Translate

What Investors Should Look for Before Approving an EPC Contract

Engineering, Procurement, and Construction (EPC) contracts are often seen as a way to simplify project execution by placing responsibility for design, procurement, and construction under a single contractor. For investors and project owners, EPC contracts can offer cost certainty, a single point of accountability, and reduced coordination effort. However, approving an EPC contract without a thorough technical and commercial review can expose investors to significant risks.


Engineering, Procurement, and Construction (EPC) contracts are often seen as a way to simplify project execution by placing responsibility for design, procurement, and construction under a single contractor. For investors and project owners, EPC contracts can offer cost certainty, a single point of accountability, and reduced coordination effort. However, approving an EPC contract without a thorough technical and commercial review can expose investors to significant risks.

This article outlines the key aspects investors should carefully evaluate before approving an EPC contract, and explains why independent project and engineering reviews play a critical role in protecting capital and ensuring long-term project success.


1. Clarity of Project Scope and Technical Definition

One of the most common causes of disputes in EPC projects is an unclear or incomplete scope of work. Investors should ensure that the project scope is clearly defined and technically mature before contract approval.

Key questions to ask include:

  • Is the scope based on a completed Feasibility Study (FS) or Front-End Engineering Design (FEED)?
  • Are process capacities, performance guarantees, and operating conditions clearly stated?
  • Are battery limits, interfaces, and exclusions properly defined?

If the EPC scope is developed from an early-stage concept rather than a robust FEED, the risk of variations, claims, and cost overruns increases substantially. Independent technical reviews can identify gaps and inconsistencies before contract signing.


2. EPC Contractor Experience and Track Record

Not all EPC contractors have the same level of expertise across industries and project sizes. Investors should carefully evaluate the contractor’s:

  • Relevant project experience
  • Proven performance in similar technologies and capacities
  • Financial stability and organizational capability

A contractor experienced in small-scale projects may struggle with large or complex facilities, while a contractor with strong construction capability may lack sufficient process engineering depth. Reviewing past project references and understanding the contractor’s actual execution role—rather than relying on marketing materials—is essential.


3. Contract Structure and Risk Allocation

EPC contracts are often labeled as “lump sum turnkey,” but the real risk allocation depends on the detailed contract terms. Investors should review:

  • Responsibility for design changes
  • Force majeure and change-in-law provisions
  • Delay liquidated damages (LDs)
  • Performance guarantees and remedies

Unbalanced risk allocation may result in aggressive pricing upfront, followed by claims and disputes during execution. A well-structured EPC contract aligns risks with the parties best able to manage them and reduces the likelihood of conflict.


4. Cost Breakdown and Pricing Transparency

While investors are often focused on the total EPC price, understanding how that price is structured is equally important. A transparent cost breakdown helps identify:

  • Unrealistic assumptions
  • Underestimated equipment or construction costs
  • Missing scope elements

Low EPC prices may look attractive but often hide commercial risks that surface later as variations or quality compromises. Independent commercial reviews can benchmark costs against industry norms and identify red flags early.


5. Schedule Realism and Execution Strategy

Project delays can significantly affect returns, especially in energy, infrastructure, and industrial projects where revenue generation depends on timely commissioning. Investors should assess:

  • Whether the proposed schedule is realistic
  • Critical path activities and key milestones
  • Contractor resource availability and execution methodology

Overly optimistic schedules are often used to win contracts but can result in rushed execution, quality issues, or claims for extensions of time. A realistic schedule supported by a credible execution plan is a strong indicator of project maturity.


6. Technology Selection and Performance Guarantees

In projects involving process plants, energy facilities, or renewable technologies, technology risk is a major concern. Investors should verify:

  • Whether the technology is proven or first-of-a-kind
  • Who bears performance risk
  • How performance guarantees are tested and enforced

Performance guarantees must be clearly defined, measurable, and backed by meaningful remedies. Independent engineering reviews can assess whether performance targets are realistic and aligned with operating conditions.


7. Interface and Integration Risks

Even under an EPC arrangement, projects often involve multiple stakeholders, licensors, utility providers, and offsite facilities. Poor interface management can lead to delays and operational issues.

Investors should ensure that:

  • Interfaces are clearly defined
  • Responsibilities are unambiguous
  • Integration risks are addressed during design

This is particularly important in complex industrial and energy projects where upstream and downstream systems must operate seamlessly.


8. Health, Safety, Environmental, and Regulatory Compliance

Compliance with local regulations, international standards, and environmental requirements is critical for project viability. Investors should confirm that:

  • The EPC contractor understands local regulatory requirements
  • Environmental permits and approvals are achievable within the schedule
  • Health and safety systems meet recognized standards

Failure in this area can result in regulatory delays, fines, or reputational damage.


9. The Role of Independent Project Review

Before approving an EPC contract, many investors rely on independent project reviews to provide an objective assessment of technical, commercial, and execution risks. Independent consultants can:

  • Review FS, FEED, and EPC documentation
  • Identify hidden risks and unrealistic assumptions
  • Support informed investment decisions

Such reviews are not about delaying projects but about improving decision quality and reducing downstream problems.


Conclusion

Approving an EPC contract is one of the most critical investment decisions in any industrial or infrastructure project. While EPC contracts offer simplicity and cost certainty on paper, their success depends on robust preparation, clear scope definition, realistic assumptions, and balanced risk allocation.

Investors who take the time to conduct thorough technical and commercial reviews—supported by independent engineering and project management expertise—are far more likely to achieve predictable outcomes, protect their capital, and realize long-term project value.


📌 How This Relates to Our Consulting Services

At Engineering Projects and Industry Review Hub, we support investors, project owners, and developers through:

  • Independent project and EPC contract reviews
  • Technical due diligence
  • Feasibility Study (FS), FEED, and DED advisory
  • Commercial and execution risk assessment

Our goal is to help decision-makers move forward with clarity and confidence.

📩 Email: afakar@gmail.com

📱 WhatsApp: +62 813-6864-3249

No comments:

Other Articles

oclkaf03bnr1

at26914806

at26997598

Followers