Energy & Utility Audit Preparedness Checklist

Change Management + Knowledge Management Readiness

Energy and utility organizations operate in environments where every change matters. Whether the change touches IT systems, OT infrastructure, BES Cyber Systems, access controls, procedures, or operational knowledge, audit readiness depends on being able to prove that the right process was followed.

This checklist is designed to help teams quickly assess whether their current change management and knowledge management practices are ready for audit review, especially in environments influenced by NERC CIP requirements.

Use this as a quick-glance readiness check if you and your team is prepared or if you are still clinging to manual efforts.

‍

Asset Identification & Categorization

Critical infrastructure, BES Cyber Systems, BES Cyber Assets, and supporting systems are clearly identified and categorized.

Asset categorization considers all generation resources, including DERs and distribution-connected generation, when determining Control Center impact ratings.

Physical and logical segmentation between BES and non-BES generation is documented and reviewed.

Assets are not incorrectly evaluated as a single Control Center when segmentation or operational responsibility should be assessed separately.

Asset records are connected to related changes, incidents, procedures, owners, locations, and compliance evidence.

‍

Change Request Documentation

Every change request includes the affected system, asset, location, owner, and business reason.

Changes are categorized by type: standard, normal, emergency, high-risk, IT, OT, or compliance-related.

Changes involving BES Cyber Systems, OT infrastructure, access controls, cloud services, or regulated systems are clearly flagged.

Required implementation details, testing plans, rollback steps, and validation notes are captured before approval.

Change history is digitally logged instead of tracked only through email, spreadsheets, shared documents, or informal handoffs.

‍

Approval & Governance Controls

Approval workflows are based on risk, asset criticality, compliance relevance, and change type.

High-risk or regulated changes require documented review before implementation.

Emergency changes include a justification, expedited approval, and post-implementation review.

Approvals include timestamps, approver identity, decision history, and supporting context.

The same person does request, approve, implement, and validate a high-risk change without oversight.

‍

Third-Party, Vendor & Supply Chain Oversight

Contractual terms require third-party service providers to comply with applicable NERC Reliability Standards.

Third-party compliance tasks are supported by documented evidence such as logs, timestamps, sign-offs, screenshots, or completion records.

Vendor-performed changes, firewall updates, PACS testing, vulnerability reviews, or technical tasks are verified by the internal team.

Third-party staff, infrastructure, and data location requirements are documented, including any compensating controls for geography, access, or data residency.

Supply Chain Risk Management plans include existing vendors, outsourced functions, and cloud service providers—not only new vendor onboarding.

‍

Vulnerability Assessment & Technical Validation

Vulnerability assessments and technical testing are documented for applicable systems.

Internal teams participate in the analysis and prioritization of technical results, including vulnerability scan findings.

Technical findings are prioritized based on organizational risk tolerance, asset criticality, and operational impact.

Remediation actions are linked to change records, owners, due dates, and completion evidence.

Vendor-provided technical results are reviewed, accepted, and documented by the responsible internal entity.

‍

Testing, Validation & Rollback

Testing requirements are documented before changes are approved.

Test results or validation evidence are attached to the change record.

Rollback plans are required for high-risk, OT-impacting, cloud-impacting, or compliance-sensitive changes.

Post-change validation is documented after implementation.

Failed or partially successful changes are reviewed and linked to corrective actions

‍

Knowledge Management Readiness

Teams know which procedures, runbooks, policies, and knowledge articles are authoritative.

Critical knowledge is reviewed, version-controlled, and updated on a defined schedule.

Outdated, duplicate, or conflicting knowledge is flagged before it is used.

Sensitive operational, vendor, cloud, or compliance knowledge is access-controlled by role or responsibility.

Knowledge articles can be linked to change records, incidents, assets, vendors, and audit evidence.

‍

Audit Evidence & Reporting

Audit evidence is captured throughout the change process, not reconstructed after the fact.

Change records include request details, approvals, risk review, implementation notes, testing evidence, rollback plans, and validation results.

Evidence can be filtered by asset, date, change type, approver, vendor, business unit, or compliance category.

Reports can show whether the required process was followed for normal, emergency, third-party, and high-risk changes.

Audit packets can be generated without pulling evidence from multiple disconnected systems.

‍

Operational Improvement

Failed changes, emergency changes, vendor issues, and repeat incidents are reviewed for process gaps.

Lessons learned are converted into updated procedures or knowledge articles.

Manual workarounds are reviewed and reduced or eliminated over time.

Knowledge gaps are identified from incidents, change failures, vendor handoffs, and audit findings.

Leadership can see trends in change success, emergency changes, vendor-related risks, audit exceptions, and knowledge gaps.

‍

Final Score = 0%

Prepared Score = 0%

Partial Prepared Score = 0%

Gap/Unknown Score = 0%

‍

What Your Score May Indicate

‍

Mostly Prepared

Your organization likely has strong process control and can produce audit evidence with minimal disruption.

‍

Many “Partially Prepared” Responses

Your process may exist, but it likely depends on manual tracking, disconnected tools, or individual follow-through. These areas may create audit friction even when the work is being done correctly.

‍

Several Gaps or Unknowns

Your organization may be exposed to audit delays, incomplete evidence, inconsistent change control, or knowledge reliability issues.

If an auditor asked tomorrow, could your team quickly prove:

• Who requested the change?

• Why it was needed?

• What systems or assets were affected?

• Who approved it?

• What risk was reviewed?

• What knowledge or procedure was followed?

• How it was tested?

• Whether it worked?

• Where the evidence lives? If the answer requires searching through emails, spreadsheets, shared drives, screenshots, and tribal knowledge, your process may be working harder than it needs to

‍

Ready to reduce audit scramble?

See how connected change and knowledge workflows can make compliance evidence easier to capture, manage, and prove.

Schedule A Readiness Review