Conclusion Procedure management constitutes a leading indicator of process safety performance in refinery operations. The evidence reviewed here indicates that document-based management models are structurally inadequate to maintain the quality, currency, and execution fidelity that safety-critical operations require. The root cause data indicate that the predominant fail- ure mode is inadequate procedure content rather than non-compliance and that the conditions producing this fail- ure – procedure drift, incomplete coverage, and lack of exe- cution feedback – are inherent to static document systems rather than incidental to them. Digital procedure management platforms address the execution transparency gap through real-time step track- ing, deviation logging, and systematic audit trail gener-
6 Oil & Gas IQ. (2021). The State of Intelligent Operations in Oil and Gas. www.oilandgasiq.com/market-outlook/articles/intelligent -operations-oil-gas 7 US Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board (CSB). (2023). Investigation Report: Husky Energy Refinery Explosion and Fire (Superior, Wisconsin). www.csb.gov/husky-energy-refinery-explosion-and-fire Giulio Cattarin is a Senior Industry Consultant at Octave (Hexagon’s software spin-off), with nine years of experience in digital technolo- gies for industrial operations, focusing on information management, connected workers, and process safety solutions. As an industry consultant, he helps owner-operators identify and architect the most effective technical solutions to achieve their business goals in safety, productivity, quality, and sustainability. He holds a Master’s degree in mechanical engineering and a PhD from the Polytechnic of Milan.
ation. AI-assisted digitisation and normalisation address the content quality gap by reduc- ing the labour effort of legacy migration and enabling library- wide consistency governance. Together, these capabilities pro- vide a procedural management infrastructure aligned with the requirements of API RP 754, API 770, and related process safety standards. References 1 Johnson, K., Morais, C., Patelli, E. (2025). Enhancing procedure quality: Advanced language tools for identify- ing ambiguity and high-potential vio- lation triggers. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 264, 111308. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2025.111308 2 Health and Safety Executive (HSE). (n.d.). Procedures. Available at: www. hse.gov.uk/humanfactors/topics/proce- dures.htm (Accessed: April 2026). 3 US Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board (CSB). (2007). Investigation Report: BP Texas City Refinery Explosion and Fire (Report No. 2005-04-I-TX). www.csb.gov/bp-ameri- ca-texas-city-refinery-explosion 4 Wilkins, B. (2015). Following Procedures Can Save Lives. Yokogawa/ ASM Consortium, Digital Controls User Group (DCU), Galveston, TX. https://refiningcommunity.com/ wp-content/uploads/2015/05/ Following-Procedures-Can-Save- Lives-Wilkins-Yokogawa-DCU- Galveston-2015.pdf 5 Airswift. (2022). Global Energy Talent Index Report 2022. www. scribd.com/document/816655060/ GETI-2022-Web-Version
93
PTQ Q3 2026
www.digitalrefining.com
Powered by FlippingBook