Every new facility, expansion, retrofit, or operational change at a global energy company introduces new engineering, environmental, operational, and public safety considerations. For one of the world's largest integrated fuels, lubricants, and chemical companies, managing that risk across thousands of facilities and major capital projects had become a high-consequence risk management challenge. Not because risk wasn't being managed, but because no one could see it all at once. D3Clarity partnered with the organization to design and build an enterprise risk intelligence platform capable of unifying that picture globally.
Client Overview
Before construction begins (and throughout the life of every operating asset), this organization conducts comprehensive High Consequence Risk (HCR) assessments to identify scenarios capable of causing catastrophic impacts to people, the environment, nearby communities, and the business itself. These assessments determine whether design changes, operational safeguards, or mitigation strategies are required long before a project becomes operational, covering scenarios such as:
- Facilities located near schools, hospitals, churches, wetlands, or densely populated areas
- Equipment capable of releasing hazardous chemicals
- Blast radius and explosion modeling
- Environmental contamination scenarios
- Emergency response planning
- Critical infrastructure dependencies
These decisions influence everything from site selection, equipment placement, and engineering design to regulatory compliance, insurance exposure, and long-term operating costs. The organization's vision was ambitious: a unified risk management platform serving as a single, globally accessible source of truth capable of identifying, visualizing, and ultimately predicting high-consequence risks anywhere in the world.
An Enterprise Visibility Problem, Not a Risk Management Problem
High-consequence risks were being managed effectively within individual operating businesses around the world, but the information remained isolated in locally managed systems, processes, and data models. Without a standardized enterprise view, corporate leadership lacked the visibility needed to understand cumulative risk, identify emerging trends, prioritize investments, and make informed strategic decisions across global operations.
- Critical information was scattered across more than 150 disconnected data models spanning engineering systems, GIS platforms, vendor applications, AutoCAD drawings, spreadsheets, Power BI reports, business presentations, operational databases, and business-unit-specific applications
- Every business unit managed data differently, and equipment was represented differently between systems
- Facilities lacked common identifiers, and some assets had no geographic coordinates at all
- Many high-consequence scenarios weren't associated with any equipment at all
- Risk analysts often spent more time finding data than actually evaluating risk
As a result, identifying a new project's true risk profile required significant manual effort across numerous engineering disciplines, safety specialists, environmental teams, and business stakeholders. Left unaddressed, the organization faced slower identification of major hazards, increased environmental and public safety exposure, inconsistent risk reporting, duplicate and conflicting information, engineering rework, poor global visibility, and continued reliance on manual processes that couldn't scale.
Perhaps most importantly, risk management remained reactive. The organization didn't need a partner to manage its risk; it needed a partner who could help it see risk in a common language across the enterprise and, eventually, automatically infer that risk from enterprise data rather than waiting for someone to manually discover and document it.