Schedule Demo
  • 716-636-0200
Schedule Demo

Dr. Rainer Hoff at AIChE GCPS 2026 — Chairing “Generative AI for Hazard Analysis” | Apr 12–16, Houston | Details →

Operational Excellence Through Structured Procedure Governance

The Center for Chemical Process Safety (CCPS) Risk-Based Process Safety (RBPS) framework emphasizes that robust Procedures are critical for safe, consistent operations. Effective procedure management is not just about documentation—it's about ensuring every procedure is created, stored, accessed, reviewed, and revised within a rigorously controlled system. FACILEX® Procedure Management embodies this principle by integrating technology with structured business processes to create a digital backbone for procedure lifecycle management.
Operational Excellence Through Structured Procedure Governance

The CCPS Perspective: Why Controlled Procedures Matter

Under the RBPS framework, Element 9: Operating Procedures and Element 15: Management of Change (MOC) emphasize the importance of:

  • Ensuring procedures are accurate, up-to-date, and followed.
  • Managing revisions systematically.
  • Avoiding uncontrolled modifications that could introduce new risks.

These principles are grounded in preventing incidents caused by outdated or improperly implemented procedures—a key concern highlighted in many industry incident investigations.

Core Tenets of Procedure Management

FACILEX® distills the best practices of RBPS into two core principles:

  1. Procedures must be stored in a controlled environment.
  2. Procedure creation and modification must follow controlled business processes.

Gone are the days of editable Word files floating on unsecured network drives. Instead, FACILEX® uses vault-based document storage with strict access control: most users can view, but cannot add or modify without initiating formal workflows.

Procedure Lifecycle: From Initiation to Archival

1. New Procedure Creation

  • Initiated via a structured form capturing metadata (title, number, classification).
  • Uses company-approved templates (typically Word documents).
  • Supports attachments like Excel lists or diagrams.
  • Enforces hierarchical classification—both by facility and procedure type.

2. Review and Approval Workflow

  • Reviewers and approvers are selected via rules or user input.
  • Edits are made using “Track Changes” for transparency.
  • FACILEX® maintains a full audit trail, even removing tracked changes in final release.

3. Controlled Push to Vault

  • Once approved, documents are “pushed” to the vault.
  • Files are assigned version numbers and release dates automatically.
  • Both native (Word) and PDF versions are stored with full traceability.

Revising Procedures: Structured, Accountable, Auditable

Procedure revisions follow a dedicated “Procedure Revision” business process:

  • Existing files are checked out to a controlled workspace.
  • Users make updates, apply revision logic, and route documents through the same review/approval steps.
  • Finalized revisions are “pushed” back into the vault, maintaining historical integrity.

This process also supports revalidation cycles, a key component of RBPS compliance. Scheduled jobs or manual dates ensure procedures are regularly reviewed—even if unchanged.

Usability Without Compromise

Despite its robust backend, FACILEX® ensures simplicity for end users:

  • Users have read-only access to approved documents via a web interface.
  • Intelligent filtering displays only relevant procedures (e.g., by role or department).
  • A simple “click-to-view” experience ensures that procedure access does not become a barrier to compliance.

Closing the Loop on Risk

The FACILEX® approach to procedure management supports the CCPS vision: A structured, controlled, and auditable process for managing critical documentation. When combined with good training and a strong safety culture, it becomes a pillar for reducing operational risk and ensuring compliance with regulatory and internal standards.By embedding discipline into the very fabric of document management, FACILEX® transforms procedures from passive documents into living tools of risk mitigation.

Picture of Gateway Group

Gateway Group

Gateway Consulting Group has been a leader in information management solutions for over 30 years, helping businesses navigate complex challenges with a blend of cutting-edge technology and expert consulting. By tailoring solutions to each client's needs, Gateway ensures efficiency, compliance, and streamlined business processes. With decades of experience, Gateway continues to deliver best-in-class strategies that optimize information management, combining innovative tools with a deep understanding of industry requirements.

Share:

More Posts

Workflow Is Not a Strategy: Why Management of Change Must Be Designed as a Lifecycle

Over the past two decades, many organizations have invested heavily in digital Management of Change (MOC) systems. Most of these systems share a common design philosophy: they treat MOC as a workflow—a predefined sequence of steps that moves a change request from initiation to approval and closure.
This approach is appealing to IT teams because workflows are easy to automate, measure, and control. However, it fundamentally misrepresents the nature of Management of Change.
MOC is not a linear process. It is a lifecycle-based business process that must adapt to technical complexity, organizational context, and evolving risk. When organizations attempt to force MOC into rigid workflow structures, they inadvertently create systems that are efficient in appearance but ineffective in practice.
To support modern process safety, MOC must be architected as a configurable lifecycle embedded within an integrated risk-based process safety framework—not as a static workflow engine.

Why Management of Change Must Be Rebuilt for Modern Industry

Management of Change (MOC) is one of the most critical controls in process safety management, yet it remains one of the most misunderstood. While regulatory frameworks such as OSHA 1910.119 define what must be addressed, they do not define how organizations should design, execute, and govern change in complex industrial environments.
Most MOC systems in use today were not designed for the realities of modern operations. They evolved from paper-based processes and early digital document management tools that prioritized compliance over risk intelligence, traceability, and integration.
To meet the demands of contemporary industrial operations, MOC must be fundamentally rethought—not as a form, a workflow, or a compliance exercise, but as a lifecycle-based business process embedded within an integrated process safety ecosystem.

AI Governance Starts Long Before AI Is Introduced

Artificial intelligence governance is often discussed as a new discipline—one that emerges only after AI tools are deployed. Policies are drafted, oversight committees formed, and ethical frameworks debated. While these steps are important, they miss a critical reality:
AI governance does not begin with AI. It begins with how information has been governed for years.

Automation Before AI: Lessons from Asset-Intensive Industries

As artificial intelligence gains momentum across industries, many organizations are eager to move directly from manual work to AI-enabled solutions. In asset-intensive and regulated environments, this leap often ends in frustration. The issue is not ambition, it is sequencing.
Organizations that succeed with AI consistently share one characteristic: they automated their information and business processes before attempting to make them intelligent. Those that skip this step discover that AI struggles to add value on top of fragmented, inconsistent, or poorly defined processes.