Vantage Data Centers colocation: published rack power-density tiers (8.3 kW avg / 20 kW air-cooled / 50 kW+ liquid-to-rack)

NO FIGURE IS PUBLISHED. Vantage prices colocation by quote only - there is no per-rack-month, per-kW-month or per-GPU-hour rate on any public page. This is itself a finding: colo power economics are not comparable across providers without a quote, so this record carries the density limits (which ARE published) rather than an invented price.

lead_time_weeks is null because the quantity is structurally not applicable: on-demand cloud capacity starts on request, so there is no order-to-delivery lead time. The constraint is the price per GPU-hour and the availability snapshot, not an interval. The one caveat worth keeping: scarce tiers gate capacity behind a reservation or Capacity Block commitment (AWS caps the booking horizon at 8 weeks, source spl-aws-capacity-block-booking-horizon), and that is a commitment window, not a lead time.

EAR 742.6(a)(6)(iii)(A) + EAR 744.23/744.6 (Entity, Unverified, MEU list screening of the end user) + the advanced-computing IaaS obligations of 91 FR 1684 (consignee KYC, and management/limitation of IaaS access to the hardware)

LAYER 1, EXPORT LICENCE: under the Jan 2026 BIS rule 91 FR 1684 (effective 2026-01-15) the license review policy for advanced-computing commodities with TPP < 21,000 AND total DRAM bandwidth < 6,500 GB/s - the NVIDIA H200 and AMD MI325X are the rule's named examples - moved from PRESUMPTION OF DENIAL to CASE-BY-CASE REVIEW, but only for exports FROM THE UNITED STATES to end users located in China or Macau, and only against six exporter certifications filed via SNAP-R before shipment: (1) items below the thresholds with the count of units shipped in the US; (2) sufficient US supply, judged 'taking into account normal lead times'; (3) no diversion of global foundry capacity away from US end users; (4) aggregate China+Macau shipments <= 50% of total US end-use shipments of that product; (5) no end-user or use prohibition; (6) the consignee runs rigorous KYC. Every shipment must then pass a qualified third-party testing lab - US-headquartered, not controlled by a D:5/Macau entity, no ownership stake in any party, qualification revocable by BIS at any time - verifying TPP, total DRAM bandwidth, interconnect bandwidth and copackaged DRAM capacity. Reexports and in-country transfers of the same chips to China/Macau REMAIN PRESUMPTION OF DENIAL. LAYER 2, END-USER AND PARENT SCREENING: per BIS guidance of 2026-05-31 a licence is required where the consignee is HEADQUARTERED in Country Group D:5 (15 CFR part 740 supplement no. 1) or Macau OR whose ULTIMATE PARENT COMPANY is so headquartered - even when the consignee itself sits outside D:5/Macau. The requirement sits at EAR 742.6(a)(6)(iii)(A) for destinations outside the US, with an exception available only under the license exception at 740.2(a)(9)(ii). The destination country alone therefore never answers the question; screen the parent. LAYER 3, REMAINING LIMITS: exports to D:5/Macau-headquartered OR -parented entities stay PRESUMPTION OF DENIAL wherever the buyer sits, and the AI Diffusion Rule that would have set a country-tier structure on who could lawfully buy what was RESCINDED on 2025-05-13 and is not being enforced, so any recorded status rests on the instruments named here rather than on tiering.

ONE OF THE FEWEST COLOS THAT PUBLISHES ITS PER-RACK POWER LIMITS AT ALL, which makes it the reference point for the colo half of this slice. Verbatim from their Power features page: standard data module supports 'an average of 8.3kW of power to each rack'; 'customers have the flexibility to deploy up to 20kW racks with traditional air-cooled technology and more than 50kW racks using liquid to rack cooling solutions'; campus footprints 'up to 300 watts per square foot'; each standard data module 'includes 4MW of IT capacity'; annualized PUE under 1.3 targeting low 1.2. Redundancy is a '5 to make 4' distributed redundant weave architecture equating to N+1 for concurrent maintainability, with 2.75MW diesel gensets on 5,000-gallon belly tanks sized to carry full IT load for 24 hours. Their own Highlights project '8.3kW to the rack on average, projecting 11kW+ in near future' - i.e. even the colo operator is telling you the average rack is not the interesting number. THE THREE TIERS ARE THE WHOLE ARGUMENT: 8.3 kW avg (typical colo), 20 kW air-cooled ceiling, 50 kW+ only with liquid to rack. Map a rack-level AI system onto that: a DGX H100 at 10.2 kW max fits tier 1-2 today; an 8-GPU HGX B200 node at roughly 8-10 kW of IT load plus PSU overhead fits tier 2; a GB200 NVL72 at ~120 kW is 14x their average rack and 6x their air-cooled ceiling, and needs a tier that does not exist in this facility. NOTE the accelerator_ids above list GB200 NVL72 and B200 as REACHABLE IN PRINCIPLE via the 50 kW+ liquid tier, not as confirmed inventory - Vantage publishes capacity, not SKUs, and the companion cooling page (supply/colo-vantage-liquid-to-rack-not-to-chip) makes clear their liquid tier is liquid-to-the-RACK, which is not the same plumbing as the in-rack cold-plate loop a GB200 NVL72 needs. EXPORT CONTROL (2026-10-04, mechanism-level; sources spl-bis-2026-05-d5-guidance, spl-bis-2026-01-advanced-computing-case-by-case): renting capacity does NOT remove the export-control question, it relocates it. Providing remote access to controlled computing capability can constitute a transfer under the EAR, so the provider must screen the end user; and separately, under the 91 FR 1684 licence regime the consignee must run KYC procedures to prevent unauthorized remote access and must manage and limit IaaS access to the hardware - obligations pushed onto the customer, who must be told to implement them. For a customer headquartered or parented in Country Group D:5 or Macau the 742.6(a)(6)(iii)(A) end-user/parent test can bite even when the capacity is consumed in a permitted region. Recorded true because the underlying hardware is controlled and the provider carries the screening duty, not because access to a US region is itself restricted. LEAD TIME: null - and for this record that is the WRONG QUESTION, which is the point worth recording. This record measures a build constraint that is not the accelerator supply chain: the lead time for a 120 kW liquid-cooled rack is set by construction, electrical service, and CDU/manifold plumbing, not by GPU allocation. Its own notes already make this argument for the colo case, so this entry only fixes the boundary: do not read a GPU lead time into a facility lead time, and do not read a facility lead time into a GPU lead time. No vendor publishes a weeks figure for either, so both stay null - probe log in source spl-negative-no-oem-publishes-lead-time. Where a real published horizon exists for the supply side it is on the accelerator record (NVIDIA's $95.2bn purchase and supply/capacity obligations substantially payable through FY2027, source spl-nvda-10k-fy2026-supply-commitments).