[House Hearing, 113 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
TIMELESS HONOR: REVIEWING CURRENT OPERATIONS OF OUR NATIONAL CEMETERIES
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
SUBCOMMITTEE ON DISABILITY ASSISTANCE AND MEMORIAL AFFAIRS
of the
COMMITTEE ON VETERANS' AFFAIRS
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED THIRTEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
TUESDAY, DECEMBER 9, 2014
__________
Serial No. 113-95
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.fdsys.gov
__________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
96-138 WASHINGTON : 2015
__________________________________________________________________________
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office
Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov. Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; DC area (202)512-1800
Fax: (202) 512-2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402-0001
COMMITTEE ON VETERANS' AFFAIRS
JEFF MILLER, Florida, Chairman
DOUG LAMBORN, Colorado MICHAEL H. MICHAUD, Maine, Ranking
GUS M. BILIRAKIS, Florida, Vice- Minority Member
Chairman CORRINE BROWN, Florida
DAVID P. ROE, Tennessee MARK TAKANO, California
BILL FLORES, Texas JULIA BROWNLEY, California
JEFF DENHAM, California DINA TITUS, Nevada
JON RUNYAN, New Jersey ANN KIRKPATRICK, Arizona
DAN BENISHEK, Michigan RAUL RUIZ, California
TIM HUELSKAMP, Kansas GLORIA NEGRETE McLEOD, California
MIKE COFFMAN, Colorado ANN M. KUSTER, New Hampshire
BRAD R. WENSTRUP, Ohio BETO O'ROURKE, Texas
PAUL COOK, California TIMOTHY J. WALZ, Minnesota
JACKIE WALORSKI, Indiana
DAVID JOLLY, Florida
Jon Towers, Staff Director
Nancy Dolan, Democratic Staff Director
SUBCOMMITTEE ON DISABILITY ASSISTANCE AND MEMORIAL AFFAIRS
JON RUNYAN, New Jersey, Chairman
DOUG LAMBORN, Colorado DINA TITUS, Nevada, Ranking Member
GUS BILIRAKIS, Florida BETO O'ROURKE, Texas
MARK AMODEI, Nevada RAUL RUIZ, California
PAUL COOK, California GLORIA NEGRETE McLEOD, California
DAVID JOLLY, Florida
Pursuant to clause 2(e)(4) of Rule XI of the Rules of the House, public
hearing records of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs are also
published in electronic form. The printed hearing record remains the
official version. Because electronic submissions are used to prepare
both printed and electronic versions of the hearing record, the process
of converting between various electronic formats may introduce
unintentional errors or omissions. Such occurrences are inherent in the
current publication process and should diminish as the process is
further refined.
C O N T E N T S
----------
Tuesday, December 9, 2014
Page
Timeless Honor: Reviewing Current Operations of Our National
Cemeteries..................................................... 1
OPENING STATEMENTS
Hon. Jon Runyan, Chairman........................................ 1
Hon. Dina Titus, Ranking Member.................................. 3
WITNESSES
Mr. Ronald E. Walters, Acting Under Secretary for Memorial
Affairs, National Cemetery Administration, U.S. Department of
Veterans Affairs............................................... 5
Prepared Statement........................................... 31
Accompanied By:
Mr. Glenn Powers, Deputy Under Secretary for Field
Programs, National Cemetery Administration, U.S.
Department of Veterans Affairs
Mr. Patrick K. Hallinan, Executive Director, Army National
Military Cemeteries, Department of the Army.................... 6
Prepared Statement........................................... 42
Hon. Max Cleland, Secretary, American Battle Monuments Commission 8
Prepared Statement........................................... 56
Ms. Ami Neiberger-Miller, Director of Outreach and Education,
Tragedy Assistance Program for Survivors....................... 22
Prepared Statement........................................... 60
Ms. Diane M. Zumatto, National Legislative Director, AMVETS...... 24
Prepared Statement........................................... 72
TIMELESS HONOR: REVIEWING CURRENT OPERATIONS OF OUR NATIONAL CEMETERIES
----------
Tuesday, December 9, 2014
U.S. House of Representatives,
Committee on Veterans' Affairs,
Subcommittee on Disability Assistance and Memorial Affairs,
Washington, D.C.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:00 p.m., in
Room 334, Cannon House Office Building, Hon. Jon Runyan
[chairman of the subcommittee] presiding.
Present: Representatives Runyan, Lamborn, Bilirakis, Titus,
and O'Rourke.
Also present: Representative Stivers.
OPENING STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN JON RUNYAN
Mr. Runyan. Good afternoon everyone. This oversight hearing
of the Subcommittee on Disability Assistance and Memorial
Affairs will now come to order.
We are here today to examine the issues facing our military
veterans cemeteries. Our goal in this hearing is to learn more
about the operations of the National Cemetery Administration,
Arlington National Cemetery and the American Battle Monuments
Commission over the past year. As well as seek the organization
commentary on several focused issues that I will be
highlighting momentarily.
I would also like to welcome Mr. Walters as he has stepped
up to perform duties as Acting Under Secretary of Memorial
Affairs after the retirement of Under Secretary Muro and we
look forward to hearing about his vision for overseeing the
honorable mission at NCA.
Mr. Hallinan, Secretary Cleland, it is also nice to have
you here as well.
The endeavors of these entities are among the most
honorable in government and the people with these organizations
work day in and day out to honor veterans and servicemembers
with dignified burials, and to assist families and loved ones
who must deal with a loss and tremendous grief.
As I said before, our Nation's solemn obligation to honor
those who have served does not cease at the end of their
service, or retirement, or ultimately upon their death, and it
is the responsibility of these organizations to see this
commitment through.
I would like to take a moment to note that today will be my
last hearing as subcommittee chair and that I am extremely
pleased that today's focus is upon the tremendous work of these
organizations. Your commitment to the timeless honor of our
Nation's veterans and the compassionate missions of NCA,
Arlington National Cemetery and ABMC.
I have been proud to work with all of you over the recent
years, and I trust that you will continue to go above and
beyond the care for our Nation and our national and our
international shrines.
With that said, today the committee is interested in
hearing from the National Cemetery Administration on several
focused areas, including continued efforts to provide burial
access initiatives for rural veterans, those planned for urban
areas in other future outlets for burial options.
We will also hear about new regulation which was aimed to
address an issue which was discussed at a previous hearing
regarding requests for headstones and markers made by those
other than next of kin.
I also look forward to hearing updates on Arlington
National Cemetery and I note for the record Mr. Hallinan has
done a tremendous job at ANC and we certainly want to make sure
that the standards he and his predecessor Ms. Condon that put
into place are carried forward. And I thank you Mr. Hallinan
for your truly tireless commitment and your evident passion for
the mission that you serve.
Additionally, I understand that 2014 is a significant
commemorative year for the Nation for the American Battle
Monuments Commission. We will be hearing updates on the far
reaching operations of ABMC which operates in 16 foreign
countries and many other locations.
Secretary Cleland, thank you for your service, for your
continued service, and for being here today. ABMC is a
remarkable organization and we appreciate hearing from you.
Now, I formally welcome our witness. As noted, these
panelists play significant roles in ensuring that we as a
Nation fulfill our responsibilities to honor those who have
served all of us. We hope that through discussion and questions
such as what will occur today we work collectively not only to
meet the challenges, but always to exceed the standard.
First, Mr. Ronald Walters, Acting Secretary for Memorial
Affairs is here on behalf of National Cemetery Administration
which oversees 131 cemeteries nationwide. Mr. Walters is
accompanied by Mr. Glenn Powers Deputy Under Secretary for
field programs.
Next, we will have Mr. Patrick Hallinan, Executive Director
of Army National Military Centers will also testified on panel
1. In his role Mr. Hallinan is charged of overseeing Arlington
National Cemetery.
And finally, Secretary Max Cleland, the American Battle
Monument Commission is with us today. Secretary Cleland will
offer an update on ABMC's mission plan and recent
commemorations.
We will also be hearing from a second panel including Ms.
Ami Neiberger-Miller who is the Director of Outreach and
Education for Tragedy Assistance Program for Survivors. And Ms.
Diane Zumatto, the National Legislative Director for AMVETS.
With those introductions complete, I also thank the member
who is not on this committee, but who has expressed an interest
in this hearing topic. I would like to ask unanimous consent
that Representative Stivers, who is not here yet, be allowed to
participate in this hearing.
Hearing no objection, so ordered.
Thank you all for being with us today and I now yield to
the ranking member for her opening statements.
[The prepared statement of Jon Runyan appears in the
Appendix]
OPENING STATEMENT OF RANKING MEMBER DINA TITUS
Ms. Titus. Well, thank you Mr. Chairman and thank you for
holding this hearing.
I guess this is our grand finale, I suspect this will be
the last time that our subcommittee meets during this session.
And I want to thank you for your leadership and tell you what a
pleasure it has been to work with you and your staff on this
committee. I think veterans have been well served by your
bipartisan, fair and compassionate approach to these issues.
So, yes----
Mr. Runyan. I want to thank you for that also because it is
a two-way street. Thank you for your commitment and your
passion.
Ms. Titus. Well, thank you. I also want to thank the
witnesses for being here. It is a special treat to see
Secretary Cleland, a long time friend from Georgia, so welcome
to all of you. I know that you share our feelings that a proper
burial for our Nation's veterans and their families is a solemn
obligation that we need to uphold.
The National Cemetery Administration has grown dramatically
since its creation in 1862 and only 14 cemeteries were created
to serve as resting places for our veterans after the war
between the States.
The administration has also expanded its geographic
diversity to better serve veterans across the country. I know
recent legislation added to your ability to do that.
There are now 131 national cemeteries New York has seven,
three other states have six and Puerto Rico has two. So your
access has grown considerably, but that brings me to my point,
there is still a problem where some of our veterans do not have
the ability to be buried in national cemeteries that are close
to home and accessible for their families.
This is especially true in the west. And the state with the
largest veterans population that is not served by a national
cemetery continues to be Nevada, which is the home to over
230,000 veterans, 153,000 of whom live in the Las Vegas area.
So in total, there are 11 States with the combined veteran
population of 1.8 million who do not have an active national
cemetery. And because most of those states are in the west,
that is a lot of square miles that is covered that doesn't have
that access.
Many of largest cities in the west like Las Vegas exceed
the NCA's eligibility requirements of 80,000 veterans, they
don't have a national cemetery. Now, you have responded by
proposing placement of national columbaria in cities that are
already served by a national cemetery to give access to urban
areas. These urban initiatives are great, but you propose them
for Los Angeles, which already has two national cemeteries, and
New York that is served by three.
This is good, but it is really a matter of convenience, not
a matter of necessity. Those cities may not have perfect
access, but they are certainly in a lot better shape than a
veteran in Las Vegas who has got to travel four hours to
California in Bakersfield to get to a national cemetery. In
Salt Lake City, you have to travel eight hours for a burial and
the closest national cemetery in Denver. So before you place
more of these facilities of convenience, I would like for us to
look a little closer at cities that exceed the 80,000 member
requirement and see if we might not want to put some facilities
there.
So I look forward to hearing your plans for how to address
that issue because as long as I am here, I am not going to let
it go. I am going to keep bringing it up and appreciate working
with you on it.
A couple of other specific issues I hope that we can
address. One is that last March I sent a letter to then-
Secretary Shinseki commending him for allowing same-sex burials
of couples in national cemeteries. We need a policy on that.
Right now it is rather capricious, it is case by case. And even
if it works for a national cemetery, the state cemeteries have
different policies and that doesn't seem to be fair to me to
our veterans and their families.
And finally something that has just recently come to my
attention, is that veterans who serve in the Armed Services are
at a disadvantage in another way. If you are the spouse of a
veteran and you pass away, you can be buried in a veteran
cemetery even if the veteran is still alive so that family
members will be able to stay together.
Unfortunately, current law prohibits the VA from burying a
family member of an active duty serviceman who passes away
while in the service. So I think that is something that we also
need to look at and work on legislation to correct, because
some of these things only make it fair for veterans and their
families,--all veterans and their families. And dealing with
them one way in national cemeteries, another in state, and on a
case-by-case basis. Let's work together to create a policy.
So I look forward to hearing all of your testimony and
especially also from the Battle Monuments Commission to how
certain cut backs and resources will effect the service that
you provide.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Titus appears in the
Appendix]
Mr. Runyan. I thank the gentlelady.
I advise the witnesses that your complete and written
statements will be entered into the hearing record.
And we are going to move on to our first witness. From the
NCAA--NCA football on the mind for some reason.
Mr. Walters, you are now recognized for 5 minutes for your
testimony.
STATEMENTS OF RONALD E. WALTERS, ACTING UNDER SECRETARY FOR
MEMORIAL AFFAIRS, NATIONAL CEMETERY ADMINISTRATION, U.S.
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS, ACCOMPANIED BY GLEN POWERS,
DEPUTY UNDER SECRETARY FOR FIELD PROGRAMS, NATIONAL CEMETERY
ADMINISTRATION, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS
STATEMENT OF RONALD E. WALTERS
Mr. Walters. Chairman Runyan, Ranking Member Titus and
distinguished members of the subcommittee. Thank you for the
opportunity to provide a review the National Cemetery
Administration's operations and our plans for continuing to
meet the needs of veterans and their families.
I am accompanied today by Glenn Powers, Deputy Under
Secretary for Field Programs. I would also like to acknowledge
our partners from the Army National Military Cemeteries and the
American Battle Monuments Commission. Our shared commitment to
honor and memorialize our Nation's veterans is strengthened
through our continued partnership.
Mr. Chairman, under Secretary McDonald's leadership, the
department recently launched MyVA, an ambitious effort to
organize the department into one that is centered around our
customer, the veteran. It is this is focus that has defined and
will continue to define NCA into the future.
Consistent with the MyVA effort, NCA measures success
against the ultimate outcome for the veteran. Direct feedback
from our customers lets us know if we are achieving those
outcomes 2014. As reported in 2014 for the fifth consecutive
time, NCA achieved the highest score ever recorded for a public
or private organization on the American customer satisfaction
index.
Thanks to our employees, NCA's score of 96 was 28 points
above the 68 point average for Federal Government agencies. Our
employees are NCA's best assets and we value their feedback.
This year I am pleased to report that NCA increased its
participation rate in VA's all employee survey by 10 percent.
NCA employee engagement, along with other VA employees is
invaluable to the successful design of MyVA. This is especially
true of NCA's workforce, 74 percent of which are veterans, the
highest percentage in the Federal Government.
Our employees are also more than willing to reach out to
those in need of a second chance. I am pleased to report that
we continue our efforts to end veteran homelessness.
Two years ago, NCA established a cemetery caretaker
apprenticeship program, designed to help homeless veterans. Our
second class of apprentices just completed their training on
December 5th. Since the program's inception, 32 formerly
homeless veterans are now employed full time at NCA. Our third
class of apprentices will convene this spring. Thanks to the
dedication of our entire workforce, NCA successfully met
increasing workload requirements in 2014.
Through our operation and maintenance program we maintained
over 3.4 million grave sites, performed over 125,000
interments, issued over 600,000 presidential memorial
certificates, provided over 360,000 headstones, markers and
medallions, and awarded $28.8 million to repair grave sites.
In addition, due to our careful planning and management of
construction, and grant funds, no interruptions in burial
services occurred at any national or state veteran cemetery. We
continue to make progress on implementing new burial access
policies previously approved by Congress.
NCA plans to eventually open 18 new cemeteries, which will
provide new or enhanced access to burial options for over 2
million veterans. The new facilities include five new national
cemeteries, two in Florida, which will open this year, and one
each in Colorado, Nebraska and New York, as well as a national
cemetery presence in eight highly rural and five urban
locations.
We strive to better serve veterans and their families in
the future. NCA recently received the results of an independent
study on emerging burial practices that addresses green burials
and additional ways to memorialize veterans. We will be happy
to brief the committee on the study in greater detail after we
have completed our review.
NCA is planning to expand the use of GIS GPS technology at
our national cemeteries to enhance overall grave site
accountability. This technology will provide state of the art
mapping, grave site and headstone information and will serve as
the basis for our ongoing grave site accountability efforts.
Finally, we intend to explore how to best share the rich
history of our national cemeteries and the stories of our
Nation's heroes with the public through a variety of
approaches.
Mr. Chairman, we look forward to our continued work with
this committee to care for those who shall have borne the
battle, and we are greatly appreciative of your leadership and
all of you have done four our Nation's veterans.
Thank you again for this opportunity to be here today, and
I would be pleased to answer any questions that you may have.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Ronald Walters appears in
the Appendix]
Mr. Runyan. Thank you, Mr. Walters.
And with that we will now hear from Mr. Hallinan for his
testimony. So, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
STATEMENT OF PATRICK K. HALLINAN
Mr. Hallinan. Chairman Runyan, Ranking Member Titus,
distinguished members of the subcommittee, thank you for the
opportunity to provide an update on operations at Arlington
National Cemetery. Since my testimony to this subcommittee a
year ago, we continue to build upon our tremendous progress. We
are setting industry standards for best practices becoming a
center of excellence while working closely with our partner
organizations that I am honored to testify with today.
I am proud to say that Arlington has one of the most
stringent accountability processes of any national cemetery. We
have leverage, cutting edge technology to develop an integrated
solution that uses digital record of interment system with
read, write, Web site capabilities to provide real time mapping
updates and a common operational picture of activities at the
cemetery.
Our interment service system performs systematic backups,
redundant identification and burial location checks, it
provides access to all digitized burial records, it stores
photographs of the caskets and the urns, and each electronic
interment record. It has a headstone design in ordering
functionality. And most of all, it enforces the strictest chain
of custody of any Federal cemetery.
The ANC mapping system tracks grave site availability,
field operational status, deconflicts funeral procession
routes, while also containing grave site and headstone GPS
locations, which are accurate to within three centimeters.
These systems in concert ensure accountability, and
efficiency, and operations at Arlington Cemetery. To keep up
with the ever-increasing pace of requests for burial at
Arlington, we have hired additional schedulers to reduce wait
times. And we continue to make every effort to ensure our
employees are trained to the highest standards when dealing
with families, and the public, treating each with respect and
sensitivity.
As we look to improve the appearance and operations within
the cemetery, we are working on several projects. In October,
we began the renovation of our welcome center restrooms to
improve our visitors' experience. We are currently renovating
the basement of the welcome center to provide work spaces for
our staff.
Another one of our goals for fiscal year 2015 is to
redesign and improve the manner in which we gather and escort
funeral processions. We are designing a new funeral procession
queuing area for family vehicles which will make our funeral
lineup much more intuitive and easier to negotiate.
I am also pleased to inform the subcommittee of planning
and design efforts that are well underway with the
establishment of an ossuary, called the Tomb of Remembrance.
This project will allow us to provide the Nation with a
dignified place to provide final disposition of cremated
remains which may be commingled or unidentified.
In May 2014, we refurbished the display room of the
Memorial Amphitheater with new exhibits which included museum-
quality cases to properly protect items gifted to the Tomb of
the Unknown Soldier.
We have recently completed an Americans with Disability Act
accessibility study that will help us program and execute
projects to ensure that our national shrine is as accessible as
possible for all those who wish to visit.
We are actively designing projects which will improve ADA
access throughout the cemetery. The cemetery staff also
continued to make progress repairing, replacing much of our
dated utility infrastructure. In 2011, we identified
approximately $74 million in deferred maintenance. To date we
have spent $40 million for improvements to the water lines, the
roads, the building and the HVAC systems.
We are committed to maintaining Arlington as an active
cemetery for as long as possible for our Nation's military
heroes. The Millennium Project is currently within budget and
on schedule, to be completed in summer of 2016. This will
provide the cemetery with an additional 27,282 burial spaces
for both caskets and interments.
Arlington has begun the planning and design of southern
expansion project. Once completed, both projects are expected
to extend Arlington's operational longevity through the 2050s.
Mr. Chairman, as this is your last year on the
subcommittee, I personally thank you for your leadership and
dedicated support of Arlington during your tenure. I commit
that through diligent efforts, established procedures,
repeatable processes and better technologies and
institutionalized standards, Arlington will sustain and
maintain the trust it has reclaimed.
We can ensure the Nation of this, every burial service at
Arlington National Cemetery will continue to be conducted with
the honor and dignity our serving members have earned, and
their families will be treated with compassion and respect.
Thank you, and I look forward to answering any questions
you may have.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Patrick Hallinan appears in
the Appendix]
Mr. Runyan. Thank you, Mr. Hallinan.
With that, I recognize Secretary Cleland for his testimony.
STATEMENT OF HON. MAX CLELAND
Mr. Cleland. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
May I say it is an honor to be with you again, Mr. Chairman
and members of the committee.
We will miss you, Mr. Chairman. We will miss talking
football, we will miss talking our mission and we will miss as
Ms. Titus said, your fair evenhandled approach to these issues
in a bipartisan way. That is rare in this town and I for one
really appreciate it. We will miss you.
Secondly, I wanted to be here with the people at this
table, over the last few years I have really gotten to know
them, and I can tell you Patrick Hallinan has been doing a
great job out here. Now he is the tip of the spear. He is the
guy leading the pack out there. I was asked by the Secretary of
the Army about 4 years ago to head up an advisory committee on
the Arlington National Cemetery. They have come light years in
4 years, I can tell you that.
Four years ago, they were operating off of 3 by 5 cards,
now they have got good technology that could launch a
satellite. I mean, it is quite amazing the transformation that
they have put together out there.
The Veterans Administration, Mr. Chairman, I used to head
and--many many years ago--and we are working very, very closely
with the VA. I met with Secretary McDonald and we are in
agreement, particularly on some sensitive issues regarding the
Punchbowl Cemetery in Hawaii and visitor center experience
there and we are working closely with all of the people at the
table.
I might say, in terms of Arlington that the American Battle
Monuments Commission has put no charge to Arlington, a charge
to us, the American Battle Monuments Commission, a liaison
officer there on site and he is doing a great job. He has been
17 years in western Europe and he is an added benefit I think
for Arlington.
One of our staff members, Tom Sole, is on the advisory
council for cemeteries that works at the VA, that meets at the
VA, his name is Tom Sole.
I have with me today people who have labored in the
vineyard of the American Battle Monuments Commission a long
time. Chris Philpot, our chief financial officer and Mike
Conley, our administrative officer, we are just honored to be
with him today.
I would say, Mr. Chairman, basically that last night I saw
the movie based on the Laura Hillenbrand book Unbroken. And it
was a powerful testimony of one man's incredible endurance in
World War II, Louis Zamperini, unbelievable, an unbelievable
story. But the amazing thing about it is when you think he was
one of the 16 million men and women caught up in World War II
that occurred on what six of the seven continents, it was
worldwide, worldwide conflagration. That expanded the work of
the American Battle Monuments Commission.
We now have 125,000 servicemembers buried in at least 14
different Nations. We have 95,000 names of the missing from
World War I and World War II on our Tablets of the Missing. You
see a movie like Unbroken and you just realize wow, why you are
in this business, General Pershing said and we like to quote at
the American Battle Monuments Commission, ``the time will not
dim the glory of their deeds.''
Mr. Chairman, I will be glad to answer any questions. The
one issue that the Congress gave the American Battle Monuments
Commission was Clark Cemetery. En route to Vietnam in 1967, I
went by the old Clark Air Base en route to Vietnam, it is now
closed. The Philippine Government asked the American military
to leave a number of years ago. That left Clark air field base
cemetery, which had been around almost 100 years with about
8,000 interments, men, women, children dependents, unattended.
And so, the Congress gave that mission to the American
Battle Monuments Commission. We have taken that mission
seriously, we are in it with both feet. We are doing an
assessment of what it will take to bring that cemetery up to
respectable standards. It is not going to be the Arlington of
the Pacific. It is not going to be one of our topnotch
cemeteries, but we will maintain it with dignity, but that is
going to cost some money. So we will be coming back to you in a
couple of years for that. Now we are on that case and burials
have begun again.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[The prepared statement of Hon. Max Cleland appears in the
Appendix]
Mr. Runyan. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. I know that was one
of the issues that was in the forefront when I first took this
position.
With that we will start a round of questioning and this
question is really for the whole panel, the collective
expertise at the NCA, Army National Cemeteries, and ABMC is
unique and frankly I want to say impressive. And each
organization must meet strict standards to properly honor those
who served the Nation.
Mr. Hallinan touched on the topic of information sharing
and best practices and the secretary also touched on that. And
I would like to think that is tremendously valuable and should
be encouraged.
How do each of your organizations share the information and
innovation? And how did that relationship of collaboration
begin?
Start with Mr. Walters.
Mr. Walters. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Well, we obviously work very, very closely with Army and
the American Battle Monuments Commission in our shared mission
to serve veterans. For starters, both organizations have a
representative on our advisory committee on NCA's advisory
committee and their input on that committee, which ranges over
a variety of issues, we have found extremely helpful over the
years.
With Army, we have also established a board that meets two
times a year to discuss areas of mutual interest and to share
best practices. For example, Mr. Hallinan mentioned the use of
GIS, GPS technology. It is something that the National Cemetery
Administration is beginning to use. And we can certainly learn
best practices from Arlington's success in that regard. I would
also submit that there are many things that NCA has shared with
Arlington that has worked equally well in their favor.
With ABMC, we are currently working on a project to
construct an interpretive center at the Punchbowl in Hawaii. In
fact, Mr. Powers was recently at the Punchbowl to check on the
progress of that. So we have many collaborative efforts with
ABMC as well to share in the historical aspects of our Nation's
veterans at our cemetery grounds.
Mr. Runyan. Mr. Hallinan, anything to add?
Mr. Hallinan. Mr. Chairman, in the direct answer to the
question how did it all begin the efforts towards communication
and collaboration. I formerly worked with Mr. Ron Walters and
the former-Under Secretary, Steve Muro for 33 years with NCA.
When I came over to Arlington in 2010 during difficult and
challenging times, one of the first things I did was create a
written memorandum of agreement between both agencies, that the
Secretary of the Army approved. So we took advantage of
training that was ongoing, standards and measures that had been
put in place, based on those 30 something, 33 years, decades
worth of experience. So that relationship was there. And we
just strengthened that relationship and continued to share over
the last couple of years.
My relationship with ABMC, the former-Senator of Cleland is
a member of our advisory committee. He was also my old boss
when I worked at the VA so we have known each other for many
years, both professionally and as veterans. So the relationship
professionally and personally was there. We reached out and
signed a written MOU with ABMC and set up meetings where we can
share some of these best practices that the committee is aware
of what we have done with technology, what we have done with
standard operating procedures, what we have done to train our
staff for sensitivity when dealing with families.
So the communications are in place, the mechanisms are in
place, the vehicles are there, we are working together. As Mr.
Cleland pointed out, he is assigned to a permanent liaison
because that is part of my staff that sits right outside my
office, actively engaged, proactively engaged looking at what
we are doing with technology, at the same time sharing their
wealth of experience on teaching the history of those who have
worn the uniform.
So across the board here at this table and going forward
into the future, excellent working relationship that has been
documented that is in place, even when we are gone.
Thank you.
Mr. Runyan. Secretary Cleland, do you have anything to add?
Ms. Cleland. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much.
Actually, the corporation between these agencies is one of
the things I am most proud of. Hadn't always been that way. As
you well know, it is unusual for a government agency to work
with another government agency because budgets and policies
usually stovepiped and everything is lined up to where you are
accountable to your Congressional counterparts and oversight
people, and you don't really talk to your colleagues, even
though they are in the same business.
We are in the same business all of us. We are in the
business of honoring those who have served, particularly when
they get killed in action and particularly when they die, and
looking after their families. So that is the business we are
in.
I made sure that Patrick Hallinan and his associate Renea
Yates came over to the 70th anniversary of the Normandy
invasion. We were there, all of us. They were with the
commission, with the President of the United States and then on
that June 6th of this year.
Then the next day they went back for a professional tour to
look at the cemetery at Normandy, and especially the
interpretive center that we have there that we think is world
class. Arlington is now looking at that kind of thing
themselves. So there is a massive change back and forth. Our
computer people, our IT people have shared information for a
number of years.
In terms of the VA, like I mentioned, I met with Secretary
McDonald. We have memorial where the VA has cemeteries, it is
unique. But there in the Punchbowl cemetery--I was just out
there Veterans Day, the VA has been out there the last few
days, so we are working closely with them on that unique
opportunity to work together to magnify the interpretive
experience and make sure that the experience at the Punchbowl
is something that future generations can grasp.
So I am proud to work with these folks and they are the
best in the business as far as I can tell.
Mr. Runyan. Thank you for that.
My time has expired, but I just want to say one thing,
because I think what you all do is unique and that there is a
personal relationship there with a lot of good professional
structure around it. And I just wanted to highlight that point.
So with that I will yield to the ranking member.
Ms. Titus. Thank you.
Mr. Walters, I would like to talk to you about that urban
initiative program and ask you maybe you can explain the
justification of why you don't include urban areas that have
people who have a difficulty getting to State cemeteries, if
they don't have a Federal cemetery. Like in Las Vegas, you have
to go out to Boulder City. If you take public transit that
takes you 2 hours and you still have to walk 6 miles. So there
are any little widows who can make that trip. So why wouldn't
those kind of urban areas be considered for this initiative?
Mr. Walters. The purpose of the urban initiative, at least
as it is defined now, is to provide ancillary service to
existing national cemeteries where we have data that shows that
there are problems with time and distance barriers at those
locations.
We have five very specific criteria against which we
evaluate a potential location for the placement of a
columbaria-only cemetery. And again, it is designed to
supplement the national cemeteries and to address gaps in
service that our customers are telling us through formal
surveys and other means and other feedback.
Ms. Titus. But would it make sense to expanding that to
also include access to the state cemetery when there is no
national cemetery?
Mr. Walters. Well, I think certainly it makes sense to
begin to engage those who use state cemeteries and bury loved
ones in state cemeteries similar to the way we are doing with
national cemeteries. I think from that point on we could then
examine whether or not it is most appropriate for the VA to
step in to provide those columbaria-only facilities or if we
can work with the states to either provide them or perhaps to
have is a better rationale for the placement of the cemeteries
to begin with at the state level.
Ms. Titus. Do you think there is something in the funding
formula that that discriminates against location of these
cemeteries in the west that could be addressed?
Mr. Walters. In the state grant funding formula?
Ms. Titus. No, or in the location of a National cemetery
funding formula.
Mr. Walters. Absolutely not. There is no formula for the
allocation of money. What determines the allocation of money
for the placement of new national cemeteries is our access
policies, which is wherever we have 80,000 veterans within a 75
mile radius of a proposed site, that is where we place a new
national cemetery, regardless of what state it is in or whether
it cross-cuts states or other factors.
Ms. Titus. Well it doesn't seem to be working very well in
the west, does it? Because they have more than 80,000 veterans
in Las Vegas.
Mr. Walters. Well, yes, ma'am. As you know, I mean our
access policies at this point consider veterans covered with a
burial option if they have convenient access to either a
national or state cemetery.
Ms. Titus. I would argue that that is not a convenient
access if you have to ride 2 hours each way on mass transit and
walk 6 miles, that is not very convenient.
Mr. Walters. Our access standard does not take into account
driving time and distance, it is mileage. My understanding is
Boulder City is approximately 30 miles from Las Vegas. I am not
aware of what the driving time would be.
I think the bottom line, ma'am, is that we do not consider
burial in a state cemetery to be an inferior option to being
buried in a national cemetery.
Ms. Titus. If you had that choice, Mr. Walters, would you
rather by buried in a state cemetery or a national cemetery?
Mr. Walters. I would be prefer to be buried in a place that
is a national shrine and states can achieve national shrine
standing and be cared for by individuals who are committed to
the perpetual care of our Nation's heroes.
Ms. Titus. Let me ask you this, and I think the little
cemetery in Boulder City is great, but how much oversight do
you have on state cemeteries after you provide some of the
funding, because state cemeteries vary very much in terms of
quality, in terms of policy, in terms of burial of same-sex
couples.
Do you go back and oversee these or once you give the money
you are just going to trust the state veterans association to
be sure they keep the national standard?
Mr. Walters. No, ma'am. We have a fairly rigorous
compliance review program which we just revamped about a year
or so ago where we go to state facilities and we apply the same
scorecard, the same operational standards, and measures that we
do to our national cemeteries to the States where applicable.
Obviously, there are some criterion that are on applicability
to Federal facilities. But we do we view the States, we have
scorecards for them, we give them opportunities to submit
corrective action plans in those instances where we find
shortcomings and we work with them to, you know, come to
closure on problems.
If I may mention one other thing about the acceptance of
state cemeteries, we recently conducted the first ever customer
satisfaction survey with those who use state cemeteries and
buried their loved ones in state cemeteries. We don't have the
full results, but we were able to extract some overall results
that 98 percent of the respondents believe the appearance of
those cemeteries, the state cemeteries with excellent; 95
percent agreed that the quality of service provided at the
state facilities was excellent and 98 percent said that they
would recommend the state cemetery to a family member.
Ms. Titus. You know, I appreciate that. I think those are
good statistics. My time is up. That is like asking a person in
an ice cream store who is eating ice cream if they like ice
cream. You are not asking other people who have chosen not to
use that facility what the reason is and what they think about
it.
So I just worry about state cemeteries having different
policies in different states, just like your homeless program,
that is a great program, but it is only in national cemeteries,
it is not in state cemeteries.
So I just think we need to work together on trying to fix
that.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Runyan. Thank you.
I recognize Mr. Bilirakis.
Mr. Bilirakis. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I appreciate it.
And I want to thank you also, Mr. Chairman, for your
service, you were an all-pro on the field, on the football
field, a champion for our veterans and I really appreciate it.
A tremendous advocate. Thank you.
And I want Senator--first of all thank you for your service
to our country. I also visited, I got an opportunity to visit
the Clark cemetery in the Philippines. I want to also thank the
VFW and the other service organizations who have maintained the
cemetery up until now, they have done an outstanding job. And
again, the private funding has come from our veterans over the
years.
I have a question for Mr. Walters. There have been a few
instances in the past where individuals have highlighted
concerns to the committee on specific sites or specific issues
and my constituents have come to me as well. For example, in
one instance a visitor observed a raise and a realign where
prone headstones appeared as though they had been run over by
construction vehicles.
The committee has largely found the NCA to be very
responsive when contacted on these issues in the last few
years. My question is how do individuals, how do our
constituents who visit national cemeteries raise concerns to
NCA? And what actions are taken upon receiving those complaints
or questions?
Mr. Walters. Yes. And thank you for the question. We have a
variety of forms through which those who visit our cemeteries
can voice concerns, beginning with complaint logs that are
maintained at the cemeteries. If an individual has a concern
about something that he or she encountered, whether it be the
physical appearance of a cemetery or the service that was
received, they can record in the complaint log their
observations.
That complaint log is kept and it is reviewed through our
organizational assessment improvement program and all of the
complaints are followed up on in a timely manner.
Of course there are other ways to do it. We have received a
variety of letters from individuals expressing concerns about
specific issues at cemeteries and we apply the same level of
aggressive resolution to those complaints as well.
Mr. Bilirakis. Do you respond to individuals?
Mr. Walters. Oh, yes, sir. We respond to individual letters
absolutely. If not ----
Mr. Bilirakis. How long does it take? Is it on a timely
basis? Give me an example of how long it takes to respond?
Mr. Walters. Sure, I think it would depend on the nature of
the complaint and how quickly we can resolve it. We usually try
to put out an interim response at first so say we are working
on the issue, that usually goes out if we send one within a few
days. And then the actual resolution can vary depending again
on the nature of the issue.
There was an issue recently at Riverside National Cemetery,
for example, where we got contractors that were treating
headstones and the grounds in a manner that was inconsistent
with what we would regard as national shrines.
This complaint came to us. We acted very aggressively. We
corrected the situation. And in fact, we added language
referred to as a dignity clause to all of our national shrine
contracts where contractors now have to be especially conscious
of what they are doing at our grave sites to make sure they are
honoring the dignity of the burials.
Mr. Bilirakis. Thank you very much.
I have one more question, Mr. Chairman.
You testified, Mr. Walters, on the current NCA proposed
rule and implementation of the dignified burial act of 2012; it
is my understanding that the National Funeral Directors
Association expressed concern with one of the details of the
proposed rule.
Under previous rules funeral homes were able to apply
directly to the VA for partial reimbursement or other
associated benefit. In their view this allowed funeral homes to
easily provide the veteran with a timely and dignified burial
and that is what I am concerned about. The convenience for the
family and of course for the veteran. Without any concern about
not being compensated for their services.
Additionally, in situations without a next of kin under the
proposed rule, funeral directors would have to apply to become
the authorized representative, which would add difficulty and
additional cost to a process where funeral directors are trying
to honor our Nation's fallen heroes.
Can you explain why NCA is not allowing funeral homes to
apply directly to the VA? Were there any comments to the
provision supporting or opposing this change during the public
comment period?
And I don't want to delay the process for the families,
particularly when there is no next of kin. So if you could
elaborate on that, I would really appreciate it?
Mr. Walters. Congressman Bilirakis, the administration of
that particular program falls under the Veterans Benefits
Administration so I would be happy to for the record provide a
response.
I will say that, you know, the intent of the direct payment
to the veteran was to do precisely what I thought you said
toward the end of your comment, which is to make sure that the
family receives the money as quickly as possible and then to
pay their expenses with it.
I also know that under Secretary Hickey's leadership the
automation of burial claims has been put into place such that
nearly half of them at this point are processed that way
without human intervention, which then frees up staff time to
perform other work. And the processing time for those burial
claims has been reduced from a peak of 190 days in February of
2013 to 64 days in December of 2014. But.
Again, sir, I will take the specific question.
Mr. Bilirakis. Yeah, again my concern is there a lot of
local funeral homes and they want to help out our families. I
just don't want to delay the process and make it inconvenient
for the families. Or if they don't have a next of kin, they can
take care of it directly.
So I appreciate very much, Mr. Chairman.
Again, thank you for your service. We are going to miss
you.
Mr. Runyan. Thank you. Thank you very much.
I recognize Mr. O'Rourke.
Mr. O'Rourke. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I also want to join my colleagues in thanking you for your
service in the way that you have lead this committee. I have
enjoyed working with you in my first term in Congress. I have
learned a lot and look forward to watching the great things
that you are going to do in the future after you leave this
institution, so thank you.
To the Secretary, to Mr. Walters, first of all, I want to
thank you for the great job that you do and that your team
does. You have a new person in El Paso, Texas, the community
that I have the honor of representing Amy Callahan is doing a
terrific job, incredibly responsive, works well with our team,
works well and is attentive to the veterans and their families
in El Paso. So through you I want to thank her and the team in
El Paso who do a phernomenal job. Thank you.
Mr. Walters. Thank you, sir. I will pass that along.
Mr. O'Rourke. And as was your predecessor Mr. Muro, you
have been very responsive to us to meet personally. We are able
to talk on the phone about concerns before they become real
problems and so I want to thank you for that as well.
I think the cemetery in El Paso at Fort Bliss is in many
ways remarkable. It is very clean, well kept, a great staff.
And the response I think you probably have the data to back it
up in terms of the surveys from those customers that you serve
has been great.
But as you know, there is one disconnect between the NCA,
and El Paso, and our offices and that is the fact that El Paso
is one of the three xeriscaped or water-wise I think is the
term you use, cemeteries out of the 131 in the system. And it
is deeply unpopular amongst those people whose opinion I care
about the most and that is the veterans, and their families,
the widows, and widowers, the children, the descendants of
those who are buried there.
You have approached this as an either or proposition,
either we have turf and grass--and I think your argument is
that when El Paso and Fort Bliss had that, it was suboptimal or
you have xeriscaping, which is water-wise, doesn't require a
lot of management or maintenance, it is cost efficient. And in
the opinion of some, it is aesthetically pleasing.
So remind everybody when we talk about water-wise with
xeriscaping, we are talking about crushed rock and dirt on
ground, we are not talking about a desert landscaping.
Although, there is some landscaping with shrubbery and some
trees. But imagine you are in El Paso, Texas, visiting a family
member who is there and it is 110 degrees outside, and you are
asked to or want to kneel and you can't because you've asked to
kneel on this crushed gravel.
I am looking for an option, some way that we can work
together to get past what is unacceptable to my community. And
we are also asking to know what the criteria are that you use
to make these decisions. My understanding is only 3 out of 131.
I don't know if Mr. Hallinan would be comfortable converting
Arlington Cemetery into a water-wise facility to save money and
time and maintenance costs. I am going to guess the answer is
no.
And so our contention in El Paso is that if a water-wise
NCA cemetery is not sufficient for the best in our system, then
it should not be sufficient for El Paso. I want to get your
comments and your thoughts on that and perhaps a suggested path
on which we can work to resolve this situation for El Paso?
Mr. Walters. Sure. Thank you for the question Congressman
O'Rourke.
Our decision to turf or xeriscape a cemetery is not
arbitrary, it is based on a variety of factors, to include
climate condition, as well as the availability of water.
In the case of El Paso, as you know, the decision to
xeriscape that cemetery was based on a congressionally mandated
study in 1999. The results of that study indicated that if El
Paso were to be maintained as a national shrine, there was not
a sufficient amount of water to do so. And the study
recommended xeriscaping the entire cemetery. At that point, we
made the decision to make the investment to xeriscape the
cemetery.
Mr. O'Rourke. And if I could interrupt you because I only
have 20 seconds, you are going me the history, I am asking for
the future. How are we going to work together to resolve this
situation? What we have today is unacceptable.
Mr. Walters. Okay. Well, just to say, I mean our survey
results just to put them on the record, our survey results from
those who are using the cemetery suggest a high degree of
acceptance, but in answer to your question.
Mr. O'Rourke. I would refer to my colleagues ice cream shop
analogy. I don't know that we are asking those whose family
members were already interred or buried at that cemetery who
did not have a choice in whether it was converted from grass to
rocks. And who are deeply disappointed in that and are asking
me as their Federal representative to do something about it.
And what I get is the process that you used to arrive at
this decision that is deeply unpopular and unacceptable to me
and the people I represent.
What I am asking for now how can we work together to do
something? Perhaps we cannot turf the entire cemetery. Perhaps
there is some water-wise solution that is an improvement upon
the crushed rocks that cover the grave cites that we have in El
Paso at Fort Bliss today. But because I am out of time and
because it probably involves a longer conversation I would just
like to gain your commitment that we can work together to do
that.
Mr. Walters. Absolutely. Congressman, we are always willing
to work with you and your staff. We have done so in the past,
we will continue to do that with you. I think a good launching
point may very well be the study that UT El Paso is currently
undertaking when they are examining soil conditions and perhaps
coming up with some recommendations or thing that we can
consider.
So absolutely we are more than willing to work with you and
your staff.
Mr. O'Rourke. Great.
Thank you Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Runyan. Thank you.
I recognize Mr. Stivers.
Mr. Stivers. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank you for
accepting unanimous consent to allow me to sit in on this
hearing. I really appreciate your leadership, it has been an
honor to serve with you in Congress. I know that other than
going to the University of Michigan you have had a
distinguished career, I happen to be a Buckeye so that part,
you know, I wish you would come to Ohio State.
Mr. Runyan. Good luck in the playoffs.
Mr. Stivers. But, I really do appreciate the way you
treated our veterans and the way you treated this committee and
worked with both sides to come to common ground.
Thank you for allowing me to be here.
I have a couple of questions for Mr. Walters and then I
have one question with Mr. Hallinan.
Mr. Walters, I appreciate your new October 1st draft of
regulation that would deal with next of kin. Frankly, the old
policy caused homeless veterans and folks whose next of kin
couldn't be identified because they had served at a conflict
much further back in our history, real hassles in getting
headstones. So I appreciate the updating version.
There are only a few questions that I have about it,
because there are some folks that are historians and other
Archivists that are interested in helping and there are a few
pieces of language that they don't quite understand and I
wanted to talk with you about it.
The first part involves where you say any individual who
provides documentation of such lawful duty basically can
provide information on these headstones. A lot of the
interested parties are having trouble understanding what the
language of such lawful duty means. I assume it means of the
duty of the VA to provide a headstone. But is there any way you
could clarify that here in this hearing or in writing later?
Mr. Walters. To make sure, Congressman Stivers, that I get
it right, I would prefer to answer that and submit it for the
record.
Mr. Stivers. I appreciate that and I knew that might be the
result.
The second is your proposed rule creates an actual date on
the calendar, it uses April 6th, 1917 the date we entered World
War I, but as you know, our archival records and our procedures
on archives actually say basically anything 62 years back and
further they don't use a date on the calendar.
I really think it would make much more sense to have those
two things be the same and use the archival records as 62 years
back, instead of the drop dead date of April 6th, 1917,
because, you know, consistency makes a lot of sense and I would
ask you to take a look at whether you could consider that
change as well.
Mr. Walters. Sure. We received 383 comments on this
particular proposed rule and we are going through them right
now and I am sure that is one of them.
In general, sir, what I will say is that our primarily
motivation in establishing the April 1917 date was to really
honor family members' wishes to the extent possible. If we
establish the 62-year timeline, that would be in place through
NARA, we are basically establishing a date of 1952 as the
launching point. And we felt that family members would be alive
for veterans who served prior to 1952.
So because of that, we thought it would just be best to
move the date back to just say standard date of our entrance
into World War I and then go from there.
Mr. Stivers. And I certainly appreciate that.
I would ask you to look at it. Because certainly many of
our veterans during the draft were more socioeconomically
disadvantaged. There were more broken families. And so I just
would ask you to take a look. If you can have consistency, I
think it makes sense.
You know, I don't think the April 6, 1917, is the worst
thing in the world, but I think consistency--one of the rules
we need to live by up here is, if we can create things that are
consistent, it just makes it easier for everybody. So please
take a look at that.
And the last thing I would ask is if you could consider
community--the sort of community of historians. Every State has
a State historic preservation officer. And if you can include
some language about that. It is a State Governor-appointed
position.
If you could, you know, allow those folks to be included in
this by name and by spelling them out, I think it would be
really helpful because there is one in every State. There is
actually, I believe, one for federally recognized Indian tribes
separately from our 50 States and the 4 territories as well.
So they are everywhere. And it is a position that could and
should be, I think, recognized in this regulation. But I would
ask you to take a look at it. I am not asking for a response to
that, but take a look at that as well.
Mr. Walters. Sure. We would be happy to do that, sir.
Mr. Stivers. Thank you so much.
And, Mr. Hallinan, I just wanted to thank you for the Tomb
of Remembrance that I have worked on for almost 4 years here in
Congress. I had a bill dealing with it. You guys took it and
did it by regulation. And I appreciate what you are doing to
implement that.
You mentioned it a little bit earlier in your comments, and
I want to thank you because it sets forward a place so that
what happened a few years ago where some unidentified remains
of our men and women ended up in a landfill--this will make
sure that never happens again. I really appreciate the efforts
you have put in it, and I just wanted to say thank you.
Mr. Hallinan. Well, Congressman, on behalf of my staff, you
are most welcome. They exist. The only reason they have a job
is to serve our Nation's heroes. And to people that wore the
uniform, that was a sensitive subject. We understood your
concern. We were out front. We have worked the process.
I am happy to update the committee that we will advertise
that project in March of 2015. We anticipate a contract being
awarded in April of 2015, with 180 days to start and complete
that project. So October or November of 2015, I anticipate
having a Tomb of Remembrance at Arlington.
Mr. Stivers. I appreciate that.
Even our unidentified soldiers, sailors, airmen, and
Marines, and even their fragments and remains deserve a place
of honor. I really appreciate that.
Mr. Hallinan. You are most welcome, sir.
Mr. Stivers. Thank you.
Last I would like to thank Senator Cleland for employing
one of my constituents, John Marshall. It is good to see John
here. But I really appreciate you and what you do for our
veterans. And thank you for serving our veterans that happen to
be buried around the globe.
I happened to visit one of your cemeteries in France this
year. It was very well kept up. I really appreciate that you
take your mission seriously and honor our heroes, regardless of
where they happen to have their final resting place.
Mr. Cleland. Thank you very much, Mr. Congressman.
Mr. Stivers. Thank you. I yield back the balance.
And I want to again thank the chairman and wish him great
luck on his future. I know you have got great things.
Mr. Runyan. Thank you very much.
Mr. Stivers. We will miss you as a blocker.
Mr. Runyan. Thanks.
I have one more question. I will open it up to the other
members, also, if they have another one, or if they want
another five, feel free.
Only because the first meeting that I had with Secretary
McDonald--he sat down and he said something that really got the
wheels turning. And I know Arlington's kind of strategic plan.
I want to address this really to Mr. Walters about NCA and
strategic plan moving forward. Because specifically after these
conflicts we are coming out of, are we prepared for the volume
that we are going to have? And what studies, plans, do we have
to be able to deal with this moving forward?
Mr. Walters. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The National Cemetery Administration has a very robust
strategic planning effort. As far as predicting the future
gravesite need or interment rates, we use the Vet Pop 2011
model that we received from another office within the VA. That
model provides us with veteran-level data at the county level.
Using that data, which is based on the 2010 census--using
that data, we then look at historical patterns down to the
individual cemetery level and make projections and assumptions
20, 30 years into the future. I will say that we have been
historically extremely successful with these predictions.
In most years, we have a variance of about 1 percent from
our projected interment rates, which, in turn, informs the need
for additional gravesites and construction projects.
So any cohort in the future would be reflected in these
models. We would reflect it in our utilization rates--our prior
year utilization rates, and that would be translated into our
future projections and our construction planning models.
As a result of our planning models, we have never had an
interruption in burial service at a national cemetery, and we
intend to continue that record.
Mr. Runyan. Thank you for that response. Because I know we
all sit with what we deal with with VBA and VHA and how we are
unable to predict a lot of that stuff. So thank you for that
response.
Ms. Titus. Thank you.
I would just ask Secretary Cleland if the typhoon that has
recently hit the Philippines has an impact on our cemeteries
there and what is happening, and, second, what you all are
doing with Normandy and the French Government to have that site
declared a UNESCO international heritage site and how that
effects our cemeteries.
Mr. Cleland. Thank you very much.
The last question I don't know the answer to, and I will
call upon Mike Conley, who might know an answer to it.
The first question about the typhoons, typhoons hit the
Philippines from time to time. Sometimes the trees are blown
down. Gravesites are impacted.
So we are subject to the weather like anyone else. However,
we have a great crew out there and a great leader, and they are
always Johnny-on-the-spot in responding and setting things
right.
Ms. Titus. That is good to know. Thank you.
I would just be curious to know about the heritage site.
Mr. Cleland. The heritage site--I will have to ask Mike
Conley does he knowing anything about the heritage site at
Normandy.
Mr. Conley. Ms. Titus, forgive my voice. I have got a cold.
But we are in contact with the UNESCO folks. Our overseas
operations office in Gars just outside Paris has reviewed
paperwork, and we are considering whether we want to endorse
that.
Our concern, obviously, is that, if it is declared a world
heritage site, that there is nothing in there that would
prevent us from maintaining and improving upon the site as we
deem appropriate as the years go ahead.
But clearly the nature of the events that happened there
clearly fall under the criteria and deserve to be so
recognized.
Ms. Titus. I agree with that. Well, thank you.
Mr. Runyan. Mr. Secretary, can you identify him for the
record, please.
Mr. Cleland. That was Mike Conley, our chief administrative
officer.
Mr. Runyan. Thank you very much.
Mr. O'Rourke.
Mr. O'Rourke. Yeah. A question for Mr. Hallinan.
A constituent of mine and her husband are both eligible for
burial at Arlington, but my understanding is that the rules do
not allow them to reserve a plot next to each other and, if
they do want to be buried together, they will be buried one on
top of the other and they will share a headstone with one's
name on one side, the other's on the other.
Is that a rule in place because of space limitations, in
other words, you are not allowed to reserve a plot next to your
spouse like you might at another national cemetery because I
think it is 2050 that we are running out of room?
Mr. Hallinan. Congressman, to answer your question, there
were prior reservations at Arlington under the U.S. Army, which
ended in 1962 by law. So there are no legal reservations
anymore. Arlington is unique. It is a space issue.
There are different types of burial patterns at our
national cemeteries, as Mr. Powers and Mr. Walters and former
Senator Cleland are aware of. But that would be a driver to
bury people side by side. To give them their own grave would
quickly use up the remaining capacity at Arlington National
Cemetery. So that was part of the process that developed.
But you are 100 percent accurate. Both are eligible. I am
taking that as a given. But they would be buried together in
the same gravesite. Whoever predeceases will go in first, and
the remaining spouse, when he or she were to pass, would go in
on top. They would share the information on a government
headstone. Yes.
Mr. O'Rourke. And is there a plan in place to add
additional grounds post-2050.
Mr. Hallinan. I don't want to say no, Congressman. I
believe that, when we approach in that year of the decade,
there may be some opportunities.
But it is very difficult in the area that we are in in
Washington. We have taken--under the Millennium Project, we
have taken space from Fort Myer--a possibility of looking at
Fort Myer again.
But when one looks for available space outside of the
current--the next expansion process, the southern expansion,
you have to look at what is going to be gained by it. It is not
just a matter of maximizing burial space. A place like Fort
Myer is a place where the Caissons and military units and MDW
support Arlington on a daily basis. It has a small footprint
already.
Any future expansion will probably come at great financial
cost. There may be land, you know, towards where the current
Iwo Jima Memorial is now. But we are really starting to get out
there.
And I am sure any interest we show beyond our current
footprint and where we are going to go to 2050 will be rather
difficult and a sensitive issue. But we are looking. We do
project beyond, what comes after 2050 for Arlington.
Mr. O'Rourke. And, lastly, for Mr. Walters. Thank you for
your commitment to work with me. I really appreciate that. And
while I feel very strongly about the position that we hold
related to the cemetery, I do again want to commend you and
your team for the way in which you take care of it. I think,
again, it is very clean, looks really nice for what it is.
But I have just heard from too many veterans and their
families at this point who desperately want something that is
more accommodating for them as they pay tribute to their loved
one. And so I know that there is a way that we can work
together to get this done. So I appreciate your willingness to
work with me on that.
Mr. Walters. We look forward to working with you, sir.
Mr. O'Rourke. Thanks.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Runyan. Thank you.
And, with that, gentlemen, on behalf of the subcommittee, I
thank you for your testimony. I wish you all success 2015. And
you are now excused. And we will wait a few minutes to switch
over the witness table.
At this time we welcome our second panel, Ms. Ami
Neiberger-Miller, who is the Director of Outreach and Education
for the Tragedy Assistance Program for Survivors; and Ms. Diane
Zumatto, National Legislative Director for AMVETS. We
appreciate your attendance here today. Your complete and
written statements will be entered into the hearing record.
Ms. Neiberger-Miller, you are now recognized for 5 minutes
for your testimony.
STATEMENT OF AMI NEIBERGER-MILLER
Ms. Neiberger-Miller. Thank you.
I am pleased to submit this testimony on behalf of TAPS,
the Tragedy Assistance Program for Survivors. TAPS is a
nonprofit organization that provides comforting care to anyone
grieving the death of someone who died while serving in our
Armed Forces, regardless of where they died or how they died.
We appreciate the subcommittee's continuing interest in
ensuring our Nation's veterans and servicemembers have final
resting places that are honorable and well maintained. These
issues touch my family. My brother was killed in action in Iraq
and is buried in Arlington National Cemetery, and my father-in-
law is also buried at Arlington.
We hope you will review our submitted testimony, which
includes opinions on legislative initiatives related to
national cemeteries and Arlington.
The scandal that enveloped the Department of Affairs also
touched the National Cemetery Administration last year.
Unfortunately, the previous Under Secretary for Memorial
Affairs retired after an OIG report revealed he had engaged in
prohibited practices and preferential treatment.
But new leadership is now in place, and we very much
appreciate the opportunities we have had to meet with VA
Secretary Robert McDonald and Under Secretary Sloan Gibson. We
know they have a commitment to assisting survivors, and it is
our hope that new VA leadership will move forward in a positive
and honorable way.
We are pleased to report the number of pending burial
allowance claims has declined significantly since last year at
this hearing with 17,818 on last week's VA report. While these
benefits do not route through the National Cemetery
Administration, delay in their delivery hurts families by
forcing them to delay settling estates and does impact their
view of the VA.
At Arlington National Cemetery, we are in a different place
today than we were even a year ago when surviving families were
upset about the removal of mementos from gravesites at Section
60. Section 60 is where hundreds of those who paid the ultimate
sacrifice in Iraq or Afghanistan are buried, including my
brother.
Superintendent Hallinan met with families and has extended
a compromise permitting them to leave handcrafted objects and
small laminated photos at gravesites. Initially, this was a
pilot during the non-growing season last year, and the
compromise was extended into the growing season and is still
currently in place.
The families are very grateful for this compromise. They
have worked to educate each other about the rules, and the
majority follow them. A few still do not follow the policies,
but the appearance of the section is much more uniform and
improved. One town hall meeting was held earlier this year with
families, and we are hopeful lines of communication will remain
open between the families and the Administration.
Because some families were turned away on Memorial Day from
Arlington due to logistics issues out on the bridge with
security, we are also working with the cemetery leadership to
help better distribute logistics information to survivors in
advance of these major events. So no one is turned away.
We would like to see greater survivor involvement in an
advisory capacity. No survivor has served on the advisory
committee for Arlington National Cemetery since Janet Manion's
death in April of 2012.
While the members of the committee all have exemplary
military and veteran service credentials--and I should add the
chair of that committee just testified on the previous panel--
we believe their deliberations would benefit from the insight
of a survivor's perspective.
We thank you for the opportunity to submit our testimony,
and we welcome any questions.
[The prepared statement of Ami Neiberger-Miller appears in
the Appendix]
Mr. Runyan. Thank you, Ms. Neiberger-Miller.
With that, I recognize Ms. Zumatto for her testimony.
STATEMENT OF DIANE M. ZUMATTO
Ms. Zumatto. Chairman Runyan, Ranking Member Titus, and
distinguished members of the subcommittee, on behalf of AMVETS,
I thank you for the opportunity to assist you in the important
job of overseeing our national cemeteries.
Previously my testimony before this committee has been
somewhat limited to a repetition of facts and statistics.
However, today's testimony will be much more heartfelt and
personal.
Because I love history, am a trained historic
preservationist, love my country, and grew up visiting and
documenting cemeteries in the New England area, today's topic
is important to me both personally and professionally.
I think it is safe to say that everybody in this room knows
and appreciates the sacred responsibility entrusted to the
National Cemetery Administration to honor the memory of
America's military men and women.
I would like to set the stage briefly to convey the true
importance of our national cemeteries not only to our Nation's
veterans, but to all American citizens.
Historically, cemeteries, especially military cemeteries,
were much more than established sites of burial with regimented
internal layouts conducive to both the expression of personal
grief and accepted societal funerary rituals.
Few individuals are aware, I believe, of some of the
equally important social and political aspects of cemeteries,
including promoting and preserving the individuality and status
of the deceased, the setting aside of landscaped spaces in or
near communities delineated by defined boundaries, the
organized commemoration of significant events and/or persons,
serving as places of beauty and tranquility where friends and
family can gather, as expressions of national identity and
pride, especially in the case of military cemeteries, and as
sites of pilgrimage and permanence.
I am hopeful that this brief introduction has sparked a
greater appreciation of historic national value of the many
unique and irreplaceable cemeteries held in trust within the
NCA system. The monuments, gravestones, architecture,
landscape, and related memorial tributes within each NCA
cemetery are richly steeped in history and represent the very
foundations of these United States.
How can we do any less than our absolute best to develop
and maintain these truly American shrines? After having spent
several weeks this summer visiting national cemeteries--there
were seven that I was able to get to in four different MSNs--my
impression of NCA cemeteries and its employees is higher than
ever.
Having had the rare opportunity for in-depth visits where I
was able to observe every facet of cemetery operations, I was
both moved and impressed with the care and professionalism at
every level of the organization.
None of the cemeteries I visited displayed any blatant
shortcomings that would be obvious to the casual observer. This
level of attention to detail, dedication, and commitment to
providing the highest quality of service to veterans and their
families would not be possible without positive role models and
strong leadership throughout the NCA system.
I certainly acknowledge that perfection does not exist in
this world and that I have not yet had the opportunity to visit
every cemetery under the stewardship of the NCA. But given the
resources, both human and financial, I must equally acknowledge
that NCA continually strives to meet its most important
obligation, providing dignified resting places for our Nation's
veterans and their eligible family members.
This concludes my testimony. And I will be happy to answer
your questions.
[The prepared statement of Diane Zumatto appears in the
Appendix]
Mr. Runyan. Thank you very much.
And we will begin a round of questions.
Ms. Neiberger-Miller. TAPS has sought to inform surviving
families who visit Arlington National Cemetery about the
enhanced security procedures resulting in access constraints
during major holidays and at a time when many families choose
to visit their fallen loved ones.
How successful has TAPS outreach been, as your testimony
noted several areas where TAPS has volunteered to assist in
spreading word? And how do you think outreach could be more
effective while also compassionate?
Ms. Neiberger-Miller. Well, sir, I think for us it is about
reaching out to our families and distributing information. We
have made improvements in our survivor database so that we can
better track our families around the burial location of their
loved one.
One of the challenges is that many of the families who bury
their loved ones at Arlington do not live in the Washington
area. So unlike people who reside here, they are not familiar
with the security precautions that occur when the President or
the Vice President travel to an event.
And so sometimes those families, especially when they are
coming in from out of town, get caught on the bridge or in very
serious traffic issues and are not familiar with the security
lockdown procedures. And so our role has been to compile the
information and to distribute it by email to families.
I would say we still have some improvements that we are
trying to make, but we are working hard at that. And we have
also met with the Cemetery Administration over the summer to
actually make some additional improvements because of some
concerns over Memorial Day.
Mr. Runyan. And very similar to information. And I wanted
to thank TAPS for participating in discussion with Gold Star
families and Section 60 in particular.
You said in your testimony that it is an agreement and it
is not a formal--do you have any suggestions on how to move
forward and kind of ease that anxiety?
Ms. Neiberger-Miller. Well, I think for all of us it has
been about keeping the lines of communication open. You know,
the situation a year ago, we had a group of very upset
families.
And for our families to really talk with the
Administration, to see them as people, for the Administration
to meet them as people and to look them in the eye and say, you
know, ``We want to work with you on this,'' that went a long
way.
And so I think it became about how to humanize the
conversation and then how to figure out what could work for
everyone, recognizing that the cemetery has to be at a certain
standard as a national shrine, but also recognizing that
grieving is different today and, for some people, leaving an
object or a photograph is extremely important, and, so, how
could we work out something that would work for everyone.
And so the families have really done a lot, I think, to
help educate each other, and they have kept those lines of
communication open. And that has been key.
Mr. Runyan. Thank you.
Ms. Zumatto, you were talking about the consistency you
have seen across your visits.
Is there anything that stood out to you when you visited
the sites that was different, that wasn't--because the object
is, obviously, to be uniform. Is there any specific things that
stood out?
Ms. Zumatto. I am going to say not really. The seven sites
that I visited--and they were not just brief run in and out. I
usually spent a minimum of two days or more at each site. I
just did not--I mean, I wasn't going through their records.
This was more observing--for instance, at Jefferson
Barracks, I spent one day just at their training center. I
spent another day at the scheduling office so I could see the
process. And then I spent a day at the cemetery itself.
But every site that I went to I was truly--I was surprised,
I think, by the care of the chain of custody, if you will. I
had no idea what the process was like until I went to Jefferson
Barracks, where I started, and the redundancy at every point to
ensure that, you know, it was the right veteran and that the
site where they were going to be interred was the right site.
I mean, they use maps. They draw--you know, this stone is
here. This stone is here. Just the detail so that there are no
errors is perhaps one of the things that really struck me.
That, and, as I was riding around with different employees
during my visits, I would constantly see--they would stop the
vehicle if they saw somebody walking around who looked like
they needed help or, if they saw a piece of trash in the road
or, you know, in the cemetery itself, they just got out. They
took care of it.
It was just really very reassuring to see that level of
care at every step of the way.
Mr. Runyan. Thank you. Good to hear.
With that, I will yield to the ranking member, Ms. Titus.
Ms. Titus. Thank you.
Thank you both for all the good work you do with families
during this most difficult time.
I would ask Ms. Neiberger-Miller if you have the same
experience dealing with people and talking to families that we
heard reported in the surveys that the NCA does. They say their
surveys show that 95 percent of the people are satisfied. It
has got the best marks of any government agency.
Is that compatible with what you hear on the ground from
families?
Ms. Neiberger-Miller. We hear from families that they are
often very satisfied with the burial process. Unfortunately, we
do work with people who are traumatically bereaved. And so many
of these people are struggling, also, with short-term memory
loss issues or some other issues going on. They are often in a
great state of shock.
These are people who died young, who were not expected to
die, who often died in very violent ways. And so their family
is often in a great degree of shock. The burial is often very
quickly after the death. There is not a wait, typically, for an
active duty service that is extremely long.
And so the family sometimes even needs the photographs or
other things from the service to really recall it very well.
And that is unfortunate, but they always will say that they
feel their loved one was honored and that they feel that
placement at Arlington or at a national cemetery honors their
loved one's service and sacrifice for our country.
Ms. Titus. Do you ever talk to families who feel like they
don't live close enough to a national cemetery to be able to
access it, so, they just resort to some other kind of more
private funeral?
Ms. Neiberger-Miller. Well, there are families sometimes
who really have to make very difficult decisions also because
this was someone who wasn't expected to die. So there was no
family plan in place, per se, like their might be for, say, an
older veteran like my father-in-law who knew for several
decades he wanted to be buried at Arlington and told all of us
that.
And so families sometimes don't always recognize the travel
distances that they may be assuming or may not realize they
want to visit as often as they do after a death. And that can
be challenging for them to make a long-distance trip to go and
visit a location. We don't hear often from families about that,
but it certainly is something that is discussed sometimes.
Ms. Titus. Thank you.
And, Ms. Zumatto, when you visited those seven cemeteries,
did you visit any State cemeteries or just national?
Ms. Zumatto. I have not yet had the opportunity to visit a
State cemetery. No, ma'am.
Ms. Titus. Do you think some of your veterans would like to
see more cemeteries in the west where they could be buried in a
national cemetery, not just a State cemetery or some convenient
facility?
Ms. Zumatto. Well, personally, just from my knowledge--not
personal experience, but from research, if you will--I don't
really believe that being buried in a State cemetery--a State
veterans cemetery is any less honorable. I just don't see it as
a negative.
If there is no National cemetery or if that National
cemetery has no more available space, then, you know, I don't
see why, as long as the State cemetery is being maintained to,
you know, the shrine standard, that that should be an issue.
However, I did have a member tell me the other day about a
problem in Alaska having to do with access. And, apparently,
there are two national cemeteries in Alaska, one of which is
only accessible by boat, and the other, apparently, is on an
active military installation.
And the issue that he brought up was the fact that it is
difficult, not everybody has access to a boat, but that, if
there is any sort of security issues going on on the base, then
the base is closed and then you can't access the cemetery.
But, as I say, as far as State cemeteries go, I haven't
been to one. It is on my list. And I am going to continue
visiting cemeteries.
Ms. Titus. I just worry about policy varying from State to
State, even with the checklist. For example, a same-sex couple
might be able to get buried together in a State that recognizes
it, but not in a State that doesn't, if it is a state cemetery,
not a national cemetery.
So I think, while state cemeteries--I think the one in
Nevada, in Boulder City, is great--I think there are still
differences that we need to address. Appreciate it.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Runyan. Mr. O'Rourke.
Mr. O'Rourke. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Ms. Neiberger-Miller, thank you for your testimony. I
really enjoy hearings like these that our chairman and ranking
member put together.
Other than your testimony, I really didn't know about a lot
of these issues. So I appreciate you bringing your perspective
directly to us.
And, likewise, Ms. Zumatto. I really appreciate all of the
work and time that you took to go to these different
cemeteries, including the one at Fort Bliss in El Paso, Texas.
And I really appreciate that.
I just want to note for the record that Mr. Walters and Mr.
Hallinan are here as well, which I really appreciate the fact
that you are listening as well to gain insight.
And, Ms. Zumatto, I really appreciated your remarks in your
written testimony about the national cemetery at Fort Bliss.
And you described it as serene and beautiful and very well
maintained and a little bit of a surprise because you had heard
that there was some discontent in El Paso about the cemetery,
and I really can't argue with your conclusions.
I think it is a very serene, a very beautiful place, again,
so clean and well maintained for the resources that they have.
You know, if you are going to have that crushed rock and some
small areas of grass, some small areas of trees and
landscaping, it is excellently maintained.
I think the disconnect might come when we talk to the
families, the survivors, who can also appreciate everything
that you describe in your assessment, but then that act of
actually kneeling at the gravesite or being close to the
headstone is a lesser experience for them--and this is, you
know, their experience as they relate it to me--because of that
environment and not having that grass and that expectation
because it was there before and because it is in the vast
majority of other cemeteries in El Paso and almost every other
single national cemetery.
But you also said something that I thought was so important
in your testimony--or wrote in your testimony, which was that,
when you visited with VSOs prior to visiting the cemetery, you
found that they were not as upset with the aesthetics as they
were with the process and they felt like they had been
disconnected from the process used to choose the xeriscaping or
the WaterWise.
Talk a little bit--I had a great exchange with Mr. Walters
in the previous panel where we agreed that we would try to work
together to find a way to make an improvement. Maybe it is not
turf and maybe it is not staying with the status quo. Maybe it
is something better for all concerned.
Talk a little bit about a process that you might recommend
from your experience that we could use in working with
survivors, working with veterans, working with VSOs in our
community, and working with the NCA.
Sorry to put you on the spot. Since you had that great
conversation with the VSOs there, I thought you might have some
thoughts on it.
Ms. Zumatto. Well, I have not done a study of xeriscaping,
so, I am not sure what other types of low maintenance or
WaterWise options there might be.
I would doubt that what is currently at Fort Bliss is the
only avenue available. I have seen pictures of Fort Bliss back
when it was turfed, and in the picture I can see a lot of brown
and bare patches.
Mr. O'Rourke. Doesn't look good, does it?
Ms. Zumatto. So I can't imagine that that would be any
better.
Mr. O'Rourke. Right.
Ms. Zumatto. I don't know if I said this in my written
testimony or not, but--and this was my first experience being
in a desert. But when you stand in the cemetery and you look at
the environment all around, it is perfectly suited the way it
is.
I did ask--I went to a local VFW post, actually, while I
was there, the day before I went to the cemetery, to talk to
veterans and see what they thought about it. And you mentioned
that--you know, a couple of things.
I asked them if it was difficult to walk on. Somebody was
saying that, you know, an elderly person, perhaps, or somebody
with some disability--you know, do they have difficulty either
with a wheelchair on that surface or, you know, walking on that
surface. So that possibility came up. I didn't try either
myself when I was there. It was 120 degrees that day, so, I
didn't try kneeling.
But there were people visiting the cemetery when I was
there and I did notice at least two individuals had brought
like--almost like a small prayer rug, if you will, something to
put on the ground to kneel on, which I thought was, you know, a
pretty good option.
But one other thing that I will mention is I recently came
back from a visit to a national military cemetery in Israel,
and they did not have any grass in that cemetery.
Mr. O'Rourke. Now, what is on--I saw your picture from the
cemetery in Israel, and it looks like there is grass on the
actual grave. It looks like it is surrounded by stones and
there is some material in between the stones over the grave.
Is that grass or some other covering?
Ms. Zumatto. The ground is mainly flagstone-type material,
and then each individual grave is sort of built up. There is a
wall, a surround, if you will. And on top of that, there is
grass--excuse me--there is soil, but it is not grass.
There are plants there, and there were a variety of
different things. And I don't know--because of that variety, I
wonder if family members maybe tried to personalize their loved
one's site. But it wasn't grass. And anyplace that didn't have
flagstones was bare dirt.
Mr. O'Rourke. Well, I appreciate you bringing that to our
attention. I have got the pictures here in front of me, and it
just provides yet another option.
In other words, it is not a choice--I would say a false
choice between bad turf and grass, which is what Fort Bliss
had, and the crushed rock.
But as you saw in the Chihuahuan Desert, it is full of life
and there are forms of grass and plant life that thrive there,
and I think there is some middle ground we can reach. And maybe
looking at what others have done, including in Israel, gives us
some options.
So, again, thank you for doing the work and providing us
some other perspective on this. I really appreciate it.
Thank you both for your testimony.
Ms. Zumatto. My pleasure.
Mr. Runyan. Anything further? No. Okay.
Well, on behalf of the subcommittee, I would like to thank
you for your testimony and for the works that TAPS and AMVETS
does to honor our veterans and care for their families and
loved ones. You are now excused.
I want to thank everyone for being here today. The status
reports from our cemetery and memorial representatives and the
input from the VSO community was well presented, and the
subcommittee appreciates the work that went into the
preparation for today's hearing.
I am certain that this subcommittee will continue to engage
in these issues in the next Congress as the final resting place
for our veterans and the families left behind deserve the
highest standard of care.
I would like to once again thank our witnesses for being
here today and ask unanimous consent that all members have 5
legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include
any extraneous material. Hearing no objection, so ordered.
I thank the members for their attendance today. And this
hearing is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 3:44 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]
APPENDIX
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Prepared Statement of Max Cleland
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee
On behalf of our Chairman General Tony McPeak and our Board of
Commissioners, I thank you for this opportunity to discuss the mission,
operations and programs of the American Battle Monuments Commission.
Since 1923, our purpose has not changed--to commemorate the service
and achievements of America's armed forces, yet our methods have
changed. We execute our mission by creating memorials worldwide where
U.S. forces have served, and by administering 25 overseas military
cemeteries--shrines to our fallen and those that fought by their side.
We do this with the words of our first Chairman, General of the
Armies John J. Pershing ever in mind. General Pershing's words serve as
the foundation statement for all that we do:
``Time Will Not Dim the Glory of Their Deeds''
The cemeteries and memorials we administer have been entrusted to
our care by the American people--we take that as a solemn
responsibility. For the first 80 years of our history, ABMC's principle
focus was to maintain our commemorative sites to the highest of
standards. That remains and always will be our core mission--the war
dead we honor deserve nothing less.
2014 has proven to be a significant commemorative year for the
Nation and for our Commission. We were honored to host President Obama
at three of the Commission's overseas cemeteries this fiscal year:
Flanders Field American Cemetery in Belgium; Manila American Cemetery
in the Philippines; and Normandy American Cemetery, France.
At Normandy on June 6th, the president was joined by French
President Hollande, Secretary of State Kerry, Secretary of Defense
Hagel, Congressional delegations, and many other civilian and military
dignitaries to commemorate the 70th Anniversary of the D-Day landings.
Before an audience of 10,000, including more than 300 D-Day veterans,
the President reflected on the historical significance of June 6, 1944:
``We come to tell the story of the men and women who did it so that
it remains seared into the memory of a future world. We tell this story
for the old soldiers who pull themselves a little straighter today to
salute brothers who never made it home. We tell the story for the
daughter who clutches a faded photo of her father, forever young; for
the child who runs his fingers over colorful ribbons he knows signify
something of great consequence, even if he doesn't yet fully understand
why.''
Unlike the Longest Day 70 years ago, it was a beautiful June day in
Normandy to remember the achievement and sacrifice of the more than
10,000 brave souls buried in the hallowed Normandy grounds and
memorialized on the cemetery's Tablets of the Missing.
Other significant commemorative events this past year included the
70th anniversary of Operation Market Garden at Netherlands American
Cemetery and the 70th anniversary of Operation Dragoon at Rhone
American Cemetery in southern France.
Not long after these World War II events concluded, attention
shifted in August to the World War I Centennial. Although the 100th
anniversary of the United States entry into the Great War will not
begin until April 2017, the Commission's eight World War I cemeteries
in Europe will receive increased attention as visitors travel to the
battlefields where the fathers and mothers of the ``Greatest
Generation'' witnessed unprecedented devastation and death; places
where American sacrifice ultimately opened an American Century.
I have shared with you previously the ambitious visitor center
projects we began as part of our Interpretation Program--what we now
refer to as Telling Their Story. I'm pleased to report this morning
that two new visitor centers at our Cambridge and Sicily-Rome
cemeteries were dedicated on Memorial Day, and the renovated visitor
center at the Pointe du Hoc Ranger Monument--just nine kilometers from
Normandy cemetery--was dedicated June 5th on the eve of D-Day.
Visitor center renovation projects at two World War I cemeteries--
Meuse-Argonne in France and Flanders Field in Belgium--are in design.
And three additional visitor center projects are in various stages of
development:
At our Honolulu Memorial in the Department of Veterans
Affairs National Memorial Cemetery of the Pacific--the
Punchbowl;
At Manila American Cemetery, our only World War II
commemorative cemetery in the Pacific; and,
At the World War I Chateau-Thierry Monument in France,
located about one hour east of Paris.
We also have two new monuments in development.
A monument to be placed at Midway Island has been
designed and fabricated, and installation is forthcoming.
We launched a competition to select an architect to
design a U.S. monument for New Zealand's national memorial park
in Wellington, responding to an invitation from the Government
of New Zealand.
These monument projects are part of an initiative launched by our
Board of Commissioners, with the counsel of the military service
historians, to honor significant battles and achievements of U.S.
forces that have not previously been commemorated by the Commission.
Closer to home, we partnered with the National Park Service to
renovate and upgrade kiosks and educational content at the World War II
and Korean War memorials on the National Mall, significantly enhancing
the visitor experience. Particularly popular is the ability for
visitors to access ABMC's World War II Registry and Korean War Honor
Roll databases at the kiosks.
We are strengthening our collaboration with Arlington National
Cemetery, defining opportunities to share best practices and training.
We can learn much from the technological advances ANC has made in
recent years, and we can share the core competencies for which our
agency has become known, strengthening both organizations. Likewise, we
continue our long-standing relationship with the National Cemetery
Administration through advisory committees and our shared interest in
the National Memorial Cemetery of the Pacific, home of our Honolulu
Memorial. Through such collaborations we have the opportunity,
collectively, to improve the efficiency of our operations and more
effectively serve our stakeholders.
Phase two of the Commission's education program initiative has
begun with the award of a contract to a joint venture of National
History Day and the George Mason University Center for History and New
Media to create a World War II-focused, education program developed by
teachers that will help students better understand the service,
experience and sacrifice of American armed forces that served and died
during the war in Northern Europe.
Products related to World War I, developed in partnership with the
University of North Carolina and Virginia Tech as phase one of our
education program, will be completed by the end of this year.
The Commission received a new mission responsibility in fiscal year
2014 with completion in December 2013 of a Memorandum of Understanding
(MOU) between the U.S. and the Republic of the Philippines, giving ABMC
the ability to restore and maintain Clark Veterans Cemetery in the
Philippines as ABMC's 25th cemetery. The action was contemplated by the
Dignified Burial and Other Veterans' Benefits Improvement Act (Public
Law 112-260), signed into law by President Obama in January 2013. Our
staff at Manila American Cemetery began basic maintenance of the
cemetery immediately upon signature of the MOU, as well as, restoration
of the perimeter fence and construction of a temporary equipment
storage facility. We are awaiting the completion of an engineering
assessment of the physical condition of the cemetery and expect initial
results this month. We will carefully analyze those results to develop
recommendations regarding appropriate next steps that will guide future
restoration plans, long-term maintenance requirements, and budget
requests beginning in the fiscal year 2017 budget cycle.
Although ABMC's core mission remains unchanged, in order that we
appropriately continue to honor our Nation's fallen, we have found it
essential to place emphasis on ``telling the story'' of these brave men
and women. As we find ourselves further in time from the seminal events
we commemorate, it is critical that we provide context for younger
generations of Americans who have little understanding of why their
fellow Americans rest in the soil of England, France, Belgium,
Luxembourg, Italy, or the Philippines.
Our visitor centers at Normandy, Cambridge, Sicily-Rome and Pointe
du Hoc, and the projects underway or planned, have inestimable value in
enabling understanding of the historical events surrounding the ``the
glory of their deeds'' and the placement of these cemeteries. As such,
we are re-invigorating our strategic plan to set forth a path focused
on better supporting this essential mission. In addition to our
standing mission and vision, inspired by General Pershing's
foundational statement; and our core values of excellence, integrity,
stewardship, commitment and respect; we have codified a new set of
guiding principles. These principles were designed to help fill a void
in our educational and historical preservation activities, along with
informing our new interpretive services program:
We Will Tell their Story
We will preserve, communicate, and interpret the stories of
competence, courage and sacrifice of those we honor, while providing
historical context for why our commemorative sites were established,
the men and women we honor, and the values for which they fought and
died. Recognizing the changing demographics of our audiences, we will
pursue opportunities at our sites and through education programs and
emerging technologies to educate and inform our audiences in a way that
evokes a lasting, personal connection.
We Will Preserve our Heritage Assets
We will protect and maintain our commemorative sites to their
original design intent and to exceptional standards. ABMC commemorative
sites are completed works of civic art that reflect the Nation's
perpetual commitment to the service and sacrifice honored within them.
The horticultural features defined by the original landscape architects
are integral to these sites. They will be maintained in a manner that
enhances a sense of awe and tranquility and that reflect their status
as important heritage assets. We will use noble materials to preserve
and maintain the structural features of our sites to a ``like new''
standard that appropriately honors those for whom they were erected. We
will plan and execute infrastructure projects that support stewardship
and preservation, actively seeking traditional craftsmen and trades,
while evaluating state of the art techniques, technology and products
that produce the same results.
We Will Develop our Cultural and Historical Resources
We will actively collect and document archival, photographic, and
dimensional materials that enhance scholarship in and interpretation of
our mission and our heritage assets. To facilitate management of these
assets at the highest professional levels, we will maintain a
thoughtful, clear and relevant scope of collections policy and a
collection management plan, and routinely document our historical
property, allowing us to learn and share critical information with the
public and our stakeholders. We will engage in comprehensive planning,
including all aspects of collections management. These management
activities will focus on professional standards and concepts of
inventory, assessment, treatment and management, specifically targeted
to areas of Heritage Assets Management such as architecture, landscape
architecture, archival and museum sciences, material science, forensic
archeology, anthropology and related fields.
These guiding principles will clarify our decision making and shape
our way forward as a world class public history organization. When
fully developed, our new strategic plan will signal a significant pivot
in mission emphasis for the American Battle Monuments Commission.
As we move toward 2020, we will continue our emphasis on
maintaining the highest standard for our memorials and cemeteries,
while providing a first class visitor education experience at each of
our sites.
In conclusion, I invite each of you to visit our commemorative
sites on your future travels, to see for yourselves our stewardship of
the resources provided to the Commission to execute the
responsibilities assigned to us by the Administration and the Congress.
_________
Executive Summary
Disability Assistance and Memorial Affairs by the
Hon. Max Cleland, Secretary, American Battle Monuments Commission
Since 1923, our purpose has not changed--to commemorate the service
and achievements of America's armed forces. 2014 has been a significant
commemorative year: the 70th Anniversary of the D-Day landings at
Normandy; the 70th anniversary of Operation Market Garden at
Netherlands; and the 70th anniversary of Operation Dragoon at Rhone.
Although the 100th anniversary of the United States entry into the
Great War will not begin until April 2017, the Commission's eight World
War I cemeteries in Europe will receive increased attention as visitors
travel to those battlefields.
Visitor centers at our Cambridge and Sicily-Rome cemeteries were
dedicated on Memorial Day, and the renovated visitor center at the
Pointe du Hoc Ranger Monument was dedicated in June. Visitor center
renovation projects at two World War I cemeteries--Meuse-Argonne in
France and Flanders Field in Belgium--are in design, and three
additional visitor center projects are in various stages of
development: at our Honolulu Memorial; at Manila; and at the World War
I Chateau-Thierry Monument in France. We also have two new monuments in
development: at Midway Island and for New Zealand's national memorial
park. Both projects are part of an initiative to honor significant
achievements of U.S. forces that have not previously been commemorated
by the Commission.
Closer to home, we partnered with the National Park Service to
renovate and upgrade kiosks and educational content at the World War II
and Korean War memorials on the National Mall, and we are strengthening
our collaboration with Arlington National Cemetery, defining
opportunities to share best practices and training. Likewise, we
continue our long-standing relationship with the National Cemetery
Administration through advisory committees and our shared interest in
the Honolulu Memorial.
Phase two of the Commission's education program has begun with
award of a contract to National History Day and the George Mason
University Center for History and New Media, to create a World War II-
focused education program developed by teachers. Products related to
World War I, developed in partnership with the University of North
Carolina and Virginia Tech as phase one of our education program, will
be completed by the end of this year.
The Commission received a new mission responsibility in fiscal year
2014 when Clark Veterans Cemetery in the Philippines became ABMC's 25th
cemetery. We are awaiting the completion of an engineering assessment
of the physical condition of the cemetery and expect initial results
this month. We will carefully analyze those results to develop
recommendations regarding appropriate next steps that will guide future
restoration plans, long-term maintenance requirements, and budget
requests beginning in the fiscal year 2017 budget cycle.
ABMC's core mission remains unchanged, but to appropriately honor
our Nation's fallen, it is essential that we tell the stories of these
brave men and women. We are re-invigorating our strategic plan to set
forth a path focused on better supporting this essential mission; we
have codified a new set of guiding principles for this effort: We will
tell their story; we will preserve our heritage assets; and we will
develop our cultural and historical resources. We will continue our
emphasis on maintaining the highest standard for our memorials and
cemeteries, while providing a first class visitor education experience
at each of our sites.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]