Interview dossier · prepared 30 Jul 2026

They sell the fix for the thing that broke Ashburn twelve days ago.

On July 22, a transmission fault in Data Center Alley knocked roughly 3 GW of load off PJM in seconds. ON.energy sells a medium-voltage system whose entire purpose is to make that not happen. You live twenty minutes from the epicenter and you are interviewing for the job that prices the contracts.

Role
Senior Manager, Commercial Negotiations & Deal Structuring
Team
Finance (per job board)
Location
Reston, VA
Interviewer
Andrea Marsiglia
Talent Acquisition Partner
Format
30 min · MS Teams
00

The brief

Logistics first, then the one picture that summarizes the whole dossier.

Check your clock before anything else

The invite reads 4:00–4:30 PM (GMT−05:00) Bogotá. Northern Virginia on August 3 runs on EDT, GMT−04:00. Your local start is 5:00 PM ET, not 4:00 PM.

Fig. 0 — Time zone conversionConfirm on your own calendar
16:00 BOGOTÁ · UTC−5 21:00 UTC 5:00 PM NORTHERN VA · EDT (UTC−4) The invite time → Your actual time
If your phone's calendar shows 4:00 PM ET, the invite was built without conversion — email Andrea today. A one-hour miss on a 30-minute screen is unrecoverable.
Fig. 1 — The whole story on one lineMemorize this chain
AI boom $1T+ capex 2025–26 Grid stress ±70% GPU swings 3 GW Ashburn drop Regulation NOGRR 282 · NERC ride-through mandatory AI UPS™ inline MV system 5 GW Crusoe deal Your role contracts big enough to sink the company Every answer you give on Monday should connect back to some link in this chain.
The pitch in one breath: AI demand broke the grid's assumptions → regulators now require ride-through → ON.energy has the patented hardware → the Crusoe deal made the contracts enormous → they need someone to price the risk in them. That someone is the role.
Reading the markers in this document

Verified independent press or a regulator — safe to state as fact.  Company claim ON.energy's own materials — say "they say."  Live moving right now; recheck before you dial in.

01

The industry

Four forces define this market in 2026. Narrate these four fluently and you sound like someone who already works in the sector.

Fig. 2 — Demand has outrun the gridEPRI via DOE · Dominion · Morgan Stanley
DATA CENTERS AS % OF US ELECTRICITY 4% 2023 up to 9% 2030 (EPRI) WAIT FOR GRID POWER, 100 MW+ SITE (DOMINION) 4–7 years 3–4 yrs previous norm now Some sites reportedly quoted up to 17 years.
Why it matters commercially: power, not capital, is the binding constraint. Anything that de-risks or shortens interconnection commands a premium — that is ON.energy's wedge. Big-tech capex commitments exceed $1T across 2025–26 (Morgan Stanley). Verified
Fig. 3 — The two-front warThe core mental model of this entire market
THE GRID voltage dips · faults frequency excursions AI CAMPUS GPU clusters ramp ±70% in milliseconds AI UPS™ inline · always in the power path FAULTS BLOCKED SWINGS ABSORBED smooth power in clean power out Most products defend one direction. ON.energy's claim is both, simultaneously, from one box.
Front one: a grid fault can kill a training run worth millions of compute-dollars, so campuses trip offline to protect themselves. Front two: that self-protection — gigawatts vanishing at once — is itself what destabilizes the grid. The CTO calls this the two-front war. It is the correct frame for the whole sector.
Fig. 4 — Regulation arrived, fastERCOT · PUCT · NERC · FERC/PJM
ERCOT · NOGRR 282 ride-through MANDATORY for computational loads ≥ 75 MW EFFECTIVE 1 AUG 2026 NERC Level 3 Computational Load Alert urges all operators to follow; mandatory standard in the works PJM · CAISO · MISO · SPP moving the same direction; FERC docket EL25-49 rewriting PJM large-load rules now "Compliance became a gating item, not a differentiator." Say this sentence once, deliberately. It changes who has pricing power.
Nuance to know: Texas Industrial Energy Consumers has intervened, arguing ERCOT lacks authority to bind retail customers directly. ON's own guide expects the technical requirements to survive via a different implementation path — the tailwind is strong but not guaranteed. Live
Fig. 5 — Capital is chasing the picks and shovelsFT via Yahoo · MarketsandMarkets
ENERGY IPO PROCEEDS $4.3B ALL of 2025 $12.6B H1 2026 alone DATA CENTER UPS MARKET $8.8B 2025 $12.5B 2030 forecast
Translation for the room: ON.energy isn't fighting for existence — it's racing to convert a demand surge into signed, financeable, margin-safe contracts before the incumbents catch up. That race is literally the job you're applying for.
01B

The megaprojects — who is building what

These five build-outs define the customer landscape ON.energy sells into; each made a different bet on power, and that bet is the commercial story.

Fig. M1 — The gigawatt league tablePress figures · Jul 2026
TARGET CAPACITY (GW) — SCALE TO 10 0 5 10 Stargate program OpenAI+Oracle+SoftBank 10 GW target $500B committed program Meta Hyperion Louisiana 5 GW compute >$50B ON.energy × Crusoe AI UPS deal 5 GW the deal your role exists for AWS Project Rainier Indiana 2.2 GW $11B ph.1 + $15B ph.2 Microsoft Fairwater WI+GA network ~2 GW per campus at full build · $7B+ initial WI, reported >$100B total program xAI Colossus 1+2+3 Memphis ~1.2 GW+ est. $30–40B incl. funding rounds
Capacities mix IT load, facility load, and announced targets — never compare them as like-for-like in the room; say "announced scale" instead. Verified press figures as of Jul 2026.

Stargate (flagship: Abilene, TX)

Location: Abilene TX flagship (Lancium Clean Campus), plus Shackelford County TX, Doña Ana County NM, Lordstown OH, Milam County TX, Port Washington WI ("Lighthouse," $15B, Oracle+Vantage).

Parties: OpenAI, Oracle, SoftBank; Abilene developed/operated by CRUSOE; Nvidia $100B investment; announced Jan 2025 at the White House.

Scale: ~1.2 GW at Abilene; ~7 GW planned across sites; 10 GW / $500B program target by 2029; >$100B already deployed as of early 2026.

End user: OpenAI training + inference (Oracle Cloud Infrastructure).

Power strategy: West Texas cheap energy + behind-the-meter self-supply incl. up to ~300 MW on-site gas turbines to sidestep interconnection queues.

Why ON cares: Crusoe built Abilene — the same Crusoe that signed ON's 5 GW AI UPS deal in July 2026. This project is one degree from your desk.

Meta Hyperion (Richland Parish, LA)

Parties: Meta + Blue Owl Capital JV (~80% sold to Blue Owl, off balance sheet) + Entergy Louisiana.

Scale: 5 GW compute + 2.5 GW support/cooling; ~3,200 acres; up to 9 buildings; first 2 GW by 2030, full ~2032.

Cost: >$50B (was $10B at Dec 2024 groundbreaking, then $27B — quintupled in under two years).

Energy: Entergy building 10 gas plants (>7 GW, +30% to Louisiana's entire grid); Meta funds 2.5 GW renewables, ~240 miles of transmission, grid-scale BESS at three sites; "Ratepayer Protection Pledge"; Earthjustice challenging the financing at the PSC.

End user: Meta Superintelligence Labs.

Why ON cares: the single biggest example of "the customer pays for the grid now" — generation, transmission, storage all inside the deal. Every one of those line items is a negotiated contract.

xAI Colossus 1/2/3 (Memphis, TN)

Parties: xAI, MLGW/TVA (Colossus 1 grid power), own 1.2 GW gas plant across the Mississippi line for 2 and 3.

Scale: Colossus 1 ~300 MW, ~200k GPUs, built in 122 days in a former Electrolux factory; Colossus 2 ~946 MW IT power — largest known AI data center by IT power (Epoch AI).

Cost: est. $30–40B including recent funding.

End users: xAI's Grok — plus merchant compute: Anthropic leasing ~325k GPUs (~$1.25B/month reported), Google ~110k, the Pentagon.

Power strategy: mostly OFF-GRID behind-the-meter gas; 168 Tesla Megapacks smoothing GPU load swings. Environmental fight over unpermitted turbines.

Why ON cares: proof at scale that GPU swings need a battery buffer — Colossus solved with parallel Megapacks exactly the problem ON argues needs an inline system. That contrast is a sophisticated interview point.

AWS Project Rainier (New Carlisle / St. Joseph County, IN)

Parties: Amazon Web Services, built exclusively for Anthropic.

Scale: 1,200 acres, ~30 buildings, ~910 MW IT power operational, building toward 2.2 GW; 500k+ Amazon Trainium2 chips — the first hyperscale non-Nvidia cluster.

Cost: $11B phase 1 (operational late 2025) + $15B phase 2 announced.

Power strategy: bet on the utility grid (AEP Indiana), natural-gas backed.

Why ON cares: single-tenant, single-chip, grid-dependent — the maximum-exposure profile for exactly the ride-through risk ON prices.

Microsoft Fairwater (Mount Pleasant WI + Atlanta GA)

Parties: Microsoft; serves OpenAI + Azure AI.

Scale: WI campus >350 MW scaling toward ~2 GW, ~half a million chips; Atlanta ~636 MW IT power, second building to >700 MW by 2027; the two linked by dedicated fiber into one "AI superfactory" training a single model across states.

Cost: $7B+ initial WI; total program reported to potentially exceed $100B at completion.

Power strategy: the shocker — the Atlanta site runs straight off Georgia Power with NO UPS and NO diesel generators; Microsoft did the math on what redundancy buys during a training run and cut it.

Why ON cares: the bear case for ON's product, stated by the most sophisticated buyer alive. Know it exists; have a view (ride-through mandates like NOGRR 282 are precisely the counterweight — a regulator can't accept "we did the math").

How to use these in the room

Don't recite; deploy. One sentence pattern: "Every megaproject made a different power bet — Rainier bet on the grid, Colossus went off-grid with Megapacks, Microsoft cut the UPS entirely, Meta is buying the utility's build-out — and each bet creates a different contract surface. ON's thesis is that regulation is about to punish the naked-grid bets."

Figures move

Figures are press-reported as of July 2026 and move monthly — Grok prompt section 6 covers the refresh.

02

Ashburn, July 22 — your opening move

The single strongest thing you can bring to the call. It happened twelve days before your interview, thirty minutes from your house, and it is a live demonstration of ON.energy's entire thesis.

Fig. 6 — Anatomy of the eventDominion · PJM · Reuters · RTO Insider
Line fault Ashburn, VA — Data Center Alley Self-protection campuses' OWN systems trip to backup diesel 3+ GW vanishes ≈3% of PJM demand, gone in seconds Voltage ripple anomalies detected from DC to Chicago Stabilized ~10 minutes — vs milliseconds normally Roughly double the July 2024 event (~1.5 GW) that made NERC stand up a task force. The utility did not shed this load — the data centers jumped.
Where AI UPS fits this picture: an inline system rides through the fault instead of tripping. The campus stays on, the 3 GW hole never opens, the ripple never happens. The event is ON.energy's sales pitch, performed live, in their new office's backyard. Verified · aftermath Live

"The data centres didn't get knocked off the grid. They jumped. Every campus made a rational decision to protect its own compute — and the sum of those rational decisions is a three-gigawatt hole in PJM."

Suggested phrasing — say it in your own words
If asked "why ON.energy?"

"Two weeks ago three gigawatts of load dropped off PJM after a fault in Ashburn — twenty minutes from my house. I read the coverage, then read ON.energy's material on the inline architecture, and it was the first time I'd seen a product that addresses both directions of that problem instead of one. I've spent nine years selling energy systems, and I've never seen a market where the regulatory deadline and the customer's own self-interest point at the same purchase order. I want to be on the commercial side of that."

02B

July 10, 2024 — the first warning shot

Two years before Ashburn 2026, the same failure happened at half the scale, in the same place — and everything ON.energy now sells into traces to that night. NERC's own incident review is public; these details are verified.

Fig. W1 — Anatomy of the July 10, 2024 eventNERC incident review · Reuters · DCD
7:00 PM thunderstorm Lightning arrestor fails on 230 kV Ox-Possum near Fairfax, VA (Dominion) — line locks out Auto-reclose misfire 6 successive faults in 82s each cleared in 42–66 ms voltage sags to 0.25–0.40 p.u. ~60 data centers jump Protection logic → backup ~1,500 MW vanishes ≈ Boston's entire demand ~50× faster than plant trip Grid overshoots Frequency → 60.047 Hz (~4 min to settle) Voltage hits 1.07 p.u. Operators pull shunt caps Near miss, then response No blackout NERC incident review LLTF stood up Aug 2024 Level 2 Alert Sept 2024 Moura: grid not designed for 1,500 MW DC loss NERC's John Moura: "The grid is not designed to withstand the loss of 1,500 MW data centers."
The punchline nobody expected in 2024 — the danger wasn't data centers drawing too much power; it was data centers LEAVING too fast. Load loss, not load growth, almost broke the grid. Verified (NERC incident review, Reuters, DCD).
Fig. W2 — Escalation: 2024 → 2026 → nextNERC · Dominion · Jul 2026 event
LOAD DROPPED (MW) 1,500 MW ~60 facilities Jul 2024 NERC forms task force 3,000+ MW voltage ripple DC-to-Chicago Jul 22, 2026 double the scale, two years later Next one? Dominion: 40 GW of contracted data center power as of Dec 2024, up 88% in five months. The exposure keeps compounding — which is the sales pitch for mandatory ride-through.
The say-it-aloud line: "2024 was the warning, 2026 was the escalation, and the regulatory response — NOGRR 282, NERC's alerts, PJM's rulemaking — is the industry deciding not to wait for the third one."
Why this section earns its place on Monday

It converts the Ashburn story from anecdote into pattern. Pattern recognition is what separates "I read the news" from "I understand the market." One suggested sentence: "What struck me is that 2024 and 2026 were the same event at different magnitudes — same county, same failure mode, same protection logic. That's not bad luck, that's a design flaw with a growth rate. And it's why ride-through went from white-paper topic to mandate."

03

Who ON.energy is

The arc: LATAM integrator → US independent power producer → AI infrastructure technology company. Each phase left something in the DNA that shows up in how they do deals.

Fig. 7 — A decade in one picturePress releases · Energy-Storage.news · on.energy
capital & scale 2015–16 Founded Cooper + de Azevedo LATAM BESS · Miami HQ Jun 2023 $20M Series B Ultra Capital · Phalanx 300 MWh in ERCOT Apr 2024 $25M facility Lombard Odier — development capital Jan 2025 $77.6M credit Pathward + BridgePeak $250M+ raised to date Feb–May 2026 AI UPS™ launch Patent 12,614,920 NLR lab validation Jul 2026 CRUSOE · 5 GW multiple hyperscale campuses, 2026–27 Ten years of storage development and $250M+ of financing, then two step-changes in six months. Your role exists because of the last dot.
Identity to remember: unusually, they are developer + system integrator + asset owner in one company — historically retaining ~80% of the US projects they build. That triple identity changes what their contracts must do (Section 06).

The scale numbers they publish

All Company claim — cite as "their materials say."

3 GW+Operating & under construction
10 GW+Production capacity
75+Projects across the Americas
$1BProjects at financial close
$350MGrid-scale assets under management
$120MTax equity & ITC transfer capital
Fig. 8 — Three numbers that are NOT the same numberPrecision here is your job description
DEPLOYED (JD) 2.5 GW hyperscale campuses OP + CONSTR (SITE) 3 GW+ all segments ANNOUNCED (CRUSOE) 5 GW future
Installed ≠ contracted ≠ announced. These figures are different measures, not contradictions. Knowing the difference is exactly the precision a deal-structuring hire is expected to bring. Never blur them in conversation.

Hiring signal

The Greenhouse board carries 56 open roles across Reston/Tysons, Houston, Miami, Atlanta, Amarillo, Mexico City and Argentina. Two adjacent hires tell you the most: a Contracts Counsel (being built in parallel with you — hence "you don't wait for Legal") and a Director of Sales, Data Center & Critical Power (the "counterweight" relationship in your JD). Your role is filed under Finance: your deliverables go to the CFO, and your incentives are margin and risk, not bookings.

"We move fast, debate hard, and learn from each other. If you want predictable, this isn't it. If you want impact, welcome."

on.energy — working at ON.energy

Pair that with the JD's "we cannot teach commercial courage." They are screening for someone who will argue cleanly and stay warm doing it — a muscle you built over nine years in living rooms.

04

AI UPS, explained properly

You don't need to be an engineer. You need the architecture in one picture and its price in another. Here are both — plus the test data that backs the claims.

Fig. 9 — THE distinction: parallel vs inlineIf you internalize one diagram, make it this one
CONVENTIONAL: BESS (PARALLEL) GRID raw grid power DATA CENTER BESS beside the path has to detect → respond → TRANSFER TRANSFER TIME ≈ 4 ms — an eternity voltage already sagged; GPUs already saw the hit ON.ENERGY: AI UPS (INLINE) GRID AI UPS — IS the path AC→DC BATTERY DC→AC DATA CENTER every watt, all the time — load never touches raw grid power TRANSFER TIME = 0 — nothing to transfer always in circuit · medium voltage 13–35 kV · at the site boundary Bonus of medium voltage: equipment moves outdoors (freeing space for compute) and ONE system shields the whole plant — IT load, chillers, pumps — not just the server racks.
The sixty-second version: a BESS sits beside the power path and reacts; even a fast static switch takes ~4 ms, and the GPUs have already seen the disturbance. AI UPS is the power path — AC in, buffered through the battery, clean AC out, continuously. Transfer isn't fast, it's zero. This is why the CTO wrote "Don't Call Me BESS."
Fig. 10 — Ride-through: what the test showedRedrawn from ON.energy NLR test description · Jan 2026
1.0 p.u. 0 V GRID → 0 V (true ZVRT) LOAD HOLDS ≈1.06 p.u. — GPUs never notice ERCOT requires ≥150 ms · ON claims 1 hr+ on battery
Tested at the DOE's National Laboratory of the Rockies (ARIES/Flatirons): 7 MW grid simulator, 20 MW load simulator, full 3.2 MW branch at 13.2 kV. Company claim — but a national-lab venue makes it a strong one. Commercial angle to raise: whether a customer's acceptance test mirrors the NLR protocol or invents a harsher one is worth real money.
Fig. 11 — Transient absorption: the other directionRedrawn from ON.energy NLR test description
GPU LOAD: ±70% swings GRID SEES: a flat line
Integrated storage absorbs the swing with reportedly <1% battery state-of-charge variation. The grid gets a smooth, ramp-rate-compliant profile no matter how chaotically the workload pulls. Company claim
Fig. 12 — Spec sheet → contract clauseEvery spec is a term someone must warrant
THE SPEC THE CLAUSE IT BECOMES Zero transfer · >99.9% availability by design Performance guarantee + availability LDs. Definition of "available," exclusions & measurement window are everything. 3.2 MW modules scaling to multi-GW Milestones & delay LDs per module, not per facility. Modularity is a negotiating lever: phased payment, phased damages. 20-yr Tier-1 warranty 6,000+ cycles Warranty must be back-to-back with the OEM's. Otherwise ON carries an uncovered multi-decade tail. (See Fig. 19.) 1–8 hr configurable backup duration Change-order trigger. Duration drives battery cost — any spec change moves price materially. US-made · FEOC UL 9540 · NFPA 855 etc. Tax-credit eligibility + conditions precedent to payment. FEOC isn't marketing — it protects the ITC. Certification gates cash.
This mapping is the interview. A candidate who can walk from a datasheet line to the clause it creates is demonstrating the exact skill the JD describes: "when you see a contract provision, your first question is 'what does this cost us?'"
05

Competitive map

Know who else is in the room when a hyperscaler runs this procurement — and where ON's leverage actually comes from.

Fig. 13 — Where everyone sitsPositioning per public product announcements, 2025–26
PROTECTION + GRID REVENUE (storage integrated) PROTECTION ONLY PARALLEL / LOW VOLTAGE INLINE / MEDIUM VOLTAGE BESS integrators Tesla · Fluence · Powin grid revenue, no UPS function LV UPS incumbents Vertiv · Schneider · Eaton huge installed base + service; struggle at the hard VRT curve MV UPS challengers ABB HiPerGuard (w/ Applied Digital) Eaton + Resilient Power (SST) closest direct threats ON.energy AI UPS inline + storage = ride-through AND ancillary revenue patent + NLR validation Real incumbent: "do nothing" — diesel + LV UPS. That's what tripped in Ashburn.
The claimed moat is the upper-right quadrant: only an inline system with substantial integrated storage does compliance and earns grid revenue. ABB's HiPerGuard is the nearest rival — ON's counter is that it's a UPS without the multi-hour storage economics. FEOC rules quietly exclude several Chinese vendors from US hyperscale bids — a commercial weapon, not a checkbox.

The honest risks — have a view on these

Concentration

Crusoe is transformative and also one counterparty carrying commissioning risk over years. That's exactly why payment security and change-order mechanics matter — why you exist.

Incumbent response

ABB, Eaton and Schneider have balance sheets, service fleets and existing hyperscaler master agreements. Patents help; a fast follower with an installed base is a durable threat.

Regulatory reversal

TIEC's intervention on ERCOT's authority could reroute NOGRR 282. ON expects the technical requirements to survive — but the tailwind isn't guaranteed.

Supply chain & capital intensity

5 GW of new commitments needs cells, transformers, PCS and working capital. They're hiring a transformer sourcing manager. Back-to-back supply terms are part of your scope.

06

How they make money

This is what separates you from a candidate who only read the homepage. ON.energy earns four different ways — and each way changes what a contract must do.

Fig. 14 — Four revenue postures, four risk shapeson.energy financing page · press history
1 · Equipment supply & integration ON builds Customer owns one-time $$$ + margin Risk lives in: performance guarantees, delivery LDs, 20-yr warranty tail 2 · Energy-as-a-Service / lease / offtake ON owns Customer pays fee annuity, 10–20 yr Converts a price fight into multi-decade risk allocation: availability defs, dispatch rights, termination value 3 · IPP asset ownership Owns & operates grid-scale storage — $350M AUM, ~80% retained stake in US projects historically. ERCOT market revenue arbitrage + ancillary services 4 · Tax structure monetisation ITC optimisation, IRS safe harbouring, ITC transfer, tax equity — $120M of such capital per their site. For storage, often the difference between a viable and a dead project. Novogradac advises. Same hardware, four different contracts. Which posture a deal takes changes every clause you'd negotiate.
Interview question this diagram answers: "What do you understand about our business model?" Most candidates say "they sell a UPS." You say "they're a manufacturer, an integrator and an asset owner at once — and the contract shape follows the posture."
Fig. 15 — Every contract has two readersThe single most useful idea in this dossier
THE CONTRACT your work product READER 1 · CUSTOMER wants: uptime, LDs with teeth, long warranty, low price, broad liability READER 2 · CREDIT COMMITTEE wants: bankability — enforceable guarantees, creditworthy offtaker, step-in rights, assignability, a liability cap that isn't hollow JP Morgan · Lombard Odier · Ultra Capital · Pathward · BridgePeak read what you sign. Terms that fail bankability kill the deal regardless of price — because ON finances what it builds.
The line to land: "In a company that owns assets as well as selling equipment, a contract term isn't just a risk allocation — it's an input to whether the project gets financed. I'd want to know which terms your lenders treat as non-negotiable, because those are the floor of my position, not the ceiling."
Fig. 16 — The grid-services revenue stackON.energy published indicative values
PEAK SHAVING — 15–30% demand-charge reduction DEMAND RESPONSE — $50–200 / kW-yr ANCILLARY SERVICES — $20–100 / kW-yr ARBITRAGE — market-dep. same one asset, stacked: ← the negotiation nobody mentions: WHO captures this? customer-owned → customer EaaS → ON, or shared — needing settlement mechanics, dispatch rights, and a rule for compute-vs-market conflicts
Turns a cost centre into a revenue generator — ON's phrase. The unglamorous, high-value question is who captures the stack and how conflicts resolve. Asking it marks you as someone who thinks past the headline price. Company claim on the figures.
07

The role, decoded

They wrote the JD emotionally — "grey zone," "commercial courage," "when to walk away." Read it as a description of a person, not a task list.

Fig. 17 — Where you sit: the counterweightJob description, translated to a picture
YOU "what does this clause cost us?" own terms, proposal → signature SALES (McGaha) pushes growth & bookings — you are the counterweight, not the department of no FINANCE (Petersen, CFO) your reporting line — risk assessments & deal summaries go here LEGAL (Contracts Counsel) being hired in parallel — you don't wait ENGINEERING / DELIVERY handoff of obligations into execution ACROSS THE TABLE: CustomersCrusoe & hyperscalers EPCRosendin — scope/interface Supplierscells · transformers · PCS Strategic partnersJV · channel · IP terms
Filed under Finance, not Sales or Legal — that's a real signal. Your incentives are margin and risk. And "develop playbooks, templates, frameworks and pricing tools" means the function doesn't exist yet: you'd be building it, which suits a founder.
They wroteThey mean
"You do not wait for Legal to tell you a clause is a problem."Legal is thin and being built now. Self-start on risk identification.
"The commercial counterweight" to SalesReal friction exists between bookings and risk discipline. Hold a line without becoming the department of no.
"Deal summaries and negotiation strategies for CFO and executive review"Direct visibility to Andrea Petersen. Written communication is a core deliverable.
"We can teach modeling; we cannot teach commercial courage"A deliberate opening for a candidate without project-finance modelling. This is your door.
"Not a contracts administration role"They fear paralegal-adjacent applicants. They want an operator.
"7+ years negotiating complex commercial agreements"The hard bar. Address it head-on — Section 10.
08

Clause playbook

The JD names eight contract concepts. Two of them deserve pictures, because pictures are how the stakes actually land. The rest are in the expandable cards below.

Fig. 18 — Why limitation of liability is THE clauseIllustrative magnitudes — the point is the ratio
WHAT'S AT STAKE IF A POWER EVENT KILLS A TRAINING RUN Contract value the money ON gets paid Capped liability e.g. cap at fees paid + consequentials excluded — survivable UNCAPPED: value of lost compute on billions of GPU capex No cap, no waiver One clause is the difference between a bad quarter and an existential event. Your position: mutual consequential-damages waiver + aggregate cap tied to contract value, with a negotiated (not open-ended) carve-out list.
Also watch: indemnities often sit outside the cap — which quietly makes the cap meaningless. Tie indemnity scope to the insurance programme (ON works with Lockton). If a customer insists on uncapped exposure: price it or decline it, out loud.
Fig. 19 — The warranty tail problemBack-to-back, visualized
yr 0 yr 10 yr 20 ON's WARRANTY TO CUSTOMER — 20 years (marketed) OEM WARRANTY TO ON — if only 10 yrs… …ON is NAKED here
Back-to-back means: never warrant more downstream than you're covered for upstream. Also nail exclusions (misuse, unauthorized modification, out-of-spec operation) and a remedy hierarchy — repair, then replace, then refund. A warranty is a repair obligation, not a general indemnity; say so in the text.
Performance guarantees

What it is. A promise the system hits specified numbers — availability, efficiency, capacity retention, ride-through — measured a defined way over a defined period.

What it costs. Definitions are everything. "99.9% availability" with no exclusions means you pay for the customer's own switchgear failure.

Your position. Guarantee what you control; exclude force majeure, customer-caused outages, grid unavailability, scheduled maintenance; measure over an annual window; cure period before remedies trigger.

Liquidated damages (LDs)

What it is. Pre-agreed money for missing a date or a number, instead of litigating actual losses.

What it costs. A delayed campus is delayed revenue on billions of GPU capex — uncapped delay LDs can exceed the whole contract.

Your position. Cap delay LDs (commonly low-to-mid single-digit % of contract value with an aggregate cap), cap performance LDs separately, make LDs the sole and exclusive remedy for that failure. Grace period; relief for delays caused by the customer, the EPC, or permitting. And with a 3.2 MW modular product: LDs per module actually late, not per facility.

Indemnification

What it is. Covering the other side's losses from third-party claims — injury, property damage, IP, environmental.

What it costs. Often sits outside the liability cap; battery systems add fire/thermal exposure that insurers price carefully.

Your position. Mutual, proportional to fault, tied to the insurance programme. IP indemnity cuts both ways given the patent position.

Payment structures & security

What it is. Milestones, advances, retainage; LCs, parent guarantees, bonds, escrow.

What it costs. ON buys cells and transformers months before customer milestones pay — the working-capital gap is real (it's what the Lombard Odier facility was structured for). A customer-demanded LC ties up ON's credit capacity.

Your position. Front-load milestones toward procurement/manufacturing; match payment triggers to cash-out events; negotiate the size, form and step-down of security instruments.

Change orders

What it is. The mechanism for adjusting price and schedule when scope, site conditions or specs change.

What it costs. On multi-year multi-site programmes this is where margin is won or lost. Chip generations, cooling architecture and 800 VDC are all moving — a customer redesign changes your sizing, and someone pays.

Your position. Define the baseline precisely; specify who authorizes; set response clocks; agree pricing bases (unit rates) up front. Include a regulatory-change mechanism: if ERCOT or NERC tightens a requirement mid-build, that's a change order, not your absorption.

Dispute resolution

What it is. Escalation ladder, mediation/arbitration/litigation, seat, governing law.

What it costs. With LATAM operations and international counterparties, enforceability isn't boilerplate. A slow dispute on a live project is itself a cost.

Your position. Tiered escalation with named executives and short clocks; continue-to-perform and pay-undisputed-amounts language; a forum you can actually enforce in.

Do not overclaim

Learning these makes you conversant, not experienced. If asked "have you negotiated an LoL with a hyperscaler," the answer is no, and you say so. What you can honestly claim: you understand what these terms do to economics, and you've negotiated contracts, financing and partner terms in your own business. Overreaching is the fastest way to lose the room — and they'll find out in round two.

09

The people

Monday is a recruiter screen, not a technical panel. Calibrate for that — but know the map behind her.

Fig. 20 — The org, as it touches this roleon.energy/team · Pathward release · Greenhouse
Alan Cooper — CEO & Co-Founder led every major financing personally · Norman Cooper chairs the board Ricardo de Azevedo CTO & Co-Founder AI UPS architect · ex-Goldman, Barclays · "Don't Call Me BESS" Andrea Petersen CFO — YOUR LIKELY LINE treasury · reporting at "public-company standards" Dax Kepshire COO hyperscale delivery · ~20 yrs scaling storage companies David Fernandes CIO & Founding Partner ex-CFO · asset deployment, project financing & capital Kevin Rooney VP Structured Finance ex-Live Oak (ON's own lender) Alberto Avila VP Finance — Data Centers plausible close partner / interviewer ★ THIS ROLE Sr Mgr, Commercial Neg. filed under Finance · Reston ALSO KNOW: Eric McGaha VP Sales (your counterweight) · Lauren Wong VP Procurement · Jorge Bianchi EVP People · José Manuel Díaz Pérez, President LATAM EXTERNAL NAMES: Chris Dolan — Chief DC Officer, Crusoe Clint Summers — PE, Sr Dir Power Eng., Rosendin
Reporting line is unconfirmed — the highlighted path is inferred from the Finance filing and the CFO-review language in the JD. Asking Andrea "who does this report to?" is a natural, smart question.
Andrea Marsiglia — your Monday interviewer

Public info on her is thin. The invite itself tells you more: it was issued in GMT−05:00 Bogotá, and ON runs real LATAM operations — she's most likely on Colombia time. Inference

Her job is signal and fit, not clause-drafting quizzes: can you explain your story clearly, do you get what ON does, are comp and location workable, will the hiring manager thank her for you. Her prep email told you the test: STAR-structured answers, and possible probing on BESS. Have three STAR stories ready and the Fig. 9 explanation fluent. Be warm and brief — recruiters remember candidates who make their job easy.

10

Your fit & your gaps

Straight assessment. You will interview better having already decided how you talk about the gap, rather than discovering it live.

Fig. 21 — You vs the JD, honestlyTheir own words define both columns
WHAT THE JD ASKS YOUR EVIDENCE Commercial courage · push back, walk away 1000s of one-call closes · founder carrying own P&L Energy sector fluency 9 yrs US solar · financing structures · Circle of Excellence '20 Financial literacy (modeling teachable) BS Corporate Finance, CU Leeds · ran a business Cross-functional communication, exec-ready writing strong verbally · exec writing unproven — say so if asked 7+ yrs complex B2B agreements (EPC, supply, LDs, LoL…) THE GAP — no large B2B contract record. Own it. Location / on-site Reston Springfield, VA — plus the Ashburn story makes geography an asset
The strategy the picture implies: they wrote, unprompted, "we can teach modeling; we cannot teach commercial courage, negotiation skills, or sound judgment." That sentence is an invitation to a candidate shaped exactly like you. Make the green rows undeniable; be honest and unbothered about the red one.
The backup move that costs nothing

If Andrea signals the years-of-B2B bar is firm, ask directly whether there's a level below — a Manager or Commercial Analyst seat on the same team with the same trajectory. That converts a rejection into a redirect, and demonstrates the exact self-awareness the role demands. With 56 roles open, including several in Reston, odds are decent something fits.

10B

Your STAR bank

Andrea's prep email asked for STAR-structured answers explicitly. These five are built from your actual history — pulled from our past sessions — and each is mapped to the JD line it proves. Two need you to fill in the numbers; the scaffolding is done.

Fig. 22 — Her prep email vs this dossierAndrea Marsiglia's four tips, checked off
1 · Research company, role & energy storage industry → Sections 01–08: industry forces, ON's history, AI UPS, competitors, business model, JD decoded line-by-line 2 · STAR stories + technical spot-checks (BESS · ISO · QMS) → This section (five stories below) + BESS answer in §11 + ISO/QMS one-liners below and in the glossary 3 · Questions for us → Section 12: five for Andrea, seven held for the hiring manager — team, culture, day-to-day, future challenges all covered 4 · Logistics check → Fig. 0 (the time-zone trap: 5:00 PM ET, not 4:00) + the −60 and −15 minute items in Section 13's run-of-show
On BESS / ISO standards / QMS: we established last session this trio is boilerplate from their technical-role email template — don't over-rotate. But have one clean sentence for each: BESS is the Fig. 9 answer; ISO standards in a manufacturing context means the ISO 9001 family of quality-management standards (careful — in this industry "ISO" also means grid operators like CAISO/ERCOT, so let context tell you which); QMS is a Quality Management System, the documented processes a manufacturer runs to make quality repeatable and auditable — relevant because ON builds hardware in US factories.
Fig. 23 — Five stories, mapped to the JDLead with №1 · hold the rest for the questions they fit
1 · TEAM SUNSHINE deal your anchor — lead with this "Lead negotiations on payment structures…" TPO + loan pricing + milestone payment terms — the JD's first bullet, literally 2 · COVENANT SOLAR LEASE℠ structuring & the model behind it "…how commercial terms affect project economics" IRR · four ITC modes incl §6418 · MACRS · sensitivity · LCOE · TCO 3 · FIVE-OFFER WEEK (May '26) anchoring, layered asks, walking away "Know when to push, when to compromise, when to walk away" competing offers as leverage · fallback ladder · declined the ones that wouldn't move 4 · FOUNDING A SCHOOL $6M budget · 1,000+ students · from zero "Develop playbooks, templates, frameworks…" you've built an operating function from scratch before — that's this job's first year 5 · 2020: COVID + EXCELLENCE adaptability under disruption "Thrives in the grey zone" your award year was the disruption year — pivoted to virtual, no performance drop
Delivery rule: one story per question, under two minutes, always ending on the R with a number or a concrete outcome. Don't volunteer all five — deploy each only when its question shows up.
№1 — Team Sunshine: the payment-terms negotiation fill in your numbers

Flagged in our last session as your single best story for this role — you negotiated TPO and loan pricing and milestone payment terms, and milestone payment structure is literally the first item on the JD's negotiation list. The scaffold below has blanks only you can fill. Write your answers in before Monday and say them out loud twice.

S — Situation

Set the table in two sentences: who Team Sunshine is relative to you, what the deal was, and what was at stake for your business. [Fill in: rough deal value or volume, and why the default terms were a problem for you.]

T — Task

"I needed terms I could actually finance my side of the deal on — the [TPO structure / loan pricing / payment milestones] as first proposed put the cash-flow risk on me."

A — Action

Name two or three specific moves: what you asked for, what you conceded to get it, and what you refused. If you priced an alternative or brought a competing option to the table, say so — that is exactly the behavior the JD describes. [Fill in: the specific term you changed, e.g. milestone timing, advance percentage, rate.]

R — Result

End on a number: the term as signed vs as proposed, and what it was worth. [Fill in: e.g. "moved payment from X to Y, worth roughly $Z per deal across N deals."] Then the one-line bridge: "That's the same muscle this role uses at a bigger scale — the question was always 'what does this term cost us?'"

№2 — Covenant Solar Lease: structuring a product and building the model behind it

Your project-finance credibility story. Use it when asked about financial fluency, deal economics, or "walk me through something complex you built."

S

"At Raynora I was competing against national third-party-ownership players with structured products I couldn't match off the shelf."

T

"I decided to design my own lease product — The Covenant Solar Lease — and I had to prove the economics worked for the investor, the customer, and me, before anyone would touch it."

A

"I built the financial model myself, from scratch: cash-flow projections, capital-stack sizing, investor IRR against target, four ITC allocation modes including Section 6418 transferability, MACRS depreciation, FMV buyout, two-dimensional sensitivity, LCOE and customer total cost of ownership."

R

"The result is a structured product I designed end-to-end and can defend line by line. So when your JD says modeling is teachable — I've already taught myself the version of it that matters: what a term does to the economics." [If you have a signed-deal or pipeline outcome for the Covenant lease, add it — a real R beats a capability claim.]

Caution: keep counterparty-confidential specifics out of it (you've restricted Covenant details in other applications for competitive reasons — same discipline applies here; the structure and the model are yours to discuss, the deal specifics may not be).

№3 — The five-offer week: anchoring, layered asks, and walking away

From May 2026: you ran interviews with five companies in a compressed window, extracted full comp terms from each, then went back to one of them with a structured counter — a higher commission rate, a larger upfront advance, and a sign-on bonus — anchored to documented competing offers, with a fallback ladder and a pre-decided walk-away. When they wouldn't move, you took the offer that best fit your actual decision criterion, without regret.

Yes, it's a negotiation of your own compensation — that's fine for a recruiter screen. It's honest, recent, verifiable, and it demonstrates the literal JD language: layered concessions, using real alternatives as leverage, and knowing when to walk.

Shape

"Recently I ran my own job search like a deal process. I collected five competing offers in one week, documented every term — commission rates, advances, guarantees, vehicle and benefit terms — and then went back to my preferred option with three layered asks anchored to the alternatives. I'd decided my walk-away before the conversation started. They moved on some terms and not others; I took the option that best fit my criterion and didn't look back. It's a small-dollar version of exactly what this role does: know your alternatives, price every term, decide the walk-away in advance."

№4 — Founding a school: building the operating playbook from zero

For "this role builds playbooks, templates and frameworks — have you built a function before?" The answer is yes, at institutional scale.

Shape

"Before energy, I was founding assistant principal of a private K-12 school in Herndon. Day one there was no operations manual, because there were no operations. Over three years I built the policies, hiring and coaching processes, and operating standards, managed a six-million-dollar annual budget, and helped grow the school past a thousand students. The lesson that transfers: a playbook isn't a document, it's the thing that lets an organization make the same good decision twice without re-fighting it. That's what I'd want to build into ON's commercial function."

№5 — 2020: the award year was the disruption year

Short, for adaptability or "tell me about performing under pressure." The elegant fact: your Circle of Excellence year was the COVID year.

Shape

"My Circle of Excellence year at Sunrun was 2020 — the year the entire in-home sales model broke overnight. I rebuilt my process around virtual consultations and new safety protocols mid-year, with no drop in performance, and finished in the company's top tier. I don't panic when the playbook stops working; I write the next page."

One honesty check before Monday

Only claim what you can survive a follow-up question on. In past sessions you deliberately stripped utility/regulatory/AHJ engagement claims from your Sunrun material because your role was front-end sales — keep that discipline live here. The Green Brilliance / PJM advisory work is usable only at the level of detail you can personally defend when a CFO asks "which substation, which tariff, what did you conclude?" If you can't answer the follow-up, don't make the claim.

11

Hard questions, with answers

Rehearse out loud. The shape and the honesty matter; the exact words don't.

"Walk me through your background."
Shape — 90 seconds, arc not chronology

"I've spent nine years in US solar, mostly on the front end — Sunrun, where I was a Circle of Excellence honoree in 2020, then running my own advisory business, Raynora, in the Mid-Atlantic. What kept pulling me deeper was the part of the deal after the handshake: how it's financed, what the terms actually obligate you to, what happens when something underperforms. I have a corporate finance degree and I've been running my own P&L, so I've lived on that side by necessity. This role is that work at the scale where it really matters, in the market on my doorstep."

"You haven't negotiated EPC or supply agreements at this scale. Why you?"

The one you must not fumble. Concede fast → redirect to their own stated criteria → offer proof → name reality.

Shape

"Fair, and I won't pretend otherwise — I haven't negotiated a nine-figure supply agreement with a hyperscaler's counsel. What I have done is negotiate several thousand agreements one-on-one under real pressure, run a business where I personally carried the cost of every term I agreed to, and build the financial literacy to see what a clause does to economics, not just what it says. Your posting says you can teach modeling but not commercial courage or judgment — I'd argue that's the harder half, and it's what I bring on day one. And I'd genuinely want to know from you: is the experience bar flexible, or does this seat need someone who's already done it? If it's the latter, I'd rather have that conversation now and ask whether there's a level below it with the same trajectory."

That last move is the trait they're screening for — knowing when to push and when to name reality — while keeping the door open.

"What do you know about ON.energy?"
Shape — a point of view, not the homepage

"You started around 2015 as a storage developer and integrator in Latin America, became an IPP in ERCOT, and in February launched AI UPS — which is the interesting move, because it isn't a BESS. It's inline at medium voltage: no transfer time, and the whole plant sits behind it, not just the racks. Then in July, 5 GW with Crusoe. What strikes me commercially is you're three businesses at once — manufacturer, integrator, asset owner — so contract terms don't just allocate risk, they decide whether a project gets financed. That's a more interesting problem than vendor contracting."

"Tell me about a time you pushed back and held your position."

STAR, as she requested — and you have two ready in Section 10B: Team Sunshine (№1) if the question is about a commercial deal, or the five-offer week (№3) if it's about holding a position and walking away. Be specific about the number at stake and the outcome. Losing a deal on principle is a better answer than winning one, given the JD's "know when to walk away."

"Why are you leaving your current role?"
Shape — direction, not escape

"Nothing's wrong where I am — I'm producing. But I've spent nine years paid per transaction, and the work I find most interesting has moved upstream into structure and terms. I want a seat where the output is the quality of the deal, not the volume of them, and where I'm building something durable — playbooks, frameworks — rather than starting from zero every month."

Honest, forward-facing, and it maps directly onto a JD that asks you to build playbooks and templates.

"What are your compensation expectations?"

You already did this work: last session, against your fixed monthly obligations, you landed on $140–160K base as the target, with any equity conversation deferred to later rounds. Walk in with that number owned.

Shape

"I'm targeting a base in the $140–160K range with bonus on top, based on senior commercial roles in this market — but I'd rather calibrate to your band. What range is the role approved at?"

"What's a BESS?" — the spot-check she warned you about
Shape — answer, then take the extra step

"A battery energy storage system — batteries plus power conversion plus controls, sitting beside the power path, storing and dispatching energy over minutes and hours: charge cheap, discharge expensive, sell ancillary services. ON has built and owned those for years. But your CTO's point is that a BESS is parallel — it has to detect a fault and transfer, and even a fast static switch is a few milliseconds, so the GPUs already saw the hit. AI UPS is inline; there's nothing to transfer. I gather you'd rather people didn't conflate the two."

12

What you ask

Pick three or four. Ask the ones only someone who understood the business would ask.

For Andrea, on Monday

  • "Who does this role report to, and who would I meet in the next round?" — confirms the Fig. 20 inference.
  • "Is this a new seat or a replacement — and what triggered opening it now?" — the honest answer is almost certainly Crusoe.
  • "What does the process and timeline look like from here?"
  • "With 56 roles open, how is Reston specifically growing?"
  • "What separates candidates who make it through from those who don't?"

Held for the hiring manager

  • "With Crusoe phased over 2026–27, how are you handling change-order mechanics as chip and cooling architectures move? An 800 VDC transition changes the load profile you sized to."
  • "Because you own assets as well as selling equipment, your lenders effectively read every contract. Which terms do your credit partners treat as non-negotiable?"
  • "In an EaaS structure, who captures the grid-services stack — and how do you resolve a conflict between a market dispatch opportunity and the customer's compute demand?"
  • "NOGRR 282 is a real tailwind, but TIEC has challenged ERCOT's authority. How do you price regulatory-change risk into a multi-year agreement?"
  • "How back-to-back is the 20-year warranty with your Tier-1 suppliers today — and where does the uncovered tail sit?"
  • "Is there an existing playbook and template set, or is building that the first six months?"
  • "What should this person have delivered by day ninety?"
13

The 30-minute plan

Thirty minutes with talent acquisition is roughly 12 minutes of you talking. Budget it.

  • −60Test the Teams link. Confirm the calendar reads 5:00 PM ET. Quiet background, solid connection, water, resume + this page on a second screen.
  • −15Search "ON.energy" and "PJM data center" for weekend news. Thirty seconds of fresh news is disproportionately valuable.
  • 0:00Warmth first. Thank her for the confirmation and mention you followed her prep note. Recruiters notice.
  • 0:02Your background — 90 seconds, arc not chronology, land on why this role. Then stop talking.
  • 0:05Her overview. Listen properly. Ask one clarifying question about something she actually said.
  • 0:12Her questions. STAR. If BESS comes up, run the Fig. 9 answer. Keep each answer under two minutes.
  • 0:20Bring Ashburn in yourself if she hasn't opened the door. You cannot leave without using it.
  • 0:23Your questions — three, not seven. Reporting line, trigger for the role, process.
  • 0:27Address the experience gap yourself if it hasn't come up — better from you than discovered later. Ask about adjacent levels if the signal is negative.
  • 0:29Close explicitly: "I want this role. What's the best next step from your side?" Confirm timeline.
  • +2hThank-you email, four sentences: thanks, one specific from the conversation, one line tying your interest to Ashburn, restated availability.
One behaviour to watch

In-home closing rewards filling silence and steering. A screen is a listening exercise: answer, stop, let her lead. If you're talking more than half the time, you're losing.

14

Glossary

Skim the night before. Recognize all of these instantly; be able to define about half.

TermMeaning
AI UPS™ON's patented inline medium-voltage UPS with integrated storage.
BESSBattery Energy Storage System. Parallel to the power path; minutes-and-hours energy management.
Double conversionAC→DC→AC continuously, so the load never sees raw grid power.
ZVRT / LVRTZero / Low Voltage Ride-Through — staying connected through a voltage collapse.
NOGRR 282ERCOT ride-through mandate for computational loads ≥75 MW. Effective 1 Aug 2026.
LCLLarge Computational Load — ERCOT's term for such a facility.
Ramp rateHow fast load may rise/fall from the grid's view; regulated because instant swings destabilize.
p.u.Per unit — voltage as a fraction of nominal. 1.0 is normal; 0 is total collapse.
Medium voltage~13–35 kV; where most large facilities interconnect.
PCSPower Conversion System — the inverter/rectifier stack.
STSStatic Transfer Switch — fast, but still ~4 ms. ON's argument against parallel designs.
N+1 / 2N+1Redundancy: one spare unit / full duplication plus a spare.
Grid-formingInverter establishes voltage & frequency itself — enables islanded operation.
PJM / ERCOTMid-Atlantic RTO (largest US operator, largest DC concentration) / Texas operator (first to regulate large loads).
FERC / NERCFederal economic regulator / reliability-standards body.
Co-locationSiting large load at a generator — the subject of FERC's PJM docket EL25-49.
Ancillary servicesPaid grid support: frequency regulation, reserves, voltage support.
ITC / safe harbour / tax equityInvestment Tax Credit (now transferable) / locking a credit vintage by early spend / investor capital exchanged for tax benefits.
FEOCForeign Entity of Concern — sourcing restrictions affecting tax-credit eligibility.
EaaS / offtakeProvider owns the asset, customer pays a service fee / long-term purchase contract that makes a project financeable.
EPCEngineering, Procurement & Construction contractor. Rosendin is a named ON partner.
LD / LoLLiquidated Damages / Limitation of Liability (cap + consequential-damages exclusion).
Back-to-backPassing an obligation upstream on identical terms — never warrant more than you're covered for.
BankabilityWhether a lender will finance against the contract. Failing terms kill deals regardless of price.
IPPIndependent Power Producer — non-utility owner-operator. ON is one.
ISO standardsIn a manufacturing context (as in the recruiter's email): the ISO 9001 family of quality-management standards. Watch the double meaning — in grid conversation, "ISO" means an Independent System Operator (CAISO, NYISO, ERCOT). Let context tell you which.
QMSQuality Management System — the documented processes a manufacturer runs so quality is repeatable and auditable. Relevant because ON builds hardware in US factories; certification often gates customer payment.
ARIES / NLRDOE research platform and national lab where AI UPS was tested at 13.2 kV.
15

Sources

Everything traces to one of these. Company materials are marketing, not audit — treat accordingly.