News:

Thanks to everyone for the feedback on what errors you encountered from the forum database changes made in Fall 2023. Let us know if you discover anymore.

Main Menu

I-35W: North Tarrant Express phase 3C

Started by Chris, August 13, 2019, 12:53:00 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Chris

Construction has begun on the $ 910 million phase 3C of the 'North Tarrant Express' megaproject of I-35W north of Fort Worth. It will be completed in 2023.

A press release by Ferrovial:

QuoteFerrovial to build and operate new extension to North Tarrant Express in Texas, worth €813 million

Ferrovial, through a consortium led by its toll road subsidiary Cintra Infraestructuras, is to build and operate a new extension (segment 3C) to the North Tarrant Express in Texas, worth USD 910 million, equivalent to €813 million. The consortium, NTE Mobility Partners Segments 3 LLC, also includes the Meridiam fund and APG, a specialized pension fund management firm.

Ferrovial Agroman will be in charge of designing and building this new road segment.

It will extend along 6.7 miles (11 km), from Heritage Trace Parkway, north of US 81/287, to Eagle Parkway, in Denton County. Existing lanes will be upgraded and will continue to be toll-free, while two tolled Managed Lanes each way will be built, as well as on-ramps. Construction work is already under way and the road is expected to be open to traffic by the end of 2023. The concession expires in 2061.

The project, which has just achieved financial closure, will be financed through a combination of equity contributions by the partners (USD 160 million) and the issuance of a PAB (USD 750 million).

This is the fourth Managed Lanes project to be operated by Cintra in the DFW area, one of the most dynamic and fastest-growing areas of the United States. The company already operates the LBJ Express, the North Tarrant Express (NTE) and NTE 35W, which is an extension of the NTE (segments 3A & 3B).

Ferrovial, through subsidiary Cintra, is one of the world's leading private sector developers of transport infrastructure, in terms of the number of projects and the volume of investment. It currently manages over 1,468 kilometers of toll roads in 24 concessions in Canada, the US, Europe, Australia and Colombia.

Phase 3C on Open Street Map:


Bobby5280

I just hope they don't build this expansion with skinny lanes. I really really hate I-35E from North Dallas up to Denton for that nonsense; it's only great if a motorist wants a thrilling white-knuckle driving experience, feeling like he's going to trade paint with other cars in the adjacent narrow lanes.

BTW, is there a time line when the other big phase of the I-35E expansion North of Dallas will begin? Supposedly when that later phase is complete I-35E will have two separate express lane roads for NB and SB traffic rather than the reversible setup currently in use. And the lanes are supposed to go back to being 12 feet wide.

MaxConcrete

Quote from: Bobby5280 on August 13, 2019, 01:35:48 PM
BTW, is there a time line when the other big phase of the I-35E expansion North of Dallas will begin? Supposedly when that later phase is complete I-35E will have two separate express lane roads for NB and SB traffic rather than the reversible setup currently in use. And the lanes are supposed to go back to being 12 feet wide.

I have noticed that right-of-way clearance is ongoing along much of the corridor, which is a good sign. According to the UTP, work Between LBJ and Bush will proceed first.

According to the draft 2020 UTP http://ftp.dot.state.tx.us/pub/txdot/tpp/utp/2020-utp.pdf

LBJ to Dallas/Denton county line (just north of Bush Turnpike): $600 million is funded for construction in the 2020-2023 period.
Work at 3 locations in Lewisville (Main, BS 121 and Corporate): $165 million is funded for construction in the 2020-2023 period.
Main expansion in Lewisville, Dallas/Denton county line to FM 407: Listed for construction in 2024 to 2029 for $657 million, not yet funded
Lewisville to Lake Dallas (finish bridge work): Listed for construction in 2024 to 2029 for $620 million, not yet funded

www.DFWFreeways.com
www.HoustonFreeways.com

MaxConcrete

Quote from: Chris on August 13, 2019, 12:53:00 PM
Construction has begun on the $ 910 million phase 3C of the 'North Tarrant Express' megaproject of I-35W north of Fort Worth. It will be completed in 2023.


This project was delayed due to its being a public-private partnership, and TxDOT's current policy is to no longer participate in PPPs.
However, there is no conventional funding to build this, and the PPP has been in the works for a very long time. Local interests lobbied to allow the project to proceed, and TxDOT acceded.

As far as I know, this is the last PPP that will be built in Texas. Any new PPPs will require authorization from the Texas legislature.
www.DFWFreeways.com
www.HoustonFreeways.com

motorola870

#4
Quote from: MaxConcrete on August 13, 2019, 07:18:28 PM
Quote from: Chris on August 13, 2019, 12:53:00 PM
Construction has begun on the $ 910 million phase 3C of the 'North Tarrant Express' megaproject of I-35W north of Fort Worth. It will be completed in 2023.


This project was delayed due to its being a public-private partnership, and TxDOT's current policy is to no longer participate in PPPs.
However, there is no conventional funding to build this, and the PPP has been in the works for a very long time. Local interests lobbied to allow the project to proceed, and TxDOT acceded.

As far as I know, this is the last PPP that will be built in Texas. Any new PPPs will require authorization from the Texas legislature.
They need to reign in the costs to drive the lanes No excuses for having $10+ tolls during peak from one toll gantry to the next while Some tollways are cheap such as the 360 south tollway less than $2 for 9 miles. I don't get how costs are up to 10x the cost of building a tollway from scratch. The deal is raw for North Texas drivers. So if this is the last set of express lanes approved does this basically deal a blow to the plan to add express lanes to the Interstate 20, Interstate 820 and U.S. 287 funnel rebuild project? That is supposed to break ground in 3 years?

Plutonic Panda

Yeah I'm not the biggest fan of PPP's currently for freeway and road projects. The tolls often seem to be much higher than other toll roads and it seems like a quick fix with negative long term results.

Bobby5280

Quote from: motorola870They need to reign in the costs to drive the lanes No excuses for having $10+ tolls during peak from one toll gantry to the next while Some tollways are cheap such as the 360 south tollway less than $2 for 9 miles.

I realize the toll cost per mile on various express lane systems in Texas is above average (it's certainly quite a bit higher per mile than the Turnpikes here in Oklahoma), but which set of express lanes in the Dallas area is charging $10 per toll gantry? If price gouging like that is indeed happening I'd like to know specifically where so I can be sure to avoid it.

Quote from: Plutonic PandaYeah I'm not the biggest fan of PPP's currently for freeway and road projects. The tolls often seem to be much higher than other toll roads and it seems like a quick fix with negative long term results.

I'm not a fan of public-private partnerships for toll roads (much less anything else) either. It just seems a bit sleazy.

Chris

Low toll rates are common on publicy owned toll roads, in particular those with a low investment programme and where the initial bonds have long been paid off.

Large-scale reconstruction and expansion costs a lot of money and if the PPP developer has to recover the entire cost, the toll rates are likely to be in the range of 10-15 cents per mile, which is comparable to most European privately operated toll roads in France, Spain or Italy. This particular project has a cost of over $ 900 million for just a 6 mile segment.

I would be weary of very long-term concessions. There should be no need for a concession to expire in more than 30 years, which is a common period to amortize infrastructure. For example the 99 year lease of the Indiana Toll Road was just to generate a large amount of upfront money for other purposes than that particular toll road. I believe this method is called 'asset recycling', which was first developed in Australia. However it is typically difficult to amend a PPP contract without major cost, and transportation planning doesn't reach that far in the future. We already can't accurately predict mobility 20 or 30 years in the future, not to mention 99 years.

A major advantage of PPPs is that funding is always available. Traditional revenue sources are always cash-strapped, this is not the case with toll projects, there is more money available than projects to spend it on. Some people want to lift the ban on tolling existing Interstate Highways, I think that the potential of toll financing is huge and could quickly turn much of the system into a tolled system. Not very attractive from a driver's point of view, but on the other hand it will generate the funding needed to reconstruct and widen everything they want.

Plutonic Panda

I'm not entirely against PPP's but they should bring tolls down a bit.

MaxConcrete

Quote from: motorola870 on August 16, 2019, 02:59:42 PM
So if this is the last set of express lanes approved does this basically deal a blow to the plan to add express lanes to the Interstate 20, Interstate 820 and U.S. 287 funnel rebuild project? That is supposed to break ground in 3 years?

The Southeast Connector project is fully funded with conventional funding, no tolls, and is slated to begin construction in the FY 2020-2023 period. This is the next "megaproject" to proceed in North Texas, after the LBJ East project.

See the UTP page 144, funding is listed at $1.59 billion.
http://ftp.dot.state.tx.us/pub/txdot/tpp/utp/2020-utp.pdf
www.DFWFreeways.com
www.HoustonFreeways.com

motorola870

#10
Quote from: MaxConcrete on August 16, 2019, 05:25:30 PM
Quote from: motorola870 on August 16, 2019, 02:59:42 PM
So if this is the last set of express lanes approved does this basically deal a blow to the plan to add express lanes to the Interstate 20, Interstate 820 and U.S. 287 funnel rebuild project? That is supposed to break ground in 3 years?

The Southeast Connector project is fully funded with conventional funding, no tolls, and is slated to begin construction in the FY 2020-2023 period. This is the next "megaproject" to proceed in North Texas, after the LBJ East project.

See the UTP page 144, funding is listed at $1.59 billion.
http://ftp.dot.state.tx.us/pub/txdot/tpp/utp/2020-utp.pdf
Okay glad to hear this for several years now in the planning they have had HOV/Express lanes for it on the planning. I will just be glad when they reconstruct interstate 20 from this project to the Dallas county line. The corridor is getting very congested and not to mention the uptick in wrecks since they raised the speed limit to 70 MPH. They need to do something about on east bound Interstate 20 on ramp at Matlock road that on ramp has been a nightmare for years can barely merge on and people will ride the lane to the end forcing non merging traffic to hit the brakes.

motorola870

Quote from: motorola870 on August 16, 2019, 10:34:47 PM
Quote from: MaxConcrete on August 16, 2019, 05:25:30 PM
Quote from: motorola870 on August 16, 2019, 02:59:42 PM
So if this is the last set of express lanes approved does this basically deal a blow to the plan to add express lanes to the Interstate 20, Interstate 820 and U.S. 287 funnel rebuild project? That is supposed to break ground in 3 years?

The Southeast Connector project is fully funded with conventional funding, no tolls, and is slated to begin construction in the FY 2020-2023 period. This is the next "megaproject" to proceed in North Texas, after the LBJ East project.

See the UTP page 144, funding is listed at $1.59 billion.
http://ftp.dot.state.tx.us/pub/txdot/tpp/utp/2020-utp.pdf
Okay glad to hear this for several years now in the planning they have had HOV/Express lanes for it on the planning. I will just be glad when they reconstruct interstate 20 from this project to the Dallas county line. The corridor is getting very congested and not to mention the uptick in wrecks since they raised the speed limit to 70 MPH. They need to do something about on east bound Interstate 20 on ramp at Matlock road that on ramp has been a nightmare for years can barely merge on and people will ride the lane to the end forcing non merging traffic to hit the brakes. I don't know why this wasn't addressed when they reconfigured the westbound entrance to Matlock road 11 years ago for the Arlington Highland Shopping center. They have the right of way and the new Center St. Bridge was designed with widening the road in the future. An auxilary lane is needed from the east bound on ramp to the collins st. off ramp.

dfwmapper

Quote from: motorola870 on August 16, 2019, 02:59:42 PM
They need to reign in the costs to drive the lanes No excuses for having $10+ tolls during peak from one toll gantry to the next while Some tollways are cheap such as the 360 south tollway less than $2 for 9 miles. I don't get how costs are up to 10x the cost of building a tollway from scratch. The deal is raw for North Texas drivers. So if this is the last set of express lanes approved does this basically deal a blow to the plan to add express lanes to the Interstate 20, Interstate 820 and U.S. 287 funnel rebuild project? That is supposed to break ground in 3 years?
The toll lanes on 35W are "managed" lanes. The tolls are dynamically adjusted to keep traffic flowing at 50mph or higher. The base price is around 15¢ per mile, but it can go beyond 10x that during the busiest times. The westbound express lanes on the combined SH 121/SH 183 between their merge and I-820 (traffic from the vicinity of DFW Airport headed towards Fort Worth) average $1.68 per mile at 5pm on Fridays.

I believe that the projects other than this I-35W phase 3C that already have most of the preliminary work done with express lanes will keep them, just without tolls, since it would be more costly to redo everything than to just leave the express lanes there. I wouldn't expect to see express lanes included on too many future projects except where they make sense as peak flow reversible lanes, e.g. replacing the zipper HOV lane on I-30 east of downtown Dallas with either one dedicated HOV lane or two dedicated regular lanes.

Rothman

Here's the basic problem with PPPs and privatization of tolls:

Public authorities have more public oversight, through appointment of boards from elected officials.  Also, we have learned from negative experiences, such as with Robert Moses and more controls have been put in place through public regulation.

With private operators, the focus goes from public service to maximizing profit.  Therefore, the public will always end up gouged as private operators ensure that they increase their profit over their expenses.

It is like when I worked at a law firm:  Sure, your retainer and contract may have all sort of safeguards in it, but at the end of the day, you are solely dependent upon the law firm itself when it comes to determining if the results of the work were adequate -- had the fun experience of dealing with a perplexed in-house counsel of a client that could not figure out if the settlement reached was a good one -- we just told him that it was (it wasn't) and he had to go with it and couldn't prove otherwise.

The public will pay more to private operators because of the profit motivation and the monopoly over the facility, not less.  You pay expenses + profit with them, whereas at least there are some more direct checks on the tolls levied by public authorities.

Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position(s) of NYSDOT.

motorola870

Quote from: dfwmapper on August 18, 2019, 03:01:23 AM
Quote from: motorola870 on August 16, 2019, 02:59:42 PM
They need to reign in the costs to drive the lanes No excuses for having $10+ tolls during peak from one toll gantry to the next while Some tollways are cheap such as the 360 south tollway less than $2 for 9 miles. I don't get how costs are up to 10x the cost of building a tollway from scratch. The deal is raw for North Texas drivers. So if this is the last set of express lanes approved does this basically deal a blow to the plan to add express lanes to the Interstate 20, Interstate 820 and U.S. 287 funnel rebuild project? That is supposed to break ground in 3 years?
The toll lanes on 35W are "managed" lanes. The tolls are dynamically adjusted to keep traffic flowing at 50mph or higher. The base price is around 15¢ per mile, but it can go beyond 10x that during the busiest times. The westbound express lanes on the combined SH 121/SH 183 between their merge and I-820 (traffic from the vicinity of DFW Airport headed towards Fort Worth) average $1.68 per mile at 5pm on Fridays.

I believe that the projects other than this I-35W phase 3C that already have most of the preliminary work done with express lanes will keep them, just without tolls, since it would be more costly to redo everything than to just leave the express lanes there. I wouldn't expect to see express lanes included on too many future projects except where they make sense as peak flow reversible lanes, e.g. replacing the zipper HOV lane on I-30 east of downtown Dallas with either one dedicated HOV lane or two dedicated regular lanes.
to be honest they should have just gone with the NTTA building the express lanes and charging solo riders 24/7 for use the lanes and 2+ HOV would be free. That would encourage people to carpool to use the new lanes or pay up if they want to avoid congestion. Saying oh lets charge an arm and a leg during rush hour to make these lanes less attractive is very out of touch. They are basically creating a traffic jam on the main lanes during rush hour instead of evenly distributing traffic the whole keep a certain speed in the express lanes is a joke as well if people drive 10 or 15 below the limit and drive the main lane speeds and more.

dfwmapper

Quote from: motorola870 on August 18, 2019, 11:23:00 PM
to be honest they should have just gone with the NTTA building the express lanes and charging solo riders 24/7 for use the lanes and 2+ HOV would be free. That would encourage people to carpool to use the new lanes or pay up if they want to avoid congestion. Saying oh lets charge an arm and a leg during rush hour to make these lanes less attractive is very out of touch. They are basically creating a traffic jam on the main lanes during rush hour instead of evenly distributing traffic the whole keep a certain speed in the express lanes is a joke as well if people drive 10 or 15 below the limit and drive the main lane speeds and more.
If I remember correctly, the NTTA has the right of first refusal on all toll projects in the Metroplex, stemming from the outcome of the legal battles around what is now the Sam Rayburn Tollway, and so they would have had to have declined all of these projects. I believe there are limits on how much they're willing and able to bond to fund construction of new toll roads, and with everything else they've done in the last decade or so (acquiring the rights to build the SRT and actually building it, building the SRT/DNT flyovers, extending the PGBT, extending the DNT, widening the PGBT/DNT/SRT, building the CTP) and what they have coming up (more DNT extensions, PGBT extension to I-20) they just didn't have the interest of taking on more projects, especially with the high costs and questionable ROI involved. Since they weren't going to do it, the only way they were going to get built was with outside money.

The blame ultimately lies with dumbshit voters who demand increased services from the government but elect legislators who campaign on a platform of lowering taxes. Your choices are lower taxes and fewer services, or higher taxes and more services. Reasonable people can disagree on exactly where along that spectrum they want their government to be, and that used to form the basis of the political system in this country. Unfortunately, there are far too many people who have been infected with the idiocy of wanting more but paying less, and those people control things at the moment. Raising the gas taxes 15 years ago and indexing them to inflation would have prevented the worst of this, but here we are.

Bobby5280

Way too many American voters are cluelessly selfish. They want the government to provide things like great roads, but don't want to pay for any of it. In fact, let's have some tax cuts and make all these new demands. They latch on to any tired, lame excuse to rationalize the impossible budgetary math. Obviously the favorite, go-to excuse is gettin' all them thar darkies off the welfare -as if that makes up 100% of all "entitlement" spending. The idea is we would be able to get all of the things we want, such as really great roads and other elements of infrastructure if it wasn't for all these lazy folks getting a hand out. Obviously the reality of it is a whole lot more complicated. If we got rid of every social safety net program, in return for more tax cuts (and maybe some new roads) the consequences of a cartoon-ish political move would be pretty far reaching.

Anyway, roads themselves are severely over priced. I suppose a good bit of the cost inflation is due to rising materials costs. Regulations on how roads much be built change routinely and that increases costs. I think the extremely long, drawn out legal and bureaucratic process does a whole lot to balloon costs as well. 40-50 years ago the US was building out elements of the Interstate Highway System at a very rapid pace. There's no way we can do that now with the slog of bureaucratic procedure and lawsuits suffocating development.

Beltway

Quote from: Rothman on August 18, 2019, 06:47:44 AM
With private operators, the focus goes from public service to maximizing profit.  Therefore, the public will always end up gouged as private operators ensure that they increase their profit over their expenses.
Not when they are regulated like a public utility, such as electricity, water, natural gas, cable TV and internet, landline telephone, etc.  Because that is what they are, a public utility.

The public utility commission and/or state corporation commission, if properly run, will allow a fair rate of return, but will not allow the "gouging" and "profit maximization" that you keep complaining about.

Are you opposed to public utilities?
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

Baloney is a reserved word on the Internet
    (Robert Coté, 2002)

Rothman

Quote from: Beltway on August 19, 2019, 12:37:31 PM
Quote from: Rothman on August 18, 2019, 06:47:44 AM
With private operators, the focus goes from public service to maximizing profit.  Therefore, the public will always end up gouged as private operators ensure that they increase their profit over their expenses.
Not when they are regulated like a public utility, such as electricity, water, natural gas, cable TV and internet, landline telephone, etc.  Because that is what they are, a public utility.

The public utility commission and/or state corporation commission, if properly run, will allow a fair rate of return, but will not allow the "gouging" and "profit maximization" that you keep complaining about.

Are you opposed to public utilities?
Nope.
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position(s) of NYSDOT.

wxfree

#19
There are regulations in place.  In free flow, the company can set tolls up to a certain maximum rate, at whatever level they think will maximize income.  If traffic counts become high, or speeds slow, then they're required to set the toll rate at a certain level, according to a formula in the contract.  The goal is the maintain a certain minimum speed, which I believe is 50, excluding problems that can't be controlled by regulating demand, such as accidents or weather.  They're pretty heavily regulated when the managed lanes experience heavy use, not being allowed to charge rates higher or lower than formula dictates.
I'd like to buy a vowel, Alex.  What is E?

J N Winkler

The starting point for economic regulation as practiced by public utility commissions is capping the maximum rate of return.  While this has its own problems (e.g., to protect ratepayers' interests, the commission staff generally has to study the operations of the utility carefully to ensure that profit above the cap is not hidden through internal consumption), it is a widely accepted model and does not usually fail badly.

It sounds like the element of economic regulation in the Texas transportation PPPs are focused on the prices drivers pay during high-demand times, which creates perverse incentives to keep the prices high at low-demand times to improve profitability and exploit the lack of a cap on rate of return.  The LBJ Express lanes in Dallas are an expensive proposition even in the middle of the night when traffic is very low.  And my concern about transportation PPPs in general is that capital is mobile (at least in the West), so profits often travel very far away from the infrastructure rather than being retained for re-investment in added capacity.
"It is necessary to spend a hundred lire now to save a thousand lire later."--Piero Puricelli, explaining the need for a first-class road system to Benito Mussolini

Beltway

Quote from: J N Winkler on August 20, 2019, 12:50:42 AM
And my concern about transportation PPPs in general is that capital is mobile (at least in the West), so profits often travel very far away from the infrastructure rather than being retained for re-investment in added capacity.
Some people complain about infrastructure and development companies like Transurban that are in foreign countries, but nothing prevents companies from being formed in the U.S. that will perform the same type of business, and even try to buy out PPPs from other such companies.  The U.S. has been dropping the ball in this area.
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

Baloney is a reserved word on the Internet
    (Robert Coté, 2002)

dfwmapper

Quote from: J N Winkler on August 20, 2019, 12:50:42 AM
It sounds like the element of economic regulation in the Texas transportation PPPs are focused on the prices drivers pay during high-demand times, which creates perverse incentives to keep the prices high at low-demand times to improve profitability and exploit the lack of a cap on rate of return.  The LBJ Express lanes in Dallas are an expensive proposition even in the middle of the night when traffic is very low.  And my concern about transportation PPPs in general is that capital is mobile (at least in the West), so profits often travel very far away from the infrastructure rather than being retained for re-investment in added capacity.
Of course the tolls are high. LBJ Express was a $2.6 billion project and NTE so far was $2 billion for segments 1/2, $1.6 billion for segments 3A/3B, and now nearly another $1 billion for segment 3C, and that's got to be paid for out of toll revenues. It seems like a lot of people are just kind of in the frame of mind that the costs on these should match greenfield construction like the DNT or PGBT extensions, where there was clear ROW just sitting there waiting for a new freeway. All of these express lane projects had to be built largely within the footprint of existing freeways, though obviously with expanded ROW in some areas, and expensive tunnels in the case of LBJ, and it all had to be done while minimizing impacts to the existing freeways during construction. The cost per mile is well beyond typical toll road construction costs.

I do agree with the dislike of the profits vanishing off into some foreign country. I also understand that there aren't necessarily a lot of companies in this country who are willing to put themselves on the hook for that much debt on projects like this where it's far from guaranteed that there will be enough revenue generated to pay it off. It's a very fine line that has to be walked of charging enough to pay for things while not charging so much that it discourages use. There's also the very real risk of everything turning to shit with a recession. If unemployment starts going up, that means fewer people driving at peak hours and therefore less demand for the express lanes, and if money is tight, cutting out trips on the Lexus Lanes is a good place to start saving.

Chris

Quote from: Beltway on August 20, 2019, 01:05:39 AMSome people complain about infrastructure and development companies like Transurban that are in foreign countries, but nothing prevents companies from being formed in the U.S. that will perform the same type of business, and even try to buy out PPPs from other such companies.  The U.S. has been dropping the ball in this area.

It should be noted that these consortiums could have a U.S. financing component, for example an investment or pension fund. Transurban, Cintra or Ferrovial are the developers, but U.S. investment funds may be involved as well, so it's not like all profit is automatically shipped overseas.

I think the reason why so few U.S. companies are involved in these large PPPs is that it is a relatively new phenomenon in the U.S., I've read that many states even today don't have legislation that allow PPPs, so that may explain why you typically see foreign companies leading these large-scale projects. PPPs have long been common in Australia and Europe.

wxfree

I haven't looked at all of the agreements, but I remember one of the earlier ones including a provision for profit sharing with TxDOT at certain levels of income.  The purpose seems to be to limit the return on investment to the private company.  They have to charge the high rates to limit traffic counts, so price caps won't work.  The other way to do that is to require payments to TxDOT if the profits are inordinately high.  It doesn't save the tollpayers money, but it it puts some of it back into public projects.
I'd like to buy a vowel, Alex.  What is E?



Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.