AUTHORITYID | CHAMBER | TYPE | COMMITTEENAME |
---|---|---|---|
hsas00 | H | S | Committee on Armed Services |
[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]
MEMBERNAME | BIOGUIDEID | GPOID | CHAMBER | PARTY | ROLE | STATE | CONGRESS | AUTHORITYID |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Brady, Robert A. | B001227 | 8119 | H | D | COMMMEMBER | PA | 115 | 1469 |
Shea-Porter, Carol | S001170 | 7528 | H | D | COMMMEMBER | NH | 115 | 1861 |
Tsongas, Niki | T000465 | 7970 | H | D | COMMMEMBER | MA | 115 | 1884 |
Speier, Jackie | S001175 | 7817 | H | D | COMMMEMBER | CA | 115 | 1890 |
Coffman, Mike | C001077 | 7864 | H | R | COMMMEMBER | CO | 115 | 1912 |
Wenstrup, Brad R. | W000815 | H | R | COMMMEMBER | OH | 115 | 2152 | |
McSally, Martha | M001197 | H | R | COMMMEMBER | AZ | 115 | 2225 | |
Gallego, Ruben | G000574 | H | D | COMMMEMBER | AZ | 115 | 2226 | |
Abraham, Ralph Lee | A000374 | H | R | COMMMEMBER | LA | 115 | 2244 | |
Russell, Steve | R000604 | H | R | COMMMEMBER | OK | 115 | 2265 | |
Kelly, Trent | K000388 | H | R | COMMMEMBER | MS | 115 | 2294 | |
Bacon, Don | B001298 | H | R | COMMMEMBER | NE | 115 | 2337 | |
Rosen, Jacky | R000608 | H | D | COMMMEMBER | NV | 115 | 2339 | |
Jones, Walter B., Jr. | J000255 | 8026 | H | R | COMMMEMBER | NC | 115 | 612 |
Disclaimer:
Please refer to the About page for more information.