A complete framework for retiring cloud infrastructure across hyperscalers, traditional cloud providers, and neoclouds with maximum capital recovery and full multi-tenant compliance.
TL;DR
ITAD for cloud providers isn’t a single category. The operational, compliance, and recovery profiles are fundamentally different across three cloud provider types:
| Provider Type | Examples | ITAD Profile |
|---|---|---|
| Hyperscalers | AWS, Azure, GCP, Oracle Cloud, Meta | Custom hardware, multi-region, in-house ITAD typically; outsource specialized recovery |
| Traditional cloud providers | IBM Cloud, DigitalOcean, Linode, OVH | Mostly standard enterprise hardware; multi-tenant sanitization concerns |
| Neoclouds | CoreWeave, Lambda, Crusoe, Voltage Park | GPU-heavy fleets, compressed refresh cycles, high secondary-market value |
Five things make cloud provider ITAD different from data center or telecom ITAD:
- Multi-tenant data sanitization. Hardware that’s served multiple customers requires sanitization that meets the most stringent customer’s requirements, not just the cloud provider’s
- SOC 2 Type II audit implications. Cloud provider customers audit disposition practices as part of broader security reviews
- Equipment mix dominated by GPU/AI infrastructure. $450+ billion in AI capex in 2026 means cloud providers retire more GPU hardware than any other category
- Multi-region coordination. Single retirement programs span multiple data centers across regions, sometimes across countries
- Custom hardware at the hyperscale tier. Open Compute and custom-designed equipment has different recovery economics than standard enterprise gear
The cloud providers that treat ITAD as a strategic capital and compliance discipline capture meaningfully more value while protecting customer trust. The ones that treat it as a disposal afterthought leave both money and compliance posture on the floor.
This guide covers the operational differences across cloud provider types, the multi-tenant compliance requirements, the equipment recovery economics, and the partner profile that fits cloud provider scale.
Why Cloud Provider ITAD Is Different
Cloud provider ITAD gets confused with enterprise data center ITAD. The two share infrastructure language but operate on different mechanics.
| Dimension | Enterprise Data Center ITAD | Cloud Provider ITAD |
|---|---|---|
| Equipment ownership | Single owner (the operator) | Single owner, but hardware served multiple customers |
| Data sanitization scope | Operator’s own data | Multiple customers’ data, often with conflicting requirements |
| Compliance landscape | Operator’s own compliance | Operator’s compliance + every customer’s compliance requirements |
| Audit posture | Internal audit | SOC 2 Type II audits with customer attestation rights |
| Scale | Racks to facilities | Multi-region, often multi-country |
| Equipment mix | Standard enterprise hardware | Standard, custom, and GPU-heavy in different proportions by provider type |
| Refresh cycles | 3-7 years (compressing) | 18 months to 5 years depending on workload type |
| Recovery channel | Generic secondary market | Specialist channels matched to specific hardware categories |
The differences compound. A cloud provider running ITAD through a generalist vendor designed for enterprise data center work typically fails on at least three of these dimensions simultaneously.
The 2026 Drivers Pushing Cloud Provider Equipment Retirement
Five forces are simultaneously driving cloud provider ITAD volumes at unprecedented levels in 2026.
Hyperscaler AI Infrastructure Capex
The top five hyperscalers (AWS, Azure, GCP, Meta, Oracle) are projected to spend over $600 billion on infrastructure in 2026, with roughly $450 billion targeting AI specifically. Goldman Sachs projects total hyperscaler capex from 2025 through 2027 will reach $1.15 trillion, more than double the $477 billion spent from 2022 through 2024.
Every dollar of new infrastructure has a corresponding retirement implication. The hardware being replaced doesn’t disappear when new equipment arrives. It has to go somewhere, and at hyperscale, the volumes are unprecedented.
Refresh Cycle Compression for AI Workloads
AI hardware refresh cycles have compressed from 5-to-7 years down to 18-36 months. For cloud providers running AI workloads (which increasingly is most of them), this is the dominant operational change.
A 3-year refresh cycle means every piece of GPU infrastructure deployed in 2023 is up for retirement in 2026. A 5-year cycle means equipment from 2021. The compression effect is that retirements that would have spread over years are now compressing into months-long windows.
The Neocloud Build-Out
A new category of cloud provider has emerged: GPU-focused operators built specifically to serve AI workloads. CoreWeave, Lambda Labs, Crusoe, Voltage Park, and others have collectively built infrastructure footprints measured in tens of thousands of GPUs. These operators:
- Refresh aggressively (because GPU generations matter for competitive positioning)
- Operate with significant secondary-market sophistication (they buy used GPUs from hyperscaler retirements)
- Have ITAD profiles that look more like specialized HPC operations than traditional cloud providers
- Are generating significant retirement volume as their early infrastructure ages out
For specialist ITAD vendors, the neocloud segment is one of the highest-growth markets in 2026.
Multi-Tenant Hardware Reassignment
Cloud providers regularly reassign hardware between customers as workloads shift. A server that served Customer A’s database workload last quarter may now serve Customer B’s general compute workload, and Customer C’s AI training workload next quarter. Each reassignment may trigger sanitization requirements depending on the customers’ contracts.
When that hardware reaches actual end-of-life, the sanitization requirements for final disposition typically have to meet the most stringent of all the customers that hardware ever served. This is operationally complex and often missed in ITAD planning.
Power Density Forced Facility Upgrades
Traditional cloud infrastructure ran at 5-15 kW per rack. Current AI infrastructure runs at 50-140 kW. The shift requires facility upgrades that often force retirement of supporting infrastructure (power distribution, cooling systems, network plumbing) along with the compute hardware itself.
For cloud providers operating multi-generation facilities, the retirement events aren’t just compute hardware. They’re entire infrastructure stacks within facilities being upgraded for GPU density.
Equipment Categories: Recovery Economics by Cloud Provider Type
Cloud provider equipment mix varies significantly across the three provider types. The recovery economics follow.
Hyperscaler Equipment Mix
Hyperscalers deploy a combination of:
| Equipment Category | Recovery Value Profile |
|---|---|
| Open Compute / custom-designed servers | Limited (designed for specific use, limited buyer market) |
| Standard rack-mount servers | Moderate (standard secondary market) |
| Custom-designed networking ASICs | Limited (proprietary, no broader use case) |
| GPU systems (NVIDIA H100, H200, A100, B200) | High (strong AI market demand) |
| Standard networking (Cisco, Arista, Juniper) | Moderate to High (broad enterprise demand) |
| Storage systems | Moderate (capacity erosion vs new) |
The custom hardware portion of hyperscaler retirements typically has lower recovery value than standard hardware because of limited secondary-market demand. Standard hardware and GPU systems carry the recovery story.
Traditional Cloud Provider Equipment Mix
Tier-2 and tier-3 traditional cloud providers (DigitalOcean, Linode, IBM Cloud, OVH) typically deploy more standard equipment:
| Equipment Category | Recovery Value Profile |
|---|---|
| Standard enterprise servers (Dell, HPE, Supermicro) | Moderate (broad secondary market) |
| Standard networking | Moderate to High |
| Storage systems | Moderate |
| Specialized GPU systems | High (when present) |
Recovery economics for traditional cloud providers look more like enterprise data center recovery: 30-55% of new value on equipment retired in the peak window after OEM End-of-Sale.
Neocloud Equipment Mix
Neoclouds are the highest-recovery cloud provider segment because of their GPU concentration:
| Equipment Category | Recovery Value Profile |
|---|---|
| NVIDIA GPU systems (H100, H200, A100) | Very High (60-80% of new in early years) |
| Specialized networking (InfiniBand, high-speed Ethernet) | High |
| Standard supporting infrastructure | Moderate |
| Power and cooling equipment | Lower (less liquid market) |
For neoclouds running 18-36 month refresh cycles, the recovery economics are highly favorable when timed correctly. The same H100 system that recovers 75% of new value at 18 months may recover 40% at 36 months. Timing matters more than for any other cloud provider category.
Multi-Tenant Data Sanitization Requirements
The compliance dimension that’s most often missed in cloud provider ITAD planning. Hardware that’s served multiple customers has sanitization requirements that have to meet the highest standard among all customers it ever served.
The NIST 800-88 Baseline
NIST 800-88 Rev. 1 is the U.S. federal standard for media sanitization. It defines three sanitization methods:
- Clear: Logical sanitization that protects against keyboard-level recovery attempts
- Purge: Physical or logical sanitization that protects against laboratory-level recovery
- Destroy: Physical destruction that renders the media unrecoverable
Most cloud provider contracts specify NIST 800-88 as the baseline sanitization standard. For most enterprise customers, this is sufficient.
The IEEE 2883 Layer
For customers with high-sensitivity data (healthcare, financial services, federal), IEEE 2883-2022 provides more granular sanitization requirements specifically for modern storage technologies including NVMe and shingled magnetic recording. Cloud provider contracts increasingly reference IEEE 2883 for these customer segments.
Multi-Tenant Implications
When a hyperscaler retires a piece of hardware that served:
- Customer A (general business workload, NIST 800-88 Clear is sufficient)
- Customer B (financial services workload, NIST 800-88 Purge required, IEEE 2883 preferred)
- Customer C (federal customer, NIST 800-88 Destroy required, plus specific federal requirements)
The hardware sanitization must meet Customer C’s requirements, the most stringent. This is operationally simple in concept but easy to miss in practice. Cloud providers running ITAD through vendors that default to baseline NIST 800-88 sanitization may be technically out of compliance with their most stringent customer requirements.
What Good Multi-Tenant Sanitization Looks Like
The operational pattern that handles this correctly:
- Cloud provider tracks customer workload assignment at hardware level through the deployment lifecycle
- At retirement, the maximum customer sanitization requirement is identified for each piece of hardware
- Sanitization is performed to that maximum standard, regardless of the cloud provider’s default
- Per-asset documentation records both the sanitization method used and the customer requirements that drove it
- Audit-ready records can demonstrate the link between customer requirements and sanitization outcomes
This is documentation discipline more than complex technical work. The discipline often isn’t there.
The Cloud Provider Compliance Landscape
Beyond data sanitization, cloud providers face compliance dimensions that enterprise data centers don’t.
SOC 2 Type II Audit Implications
Most cloud provider customers require SOC 2 Type II reports as a baseline trust signal. SOC 2 Type II audits cover security, availability, processing integrity, confidentiality, and privacy controls over an operational period.
ITAD practices fall within SOC 2 scope. The audit can examine:
- How retired hardware is sanitized and what documentation exists
- Chain of custody from removal through final disposition
- Vendor management for ITAD providers (their certifications, audit history)
- How customer data residency requirements affect ITAD operations
A cloud provider with weak ITAD documentation can fail SOC 2 controls. Failed SOC 2 controls show up in the report, and customers see them.
FedRAMP Considerations
For cloud providers serving federal customers (AWS GovCloud, Azure Government, GCP Assured Workloads), FedRAMP authorization adds additional requirements:
- NIST 800-88 Destroy required for data-bearing media (Purge isn’t sufficient)
- ITAR compliance for any equipment that might cross borders
- Specific chain-of-custody documentation requirements
- Authorized destruction methods may be required for specific data classifications
Cloud providers with FedRAMP-authorized infrastructure need ITAD partners with these capabilities. Many ITAD vendors don’t have ITAR compliance, which excludes them from supporting FedRAMP environments.
Customer Audit Rights
Many cloud provider contracts include customer audit rights that extend to ITAD operations. Customers (or their auditors) can request:
- Evidence of sanitization for specific hardware that served their workloads
- Chain-of-custody documentation
- ITAD vendor certifications
- Mass-balance recovery reports
Cloud providers that can’t produce this documentation on request risk customer trust events. Customers that lose trust in disposition practices may move workloads elsewhere.
State and International Data Residency
Cloud provider customers increasingly require data residency commitments (data stays within specific jurisdictions). When hardware is retired, those data residency requirements often extend to the ITAD pathway:
- Sanitization must occur within the customer’s required jurisdiction
- Downstream vendors must not export equipment that may still contain residual data
- Documentation must demonstrate jurisdictional compliance through final disposition
This is operationally complex. ITAD vendors with single-jurisdiction operations may not satisfy multi-jurisdiction cloud provider requirements.
Scope 3 Reporting at Cloud Provider Scale
Cloud providers face Scope 3 reporting requirements that differ from enterprise data centers in important ways.
Category 1 vs Category 5 vs Category 12
For most enterprises, retired hardware falls under Scope 3 Category 5 (Waste Generated in Operations). Cloud providers are more complicated:
| Category | What It Covers for Cloud Providers |
|---|---|
| Category 1: Purchased Goods and Services | New equipment purchases (huge for cloud providers) |
| Category 2: Capital Goods | Major infrastructure investments |
| Category 5: Waste Generated in Operations | Retired hardware from cloud provider’s own operations |
| Category 11: Use of Sold Products | Customer workloads running on cloud infrastructure |
| Category 12: End-of-Life Treatment of Sold Products | This typically doesn’t apply to cloud providers selling services rather than physical products |
Most cloud providers report retired hardware under Category 5. The complication: when hardware served paying customers, some argue it should be categorized differently. The reporting framework is still evolving on this question.
Reuse vs Recycle Reporting Differentials at Scale
The reuse vs recycle Scope 3 differential matters more for cloud providers than for enterprise data centers because of the absolute volumes involved. A hyperscaler retiring 100,000 servers annually with 70% reuse rates vs 20% reuse rates is reporting fundamentally different sustainability outcomes, even if both technically claim “responsible disposition.”
Sophisticated cloud provider ESG reports separate these outcomes explicitly:
- Tons reused (with avoided emissions credit)
- Tons recovered for materials
- Tons sent to energy recovery
- Tons landfilled
The differential is meaningful for ESG ratings and customer reporting. Cloud providers that lump reuse and recycle together are under-reporting their sustainability performance.
Audit-Ready Documentation
Cloud provider scale makes audit-ready Scope 3 documentation particularly demanding. The required artifacts:
- Per-project mass-balance recovery reports
- Material category breakdown by weight
- Downstream vendor disclosure with certifications
- Reuse vs recycle outcome tracking
- Carbon footprint calculations for reuse vs recycle pathways
- Customer-attestable evidence (for customer audit responses)
This documentation depth is what separates ITAD operations that survive SOC 2 audits, customer reviews, and ESG rating agency inquiries from those that don’t.
The Right ITAD Partner Profile for Cloud Providers
The vendor selection criteria that matter for cloud provider ITAD aren’t the same as enterprise data center ITAD. Five criteria that separate genuine cloud provider ITAD specialists from generalists:
1. Multi-Tenant Sanitization Capability
The vendor’s standard sanitization process should handle multi-tenant hardware correctly:
- Sanitization to NIST 800-88 Purge minimum, with Destroy capability for high-sensitivity assets
- IEEE 2883 capability for modern storage technologies
- Per-asset sanitization documentation that ties to specific customer requirements
- ITAR compliance for FedRAMP-relevant equipment
Vendors that default to baseline sanitization without flexibility to match multi-tenant requirements are the wrong vendors for cloud providers.
2. GPU-Specific Recovery Capability
For neoclouds and AI-focused cloud providers, GPU recovery economics are the dominant variable. The right vendor profile includes:
- Specialist GPU valuation across NVIDIA generations
- Direct buyer relationships for current and prior-generation GPUs
- Understanding of GPU-specific handling (liquid cooling drainage, per-accelerator inventory)
- Export compliance for current-generation GPUs subject to ECCN 3A090 controls
- Ability to handle the velocity of GPU refresh (multiple refresh events per year at neocloud scale)
3. Multi-Region Operations
Single cloud provider ITAD programs span multiple data centers, often across multiple regions. The right vendor has:
- Regional field operations capability (not just centralized depot)
- Standardized intake protocols across heterogeneous facilities
- Cross-region documentation discipline that rolls up to program-level reporting
- Capability to handle compliance requirements that vary by jurisdiction
4. SOC 2 and Customer Audit Readiness
The vendor’s documentation and operations should support the cloud provider’s SOC 2 audit posture:
- Documentation depth suitable for SOC 2 controls testing
- Audit response capability (when customers or auditors request specific records)
- Ability to attest to specific outcomes for specific customers (when needed for customer audit responses)
- Operations that wouldn’t fail a controlled audit examination
5. Reuse-First Disposition Hierarchy
For cloud providers with meaningful ESG commitments, reuse-first disposition is operationally important:
- Sanitized hardware routed to reuse markets before any recycling decision
- Direct buyer relationships across the customer types that buy used cloud infrastructure (other cloud providers, enterprises, refurbishers)
- Reuse rate tracking and reporting separate from recycling outcomes
- Capability to recover specialty components (transceivers, specific chips) independently from chassis disposition
Vendors that can deliver all five at the right scale are a small subset of the broader ITAD market. The vendor selection question for cloud providers is which subset.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is ITAD for cloud providers?
ITAD for cloud providers is the process of retiring, sanitizing, recovering value from, and disposing of infrastructure used to deliver cloud services. It encompasses compute servers, GPUs and AI accelerators, networking equipment, storage systems, and supporting infrastructure across hyperscalers (AWS, Azure, GCP, Oracle Cloud, Meta), traditional cloud providers (IBM Cloud, DigitalOcean, Linode, OVH), and neoclouds (CoreWeave, Lambda, Crusoe, Voltage Park). Cloud provider ITAD differs from enterprise data center ITAD because of multi-tenant data sanitization requirements, SOC 2 audit implications, and the scale of multi-region operations.
How does AI infrastructure affect cloud provider ITAD?
AI infrastructure is the largest single driver of cloud provider ITAD volume in 2026. Top hyperscalers will spend over $600 billion on infrastructure with roughly $450 billion targeting AI specifically. AI hardware refresh cycles have compressed from 5-7 years to 18-36 months, meaning equipment deployed even in 2023 is up for retirement in 2026. The shift also forces facility-wide upgrades (power, cooling, networking) to support 50-140 kW per rack densities, generating significant supporting infrastructure retirement alongside the compute hardware itself.
What is multi-tenant data sanitization?
Multi-tenant data sanitization is the requirement to sanitize cloud infrastructure to meet the data security standards of all customers whose workloads ever ran on that hardware. When a single server has served multiple cloud customers over its lifecycle, the sanitization at retirement must meet the most stringent customer’s requirements, not the cloud provider’s default. This is operationally complex because it requires tracking customer workload assignment at the hardware level through deployment, identifying the maximum sanitization requirement at retirement, and documenting the link between customer requirements and sanitization outcomes.
What are neoclouds and how do they differ from traditional cloud providers?
Neoclouds are a category of cloud providers built specifically to serve AI and HPC workloads, typically focused on GPU infrastructure. Examples include CoreWeave, Lambda Labs, Crusoe, and Voltage Park. They differ from traditional cloud providers in three ways: equipment mix is heavily GPU-focused (often 70%+ of capacity), refresh cycles are aggressive (18-36 months rather than 3-5 years), and they often operate as significant participants in the secondary market for both buying and selling used GPU infrastructure. Their ITAD profile looks more like specialized HPC operations than traditional cloud providers.
How does SOC 2 Type II affect cloud provider ITAD?
SOC 2 Type II audits examine cloud provider security controls over an operational period. ITAD practices fall within audit scope: how retired hardware is sanitized, what documentation exists, chain of custody from removal through final disposition, vendor management for ITAD providers (their certifications, audit history), and how customer data residency requirements affect ITAD operations. Cloud providers with weak ITAD documentation can fail SOC 2 controls, and failed controls appear in audit reports that customers see. Strong ITAD documentation supports SOC 2 attestation rather than threatening it.
What certifications should a cloud provider’s ITAD partner have?
Standard ITAD certifications (R2v3 with Appendix E for materials recovery, NAID AAA, ISO 14001, ISO 45001, RIOS) plus cloud-provider-specific capabilities: NIST 800-88 with both Purge and Destroy methods, IEEE 2883 capability for modern storage, ITAR compliance for FedRAMP-relevant work, documented multi-tenant sanitization procedures, and audit response capability suitable for SOC 2 and customer audit examination. For cloud providers with international operations, additional considerations include data residency-compliant operations and jurisdiction-specific sanitization capability.
Can the cost of cloud provider ITAD be offset by recovery value?
Yes, on programs with sufficient recoverable equipment value. Cloud provider ITAD economics typically favor recovery offset because of the equipment mix: current-generation GPUs recover 60-80% of new value, standard networking and switching recovers 40-65%, and reusable infrastructure carries meaningful aggregate value. Specialist ITAD vendors with direct buyer relationships across carriers, hyperscalers, neoclouds, and international operators can offset 50-100% of ITAD costs through recovered value on appropriate equipment mixes. The economics depend heavily on equipment timing relative to OEM lifecycle events and the depth of the vendor’s buyer network.
How long does a typical cloud provider ITAD program take?
Cloud provider ITAD programs typically run as continuous operations rather than discrete projects. Hyperscalers operate continuous retirement workflows across dozens or hundreds of facilities globally. Neoclouds running 18-36 month refresh cycles execute multiple refresh events per year. Individual retirement events within these programs typically complete in 1-4 weeks for site-level work, 30-90 days for full multi-site programs. The program-level cadence is driven by capacity planning and capital cycles, not by ITAD vendor capacity. Specialist vendors with multi-region operations are designed to support continuous program work rather than discrete project engagement.
What’s the difference between hyperscaler ITAD and traditional cloud provider ITAD?
Hyperscalers run substantial custom hardware (Open Compute, proprietary ASICs) alongside standard equipment, with internal ITAD capability supplemented by specialist outsourced services for specific equipment categories. Traditional cloud providers (tier-2, tier-3) typically run more standard enterprise hardware and outsource more of their ITAD operations. The recovery economics differ: custom hyperscaler hardware often has lower secondary-market value because of limited buyer markets, while standard hardware from traditional cloud providers has broader buyer demand. The compliance profiles can also differ based on customer mix and audit requirements.
How does cloud provider ITAD affect ESG and sustainability reporting?
Cloud provider ITAD feeds directly into Scope 3 Category 5 (Waste Generated in Operations) reporting. The reporting depth that matters: reuse vs recycle outcomes tracked separately (reuse generates higher avoided-emissions credit), mass-balance recovery reports with material category breakdowns, downstream vendor disclosure documenting where materials actually go, and customer-attestable evidence for cloud customers with their own ESG reporting obligations. Cloud providers with meaningful ESG commitments increasingly require this documentation depth from ITAD partners. Generalist vendors typically don’t produce it.
The Bottom Line
Cloud provider ITAD in 2026 has its own operational, compliance, and recovery profile that’s distinct from enterprise data center ITAD. The differences aren’t marginal. Multi-tenant data sanitization, SOC 2 audit implications, multi-region coordination, GPU-heavy equipment mixes, and the scale of refresh cycle compression all create requirements that generalist ITAD vendors typically don’t meet.
The cloud providers that treat ITAD as a strategic capability invest in the operational discipline that supports SOC 2 controls, the vendor relationships that capture appropriate recovery value, and the documentation that supports customer trust posture. The cloud providers that treat ITAD as a disposal cost typically discover the gap during a SOC 2 audit, a customer audit response, or an ESG rating review.
The framework isn’t unreasonable. Build customer workload tracking into ITAD planning. Select partners with multi-tenant sanitization capability. Match GPU recovery channels to the timing of OEM lifecycle events. Maintain documentation depth that supports audit responses. Treat recovery value as a capital input rather than an afterthought.
For hyperscalers, traditional cloud providers, and neoclouds alike, the cumulative effect of getting this right across many retirement events is substantial. Customer trust outcomes, sustainability outcomes, and capital recovery outcomes all align around the same vendor selection and operational discipline questions.
How ROC Telecom Helps
ROC Telecom is an R2v3, RIOS, NIST 800-88, and ITAR-compliant ITAD specialist built for the operational profile cloud providers need:
- Multi-tenant sanitization capability with NIST 800-88 Purge and Destroy methods, IEEE 2883 for modern storage, and per-asset documentation tied to customer requirements
- GPU and AI infrastructure recovery across NVIDIA H100, H200, A100, B200 platforms with direct buyer relationships across other cloud providers, neoclouds, and international operators
- Specialist buyer network that includes carriers, hyperscalers, neoclouds, and international cloud operators (not generic broker channels)
- Multi-region field operations with 48-hour rapid-response mobilization nationwide for compressed-timeline programs
- SOC 2-ready documentation with per-asset Certificates of Destruction, chain-of-custody records, mass-balance recovery reports, and audit response capability
- ITAR compliance for FedRAMP-relevant equipment and export-controlled hardware
- R2v3 Appendix E (materials recovery scope) with in-house dismantling and direct-to-refiner relationships delivering 3x the carbon savings of standard ITAD
- Reuse-first disposition that captures secondary-market value before any recycling decision, generating higher Scope 3 credit
15+ years of ITAD experience, $25M+ in client capital recovered, 45M+ pounds diverted from landfill.
Request a Free Cloud Provider ITAD Program Assessment
Tell us about your cloud infrastructure retirement program. A specialist will reach out to discuss equipment categories, multi-tenant sanitization requirements, SOC 2 documentation, GPU recovery timing, and the right engagement model for your scale. No commitment, no spam.
Prefer to talk directly? Call 585-406-1249 or email bailey@roctelecom.com.
"*" indicates required fields
Related reading:
- How GPU Decommissioning Differs from Standard Server Retirement (2026 Guide)
- Data Center Asset Recovery: The 2026 Strategic Guide
- ITAD for Telecom and Mobile Operators: The 2026 Strategic Guide
- Why AI Is Shortening Your Hardware Lifecycles (and What to Do About It)
- Top 10 ITAD Companies for Data Center Decommissioning & Asset Recovery in 2026
- Top 10 Data Center Decommissioning Companies of 2026
- What Most Data Centers Miss About E-Waste: 7 Gaps Even ESG-Conscious Operators Overlook