Oil and gas software an inspector can read
Work gets done and the paperwork does not follow. Then someone asks for twelve months of history. A binder in a shed with three gaps in it is now the whole problem.
A compliance record is worth exactly what its audit trail proves. If an inspection can be edited afterwards with no trace, it will not hold up when somebody asks who did what and when. So the strongest thing software does here is dull work. It makes a timestamped, signed, photo-backed record that nobody can quietly change. It also shows which sites were missed, as easily as which were done.
Proving the negative is the hard part
Most systems can show that a check happened. Very few can show that one did not. The second question is the one an auditor actually asks, because a missing record is the finding even when the work was done properly.
That difference is structural. A list of finished inspections is a log. To know which asset owed a check in a window and did not get one, you have to model the duty itself. Recurring, per asset, per site, and it raises its own hand when it lapses.
TankAware is built around that idea. It schedules inspections, tracks deficiencies and holds the evidence across hundreds of sites. Alerts flag an odd tank reading before it turns into a failure.
- 01Model the obligation, not only the completed task.
- 02Capture a result per area checked. One verdict for a whole site is not a record.
- 03Retention is per record type. One timer for everything is wrong in several directions at once.
What we built here
40%
fewer manual errors, reported by Sutherland Excavating Ltd.
30%
higher inspection accuracy, reported on TankAware
30%
less operational overhead after launch
5
permission tiers with per-organisation isolation
- CaptureOffline. The original time survives the sync.
- SignA named person and their role.
- FreezeThe checklist as it stood that day.
- AmendA new version, never an overwrite.
- EscalateA lapsed duty raises itself.
- ExportRetention outlasts any vendor.
The last step is the one nobody negotiates for. Records here outlive software contracts, so an operator who cannot export their own history is exposed by the choice of supplier.
Where we are useful
Digital inspection and deficiency tracking
Recurring obligations per site and per asset, captured offline with photos and a named signer. Deficiencies raise work orders rather than sitting in an inbox. This is the TankAware core.
Tank and site telemetry
IoT sensor pipelines on AWS with predictive alerts, built for remote sites. Raw readings kept apart from derived values, so recalibration reinterprets history instead of rewriting it.
Contractor portal and payments
The deficiency to work-order loop crosses company lines, so contractors get their own access and the job ends in a payment. Built into TankAware.
Multi-tenant separation
Five permission tiers with each organisation isolated under its own subdomain. A contractor sees their sites and no one else's, which is a breach question rather than a bug.
Hardware in a hazardous area is a design input
Petroleum sites have areas around fill points, vents and dispensers where flammable vapour may be present. Anything installed there must be rated for it. A standard commercial gateway, tablet or camera in one of those areas is a code violation and an ignition risk.
Software teams miss this because it is invisible in a requirements document. Nobody writes down that the sensor must not explode. It surfaces during installation, when the hardware is already bought.
Treat area classification as an input before any device is chosen, with your electrical engineer and the authority having jurisdiction involved. It narrows the hardware options long before price does.
- Ask which areas are classified before anyone specifies a device.
- A device 200 miles away behind a gate cannot be restarted by support. Plan for remote diagnostics.
- Physical access, not the protocol, is the expensive part of a field fleet.
Site operations we have shipped
TankAware
AI + IoT petroleum site management for Sutherland Excavating Ltd.
Read the case study →
WAIQ
Business operations and execution platform for multi-site organizations.
Read the case study →
WorkMateAI
Dispute resolution, payments, and compliance for Australia's on-demand trades.
Read the case study →
“TankAware has revolutionized how we manage petroleum sites. The real-time data and automation have exceeded expectations.”
Blake Sutherland · President, Sutherland Excavating Ltd.
The stack behind TankAware
Built with
Field work
Security
Questions buyers ask us first
01Can we replace paper inspection logs with an app?
Usually yes, and it is the strongest reason operators here buy software. Records have to be available when an inspector asks, and a binder in a shed rarely is. Check acceptance of electronic records and signatures with your implementing agency first, because it varies by jurisdiction and by the specific obligation.
02How do you keep offline inspections from looking falsified?
Record the time of capture and the time of sync as two separate fields. A check made at nine and uploaded at five is honest work. Keep only the upload time and it reads as a suspect evening entry. Every offline record in the estate has this problem at once.
03Will it connect to our gauge consoles and back office?
It can, and we would scope that honestly rather than promise it. We have shipped no console or back-office integration, so treat it as new work. Expect several console generations across an estate of any age, which means device variance rather than one integration. Your back office stays the system of record and wins any conflict.
04Do sensors at our sites need special ratings?
Inside a hazardous area, yes, and this is the constraint that quietly kills naive projects. Areas around fill points, vents and dispensers may hold flammable vapour, and equipment installed there must be rated for it. Involve your fire marshal and a qualified electrical engineer before any hardware is chosen.
05How long do we have to keep these records?
Longer than one setting can express, which is why a single retention timer is the common bug. Different record types run on different clocks, and some are counted by event or by number kept rather than by date. Get your list of obligations from your implementing agency, then model retention per type rather than globally.
06What would a first project with you look like?
Small, provable, and aimed at the record you could not produce last time somebody asked. Scoping calls are free. Where the work starts inside your existing codebase, there is a paid two-week diagnostic ending in a fixed price rather than a range.
