Control statement
Employ [Organization-defined: protective measures] against electromagnetic pulse damage for [Organization-defined: system and system components].
Discussion
An electromagnetic pulse (EMP) is a short burst of electromagnetic energy that is spread over a range of frequencies. Such energy bursts may be natural or man-made. EMP interference may be disruptive or damaging to electronic equipment. Protective measures used to mitigate EMP risk include shielding, surge suppressors, ferro-resonant transformers, and earth grounding. EMP protection may be especially significant for systems and applications that are part of the U.S. critical infrastructure.
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 Electromagnetic Pulse Protection 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
[Organization-defined: protective measures] are employed against electromagnetic pulse damage for [Organization-defined: system and system components].
Examine
- Physical and environmental protection policy
- procedures addressing protective measures to mitigate EMP risk to systems and components
- documentation detailing protective measures to mitigate EMP risk
- list of locations where protective measures to mitigate EMP risk are implemented
- system security plan
- other relevant documents or records
Interview
- Organizational personnel with responsibilities for physical and environmental protection
- system developers/integrators
- organizational personnel with information security responsibilities
Test
- Mechanisms for mitigating EMP risk
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.