Prepared for lenders, CDCs, and federal agencies to SBA SOP 50 10 8, USDA 7 CFR Part 5001, and conventional underwriting standards. Fiduciary duty runs to the lender and the agency, never the borrower. 4,000+ engagements since 1998 covering $41.2 billion in evaluated project value. So far in 2026: 41 engagements and $1.54 billion evaluated — 17 SBA, 11 USDA.
Infrastructure-class projects — data centers, solar and storage, telecom assets, utility-adjacent facilities — are underwritten on contracted revenue and counterparty credit rather than market absorption. The feasibility study evaluates the revenue contract or interconnection position, the capacity and demand fundamentals behind it, capital and operating cost benchmarks against the technology class, and the residual risk where merchant exposure remains. For renewable energy under USDA REAP, the analysis additionally documents the energy production basis, incentive stack, and payback arithmetic the program requires.
The methodology draws on interconnection queue and utility data, NREL and EIA production and cost benchmarks for energy assets, market capacity studies for data and telecom infrastructure, and engineering inputs supplied by the project team — independently tested rather than accepted. Financial models carry contracted and merchant cases separately, with coverage tested under the program standard.
Every Wert-Berater financial model is fully linked with no hardcoded values, so any reviewer can stress any input. Deliverables comprise a complete narrative report and the linked Excel model, with ten-year pro forma, sensitivity analysis at ±5, 10, and 15 percent, interest-rate stress from +0.5 to +3.0 percent, and ratio analysis benchmarked against RMA and IBISWorld data.
SBA engagements are prepared to SOP 50 10 8, including its debt-service-coverage minimums of 1.15x operating and 1.00x global. USDA engagements follow RD Staff Instruction 5001 across the Business & Industry, Community Facilities, REAP, and Value-Added Producer Grant programs. Conventional engagements are built to the lender's stated coverage standard, typically 1.20x. The firm prepares REAP-compliant studies under USDA 7 CFR Part 5001, B&I studies for rural energy and infrastructure, and conventional lender studies for data center and telecom assets; green-field carbon and biofuel projects are evaluated under the same evidentiary discipline.
Representative work includes a $52,688,000 green carbon project evaluation and renewable-energy feasibility within the firm's USDA program practice. Independence is non-negotiable: determinations follow the evidence and are not revised under pressure, and studies are built to pass lender, agency, and third-party review without exception items.
A feasibility study for this asset class is built around the revenue contract first, because contracted cash flow is the underwriting spine. The narrative opens with a counterparty credit review — the offtaker, the power purchase agreement obligor, or the colocation anchor tenant — and works forward through production or utilization assumptions to reach a coverage conclusion the lender can defend to its credit committee or agency reviewer.
The result is a document that answers the credit question directly, without burying the conclusion in qualifications.
Demand analysis for infrastructure assets does not follow the absorption model used in commercial real estate. Capacity is absorbed by contract, not by foot traffic, so the analysis focuses on the structural drivers behind the contract rather than on vacancy surveys or lease comparables.
For renewable energy, the relevant market evidence includes regional grid capacity studies published by the applicable independent system operator or regional transmission organization, interconnection queue data showing the volume and vintage of projects ahead of and behind the subject in the queue, and utility integrated resource plans that document the offtaker's long-term procurement obligations. NREL's Annual Technology Baseline and EIA's capacity factor databases supply the production benchmarks against which the project's engineering estimate is independently tested.
For data centers, the analysis draws on utility service territory load forecasts, fiber route and carrier-neutral exchange point registries, state public utility commission filings, and publicly available colocation market reports from industry trade associations. Power use effectiveness targets and critical IT load assumptions are benchmarked against published standards rather than accepted from the sponsor's proforma.
For telecom infrastructure, tower registration databases, FCC licensing records, and carrier network expansion filings provide the demand signal. The study identifies whether the subject site fills a documented coverage gap or competes with existing licensed capacity, and it weights anchor tenant commitment accordingly.
A small number of inputs drive most of the variance in coverage for this project type. Identifying them, documenting the basis for each, and stress-testing each independently is the core analytical task. The sensitivity table in every Wert-Berater engagement isolates each of the following because lenders and agency reviewers will ask about each one directly.
Each program applies its coverage standard to a project type that most community and regional lenders encounter infrequently, which is why the feasibility study carries more analytical weight here than in a standard commercial real estate transaction.
SBA lenders underwriting infrastructure assets under SOP 50 10 8 need the study to demonstrate 1.15x operating coverage and 1.00x global coverage, with both metrics tested under the contracted case and disclosed under the merchant or partial-merchant case. The study must document that the borrower's equity injection meets program requirements and that the project's operating history — or, for green-field assets, its contractual revenue certainty — supports the coverage conclusion without reliance on projections that the credit officer cannot independently verify.
USDA Business & Industry and REAP engagements require the analyst to follow RD Staff Instruction 5001 and to document the energy production basis, the incentive arithmetic, and the rural economic impact in the narrative. REAP studies carry an additional obligation to show that the project reduces energy costs or increases energy production for an eligible rural small business or agricultural producer.
Conventional lenders typically require 1.20x coverage and place particular emphasis on counterparty credit quality, contract remaining term relative to loan amortization, and the residual value of the collateral at loan maturity. For data centers, lenders also scrutinize power contract terms and redundancy infrastructure costs, because a facility that loses its power agreement loses most of its collateral value simultaneously.
Every engagement begins with a fixed fee quoted in writing within one business day of the initial inquiry. The fee does not vary with the study's conclusion, and no portion of it is contingent on loan approval, project financing, or any outcome. This structure is not incidental: it is the condition under which an independent determination is possible.
The data room for an infrastructure or energy engagement typically includes the executed or draft offtake agreement, the interconnection agreement or queue confirmation, the engineer's production estimate, a project cost summary with contractor bids or cost estimates, and the borrower's most recent financial statements. When documents are incomplete, the engagement letter identifies the specific items required before the clock starts.
Standard delivery is ten to fifteen business days from a complete data room. Rush delivery is available and is quoted at the time of engagement. The timeline reflects the analytical work required, not a fixed calendar: if the data room is complete and clean, delivery is at the short end of the range.
Upon delivery, the full financial model is published to a secure client portal. The model remains live: if the lender's credit committee requests a revised interest rate assumption or a different amortization period, the input is changed and every output recalculates automatically. No hardcoded values means no manual re-entry errors and no version-control disputes between the analyst's spreadsheet and the lender's copy. The narrative report is delivered as a bound document suitable for agency submission without reformatting.
Wert-Berater quotes a fixed fee in writing within one business day of the initial inquiry. The fee is not contingent on the study's conclusion or on loan approval. Because scope varies by project complexity — a single-asset REAP study differs from a multi-site data center engagement — the quote is project-specific. Contact the firm with a brief project description to receive a same-day fee indication.
Standard delivery is ten to fifteen business days from receipt of a complete data room. Rush delivery is available and is quoted at engagement. The clock starts when all required documents are in hand — executed or draft offtake agreement, interconnection confirmation, engineer's production estimate, project cost summary, and borrower financials. Incomplete submissions extend the timeline; a checklist is provided at engagement.
Revenue depends on a single contract or a small number of contracts with specific counterparties, rather than on broad market absorption. If the offtaker defaults, terminates, or curtails, revenue can fall sharply with little ability to re-lease quickly. The collateral is also technology-specific: a solar array or a data center with obsolete power infrastructure has limited alternative use. The feasibility study must evaluate counterparty credit, contract structure, and residual collateral value as distinct analytical tasks.
Not automatically. REAP studies follow RD Staff Instruction 5001 and must document energy production basis, incentive arithmetic, and rural eligibility. SBA studies follow SOP 50 10 8 and require global coverage analysis and specific equity-injection documentation. If a project is financed with both programs, the study is scoped to satisfy both sets of requirements simultaneously, which adds analytical content but avoids preparing two separate documents.
The engineer's production estimate is supplied by the project team and reviewed independently — it is not prepared by the feasibility analyst, nor is it accepted without scrutiny. The study benchmarks the engineer's capacity factor and annual output assumptions against NREL and EIA data for the applicable resource zone and documents any material variance. The lender receives both the engineer's figure and the analyst's independent assessment.
The financial model is published to a secure client portal and remains live after delivery. Because every model is a fully linked Excel workbook with no hardcoded values, any input — interest rate, amortization period, capacity factor, O&M escalator — can be changed and every output recalculates automatically. Revised sensitivity runs do not require a new engagement; they are handled through the portal without manual re-entry or version-control risk.
Power availability, water for cooling, fibre routes and substation timing are the constraints that most often decide a computing-campus site. Those are treated directly in our data center feasibility study consultants practice.
Qualify a project. Tell us about the project and the program. We will tell you the truth about it — scope, timeline, and fee confirmed before work begins.
Schedule a Zoom Call →Legal disclosure. Wert-Berater, Inc. offices are mailing addresses only. Following the COVID-19 pandemic the firm has elected to work remotely; its office locations receive mail and are not staffed for visitors or in-person meetings. Headquarters mailing address: 1968 South Coast Hwy, Ste 2382, Laguna Beach, CA 92651.
Wert-Berater, Inc. is an independent provider of feasibility studies and other related services. The firm does not provide financing or equity investment advice, and does not arrange, broker, or place debt or equity capital of any kind.
All appraisal assignments are performed by Bruce E. Jones, MAI, ASA-GC, BCA, CMEA, a member of the Appraisal Institute since 2006, a staff member of Wert-Berater, Inc. and owner of Special Purpose Realty Valuation.