# Product Requirements Document (PRD) ## Centralized AI-Powered HSE Incident Management & Reporting System **Prepared for:** Setia Corporation — 3PL Warehouse Operations **Based on:** Draft Proposal (Nurul Ain Athirah, June 2026) + Incident Reporting Flowchart, reviewed and extended **Purpose:** This document defines *what* the system must do. Hand it to Claude Code together with `02_Technical_Specification_for_Claude_Code.md` and `03_Development_Roadmap_and_Claude_Code_Brief.md` to build it. --- ## 1. Objectives Replace the current WhatsApp / Excel / paper-based HSE reporting process with a single digital system that: 1. Captures every incident, near miss, hazard, and asset event in one database — with photo, video, and document evidence attached at every stage, not just at first report. 2. Runs a structured, auditable workflow from report → response → investigation → CAPA → verification → closure. 3. Tracks CAPA (Corrective and Preventive Actions) to completion with owner, due date, evidence, and automatic overdue escalation. 4. Gives management a live dashboard instead of a monthly manual compilation. 5. Keeps Setia Corporation compliant with Malaysian DOSH reporting law (NADOPOD 2004) without manual form-filling. 6. Uses AI (Claude) to reduce the admin burden on HSE staff — drafting summaries, suggesting root causes and CAPA, flagging incomplete reports, and detecting risk patterns across sites. --- ## 2. Users & Roles | Role | Who | Access | Key responsibility | |---|---|---|---| | Reporter | Any employee, supervisor, witness, security guard | Submit reports via QR/app; view status of own reports only | Report incidents/hazards immediately | | Operation Supervisor | Warehouse/shift supervisor | Full access to incidents in their site/zone | Secure area, first response, initial classification | | HSE Officer | Safety Assistant / HSE team | Full access across all sites | Investigation, RCA, CAPA assignment, verification, closure, DOSH filing | | CAPA Owner | Department head (Ops, Maintenance, HR, etc.) | Access to CAPA items assigned to their department only | Complete corrective actions, upload proof | | Management / Admin | Ms. Agnes, Mr. Terence, Mr. Yap, Mr. Jensen, etc. | Read-only dashboard across all sites; admin can manage users/config | Review trends, approve budget for corrective actions, audit readiness | | System Admin | IT/appointed super-user | Full config access | User management, site/zone setup, form configuration | Every action in the system must be attributable to a logged-in user — no anonymous edits (see §9 Compliance). --- ## 3. Incident Types Covered The current flowchart only branches on **Injury** and **MHE (asset)**. The system must cover all of the following, each with its own lightweight intake form: - Injury / medical treatment case (LTI and non-LTI) - Near miss (no injury/damage, but could have) — **kept fast and low-friction on purpose**, since near-miss volume is the single best leading indicator of future serious incidents - Unsafe condition / hazard observation (proactive, not tied to an event) - Property / asset / MHE damage (forklift, racking, dock equipment) - Environmental incident (spill, leak, chemical release, waste) - Security incident (theft, unauthorized access, if relevant to your sites) - Fire / emergency incident --- ## 4. Incident Lifecycle & Workflow Rules This corrects and extends the two flowcharts supplied. The visual summary was shown earlier in this conversation; the rules below are the ones that must be encoded in the system's logic. ### Phase 1 — Report - Reporter scans a site/zone-specific QR code (or opens the app), selects incident type, fills a short form, and attaches at least one photo (video/documents optional at this stage). - System auto-generates a unique incident reference number (format: `SITE-YYYYMM-####`) and timestamps the report. - System auto-detects the reporting site/zone from the QR code (no manual typing → fewer errors). - Automatic notification fires immediately to the relevant Supervisor and HSE Officer (see §7). ### Phase 2 — Triage & Initial Response - Supervisor/HSE confirms or reclassifies incident type and assigns a **severity level (1–5)**, which the current flowchart does not have — this is what drives SLA timers in step below. AI can suggest a severity level from the description (see §8), but a human always confirms it. - Workflow branches based on type: - **Injury involved →** medical treatment or first aid → medical status (LTI / non-LTI). - **Asset/MHE involved →** emergency shutdown & LOTO if needed → operator-error check → minor/major classification → HR/discipline path if applicable. - **Environmental →** containment steps, spill-kit deployment logged, environmental authority check. - **Near miss / hazard observation →** skip straight to root-cause + CAPA, no medical/asset branch needed. - **Regulatory check (new, mandatory):** at this point the system checks the severity/injury data against the DOSH NADOPOD 2004 rules (see §9) and tells the HSE Officer exactly which obligation applies — immediate notification, JKKP 6/7 within 7 days, or record-only in JKKP 8. This removes reliance on the HSE officer remembering the rule. ### Phase 3 — Investigation & CAPA - HSE conducts investigation: witness statements, alcohol/urine test (if applicable), evidence collection, structured root cause analysis (5-Why and/or fishbone — selectable template, not free text only). - Every CAPA item created must have: description, responsible department/owner, due date, priority, and linkage to the root cause it addresses. - System auto-escalates (notifies owner, then owner's manager, then HSE) if a CAPA passes its due date without a status update. ### Phase 4 — Verification & Closure - CAPA owner uploads **completion evidence** (photo/document proof the fix is in place) before marking a CAPA "done." - HSE verifies effectiveness. If not effective, the CAPA **reopens** rather than the incident being closed with an open gap — this loop is missing from both flowcharts provided and is added here deliberately. - Once all CAPAs are verified, HSE closes the incident; record locks (no further edits, only addenda) and flows into the dashboard and the JKKP 8 annual register automatically. --- ## 5. Evidence Management (Photos, Videos, Documents) This must be a first-class feature across the entire lifecycle, not just at initial report: | Stage | Evidence expected | |---|---| | Report | Scene photo/video, hazard photo | | Response | LOTO tag photo, first-aid record, medical referral letter | | Investigation | Witness statement scans, CCTV export, equipment inspection report, alcohol/urine test result | | CAPA | **Before/after photos**, purchase receipts, training attendance sheets, updated SOP document | | Verification | Final confirmation photo/video that the corrective action is in place and working | Requirements: - Accept JPG/PNG/HEIC, MP4/MOV, PDF/DOCX/XLSX. Max file size per upload configurable (recommend 200MB for video, compress on upload). - Every file stores: uploader, timestamp, incident ID, stage, and an immutable file hash (for audit integrity — important if DOSH ever questions a record). - Files retained **minimum 5 years** to match DOSH JKKP 8 register retention law — do not auto-delete. - Thumbnail/preview generation so HSE doesn't have to download every file to review it. --- ## 6. CAPA Monitoring (dedicated module) Because this was explicitly requested as a standout feature: - Central CAPA register, filterable by site, department, status (open/in progress/overdue/verified/closed), and due date. - Kanban-style board view (To Do / In Progress / Verification / Closed) in addition to table view — much faster for a department head to scan than a spreadsheet. - Auto-escalation ladder: 3 days before due → reminder; on due date → notify owner; 3 days overdue → notify owner's manager; 7 days overdue → notify HSE + flagged red on dashboard. - CAPA effectiveness re-check scheduled automatically (e.g., 30/60/90 days after closure) to confirm the fix actually held — this is beyond what the current proposal covers and beyond most SME-level systems, but is standard in mature EHS practice. --- ## 7. Notifications - **Email** for formal records (investigation assignment, CAPA assignment, closure). - **WhatsApp Business API** for time-critical alerts (new serious incident, CAPA overdue) — recommended in addition to email because your teams already operate on WhatsApp; email-only notification (as in the original proposal) will likely be checked less often by warehouse floor staff. - In-app notification badge for all users. --- ## 8. AI-Assisted Capabilities (this is what makes it an "AI" system, not just a digital form) | Capability | What it does | Business value | |---|---|---| | Report quality check | Flags incomplete reports (e.g., injury reported but no photo, or description too vague) before submission | Fixes the "delayed/incomplete information" problem named in the original proposal | | Auto severity/category suggestion | Suggests severity level and incident category from the free-text description | Speeds up triage, reduces inconsistent classification between HSE staff | | Similar-incident retrieval | Surfaces past incidents with similar description/location/equipment | Reveals recurring hazards fast — supports the "limited safety trend visibility" gap named in the proposal | | Root cause & CAPA drafting assistant | Suggests likely root causes and draft corrective actions based on the investigation notes, for HSE to accept/edit | Cuts investigation write-up time, improves CAPA quality consistency | | Auto-fill regulatory forms | Generates JKKP 6/7 draft PDFs and the JKKP 8 annual register from stored data | Removes the single biggest admin burden named in the proposal | | Risk heatmap / prediction | Combines near-miss + incident + audit data by site/zone/shift to flag rising-risk areas before a serious incident occurs | Matches what leading commercial EHS platforms (VelocityEHS, Intelex) market as "predictive safety" in 2026 — but tuned to your own warehouses instead of generic industry data | All AI outputs are **suggestions the human reviews and approves** — never auto-submitted to DOSH or auto-closed without a human sign-off. This matters both legally and for HSE staff trust in the tool. --- ## 9. Compliance Requirements — Malaysia Specific (correction to the source flowchart) The uploaded flowchart labels the legal threshold box "OSHA Regulations." **For Malaysia this should be the Occupational Safety and Health Act 1994 (amended 2022) and its subsidiary regulation, NADOPOD 2004** (Notification of Accident, Dangerous Occurrence, Occupational Poisoning and Occupational Disease Regulations), enforced by DOSH/JKKP. The system's compliance logic should follow the actual rule, which is more specific than the flowchart's single ">4 days" box: | Situation | Obligation | |---|---| | Fatality, or serious bodily injury as defined in NADOPOD's First Schedule (e.g., fracture, amputation, loss of sight) | Notify nearest DOSH office **immediately** by fastest means, then submit **JKKP 6** within 7 days | | Dangerous occurrence (Second Schedule — e.g., boiler explosion, structural collapse), regardless of injury | Notify DOSH **immediately**, then **JKKP 6** within 7 days | | Other injury causing incapacity for **more than 4 consecutive days** | Submit **JKKP 6** within 7 days (immediate call not legally required, but recommended for serious cases) | | Occupational poisoning/disease (Third Schedule) | **JKKP 7** within 7 days | | Any of the above | Also logged in the **JKKP 8** annual register, kept on-site 5 years, submitted to DOSH before 31 January each year | Build the severity/injury intake fields so the system can determine which box applies automatically, and generate a checklist/reminder for the HSE Officer rather than relying on memory. --- ## 10. Dashboard & Analytics Requirements - Total incidents, near misses, severity rate, open vs. closed — as in the original proposal — **plus**: - Leading vs. lagging indicator split (near-miss/hazard reports = leading; injury/LTI = lagging) — this is the single biggest gap vs. commercial platforms and the cheapest to add. - Site/zone/shift heatmap — critical for a multi-warehouse 3PL operation to compare performance and spot which dock, zone, or shift is generating the most risk. - CAPA on-time completion rate (%). - Top incident category and top root cause, trended over time. - DOSH-reportable incident count and filing status (filed / pending / overdue) — audit-readiness at a glance. - Exportable to PDF/Excel for board reporting. --- ## 11. Non-Functional Requirements - **Mobile-first**, works on low-end Android phones common on warehouse floors; must work with poor/no signal (offline capture, syncs when back online). - **Multi-language** UI: Bahasa Malaysia, English, Mandarin at minimum (Tamil if your workforce needs it) — the original proposal's Google Form is English-only, which will suppress reporting from non-English-fluent floor staff. - **Multi-site** from day one — site and zone are first-class fields on every record, not an afterthought. - **Role-based access control** enforced at the data level, not just hidden UI elements. - **Full audit trail**: every create/edit/status-change/file-upload logged with user + timestamp, immutable. - **Data retention**: minimum 5 years per DOSH requirement; evidence files never hard-deleted. --- ## 12. Success Metrics for the Project - 100% of incidents captured digitally within 30 days of launch (zero WhatsApp-only reports). - CAPA on-time closure rate above 85% within 3 months. - Time from incident report to HSE Officer notification under 2 minutes (vs. current dependency on someone forwarding a WhatsApp message). - Monthly HSE report preparation time reduced from days to minutes (auto-generated from dashboard). - Zero missed DOSH statutory reporting deadlines.