A Lavaca County commissioner said Nov. 24 that he followed an oversized permitted transport that crossed a bridge the Texas Department of Transportation has certified for replacement, and estimated the load may have weighed “60 to 80,000 pounds” — far above the bridge’s posted capacity.

The commissioner told the court he asked the driver for a permit and discovered the Texas Department of Motor Vehicles had issued directions routing the load onto county roads without consulting county staff. He said the permit’s printed directions led the truck across a vulnerable 30,000-pound bridge on County Road 244 and that the county was not contacted before the route was approved.

Sheriff (name not provided) told the court he and commissioners met with the well operator and its contractors and urged the county to require a routing agreement with a clear map and site-specific directions. The sheriff said adopting a routing agreement through the commissioners court and publishing it as a county ordinance would give deputies the authority to ticket operators who deviate from approved routes and, if necessary, shut down operations until routes are followed.

Officials flagged two enforcement gaps: (1) the county’s current $250,000 blanket bond for companies operating countywide may not cover the cost of replacing a damaged bridge, and (2) state-issued permits and the information provided by TxDOT/DMV can leave counties out of the permitting loop. County speakers suggested bonds be written to cover specific roads (for example, County Road 195) rather than a single blanket bond covering all activity.

The sheriff said state motor-vehicle enforcement personnel told him TxDOT permits can effectively supersede some local restrictions in practice, but that front-end coordination — county staff meeting with DMV/TxDOT and with contractors before projects begin — can prevent misrouting. Sheriff’s office staff said DMV can search permits by plate or company name if the printed permit lacks a number, but that the county should be given advance notice so route maps can be made clear.

Commissioners and the sheriff said the practical problem was drivers using GPS shortest-route directions and unintentionally being routed across bridges and narrow roads not suited for heavy trucks. They urged the court to require routing meetings with operators such as EOG Energy and their subcontractors and to work to improve communication with TxDOT and the Texas DMV.

The court did not take formal action on the item at the Nov. 24 meeting but agreed to continue discussions and to arrange follow-up meetings to develop clearer routing agreements and bond language. Judge noted the matter will return for further consideration rather than immediate adoption.