FMCSR 177.800(c): Hazmat Security Plan Citation Q&A

No. Across our 13 million inspection records, the 0.0% out-of-service rate for this violation shows that 177.800(c) citations do not result in immediate vehicle removal. All 6 all-time citations in our database were issued without an out-of-service order. However, this is significantly below the 31.4% all-FMCSR average OOS rate, making it one of the least likely violations to trigger an immediate roadside pull. That said, the citation itself carries weight in your CSA profile.

This violation carries a CSA severity weight of 7. The actual points added to your record depend on the 30-day violation count in your BASIC 6 (Hazardous Materials) category. If this is your first hazmat violation in 30 days, it contributes 7 points. If you receive a second citation for any BASIC 6 code within 30 days, both violations count toward your CSA score. Fleet managers should monitor drivers hauling hazmat closely to prevent cumulative violations in this category.

1. Document the citation. Get a copy of the inspection report and understand exactly what the inspector found.
2. Contact your safety manager or legal team. Have them review the finding for accuracy and potential DataQs appeal eligibility.
3. Audit your hazmat security documentation. Verify your carrier has a current, documented security plan in place—this is a carrier-level compliance issue, not a driver equipment problem.
4. Report to your carrier's compliance officer. This violation can impact the entire company's FMCSA profile, so escalate immediately.
5. Request retraining if needed. Ensure you understand hazmat regulations and your carrier's security procedures.

Yes, but for different reasons. Our inspection data shows peer hazmat violations like general loading/unloading (177.834A-HMC) have a 99.2% out-of-service rate—vastly higher than 177.800(c)'s 0.0% rate. However, 177.800(c) is rarer. Across 13 million inspections, only 6 citations exist all-time, ranking #2357 of 3,036 FMCSR codes. The severity lies not in immediate roadside consequences but in regulatory attention: a security plan failure signals systemic carrier-level noncompliance and can trigger compliance reviews beyond a single inspection.

Yes. The FMCSA DataQs system allows drivers and carriers to formally contest violations within 90 days of citation. For 177.800(c), your contestability depends on what the inspector found: if they claim no security plan exists but your carrier has documented one, you have grounds to challenge. File through your carrier's DataQs account with supporting evidence (dated security plan documentation, policies, training records). The appeal must show the finding was factually inaccurate. Documentation-based violations like this are often appealable when records can prove compliance at the time of inspection.

Both, in different ways. The violation appears on your personal driving record and counts toward your CSA profile under the Hazardous Materials (BASIC 6) category. Simultaneously, it appears on your carrier's FMCSA safety profile, affecting the company's compliance score. Your carrier bears the primary responsibility—a security plan is a company-level policy—but as the driver of a hazmat vehicle during the inspection, you're tied to the finding. When you move to a new carrier, the violation stays with you in CSA; your current carrier's compliance history affects their insurance rates and regulatory scrutiny.

Rarely. Across 13 million inspections, our database shows only 6 all-time citations for this violation, with 0 citations in the last 12 months and 0 in the last 90 days. This rarity reflects the fact that most carriers hauling hazmat have security plans in place and inspectors prioritize active equipment and operational violations over documentation audits. When 177.800(c) is cited, it often signals a broader compliance gap—either a brand-new carrier with incomplete policies or a follow-up from a previous hazmat violation. The citation's low frequency doesn't mean it's unimportant; it means inspectors encounter it only when documentation is clearly absent or inadequate.

Our inspection records identify six carriers cited for this violation: Greenwood Motor Lines Inc (USDOT 63391), Associated Pipe Line Contractors Inc (USDOT 119397), Suteco Transport LLC (USDOT 280084), Greenville Oil & Petroleum Inc (USDOT 356332), Hovland Masonry Inc (USDOT 494710), and Nuco2 Supply LLC (USDOT 578807). Each received one citation all-time. No carrier has multiple citations, suggesting isolated compliance gaps rather than systemic negligence. If you work for or are considering employment with one of these carriers, request confirmation of current security plan documentation from management.