Energy and utilities GRC, for critical infrastructure.
Utilities and energy companies manage IT and operational technology under critical infrastructure rules. TruOps keeps both programs evidenced.
- NERC CIP
- TSA security directives
- NIST CSF 2.0
- NIS2 (EU)
- ISA/IEC 62443
- Assessments pre-filled, with sources
- Vendor reviews sized to risk
- Findings with recommended fixes
- Examiner- and board-ready, dated
TruOps helps energy and utility companies run NIST CSF 2.0 maturity assessments the board can trend, assess CIP-013 and TSA suppliers through a portal, meet NIS2 in the EU, and scope IT and OT separately — next to, not instead of, a CIP-native system of record.
- IT and OT need different evidence and one board report
- NERC CIP or TSA directives are live, and CSF maturity is what the board sees
- Equipment and service suppliers are the attack surface
The rules that apply
Most energy and utility companies answer to several overlapping regimes at once. The common ones:
| Regime | What it asks for |
|---|---|
| NERC CIP | Reliability standards for the bulk electric system |
| TSA security directives | Cybersecurity requirements for pipelines |
| NIST CSF 2.0 | Maturity measurement |
| NIS2 (EU) | Energy entities as essential entities |
| ISA/IEC 62443 | Industrial automation and control systems security |
Exactly which apply depends on your size, location, and activities. TruOps runs whichever you need on one engine and shows where they overlap.
The actual challenge
CIP-002 through CIP-015 (including CIP-013 supply chain and CIP-015 INSM) live in a CIP-native system. The board asks for NIST CSF maturity. TSA directives sit in a third binder. Those programs do not talk, and TruOps will not claim to replace the CIP audit system of record.
- Leadership cannot see whether CIP work is moving CSF maturity.
- CIP-013 and TSA supplier reviews happen on major capital projects only; the service-vendor tail is unassessed.
- IT and OT get one blended color that neither operator nor the CISO trusts.
Bring one real document. Watch the program get set up from it.
What you are probably using today
Utilities typically have a CIP compliance system (often Archer, Onspring, or a CIP-specialist overlay), an IT GRC, and OT that is air-gapped from both. Suppliers are in the capital project files.
| What you use now | Where it breaks | With TruOps |
|---|---|---|
| Enterprise GRC suites | They can model almost anything. That flexibility usually comes through implementation partners and administrators, so a change can become a project. | AI reads your existing documents and sets up the program. The first assessment opens pre-filled from them, with sources. Changes are a request in plain language, not a project. |
| CIP in one system, CSF in a consultant deck | Leadership cannot see whether CIP work is moving CSF maturity. TruOps does not replace RSAWs, evidence packing, or CIP audit sampling. | Score CSF by function with evidence attached; scope IT and OT separately with a combined view. Keep CIP as the system of record for reliability standards. |
| CIP-013 / NATF questionnaires only on large procurements | The long tail of service vendors and software suppliers is unassessed. Independent reports are collected, not read. | Tier and assess equipment and service suppliers on the same vendor engine; compare answers with SOC 2 or ISO reports. |
| TSA pipeline directives in a share drive | A different owner, a different evidence set, no map to CSF or CIP-013. | Import the directive as a framework, map honest overlap, and run supplier assessments once. |
Jobs this sector actually runs
Frameworks are how outsiders name the work. These are the programs energy and utility companies actually staff, and what "done" has to look like when an examiner, customer, or board asks.
| Use case | What done looks like |
|---|---|
| Board CSF maturity, next to CIP | A current vs. target NIST CSF 2.0 score by function, with evidence attached — what directors ask for, which a CIP audit system does not produce by itself |
| CIP-013 / TSA supplier assessments | Vendors of BES cyber systems, EACMS, PACS, and pipeline-relevant services assessed through a portal, with independent reports (SOC 2, ISO) read against the answers |
| IT vs OT scoped separately | Corporate IT and operational technology assessed in their own scopes, rolled up so leadership is not looking at one blended color |
| NIS2 for EU energy entities | Essential-entity obligations mapped to the same control set as CSF, with partials shown so you do not over-claim |
What makes it hard
- IT and OT environments need different controls and evidence.
- Suppliers of equipment and services are a growing attack surface.
- Regulators and boards want maturity trends, not snapshots.
How TruOps handles it
- Score NIST CSF maturity by function and trend it over time.
- Scope IT and OT separately, with a combined view.
- Assess equipment and service suppliers through a portal.
If this is your situation
Bring the last CSF workshop and a CIP-013 vendor list. TruOps will trend maturity and run supplier assessments — without asking you to abandon the CIP system of record.
How TruOps helps
- One engine
- Compliance, risk, vendor, and customer assessments share one set of questionnaires, evidence, and findings.
- Pre-filled with sources
- Assessments open with answers drawn from your documents and tools, each cited.
- Vendor portal
- Third parties answer, upload proof, and fix findings in their own space.
- Examiner-ready history
- Results saved as of their date, with every decision in one audit log.
Questions
Which compliance requirements apply to energy and utility companies?
Common ones include NERC CIP, TSA security directives, NIST CSF 2.0, NIS2 (EU), ISA/IEC 62443. Which apply depends on your size, location, and activities; TruOps runs any of them on one engine and shows where they overlap.
Does TruOps replace NERC CIP compliance software?
No. CIP-002 through CIP-015 are specialized reliability-standard workflows, usually run in a CIP-native system of record. TruOps sits next to that: NIST CSF maturity the board can trend, CIP-013 and TSA supplier assessments through a portal, and IT vs OT scoping. It does not replace CIP evidence packing, RSAWs, or audit sampling.
Do we have to rip out the tools we already use?
No. Connectors are read-only: they observe cloud, identity, endpoint, vulnerability, and code tools; they do not change them. Spreadsheets, prior reports, and policies upload into the Data Room. If you are on a SOC 2 automation tool or an enterprise GRC suite, you migrate the program (frameworks, evidence, vendors, risks), not the business.
Can we bring our existing assessments, control lists, and vendor files?
Yes. Upload workbooks, reports, policies, and vendor exports. TruOps turns them into structured questionnaires, controls, and register entries, each cited back to the file they came from, for you to review.
See it run on your own data.
Thirty minutes with a GRC expert, not an SDR. Bring one real document (a SOC 2 report, a risk register, a vendor list; redacted is fine) and watch TruOps set up a live program from it, with an assessment already pre-filled.