By Brent Douziech, PMP, ICD, Chief Operating Officer, Scovan
Why the Future of EPC is Hybrid
The traditional EPC model is slow and bloated. It separates engineering from procurement and construction, creating handoffs, duplication, and delay. On the other end, EPC Lite removes overhead — but pushes integration risk back onto the owner. What’s missing is a third model: one that combines engineering-led accountability with a builder’s mindset.
This isn’t theory. Scovan is already delivering projects this way. By integrating engineering, procurement, modularization, and fabrication from the outset, we are offering a faster, more efficient, and more accountable way to deliver.
The Legacy EPC Model: Costly and Inflexible
Legacy EPC contracts were built for mega projects and risk-heavy scopes. But for many projects today, they introduce friction.
- Cost escalation is common, especially when work is delivered in sequence, not in collaboration
- Risk, liquidated damages, and other pain/gain mechanisms are priced in by the EPC and embedded in margin, often invisible to the owner
- Contract terms tend to protect the EPC’s interest, not align with the owner’s expected outcomes, this provides flexibility in the model and conversion of commercial structures through the project lifecycle to create cost certainty
- Constructability input arrives too late, when changes are costly and disruptive
This isn’t about blame. These models evolved to serve a purpose. But owners are now paying for risks they don’t control, and absorbing delays they can’t influence.
EPC Lite: Lean but Fragmented
Some owners have moved to EPC Lite — engaging smaller engineering firms and managing procurement and construction themselves. It cuts overhead but increases complexity.
- Integration is limited
- Execution decisions are made in silos
- Risk appears distributed — but often ends up squarely on the owner’s shoulders
In theory, EPC Lite offers control. In practice, it creates exposure.
A Hybrid Model That Delivers
Scovan’s hybrid model closes the gap. It brings engineering depth and construction alignment under one accountable team. From day one, we own the integration — not just design, but procurement and fabrication planning as well.
It works because it’s built around outcomes:
- Cost is visible — directly tied to design and procurement strategy
- Schedule is optimized — through modular planning and concurrent workflows
- Constructability is baked in early — not added at the end
- Risk isn’t buried in markup — it’s actively managed through alignment
Built for Both Projects and Business
Today’s energy companies are under pressure — doing more with less, with no room for error. The goal is no longer just risk transfer. It’s capital efficiency, execution certainty, and value retention.
The hybrid model delivers. It removes the bloat of traditional EPC and the blind spots of EPC Lite. This isn’t about compromise. It’s about intention.
It’s not EPC Lite. It’s EPC done right.
Case Notes: The Hybrid Model in Action
1. Cenovus Energy – Modular SAGD Execution
Cenovus standardized its well CPF and pad execution by integrating design and procurement early. This led to predictable schedules, tighter cost control, and fewer field hours, outcomes made possible by hybrid EPC thinking.
2. Suncor Energy – Fort Hills Early Works
Rather than wrapping all scope under one EPC, Suncor retained control of engineering and procurement for early works. This improved visibility on costs and interfaces , reinforcing the same principles we see in hybrid delivery: less complexity, more accountability.
Originally published in IGNITE V10.
