Operational Readiness Command Center
Whether a facility, area, utility or system is ready to enter regulated operation — and if not, which dependency is responsible, who owns the next action, and what evidence is missing. Every status here can explain itself.
Verified readiness counts only criteria holding approved evidence. Reported completion — what each workstream says about itself — is shown beside it and never in place of it, because the gap between the two is the thing a readiness review exists to find. A workstream nobody has scoped is excluded from both figures rather than counted as zero.
235 of 371 readiness criteria have approved evidence, across all nineteen workstreams. 1 workstream excluded — see incomplete data.
The workstreams’ own figures, across all nineteen workstreams. Shown apart from verified readiness because they measure different things.
Confidence: low while 3 blockers remain unresolved on the critical path.
Utilities, Training & competency, Cybersecurity & access — all 3 sit on the critical path.
Program-wide, not area-filtered — a gate spans workstreams. Next decision: qualification readiness, currently blocked. Passing a gate is not a regulatory approval.
1 workstream excluded from verified readiness (Business continuity — not assessed), contributing no criteria rather than counting as zero. The percentage above therefore describes scoped work across all nineteen workstreams, not the whole program.
Verified readiness = readiness criteria with approved evidence ÷ total criteria across assessed workstreams. Self-reported completion, submitted evidence and evidence under review are all excluded from the numerator; only approved evidence counts. Workstreams marked not assessed or not applicable are removed from both numerator and denominator rather than counted as zero.
Last calculated from source systems 2 hours ago. Every figure on this page drills to the workstream, its criteria and the record that satisfies each one.
Readiness by workstream
Nineteen workstreams in five groups. Reported completion and verified readiness are shown separately on purpose.
Upcoming stage gates
Twelve gates. Selecting one opens its entry criteria, evidence and unresolved dependencies.
GT-07, computed by the shared module
This gate’s readiness comes from wfi-slice.ts, the module the Requirement-to-Evidence Trace will read. Change a fixture here and the trace reaches the same conclusion, because neither product owns the arithmetic.
A scoped criterion has no resolvable evidence state, so no percentage is shown for this gate.
GT-07 cannot be declared ready: 1 criterion has no evidence record to read.
RC-03 has no record in CMMS. Conductivity transmitter calibration certificate does not exist to be read, so the criterion cannot be evaluated.
RC-02 is held by EV-02 (Sanitisation cycle qualification result), in review in Commissioning database as of 2026-08-04. It discharges the criterion only once approved.
No percentage is shown. A criterion with no resolvable evidence state cannot be averaged into one, and a figure computed over the remainder would read as a measure of the whole gate.
The gate decision remains a person’s to record. This module computes what the evidence supports and stops there.
Six gates answered from a record set instead of a rating
The twelve stage gates above are the project’s decision sequence. These six are derived for the water-for-injection system from what its record set actually contains: a gate is met only when a record was found, and where one is not, the blocker is named rather than scored.
- MetProcedural readiness
Is there an approved operating procedure for this system?
Operations cannot run a system it has no approved method for.
- MetTraining readiness
Is there a training curriculum, and evidence that anyone completed it?
A procedure nobody has been trained against is a document, not a capability.
- Not metCalibration readiness
Is there a calibration procedure, and does every instrument monitoring a critical parameter have a calibration record?
Measurements used as evidence are only as good as the instruments behind them.
- Conductivity transmitter monitors a critical parameter but has no calibration record.
- MetMaintenance readiness
Is there a maintenance plan for this system?
Handover transfers upkeep; without a plan the system degrades unmonitored.
- MetSpares readiness
Is there a critical spare parts list?
A system that cannot be repaired quickly becomes an availability risk to the product.
- MetValidation readiness
Is performance qualification present, and does every requirement trace to evidence?
Routine operation rests on verified performance, not on intent.
- Calibration readiness: whether the gap is real or unmodelled, and whether operation can begin without it.
- Procedural readiness: whether the records found are adequate — their presence is not their sufficiency.
- Training readiness: whether the records found are adequate — their presence is not their sufficiency.
- Maintenance readiness: whether the records found are adequate — their presence is not their sufficiency.
- Spares readiness: whether the records found are adequate — their presence is not their sufficiency.
- Validation readiness: whether the records found are adequate — their presence is not their sufficiency.
- Release of the system into routine operation, which is a regulated decision this module does not make.
- A met gate means the modelled record set contains what the gate looks for. It is not a judgement that those records are adequate, current, or approved.
- An unmet gate is a gap in the modelled record set, never a finding that the work was not done.
- Gates do not read the lifecycle state and the lifecycle state does not gate them; it is reported for context only.
- The gate set is SPEQ’s construction of operational readiness practice, not a regulatory checklist.
- Synthetic pilot data. Not a release decision.
- There is deliberately no overall score here. Six gates with one named blocker is a more useful sentence than any percentage, and a percentage would invite someone to treat it as the release decision it is not.
Illustrative reference program with invented data, for methodology and interface design only. Nothing here is an assessment of a real facility, an assertion of compliance, or a regulatory approval. SPEQ relates readiness criteria, evidence and ownership; the evidence itself remains in the systems of record named against each item.