U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

96–138 2015

TIMELESS HONOR: REVIEWING CURRENT 

OPERATIONS OF OUR NATIONAL CEMETERIES 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON DISABILITY 

ASSISTANCE AND MEMORIAL AFFAIRS 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON VETERANS’ AFFAIRS 

U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED THIRTEENTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

TUESDAY, DECEMBER 9, 2014 

Serial No. 113–95 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs 

( 

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.fdsys.gov 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLER
(II) 

COMMITTEE ON VETERANS’ AFFAIRS 

JEFF MILLER, Florida, Chairman 

DOUG LAMBORN, Colorado 

GUS M. BILIRAKIS, Florida, Vice-Chairman 

DAVID P. ROE, Tennessee 

BILL FLORES, Texas 

JEFF DENHAM, California 

JON RUNYAN, New Jersey 

DAN BENISHEK, Michigan 

TIM HUELSKAMP, Kansas 

MIKE COFFMAN, Colorado 

BRAD R. WENSTRUP, Ohio 

PAUL COOK, California 

JACKIE WALORSKI, Indiana 

DAVID JOLLY, Florida 

MICHAEL H. MICHAUD, Maine, Ranking 

Minority Member 

CORRINE BROWN, Florida 

MARK TAKANO, California 

JULIA BROWNLEY, California 

DINA TITUS, Nevada 

ANN KIRKPATRICK, Arizona 

RAUL RUIZ, California 

GLORIA NEGRETE MCLEOD, California 

ANN M. KUSTER, New Hampshire 

BETO O’ROURKE, Texas 

TIMOTHY J. WALZ, Minnesota 

JON TOWERS, Staff Director 

NANCY DOLAN, Democratic Staff Director 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON DISABILITY ASSISTANCE AND MEMORIAL 

AFFAIRS 

JON RUNYAN, New Jersey, Chairman 

DOUG LAMBORN, Colorado 

GUS BILIRAKIS, Florida 

MARK AMODEI, Nevada 

PAUL COOK, California 

DAVID JOLLY, Florida 

DINA TITUS, Nevada, Ranking Member 

BETO O’ROURKE, Texas 

RAUL RUIZ, California 

GLORIA NEGRETE MCLEOD, California 

Pursuant to clause 2(e)(4) of Rule XI of the Rules of the House, public hearing records 

of the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs are also published in electronic form. The printed 

hearing record remains the official version. Because electronic submissions are used to 

prepare both printed and electronic versions of the hearing record, the process of converting 

between various electronic formats may introduce unintentional errors or omissions. Such occurrences are inherent in the current publication process and should diminish as the process 

is further refined. 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLER
(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

Tuesday, December 9, 2014 

Page 

Timeless Honor: Reviewing Current Operations of Our National Cemeteries ... 1 

OPENING STATEMENTS 

Hon. Jon Runyan, Chairman .................................................................................. 1 

Hon. Dina Titus, Ranking Member ........................................................................ 3 

WITNESSES 

Mr. Ronald E. Walters, Acting Under Secretary for Memorial Affairs, National Cemetery Administration, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs ......... 5 

Prepared Statement ......................................................................................... 31 

Accompanied By: 

Mr. Glenn Powers, Deputy Under Secretary for Field Programs, National Cemetery Administration, U.S. Department of Veterans 

Affairs 

Mr. Patrick K. Hallinan, Executive Director, Army National Military Cemeteries, Department of the Army .......................................................................... 6 

Prepared Statement ......................................................................................... 42 

Hon. Max Cleland, Secretary, American Battle Monuments Commission ......... 8 

Prepared Statement ......................................................................................... 56 

Ms. Ami Neiberger-Miller, Director of Outreach and Education, Tragedy Assistance Program for Survivors ........................................................................... 22 

Prepared Statement ......................................................................................... 60 

Ms. Diane M. Zumatto, National Legislative Director, AMVETS ....................... 24 

Prepared Statement ......................................................................................... 72 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLER

VACREP0180 with DISTILLER
(1) 

TIMELESS HONOR: REVIEWING CURRENT OPERATIONS OF OUR NATIONAL CEMETERIES 

Tuesday, December 9, 2014 

U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, COMMITTEE ON VETERANS’ AFFAIRS, SUBCOMMITTEE ON DISABILITY ASSISTANCE AND MEMORIAL

AFFAIRS, Washington, D.C. 

The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:00 p.m., in Room 

334, Cannon House Office Building, Hon. Jon Runyan [chairman of 

the subcommittee] presiding. 

Present: Representatives Runyan, Lamborn, Bilirakis, Titus, and 

O’Rourke. 

Also present: Representative Stivers. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN JON RUNYAN 

Mr. RUNYAN. Good afternoon everyone. This oversight hearing of 

the Subcommittee on Disability Assistance and Memorial Affairs 

will now come to order. 

We are here today to examine the issues facing our military veterans cemeteries. Our goal in this hearing is to learn more about 

the operations of the National Cemetery Administration, Arlington 

National Cemetery and the American Battle Monuments Commission over the past year. As well as seek the organization commentary on several focused issues that I will be highlighting momentarily. 

I would also like to welcome Mr. Walters as he has stepped up 

to perform duties as Acting Under Secretary of Memorial Affairs 

after the retirement of Under Secretary Muro and we look forward 

to hearing about his vision for overseeing the honorable mission at 

NCA. 

Mr. Hallinan, Secretary Cleland, it is also nice to have you here 

as well. 

The endeavors of these entities are among the most honorable in 

government and the people with these organizations work day in 

and day out to honor veterans and servicemembers with dignified 

burials, and to assist families and loved ones who must deal with 

a loss and tremendous grief. 

As I said before, our Nation’s solemn obligation to honor those 

who have served does not cease at the end of their service, or retirement, or ultimately upon their death, and it is the responsibility of these organizations to see this commitment through. 

I would like to take a moment to note that today will be my last 

hearing as subcommittee chair and that I am extremely pleased 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLER
2 

that today’s focus is upon the tremendous work of these organizations. Your commitment to the timeless honor of our Nation’s veterans and the compassionate missions of NCA, Arlington National 

Cemetery and ABMC. 

I have been proud to work with all of you over the recent years, 

and I trust that you will continue to go above and beyond the care 

for our Nation and our national and our international shrines. 

With that said, today the committee is interested in hearing from 

the National Cemetery Administration on several focused areas, including continued efforts to provide burial access initiatives for 

rural veterans, those planned for urban areas in other future outlets for burial options. 

We will also hear about new regulation which was aimed to address an issue which was discussed at a previous hearing regarding 

requests for headstones and markers made by those other than 

next of kin. 

I also look forward to hearing updates on Arlington National 

Cemetery and I note for the record Mr. Hallinan has done a tremendous job at ANC and we certainly want to make sure that the 

standards he and his predecessor Ms. Condon that put into place 

are carried forward. And I thank you Mr. Hallinan for your truly 

tireless commitment and your evident passion for the mission that 

you serve. 

Additionally, I understand that 2014 is a significant commemorative year for the Nation for the American Battle Monuments Commission. We will be hearing updates on the far reaching operations 

of ABMC which operates in 16 foreign countries and many other 

locations. 

Secretary Cleland, thank you for your service, for your continued 

service, and for being here today. ABMC is a remarkable organization and we appreciate hearing from you. 

Now, I formally welcome our witness. As noted, these panelists 

play significant roles in ensuring that we as a Nation fulfill our responsibilities to honor those who have served all of us. We hope 

that through discussion and questions such as what will occur 

today we work collectively not only to meet the challenges, but always to exceed the standard. 

First, Mr. Ronald Walters, Acting Secretary for Memorial Affairs 

is here on behalf of National Cemetery Administration which oversees 131 cemeteries nationwide. Mr. Walters is accompanied by Mr. 

Glenn Powers Deputy Under Secretary for field programs. 

Next, we will have Mr. Patrick Hallinan, Executive Director of 

Army National Military Centers will also testified on panel 1. In 

his role Mr. Hallinan is charged of overseeing Arlington National 

Cemetery. 

And finally, Secretary Max Cleland, the American Battle Monument Commission is with us today. Secretary Cleland will offer an 

update on ABMC’s mission plan and recent commemorations. 

We will also be hearing from a second panel including Ms. Ami 

Neiberger-Miller who is the Director of Outreach and Education for 

Tragedy Assistance Program for Survivors. And Ms. Diane 

Zumatto, the National Legislative Director for AMVETS. 

With those introductions complete, I also thank the member who 

is not on this committee, but who has expressed an interest in this 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLER
3 

hearing topic. I would like to ask unanimous consent that Representative Stivers, who is not here yet, be allowed to participate 

in this hearing. 

Hearing no objection, so ordered. 

Thank you all for being with us today and I now yield to the 

ranking member for her opening statements. 

[The prepared statement of Jon Runyan appears in the Appendix] 

OPENING STATEMENT OF RANKING MEMBER DINA TITUS 

Ms. TITUS. Well, thank you Mr. Chairman and thank you for 

holding this hearing. 

I guess this is our grand finale, I suspect this will be the last 

time that our subcommittee meets during this session. And I want 

to thank you for your leadership and tell you what a pleasure it 

has been to work with you and your staff on this committee. I 

think veterans have been well served by your bipartisan, fair and 

compassionate approach to these issues. So, yes—— 

Mr. RUNYAN. I want to thank you for that also because it is a 

two-way street. Thank you for your commitment and your passion. 

Ms. TITUS. Well, thank you. I also want to thank the witnesses 

for being here. It is a special treat to see Secretary Cleland, a long 

time friend from Georgia, so welcome to all of you. I know that you 

share our feelings that a proper burial for our Nation’s veterans 

and their families is a solemn obligation that we need to uphold. 

The National Cemetery Administration has grown dramatically 

since its creation in 1862 and only 14 cemeteries were created to 

serve as resting places for our veterans after the war between the 

States. 

The administration has also expanded its geographic diversity to 

better serve veterans across the country. I know recent legislation 

added to your ability to do that. 

There are now 131 national cemeteries New York has seven, 

three other states have six and Puerto Rico has two. So your access 

has grown considerably, but that brings me to my point, there is 

still a problem where some of our veterans do not have the ability 

to be buried in national cemeteries that are close to home and accessible for their families. 

This is especially true in the west. And the state with the largest 

veterans population that is not served by a national cemetery continues to be Nevada, which is the home to over 230,000 veterans, 

153,000 of whom live in the Las Vegas area. 

So in total, there are 11 States with the combined veteran population of 1.8 million who do not have an active national cemetery. 

And because most of those states are in the west, that is a lot of 

square miles that is covered that doesn’t have that access. 

Many of largest cities in the west like Las Vegas exceed the 

NCA’s eligibility requirements of 80,000 veterans, they don’t have 

a national cemetery. Now, you have responded by proposing placement of national columbaria in cities that are already served by a 

national cemetery to give access to urban areas. These urban initiatives are great, but you propose them for Los Angeles, which already has two national cemeteries, and New York that is served by 

three. 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLER
4 

This is good, but it is really a matter of convenience, not a matter of necessity. Those cities may not have perfect access, but they 

are certainly in a lot better shape than a veteran in Las Vegas who 

has got to travel four hours to California in Bakersfield to get to 

a national cemetery. In Salt Lake City, you have to travel eight 

hours for a burial and the closest national cemetery in Denver. So 

before you place more of these facilities of convenience, I would like 

for us to look a little closer at cities that exceed the 80,000 member 

requirement and see if we might not want to put some facilities 

there. 

So I look forward to hearing your plans for how to address that 

issue because as long as I am here, I am not going to let it go. I 

am going to keep bringing it up and appreciate working with you 

on it. 

A couple of other specific issues I hope that we can address. One 

is that last March I sent a letter to then-Secretary Shinseki commending him for allowing same-sex burials of couples in national 

cemeteries. We need a policy on that. Right now it is rather capricious, it is case by case. And even if it works for a national cemetery, the state cemeteries have different policies and that doesn’t 

seem to be fair to me to our veterans and their families. 

And finally something that has just recently come to my attention, is that veterans who serve in the Armed Services are at a disadvantage in another way. If you are the spouse of a veteran and 

you pass away, you can be buried in a veteran cemetery even if the 

veteran is still alive so that family members will be able to stay 

together. 

Unfortunately, current law prohibits the VA from burying a family member of an active duty serviceman who passes away while 

in the service. So I think that is something that we also need to 

look at and work on legislation to correct, because some of these 

things only make it fair for veterans and their families,—all veterans and their families. And dealing with them one way in national cemeteries, another in state, and on a case-by-case basis. 

Let’s work together to create a policy. 

So I look forward to hearing all of your testimony and especially 

also from the Battle Monuments Commission to how certain cut 

backs and resources will effect the service that you provide. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

[THE PREPARED STATEMENT OF MS. TITUS APPEARS IN THE APPENDIX] 

Mr. RUNYAN. I thank the gentlelady. 

I advise the witnesses that your complete and written statements 

will be entered into the hearing record. 

And we are going to move on to our first witness. From the 

NCAA—NCA football on the mind for some reason. 

Mr. Walters, you are now recognized for 5 minutes for your testimony. 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLER
5 

STATEMENTS OF RONALD E. WALTERS, ACTING UNDER SECRETARY FOR MEMORIAL AFFAIRS, NATIONAL CEMETERY 

ADMINISTRATION, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS, ACCOMPANIED BY GLEN POWERS, DEPUTY UNDER 

SECRETARY FOR FIELD PROGRAMS, NATIONAL CEMETERY 

ADMINISTRATION, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS 

STATEMENT OF RONALD E. WALTERS 

Mr. WALTERS. Chairman Runyan, Ranking Member Titus and 

distinguished members of the subcommittee. Thank you for the opportunity to provide a review the National Cemetery Administration’s operations and our plans for continuing to meet the needs of 

veterans and their families. 

I am accompanied today by Glenn Powers, Deputy Under Secretary for Field Programs. I would also like to acknowledge our 

partners from the Army National Military Cemeteries and the 

American Battle Monuments Commission. Our shared commitment 

to honor and memorialize our Nation’s veterans is strengthened 

through our continued partnership. 

Mr. Chairman, under Secretary McDonald’s leadership, the department recently launched MyVA, an ambitious effort to organize 

the department into one that is centered around our customer, the 

veteran. It is this is focus that has defined and will continue to define NCA into the future. 

Consistent with the MyVA effort, NCA measures success against 

the ultimate outcome for the veteran. Direct feedback from our customers lets us know if we are achieving those outcomes 2014. As 

reported in 2014 for the fifth consecutive time, NCA achieved the 

highest score ever recorded for a public or private organization on 

the American customer satisfaction index. 

Thanks to our employees, NCA’s score of 96 was 28 points above 

the 68 point average for Federal Government agencies. Our employees are NCA’s best assets and we value their feedback. 

This year I am pleased to report that NCA increased its participation rate in VA’s all employee survey by 10 percent. NCA employee engagement, along with other VA employees is invaluable to 

the successful design of MyVA. This is especially true of NCA’s 

workforce, 74 percent of which are veterans, the highest percentage 

in the Federal Government. 

Our employees are also more than willing to reach out to those 

in need of a second chance. I am pleased to report that we continue 

our efforts to end veteran homelessness. 

Two years ago, NCA established a cemetery caretaker apprenticeship program, designed to help homeless veterans. Our second 

class of apprentices just completed their training on December 5th. 

Since the program’s inception, 32 formerly homeless veterans are 

now employed full time at NCA. Our third class of apprentices will 

convene this spring. Thanks to the dedication of our entire workforce, NCA successfully met increasing workload requirements in 

2014. 

Through our operation and maintenance program we maintained 

over 3.4 million grave sites, performed over 125,000 interments, 

issued over 600,000 presidential memorial certificates, provided 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLER
6 

over 360,000 headstones, markers and medallions, and awarded 

$28.8 million to repair grave sites. 

In addition, due to our careful planning and management of construction, and grant funds, no interruptions in burial services occurred at any national or state veteran cemetery. We continue to 

make progress on implementing new burial access policies previously approved by Congress. 

NCA plans to eventually open 18 new cemeteries, which will provide new or enhanced access to burial options for over 2 million 

veterans. The new facilities include five new national cemeteries, 

two in Florida, which will open this year, and one each in Colorado, 

Nebraska and New York, as well as a national cemetery presence 

in eight highly rural and five urban locations. 

We strive to better serve veterans and their families in the future. NCA recently received the results of an independent study on 

emerging burial practices that addresses green burials and additional ways to memorialize veterans. We will be happy to brief the 

committee on the study in greater detail after we have completed 

our review. 

NCA is planning to expand the use of GIS GPS technology at our 

national cemeteries to enhance overall grave site accountability. 

This technology will provide state of the art mapping, grave site 

and headstone information and will serve as the basis for our ongoing grave site accountability efforts. 

Finally, we intend to explore how to best share the rich history 

of our national cemeteries and the stories of our Nation’s heroes 

with the public through a variety of approaches. 

Mr. Chairman, we look forward to our continued work with this 

committee to care for those who shall have borne the battle, and 

we are greatly appreciative of your leadership and all of you have 

done four our Nation’s veterans. 

Thank you again for this opportunity to be here today, and I 

would be pleased to answer any questions that you may have. 

[THE PREPARED STATEMENT OF MR. RONALD WALTERS APPEARS IN

THE APPENDIX] 

Mr. RUNYAN. Thank you, Mr. Walters. 

And with that we will now hear from Mr. Hallinan for his testimony. So, you are recognized for 5 minutes. 

STATEMENT OF PATRICK K. HALLINAN 

Mr. HALLINAN. Chairman Runyan, Ranking Member Titus, distinguished members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to provide an update on operations at Arlington National 

Cemetery. Since my testimony to this subcommittee a year ago, we 

continue to build upon our tremendous progress. We are setting industry standards for best practices becoming a center of excellence 

while working closely with our partner organizations that I am 

honored to testify with today. 

I am proud to say that Arlington has one of the most stringent 

accountability processes of any national cemetery. We have leverage, cutting edge technology to develop an integrated solution that 

uses digital record of interment system with read, write, Web site 

capabilities to provide real time mapping updates and a common 

operational picture of activities at the cemetery. 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLER
7 

Our interment service system performs systematic backups, redundant identification and burial location checks, it provides access 

to all digitized burial records, it stores photographs of the caskets 

and the urns, and each electronic interment record. It has a headstone design in ordering functionality. And most of all, it enforces 

the strictest chain of custody of any Federal cemetery. 

The ANC mapping system tracks grave site availability, field 

operational status, deconflicts funeral procession routes, while also 

containing grave site and headstone GPS locations, which are accurate to within three centimeters. 

These systems in concert ensure accountability, and efficiency, 

and operations at Arlington Cemetery. To keep up with the everincreasing pace of requests for burial at Arlington, we have hired 

additional schedulers to reduce wait times. And we continue to 

make every effort to ensure our employees are trained to the highest standards when dealing with families, and the public, treating 

each with respect and sensitivity. 

As we look to improve the appearance and operations within the 

cemetery, we are working on several projects. In October, we began 

the renovation of our welcome center restrooms to improve our visitors’ experience. We are currently renovating the basement of the 

welcome center to provide work spaces for our staff. 

Another one of our goals for fiscal year 2015 is to redesign and 

improve the manner in which we gather and escort funeral processions. We are designing a new funeral procession queuing area for 

family vehicles which will make our funeral lineup much more intuitive and easier to negotiate. 

I am also pleased to inform the subcommittee of planning and 

design efforts that are well underway with the establishment of an 

ossuary, called the Tomb of Remembrance. This project will allow 

us to provide the Nation with a dignified place to provide final disposition of cremated remains which may be commingled or unidentified. 

In May 2014, we refurbished the display room of the Memorial 

Amphitheater with new exhibits which included museum-quality 

cases to properly protect items gifted to the Tomb of the Unknown 

Soldier. 

We have recently completed an Americans with Disability Act accessibility study that will help us program and execute projects to 

ensure that our national shrine is as accessible as possible for all 

those who wish to visit. 

We are actively designing projects which will improve ADA access throughout the cemetery. The cemetery staff also continued to 

make progress repairing, replacing much of our dated utility infrastructure. In 2011, we identified approximately $74 million in deferred maintenance. To date we have spent $40 million for improvements to the water lines, the roads, the building and the 

HVAC systems. 

We are committed to maintaining Arlington as an active cemetery for as long as possible for our Nation’s military heroes. The 

Millennium Project is currently within budget and on schedule, to 

be completed in summer of 2016. This will provide the cemetery 

with an additional 27,282 burial spaces for both caskets and interments. 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLER
8 

Arlington has begun the planning and design of southern expansion project. Once completed, both projects are expected to extend 

Arlington’s operational longevity through the 2050s. 

Mr. Chairman, as this is your last year on the subcommittee, I 

personally thank you for your leadership and dedicated support of 

Arlington during your tenure. I commit that through diligent efforts, established procedures, repeatable processes and better technologies and institutionalized standards, Arlington will sustain and 

maintain the trust it has reclaimed. 

We can ensure the Nation of this, every burial service at Arlington National Cemetery will continue to be conducted with the 

honor and dignity our serving members have earned, and their 

families will be treated with compassion and respect. 

Thank you, and I look forward to answering any questions you 

may have. 

[THE PREPARED STATEMENT OF MR. PATRICK HALLINAN APPEARS

IN THE APPENDIX] 

Mr. RUNYAN. Thank you, Mr. Hallinan. 

With that, I recognize Secretary Cleland for his testimony. 

STATEMENT OF HON. MAX CLELAND 

Mr. CLELAND. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

May I say it is an honor to be with you again, Mr. Chairman and 

members of the committee. 

We will miss you, Mr. Chairman. We will miss talking football, 

we will miss talking our mission and we will miss as Ms. Titus 

said, your fair evenhandled approach to these issues in a bipartisan 

way. That is rare in this town and I for one really appreciate it. 

We will miss you. 

Secondly, I wanted to be here with the people at this table, over 

the last few years I have really gotten to know them, and I can tell 

you Patrick Hallinan has been doing a great job out here. Now he 

is the tip of the spear. He is the guy leading the pack out there. 

I was asked by the Secretary of the Army about 4 years ago to 

head up an advisory committee on the Arlington National Cemetery. They have come light years in 4 years, I can tell you that. 

Four years ago, they were operating off of 3 by 5 cards, now they 

have got good technology that could launch a satellite. I mean, it 

is quite amazing the transformation that they have put together 

out there. 

The Veterans Administration, Mr. Chairman, I used to head 

and—many many years ago—and we are working very, very closely 

with the VA. I met with Secretary McDonald and we are in agreement, particularly on some sensitive issues regarding the Punchbowl Cemetery in Hawaii and visitor center experience there and 

we are working closely with all of the people at the table. 

I might say, in terms of Arlington that the American Battle 

Monuments Commission has put no charge to Arlington, a charge 

to us, the American Battle Monuments Commission, a liaison officer there on site and he is doing a great job. He has been 17 years 

in western Europe and he is an added benefit I think for Arlington. 

One of our staff members, Tom Sole, is on the advisory council 

for cemeteries that works at the VA, that meets at the VA, his 

name is Tom Sole. 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLER
9 

I have with me today people who have labored in the vineyard 

of the American Battle Monuments Commission a long time. Chris 

Philpot, our chief financial officer and Mike Conley, our administrative officer, we are just honored to be with him today. 

I would say, Mr. Chairman, basically that last night I saw the 

movie based on the Laura Hillenbrand book Unbroken. And it was 

a powerful testimony of one man’s incredible endurance in World 

War II, Louis Zamperini, unbelievable, an unbelievable story. But 

the amazing thing about it is when you think he was one of the 

16 million men and women caught up in World War II that occurred on what six of the seven continents, it was worldwide, 

worldwide conflagration. That expanded the work of the American 

Battle Monuments Commission. 

We now have 125,000 servicemembers buried in at least 14 different Nations. We have 95,000 names of the missing from World 

War I and World War II on our Tablets of the Missing. You see 

a movie like Unbroken and you just realize wow, why you are in 

this business, General Pershing said and we like to quote at the 

American Battle Monuments Commission, ‘‘the time will not dim 

the glory of their deeds.’’ 

Mr. Chairman, I will be glad to answer any questions. The one 

issue that the Congress gave the American Battle Monuments 

Commission was Clark Cemetery. En route to Vietnam in 1967, I 

went by the old Clark Air Base en route to Vietnam, it is now 

closed. The Philippine Government asked the American military to 

leave a number of years ago. That left Clark air field base cemetery, which had been around almost 100 years with about 8,000 interments, men, women, children dependents, unattended. 

And so, the Congress gave that mission to the American Battle 

Monuments Commission. We have taken that mission seriously, we 

are in it with both feet. We are doing an assessment of what it will 

take to bring that cemetery up to respectable standards. It is not 

going to be the Arlington of the Pacific. It is not going to be one 

of our topnotch cemeteries, but we will maintain it with dignity, 

but that is going to cost some money. So we will be coming back 

to you in a couple of years for that. Now we are on that case and 

burials have begun again. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

[THE PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. MAX CLELAND APPEARS IN

THE APPENDIX] 

Mr. RUNYAN. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. I know that was one of 

the issues that was in the forefront when I first took this position. 

With that we will start a round of questioning and this question 

is really for the whole panel, the collective expertise at the NCA, 

Army National Cemeteries, and ABMC is unique and frankly I 

want to say impressive. And each organization must meet strict 

standards to properly honor those who served the Nation. 

Mr. Hallinan touched on the topic of information sharing and 

best practices and the secretary also touched on that. And I would 

like to think that is tremendously valuable and should be encouraged. 

How do each of your organizations share the information and innovation? And how did that relationship of collaboration begin? 

Start with Mr. Walters. 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLER
10 

Mr. WALTERS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Well, we obviously work very, very closely with Army and the 

American Battle Monuments Commission in our shared mission to 

serve veterans. For starters, both organizations have a representative on our advisory committee on NCA’s advisory committee and 

their input on that committee, which ranges over a variety of 

issues, we have found extremely helpful over the years. 

With Army, we have also established a board that meets two 

times a year to discuss areas of mutual interest and to share best 

practices. For example, Mr. Hallinan mentioned the use of GIS, 

GPS technology. It is something that the National Cemetery Administration is beginning to use. And we can certainly learn best 

practices from Arlington’s success in that regard. I would also submit that there are many things that NCA has shared with Arlington that has worked equally well in their favor. 

With ABMC, we are currently working on a project to construct 

an interpretive center at the Punchbowl in Hawaii. In fact, Mr. 

Powers was recently at the Punchbowl to check on the progress of 

that. So we have many collaborative efforts with ABMC as well to 

share in the historical aspects of our Nation’s veterans at our cemetery grounds. 

Mr. RUNYAN. Mr. Hallinan, anything to add? 

Mr. HALLINAN. Mr. Chairman, in the direct answer to the question how did it all begin the efforts towards communication and collaboration. I formerly worked with Mr. Ron Walters and the 

former-Under Secretary, Steve Muro for 33 years with NCA. 

When I came over to Arlington in 2010 during difficult and challenging times, one of the first things I did was create a written 

memorandum of agreement between both agencies, that the Secretary of the Army approved. So we took advantage of training that 

was ongoing, standards and measures that had been put in place, 

based on those 30 something, 33 years, decades worth of experience. So that relationship was there. And we just strengthened 

that relationship and continued to share over the last couple of 

years. 

My relationship with ABMC, the former-Senator of Cleland is a 

member of our advisory committee. He was also my old boss when 

I worked at the VA so we have known each other for many years, 

both professionally and as veterans. So the relationship professionally and personally was there. We reached out and signed a 

written MOU with ABMC and set up meetings where we can share 

some of these best practices that the committee is aware of what 

we have done with technology, what we have done with standard 

operating procedures, what we have done to train our staff for sensitivity when dealing with families. 

So the communications are in place, the mechanisms are in 

place, the vehicles are there, we are working together. As Mr. 

Cleland pointed out, he is assigned to a permanent liaison because 

that is part of my staff that sits right outside my office, actively 

engaged, proactively engaged looking at what we are doing with 

technology, at the same time sharing their wealth of experience on 

teaching the history of those who have worn the uniform. 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLER
11 

So across the board here at this table and going forward into the 

future, excellent working relationship that has been documented 

that is in place, even when we are gone. 

Thank you. 

Mr. RUNYAN. Secretary Cleland, do you have anything to add? 

Ms. CLELAND. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much. 

Actually, the corporation between these agencies is one of the 

things I am most proud of. Hadn’t always been that way. As you 

well know, it is unusual for a government agency to work with another government agency because budgets and policies usually 

stovepiped and everything is lined up to where you are accountable 

to your Congressional counterparts and oversight people, and you 

don’t really talk to your colleagues, even though they are in the 

same business. 

We are in the same business all of us. We are in the business 

of honoring those who have served, particularly when they get 

killed in action and particularly when they die, and looking after 

their families. So that is the business we are in. 

I made sure that Patrick Hallinan and his associate Renea Yates 

came over to the 70th anniversary of the Normandy invasion. We 

were there, all of us. They were with the commission, with the 

President of the United States and then on that June 6th of this 

year. 

Then the next day they went back for a professional tour to look 

at the cemetery at Normandy, and especially the interpretive center that we have there that we think is world class. Arlington is 

now looking at that kind of thing themselves. So there is a massive 

change back and forth. Our computer people, our IT people have 

shared information for a number of years. 

In terms of the VA, like I mentioned, I met with Secretary 

McDonald. We have memorial where the VA has cemeteries, it is 

unique. But there in the Punchbowl cemetery—I was just out there 

Veterans Day, the VA has been out there the last few days, so we 

are working closely with them on that unique opportunity to work 

together to magnify the interpretive experience and make sure that 

the experience at the Punchbowl is something that future generations can grasp. 

So I am proud to work with these folks and they are the best in 

the business as far as I can tell. 

Mr. RUNYAN. Thank you for that. 

My time has expired, but I just want to say one thing, because 

I think what you all do is unique and that there is a personal relationship there with a lot of good professional structure around it. 

And I just wanted to highlight that point. 

So with that I will yield to the ranking member. 

Ms. TITUS. Thank you. 

Mr. Walters, I would like to talk to you about that urban initiative program and ask you maybe you can explain the justification 

of why you don’t include urban areas that have people who have 

a difficulty getting to State cemeteries, if they don’t have a Federal 

cemetery. Like in Las Vegas, you have to go out to Boulder City. 

If you take public transit that takes you 2 hours and you still have 

to walk 6 miles. So there are any little widows who can make that 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLER
12 

trip. So why wouldn’t those kind of urban areas be considered for 

this initiative? 

Mr. WALTERS. The purpose of the urban initiative, at least as it 

is defined now, is to provide ancillary service to existing national 

cemeteries where we have data that shows that there are problems 

with time and distance barriers at those locations. 

We have five very specific criteria against which we evaluate a 

potential location for the placement of a columbaria-only cemetery. 

And again, it is designed to supplement the national cemeteries 

and to address gaps in service that our customers are telling us 

through formal surveys and other means and other feedback. 

Ms. TITUS. But would it make sense to expanding that to also include access to the state cemetery when there is no national cemetery? 

Mr. WALTERS. Well, I think certainly it makes sense to begin to 

engage those who use state cemeteries and bury loved ones in state 

cemeteries similar to the way we are doing with national cemeteries. I think from that point on we could then examine whether 

or not it is most appropriate for the VA to step in to provide those 

columbaria-only facilities or if we can work with the states to either provide them or perhaps to have is a better rationale for the 

placement of the cemeteries to begin with at the state level. 

Ms. TITUS. Do you think there is something in the funding formula that that discriminates against location of these cemeteries in 

the west that could be addressed? 

Mr. WALTERS. In the state grant funding formula? 

Ms. TITUS. No, or in the location of a National cemetery funding 

formula. 

Mr. WALTERS. Absolutely not. There is no formula for the allocation of money. What determines the allocation of money for the 

placement of new national cemeteries is our access policies, which 

is wherever we have 80,000 veterans within a 75 mile radius of a 

proposed site, that is where we place a new national cemetery, regardless of what state it is in or whether it cross-cuts states or 

other factors. 

Ms. TITUS. Well it doesn’t seem to be working very well in the 

west, does it? Because they have more than 80,000 veterans in Las 

Vegas. 

Mr. WALTERS. Well, yes, ma’am. As you know, I mean our access 

policies at this point consider veterans covered with a burial option 

if they have convenient access to either a national or state cemetery. 

Ms. TITUS. I would argue that that is not a convenient access if 

you have to ride 2 hours each way on mass transit and walk 6 

miles, that is not very convenient. 

Mr. WALTERS. Our access standard does not take into account 

driving time and distance, it is mileage. My understanding is Boulder City is approximately 30 miles from Las Vegas. I am not aware 

of what the driving time would be. 

I think the bottom line, ma’am, is that we do not consider burial 

in a state cemetery to be an inferior option to being buried in a national cemetery. 

Ms. TITUS. If you had that choice, Mr. Walters, would you rather 

by buried in a state cemetery or a national cemetery? 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLER
13 

Mr. WALTERS. I would be prefer to be buried in a place that is 

a national shrine and states can achieve national shrine standing 

and be cared for by individuals who are committed to the perpetual 

care of our Nation’s heroes. 

Ms. TITUS. Let me ask you this, and I think the little cemetery 

in Boulder City is great, but how much oversight do you have on 

state cemeteries after you provide some of the funding, because 

state cemeteries vary very much in terms of quality, in terms of 

policy, in terms of burial of same-sex couples. 

Do you go back and oversee these or once you give the money you 

are just going to trust the state veterans association to be sure 

they keep the national standard? 

Mr. WALTERS. No, ma’am. We have a fairly rigorous compliance 

review program which we just revamped about a year or so ago 

where we go to state facilities and we apply the same scorecard, 

the same operational standards, and measures that we do to our 

national cemeteries to the States where applicable. Obviously, 

there are some criterion that are on applicability to Federal facilities. But we do we view the States, we have scorecards for them, 

we give them opportunities to submit corrective action plans in 

those instances where we find shortcomings and we work with 

them to, you know, come to closure on problems. 

If I may mention one other thing about the acceptance of state 

cemeteries, we recently conducted the first ever customer satisfaction survey with those who use state cemeteries and buried their 

loved ones in state cemeteries. We don’t have the full results, but 

we were able to extract some overall results that 98 percent of the 

respondents believe the appearance of those cemeteries, the state 

cemeteries with excellent; 95 percent agreed that the quality of 

service provided at the state facilities was excellent and 98 percent 

said that they would recommend the state cemetery to a family 

member. 

Ms. TITUS. You know, I appreciate that. I think those are good 

statistics. My time is up. That is like asking a person in an ice 

cream store who is eating ice cream if they like ice cream. You are 

not asking other people who have chosen not to use that facility 

what the reason is and what they think about it. 

So I just worry about state cemeteries having different policies 

in different states, just like your homeless program, that is a great 

program, but it is only in national cemeteries, it is not in state 

cemeteries. 

So I just think we need to work together on trying to fix that. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. RUNYAN. Thank you. 

I recognize Mr. Bilirakis. 

Mr. BILIRAKIS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I appreciate it. 

And I want to thank you also, Mr. Chairman, for your service, 

you were an all-pro on the field, on the football field, a champion 

for our veterans and I really appreciate it. A tremendous advocate. 

Thank you. 

And I want Senator—first of all thank you for your service to our 

country. I also visited, I got an opportunity to visit the Clark cemetery in the Philippines. I want to also thank the VFW and the 

other service organizations who have maintained the cemetery up 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLER
14 

until now, they have done an outstanding job. And again, the private funding has come from our veterans over the years. 

I have a question for Mr. Walters. There have been a few instances in the past where individuals have highlighted concerns to 

the committee on specific sites or specific issues and my constituents have come to me as well. For example, in one instance a visitor observed a raise and a realign where prone headstones appeared as though they had been run over by construction vehicles. 

The committee has largely found the NCA to be very responsive 

when contacted on these issues in the last few years. My question 

is how do individuals, how do our constituents who visit national 

cemeteries raise concerns to NCA? And what actions are taken 

upon receiving those complaints or questions? 

Mr. WALTERS. Yes. And thank you for the question. We have a 

variety of forms through which those who visit our cemeteries can 

voice concerns, beginning with complaint logs that are maintained 

at the cemeteries. If an individual has a concern about something 

that he or she encountered, whether it be the physical appearance 

of a cemetery or the service that was received, they can record in 

the complaint log their observations. 

That complaint log is kept and it is reviewed through our organizational assessment improvement program and all of the complaints are followed up on in a timely manner. 

Of course there are other ways to do it. We have received a variety of letters from individuals expressing concerns about specific 

issues at cemeteries and we apply the same level of aggressive resolution to those complaints as well. 

Mr. BILIRAKIS. Do you respond to individuals? 

Mr. WALTERS. Oh, yes, sir. We respond to individual letters absolutely. If not —— 

Mr. BILIRAKIS. How long does it take? Is it on a timely basis? 

Give me an example of how long it takes to respond? 

Mr. WALTERS. Sure, I think it would depend on the nature of the 

complaint and how quickly we can resolve it. We usually try to put 

out an interim response at first so say we are working on the issue, 

that usually goes out if we send one within a few days. And then 

the actual resolution can vary depending again on the nature of the 

issue. 

There was an issue recently at Riverside National Cemetery, for 

example, where we got contractors that were treating headstones 

and the grounds in a manner that was inconsistent with what we 

would regard as national shrines. 

This complaint came to us. We acted very aggressively. We corrected the situation. And in fact, we added language referred to as 

a dignity clause to all of our national shrine contracts where contractors now have to be especially conscious of what they are doing 

at our grave sites to make sure they are honoring the dignity of 

the burials. 

Mr. BILIRAKIS. Thank you very much. 

I have one more question, Mr. Chairman. 

You testified, Mr. Walters, on the current NCA proposed rule 

and implementation of the dignified burial act of 2012; it is my understanding that the National Funeral Directors Association expressed concern with one of the details of the proposed rule. 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLER
15 

Under previous rules funeral homes were able to apply directly 

to the VA for partial reimbursement or other associated benefit. In 

their view this allowed funeral homes to easily provide the veteran 

with a timely and dignified burial and that is what I am concerned 

about. The convenience for the family and of course for the veteran. 

Without any concern about not being compensated for their services. 

Additionally, in situations without a next of kin under the proposed rule, funeral directors would have to apply to become the authorized representative, which would add difficulty and additional 

cost to a process where funeral directors are trying to honor our 

Nation’s fallen heroes. 

Can you explain why NCA is not allowing funeral homes to apply 

directly to the VA? Were there any comments to the provision supporting or opposing this change during the public comment period? 

And I don’t want to delay the process for the families, particularly when there is no next of kin. So if you could elaborate on that, 

I would really appreciate it? 

Mr. WALTERS. Congressman Bilirakis, the administration of that 

particular program falls under the Veterans Benefits Administration so I would be happy to for the record provide a response. 

I will say that, you know, the intent of the direct payment to the 

veteran was to do precisely what I thought you said toward the end 

of your comment, which is to make sure that the family receives 

the money as quickly as possible and then to pay their expenses 

with it. 

I also know that under Secretary Hickey’s leadership the automation of burial claims has been put into place such that nearly 

half of them at this point are processed that way without human 

intervention, which then frees up staff time to perform other work. 

And the processing time for those burial claims has been reduced 

from a peak of 190 days in February of 2013 to 64 days in December of 2014. But. 

Again, sir, I will take the specific question. 

Mr. BILIRAKIS. Yeah, again my concern is there a lot of local funeral homes and they want to help out our families. I just don’t 

want to delay the process and make it inconvenient for the families. Or if they don’t have a next of kin, they can take care of it 

directly. 

So I appreciate very much, Mr. Chairman. 

Again, thank you for your service. We are going to miss you. 

Mr. RUNYAN. Thank you. Thank you very much. 

I recognize Mr. O’Rourke. 

Mr. O’ROURKE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I also want to join my colleagues in thanking you for your service 

in the way that you have lead this committee. I have enjoyed working with you in my first term in Congress. I have learned a lot and 

look forward to watching the great things that you are going to do 

in the future after you leave this institution, so thank you. 

To the Secretary, to Mr. Walters, first of all, I want to thank you 

for the great job that you do and that your team does. You have 

a new person in El Paso, Texas, the community that I have the 

honor of representing Amy Callahan is doing a terrific job, incredibly responsive, works well with our team, works well and is attenVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:42 Mar 03, 2016 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 C:\PDF\OUT\96138.TXT PAT

VACREP0180 with DISTILLER
16 

tive to the veterans and their families in El Paso. So through you 

I want to thank her and the team in El Paso who do a 

phernomenal job. Thank you. 

Mr. WALTERS. Thank you, sir. I will pass that along. 

Mr. O’ROURKE. And as was your predecessor Mr. Muro, you have 

been very responsive to us to meet personally. We are able to talk 

on the phone about concerns before they become real problems and 

so I want to thank you for that as well. 

I think the cemetery in El Paso at Fort Bliss is in many ways 

remarkable. It is very clean, well kept, a great staff. And the response I think you probably have the data to back it up in terms 

of the surveys from those customers that you serve has been great. 

But as you know, there is one disconnect between the NCA, and 

El Paso, and our offices and that is the fact that El Paso is one 

of the three xeriscaped or water-wise I think is the term you use, 

cemeteries out of the 131 in the system. And it is deeply unpopular 

amongst those people whose opinion I care about the most and that 

is the veterans, and their families, the widows, and widowers, the 

children, the descendants of those who are buried there. 

You have approached this as an either or proposition, either we 

have turf and grass—and I think your argument is that when El 

Paso and Fort Bliss had that, it was suboptimal or you have 

xeriscaping, which is water-wise, doesn’t require a lot of management or maintenance, it is cost efficient. And in the opinion of 

some, it is aesthetically pleasing. 

So remind everybody when we talk about water-wise with 

xeriscaping, we are talking about crushed rock and dirt on ground, 

we are not talking about a desert landscaping. Although, there is 

some landscaping with shrubbery and some trees. But imagine you 

are in El Paso, Texas, visiting a family member who is there and 

it is 110 degrees outside, and you are asked to or want to kneel 

and you can’t because you’ve asked to kneel on this crushed gravel. 

I am looking for an option, some way that we can work together 

to get past what is unacceptable to my community. And we are also 

asking to know what the criteria are that you use to make these 

decisions. My understanding is only 3 out of 131. I don’t know if 

Mr. Hallinan would be comfortable converting Arlington Cemetery 

into a water-wise facility to save money and time and maintenance 

costs. I am going to guess the answer is no. 

And so our contention in El Paso is that if a water-wise NCA 

cemetery is not sufficient for the best in our system, then it should 

not be sufficient for El Paso. I want to get your comments and your 

thoughts on that and perhaps a suggested path on which we can 

work to resolve this situation for El Paso? 

Mr. WALTERS. Sure. Thank you for the question Congressman 

O’Rourke. 

Our decision to turf or xeriscape a cemetery is not arbitrary, it 

is based on a variety of factors, to include climate condition, as well 

as the availability of water. 

In the case of El Paso, as you know, the decision to xeriscape 

that cemetery was based on a congressionally mandated study in 

1999. The results of that study indicated that if El Paso were to 

be maintained as a national shrine, there was not a sufficient 

amount of water to do so. And the study recommended xeriscaping 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLER
17 

the entire cemetery. At that point, we made the decision to make 

the investment to xeriscape the cemetery. 

Mr. O’ROURKE. And if I could interrupt you because I only have 

20 seconds, you are going me the history, I am asking for the future. How are we going to work together to resolve this situation? 

What we have today is unacceptable. 

Mr. WALTERS. Okay. Well, just to say, I mean our survey results 

just to put them on the record, our survey results from those who 

are using the cemetery suggest a high degree of acceptance, but in 

answer to your question. 

Mr. O’ROURKE. I would refer to my colleagues ice cream shop 

analogy. I don’t know that we are asking those whose family members were already interred or buried at that cemetery who did not 

have a choice in whether it was converted from grass to rocks. And 

who are deeply disappointed in that and are asking me as their 

Federal representative to do something about it. 

And what I get is the process that you used to arrive at this decision that is deeply unpopular and unacceptable to me and the people I represent. 

What I am asking for now how can we work together to do something? Perhaps we cannot turf the entire cemetery. Perhaps there 

is some water-wise solution that is an improvement upon the 

crushed rocks that cover the grave cites that we have in El Paso 

at Fort Bliss today. But because I am out of time and because it 

probably involves a longer conversation I would just like to gain 

your commitment that we can work together to do that. 

Mr. WALTERS. Absolutely. Congressman, we are always willing to 

work with you and your staff. We have done so in the past, we will 

continue to do that with you. I think a good launching point may 

very well be the study that UT El Paso is currently undertaking 

when they are examining soil conditions and perhaps coming up 

with some recommendations or thing that we can consider. 

So absolutely we are more than willing to work with you and 

your staff. 

Mr. O’ROURKE. Great. 

Thank you Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. RUNYAN. Thank you. 

I recognize Mr. Stivers. 

Mr. STIVERS. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank you for accepting 

unanimous consent to allow me to sit in on this hearing. I really 

appreciate your leadership, it has been an honor to serve with you 

in Congress. I know that other than going to the University of 

Michigan you have had a distinguished career, I happen to be a 

Buckeye so that part, you know, I wish you would come to Ohio 

State. 

Mr. RUNYAN. Good luck in the playoffs. 

Mr. STIVERS. But, I really do appreciate the way you treated our 

veterans and the way you treated this committee and worked with 

both sides to come to common ground. 

Thank you for allowing me to be here. 

I have a couple of questions for Mr. Walters and then I have one 

question with Mr. Hallinan. 

Mr. Walters, I appreciate your new October 1st draft of regulation that would deal with next of kin. Frankly, the old policy 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLER
18 

caused homeless veterans and folks whose next of kin couldn’t be 

identified because they had served at a conflict much further back 

in our history, real hassles in getting headstones. So I appreciate 

the updating version. 

There are only a few questions that I have about it, because 

there are some folks that are historians and other Archivists that 

are interested in helping and there are a few pieces of language 

that they don’t quite understand and I wanted to talk with you 

about it. 

The first part involves where you say any individual who provides documentation of such lawful duty basically can provide information on these headstones. A lot of the interested parties are 

having trouble understanding what the language of such lawful 

duty means. I assume it means of the duty of the VA to provide 

a headstone. But is there any way you could clarify that here in 

this hearing or in writing later? 

Mr. WALTERS. To make sure, Congressman Stivers, that I get it 

right, I would prefer to answer that and submit it for the record. 

Mr. STIVERS. I appreciate that and I knew that might be the result. 

The second is your proposed rule creates an actual date on the 

calendar, it uses April 6th, 1917 the date we entered World War 

I, but as you know, our archival records and our procedures on archives actually say basically anything 62 years back and further 

they don’t use a date on the calendar. 

I really think it would make much more sense to have those two 

things be the same and use the archival records as 62 years back, 

instead of the drop dead date of April 6th, 1917, because, you 

know, consistency makes a lot of sense and I would ask you to take 

a look at whether you could consider that change as well. 

Mr. WALTERS. Sure. We received 383 comments on this particular proposed rule and we are going through them right now and 

I am sure that is one of them. 

In general, sir, what I will say is that our primarily motivation 

in establishing the April 1917 date was to really honor family 

members’ wishes to the extent possible. If we establish the 62-year 

timeline, that would be in place through NARA, we are basically 

establishing a date of 1952 as the launching point. And we felt that 

family members would be alive for veterans who served prior to 

1952. 

So because of that, we thought it would just be best to move the 

date back to just say standard date of our entrance into World War 

I and then go from there. 

Mr. STIVERS. And I certainly appreciate that. 

I would ask you to look at it. Because certainly many of our veterans during the draft were more socioeconomically disadvantaged. 

There were more broken families. And so I just would ask you to 

take a look. If you can have consistency, I think it makes sense. 

You know, I don’t think the April 6, 1917, is the worst thing in 

the world, but I think consistency—one of the rules we need to live 

by up here is, if we can create things that are consistent, it just 

makes it easier for everybody. So please take a look at that. 

And the last thing I would ask is if you could consider community—the sort of community of historians. Every State has a State 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLER
19 

historic preservation officer. And if you can include some language 

about that. It is a State Governor-appointed position. 

If you could, you know, allow those folks to be included in this 

by name and by spelling them out, I think it would be really helpful because there is one in every State. There is actually, I believe, 

one for federally recognized Indian tribes separately from our 50 

States and the 4 territories as well. 

So they are everywhere. And it is a position that could and 

should be, I think, recognized in this regulation. But I would ask 

you to take a look at it. I am not asking for a response to that, but 

take a look at that as well. 

Mr. WALTERS. Sure. We would be happy to do that, sir. 

Mr. STIVERS. Thank you so much. 

And, Mr. Hallinan, I just wanted to thank you for the Tomb of 

Remembrance that I have worked on for almost 4 years here in 

Congress. I had a bill dealing with it. You guys took it and did it 

by regulation. And I appreciate what you are doing to implement 

that. 

You mentioned it a little bit earlier in your comments, and I 

want to thank you because it sets forward a place so that what 

happened a few years ago where some unidentified remains of our 

men and women ended up in a landfill—this will make sure that 

never happens again. I really appreciate the efforts you have put 

in it, and I just wanted to say thank you. 

Mr. HALLINAN. Well, Congressman, on behalf of my staff, you are 

most welcome. They exist. The only reason they have a job is to 

serve our Nation’s heroes. And to people that wore the uniform, 

that was a sensitive subject. We understood your concern. We were 

out front. We have worked the process. 

I am happy to update the committee that we will advertise that 

project in March of 2015. We anticipate a contract being awarded 

in April of 2015, with 180 days to start and complete that project. 

So October or November of 2015, I anticipate having a Tomb of Remembrance at Arlington. 

Mr. STIVERS. I appreciate that. 

Even our unidentified soldiers, sailors, airmen, and Marines, and 

even their fragments and remains deserve a place of honor. I really 

appreciate that. 

Mr. HALLINAN. You are most welcome, sir. 

Mr. STIVERS. Thank you. 

Last I would like to thank Senator Cleland for employing one of 

my constituents, John Marshall. It is good to see John here. But 

I really appreciate you and what you do for our veterans. And 

thank you for serving our veterans that happen to be buried 

around the globe. 

I happened to visit one of your cemeteries in France this year. 

It was very well kept up. I really appreciate that you take your 

mission seriously and honor our heroes, regardless of where they 

happen to have their final resting place. 

Mr. CLELAND. Thank you very much, Mr. Congressman. 

Mr. STIVERS. Thank you. I yield back the balance. 

And I want to again thank the chairman and wish him great 

luck on his future. I know you have got great things. 

Mr. RUNYAN. Thank you very much. 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLER
20 

Mr. STIVERS. We will miss you as a blocker. 

Mr. RUNYAN. Thanks. 

I have one more question. I will open it up to the other members, 

also, if they have another one, or if they want another five, feel 

free. 

Only because the first meeting that I had with Secretary McDonald—he sat down and he said something that really got the wheels 

turning. And I know Arlington’s kind of strategic plan. 

I want to address this really to Mr. Walters about NCA and strategic plan moving forward. Because specifically after these conflicts 

we are coming out of, are we prepared for the volume that we are 

going to have? And what studies, plans, do we have to be able to 

deal with this moving forward? 

Mr. WALTERS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

The National Cemetery Administration has a very robust strategic planning effort. As far as predicting the future gravesite need 

or interment rates, we use the Vet Pop 2011 model that we received from another office within the VA. That model provides us 

with veteran-level data at the county level. 

Using that data, which is based on the 2010 census—using that 

data, we then look at historical patterns down to the individual 

cemetery level and make projections and assumptions 20, 30 years 

into the future. I will say that we have been historically extremely 

successful with these predictions. 

In most years, we have a variance of about 1 percent from our 

projected interment rates, which, in turn, informs the need for additional gravesites and construction projects. 

So any cohort in the future would be reflected in these models. 

We would reflect it in our utilization rates—our prior year utilization rates, and that would be translated into our future projections 

and our construction planning models. 

As a result of our planning models, we have never had an interruption in burial service at a national cemetery, and we intend to 

continue that record. 

Mr. RUNYAN. Thank you for that response. Because I know we 

all sit with what we deal with with VBA and VHA and how we are 

unable to predict a lot of that stuff. So thank you for that response. 

Ms. TITUS. Thank you. 

I would just ask Secretary Cleland if the typhoon that has recently hit the Philippines has an impact on our cemeteries there 

and what is happening, and, second, what you all are doing with 

Normandy and the French Government to have that site declared 

a UNESCO international heritage site and how that effects our 

cemeteries. 

Mr. CLELAND. Thank you very much. 

The last question I don’t know the answer to, and I will call upon 

Mike Conley, who might know an answer to it. 

The first question about the typhoons, typhoons hit the Philippines from time to time. Sometimes the trees are blown down. 

Gravesites are impacted. 

So we are subject to the weather like anyone else. However, we 

have a great crew out there and a great leader, and they are always Johnny-on-the-spot in responding and setting things right. 

Ms. TITUS. That is good to know. Thank you. 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLER
21 

I would just be curious to know about the heritage site. 

Mr. CLELAND. The heritage site—I will have to ask Mike Conley 

does he knowing anything about the heritage site at Normandy. 

Mr. CONLEY. Ms. Titus, forgive my voice. I have got a cold. 

But we are in contact with the UNESCO folks. Our overseas operations office in Gars just outside Paris has reviewed paperwork, 

and we are considering whether we want to endorse that. 

Our concern, obviously, is that, if it is declared a world heritage 

site, that there is nothing in there that would prevent us from 

maintaining and improving upon the site as we deem appropriate 

as the years go ahead. 

But clearly the nature of the events that happened there clearly 

fall under the criteria and deserve to be so recognized. 

Ms. TITUS. I agree with that. Well, thank you. 

Mr. RUNYAN. Mr. Secretary, can you identify him for the record, 

please. 

Mr. CLELAND. That was Mike Conley, our chief administrative officer. 

Mr. RUNYAN. Thank you very much. 

Mr. O’Rourke. 

Mr. O’ROURKE. Yeah. A question for Mr. Hallinan. 

A constituent of mine and her husband are both eligible for burial at Arlington, but my understanding is that the rules do not 

allow them to reserve a plot next to each other and, if they do want 

to be buried together, they will be buried one on top of the other 

and they will share a headstone with one’s name on one side, the 

other’s on the other. 

Is that a rule in place because of space limitations, in other 

words, you are not allowed to reserve a plot next to your spouse 

like you might at another national cemetery because I think it is 

2050 that we are running out of room? 

Mr. HALLINAN. Congressman, to answer your question, there 

were prior reservations at Arlington under the U.S. Army, which 

ended in 1962 by law. So there are no legal reservations anymore. 

Arlington is unique. It is a space issue. 

There are different types of burial patterns at our national cemeteries, as Mr. Powers and Mr. Walters and former Senator Cleland 

are aware of. But that would be a driver to bury people side by 

side. To give them their own grave would quickly use up the remaining capacity at Arlington National Cemetery. So that was part 

of the process that developed. 

But you are 100 percent accurate. Both are eligible. I am taking 

that as a given. But they would be buried together in the same 

gravesite. Whoever predeceases will go in first, and the remaining 

spouse, when he or she were to pass, would go in on top. They 

would share the information on a government headstone. Yes. 

Mr. O’ROURKE. And is there a plan in place to add additional 

grounds post-2050. 

Mr. HALLINAN. I don’t want to say no, Congressman. I believe 

that, when we approach in that year of the decade, there may be 

some opportunities. 

But it is very difficult in the area that we are in in Washington. 

We have taken—under the Millennium Project, we have taken 

space from Fort Myer—a possibility of looking at Fort Myer again. 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLER
22 

But when one looks for available space outside of the current— 

the next expansion process, the southern expansion, you have to 

look at what is going to be gained by it. It is not just a matter of 

maximizing burial space. A place like Fort Myer is a place where 

the Caissons and military units and MDW support Arlington on a 

daily basis. It has a small footprint already. 

Any future expansion will probably come at great financial cost. 

There may be land, you know, towards where the current Iwo Jima 

Memorial is now. But we are really starting to get out there. 

And I am sure any interest we show beyond our current footprint 

and where we are going to go to 2050 will be rather difficult and 

a sensitive issue. But we are looking. We do project beyond, what 

comes after 2050 for Arlington. 

Mr. O’ROURKE. And, lastly, for Mr. Walters. Thank you for your 

commitment to work with me. I really appreciate that. And while 

I feel very strongly about the position that we hold related to the 

cemetery, I do again want to commend you and your team for the 

way in which you take care of it. I think, again, it is very clean, 

looks really nice for what it is. 

But I have just heard from too many veterans and their families 

at this point who desperately want something that is more accommodating for them as they pay tribute to their loved one. And so 

I know that there is a way that we can work together to get this 

done. So I appreciate your willingness to work with me on that. 

Mr. WALTERS. We look forward to working with you, sir. 

Mr. O’ROURKE. Thanks. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. RUNYAN. Thank you. 

And, with that, gentlemen, on behalf of the subcommittee, I 

thank you for your testimony. I wish you all success 2015. And you 

are now excused. And we will wait a few minutes to switch over 

the witness table. 

At this time we welcome our second panel, Ms. Ami NeibergerMiller, who is the Director of Outreach and Education for the Tragedy Assistance Program for Survivors; and Ms. Diane Zumatto, National Legislative Director for AMVETS. We appreciate your attendance here today. Your complete and written statements will be 

entered into the hearing record. 

Ms. Neiberger-Miller, you are now recognized for 5 minutes for 

your testimony. 

STATEMENT OF AMI NEIBERGER-MILLER 

Ms. NEIBERGER-MILLER. Thank you. 

I am pleased to submit this testimony on behalf of TAPS, the 

Tragedy Assistance Program for Survivors. TAPS is a nonprofit organization that provides comforting care to anyone grieving the 

death of someone who died while serving in our Armed Forces, regardless of where they died or how they died. 

We appreciate the subcommittee’s continuing interest in ensuring our Nation’s veterans and servicemembers have final resting 

places that are honorable and well maintained. These issues touch 

my family. My brother was killed in action in Iraq and is buried 

in Arlington National Cemetery, and my father-in-law is also buried at Arlington. 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLER
23 

We hope you will review our submitted testimony, which includes 

opinions on legislative initiatives related to national cemeteries and 

Arlington. 

The scandal that enveloped the Department of Affairs also 

touched the National Cemetery Administration last year. Unfortunately, the previous Under Secretary for Memorial Affairs retired 

after an OIG report revealed he had engaged in prohibited practices and preferential treatment. 

But new leadership is now in place, and we very much appreciate 

the opportunities we have had to meet with VA Secretary Robert 

McDonald and Under Secretary Sloan Gibson. We know they have 

a commitment to assisting survivors, and it is our hope that new 

VA leadership will move forward in a positive and honorable way. 

We are pleased to report the number of pending burial allowance 

claims has declined significantly since last year at this hearing 

with 17,818 on last week’s VA report. While these benefits do not 

route through the National Cemetery Administration, delay in 

their delivery hurts families by forcing them to delay settling estates and does impact their view of the VA. 

At Arlington National Cemetery, we are in a different place 

today than we were even a year ago when surviving families were 

upset about the removal of mementos from gravesites at Section 

60. Section 60 is where hundreds of those who paid the ultimate 

sacrifice in Iraq or Afghanistan are buried, including my brother. 

Superintendent Hallinan met with families and has extended a 

compromise permitting them to leave handcrafted objects and 

small laminated photos at gravesites. Initially, this was a pilot during the non-growing season last year, and the compromise was extended into the growing season and is still currently in place. 

The families are very grateful for this compromise. They have 

worked to educate each other about the rules, and the majority follow them. A few still do not follow the policies, but the appearance 

of the section is much more uniform and improved. One town hall 

meeting was held earlier this year with families, and we are hopeful lines of communication will remain open between the families 

and the Administration. 

Because some families were turned away on Memorial Day from 

Arlington due to logistics issues out on the bridge with security, we 

are also working with the cemetery leadership to help better distribute logistics information to survivors in advance of these major 

events. So no one is turned away. 

We would like to see greater survivor involvement in an advisory 

capacity. No survivor has served on the advisory committee for Arlington National Cemetery since Janet Manion’s death in April of 

2012. 

While the members of the committee all have exemplary military 

and veteran service credentials—and I should add the chair of that 

committee just testified on the previous panel—we believe their deliberations would benefit from the insight of a survivor’s perspective. 

We thank you for the opportunity to submit our testimony, and 

we welcome any questions. 

[THE PREPARED STATEMENT OF AMI NEIBERGER-MILLER APPEARS

IN THE APPENDIX] 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLER
24 

Mr. RUNYAN. Thank you, Ms. Neiberger-Miller. 

With that, I recognize Ms. Zumatto for her testimony. 

STATEMENT OF DIANE M. ZUMATTO 

Ms. ZUMATTO. Chairman Runyan, Ranking Member Titus, and 

distinguished members of the subcommittee, on behalf of AMVETS, 

I thank you for the opportunity to assist you in the important job 

of overseeing our national cemeteries. 

Previously my testimony before this committee has been somewhat limited to a repetition of facts and statistics. However, today’s 

testimony will be much more heartfelt and personal. 

Because I love history, am a trained historic preservationist, love 

my country, and grew up visiting and documenting cemeteries in 

the New England area, today’s topic is important to me both personally and professionally. 

I think it is safe to say that everybody in this room knows and 

appreciates the sacred responsibility entrusted to the National 

Cemetery Administration to honor the memory of America’s military men and women. 

I would like to set the stage briefly to convey the true importance 

of our national cemeteries not only to our Nation’s veterans, but to 

all American citizens. 

Historically, cemeteries, especially military cemeteries, were 

much more than established sites of burial with regimented internal layouts conducive to both the expression of personal grief and 

accepted societal funerary rituals. 

Few individuals are aware, I believe, of some of the equally important social and political aspects of cemeteries, including promoting and preserving the individuality and status of the deceased, 

the setting aside of landscaped spaces in or near communities delineated by defined boundaries, the organized commemoration of 

significant events and/or persons, serving as places of beauty and 

tranquility where friends and family can gather, as expressions of 

national identity and pride, especially in the case of military cemeteries, and as sites of pilgrimage and permanence. 

I am hopeful that this brief introduction has sparked a greater 

appreciation of historic national value of the many unique and irreplaceable cemeteries held in trust within the NCA system. The 

monuments, gravestones, architecture, landscape, and related memorial tributes within each NCA cemetery are richly steeped in 

history and represent the very foundations of these United States. 

How can we do any less than our absolute best to develop and 

maintain these truly American shrines? After having spent several 

weeks this summer visiting national cemeteries—there were seven 

that I was able to get to in four different MSNs—my impression 

of NCA cemeteries and its employees is higher than ever. 

Having had the rare opportunity for in-depth visits where I was 

able to observe every facet of cemetery operations, I was both 

moved and impressed with the care and professionalism at every 

level of the organization. 

None of the cemeteries I visited displayed any blatant shortcomings that would be obvious to the casual observer. This level of 

attention to detail, dedication, and commitment to providing the 

highest quality of service to veterans and their families would not 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLER
25 

be possible without positive role models and strong leadership 

throughout the NCA system. 

I certainly acknowledge that perfection does not exist in this 

world and that I have not yet had the opportunity to visit every 

cemetery under the stewardship of the NCA. But given the resources, both human and financial, I must equally acknowledge 

that NCA continually strives to meet its most important obligation, 

providing dignified resting places for our Nation’s veterans and 

their eligible family members. 

This concludes my testimony. And I will be happy to answer your 

questions. 

[THE PREPARED STATEMENT OF DIANE ZUMATTO APPEARS IN THE

APPENDIX] 

Mr. RUNYAN. Thank you very much. 

And we will begin a round of questions. 

Ms. NEIBERGER-MILLER. TAPS has sought to inform surviving 

families who visit Arlington National Cemetery about the enhanced 

security procedures resulting in access constraints during major 

holidays and at a time when many families choose to visit their 

fallen loved ones. 

How successful has TAPS outreach been, as your testimony 

noted several areas where TAPS has volunteered to assist in 

spreading word? And how do you think outreach could be more effective while also compassionate? 

Ms. NEIBERGER-MILLER. Well, sir, I think for us it is about reaching out to our families and distributing information. We have made 

improvements in our survivor database so that we can better track 

our families around the burial location of their loved one. 

One of the challenges is that many of the families who bury their 

loved ones at Arlington do not live in the Washington area. So unlike people who reside here, they are not familiar with the security 

precautions that occur when the President or the Vice President 

travel to an event. 

And so sometimes those families, especially when they are coming in from out of town, get caught on the bridge or in very serious 

traffic issues and are not familiar with the security lockdown procedures. And so our role has been to compile the information and to 

distribute it by email to families. 

I would say we still have some improvements that we are trying 

to make, but we are working hard at that. And we have also met 

with the Cemetery Administration over the summer to actually 

make some additional improvements because of some concerns over 

Memorial Day. 

Mr. RUNYAN. And very similar to information. And I wanted to 

thank TAPS for participating in discussion with Gold Star families 

and Section 60 in particular. 

You said in your testimony that it is an agreement and it is not 

a formal—do you have any suggestions on how to move forward 

and kind of ease that anxiety? 

Ms. NEIBERGER-MILLER. Well, I think for all of us it has been 

about keeping the lines of communication open. You know, the situation a year ago, we had a group of very upset families. 

And for our families to really talk with the Administration, to see 

them as people, for the Administration to meet them as people and 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLER
26 

to look them in the eye and say, you know, ‘‘We want to work with 

you on this,’’ that went a long way. 

And so I think it became about how to humanize the conversation and then how to figure out what could work for everyone, recognizing that the cemetery has to be at a certain standard as a national shrine, but also recognizing that grieving is different today 

and, for some people, leaving an object or a photograph is extremely important, and, so, how could we work out something that 

would work for everyone. 

And so the families have really done a lot, I think, to help educate each other, and they have kept those lines of communication 

open. And that has been key. 

Mr. RUNYAN. Thank you. 

Ms. Zumatto, you were talking about the consistency you have 

seen across your visits. 

Is there anything that stood out to you when you visited the sites 

that was different, that wasn’t—because the object is, obviously, to 

be uniform. Is there any specific things that stood out? 

Ms. ZUMATTO. I am going to say not really. The seven sites that 

I visited—and they were not just brief run in and out. I usually 

spent a minimum of two days or more at each site. I just did not— 

I mean, I wasn’t going through their records. 

This was more observing—for instance, at Jefferson Barracks, I 

spent one day just at their training center. I spent another day at 

the scheduling office so I could see the process. And then I spent 

a day at the cemetery itself. 

But every site that I went to I was truly—I was surprised, I 

think, by the care of the chain of custody, if you will. I had no idea 

what the process was like until I went to Jefferson Barracks, where 

I started, and the redundancy at every point to ensure that, you 

know, it was the right veteran and that the site where they were 

going to be interred was the right site. 

I mean, they use maps. They draw—you know, this stone is here. 

This stone is here. Just the detail so that there are no errors is perhaps one of the things that really struck me. That, and, as I was 

riding around with different employees during my visits, I would 

constantly see—they would stop the vehicle if they saw somebody 

walking around who looked like they needed help or, if they saw 

a piece of trash in the road or, you know, in the cemetery itself, 

they just got out. They took care of it. 

It was just really very reassuring to see that level of care at 

every step of the way. 

Mr. RUNYAN. Thank you. Good to hear. 

With that, I will yield to the ranking member, Ms. Titus. 

Ms. TITUS. Thank you. 

Thank you both for all the good work you do with families during 

this most difficult time. 

I would ask Ms. Neiberger-Miller if you have the same experience dealing with people and talking to families that we heard reported in the surveys that the NCA does. They say their surveys 

show that 95 percent of the people are satisfied. It has got the best 

marks of any government agency. 

Is that compatible with what you hear on the ground from families? 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLER
27 

Ms. NEIBERGER-MILLER. We hear from families that they are 

often very satisfied with the burial process. Unfortunately, we do 

work with people who are traumatically bereaved. And so many of 

these people are struggling, also, with short-term memory loss 

issues or some other issues going on. They are often in a great 

state of shock. 

These are people who died young, who were not expected to die, 

who often died in very violent ways. And so their family is often 

in a great degree of shock. The burial is often very quickly after 

the death. There is not a wait, typically, for an active duty service 

that is extremely long. 

And so the family sometimes even needs the photographs or 

other things from the service to really recall it very well. And that 

is unfortunate, but they always will say that they feel their loved 

one was honored and that they feel that placement at Arlington or 

at a national cemetery honors their loved one’s service and sacrifice 

for our country. 

Ms. TITUS. Do you ever talk to families who feel like they don’t 

live close enough to a national cemetery to be able to access it, so, 

they just resort to some other kind of more private funeral? 

Ms. NEIBERGER-MILLER. Well, there are families sometimes who 

really have to make very difficult decisions also because this was 

someone who wasn’t expected to die. So there was no family plan 

in place, per se, like their might be for, say, an older veteran like 

my father-in-law who knew for several decades he wanted to be 

buried at Arlington and told all of us that. 

And so families sometimes don’t always recognize the travel distances that they may be assuming or may not realize they want to 

visit as often as they do after a death. And that can be challenging 

for them to make a long-distance trip to go and visit a location. We 

don’t hear often from families about that, but it certainly is something that is discussed sometimes. 

Ms. TITUS. Thank you. 

And, Ms. Zumatto, when you visited those seven cemeteries, did 

you visit any State cemeteries or just national? 

Ms. ZUMATTO. I have not yet had the opportunity to visit a State 

cemetery. No, ma’am. 

Ms. TITUS. Do you think some of your veterans would like to see 

more cemeteries in the west where they could be buried in a national cemetery, not just a State cemetery or some convenient facility? 

Ms. ZUMATTO. Well, personally, just from my knowledge—not 

personal experience, but from research, if you will—I don’t really 

believe that being buried in a State cemetery—a State veterans 

cemetery is any less honorable. I just don’t see it as a negative. 

If there is no National cemetery or if that National cemetery has 

no more available space, then, you know, I don’t see why, as long 

as the State cemetery is being maintained to, you know, the shrine 

standard, that that should be an issue. 

However, I did have a member tell me the other day about a 

problem in Alaska having to do with access. And, apparently, there 

are two national cemeteries in Alaska, one of which is only accessible by boat, and the other, apparently, is on an active military 

installation. 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLER
28 

And the issue that he brought up was the fact that it is difficult, 

not everybody has access to a boat, but that, if there is any sort 

of security issues going on on the base, then the base is closed and 

then you can’t access the cemetery. 

But, as I say, as far as State cemeteries go, I haven’t been to one. 

It is on my list. And I am going to continue visiting cemeteries. 

Ms. TITUS. I just worry about policy varying from State to State, 

even with the checklist. For example, a same-sex couple might be 

able to get buried together in a State that recognizes it, but not in 

a State that doesn’t, if it is a state cemetery, not a national cemetery. 

So I think, while state cemeteries—I think the one in Nevada, 

in Boulder City, is great—I think there are still differences that we 

need to address. Appreciate it. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. RUNYAN. Mr. O’Rourke. 

Mr. O’ROURKE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Ms. Neiberger-Miller, thank you for your testimony. I really 

enjoy hearings like these that our chairman and ranking member 

put together. 

Other than your testimony, I really didn’t know about a lot of 

these issues. So I appreciate you bringing your perspective directly 

to us. 

And, likewise, Ms. Zumatto. I really appreciate all of the work 

and time that you took to go to these different cemeteries, including the one at Fort Bliss in El Paso, Texas. And I really appreciate 

that. 

I just want to note for the record that Mr. Walters and Mr. 

Hallinan are here as well, which I really appreciate the fact that 

you are listening as well to gain insight. 

And, Ms. Zumatto, I really appreciated your remarks in your 

written testimony about the national cemetery at Fort Bliss. And 

you described it as serene and beautiful and very well maintained 

and a little bit of a surprise because you had heard that there was 

some discontent in El Paso about the cemetery, and I really can’t 

argue with your conclusions. 

I think it is a very serene, a very beautiful place, again, so clean 

and well maintained for the resources that they have. You know, 

if you are going to have that crushed rock and some small areas 

of grass, some small areas of trees and landscaping, it is excellently 

maintained. 

I think the disconnect might come when we talk to the families, 

the survivors, who can also appreciate everything that you describe 

in your assessment, but then that act of actually kneeling at the 

gravesite or being close to the headstone is a lesser experience for 

them—and this is, you know, their experience as they relate it to 

me—because of that environment and not having that grass and 

that expectation because it was there before and because it is in 

the vast majority of other cemeteries in El Paso and almost every 

other single national cemetery. 

But you also said something that I thought was so important in 

your testimony—or wrote in your testimony, which was that, when 

you visited with VSOs prior to visiting the cemetery, you found 

that they were not as upset with the aesthetics as they were with 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLER
29 

the process and they felt like they had been disconnected from the 

process used to choose the xeriscaping or the WaterWise. 

Talk a little bit—I had a great exchange with Mr. Walters in the 

previous panel where we agreed that we would try to work together 

to find a way to make an improvement. Maybe it is not turf and 

maybe it is not staying with the status quo. Maybe it is something 

better for all concerned. 

Talk a little bit about a process that you might recommend from 

your experience that we could use in working with survivors, working with veterans, working with VSOs in our community, and 

working with the NCA. 

Sorry to put you on the spot. Since you had that great conversation with the VSOs there, I thought you might have some thoughts 

on it. 

Ms. ZUMATTO. Well, I have not done a study of xeriscaping, so, 

I am not sure what other types of low maintenance or WaterWise 

options there might be. 

I would doubt that what is currently at Fort Bliss is the only avenue available. I have seen pictures of Fort Bliss back when it was 

turfed, and in the picture I can see a lot of brown and bare patches. 

Mr. O’ROURKE. Doesn’t look good, does it? 

Ms. ZUMATTO. So I can’t imagine that that would be any better. 

Mr. O’ROURKE. Right. 

Ms. ZUMATTO. I don’t know if I said this in my written testimony 

or not, but—and this was my first experience being in a desert. But 

when you stand in the cemetery and you look at the environment 

all around, it is perfectly suited the way it is. 

I did ask—I went to a local VFW post, actually, while I was 

there, the day before I went to the cemetery, to talk to veterans 

and see what they thought about it. And you mentioned that—you 

know, a couple of things. 

I asked them if it was difficult to walk on. Somebody was saying 

that, you know, an elderly person, perhaps, or somebody with some 

disability—you know, do they have difficulty either with a wheelchair on that surface or, you know, walking on that surface. So 

that possibility came up. I didn’t try either myself when I was 

there. It was 120 degrees that day, so, I didn’t try kneeling. 

But there were people visiting the cemetery when I was there 

and I did notice at least two individuals had brought like—almost 

like a small prayer rug, if you will, something to put on the ground 

to kneel on, which I thought was, you know, a pretty good option. 

But one other thing that I will mention is I recently came back 

from a visit to a national military cemetery in Israel, and they did 

not have any grass in that cemetery. 

Mr. O’ROURKE. Now, what is on—I saw your picture from the 

cemetery in Israel, and it looks like there is grass on the actual 

grave. It looks like it is surrounded by stones and there is some 

material in between the stones over the grave. 

Is that grass or some other covering? 

Ms. ZUMATTO. The ground is mainly flagstone-type material, and 

then each individual grave is sort of built up. There is a wall, a 

surround, if you will. And on top of that, there is grass—excuse 

me—there is soil, but it is not grass. 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLER
30 

There are plants there, and there were a variety of different 

things. And I don’t know—because of that variety, I wonder if family members maybe tried to personalize their loved one’s site. But 

it wasn’t grass. And anyplace that didn’t have flagstones was bare 

dirt. 

Mr. O’ROURKE. Well, I appreciate you bringing that to our attention. I have got the pictures here in front of me, and it just provides yet another option. 

In other words, it is not a choice—I would say a false choice between bad turf and grass, which is what Fort Bliss had, and the 

crushed rock. 

But as you saw in the Chihuahuan Desert, it is full of life and 

there are forms of grass and plant life that thrive there, and I 

think there is some middle ground we can reach. And maybe looking at what others have done, including in Israel, gives us some options. 

So, again, thank you for doing the work and providing us some 

other perspective on this. I really appreciate it. 

Thank you both for your testimony. 

Ms. ZUMATTO. My pleasure. 

Mr. RUNYAN. Anything further? No. Okay. 

Well, on behalf of the subcommittee, I would like to thank you 

for your testimony and for the works that TAPS and AMVETS does 

to honor our veterans and care for their families and loved ones. 

You are now excused. 

I want to thank everyone for being here today. The status reports 

from our cemetery and memorial representatives and the input 

from the VSO community was well presented, and the subcommittee appreciates the work that went into the preparation for 

today’s hearing. 

I am certain that this subcommittee will continue to engage in 

these issues in the next Congress as the final resting place for our 

veterans and the families left behind deserve the highest standard 

of care. 

I would like to once again thank our witnesses for being here 

today and ask unanimous consent that all members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include any extraneous material. Hearing no objection, so ordered. 

I thank the members for their attendance today. And this hearing is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 3:44 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.] 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLER
31 

APPENDIX 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 1 here 96138.001
32 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 2 here 96138.002
33 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 3 here 96138.003
34 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 4 here 96138.004
35 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 5 here 96138.005
36 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 6 here 96138.006
37 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 7 here 96138.007
38 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 8 here 96138.008
39 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 9 here 96138.009
40 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 10 here 96138.010
41 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 11 here 96138.011
42 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 12 here 96138.012
43 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 13 here 96138.013
44 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 14 here 96138.014
45 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 15 here 96138.015
46 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 16 here 96138.016
47 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 17 here 96138.017
48 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 18 here 96138.018
49 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 19 here 96138.019
50 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 20 here 96138.020
51 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 21 here 96138.021
52 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 22 here 96138.022
53 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 23 here 96138.023
54 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 24 here 96138.024
55 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 25 here 96138.025
56 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MAX CLELAND

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee 

On behalf of our Chairman General Tony McPeak and our Board of Commissioners, I thank you for this opportunity to discuss the mission, operations and programs of the American Battle Monuments Commission. 

Since 1923, our purpose has not changed—to commemorate the service and 

achievements of America’s armed forces, yet our methods have changed. We execute 

our mission by creating memorials worldwide where U.S. forces have served, and 

by administering 25 overseas military cemeteries—shrines to our fallen and those 

that fought by their side. 

We do this with the words of our first Chairman, General of the Armies John J. 

Pershing ever in mind. General Pershing’s words serve as the foundation statement 

for all that we do: 

‘‘Time Will Not Dim the Glory of Their Deeds’’ 

The cemeteries and memorials we administer have been entrusted to our care by 

the American people—we take that as a solemn responsibility. For the first 80 years 

of our history, ABMC’s principle focus was to maintain our commemorative sites to 

the highest of standards. That remains and always will be our core mission—the 

war dead we honor deserve nothing less. 

2014 has proven to be a significant commemorative year for the Nation and for 

our Commission. We were honored to host President Obama at three of the Commission’s overseas cemeteries this fiscal year: Flanders Field American Cemetery in 

Belgium; Manila American Cemetery in the Philippines; and Normandy American 

Cemetery, France. 

At Normandy on June 6th, the president was joined by French President 

Hollande, Secretary of State Kerry, Secretary of Defense Hagel, Congressional delegations, and many other civilian and military dignitaries to commemorate the 70th 

Anniversary of the D–Day landings. Before an audience of 10,000, including more 

than 300 D–Day veterans, the President reflected on the historical significance of 

June 6, 1944: 

‘‘We come to tell the story of the men and women who did it so that it remains 

seared into the memory of a future world. We tell this story for the old soldiers who 

pull themselves a little straighter today to salute brothers who never made it home. 

We tell the story for the daughter who clutches a faded photo of her father, forever 

young; for the child who runs his fingers over colorful ribbons he knows signify 

something of great consequence, even if he doesn’t yet fully understand why.’’ 

Unlike the Longest Day 70 years ago, it was a beautiful June day in Normandy 

to remember the achievement and sacrifice of the more than 10,000 brave souls buried in the hallowed Normandy grounds and memorialized on the cemetery’s Tablets 

of the Missing. 

Other significant commemorative events this past year included the 70th anniversary of Operation Market Garden at Netherlands American Cemetery and the 70th 

anniversary of Operation Dragoon at Rhone American Cemetery in southern France. 

Not long after these World War II events concluded, attention shifted in August 

to the World War I Centennial. Although the 100th anniversary of the United 

States entry into the Great War will not begin until April 2017, the Commission’s 

eight World War I cemeteries in Europe will receive increased attention as visitors 

travel to the battlefields where the fathers and mothers of the ‘‘Greatest Generation’’ witnessed unprecedented devastation and death; places where American sacrifice ultimately opened an American Century. 

I have shared with you previously the ambitious visitor center projects we began 

as part of our Interpretation Program—what we now refer to as Telling Their Story. 

I’m pleased to report this morning that two new visitor centers at our Cambridge 

and Sicily-Rome cemeteries were dedicated on Memorial Day, and the renovated visitor center at the Pointe du Hoc Ranger Monument—just nine kilometers from Normandy cemetery—was dedicated June 5th on the eve of D–Day. 

Visitor center renovation projects at two World War I cemeteries—Meuse-Argonne 

in France and Flanders Field in Belgium—are in design. And three additional visitor center projects are in various stages of development: 

• At our Honolulu Memorial in the Department of Veterans Affairs National 

Memorial Cemetery of the Pacific—the Punchbowl; 

• At Manila American Cemetery, our only World War II commemorative cemetery in the Pacific; and, 

• At the World War I Chateau-Thierry Monument in France, located about one 

hour east of Paris. 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLER
57 

We also have two new monuments in development. 

• A monument to be placed at Midway Island has been designed and fabricated, 

and installation is forthcoming. 

• We launched a competition to select an architect to design a U.S. monument 

for New Zealand’s national memorial park in Wellington, responding to an invitation from the Government of New Zealand. 

These monument projects are part of an initiative launched by our Board of Commissioners, with the counsel of the military service historians, to honor significant 

battles and achievements of U.S. forces that have not previously been commemorated by the Commission. 

Closer to home, we partnered with the National Park Service to renovate and upgrade kiosks and educational content at the World War II and Korean War memorials on the National Mall, significantly enhancing the visitor experience. Particularly popular is the ability for visitors to access ABMC’s World War II Registry and 

Korean War Honor Roll databases at the kiosks. 

We are strengthening our collaboration with Arlington National Cemetery, defining opportunities to share best practices and training. We can learn much from the 

technological advances ANC has made in recent years, and we can share the core 

competencies for which our agency has become known, strengthening both organizations. Likewise, we continue our long-standing relationship with the National Cemetery Administration through advisory committees and our shared interest in the National Memorial Cemetery of the Pacific, home of our Honolulu Memorial. Through 

such collaborations we have the opportunity, collectively, to improve the efficiency 

of our operations and more effectively serve our stakeholders. 

Phase two of the Commission’s education program initiative has begun with the 

award of a contract to a joint venture of National History Day and the George 

Mason University Center for History and New Media to create a World War II-focused, education program developed by teachers that will help students better understand the service, experience and sacrifice of American armed forces that served 

and died during the war in Northern Europe. 

Products related to World War I, developed in partnership with the University of 

North Carolina and Virginia Tech as phase one of our education program, will be 

completed by the end of this year. 

The Commission received a new mission responsibility in fiscal year 2014 with 

completion in December 2013 of a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between 

the U.S. and the Republic of the Philippines, giving ABMC the ability to restore and 

maintain Clark Veterans Cemetery in the Philippines as ABMC’s 25th cemetery. 

The action was contemplated by the Dignified Burial and Other Veterans’ Benefits 

Improvement Act (Public Law 112–260), signed into law by President Obama in 

January 2013. Our staff at Manila American Cemetery began basic maintenance of 

the cemetery immediately upon signature of the MOU, as well as, restoration of the 

perimeter fence and construction of a temporary equipment storage facility. We are 

awaiting the completion of an engineering assessment of the physical condition of 

the cemetery and expect initial results this month. We will carefully analyze those 

results to develop recommendations regarding appropriate next steps that will guide 

future restoration plans, long-term maintenance requirements, and budget requests 

beginning in the fiscal year 2017 budget cycle. 

Although ABMC’s core mission remains unchanged, in order that we appropriately continue to honor our Nation’s fallen, we have found it essential to place 

emphasis on ‘‘telling the story’’ of these brave men and women. As we find ourselves 

further in time from the seminal events we commemorate, it is critical that we provide context for younger generations of Americans who have little understanding of 

why their fellow Americans rest in the soil of England, France, Belgium, Luxembourg, Italy, or the Philippines. 

Our visitor centers at Normandy, Cambridge, Sicily-Rome and Pointe du Hoc, and 

the projects underway or planned, have inestimable value in enabling understanding of the historical events surrounding the ‘‘the glory of their deeds’’ and the 

placement of these cemeteries. As such, we are re-invigorating our strategic plan to 

set forth a path focused on better supporting this essential mission. In addition to 

our standing mission and vision, inspired by General Pershing’s foundational statement; and our core values of excellence, integrity, stewardship, commitment and respect; we have codified a new set of guiding principles. These principles were designed to help fill a void in our educational and historical preservation activities, 

along with informing our new interpretive services program: 

We Will Tell their Story 

We will preserve, communicate, and interpret the stories of competence, courage 

and sacrifice of those we honor, while providing historical context for why our comVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:42 Mar 03, 2016 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00061 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 C:\PDF\OUT\96138.TXT PAT

VACREP0180 with DISTILLER
58 

memorative sites were established, the men and women we honor, and the values 

for which they fought and died. Recognizing the changing demographics of our audiences, we will pursue opportunities at our sites and through education programs 

and emerging technologies to educate and inform our audiences in a way that 

evokes a lasting, personal connection. 

We Will Preserve our Heritage Assets 

We will protect and maintain our commemorative sites to their original design intent and to exceptional standards. ABMC commemorative sites are completed works 

of civic art that reflect the Nation’s perpetual commitment to the service and sacrifice honored within them. The horticultural features defined by the original landscape architects are integral to these sites. They will be maintained in a manner 

that enhances a sense of awe and tranquility and that reflect their status as important heritage assets. We will use noble materials to preserve and maintain the 

structural features of our sites to a ‘‘like new’’ standard that appropriately honors 

those for whom they were erected. We will plan and execute infrastructure projects 

that support stewardship and preservation, actively seeking traditional craftsmen 

and trades, while evaluating state of the art techniques, technology and products 

that produce the same results. 

We Will Develop our Cultural and Historical Resources 

We will actively collect and document archival, photographic, and dimensional 

materials that enhance scholarship in and interpretation of our mission and our 

heritage assets. To facilitate management of these assets at the highest professional 

levels, we will maintain a thoughtful, clear and relevant scope of collections policy 

and a collection management plan, and routinely document our historical property, 

allowing us to learn and share critical information with the public and our stakeholders. We will engage in comprehensive planning, including all aspects of collections management. These management activities will focus on professional standards and concepts of inventory, assessment, treatment and management, specifically 

targeted to areas of Heritage Assets Management such as architecture, landscape 

architecture, archival and museum sciences, material science, forensic archeology, 

anthropology and related fields. 

These guiding principles will clarify our decision making and shape our way forward as a world class public history organization. When fully developed, our new 

strategic plan will signal a significant pivot in mission emphasis for the American 

Battle Monuments Commission. 

As we move toward 2020, we will continue our emphasis on maintaining the highest standard for our memorials and cemeteries, while providing a first class visitor 

education experience at each of our sites. 

In conclusion, I invite each of you to visit our commemorative sites on your future 

travels, to see for yourselves our stewardship of the resources provided to the Commission to execute the responsibilities assigned to us by the Administration and the 

Congress. 

f 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Disability Assistance and Memorial Affairs by the 

Hon. Max Cleland, Secretary, American Battle Monuments Commission 

Since 1923, our purpose has not changed—to commemorate the service and 

achievements of America’s armed forces. 2014 has been a significant commemorative 

year: the 70th Anniversary of the D–Day landings at Normandy; the 70th anniversary of Operation Market Garden at Netherlands; and the 70th anniversary of Operation Dragoon at Rhone. Although the 100th anniversary of the United States entry 

into the Great War will not begin until April 2017, the Commission’s eight World 

War I cemeteries in Europe will receive increased attention as visitors travel to 

those battlefields. 

Visitor centers at our Cambridge and Sicily-Rome cemeteries were dedicated on 

Memorial Day, and the renovated visitor center at the Pointe du Hoc Ranger Monument was dedicated in June. Visitor center renovation projects at two World War 

I cemeteries—Meuse-Argonne in France and Flanders Field in Belgium—are in design, and three additional visitor center projects are in various stages of development: at our Honolulu Memorial; at Manila; and at the World War I ChateauThierry Monument in France. We also have two new monuments in development: 

at Midway Island and for New Zealand’s national memorial park. Both projects are 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLER
59 

part of an initiative to honor significant achievements of U.S. forces that have not 

previously been commemorated by the Commission. 

Closer to home, we partnered with the National Park Service to renovate and upgrade kiosks and educational content at the World War II and Korean War memorials on the National Mall, and we are strengthening our collaboration with Arlington National Cemetery, defining opportunities to share best practices and training. 

Likewise, we continue our long-standing relationship with the National Cemetery 

Administration through advisory committees and our shared interest in the Honolulu Memorial. 

Phase two of the Commission’s education program has begun with award of a contract to National History Day and the George Mason University Center for History 

and New Media, to create a World War II-focused education program developed by 

teachers. Products related to World War I, developed in partnership with the University of North Carolina and Virginia Tech as phase one of our education program, 

will be completed by the end of this year. 

The Commission received a new mission responsibility in fiscal year 2014 when 

Clark Veterans Cemetery in the Philippines became ABMC’s 25th cemetery. We are 

awaiting the completion of an engineering assessment of the physical condition of 

the cemetery and expect initial results this month. We will carefully analyze those 

results to develop recommendations regarding appropriate next steps that will guide 

future restoration plans, long-term maintenance requirements, and budget requests 

beginning in the fiscal year 2017 budget cycle. 

ABMC’s core mission remains unchanged, but to appropriately honor our Nation’s 

fallen, it is essential that we tell the stories of these brave men and women. We 

are re-invigorating our strategic plan to set forth a path focused on better supporting this essential mission; we have codified a new set of guiding principles for 

this effort: We will tell their story; we will preserve our heritage assets; and we will 

develop our cultural and historical resources. We will continue our emphasis on 

maintaining the highest standard for our memorials and cemeteries, while providing 

a first class visitor education experience at each of our sites. 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLER
60 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 26 here 96138.026
61 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 27 here 96138.027
62 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 28 here 96138.028
63 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 29 here 96138.029
64 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 30 here 96138.030
65 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 31 here 96138.031
66 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 32 here 96138.032
67 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 33 here 96138.033
68 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 34 here 96138.034
69 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 35 here 96138.035
70 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 36 here 96138.036
71 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 37 here 96138.037
72 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 38 here 96138.038
73 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 39 here 96138.039
74 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 40 here 96138.040
75 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 41 here 96138.041
76 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 42 here 96138.042
77 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 43 here 96138.043
78 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 44 here 96138.044
79 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 45 here 96138.045
80 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 46 here 96138.046
81 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 47 here 96138.047
82 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 48 here 96138.048
83 

Æ 


VACREP0180 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 49 here 96138.049