Control statement
- a.Authorize and control [Organization-defined: organization-defined types of system components] entering and exiting the facility; and
- b.Maintain records of the system components.
Discussion
Enforcing authorizations for entry and exit of system components may require restricting access to delivery areas and isolating the areas from the system and media libraries.
Organization-defined parameters
These values must be resolved through the organization’s tailoring and governance process. Bracketed parameter references in the control text identify where a decision is required.
From control text to operational evidence
Use Delivery and Removal as a testable risk decision. Translate the official statement into accountable people, repeatable processes, configured technology, and evidence that demonstrates the outcome over time. In this family, pay particular attention to physical access, facility protection, environmental safeguards, and visitor accountability.
Implementation workflow
- Define the control boundary, responsible owner, inherited portions, and systems or processes in scope.
- Resolve each organization-defined parameter before declaring the control implemented.
- Document how the implementation satisfies every clause of the official control statement.
- Collect evidence as a normal byproduct of operation rather than only before an assessment.
- Review exceptions, changes, and monitoring results on a risk-based cadence.
Evidence examples
- badge and visitor logs
- physical access reviews
- facility diagrams and sensor records
- environmental and power test results
Common failure patterns
- logical security assumptions invalidated by physical access
- tailgating and visitor exceptions normalized
- critical infrastructure not included in access reviews
- environmental alarms not integrated into response
Questions practitioners should ask
- What risk decision is this control intended to support in this system?
- Which parts are implemented locally, inherited, shared, or not applicable—and what evidence supports that decision?
- Do the documented narrative, deployed configuration, operating process, and collected evidence agree?
- What event or threshold requires the implementation to be reviewed or changed?
Assessment objectives and methods
Show the assessment objective
- PE-16a.
- PE-16a.[01][Organization-defined: types of system components] are authorized when entering the facility;
- PE-16a.[02][Organization-defined: types of system components] are controlled when entering the facility;
- PE-16a.[03][Organization-defined: types of system components] are authorized when exiting the facility;
- PE-16a.[04][Organization-defined: types of system components] are controlled when exiting the facility;
- PE-16b.records of the system components are maintained.
Examine
- Physical and environmental protection policy
- procedures addressing the delivery and removal of system components from the facility
- facility housing the system
- records of items entering and exiting the facility
- system security plan
- other relevant documents or records
Interview
- Organizational personnel with responsibilities for controlling system components entering and exiting the facility
- organizational personnel with information security responsibilities
Test
- Organizational process for authorizing, monitoring, and controlling system-related items entering and exiting the facility
- mechanisms supporting and/or implementing, authorizing, monitoring, and controlling system-related items entering and exiting the facility
Related controls
These relationships come from the official OSCAL catalog. They indicate useful dependencies or context, not automatic inheritance or equivalence.
Authoritative sources
Bare Metal Cyber is an independent educational publisher and is not affiliated with or endorsed by NIST. Official control requirements and interpretations remain with NIST and the responsible authorizing organization.