PE-9(2): Automatic Voltage Controls

PE-9(2): automatic voltage controls requirement is a facilities-and-IT crossover control. It sits in the Physical and Environmental Protection family, but assessors typically test it like an engineering control: you either have automatic voltage regulation in place for the defined environment, or you don’t ¹.

For a Compliance Officer, CCO, or GRC lead, the fastest path is to treat PE-9(2) as a scoped infrastructure requirement with three deliverables: (1) a clear statement of where automatic voltage controls are required (your “ODP,” or organization-defined parameter), (2) implementation via the right power equipment and configurations, and (3) repeatable evidence that it works and is maintained.

This page focuses on “how to implement” rather than theory. You’ll see a practical scoping method, step-by-step execution, the artifacts auditors ask for, and the common failure modes that turn a straightforward control into a finding. Where helpful, this guidance references NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 as the governing framework source ².

Regulatory text

Requirement (verbatim excerpt): “Employ automatic voltage controls for {{ insert: param, pe-09.02_odp }}.” ²

What the operator must do:

1. Define the ODP (the scoped environment and systems where this applies). The control explicitly depends on an organization-defined parameter, so you must document what “for [X]” means in your environment ².
2. Implement automatic voltage control mechanisms for that scope. In practice this is typically automatic voltage regulation (AVR) built into UPS systems, power conditioners, or other power distribution equipment.
3. Operate and maintain those mechanisms so they remain effective: monitoring, alerting, periodic functional checks, and maintenance records that show continued operation.

Plain-English interpretation

You must prevent voltage instability from damaging or disrupting systems by using equipment that automatically corrects voltage issues without relying on a person to intervene. If your environment experiences brownouts, sags, surges, or noisy power, you need an engineered control that compensates automatically for the in-scope systems.

Who it applies to (entity and operational context)

PE-9(2) is applicable when you implement NIST SP 800-53 for:

• Federal information systems, including agency-operated facilities and IT environments ¹.
• Contractor systems handling federal data, including environments operated by third parties that process, store, or transmit federal information ¹.

Operationally, it most often applies to:

• Data centers, server rooms, network closets, and communications rooms.
• Industrial/control environments hosting IT/OT systems where power quality affects availability and integrity.
• Any facility zone where loss of power conditioning could cause system outages, data corruption, or hardware damage.

What you actually need to do (step-by-step)

Step 1: Set the scope (your ODP) in writing

Create a short, explicit PE-9(2) scoping statement:

• Locations: which sites, buildings, rooms, and closets.
• Assets: which classes of equipment (e.g., core network, virtualization clusters, storage, security appliances, identity systems).
• Power path: what parts of the electrical chain are included (utility feed, generator/ATS, UPS, PDU, rack-level power).

Deliverable: a one-page “PE-9(2) Automatic Voltage Controls Scope” section in your SSP or facilities controls standard ².

Practical tip: If you can’t justify excluding a critical room, don’t. Most findings come from “we assumed it was covered” gaps between facilities and IT.

Step 2: Select the automatic voltage control mechanism for each in-scope area

For each in-scope room/rack, document the method:

• UPS with automatic voltage regulation capability enabled.
• Power conditioner/line conditioner upstream of critical loads.
• Intelligent PDUs or power distribution equipment with voltage regulation features (where applicable).

Your documentation should answer: What device performs automatic voltage control, and where is it installed in the power chain?

Step 3: Define measurable operating requirements

Write operational requirements that can be tested:

• Monitoring approach (BMS/DCIM, UPS network cards, SNMP monitoring, or facilities monitoring).
• Alert thresholds and escalation (who gets paged; what is the required response workflow).
• Maintenance and testing expectations (battery health checks, device self-tests, vendor maintenance schedule).
• Configuration baselines (AVR enabled, alerting enabled, management interface secured).

Assessors tend to probe whether the control exists “on paper” or is actually run day to day ¹.

Step 4: Implement, validate, and record the baseline

Implementation should include:

• Installation records (work orders, commissioning documents).
• Configuration exports/screenshots for UPS/monitoring settings (AVR mode, transfer thresholds if applicable, alert destinations).
• Initial functional checks (e.g., UPS self-test results; monitoring alerts tested end-to-end).

Validation is the difference between “we bought UPS units” and “we employ automatic voltage controls” ².

Step 5: Connect PE-9(2) to incident and change management

Voltage events often surface as incidents. Tie together:

• Incident tickets for power anomalies.
• Corrective actions (replace UPS, adjust thresholds, remediate wiring issues).
• Change records when equipment is added, replaced, or reconfigured.

This is where many teams get caught: controls drift during refresh cycles and room moves.

Step 6: Assign control ownership and recurring evidence collection

Make ownership explicit:

• Facilities: electrical infrastructure, UPS lifecycle, vendor maintenance.
• IT operations: monitoring, alert routing, device management interfaces.
• GRC: control language, evidence quality, assessor coordination.

Daydream can help you map PE-9(2) to a named control owner, a documented procedure, and a recurring evidence checklist so you don’t rebuild the story each audit cycle ².

Required evidence and artifacts to retain

Keep artifacts that prove scope, implementation, and ongoing operation:

Scope and design

• PE-9(2) scope/ODP statement (locations, systems).
• One-line electrical diagrams and rack power diagrams for in-scope areas.
• Asset inventory entries showing UPS/power conditioning coverage.

Implementation

• UPS/power conditioner make/model list mapped to rooms/racks.
• Configuration evidence: AVR enabled, alerting configured, management access controlled.
• Commissioning or installation work orders.

Operations

• Monitoring dashboard screenshots or exports showing voltage status and alarms.
• Alert test evidence (ticket or email proving routing works).
• Maintenance logs: inspections, battery replacements, service reports.
• Incident tickets tied to voltage anomalies and remediation actions.

Governance

• Control narrative in SSP (or equivalent) describing how PE-9(2) is met ¹.
• Control test procedure (what you check, how often, pass/fail criteria).

Common exam/audit questions and hangups

Expect assessors to ask:

• “What is your organization-defined scope for PE-9(2), and why?” ²
• “Show me where automatic voltage control is implemented in this room’s power chain.”
• “How do you know AVR is enabled and functioning?”
• “What happens when voltage goes out of range? Show the alert and the ticket.”
• “How do you prevent gaps during equipment refresh or new rack installs?”

Hangups that trigger findings:

• Facilities says “UPS exists,” but IT can’t show monitoring or configuration.
• Monitoring exists, but no one can show a tested alert path.
• Partial coverage: some critical racks are on regulated power; adjacent “temporary” racks are not.

Frequent implementation mistakes (and how to avoid them)

1. Treating “battery backup” as “automatic voltage control.”
   A UPS can provide backup without effective voltage regulation configured. Avoid this by documenting the AVR feature and configuration state per device.

2. Undefined scope (ODP left vague).
   The control text explicitly references an organization-defined parameter ². If you don’t define it, auditors will define it for you.

3. No linkage between diagrams and reality.
   Outdated diagrams are common. Tie diagrams to a change process so moves/adds/changes update evidence.

4. No operational proof.
   A purchase order is not proof of operation. Keep maintenance logs, self-test outputs, and monitoring exports.

5. Third-party facility dependency not governed.
   If a colocation provider supplies regulated power, you still need due diligence evidence: contract language, SOC reports where relevant, and shared responsibility statements.

Enforcement context and risk implications

No public enforcement cases were provided in the source catalog for this specific enhancement. Practically, the risk is straightforward: voltage instability can cause downtime, equipment damage, data corruption, and cascading failures that become reportable incidents depending on your environment and contractual obligations. From an assessment standpoint, PE-9(2) findings usually show up as “control not implemented” or “not operating effectively,” driven by missing evidence rather than engineering complexity ¹.

Practical 30/60/90-day execution plan

Days 0–30: Scope and baseline

• Name the control owner(s) across Facilities/IT/GRC.
• Write the PE-9(2) ODP scope statement and get it approved.
• Inventory in-scope rooms/racks and map each to a voltage control mechanism.
• Identify gaps (no AVR, no monitoring, unmanaged closets) and open remediation tickets.
• Create an evidence checklist aligned to your audit cadence.

Days 31–60: Implement and validate

• Install or reconfigure UPS/power conditioning where gaps exist.
• Enable monitoring/alerting for each in-scope device; test the alert route.
• Collect baseline evidence: diagrams, configs, self-test results, and maintenance status.
• Update SSP/control narrative to match the actual design ¹.

Days 61–90: Operationalize and make it repeatable

• Put maintenance and functional checks on a calendar aligned to vendor guidance and internal reliability needs.
• Integrate power events into incident management (ticket templates, post-incident review prompts).
• Add a change-management gate: new racks/rooms must show PE-9(2) coverage before production cutover.
• In Daydream, map PE-9(2) to owners, procedures, and recurring evidence tasks so future audits are a pull, not a scramble ².

Frequently Asked Questions

Does PE-9(2) require a UPS everywhere?

PE-9(2) requires “automatic voltage controls” for your defined scope, not a specific product type ². Many organizations meet it with UPS units that provide AVR, but you can also meet it with other automatic voltage regulation equipment if it covers the scoped systems.

What does the “organization-defined parameter” mean in practice?

It means you must explicitly define where the control applies (rooms, racks, systems) and document it ². If you leave it ambiguous, you will struggle to prove coverage and auditors will test edge cases.

If we’re in a colocation data center, who owns this control?

Responsibility is shared: the colo may provide conditioned power, but you still need governance evidence showing what the third party provides and how you verify it. Keep contracts, shared responsibility language, and any available facility assurance reports tied to your PE-9(2) scope.

What evidence is most persuasive to an assessor?

A tight set: scoped list of in-scope locations, power diagrams, device inventory, configuration evidence that AVR/alerts are enabled, and maintenance/self-test records. Add a sample incident ticket showing response to a voltage alarm to demonstrate operation.

How do we handle “temporary” network closets and pop-up racks?

Treat them as production the moment they carry production workloads. Add a change gate so temporary installs must either be excluded with documented risk acceptance or brought under the PE-9(2) scope with automatic voltage control coverage.

How should we map PE-9(2) in our GRC tool?

Map it to a control owner, a documented implementation procedure, and a recurring evidence collection workflow ². Daydream is useful here because it turns PE-9(2) into assigned tasks and an audit-ready evidence trail.

Footnotes

1. NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5

2. NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 OSCAL JSON