For independent ERCOT AI data-center developer-operators
Teams often reconcile power-critical changes manually across engineering systems, schedules, document control, and meetings. Doku Basis identifies each affected study, drawing, order, agreement, milestone, and commissioning gate, then drives verified closure.
Built for CDOs, COOs, Heads of Power, and EVPs of Product Delivery, with interconnection, engineering, procurement, project-controls, and commissioning leaders carrying the work.
One coherent decision path
The diagnostic is optional, not a prerequisite. No restricted project evidence is requested before an approved legal and security boundary.
Use 5 minutes for the gate and deadline, 10 for the current workflow and changed fact, 5 for the consequence and owner, and 5 to choose stop, diagnostic, or program.
Request the fit review02 / Optional paid diagnosticMap one gate, one change class, the minimum evidence, consequence chain, authority gaps, exposure range, and a proceed or stop recommendation.
Review the diagnostic03 / Design partnershipDeploy Doku Basis in shadow mode, operate one governed change workflow, validate the result, and decide production or expansion.
Review the 90-day programDefault diagnostic conversion credit: 100% of the accepted diagnostic fee toward a design partnership signed within 30 days. Customer-specific proposals and signed agreements control all terms. The public commercial review maps the buyer, technical authority, security, procurement, and signature decisions.
Entities seeking to interconnect eligible load facilities of 75 MW or greater through Batch Zero must follow PGRR145 eligibility, evidence, form, attestation, and submission responsibilities.
ERCOT sourceMarket signal verified July 22, 2026.FERC directed six regional grid operators to justify or reform large-load tariffs, studies, cost allocation, and flexible-service rules.
FERC sourceFederal action issued June 18, 2026.Transformers, switchgear, controls, and other critical components may require commitment before the full project basis is frozen.
Project delivery signalInteractive illustrative prototype
Projects fail at the interfaces when one organization changes an assumption and another continues designing, buying, scheduling, or testing against the old state. Select a scenario to see the kind of explainable impact Doku is designed to surface. These examples are illustrative, not customer results.
Selected change
The changed phase requirement conflicts with the accepted study case and selected equipment basis.
Accepted MW and dynamic assumptions require review.
Selected equipment basis may no longer serve the revised phase.
The approved facilities path references the prior ramp.
Service and tenant dates may depend on the original phase.
Design freeze and release activities require impact assessment.
Test load and acceptance conditions must reflect the revised state.
Potential exposure: study rework, transformer rating review, delayed equipment release, and a threatened utility approval gate.
Illustrative project economics
This arithmetic excludes tenant revenue, premium freight, redesign, liquidated damages, or a lost equipment slot. It is an illustration, not a promise of Doku-caused savings.
The missing layer
PSS/E, PSCAD, ETAP, SKM, CAD, BIM, and equipment systems remain authoritative for specialist work. They do not own the complete project consequence of a changed fact.
Project controls, document systems, and construction platforms track activity. Engineering, utility, procurement, and commissioning prerequisites still live elsewhere.
Doku shows what is authoritative, what changed, why each downstream item is affected, who must act, and what proves closure.
The paid design partnership
Start with one live project, one consequential upcoming gate, and one class of changes. Doku operates in shadow mode first, proves value, then earns a required workflow.
Map critical facts, artifacts, organizations, source authority, the next gate, and the highest-consequence dependencies.
Connect selected utility, engineering, equipment, agreement, schedule, and commissioning evidence without replacing current tools.
Detect impact, identify reviews, assign accountable owners, and drive the change to evidence-backed closure.
Validate schedule exposure, equipment risk, avoided rework, review effort, financing impact, or readiness uncertainty.
Convert the validated workflow into a required process, then choose the next phase, campus, integration, or module.
A CDO, COO, Head of Power, EVP Product Delivery, or equivalent accountable for the project outcome.
Access to the selected facts and artifacts required for the bounded workflow.
One champion joins a 60-minute weekly session, with bounded reviews from the responsible experts.
What you receive
Critical facts, assumptions, authority, current state, and history.
Selected facts linked to the models, drawings, orders, agreements, schedule, and tests that depend on them.
Explainable affected-object detection, review ownership, deadlines, and closure.
The unresolved facts and decisions most capable of moving energization.
Who reviewed what, against which version, under which authority, with which proof.
Customer-confirmed findings, operating improvement, economic exposure, and the expansion decision.
Baseline, measures, evidence, decision rights, and day-90 outcome
Project qualification
Expansion path
ERCOT's concentrated delivery network can accelerate approved templates, but expansion is never automatic. Project facts remain customer-owned and isolated; each step requires measured value, sponsor acceptance, and explicit permission.
Protect a live decision and agree the baseline, closure measure, and accountable owner.
Make the validated workflow required only after sponsor acceptance.
Reuse approved rules and integrations, never customer-confidential project facts.
Compare permissioned risk patterns and preserve institutional memory across projects.
Carry customer-owned entitlement, restudy, commissioning, and expansion history into operations.
Founder-market fit
Jorg's experience spans GPU-cloud deployment, production ML systems, and AI-infrastructure strategy, including work at RunPod, Fluidstack, Brium, Meta FAIR, and Google AI. Doku applies that operating perspective to the physical power, engineering, procurement, and commissioning constraints now gating AI infrastructure.
The program is intentionally built around live artifacts and accountable experts: one real project, one upcoming gate, and measurable evidence, not a broad transformation exercise.
Trust and deployment
Control status
Doku does not claim SOC 2, ISO 27001, NERC CIP certification, or independent assurance unless explicitly stated in current signed security materials. The contracting party and project controls are identified before confidential evidence is exchanged.
| Area | Public site | Project deployment |
|---|---|---|
| Identity and access | No customer accounts | Defined per customer architecture |
| Data collection | High-level qualification only | Approved data inventory and scope |
| AI model use | None in public form | Defined in signed security materials |
| Audit and evidence | Application and operational logging | Project-specific audit design |
| Performance and runtime integrity | First-party Core Web Vitals and sanitized failure types | Monitoring defined per customer architecture |
| Independent assurance | Not claimed | Scoped to customer requirements and maturity |
Doku complements source engineering systems and accountable experts. It makes project dependencies, decisions, and evidence governable across them.
Doku Basis design principle
Questions
A 25-minute fit review focused on one upcoming power-critical gate. The conversation requires no project files and creates no obligation. Reply "open to 25 minutes" to the email that brought you here, or use the direct email action.
Yes. When a buyer needs decision evidence before approving the full deployment, Doku can propose an optional 10-business-day Power-Critical Gate Diagnostic. The typical fee is $15,000-$25,000. It covers one gate and one change class, ends with a documented proceed or stop decision, and defaults to a 100% credit toward a design partnership signed within 30 days. The accepted proposal controls the exact scope, fee, credit, evidence boundary, and terms.
Yes. The founding design-partner program is a paid engagement. The typical 90-day scope is $100,000-$150,000 depending on integrations, participating organizations, and project complexity. Up to $50,000 can be credited toward the first production subscription when the validated workflow converts. Travel, taxes, third-party licenses, and unusually deep integrations are identified and scoped separately in the proposal.
No. The initial deployment runs alongside engineering, scheduling, procurement, document-control, construction, and commissioning systems. Doku governs selected cross-system facts, dependencies, responsibilities, and evidence.
A named executive sponsor, one operational champion, a 60-minute weekly working session, bounded expert reviews, and controlled access to the evidence required for the selected workflow. The project team retains source authority and professional approval.
Yes. Shadow mode is the preferred starting point. Doku observes a selected workflow, identifies inconsistencies and downstream consequences, and compares findings with the current process before becoming required.
A successful deployment catches or resolves a consequential issue earlier, shortens time from change to verified closure, creates evidence trusted by the project team, and justifies a second workflow, phase, or project.
The outcome review determines whether the validated workflow should become a required production process. Any production subscription, implementation boundary, integrations, service level, and annual price are documented in a separate proposal before conversion. There is no automatic renewal from the design-partner engagement.
ERCOT combines concentrated data-center growth, changing large-load rules, shared delivery partners, and strong reference density. Batch Zero applies to eligible load facilities of 75 MW or greater that seek interconnection through that process under PGRR145. Doku's underlying architecture can later be configured for other regions.
Customer data remains customer-owned and is used to deliver the contracted service. Doku does not use customer project information to train shared models without explicit authorization. Detailed hosting, retention, and model-provider terms are defined in project security materials and the signed agreement.
The public form accepts only high-level qualification information. Production discovery, export, retention, deletion, residency, and legal-hold requirements are defined during security review and documented in the signed agreement before restricted project evidence is exchanged.
Doku is selecting its founding design-partner cohort. Customer names, logos, artifacts, and measured outcomes will only be published with explicit permission after real deployments. Every product view and economic example on this page is clearly labeled illustrative.
Request a fit review
Share only high-level project facts: phase, target delivery date, and the next grid, engineering, equipment, agreement, construction, or commissioning decision. Doku will respond within two business days and, if appropriate, use a 25-minute call to determine the smallest justified next step.
Prefer one email? Request the fit reviewPrefer email? jorg@dokuinfra.com