PL · Plan wizard

Planning Plan

Documents how the system's planning artifacts — System Security Plan (SSP), Rules of Behavior, security and privacy architectures, baseline selection, and baseline tailoring — are governed across creation, review, change-control, and integration with the broader RMF package. Covers the controls of the PL family in NIST SP 800-53 r5 and aligns with NIST SP 800-37 r2 (RMF), NIST SP 800-160 v1 r1 (Engineering Trustworthy Secure Systems), NIST SP 800-18 r1 (Guide for Developing Security Plans), FIPS 199 / 200 (baseline selection), and CNSSI 1253 (overlays for national-security systems).

1
Full official name of the information system.
Short identifier used in headings and references.
Role or named individual accountable for the system.
Describe what falls inside the authorization boundary - components, services, networks, data flows.
2
Determines which controls in this family appear in your plan.
3
Approach basics → §4.x

Locations and roles that anchor the rest of the plan.

Where the SSP is authoritatively maintained (e.g., 'eMASS package PKG-12345', 'GRC tool — Compliance section', '/repo/compliance/ssp.md under version control').
Role accountable for the SSP (typically System Owner with ISSO support).
Where the Rules of Behavior are maintained. Often co-located with the access-agreement template (PS-6).
Where the architecture document is maintained (e.g., 'Confluence space ARCH at /docs/CTLS-architecture', '/repo/architecture/security.drawio').
Role accountable for architecture changes (e.g., 'Security Architecture Review Board', 'Application Security Lead').
Brief phrase identifying the baseline (e.g., 'NIST SP 800-53 r5 Moderate + privacy overlay', 'FedRAMP Moderate baseline', 'CNSSI 1253 Moderate / Moderate / Moderate').
Where tailoring decisions, overlays applied, control supplements / removals are recorded.
SSP Management (PL-2) → §4.x

How the System Security Plan is authored, reviewed, and updated.

What the SSP covers (system description, boundary, categorization, baseline + tailoring, all 800-53 r5 controls + ODVs, supporting family plans, overlays). Reference NIST SP 800-18 r1.
How often the SSP is reviewed (typical: 'Annual + on significant change per CM-4').
From change identified → SSP updated → AO reviewed → re-issued. Reference CM-3.
Roles to whom the SSP is distributed (System Owner, ISSO, ISSM, AO, designated assessors, contracting officer if applicable).
Inventory of supporting plans referenced by the SSP (CM, AC, AU, IA, IR, CP, SI, CA, SC, RA, SA, PE, PS, MA, MP, AT, PL, SR, PT, PM as applicable). Where each supporting plan lives.
Rules of Behavior (PL-4) → §4.x

User obligations and acceptable use.

How often RoB is reaffirmed (typical: 'Annually + on significant policy change').
Where signed RoB acknowledgments are retained. Often co-located with PS-6 access-agreement records.
Per PL-4(1) — restrictions on disclosing system / org information via social media. What may not be disclosed (system identifiers, technical details, project codes, classified or CUI material).
Where RoB revisions are logged (version, date, summary of change). Important when reaffirmation is triggered by a change.
Security and Privacy Architecture (PL-8) → §4.x

How architecture is documented and governed.

How often the architecture document is reviewed for currency. Per NIST SP 800-160 v1 r1.
How the architecture document supports engineering decisions. ADRs cite architecture sections; design reviews reference architecture; change-control routes architecture-affecting changes through SARB.
Baseline Selection (PL-10) → §4.x

Selection of the control baseline per categorization.

How the categorization that drives the baseline was determined (FIPS 199 high-water mark per RA-2). Reference RA-2 documentation.
Where the as-selected baseline (the list of in-scope controls) is documented.
    Suggested:
    Baseline Tailoring (PL-11) → §4.x

    Decisions to add, remove, supplement, or restrict controls relative to baseline.

    Approach to tailoring per NIST SP 800-53B § 2.4 / NIST SP 800-37 r2 § 3.3 — applicability, scoping, parameter selection, control supplements, mitigation alternatives.
    Who approves tailoring decisions. Typically: System Owner approves operational tailoring, AO approves overall baseline tailoring.
    How often the tailoring register is reviewed for continued validity (typical: 'Annual + on significant change').
    Planning-Artifact Scope and Coverage → §2.x

    Quantitative scope numbers that anchor metrics later in the plan.

    Approximate count of supporting plans the SSP references (one per applicable 800-53 family — typically 14-20).
    Approximate count of controls / enhancements with tailoring decisions documented.
    Count of personnel required to acknowledge the RoB.
    Count of architecture document major versions issued (anchors change-rate metric).
    Planning Metrics & KPIs → §6.x

    Metrics tracked to demonstrate PL control effectiveness.

      Suggested:
      Cross-references to other RMF artifacts → §7

      Where this plan plugs into the broader RMF package.

      Where in the SSP the PL control implementations are summarized (e.g., 'SSP §13.1 — meta').
      Convention for PL-related POA&M items (e.g., 'POAM-PL-' for general).
      How PL-2 SSP feeds CA-2 assessment and CA-6 authorization decisions. Where AO sees the SSP.
      How RA-2 categorization drives PL-10 baseline selection. Trigger when categorization changes.
      How architecture / SSP changes route through CM-3 change control. CM-4 significant-change determination.
      How PL-4 Rules of Behavior pair with PS-6 access agreements. Co-administered or separate?
      How each family plan references back to this PL plan (the SSP it documents). Reference the supporting-plans register.
      Pointer to the CA-7 monitoring strategy document tying PL continuous-monitoring metrics to the broader ConMon plan.
      4

      Pick a baseline in section 2 and the applicable controls will appear here. Each control gets a card with the official text, related controls, linked CCIs, and fields for your implementation status, narrative, responsible role, and evidence.

      5