Skip to main content
    QHSEtech
    All templatesESG/CSRD · 4 pages · Updated 20 October 2026

    Scope 3 Supplier Data Request Template

    PDF ExcelFree, no email

    Four-page request that a buyer sends to ONE supplier for the greenhouse gas emissions attributable to the goods or services the buyer purchases from it (category 1 of the GHG Protocol Scope 3 Standard, purchased goods and services): the request details (buyer, supplier, reporting period, products covered, contact, level of data asked for), the supplier's own Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions for the covered products (Scope 2 under both methods, gases, GWP source, biomass CO2 kept apart), how they were allocated to the buyer's purchases and on what basis, whether each figure was measured, calculated or estimated, the boundary, standard or method, emission factor sources and years, data quality and any first-party or third-party assurance, optional product-level and upstream data, the targets and disclosures the supplier states (SBTi status, CDP response, other targets), what could not be provided and why, and the supplier's sign-off. A fourth page is a buyer-side log of what was received, what was checked and how the figures will be used. It supplies no emission factors, no limits and no scoring scale, and it does not show that an inventory conforms to any standard or law.

    What's inside

    Page 1: the request and the supplier's own emissions

    1. Request details: request reference, date sent, reply date, buyer and supplier with contacts, the supplier's country and sites, the reporting period requested (the same 12 months as the buyer's inventory where possible), the products or services covered, the buyer's item references, the buyer's purchases in the period (quantity and unit, value and currency) and the level of data asked for, from product level to whole company
    2. What this request covers: what is in category 1, what is left out (transport to the buyer, which is category 4, and capital goods, which are category 2), what is optional and what the buyer does not supply
    3. The supplier's own Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions for the covered products: Scope 1, Scope 2 by the location-based method and by the market-based method, each for the whole unit and as allocated to the buyer's purchases, with the unit and whether each figure was measured, calculated or estimated, the gases included, the source and version of the GWP values and whether biomass CO2 is reported apart from the scopes

    Page 2: allocation, method and quality

    1. Allocation to the buyer's purchases: whether allocation was needed, who did it, the basis (mass, volume, energy, units produced, revenue or spend, other), the buyer's purchases, total production in the same unit, the fraction, one factor for the whole facility, and the range if other bases were tried
    2. How the figures were obtained: the organisational boundary approach, what was left out, the standard or method used, a table of emission factor sources with edition or year and what each was used for, the share based on the supplier's own records, data quality in three parts, and verification or assurance (none, first party or third party, level, standard, assurer, statement)
    3. Product-level and upstream data (optional): a product-level figure if the supplier holds one, and the supplier's own upstream emissions or main upstream activities

    Page 3: targets, gaps and sign-off

    1. Targets and disclosures the supplier states: SBTi status (validated, commitment only, removed, none), the target details as the SBTi Target Dashboard shows them, the CDP climate response and score, other targets and an internal carbon price
    2. What could not be provided: each missing item, why, what can be given instead and by when, and any limit on how the data may be used
    3. Supplier sign-off: who completed and who approved the data, and where to return the form

    Page 4: the buyer's log

    1. Received, checked and used: date received, complete or not, same period as the inventory, units and gases consistent, the checks made, the buyer's own data quality assessment, how the data will be used (supplier-specific method, hybrid method, not used, engagement only) and the share of the category 1 figure that rests on supplier data
    2. Questions and replies: a log of queries to the supplier and the replies
    3. Follow-up and sign-off: actions with owner and date, the next request, where the record is kept, and buyer sign-off

    The section titles and tick options are ours, to change. Send pages 1 to 3 to the supplier and keep page 4.

    What requires or shapes this record

    No source opened for this page prescribes a supplier data request form, and this form does not say that any law requires one. The method comes from the GHG Protocol, a voluntary standard: the Corporate Value Chain (Scope 3) Standard (2011) and its Technical Guidance for Calculating Scope 3 Emissions (version 1.0, 2013) describe category 1, ask suppliers for specific items and explain allocation, and the Corporate Standard (2004) and Scope 2 Guidance (2015) define Scope 1 and 2 and the two Scope 2 methods. The GHG Protocol's update page, read on 20 October 2026, says it and ISO are developing one consolidated corporate standard, and its FAQ of 29 July 2026 gives a consolidated public consultation in the second quarter of 2027 and publication in the fourth quarter of 2028, so the documents above are the ones read for this page and a later edition may differ. EU rules on sustainability reporting are changing: the European Commission's page on corporate sustainability reporting, read on 20 October 2026, lists a political agreement on the Omnibus I simplification package of 9 December 2025 and, on 3 July 2026, the adoption of two delegated acts, one amending Delegated Regulation (EU) 2023/2772 on the European sustainability reporting standards and one on standards for voluntary use by undertakings protected by the value chain cap. The legal texts were not opened for this form, so it states no scope, date or threshold: check what applies to you and to your supplier before you rely on any of them. The same page describes the 26 February 2025 Omnibus proposal as seeking to ensure that reporting requirements on large companies do not burden smaller companies in their value chains; how that ended up was not checked. A completed form shows that data were requested and received; it does not show compliance with any law or standard. This page is general information, not legal advice.

    • GHG Protocol, Corporate Value Chain (Scope 3) Accounting and Reporting Standard (WRI and WBCSD, 2011), sections 6.2, 7.3, 7.4, 8.1 to 8.3 and 10.8 and chapter 11 (free PDF, read 20 October 2026)

      A voluntary standard. Section 7.4 says companies should first engage their tier 1 suppliers and may send questionnaires asking for product life cycle emissions data, Scope 1 and Scope 2 data for the reporting year following the Corporate Standard, the supplier's upstream Scope 3 emissions or the types of upstream activities, a description of the methods and data sources (including emission factors and GWP values), the allocation method or the information needed to allocate, and whether the data are assured or verified and how. It ranks data by how product-specific it is (product, activity or production line, facility, business unit, company) and says to collect or adjust data to a consistent 12-month period. Section 7.3 names five data quality indicators (technological, temporal and geographical representativeness, completeness and reliability); its box 7.2 gives example criteria and box 7.3 an example spend share, which this form does not print because they are examples, not requirements. Sections 8.1 to 8.3 say to avoid or minimise allocation where possible (product-level data, sub-metering, engineering models), to use physical factors where they reflect cause and effect and economic factors where data are not available, to use one consistent factor for a facility, and that either the supplier or the buyer may allocate; box 8.1 gives the allocation as total emissions times the buyer's purchases over total production in the same units. Section 6.2 says biogenic CO2 stays outside the scopes and is reported separately. Section 10.8 says an assurance statement says whether the assurer was a first or third party, the standard used and the level (limited or reasonable). Chapter 11 requires the reporting company to report the percentage of emissions calculated from supplier data. The standard's text is not reproduced here.

    • GHG Protocol, Technical Guidance for Calculating Scope 3 Emissions, version 1.0 (2013), category 1, pages 20 to 26 (free PDF, read 20 October 2026)

      Describes category 1 as all upstream (cradle-to-gate) emissions from the production of goods and services the company bought in the year, and says transport of purchased products from a tier 1 supplier in vehicles the company does not own or control belongs to category 4. It lists four methods in order of how specific they are to the supplier: supplier-specific (product-level cradle-to-gate data), hybrid (allocated Scope 1 and Scope 2 data from suppliers plus activity data and secondary data for what the supplier cannot give), average-data and spend-based. The first two need data from suppliers. It lists what a supplier questionnaire may ask for (product life cycle data, the methods and data sources including emission factors and GWP values, whether and how the data were assured or verified, and other information such as the share of primary data), says supplier data should cover the same period as the buyer's inventory and that verified data are preferred. This is why the form asks for allocated Scope 1 and Scope 2 as one part of the request and says plainly that they are not the whole of the product's emissions up to receipt.

    • GHG Protocol, Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard, revised edition (2004), chapters 3, 4 and 9; and Scope 2 Guidance (2015), sections 1.5.1 and 7.4 (free PDFs, read 20 October 2026); update page https://ghgprotocol.org/ghg-protocol-standards-and-guidance-update-process-0

      Chapter 3 says a company consolidates its emissions by the equity share approach or the control approach (financial or operational control), and chapter 4 defines Scope 1 as direct emissions from sources the company owns or controls and Scope 2 as emissions from generating purchased electricity, with direct CO2 from burning biomass reported separately from Scope 1. Chapter 9 lists what a report states, including the boundaries chosen, the reporting period, the methods and any exclusions, any external assurance and a copy of the verification statement. The Scope 2 Guidance (https://ghgprotocol.org/sites/default/files/standards/Scope%202%20Guidance_Final_Sept26.pdf) says companies with operations in markets that offer contractual instruments report Scope 2 two ways, a location-based and a market-based total, each labelled, which it calls dual reporting. That is why the form asks for both and lets the supplier say why a method does not apply. The update page, read on 20 October 2026, says the consolidated GHG Protocol and ISO corporate standard is in development.

    • SBTi Target Dashboard and Standards and guidance pages, CDP Scores and Supply Chain Membership pages, and European Commission corporate sustainability reporting page (public pages, read 20 October 2026)

      SBTi (https://sciencebasedtargets.org/target-dashboard): the dashboard lists companies with validated targets and companies that have only committed to set targets. Validation is carried out by SBTi Services. A commitment is an intention to submit targets within 24 months and a company with a commitment does not yet have validated targets; commitments that lapse are shown as removed. Temperature alignment is shown as 1.5°C, well-below 2°C or 2°C and, the page says, is normally given only for Scope 1 and 2 targets. The standards page (https://sciencebasedtargets.org/standards-and-guidance) says Corporate Net-Zero Standard Version 2.0 can be used for validation from early 2027 and that targets set in 2026 use Version 1.3.1; it describes scope 3 targets as supplier engagement targets and/or reduction targets and gives a coverage figure that this form does not print. CDP (https://www.cdp.net/en/supply-chain): supply chain members ask chosen suppliers to disclose through CDP, including emissions allocations, and suppliers answer supply chain questions as well as the main questionnaire. CDP (https://www.cdp.net/en/scores): companies that did not submit by the scoring deadline get no score, and the page says the public scores it shows may be used only for internal, non-commercial purposes without CDP's written consent. European Commission (https://finance.ec.europa.eu/capital-markets-union-and-financial-markets/company-reporting-and-auditing/company-reporting/corporate-sustainability-reporting_en): the timeline entries quoted in the requirements paragraph above. None of these pages prescribes this form.

    Each source checked on 20 October 2026. Not legal advice; check the text in force for your site.

    Field by field

    Pages 1 to 3 go to the supplier: the buyer fills in section 1 and the supplier fills in the rest. Page 4 is the buyer's own log and stays with the buyer. The section titles and tick options are ours: change them to fit your supplier base. The form supplies no emission factors, no limits and no scoring scale. Where a value is needed, the supplier or the buyer writes it with its source, its edition or year and the date it was read, and keeps them the same from one request to the next so that replies can be compared.

    Reporting period requested
    Why: Supplier data should cover the same period as the buyer's inventory, and suppliers keep books on financial or calendar years, so the form asks for the period and the supplier's own year. The Scope 3 Standard says to collect or adjust data to a consistent 12-month period.
    Common mistake: Accepting the supplier's last financial year without writing down that it differs, so a later check finds two periods mixed.
    Products or services covered
    Why: Category 1 is what the buyer bought in the period. Naming the products, the buyer's item or contract references and the quantity and value purchased fixes what the figures must relate to and gives the allocation its numerator.
    Common mistake: Asking for "emissions from the supplier" without saying which products, so the reply is the whole company's figure.
    Level of data asked for
    Why: The Scope 3 Standard ranks supplier data from product level down to whole company and says to seek the most product-specific level the supplier holds, because it avoids or reduces allocation. The tick records what was asked and the reply shows what was given.
    Common mistake: Taking a company-wide figure from a supplier that makes many different products, which can misstate the buyer's share a great deal.
    Scope 1 (direct emissions)
    Why: Scope 1 is direct emissions from sources the supplier owns or controls. The form asks for the figure for the whole unit and as allocated to the buyer's purchases, with a unit and the way it was obtained, so the allocation can be checked.
    Common mistake: Giving only the allocated figure, so nobody can check that it is a share of a whole.
    Scope 2, location-based method
    Why: The Scope 2 Guidance asks companies in markets with contractual instruments to report Scope 2 under both the location-based and the market-based method and to label each. The form has a line for each and a place to say why a method does not apply.
    Common mistake: Adding the two methods together, or mixing them from one site to the next, so the total means nothing.
    Gases included in the figures
    Why: The Scope 3 Standard says supplier Scope 1 and 2 data should cover CO2, CH4, N2O, HFCs, PFCs and SF6, and may be given in CO2 equivalent. The ticks show what is in the figures; the GWP source and version beside them is needed to compare suppliers.
    Common mistake: Accepting a tonnage in CO2 equivalent without asking which gases and which GWP values, so figures from two suppliers cannot be added.
    CO2 from burning biomass reported separately from the scopes?
    Why: The Scope 3 Standard and the Corporate Standard say CO2 from burning biomass is not counted in the scopes but reported separately. The question makes the supplier say where it put it.
    Common mistake: Leaving it blank, so biomass CO2 is either dropped or counted inside Scope 1 without anyone knowing.
    Allocation basis
    Why: A supplier that makes many products reports emissions for the whole site, and a share has to be given to the buyer's purchases. The Scope 3 Standard prefers to avoid allocation and, where it is needed, says physical factors where they reflect cause and effect and economic factors where data are not available. The form records the basis, the buyer's purchases, total production in the same unit and the fraction.
    Common mistake: Writing "allocated by revenue" with no figures, or purchases and production in different units, so the fraction cannot be checked.
    How the figure was obtained
    Why: A measured figure, a figure calculated from activity data and an estimate carry different weight. The tick for each line tells the buyer how much to rely on it and what to ask next.
    Common mistake: Ticking "measured" for a figure that was calculated from invoices and a published factor.
    Boundary: how the supplier consolidates
    Why: The Corporate Standard says a company consolidates by equity share or by financial or operational control, and the choice changes what counts as direct. The form asks which, what was left out and why, and which standard or method was used.
    Common mistake: Not asking what was excluded, so a missing site looks like a low figure.
    Standard or method used
    Why: The Scope 3 Standard asks for a description of the methods the supplier used. The ticks name the GHG Protocol Corporate and Product Standards and leave a line for another standard or method with its year.
    Common mistake: Writing "in line with the GHG Protocol" and nothing else, which names no method and no edition.
    Emission factor source
    Why: The Scope 3 Standard asks suppliers for their data sources, including emission factors and GWP values, and says companies should encourage consistent sources across suppliers. The table asks for each source, its edition or year and what it was used for. The form supplies no factors.
    Common mistake: Taking the supplier's factor without its source and year, so it cannot be compared or updated.
    Data quality: technology, time and geography
    Why: The Scope 3 Standard's five indicators are technological, temporal and geographical representativeness, completeness and reliability. The form asks the supplier to say how each applies in its own words and which scale, if any, it used. The buyer gives its own view on page 4. The form supplies no scale.
    Common mistake: Asking for a single quality score, which hides which of the five is weak.
    Verification or assurance
    Why: The Technical Guidance and the Scope 3 Standard ask whether the data were assured or verified and how, and say verified data are preferred. The form asks whether it was first party or third party, the level (limited or reasonable), the standard and the assurer, and whether the statement is attached.
    Common mistake: Taking "yes, verified" at face value, with no statement and no scope, so it is not known what was verified.
    Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi) status
    Why: A supplier may say it has science-based targets. The SBTi Target Dashboard shows validated targets and, separately, commitments to set targets, and a commitment is not a validated target. The form records the status the supplier states and lets the buyer check it. CDP gives a score only where a response was in by its deadline, and its page says published scores are for internal, non-commercial use unless CDP agrees. Any statement is the supplier's, not verified data.
    Common mistake: Counting a commitment as a validated target, or treating a missing CDP score as a low one when the supplier simply did not respond.
    What could not be provided
    Why: Missing data are normal in a first request. The Scope 3 Standard suggests asking for data a supplier already holds, such as energy use, rather than emissions. The table records what is missing, why, what can be given instead and by when, and the buyer then knows what secondary data it must use.
    Common mistake: Leaving gaps blank, so the buyer cannot tell a zero from a figure that was not held.
    How the data will be used
    Why: The Scope 3 Standard requires the reporting company to report the percentage of emissions calculated from supplier data. The log records which method the reply feeds (supplier-specific, hybrid, not used or engagement only) and the share that rests on it.
    Common mistake: Treating allocated Scope 1 and 2 as the product's whole figure, which leaves out the supplier's own suppliers.

    Worked example

    IllustrativeA request to an invented steel parts supplier, with invented figures

    SectionEntry
    1 RequestExample Buyer Ltd asks Sample Metals Ltd (both invented) for category 1 data for 1 January to 31 December 2025 on steel brackets. The buyer bought 1,200 tonnes in the period. Level asked for: product level, otherwise facility.
    3 Supplier's figuresNo product-level figure is held, so the supplier gives facility figures for the plant that makes the brackets: Scope 1 4,200 tCO2e, Scope 2 location-based 2,600 tCO2e and market-based 1,900 tCO2e. Gases: CO2, CH4 and N2O. No biomass CO2. All three figures are marked calculated from activity data.
    4 AllocationPhysical, by mass: the plant made 60,000 tonnes in the period and the buyer bought 1,200 tonnes, so the fraction is 1,200 / 60,000 = 0.02. Allocated: Scope 1 84 tCO2e (4,200 x 0.02), Scope 2 location-based 52 (2,600 x 0.02) and market-based 38 (1,900 x 0.02). One factor is used for the whole plant.
    TotalsAllocated Scope 1 and 2: 136 tCO2e location-based (84 + 52) and 122 tCO2e market-based (84 + 38), kept as two separate totals and not added together.
    5 Method and qualityOperational control. The supplier names the standard and the sources and years of its factors, with each use. Third-party assurance, limited level, statement attached. Completeness: all sites of the plant, full year.
    6 to 8 Optional data, targets, gapsNo product-level or upstream figure. SBTi: commitment to set targets only, no validated targets (the buyer checks the Target Dashboard). CDP: not responded. Not provided: the upstream emissions of the steel the supplier buys, with a promise of a study and no date.
    10 Buyer's logReceived on time and complete except section 6. Checks: allocated amounts are below the whole-plant amounts and each fraction is 0.02. Use: hybrid method. The 136 and 122 are the supplier's own Scope 1 and 2 only, not the brackets' emissions up to receipt, so the buyer adds secondary data for the upstream steel. Follow-up: ask for upstream data next year.

    The figures are invented to show the arithmetic and are not typical values. The form supplies no emission factors and no limits: the supplier's sources and years go in section 5, and the buyer adds none.

    When a spreadsheet stops being enough

    A paper form or a spreadsheet works for a handful of suppliers and one inventory a year. It stops working when you ask dozens or hundreds of suppliers, when one supplier is asked about several sites and years, when replies come back in different units, gases and periods, when chasing and re-requesting is done by hand, and when someone asks which figure in the inventory came from which reply.

    A software record can send the same request to many suppliers, hold each reply against its supplier and period, check units, gases and the allocation arithmetic as replies arrive, flag missing items, keep the history of queries and changed replies, and mark which lines of the inventory rest on supplier data and which on secondary data. Ask whether a supplier can reply in its own format, whether the whole-unit and allocated figures are both kept, how a revised reply is versioned and how the share based on supplier data is shown. The list below applies the Scope 3 emissions software rule used by the guide. Nothing in it shows that a product holds this request, so test it with a few of your own suppliers.

    Same rule for every product: tagged “Carbon Accounting”, “Carbon Management”, “Scope 3” or “Emissions Reporting”, with a sourced Scope 3 or supplier-emissions capability in its record, or one the vendor stated to us, labelled as vendor-stated. Documented and conditional capabilities qualify; check the linked scope before treating a module as included.

    Tekmon pays for a sponsored placement (above); its place in this list follows the same rule as every entry. How lists are ordered

    All 12 matching profiles are shown. Documentation review, not hands-on testing or a claim of compliance.