Letter to the Editor: Cargo Theft Data

Click here to write a Letter to the Editor.

n the opinion piece, "A Need for Cargo Theft Data," the author unfairly characterized the legislation now under consideration by the California Legislature to improve the security of hazmat transportation.

The bill, as currently amended, would allow carriers to either employ a device that permits the California Highway Patrol to remotely shut down the truck or install an approved anti-hijacking device. The CHP has tested several remote shutdown and anti-hijacking systems. The results from their evaluation will be released soon.

With this legislation, carriers that have already invested in tracking systems can comply with the law for a relatively small incremental expense. Fleets that cannot justify a tracking system can install an anti-hijacking device for less than $900 a truck. More than 20 California-based hazardous materials fleets already have such devices installed.

Using the opinion author’s example of a fleet of 1,700 trucks, there would be a five-year cost of $1.5 million for anti-hijacking devices. This is much less than the writer’s fleet tracking five-year cost estimate of $4.6 million.

Because anti-hijacking and anti-theft devices would prevent both cargo theft and terrorist attacks, they are a very attractive solution for security needs of both the trucking industry and the country.

Drew Robertson

I>Director

reight Transportation

ecurity Consortium

ew York

This letter appeared in the May 17 print edition of Transport Topics. Subscribe today.