ISO 27002:2022vsNRC 10 CFR 73.54 - Nuclear Facility Cybersecurity
See exactly how ISO 27002:2022 controls map to NRC 10 CFR 73.54 - Nuclear Facility Cybersecurity. Pre-computed mappings, identified gaps, and coverage analysis.
Need this as a report you can hand to an assessor? A coverage crosswalk for this pair can be built to order.
According to the TheArtOfService Compliance Knowledge Graph:
ISO 27002:2022 maps to NRC 10 CFR 73.54 - Nuclear Facility Cybersecurity with 23% coverage across 21 directly mapped controls. Analysis of 93 ISO 27002:2022 controls identifies 72 compliance gaps, primarily concentrated in Technological controls – ISO 27002:2022.
Source: TheArtOfService Knowledge Graph | 93 controls analysed | 1,113 frameworks | 315K+ cross-framework mappings
Control Mappings
Showing 20 of 26 control mappings across 4 domains. Sign up to explore all 315K+ mappings across 1,113 frameworks.
Organizational controls – ISO 27002:2022(18 mappings)
People controls – ISO 27002:2022(1 mappings)
Physical controls – ISO 27002:2022(1 mappings)
+6 more mappings
Plus AI-powered gap analysis, compliance advisory, PDF exports, and cross-mapping for all 1,113 frameworks.
Create Free Account →Free forever, no credit card required
A ISO 27002:2022 to NRC 10 CFR 73.54 - Nuclear Facility Cybersecurity crosswalk, built to order
The table above lists candidate mappings. A crosswalk answers the narrower question you are probably here for: which NRC 10 CFR 73.54 - Nuclear Facility Cybersecurity controls your existing ISO 27002:2022 work already satisfies, which are real gaps, and the reasoning behind every claim so you can check it. One pair, $299, one time.
This direction has not been through crosswalk review and sign off, so no coverage figure is published for it. Reporting an unreviewed number would be worse than reporting none. It can be built to order at the same price as a pair that is already on the shelf.
If the two frameworks turn out to have too little in common for a crosswalk to help you, we say so and refund it rather than send a number worth nothing.
This direction has not been through crosswalk review and sign off, so no coverage figure is published for it. Reporting an unreviewed number would be worse than reporting none. It can be built to order at the same price as a pair that is already on the shelf.
If the two frameworks turn out to have too little in common for a crosswalk to help you, we say so and refund it rather than send a number worth nothing.
- Every evidenced control, with the reasoning behind it
- Every gap, with what it requires
- Its level of review stated plainly, not a bare number
Why this page shows two different percentages. The 23% in the header counts how many ISO 27002:2022 controls carry at least one candidate mapping in the graph, before any review. The crosswalk percentage counts something stricter: how many NRC 10 CFR 73.54 - Nuclear Facility Cybersecurity controls are actually evidenced, after a pass that argued against each mapping and kept only what survived. They answer different questions and they are not meant to agree.
A crosswalk narrows the work. It does not replace an audit, and your assessor may take a different view on individual controls. Mappings between frameworks are judgements, not text printed in either standard, which is why every claim in the report shows its reasoning. Questions go to support@theartofservice.com.
Related Comparisons
Other ISO 27002:2022 comparisons
Other NRC 10 CFR 73.54 - Nuclear Facility Cybersecurity comparisons
Stop Paying Consultants to Read Spreadsheets
Cross-framework mappings across 1,113 frameworks, at a fraction of consulting costs.
Free
- ✓ 1,113 framework browser
- ✓ Cross-framework mappings (315K+)
- ✓ 824 compliance assessments
- ✓ 3 AI queries & searches per day
Professional
- ✓ Unlimited AI Compliance Advisory
- ✓ Unlimited full-text search
- ✓ Framework self-assessment
- ✓ PDF, Excel & CSV exports
What are the key differences between ISO 27002:2022 and NRC 10 CFR 73.54 - Nuclear Facility Cybersecurity?
ISO 27002:2022 has 93 controls across its framework, while NRC 10 CFR 73.54 - Nuclear Facility Cybersecurity covers 33 controls. Direct mapping analysis identifies 21 overlapping controls (23% coverage). The frameworks diverge most significantly in Technological controls – ISO 27002:2022, where 29 ISO 27002:2022 controls have no direct NRC 10 CFR 73.54 - Nuclear Facility Cybersecurity equivalent.
How many controls map between ISO 27002:2022 and NRC 10 CFR 73.54 - Nuclear Facility Cybersecurity?
Of 93 total ISO 27002:2022 controls, 21 map directly to NRC 10 CFR 73.54 - Nuclear Facility Cybersecurity controls, representing 23% coverage. The remaining 72 controls represent compliance gaps requiring additional documentation or compensating controls to satisfy both frameworks simultaneously.
What are the compliance gaps when mapping ISO 27002:2022 to NRC 10 CFR 73.54 - Nuclear Facility Cybersecurity?
72 ISO 27002:2022 controls have no direct equivalent in NRC 10 CFR 73.54 - Nuclear Facility Cybersecurity. The highest concentration of gaps is in Technological controls – ISO 27002:2022 with 29 unmapped controls. These gaps represent areas where additional controls, policies, or documentation must be created to achieve compliance with both frameworks.
Which control domains have the most gaps between ISO 27002:2022 and NRC 10 CFR 73.54 - Nuclear Facility Cybersecurity?
The domain with the highest gap count is Technological controls – ISO 27002:2022 (29 gaps). Export the full domain-by-domain gap breakdown via the Professional tier to generate a prioritised remediation roadmap.
Related Resources
This platform provides educational compliance tools, not legal, regulatory, or professional compliance advice. Cross-framework mappings are judged interpretations, grounded in the source text of both frameworks, and do not reproduce or replace official standards. Framework names and trademarks belong to their respective owners. Consult qualified professionals for your specific compliance requirements. See our Terms of Service.