CAA
U.S. federal law regulating air emissions and quality standards
APRA CPS 234
Australian prudential standard for information security resilience
Quick Verdict
CAA governs US air emissions and quality standards for all industries via permits and enforcement, while APRA CPS 234 mandates information security capabilities for Australian financial entities. Organizations adopt CAA for environmental compliance; CPS 234 for cyber resilience and regulatory trust.
CAA
Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. §7401 et seq.)
Key Features
- Sets NAAQS for six criteria pollutants protecting health/welfare
- Mandates SIPs for state attainment planning and designations
- Requires Title V permits consolidating all applicable requirements
- Imposes NSPS and MACT technology-based emission standards
- Enables cooperative federalism with EPA-state implementation
APRA CPS 234
APRA Prudential Standard CPS 234 Information Security
Key Features
- Board ultimate responsibility for information security
- Risk-based capability commensurate with threats
- Systematic independent testing and assurance
- 72-hour APRA notification for material incidents
- Third-party oversight for all information assets
Detailed Analysis
A comprehensive look at the specific requirements, scope, and impact of each standard.
CAA Details
What It Is
The Clean Air Act (CAA), codified at 42 U.S.C. §7401 et seq., is a comprehensive U.S. federal statute establishing the national framework for air pollution control. It authorizes EPA to set ambient and source-based standards, with states implementing via enforceable plans. Its cooperative federalism approach combines national floors with state flexibility.
Key Components
- NAAQS for six criteria pollutants (primary/secondary standards).
- SIPs, NSPS, MACT/NESHAPs, Title V permits, NSR/PSD.
- Titles cover mobile sources, acid rain trading (Title IV), ozone protection (Title VI).
- Enforcement via penalties, sanctions, citizen suits; no formal certification but permit compliance.
Why Organizations Use It
Mandatory for emitters meeting thresholds; drives compliance to avoid fines, shutdowns, nonattainment impacts. Reduces health/environmental risks, enables permitting for expansions, supports ESG via emission reductions. Builds stakeholder trust through transparent reporting.
Implementation Overview
Phased: applicability assessment, emissions inventory, permitting (Title V/NSR), install controls/monitoring (CEMS), ongoing reporting. Applies to major stationary/mobile sources nationwide; state variations require SIP reviews. Audits via EPA tools like ECMPS.
APRA CPS 234 Details
What It Is
APRA Prudential Standard CPS 234 (Information Security) is a binding prudential regulation issued by the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority, effective 1 July 2019. It mandates APRA-regulated entities to maintain an information security capability commensurate with threats and vulnerabilities to ensure operational resilience. The approach is risk-based, focusing on governance, controls, testing, and incident response.
Key Components
- **Governance and accountabilityBoard ultimate responsibility, defined roles.
- Policy framework, asset classification (criticality/sensitivity), commensurate controls.
- Systematic testing, independent assurance, incident management.
- Outcomes-based with 36 paragraphs; no fixed controls, emphasizes CIA triad.
- Compliance via evidence, APRA notifications (72 hours for incidents, 10 business days for weaknesses).
Why Organizations Use It
- Mandatory for banks, insurers, super funds; avoids penalties, remediation.
- Enhances resilience, reduces incident impact, builds trust.
- Strategic benefits: competitive edge, better vendor terms, operational efficiency.
Implementation Overview
Phased: gap analysis, governance, assets/controls, testing, monitoring. Applies to APRA entities (scale-agnostic, proportionate); group-wide. No certification, but audit-ready evidence required. (178 words)
Key Differences
| Aspect | CAA | APRA CPS 234 |
|---|---|---|
| Scope | Air emissions, NAAQS, permits, enforcement | Information security, cyber resilience, third-parties |
| Industry | All industries, US-wide stationary/mobile sources | Australian financial services (banks, insurers) |
| Nature | Mandatory US federal environmental law | Mandatory prudential standard for regulated entities |
| Testing | CEMS, stack tests, Title V monitoring | Systematic control testing, annual response plans |
| Penalties | Civil/criminal fines, sanctions, FIPs | Supervisory actions, remediation, license risks |
Scope
Industry
Nature
Testing
Penalties
Frequently Asked Questions
Common questions about CAA and APRA CPS 234
CAA FAQ
APRA CPS 234 FAQ
You Might also be Interested in These Articles...
Asset-Backed Issuers and SEC Cybersecurity Rules: Applicability, Disclosures, and Compliance Roadmap
How SEC cybersecurity rules apply to asset-backed issuers (ABS): Form 10-D disclosures, ABS-EE risk management, Inline XBRL tagging, exemptions. Roadmap for tru
NIST CSF 2.0 Plain English Decoder: Translating Govern, Supply Chain, and Core Functions from Jargon to Actionable Insights
Demystify NIST CSF 2.0 jargon with plain English tables for Govern, Supply Chain & Core Functions. Actionable steps for risk oversight & vendor management. Empo
CMMC Cost Calculator: Realistic Budgets for Levels 1-3, C3PAO Fees, and ROI for Small DIB Suppliers
Calculate realistic CMMC costs for Levels 1-3: self-assessments, C3PAO fees, tooling, remediation & ROI. Interactive tool for small DIB suppliers. Get benchmark
Run Maturity Assessments with GRADUM
Transform your compliance journey with our AI-powered assessment platform
Assess your organization's maturity across multiple standards and regulations including ISO 27001, DORA, NIS2, NIST, GDPR, and hundreds more. Get actionable insights and track your progress with collaborative, AI-powered evaluations.
Check out these other Gradum.io Standards Comparison Pages
FERPA vs ISO 27032
Compare FERPA vs ISO 27032: U.S. student privacy law meets global internet cybersecurity guidelines. Unlock compliance insights, risk strategies, and best practices for secure education data.
FDA 21 CFR Part 11 vs HITRUST CSF
Discover FDA 21 CFR Part 11 vs HITRUST CSF: Compare FDA electronic records rules with HITRUST's harmonized security framework. Unlock compliance strategies for regulated industries now!
Six Sigma vs FDA 21 CFR Part 11
Uncover Six Sigma vs FDA 21 CFR Part 11: DMAIC rigor vs electronic records controls, validation & audit trails for life sciences compliance. Boost data integrity—read now!