Role purposeLead technical-economic-financial evaluation and bankability analysis across energy and critical-minerals opportunities, integrating project fundamentals, sponsor capacity, financing mechanisms, U.S. export potential, sensitivities, and implementation conditions.
Representative problems this role must solve- A technically plausible project lacks defensible CAPEX/OPEX, revenue, market, schedule, risk allocation, sponsor capacity, or financing structure.
- Sponsor economics are optimistic, incomplete, internally inconsistent, or unsupported by source evidence.
- Government needs to know what technical assistance, feasibility work, structuring, de-risking, or evidence is necessary for credible financing.
Responsibilities- Build or review assumptions, CAPEX/OPEX, lifecycle cost, revenue/off-take, cash flow, IRR/NPV/ROI, sensitivity, scenario, financing, risk-allocation, and sponsor-capacity analyses.
- Reconcile technical, market, schedule, environmental/social, regulatory, procurement, and financing assumptions across modules.
- Identify financing mechanisms and conditions appropriate to project stage, sponsor, country, currency, risk, and U.S. export pathway.
- Translate financeability gaps into TOR tasks, model requirements, diligence needs, milestones, budget inputs, and decision conditions.
- Serve as independent model reviewer where not the content owner.
Minimum evidence-based qualifications- Senior infrastructure, project-finance, development-finance, investment, transaction advisory, economic modeling, lender, sponsor, or owner experience.
- Direct evidence building or reviewing project models and investment/bankability decisions-not only corporate accounting or FP&A.
- Energy, mining/minerals, processing, infrastructure, or emerging-market experience.
- Ability to explain assumptions, sensitivities, uncertainty, model limitations, and financing pathways to non-financial decision-makers.
- U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident, with written attestation required before proposal inclusion.
- Demonstrated senior/expert judgment supported by specific project, analysis, decision-product, or implementation evidence-not keyword familiarity alone.
- Ability to produce concise, defensible written analysis in English and work across technical, commercial, financial, safeguards, institutional, and implementation interfaces.
- Ability to become available for potential Indo-Pacific travel within 20 calendar days after Axyde's written mobilization notice following contract award, subject to assignment needs and Government direction.
- Willingness to disclose availability, employment/contract restrictions, confidentiality obligations, conflicts, noncompetes, country/customer limitations, and relevant intellectual-property constraints.
Evidence to submit- Current résumé or CV with dates, employer/client, country, project stage, personal role, methods used, decision product, and outcome for the most relevant assignments.
- Two to four representative projects demonstrating the required expert judgment and decision-grade products.
- Countries/regions worked, languages used professionally, travel limitations, and current location.
- Licenses, registrations, clearances, certifications, publications, or standards experience when relevant to the role.
- Written permission for Axyde to use and evidence-preservingly reformat the résumé for solicitation 1131PL26R0056, subject to final résumé review if requested.
Application questions- Are you a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident? State one; do not upload identity documents at the application stage.
- May Axyde use your name and evidence-preservingly tailor/reformat your résumé for this specific contingent proposal?
- Could you become available for required Indo-Pacific travel within 20 calendar days after Axyde's written mobilization notice following contract award? Identify restrictions.
- Identify current employment, contractual, confidentiality, noncompete, customer, country, or conflict restrictions relevant to this opportunity.
- Describe the strongest decision product you personally led or independently reviewed and the decision it supported.
- Describe one project model or bankability review you personally led. What assumptions were decisive and what decision followed?
- Identify financing mechanisms you have evaluated or implemented and the project stages/countries where they were relevant.
- Provide an example where you challenged sponsor assumptions or reconciled a technical-financial inconsistency.
