CRS (Nunez-Neto) says the Secure Fence Act of 2006 calls for 850 miles of fence, whereas it really calls for 700 miles of fence.

"The Corps of Engineers also predicted that the 25-year life cycle cost of the fence would range from $16.4 million to $70 million per mile depending on the amount of damage sustained by the fencing." (CRS report CRS-25)

Nunez-Neto arrived at a cost of the fence at $60 billion by multiplying the wrong length (850 miles) of the fence by an outrageous number ($70 million per mile over 25 years).

Engineering Life-Cycle Cost Comparison Study of Barrier Fencing Systems -- Feb. 1999 (Corps of Engineers)
 Requires Free Acrobat PDF File Reader

"Although these results attempt to account for the effects of terrain, structural vandalism, projected maintenance and repair (M&R) costs and special equipment needs, they should be considered preliminary. For this application, more operational experience is needed to arrive at an optimized and practical solution." (Page 2)

Sandia Fence - Pessimistic Assumptions
(emphasis added)

Construction costs for the first year are assumed to total $10,759,467 for 14 miles. Beginning in year 2, damage to fencing is assumed to be severe and ongoing. For years 2, 3, and 4, maintenance of 80 man-hours per week is assumed. At a rate of $22.60 per man-hour, the yearly maintenance costs come to $94,016. In the fifth year (and every fourth year thereafter), a complete replacement of the fence is required. (Page 23)

OUR COMMENTS
Operational Experience Ignored

American Patrol can find no evidence that Nuñez-Neto contacted the Corps of Engineers to check on the validity of the pessimistic cost assumptions made seven years ago even though the Corps now has experience with which to test the assumptions and even though there is no evidence that the assumptions were anywhere close to reality.

Challenging Assumptions

If we take the actual length of the fence at 700 miles and use the lower estimate of cost given by the Corps of Engineers ($16.4 million), the life cycle cost would be $11.5 billion, not $60 billion. Even then, no attempt is made to measure the benefit of the fence such as lowered burdens on the American taxpayer and lowered costs of Border Patrol Agents and related expenses. Had these factors been taken into account the analysis would have shown that the fence would probably pay for itself in the first year of operation and that a true Net Present Value of the fence over twenty five years would have exceeded the $60 billion that CRS says it would have cost!

In other words, had an honest cost-benefit analysis been done, it would probably show that the fence would save the taxpayers $60 billion, instead of costing them $60 billion. That is a swing of $120 billion - not chump change.

We understand that American Border Patrol is planning to develop a computer model of the cost effectiveness of the fence as part of Operation B.E.E.F.