    [House Hearing, 115 Congress]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                            [H.A.S.C. No. 115-82]

              ARLINGTON NATIONAL CEMETERY--PRESERVING THE PROMISE

                                   __________

                                    HEARING

                                   BEFORE THE

                       SUBCOMMITTEE ON MILITARY PERSONNEL

                                     OF THE

                          COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES

                            HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                         ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS

                                 SECOND SESSION

                                   __________

                                  HEARING HELD

                                 MARCH 8, 2018

    [GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                   __________

                        U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
    29-460                      WASHINGTON : 2019

                       SUBCOMMITTEE ON MILITARY PERSONNEL

                        MIKE COFFMAN, Colorado, Chairman

    WALTER B. JONES, North Carolina      JACKIE SPEIER, California
    BRAD R. WENSTRUP, Ohio, Vice Chair   ROBERT A. BRADY, Pennsylvania
    STEVE RUSSELL, Oklahoma              NIKI TSONGAS, Massachusetts
    DON BACON, Nebraska                  RUBEN GALLEGO, Arizona
    MARTHA McSALLY, Arizona              CAROL SHEA-PORTER, New Hampshire
    RALPH LEE ABRAHAM, Louisiana         JACKY ROSEN, Nevada
    TRENT KELLY, Mississippi
                     Dan Sennott, Professional Staff Member
                    Craig Greene, Professional Staff Member
                             Danielle Steitz, Clerk

                                C O N T E N T S

                                  ----------
                                                                       Page

                  STATEMENTS PRESENTED BY MEMBERS OF CONGRESS

    Coffman, Hon. Mike, a Representative from Colorado, Chairman,
      Subcommittee on Military Personnel.............................     1

                                   WITNESSES

    Allen, Forrest, Associate Director, Government Relations,
      Military Officers Association of America.......................     2
    Avila, Gerardo, Deputy Director, Veterans Affairs and
      Rehabilitation Division, The American Legion...................     3
    Durham-Aguilera, Karen, Executive Director, Army National
      Military Cemeteries, Department of the Army; and Katharine
      Kelley, Superintendent, Arlington National Cemetery............    13
    Towles, John, Deputy Director, National Legislative Service,
      Veterans of Foreign Wars.......................................     5
    Zuegel, Col Keith W., USAF (Ret.), Senior Director, Government
      Relations, Air Force Association...............................     7

                                   APPENDIX

    Prepared Statements:

        Allen, Forrest...............................................    26
        Avila, Gerardo...............................................    37
        Coffman, Hon. Mike...........................................    25
        Durham-Aguilera, Karen.......................................    57
        Towles, John.................................................    42
        Zuegel, Col Keith W..........................................    49

    Documents Submitted for the Record:

        [There were no Documents submitted.]

    Witness Responses to Questions Asked During the Hearing:

        [There were no Questions submitted during the hearing.]

    Questions Submitted by Members Post Hearing:

        [There were no Questions submitted post hearing.]

            ARLINGTON NATIONAL CEMETERY--PRESERVING THE PROMISE

                                  ----------

                      House of Representatives,
                           Committee on Armed Services,
                            Subcommittee on Military Personnel,
                               Washington, DC, Thursday, March 8, 2018.
        The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10:56 a.m., in
    room 2212, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Mike Coffman
    (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.

     OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MIKE COFFMAN, A REPRESENTATIVE FROM
         COLORADO, CHAIRMAN, SUBCOMMITTEE ON MILITARY PERSONNEL

        Mr. Coffman. This hearing is called to order. I want to
    welcome everyone to this morning's Military Personnel
    Subcommittee hearing. The purpose of today's hearing is to
    receive testimony from stakeholders and Department officials on
    the future of Arlington National Cemetery. This iconic resting
    place for generations of brave men and women who have served
    their country is truly a national treasure. During its 153-year
    history, more than 400,000 people have been interred or inurned
    at the cemetery. Unfortunately, the cemetery is rapidly running
    out of space. If nothing is done, in a matter of 23 short
    years, the cemetery will be closed for new burials.
        In response to a congressional mandate, last year, the
    Secretary of the Army provided a report on Arlington National
    Cemetery's capacity. The report makes clear that action is
    required if we hope to preserve Arlington as an active
    cemetery. I look forward to hearing from our two panels about
    the recommendations on how best to preserve Arlington National
    Cemetery. For our first panel, comprised of military and
    veteran organizations, I look forward to hearing the views of
    the veterans and Active Duty members who will be directly
    impacted by any decisions regarding changes of eligibility
    criteria. I also look forward to hearing your members' ideas on
    how best to preserve Arlington National Cemetery as an active
    cemetery well into the future.
        For our second panel, consisting of the leadership of
    Arlington National Cemetery, I look forward to hearing what
    steps have been taken to exhaustively research the capacity
    issue and what options are available to maximize both
    eligibility and the life of the cemetery.
        We will give each witness an opportunity to present his or
    her testimony and each member an opportunity to question the
    witnesses for 5 minutes. We would also respectively remind the
    witnesses to summarize, to the greatest extent possible, the
    high points of your written testimony in 5 minutes or less.
    Your written comments and statements will be made part of the
    hearing record.
        Let me welcome our first panel today. Mr. Forrest Allen,
    Associate Director of Government Relations, the Military
    Officers Association of America; Mr. Gerardo Avila, Deputy
    Director, the Medical/Physical Evaluation Boards and Department
    of Defense, The American Legion; Mr. John Towles, Deputy
    Director, National Legislative Service, Veterans of Foreign
    Wars; Colonel Keith Zuegel, United States Air Force (retired),
    Senior Director, Government Relations, Air Force Association.
        With that, Mr. Allen, you may now make your opening
    statement.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Coffman can be found in the
    Appendix on page 25.]

      STATEMENT OF FORREST ALLEN, ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR, GOVERNMENT
          RELATIONS, MILITARY OFFICERS ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA

        Mr. Allen. Thank you, Chairman Coffman, Ranking Member
    Speier, and other distinguished members of the Military
    Personnel Subcommittee of the House Armed Services Committee.
    On behalf of the Military Officers Association of America
    [MOAA], I am grateful for the opportunity to present our
    position concerning the future of Arlington National Cemetery.
        With finite years of capacity for new burials remaining at
    the cemetery, it is important to maintain the dignity of burial
    there, respect the end-of-life plans for the currently eligible
    population, and, if possible, take reasonable steps towards
    extending the life of the cemetery for future service members.
    MOAA commends the Secretary of the Army, congressional
    committees, the advisory committee on Arlington National
    Cemetery, and other cemetery officials for making significant
    efforts to include all stakeholders in this discussion. It is
    fitting that today's hearing is about preserving the promise.
        To MOAA, preserving the promise of the cemetery is
    resolving to allow those in the currently eligible population
    with expectations of burial at Arlington to execute their end-
    of-life plans. No promise exists that the cemetery will remain
    open for new burials forever, nor is there a promise that
    future service members, even retirees, will be guaranteed an
    opportunity to be buried there. Either way, if a decision is
    made, it is going to be very important to address future
    expectations with expediency.
        Preserving the promise also means preserving the dignified
    setting, the aesthetics, and the history of the cemetery. While
    many other national cemeteries across the Nation serve a
    similar purpose in honoring those who served and do so very
    well, Arlington, undoubtedly, has a special connotation of its
    own.
        So many of the interested groups, many sitting with me
    here, have been talking about two primary options for extending
    the life of the cemetery: expansion and eligibility changes.
    Expansion of the cemetery grounds, contiguously or not, is a
    viable path forward and is the preferred method of extending
    the life of the cemetery. While it is costly and time-
    consuming, MOAA members have clearly indicated their preference
    for expansion over significantly restricting eligibility. The
    advisory committee's first survey also revealed a strong desire
    to undertake expansion efforts first.
        Opportunities for expansion to adjacent lands are few.
    However, Option 2C of the February 2017 advisory committee
    report to Congress suggested the establishment of a new DOD
    [Department of Defense] national cemetery at a separate
    location, which we believe could serve as the starting point
    for noncontiguous expansion of the cemetery. Locations like
    Gettysburg or Quantico could serve as dignified burial sites
    associated with the original Arlington Cemetery. And while such
    sites might not have the same feel at the outset, there is
    potential for that aura to develop over time. Recall, after
    all, that the Arlington Cemetery we know today did not develop
    its reputation overnight.
        Eligibility restrictions are a tougher sell. MOAA does not
    oppose restricting a select number of gravesites for those who
    are killed in action, or who earn a particular award of high
    honor. However, the expectation and earned right to be laid to
    rest at Arlington for the currently eligible population should
    not be exchanged for an Active Duty member who serves in the
    future and dies from a noncombat-related incident.
        So if at the end of your deliberations, eligibility
    restrictions are deemed desirable or necessary, MOAA suggests
    there should, at a minimum, be a reinstatement of the
    reservation system to allow those who have already made plans
    at Arlington to have a chance to have their wishes honored.
        So MOAA surveyed its membership about a year and a half
    ago, and some of the significant results are listed in our
    written testimony. But the survey revealed that reaching
    maximum capacity is a widely accepted fate. So when the
    cemetery is full, it is going to be full. At the same time,
    respondents were evenly split for and against changing
    eligibility restrictions after all expansion options were
    exhausted. Also, about two-thirds of respondents suggested
    eligibility changes would be acceptable so long as retirees
    remained eligible.
        Thus, to best honor the promise of Arlington, MOAA has
    several recommendations: One, Congress not take action
    restricting eligibility for the military retiree population,
    other than reserving a set number of plots for specific
    honorees; two, Congress appropriate funds to undertake
    acquisition and development of adjacent land, including the
    completion of the Southern Expansion Project currently
    underway; and three, Congress appropriate funds for the study
    and eventual acquisition of noncontiguous land to be used as an
    Arlington annex.
        Thank you to the Subcommittee on Military Personnel for
    holding this hearing to examine the options forward. We eagerly
    look forward to any recommendations that come from the
    discussion. And I look forward to your questions. Thank you.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Allen can be found in the
    Appendix on page 26.]
        Mr. Coffman. Mr. Avila, you are now recognized for 5
    minutes.

     STATEMENT OF GERARDO AVILA, DEPUTY DIRECTOR, VETERANS AFFAIRS
            AND REHABILITATION DIVISION, THE AMERICAN LEGION

        Mr. Avila. It is often said that taking a walk through
    Arlington National Cemetery is to take a walk through America's
    history with its most revered patriots. Laying our Nation's
    veterans, service members, and their eligible family members to
    rest with dignity, respect, and honor, is the foundation of the
    mission of this hallowed ground called Arlington National
    Cemetery. The hallowed grounds of Arlington, which has stood
    since the Civil War as the crown jewel of reverence for the
    fallen men and women who have served this Nation during peace
    and wartime, is at its crossroads in its long, proud history.
        Chairman Coffman, Ranking Member Speier, and distinguished
    members of the Subcommittee on Military Personnel, on behalf of
    our National Commander, Denise H. Rohan, and the 2 million
    members of The American Legion, thank you for the opportunity
    to testify regarding the future of Arlington National Cemetery.
        The likelihood that Arlington National Cemetery, with this
    150-year history, could cease to operate within the next three
    decades is a real possibility. There are currently 71 living
    Medal of Honor recipients with 11 from our current conflicts.
    These 11, if they live to average life expectancy, will not
    have the option to be buried at Arlington due to lack of
    capacity. Extending the life of Arlington as an active cemetery
    will require difficult decisions to be made. And recognizing
    this reality, The American Legion adopted Resolution No. 93
    during our national convention in 2016, urging Congress to
    codify eligibility criteria to be restricted to service members
    who die in Active Duty, and to our most decorated veterans to
    include recipients of the Purple Heart; former members of the
    Armed Forces, separated from the military before October 1,
    1949, with a physical disability of 30 percent or greater;
    retirees; eligible spouses and children; former prisoners of
    war; and for the President or former Presidents as Commanders
    in Chief.
        The American Legion also believes that there should be no
    waivers for unqualified persons, except under unique and
    compelling circumstances, in order to assure that the remaining
    spaces are used judiciously. The options of expansion and using
    new burial techniques have also been suggested as ideas to
    increase capacity. Each comes with its own sets of challenges.
    Expanding the current footprint will be difficult, due to
    Arlington's geographical location.
        Other expansion challenges include money and time. The two
    current expansion projects underway have a combined budget of
    over $350 million. The American Legion supports exploring the
    option of expansion within close proximity to the current
    footprint in the Capital Region. We support the proposal for
    exploring alternative ideas and maximizing the current and any
    future space with the use of new burial techniques that will
    allow for increased use of above-ground inurnments.
        The American Legion shares with the U.S. Army its expressed
    concern in using new above-ground techniques, fearing it will
    alter the architectural design of the cemetery. However, we
    remain open to changes that do not detract from Arlington and
    would be beneficial in creating additional capacity. The
    American Legion's own 100-year history is intricately
    intertwined with endeavors to pursue the legacy of this
    Nation's veterans and current service members.
        We would like to take this opportunity to acknowledge and
    say thank you to Arlington National Cemetery, the advisory
    committee, for beginning this very important conversation and
    for including The American Legion and the veteran service
    organizations. Our 2 million members, as well as all living
    veterans, deserve to have a voice when deciding the future of
    such hallowed place.
        Thank you, again, Chairman Coffman, Ranking Member Speier,
    and distinguished members of the subcommittee. We appreciate
    the opportunity to present The American Legion's views and look
    forward to any questions that you and/or the subcommittee may
    have.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Avila can be found in the
    Appendix on page 37.]
        Mr. Coffman. Thank you, Mr. Avila.
        Mr. Towles, you are now recognized for 5 minutes.

    STATEMENT OF JOHN TOWLES, DEPUTY DIRECTOR, NATIONAL LEGISLATIVE
                   SERVICE, VETERANS OF FOREIGN WARS

        Mr. Towles. Chairman Coffman, Ranking Member Speier, and
    members of this subcommittee, on behalf of the men and women of
    the Veterans of Foreign Wars [VFW] of the United States and its
    auxiliary, I would thank you for the opportunity to testify
    before this distinguished subcommittee this morning and to
    present our views concerning the future of Arlington National
    Cemetery.
        As this Nation's oldest war veterans service organization,
    the VFW and its auxiliary proudly represent more than 1.7
    million members, including 300 post-9/11 veterans, and more
    than 60,000 members of the Active Duty National Guard and
    Reserves. This is one of the many reasons that the future of
    our Nation's most hallowed ground has been, and will continue
    to be, a top priority for us.
        In 1967, President Lyndon Johnson requested that the
    Department of Veterans Affairs [VA] conduct a survey of all
    existing veterans benefits to include burial and cemetery
    programs administered by both the Department of the Army and
    the VA.
        A year later, in consultation with the National Veterans
    Advisory Committee, which included VFW representation, they
    delivered a report to Congress that paved the way for the
    transfer of 82 of the Army's 84 cemeteries. The only two that
    remain under the care of the Army was the Soldiers Home
    National Cemetery and Arlington National Cemetery. Nineteen
    sixty-seven also saw a significant restriction placed on the
    eligibility at Arlington due to growing concerns that the
    number of American service members being killed in action
    during the Vietnam War and the rapidly aging World War II
    veteran population would soon fill Arlington to its capacity.
        This new regulation restricted in-ground burials to
    military personnel who died on Active Duty, or career military
    retirees or recipients of this Nation's highest military
    awards. At that time, VFW vehemently opposed any eligibility
    restrictions. In fact, our membership was so outraged that we
    completely withdrew from Arlington's Veterans Day ceremony that
    year, sparking a national controversy, as you can imagine.
        As a membership organization, the VFW is required to
    represent the views and preferences of our members. And in
    1967, this meant opposing any eligibility restrictions. Much
    has changed since 1967.
        After many meetings with top officials within the Office of
    the Secretary of Defense and the Department of the Army
    throughout the years, as well as surveys and roundtables
    conducted by Arlington National Cemetery leadership, many
    proposals to reform eligibility have been brought forward and
    submitted for our consideration.
        At this time, there is only one eligibility restriction
    that has been brought forth that the VFW supports, and that is
    to restrict eligibility to 24 months of Active Duty service,
    not including those who were killed in action or die on Active
    Duty. Enacting this eligibility restriction would effectively
    make in-ground interment policy for Arlington commensurate with
    that of the cemeteries within the VA's National Cemetery
    Administration, and would reduce the workload at Arlington by
    approximately 200 burials per year.
        While the VFW acknowledges that restricting eligibility to
    those who are killed in action or Medal of Honor recipients
    would ensure that Arlington remains open in perpetuity, the VFW
    has an obligation to advocate for, and preserve the integrity
    of, the option best suited to do the most good for the most
    number of veterans. Additionally, restricting eligibility to a
    very small category of veterans is simply not feasible at this
    time, not if the true goal is to provide those who are entitled
    to be laid to rest at one of America's most sacred cemeteries
    the ability to do so.
        Furthermore, the VFW feels it is imperative that the way
    forward also include the acquisition of additional space in
    some form, as land is a finite resource. This is why the VFW
    fully supports the proposed Southern Expansion which would,
    according to Arlington officials, add an additional 30 to 40
    acres to the cemetery and provide approximately 40- to 60,000
    new gravesites. When combined with the proposed 24-month
    eligibility restriction, the life of the cemetery would be
    extended through 2074.
        You may be asking yourself, what about after 2074? As
    previously stated, there is no easy answer given the current
    shortage of land in the area. However, there is one property
    that may offer a solution, and that is the Armed Forces
    Retirement Home.
        For the past decade, VFW members have donated their time
    and resources to assist the residents in the Armed Forces
    Retirement Home by helping to maintain the property through
    various service projects. Every year we go out, we see unused
    space. We see a golf course that is struggling to remain open.
    We read articles in the local press concerning proposals to
    develop up to 80 acres of so-called excess space on the
    property for commercial use. And most of us have seen by now
    the most recent Army IG [Inspector General] report highlighting
    the failures of officials to conduct proper oversight of this
    property. The Cemetery at the Armed Forces Retirement Home is,
    aside from Arlington itself, arguably one of the most historic
    oldest cemeteries in this country.
        Mr. Chairman, if 30 to 40 acres will provide an additional
    40,000 to 60,000 gravesites, then simple math tells us that
    reclaiming the 80 acres of surplus land there would give us an
    additional 80,000 to 120,000 gravesites which would push us
    well beyond 2074. Aside from that, we must continue to
    encourage VA to work with their other State and Federal
    partners in order to expand the National Cemetery
    Administration's current inventory, while also working with
    your colleagues on the House and Senate Veterans Affairs
    Appropriations Committee to provide them with the funding
    needed to do so.
        In the end, the men and women who served this Nation
    honorably, as well as their family members, deserve to be laid
    at rest in hallowed ground. It may not have been a
    consideration while they were serving, but it is an honor that
    they have nonetheless earned through their blood, sweat, and
    tears. As a Nation, we have an obligation to ensure that they
    and their sacrifices are as honored as thoroughly as possible.
    This includes their final resting place.
        Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Speier, this concludes my
    testimony, and again, I want to sincerely thank you for the
    invitation to come and testify on this topic. And I look
    forward to any questions you may have.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Towles can be found in the
    Appendix on page 42.]
        Mr. Coffman. Thank you, Mr. Towles.
        Colonel Zuegel, you are now recognized for 5 minutes.

    STATEMENT OF COL KEITH W. ZUEGEL, USAF (RET.), SENIOR DIRECTOR,
              GOVERNMENT RELATIONS, AIR FORCE ASSOCIATION

        Colonel Zuegel. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Chairman Coffman, Ranking Member Speier, Congressman
    Wenstrup, Congressman Bacon, thank you for being here today,
    and the other members of the committee. On behalf of the Air
    Force Association's membership of 96,000, the nearly 700,000
    airmen, civilians, and families that we represent, and the
    millions of veterans who have worn Air Force blue, I am honored
    to testify today on the importance of Arlington National
    Cemetery.
        We have been involved in this issue for quite some time,
    and routinely participate in meetings with the Arlington
    National Cemetery's advisory committee. There are an estimated
    22 million veterans alive today who serve--22 million veterans
    alive today who served honorably and understand the
    significance and the impact of Arlington National Cemetery. As
    the organization that led the financing and construction of the
    Air Force Memorial, which could potentially be encroached by
    cemetery expansion options, we at AFA [Air Force Association]
    realize that the surrounding land is finite. Space on this
    hallowed ground is projected to run out in the early 2040s, and
    a solution must be found soon.
        Thank you for holding this hearing, for having this
    difficult discussion. We strongly believe that our Nation's
    decision makers should explore an all-of-the-above strategy to
    include land expansion and land optimization before reducing or
    curtailing eligibility. It is important to keep this cemetery
    viable as long as possible for future Medal of Honor
    recipients, those killed in combat, and top medal awardees. We
    should strive to obtain surrounding land to expand the present
    cemetery. Although the cemetery's majestic serenity should be
    largely preserved, there are avenues to increase burial
    locations without losing the cemetery's solemn presence.
        In addition to exploring expansion possibilities, more
    above-ground inurnments should be considered. As military
    members age and consider their final resting place, it is
    paramount that the hearing today be followed up by quick and
    decisive action. From the Secretary of the Army, Secretary of
    Defense, and the President, we ask for your oversight in making
    sure this happens.
        Thank you for the invitation to testify today. We thank you
    for bringing this issue before the public. And the Air Force
    Association is honored to be part of it. We are honored to
    present testimony to advocate for the continued viability of
    Arlington National Cemetery. We are entrusted with the solemn
    responsibility to care for those men and women that have
    sacrificed so much for our great Nation. And we are eager to
    work with the U.S. Congress and Department of Defense on the
    best way forward for Arlington National Cemetery.
        Thank you. We stand ready for your questions.
        [The prepared statement of Colonel Zuegel can be found in
    the Appendix on page 49.]
        Mr. Coffman. Thank you, Colonel Zuegel.
        Let me just start.
        Mr. Allen, I have a question for you. The results from the
    first survey appear to favor restricting eligibility to POWs
    [prisoners of war], valor awards, the Purple Heart, Medal of
    Honor, killed in action, and Active Duty. Sixty-eight percent
    of the veterans in this survey favor this category, while only
    47 percent favor keeping retirees eligible. And I am referring
    to a survey that was done, I believe, by the Department of the
    Army.
        I am curious why your testimony is contradictory to the
    survey results. Can you elaborate on this?
        Mr. Allen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the question.
        Yes. So our position is contrary to what that particular
    point in the Arlington National Cemetery advisory committee
    survey said, because I am here representing the members of the
    Military Officers Association. And our members explicitly
    stated that they prefer not to restrict eligibility to the
    military retiree population. And I think that is the
    distinguishing factor between the data point that you are
    bringing up from the advisory committee survey versus what our
    stance is.
        So it is not that we are completely against reserving a
    certain number of plots for those categories which you
    mentioned are part of that data point, but our members
    certainly want to preserve a number of spaces for the retiree
    population.
        Mr. Coffman. Let me ask this to the others, if they would
    like to comment on this. And, again, the results from the first
    survey conducted by the Arlington National Cemetery Foundation
    favors restricting eligibility to POWs, valor awards, the
    Purple Heart, Medal of Honor, those killed in action, and
    Active Duty. Would the rest of you comment on that?
        Mr. Avila.
        Mr. Avila. I believe there were about 28,000 people that
    participated in the survey, not necessarily veterans. I think
    there were different categories where family members or people
    that have no association to the cemetery.
        The American Legion has our Resolution 93; that is the
    current criteria that we support. But I think part of this
    leads to the difficult discussion that must be had, and we can
    bring back to our membership and educate them on the tough
    choices that might have to be made. We would like to continue
    to engage Arlington Cemetery and the advisory committee to
    shape any criteria down the future. But our current position is
    based on Resolution 93, Chairman.
        Mr. Coffman. Okay. Mr. Towles.
        Mr. Towles. Mr. Chairman, I echo my colleague's sentiment
    from MOAA. We are a membership-driven organization. And as a
    result, we have to consult with them when we make a stance such
    as this. Our stance is if you are going to restrict
    eligibility, it should be done as minutely as possible as to
    provide the most benefit to the most amount of veterans.
        Mr. Coffman. Okay. Colonel Zuegel.
        Colonel Zuegel. Mr. Chairman, pretty much along those
    lines. Again, expansion. But we also think we should consider
    the 24 months of Active Duty eligibility that--similar to what
    the VA has. And then the other categories you named, of course,
    what is left out of that affects most of our members, our
    retirees. And I think more of a discussion has to be for Active
    Duty retirees.
        Mr. Coffman. Okay. Let me, if I can, throw out one more
    question to you.
        A few of you have stated that your members understand that
    eligibility criteria changes need to be explored in order to
    keep Arlington National Cemetery an active cemetery, but that
    these changes should not be applied to those who have already
    made end-of-life plans that include burials at Arlington
    National Cemetery.
        What is your recommended method for identifying and
    distinguishing those individuals who have made end-of-life
    plans and those who haven't?
        Why don't we start--Mr. Allen, let's start with you.
        Mr. Allen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        So we believe at MOAA that there is an opportunity to
    reinstate a reservation system. There was one in the past
    before we had the niceties of computers and the internet to
    hold a registration system. But we think a new reservation
    system might give people an opportunity to express their
    interest in being buried there.
        Mr. Coffman. Mr. Avila.
        Mr. Avila. Our resolution does not state reservation
    system, so we have no position on that. We have the criteria
    that we feel should be met and able to be interred, buried in
    Arlington. But like I said, if it is a decision that must be
    made to expand Arlington's life, then I think that is a
    conversation that we can have with our membership.
        Mr. Coffman. Mr. Towles.
        Mr. Towles. Mr. Chairman, we have no thoughts concerning a
    reservation system.
        Mr. Coffman. Colonel Zuegel.
        Colonel Zuegel. Yes, sir. I believe the reservation system
    is a good idea, and we should explore that option as well.
        Mr. Coffman. Very well.
        Dr. Wenstrup, you are now recognized for 5 minutes.
        Dr. Wenstrup. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just have one
    quick question.
        Colonel, you had mentioned other interment methods. Could
    you elaborate on that? I think you were referring to other ways
    of interring people maybe at Arlington.
        Colonel Zuegel. Congressman, what I meant to portray is
    that, you know, we want to maintain the majesty of the iconic
    nature of the cemetery. And it is one of the--you know, it is a
    landmark, and it is that way for a reason. But there is ways, I
    think--as I drive into Rosslyn every day and I watch those--you
    know, all those that preceded us, it seems like there is still
    some space that could be had around that area. We could expand
    a little bit going closer to the fences. And there are some
    areas of the cemetery that I think we could, you know, use more
    land management as opposed to, you know, the way it is right
    now. You know, we could come a little closer to the boundaries.
    I also think we should look at more columbariums. We should
    look at the above-the-ground inurnments as well. And I think
    that would help and go a long way.
        Dr. Wenstrup. Okay. Thank you.
        That is the only question I have. I will yield to General
    Bacon.
        Mr. Bacon. Thank you very much. And for one of the few
    committee hearings, I can say I have been a member--a proud
    member of all four of your organizations. And I appreciate all
    four of you and who you represent.
        What I hear is--if I could summarize it. There is a
    reluctance to significantly change the criteria. But it is hard
    to buy more land. But that you all acknowledge we will
    eventually fill this up, and there will be no space for Medal
    of Honor winners and those killed in action. I am just sort of
    paraphrasing. Do I have that that about right?
        So I am hearing yes on all four of you.
        It just seems to me we, at least from my perspective, that
    we should put a higher priority in ensuring space for those
    killed in action, and those recognized for the courage, or, you
    know, Medal of Honor winners and Purple Heart winners. It seems
    like that place should be reserved for those who paid their
    ultimate sacrifice and who received the Medal of Honor. And if
    we don't make that action, I feel like it--doesn't do justice
    to those 10, 20, 30, 50 years from now. I just want to comment,
    but I welcome your feedback if--or you think I got that wrong.
        Colonel Zuegel. Congressman, I think most of us had agreed,
    when we were talking earlier, that we should save a select
    number of sites for, you know, the future Medal of Honor
    recipients and Purple Hearts and, you know, valor awardees. I
    think we should continue to do that and continue keeping it
    viable, but not at the exclusion of the members we represent or
    those that are honorably serving today and that made plans to
    be honored by being laid to rest at Arlington Cemetery.
        Mr. Bacon. But the reality is if we don't change that, it
    will fill up pretty fast, and it will limit the future of those
    who have paid the ultimate sacrifice and who earned the Medal
    of Honor. So I just think we have to realize that there is a
    choice here if we want to preserve this for those who have
    given their all. And it is not an easy choice. I am a near 30-
    year Air Force veteran too. If I take the criteria that is
    being recommended, I won't be allowed to be buried there
    either. But I think I would prefer keeping that spot open for a
    Medal of Honor winner and someone who paid the ultimate
    sacrifice. But it sounds like I am a minority view on that,
    though, from the feedback that you have been given. Is that
    correct?
        Mr. Avila. So, I think from our perspective with the
    resolution that was made 2 years ago, you are correct in that.
    But I think this is the honest conversation, the tough
    questions that we need to ask. I am here representing The
    American Legion. Me, for myself, I am a retiree. If I meet the
    criteria for interment burial at Arlington, but you are telling
    me that my slot could be used for a Medal of Honor recipient,
    or a KIA [killed in action], for Gerardo, I would give up my
    slot for one if it can be guaranteed to be saved. But that is
    me. But this is the conversation that I believe we need to have
    with our membership and everybody at this table.
        Mr. Bacon. I think you and I feel the same way. Maybe it
    just takes more time to have this discussion and sensitize
    folks. Here is the choice. It is not--if we don't change the
    criteria, we will fill up the cemetery, and it will limit the
    future heroes, their ability to get there. I think all who
    served can say they--you know, you say heroism. I think for
    those who paid the ultimate sacrifice and won the Medal of
    Honor, Arlington should be reserved for them if no one else.
        I really appreciate getting your feedback, though. I think
    I expected to see more of that thinking. But, of course, we
    have had these discussions here. We know there is a fork in the
    road that we are going to have to take. So I think that I have
    been sensitized to it already.
        But I think what I am hearing today, Chairman, that we are
    going to have to do some hard work in communicating this to the
    veterans.
        And I yield back. And I thank you for your feedback from
    your members, which I am a one.
        Mr. Coffman. Well, thank you, General Bacon. You have got
    four out of four of these organizations. I got three out of
    four, so you got me beat. The Air Force is the only one ----
        Mr. Bacon. You get a C. I get an A.
        Mr. Coffman. I will take that. I think the Air Force is the
    only one I am not in.
        Colonel Zuegel. We are prepared to take care of that today,
    Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Coffman. I don't think my test scores were there. So I
    was Army and Marine Corps, but I won't go there.
        Let me ask you all this question. If eligibility criteria
    change, what should be the timeline for phasing in those
    changes?
        Mr. Allen, we will start with you.
        Mr. Allen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        We have not really discussed a timeline among our
    membership. And I would be hesitant to give you a projection on
    that without having discussed that. You know, if there is a
    decision, and it is going to be made anywhere in the reasonably
    near future, the big challenge that we would want to make sure
    that is going to be handled is the communication aspect of
    that. I know General Bacon just mentioned that. But, really,
    formulating a path forward to make sure all interested parties
    are aware of any changes coming will be an important factor.
        Mr. Coffman. We are doing a second round at this time.
        Mr. Avila, if you could answer--if eligibility criteria
    change, what should be the timeline for phasing in those
    changes?
        Mr. Avila. In accordance with the resolution, we know the
    criteria that American Legion supports. Approximately 67,000
    spaces are used annually, based on ceremonies that happen at
    Arlington. The first question I believe we need to answer is do
    we want Arlington to be an active cemetery? And the question is
    yes, I believe the sooner, as far as changing the criteria, to
    ensure that Arlington continues to be an active cemetery.
        Mr. Coffman. Mr. Towles.
        Mr. Towles. Mr. Chairman, I think we would have to see more
    specifics in terms of what you mean by eligibility changes. I
    mean, one option is to do the 24-month option to be on par with
    VA. The other one is just to allow KIAs and Medal of Honor
    recipients. So I think we would have to be more specific.
        I can state that currently, we have discussed a timeline of
    implementation for the option that we fully support. We are not
    prepared to make a comment about that currently, though.
        Mr. Coffman. Okay. Colonel Zuegel.
        Colonel Zuegel. Mr. Chairman, again, that is assuming that
    you have exhausted all methods for land expansion, all methods
    for a land management, and you have used all the above criteria
    and started invoking some--you know, and started looking at
    some selection. I think we could do it over the next decade.
    Obviously, if somebody hasn't entered yet, we should say,
    ``This is the way the new system is,'' just like we did with
    the retirement. I think everybody would expect that, and that
    is very understandable. We can't wait 20 years because we are
    too close to the early 2040s, obviously. So we would have to do
    something within the next decade.
        Mr. Coffman. Okay.
        Colonel Zuegel. Just reasonably.
        Mr. Coffman. Well, let me ask another question. Do you
    believe--and this is to the entire panel. Do you believe that
    if the government acquired noncontiguous acreage in the
    National Capital Region, and designated it as part of Arlington
    National Cemetery, that it would achieve the same iconic status
    as Arlington National Cemetery has over time, or would it
    forever be regarded as an annex?
        Mr. Allen.
        Mr. Allen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        We believe that such an acquisition of noncontiguous land
    would be a viable way of extending the life of the cemetery. I
    think that such a parcel of land would be able to develop the
    aura, the aesthetics that the current Arlington National
    Cemetery has, and that is in a great deal of thanks to the
    Department of Army for taking care of the grounds so well.
        Mr. Coffman. Thank you.
        Mr. Avila.
        Mr. Avila. We believe that it can reach the same status as
    Arlington currently does. And that has to do not just with the
    land location, but it goes with the honors that come with being
    interred at Arlington. And if those are continued to provide,
    we feel that it is a good viable option.
        Mr. Coffman. Mr. Towles.
        Mr. Towles. Resoundingly yes, especially as my colleagues
    have already stated, if those same benefits and honors were
    rendered and--I definitely believe so, so long as it is in the
    National Capital Region. It would be difficult to pitch that if
    it were in Texas, for instance. So yes.
        Mr. Coffman. Colonel Zuegel.
        Colonel Zuegel. It would be very difficult to match the
    iconic nature of Arlington National Cemetery whether we called
    it Arlington North or South, or whatever. So whether it is an
    annex or not--you know, I praise the Department of Defense and
    the Department of Veterans Affairs for what they do currently.
    You know, the cemeteries are all, you know, well-maintained and
    accessible to veterans, and they honor the veterans.
        I have had this personal discussion in my home about--you
    know, I am eligible also for burial at the Air Force Academy.
    And my kid said, ``Well, I would rather Dad be buried at
    Arlington National Cemetery, and--because we'd visit it more
    often.'' But I don't think you can match the iconic nature of
    Arlington Cemetery. But, you know, I think it is one of the
    all-the-above solution ideas that we have to come up with.
        Mr. Coffman. Okay. Thank you, Colonel Zuegel.
        We will now take a brief recess in order to set the witness
    table for the second panel. I want to thank everybody for your
    testimony today. I really appreciate it. Thank you.
        [Recess.]
        Mr. Coffman. I wish to now welcome our second panel.
        We would like to respectfully remind the second panel to
    summarize, to the greatest extent possible, the high points of
    your written testimony in 5 minutes or less. Your written
    comments and statements will be made part of the hearing
    record.
        Our second panel consists of Ms. Karen Durham-Aguilera,
    Executive Director of Army National Military Cemeteries; Ms.
    Kate Kelley, Superintendent, Arlington National Cemetery.
        With that, Ms. Durham-Aguilera, you are now recognized to
    make your opening statement.

     STATEMENT OF KAREN DURHAM-AGUILERA, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, ARMY
       NATIONAL MILITARY CEMETERIES, DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY; AND
     KATHARINE KELLEY, SUPERINTENDENT, ARLINGTON NATIONAL CEMETERY

        Ms. Durham-Aguilera. So, Chairman Coffman and distinguished
    members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to
    provide a further update to the subcommittee.
        Arlington National Cemetery is the premier national
    military cemetery in our Nation's capital. It is an iconic
    place devoted to honoring our veterans' and patriots' service
    and sacrifice in the defense of our Nation. Each week, the
    cemetery faithfully conducts 150 funeral services on behalf of
    a grateful Nation.
        In fiscal year 2017, we interred nearly 7,100 Active Duty
    service members, veterans, and their family members. We also
    annually host approximately 3.3 million guests, helping each
    visitor connect to the sacrifices of our military. On behalf of
    the cemetery and the Department of the Army, I express our deep
    appreciation for the support provided by Congress over these
    many years.
        Arlington National Cemetery is proud to honor each
    generation of men and women who serve in the defense of our
    Nation. As the steward of this national shrine, the Army is
    committed to maintaining Arlington National Cemetery as an
    active cemetery and extending its legacy well into the future,
    currently defined as 150 years. Unfortunately, without changes
    to the eligibility requirements and the physical footprint,
    Arlington National Cemetery will not be a burial operation--an
    option for most who served in the Gulf War or any conflict
    since, regardless of their contributions, achievements, or
    valor. The Secretary of the Army's February 2017 report to
    Congress informs that the cemetery will reach maximum capacity
    in the early 2040s, and further discusses the difficult topics
    of eligibility and expansion.
        Arlington National Cemetery's ability to remain open as an
    active burial site well into the future is a function of
    limited burial capacity in conflict with extraordinary demand.
    Capacity meaning available gravesites and niches, and demand
    meaning the volume of families' request for interment and
    inurnment of the currently eligible populations. We are
    addressing capacity through the Millennium Project, nearly
    completed, and planning for the future Southern Expansion
    Project. Based on changing conditions and revised estimates,
    the Army requires additional authority and funding to complete
    the land acquisition and the defense access roads project
    associated with Southern Expansion. We are working with the
    Army staff and other committees of Congress to address these
    shortfalls.
        Beyond those efforts, there are no additional plans for
    increasing the available burial space through expansion. There
    are few adjacent Federal lands available to increase the
    cemetery's burial space. Even if these lands were made
    available, they would only extend the life of the cemetery by a
    few years, at a great cost. Expansion alone will not keep
    Arlington National Cemetery open to new interments past the
    2040s to 2050s. We must address the demand for interment by
    restricting eligibility in addition to physical expansion.
        We are very sensitive to the fact that many who have served
    or are currently serving would be impacted. We will evaluate
    ways to minimize these impacts, while also extending the life
    of Arlington National Cemetery. We will continue to champion,
    along with our partners of the Veterans Affairs National
    Cemeteries Administration, the 135 other beautiful national
    cemeteries our Nation provides to honor our veterans at over
    100 State-run veteran cemeteries.
        Our next phase will better inform stakeholders to the
    benefits and the risk of policy options and the reality of
    expanding the cemetery in the National Capital Region. It is
    our desire to give each stakeholder the information necessary
    for honest and thoughtful deliberation of any future changes.
    Further, it is our intent to initiate a second survey by the
    end of this month, March 2018, that will further provide public
    input and inform our future recommendations.
        The Army anticipates continuing robust and candid public
    dialogue as we move forward. Enabled by the tremendous support
    of Congress and the diligent efforts of our great dedicated
    team at Arlington National Cemetery, the Army will continue to
    sustain the sacred trust of our citizens.
        We look forward to working with Congress, the Advisory
    Committee on Arlington National Cemetery, the military service
    organizations, veterans service organizations, and the public
    on enabling the future of Arlington National Cemetery that
    continues its long tradition of honoring our Nation's heroes
    for generations to come.
        Chairman Coffman, this concludes my testimony. Ms. Kelley
    and I will gladly respond to any questions that you or the
    subcommittee members may have. Thank you.
        [The prepared statement of Ms. Durham-Aguilera can be found
    in the Appendix on page 57.]
        Mr. Coffman. Ms. Kelley.
        Ms. Kelley. Yes, sir.
        Mr. Coffman. Very good. Are you ready to answer questions?
        Okay. Ms. Durham-Aguilera, do you feel confident that you
    have done everything you can to remain inclusive and to not
    turn deserving veterans away, while still keeping the cemetery
    open for, sadly, our inevitable future war dead?
        Ms. Durham-Aguilera. Thank you, Chairman Coffman. It is a
    tough reality. You know, the current veteran population is over
    20 million. The retiree population is over 2 million. The total
    force, Active and Reserve, today is over 2 million. Right now,
    today, we have around 100,000 available burial spaces. We
    cannot serve that population in any event.
        There are numerous other options for veterans, to include
    the wonderful cemeteries from the VANCA [Veterans Affairs
    National Cemeteries Administration] as well as the State-run
    cemeteries. We do believe that we are looking at every
    possibility in what we can do, but we also know that we cannot
    serve that entire population no matter what. So we are looking
    to see what can we do in the near future.
        But one thing that we know, we are filling up every day.
    Within the next 3 to 4 years, Section 60 that a lot of people
    identify with, without any changes, it will be closed. So
    trying to get to that reality gives those hard choices is on
    our minds every single day as we go out and lay our veterans
    and patriots to rest.
        Thank you.
        Mr. Coffman. Ms. Kelley, do you have any additional
    comments on that?
        Ms. Kelley. I would only add that what we continue to do at
    the cemetery is efficiently and effectively manage space with
    what we have control over today and that all considerations are
    given to maximizing our ability to serve veterans and their
    families. And so we make decisions every single day in our
    planning processes and how we utilize the existing acreage that
    we have to effectively ensure we continue to provide that open
    and active experience that the public wants us to be.
        Thank you, sir.
        Mr. Coffman. We know that you have considerable aboveground
    space at Arlington National Cemetery. Is this still a good way
    to extend the life of Arlington National Cemetery, if more
    columbariums--did I say that right?--columbarium or niche wall
    space is developed to serve various populations?
        Ms. Durham-Aguilera. So thank you, Chairman Coffman. So
    today, in Arlington National Cemetery, we have about 64,000
    available belowground spaces. We have around 37,000 spaces
    available in the columbariums or the niche walls. The trends
    that we have seen over the last 5 years are very similar to
    what the VANCA is seeing, is that of the people that are going
    to be laid at rest at Arlington National Cemetery, about a
    third of them want to be buried in a columbarium or the niche
    walls. Again, it depends on their eligibility. About a third
    choose to have their cremated remains buried below ground. And
    then the other third are the traditional casket.
        So as we plan for the Millennium Expansion, which will be
    open later on this year, and as we are planning for the
    Southern Expansion, those were the trends that we are keeping
    in mind for our design.
        Now, as far as expanding more columbariums or niche walls
    at Arlington National Cemetery, there is few spaces where we
    could do that today. One of the things, too, that the VA
    considers is keeping niche walls to a certain height so that
    people can reach them. People want to come and put their hands
    on the niche cover of their loved one. So you can't build them
    too high or people can't do that and make that connection. So
    that is another consideration. But we cannot do that as our
    solution, our only solution to be able to keep Arlington
    National Cemetery, you know, open well into the future.
        Thank you.
        Mr. Coffman. Ms. Kelley, do you have any additional
    comments on that?
        Ms. Kelley. I would also add that the look and feel of the
    cemetery. As, Chairman, you described it as iconic in your
    opening statement. And I think the executive director and I,
    and certainly the Army, feel very strongly the same way. And we
    would want to balance the amount of aboveground space that is
    created so that we don't lose that iconic look and feel of what
    Arlington is today.
        Mr. Coffman. Okay. General Bacon, you are now recognized
    for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Bacon. Thank you very much.
        And I appreciate you both coming back. You really educated
    me the last time you were here, so I really appreciated the
    information and the truth.
        We've got to make a hard choice here. Before I ask you a
    question, I just want to say that I was a flagbearer 12 times
    at Arlington. It is a special place, and I think we have to
    preserve it for our future Medal of Honor winners and those
    killed in action. And I also want to just thank you for what
    you are doing for Nebraska. The Omaha National Cemetery will be
    the iconic place as far as Nebraska, and it has really come
    along very well. So that will be where I will be buried
    eventually. Hopefully a long time from now. I will kick the can
    as long as I can here on that.
        But I just want to say with clarity that I think it is an
    absolute necessity that we preserve Arlington National Cemetery
    for those killed in action or the line of duty. I could see
    there could be a difference there. And I think that is a good
    discussion point, or those who have earned the Medal of Honor
    or a like type of award. And if we don't do that, I think we
    have made a bad choice. I mean, this should be the ultimate
    place that we recognize those who have paid that ultimate
    sacrifice, and no other place is like Arlington for that.
        And to make that decision means it is a decision. It is a
    decision to not let that happen 20 years from now, 40 years
    from now, whenever that may be. So I think we have to make that
    decision now, in my humble view. And one of the choices that we
    heard earlier was that we should block off a segment of
    Arlington for Medal of Honor winners and killed in action, but
    don't change the criteria or tweak the criteria a little bit.
    What is the reality of that decision if we went down that path?
        Ms. Durham-Aguilera. So thank you, Senator. It won't make
    any difference.
        Mr. Bacon. Don't call me a Senator. That is illegal.
        [Laughter.]
        Ms. Durham-Aguilera. I am sorry.
        Mr. Bacon. Sorry. We have to push back on that.
        Ms. Durham-Aguilera. I will try to get over that
    embarrassment.
        So, Congressman Bacon, thank you very much. It won't make
    any difference. It would be pretty hard to call off that
    segment. How big is that segment going to be, when we only have
    a certain number of spaces to make any meaningful difference
    but just still try to take care of our Medal of Honor, killed
    in action, those who perish in other tragedies, like the USS
    Fitzgerald, last year, or the C-130. You know, God willing, we
    won't have a large number of that population, but we have a
    large number of our currently eligible population right now.
    Twenty million right now.
        So it really, realistically, would not make a meaningful
    difference to try to just hold just a small section, or however
    the case may be, for that category of people.
        Thank you.
        Mr. Bacon. It would probably have a minor impact, so I am
    hearing.
        Ms. Durham-Aguilera. Yes, sir.
        Mr. Bacon. Right.
        Ma'am, anything to add?
        Ms. Kelley. I think in our previous discussions and
    certainly in the documents that you have in front of you, you
    really see the difference that we are talking about. Holding
    space for those small populations is certainly doable, but does
    not fix the larger issue, which is the extraordinary demand of
    the other eligible populations. So, really, it is an untenable
    fix.
        Mr. Bacon. I am just thinking, last year, we lost 80 people
    in training accidents. So if we went with line of duty, I just
    feel like this is what Arlington was reserved for, for the
    highest levels of respect and those who did that. And let's be
    honest, a no decision is a decision, and it is not the best
    decision.
        Thank you very much.
        Mr. Coffman. Thank you, General Bacon.
        Can you walk us through--either one of you, could one of
    you walk us through the survey results that you did, just
    quickly, in terms of the different categories?
        Ms. Kelley.
        Ms. Kelley. Mr. Chairman, I would be happy to. In front of
    you, the document speaks to three primary points that are
    germane to this discussion. The top left speaks to the
    challenge, and that is the graphic that shows you the--when we
    would close. And so if you look on the top left, we talk about
    the fact that, with no changes, we would be out of space in the
    early 2040s. If we were to get Southern Expansion, that can
    push us another 10-ish years. But therein lies the challenge,
    because that does not net us a significant gain. And so that is
    what we are illustrating.
        We went out with our survey to explain that challenge to
    the public, to veteran service organizations, military service
    organizations, and anyone else who wanted to participate. And
    what you see in the top right is the themes that came as a
    result of that survey.
        Now, in the survey, we asked open and honest questions
    about eligibility. We wanted feedback on whether people
    understood it, understood what it was today, and understood the
    challenge that the executive director and I are talking about,
    which is the fact that we can't serve the full population who
    is eligible today, we are closing down the available space. And
    so in the top right, you can see the preponderance of
    respondents felt very strongly about preserving Arlington open
    and active well into the future. And that is important for us
    because that tells us we have to think about changes that allow
    us to do that.
        And the survey response centers on significant categories
    where people felt very strongly. Killed in action, Medal of
    Honor, high award recipients, former POW, or perish on Active
    Duty were clearly the categories that the respondents of our
    first survey felt very strongly about. And those have been
    consistent in our dialogue. It is very telling to see where
    those percentages laid out, sir.
        Mr. Coffman. Well, thank you.
        And let me just say as someone who--as a military retiree,
    I don't feel that--I want to preserve Arlington Cemetery, first
    and foremost, for those killed in action or those who are lost
    in Active Duty. I have, you know, known soldiers and Marines
    during my career who were lost in training accidents, and I
    honor their loss as much as I do those killed in action, for a
    number of reasons that I don't need to go into today.
        I believe, to the American people, that when they associate
    the Arlington National Cemetery, they do so in thinking about
    our war dead. I mean, I think that that is the association. And
    so if we go beyond that to some degree, to Medal of Honor
    winners or significant valor awards, POWs, I would think, if we
    do family members--I can't remember where that is on the
    survey. But I think it has to be limited. And I do not think
    that opening a noncontiguous annex or noncontiguous cemetery
    will have the same value to the American people as Arlington
    National Cemetery does. I just don't think, even if you do all
    the honors.
        We do all the honors at Fort Logan National Cemetery in
    Colorado. And it is not Arlington. But my father, late father,
    a World War II, Korean war veteran, highly decorated, is
    interred there, buried there. And I think that that is highly
    appropriate. He was not killed in action. He lived a full life.
    And so that is where I sort of am right now.
        Are there any other comments that you would like to make at
    this time in closing?
        Ms. Durham-Aguilera. So, Chairman Coffman, just a couple of
    comments. Now, first, our process going forward is to launch a
    second survey within the next few weeks. We will have it open a
    minimum of 60 days. We could adjust based on the feedback that
    we get.
        After we are able to analyze the results of that next
    survey, we will put that all together, and then I intend to go
    to the Secretary of the Army and provide the results of that,
    plus recommendations. He intends to discuss any possible
    changes with his service colleagues from the other branches of
    the armed services and the Coast Guard, and then, of course,
    the Secretary of Defense. He also intends that, at that time,
    we also have further discussions with Congress. So that is the
    focus of our way ahead.
        In the meantime, we will continue to do that great honor.
    We talk about it every day, about what an honor it is to serve
    at Arlington National Cemetery and take care of our veterans
    and patriots. Thank you.
        Mr. Coffman. Ms. Kelley.
        Ms. Kelley. I would just like to thank you for the
    opportunity to talk about this challenge. And the executive
    director is exactly right, we need to continue the open
    dialogue and we will.
        Mr. Coffman. Sure.
        Ms. Kelley. And we will continue to serve as best we can
    each day. Thank you.
        Mr. Coffman. And I just want to say, if we are going to
    keep Arlington there for generations to come, those who have
    been lost or who have made the ultimate sacrifice in defense of
    our freedom, then we are going to have to make some tough
    decisions. And I am prepared to do that.
        I wish to thank all of the witnesses for their testimony
    today on this important issue.
        There being no further business, the subcommittee stands
    adjourned.
        [Whereupon, at 11:58 a.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]

    =======================================================================

                               A P P E N D I X

                                 March 8, 2018

    =======================================================================

                  PREPARED STATEMENTS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

                                 March 8, 2018

    =======================================================================

       [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                    [all]