or potentially a table with different products and their respective recycled plastic content.
• Departments can allocate points based on this percentage value or an average of products, at their discretion.

Warranty

RFP language: Please provide documentation on the warranty period and warranty services included as part of the procurement.

Note: it is likely that most departments will already include some questions on warranty as part of a procurement process. Additional language around level of service, turnaround times, exclusions, and testimonials could help make stronger decisions about evaluating warranty coverage. For the purposes of this guideline, the intent is to make sure that their business model is not based on planned obsolescence or lower-cost but short-lived products. Language can be adapted in whichever way is necessary by the department, noting the suggested warranty minimums for each hardware category.

Durability and repairability 

RFP language: Please provide documentation demonstrating product durability, as well as support options for repairing failed devices, component replacement and ordering times, and options for loaned devices during service times as appropriate.

Note: Departments are likely to have pre-established requirements or scoring for servicing and/or replacement parts as part of the core RFP scope. Ensuring partnership with a company that has a strong support system and stands behind their devices, both during and after warranty periods, is the intent of this evaluation. If this is already met through existing scoring/requirements, this may not need any additional questions.

Expected responses:

• There is likely to be high variability in the documentation provided by respondents, depending on their support programs and supplier networks. This may be in the form of product manuals or links to ordering website for components, repairs, etc.
• There are not yet any consistent frameworks available to monitor durability or repairability. New repairability standards are emerging in some European countries, so many multinationals for consumer devices (laptops, smartphones, tablets, displays, etc.) will already be required to have these. Some respondents may list these benefits, but it is too new to consider as a requirement, and is only adopted in certain countries.

Battery life

RFP language: Please provide the number of tested recharge cycles for the product where the battery retains 80% of its original capacity for all product battery options. Please provide a declaration that testing is conducted in compliance with IEC EN 61960.

Expected response:

• The vendor is likely to provide an integer number of charging cycles wherein the battery retains 80% of its original charge, as well as a declaration or acknowledgement/confirmation that testing was conducted in compliance with the stated IEC standard.
• Note that a suggested minimum is at least 500; the procuring department may choose to allocate additional points if a product has significantly higher number of charging cycles.

Takeback program

RFP language: Please briefly describe any takeback program(s) that are in place to repurpose products from this purchase. Describe the nature of the program, any costs or benefits (i.e. rebates) to Waterloo, the end-use of recovered materials/components from the product, and any partnerships for repurposing of materials or products.

Expected response:

• There are wide ranges of responses likely for this question, as vendors have developed a range of end-use programs. Reviewers could expect to see programs that lead to refurbishment for resale, donation or partnerships with charitable organizations, or recycling. While all of these do have environmental benefits, the most beneficial uses would be reusing/repurposing of equipment wherever possible, with recycling as a secondary option.
• Some vendors may offer to purchase back, grant rebates/credit, or offer discounted trade-ins on products. These should be considered within a lifecycle cost assessment, but from a sustainability perspective this should not compromise an increase in purchasing and waste generation with shorter asset lifespans.

Takeback program - Cartridges

RFP language – Please confirm that you offer a cartridge takeback program and provide a brief description of the program.

Expected response:

• Vendors will likely signal a binary yes/no response to this question. Departments could choose to request other details as is appropriate, such as the frequency of collection, any associated costs/rebates, and information on what is done with the returned cartridges.

Reporting and data

This will likely vary depending on the nature and scope of the RFP. However, the question should request that the vendor can provide once annually a summary of products purchased for the previous year (if the contract is for a multi-year period), including the following, depending on the type of purchase:

• The total dollar value of hardware purchased by Waterloo, as well as the total dollar value of products certified to EPEAT Bronze, Silver, Gold, or Platinum.
• The dollar value of any hardware purchased by Waterloo meeting any other environmental sustainability certifications (i.e. TCO, EnergySTAR) if not included in EPEAT applicable categories.
• Links or PDFs of any EPDs for hardware purchased by Waterloo that are newly introduced or were not included in the original RFP documentation.
• The number of items and weights collected through any takeback programs, and any change in destination for taken back items if different from RFP documentation.

Software purchases

Energy efficiency

RFP language: Please provide the expected energy efficiency of the software solution in terms of reasonably expected energy consumption per unit of activity (for example kWh per user, per page, per unit of storage, per unit of processing power as may be appropriate to the RFP). Please provide any documentation that demonstrates this energy efficiency.

Expected responses:

• Respondents may provide a link to power consumption information about their servers/data centres, specify which data hosting providers they use, or a technical report or sustainability report outlining energy efficiency.
• The procuring department would need to specify which metric of measurement is most appropriate.
• There is no standard third-party testing for energy efficiency of software and/or cloud services at this time.

Carbon footprint

RFP language: Please provide the expected annual carbon emissions of the software solution in terms of reasonably expected greenhouse gas emissions per unity of activity (per user, per page, per storage, etc.)

Expected responses:

• There may be a wide variety of responses provided, as these are not as rigorously compiled as an EPD for physical products.
• In a similar fashion to energy metric, the vendor should be able to provide an estimate of emissions associated with the software, in tonnes of CO2-e.

Reporting and data

RFP language: Please confirm that upon annual request you can provide information about the annual energy consumption (ekWh) and carbon emissions (t CO2-e) associated with University of Waterloo’s use of the software product, or whether this information is available within the software/solution itself.

Expected responses: This would be a yes/no reply that they can provide these numbers on an annual basis.