What is the penalty for driving over a weight limit set by TxDOT on a Texas road or bridge?

Plain-English summary

The Burnet County Attorney, Eddie Arredondo, asked the Attorney General a narrow penalty question about overweight vehicles. The Transportation Code sets statewide maximum axle and gross weights for vehicles on public highways in section 621.101. Section 621.102 then lets the executive director of the Texas Department of Transportation set a lower maximum for a particular state highway or farm or ranch road when a heavier load would rapidly deteriorate or destroy the road, a bridge, or a culvert. Neither section, by itself, makes exceeding the limit a crime or attaches a fine. The penalties live in two other sections, and the question was which one applies to a section 621.102 violation.

Section 621.506 carries a graduated schedule of fines that climb with the amount of the overweight, reaching $10,000 and beyond in aggravated cases. It lists the specific statutes whose violation triggers that schedule, and section 621.101 is on the list. Section 621.507 is the catch-all: it sets lower penalties (beginning at $200 for a first offense) for violating any provision "for which an offense is not specified by another section." The county attorney noted two ways to read the statute. One reading routes a section 621.102 violation through 621.507 because 621.102 specifies no penalty. The other treats exceeding an executive-director limit as essentially a 621.101 violation, which would pull in the harsher graduated schedule, and argued that the road-protection purpose of 621.102 is better served by stiffer fines.

The AG went with the plain text. Section 621.506 lists the statutes it covers, and it does not include section 621.102. Under settled rules of construction, the AG presumed the Legislature chose its words with care and omitted 621.102 on purpose, and it declined to rewrite the statute under the guise of interpreting it. Because no statute specifies a penalty for exceeding an executive-director weight limit, that violation is an offense "not specified by another section," so it falls under the catch-all penalties of section 621.507. The policy argument for heavier fines, the AG said, is one for the Legislature, which did not make that choice.

What this means for you

This describes what the 2021 opinion holds about which penalty statute applies. The opinion is now several years old, and the Transportation Code's weight and penalty provisions can be amended, so confirm current law before relying on this.

Prosecutors and courts

Based on this opinion, a charge for exceeding a weight limit that the TxDOT executive director set under section 621.102 should be brought and punished under the catch-all penalties of section 621.507, not the graduated schedule of section 621.506. The opinion turns on section 621.506's list not naming section 621.102.

Commercial drivers and carriers

The opinion describes the lower catch-all penalty as the one that applies to an executive-director weight-limit violation. It does not change the separate, steeper penalties that apply when a vehicle violates the statutory maximums in section 621.101 itself.

Road and bridge authorities

The opinion treats the size of the penalty as a legislative choice. It notes that section 621.102 exists to protect roads and bridges from heavy loads, but holds that the current text routes its violations to the lighter penalty regardless of that purpose.

Common questions

Q: If I exceed a weight limit TxDOT posted to protect a bridge, what fine do I face?
A: Under this opinion, the catch-all penalty in section 621.507, which starts at $200 for a first offense, rather than the graduated fines in section 621.506.

Q: Why doesn't the bigger graduated fine apply?
A: Section 621.506 lists the weight statutes it covers and does not include section 621.102. The AG read that omission as deliberate and declined to add 621.102 to the list by interpretation.

Q: Does this change the penalty for violating the regular statewide weight limits?
A: No. Violations of section 621.101's statutory maximums remain subject to the graduated schedule in section 621.506. The opinion addresses only limits set by the executive director under section 621.102.

Q: Could the penalty be made stiffer?
A: The AG framed that as a question for the Legislature. The opinion says courts must take the Legislature at its word and not revise the statute, so any change would come through amendment.

Background and statutory framework

Title 7, subtitle E of the Transportation Code (sections 621.001 through 623.427) governs vehicle size and weight. Section 621.101 sets generally applicable maximum single-axle, tandem-axle, and gross weights for vehicles on public highways and at certain ports-of-entry. Section 621.102 authorizes the TxDOT executive director to set lower maximums for a specific state highway or farm or ranch road when heavier loads would damage the road or its bridges and culverts, capped at the statutory maximum. The enforcement and penalty provisions are separate: section 621.502 prohibits operating over the authorized weight, section 621.506 lists the statutes whose violation draws a graduated fine schedule, and section 621.507 supplies a catch-all penalty for offenses not specified elsewhere. The opinion applies standard textual canons, drawn from Texas Supreme Court decisions including Sunstate Equipment, Bluitt, and Christus Health, to conclude that the omission of section 621.102 from section 621.506's list is controlling.

Citations and references

Statutory provisions:

• Tex. Transp. Code § 621.102 (executive director may set lower maximum weights)
• Tex. Transp. Code §§ 621.101, 621.502(a)(2), 621.506, 621.507 (maximum weights, prohibition, graduated penalties, catch-all penalty)

Key cases:

• Sunstate Equip. Co., LLC v. Hegar, 601 S.W.3d 685 (Tex. 2020) (effectuate legislative intent from the statute's text)
• In re Commitment of Bluitt, 605 S.W.3d 199 (Tex. 2020) (Legislature purposefully omits words not chosen)
• Christus Health Gulf Coast v. Aetna, Inc., 397 S.W.3d 651 (Tex. 2013) (courts take the Legislature at its word and do not revise statutes while interpreting them)

Source

• Landing page: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/opinions/ken-paxton/kp-0354
• Original PDF: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/2021/kp-0354.pdf

Original opinion text

KEN PAXTON
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS

February 9, 2021

The Honorable Eddie Arredondo
Burnet County Attorney
220 South Pierce
Burnet, Texas 78611

Opinion No. KP-0354

Re: Punishment for a violation of the maximum vehicle weight limit established by the executive director of the Texas Department of Transportation under Transportation Code section 621.102 (RQ-0373-KP)

Dear Mr. Arredondo:

You ask about the potential punishment for a violation of the maximum vehicle weight limit established by the executive director of the Texas Department of Transportation under Transportation Code section 621.102.¹ Your question concerns the interplay of section 621.102 with sections 621.101, 621.506, and 621.507 of the Transportation Code. Request Letter at 1–2. Section 621.101 specifies maximum weight limitations for vehicles operating over or on a public highway or certain ports-of-entry, while section 621.102 authorizes the executive director to set different limitations that do not exceed the maximum. TEX. TRANSP. CODE §§ 621.101, .102. Section 621.506 contains a graduated schedule of fines that increase according to the amount that a violating vehicle's weight exceeds the applicable maximum, while section 621.507 provides a catch-all penalty for violating a provision for which an offense is not specified—beginning with $200 for a first offense and otherwise generally less severe than the penalties on the graduated schedule. Id. §§ 621.506, .507. You ask, in essence, whether operation of a vehicle exceeding the limitations set by the executive director under section 621.102 is subject to the graduated schedule of penalties in section 621.506 or to the catch-all penalties in section 621.507. Request Letter at 1–2.

Courts construing a statute attempt to effectuate the Legislature's intent as expressed in the words of the statute. Sunstate Equip. Co., LLC v. Hegar, 601 S.W.3d 685, 689–90 (Tex. 2020). To do so, courts start with a statute's "text and the plain meaning of its words construed within the statute as a whole." Id. They "presume the Legislature chose the statute's language with care, purposefully choosing each word, while purposefully omitting words not chosen." In re Commitment of Bluitt, 605 S.W.3d 199, 203 (Tex. 2020).

Title 7, subtitle E of the Transportation Code governs vehicle size and weight. See generally TEX. TRANSP. CODE §§ 621.001–623.427 (subtitle E). In that subtitle, section 621.101 provides generally applicable maximum weight limitations:

(a) A vehicle or combination of vehicles may not be operated over or on a public highway or at a port-of-entry between Texas and the United Mexican States if the vehicle or combination has:

(1) a single axle weight heavier than 20,000 pounds, including all enforcement tolerances;

(2) a tandem axle weight heavier than 34,000 pounds, including all enforcement tolerances; [or]

(3) an overall gross weight on a group of two or more consecutive axles heavier than the weight computed using [a specified] formula . . . .

Id. § 621.101(a)(1)–(3). Section 621.102 authorizes the executive director to set maximum weights for vehicles "that may be moved over a state highway or a farm or ranch road if the executive director finds that heavier maximum weight would rapidly deteriorate or destroy the road or a bridge or culvert along the road," provided that a "maximum weight set under this subsection may not exceed the maximum set by statute for that weight." Id. § 621.102(a). Neither section 621.101 nor section 621.102 by themselves make operating a vehicle in excess of these maximums a criminal offense or provide for a penalty.

Section 621.502 contains a prohibition against operating a vehicle if "the vehicle's single axle weight, tandem axle weight, or gross weight is greater than the applicable weight authorized for that vehicle by" statutes regulating size and weight. Id. § 621.502(a)(2). Section 621.506 states that a "person commits an offense if the person . . . operates a vehicle or combination of vehicles in violation of Section 621.101" or other specified statutes, but it does not include section 621.102. Id. § 621.506(a)(1). Section 621.506 further provides a graduated schedule of penalties that range from $100 to $10,000 and more under aggravating circumstances. Id. § 621.506(b)–(b-3). Section 621.507 is a catch-all provision containing penalties for a violation of a provision "for which an offense is not specified by another section." Id. § 621.507(a), (b).

You argue that because section 621.102 does not specify a penalty, a violation of the statute is subject to the catch-all penalties in section 621.507. Request Letter at 2. You explain an alternative argument, that section 621.102 merely gives the executive director the authority to alter the maximum weights in section 621.101, and thus operating a vehicle exceeding the weights set by the executive director is essentially a violation of section 621.101, subject to the graduated schedule of penalties for violating that section. Id. You also suggest that because section 621.102 allows the executive director to set lower maximum weights to prevent the damage caused by heavier maximum weights, the purpose of that statute might be better served by the higher graduated penalty schedule rather than the lower catch-all penalty. Id. However, the Legislature did not make that policy choice. Section 621.102 does not specify consequences for exceeding the maximum weights set by the executive director, and we must assume that section 621.506's failure to include section 621.102 was intentional. See Bluitt, 605 S.W.3d at 203. We "must take the Legislature at its word, respect its policy choices, and resist revising a statute under the guise of interpreting it." Christus Health Gulf Coast v. Aetna, Inc., 397 S.W.3d 651, 654 (Tex. 2013). Because no statute specifies the penalty for operating a vehicle in excess of the maximum weight set by the executive director, a violation of section 621.102 is an offense "not specified by another section." See TEX. TRANSP. CODE § 621.507(a). Accordingly, operating a vehicle in excess of the maximum weight set by the executive director under section 621.102 is subject to the catch-all penalties of section 621.507.

¹ See Letter from Honorable Eddie Arredondo, Burnet Cty. Att'y, to Honorable Ken Paxton, Tex. Att'y Gen. at 2 (Aug. 13, 2020), https://www2.texasattorneygeneral.gov/opinions/opinions/51paxton/rq/2020/pdf/RQ0373KP.pdf ("Request Letter").

S U M M A R Y

While section 621.101 of the Transportation Code specifies maximum weight limitations for vehicles operating over or on a public highway or certain ports-of-entry, section 621.102 authorizes the executive director of the Department of Transportation to set different limitations that do not exceed these maximums. Section 621.506 provides a graduated schedule of penalties for violating specified maximum weight statutes but does not include section 621.102. Because no statute specifies the penalty for violating section 621.102, operating a vehicle in excess of the maximum weight set by the executive director under that section is subject to the catch-all penalties in section 621.507.

Very truly yours,

KEN PAXTON
Attorney General of Texas

BRENT E. WEBSTER
First Assistant Attorney General

LESLEY FRENCH
Chief of Staff
Acting Deputy Attorney General for Legal Counsel

VIRGINIA K. HOELSCHER
Chair, Opinion Committee

WILLIAM A. HILL
Assistant Attorney General, Opinion Committee