Skip to main content

Full text of "Oversight of H.J. Res. 131, National Cemetery System, American Battle Monuments Commission, and Arlington National Cemetery : hearing before the Subcommittee on Housing and Memorial Affairs of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs, House of Representatives, One Hundred Third Congress, second session, May 24, 1994"

See other formats


':?n 




OVERSIGHT OF H.J. RES. 131, NATIONAL 
CEMETERY SYSTEM, AMERICAN BAT- 
TLE MONUMENTS COMMISSION, AND 
ARLINGTON NATIONAL CEMETERY 



Y 4. V 64/3: 103-49 



Oversight of H.J. Res. 131/ Kationa... 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON 
HOUSING AND MEMORIAL AFFAIRS 

OF THE 

COMMITTEE ON VETERANS' AFFAIRS 
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED THIRD CONGRESS 
SECOND SESSION 



MAY 24, 1994 



Printed for the use of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs 

Serial No. 103-49 




U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 
84-882CC WASHINGTON : 1994 

For sale by the U.S. Government Printing Office 
Superintendent of Document.s, Congressional Sales Office, Washington, DC 20402 
ISBN 0-16-046398-X 



■f^l 



\^ 



OVERSIGHT OF H.J. RES. 131, NATIONAL 
CEMETERY SYSTEM, AMERICAN BAT- 
TLE MONUMENTS COMMISSION, AND 
ARLINGTON NATIONAL CEMETERY 



Y 4. V 64/3: 103-49 



^ Oversight of H.J. Res. 131. Hationa... 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON 
HOUSING AND MEMORIAL AFFAIRS 

OF THE 

COMMITTEE ON VETERANS' AFFAIRS 
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED THIRD CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 



MAY 24, 1994 



Printed for the use of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs 

Serial No. 103-49 




U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 
84-882CC WASHINGTON : 1994 

For sale by the U.S. Govemmeni Printing Office 
Superintendent of Document,s. Congressional Sales Office, Washington, DC 20402 
ISBN 0-16-046398-X 



COMMITTEE ON VETERANS' AFFAIRS 



G.V. (SONNY) MONTGOMERY, Mississippi, Chairman 



DON EDWARDS, California 

DOUGLAS APPLEGATE, Ohio 

LANE EVANS, Illinois 

TIMOTHY J. PENNY, Minnesota 

J. ROY ROWLAND, Georgia 

JIM SLATTERY, Kansas 

JOSEPH P. KENNEDY, II, Massachusetts 

GEORGE E. SANGMEISTER, Illinois 

JILL L. LONG, Indiana 

CHET EDWARDS, Texas 

MAXINE WATERS, CaUfomia 

BOB CLEMENT, Tennessee 

BOB FILNER, California 

FRANK TEJEDA, Texas 

LUIS V. GUTIERREZ, lUinois 

SCOTTY BAESLER, Kentucky 

SANFORD BISHOP, Georgia 

JAMES E. CLYBURN, South Carolina 

MIKE KREIDLER, Washington 

CORRINE BROWN, Florida 



BOB STUMP, Arizona 
CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey 
DAN BURTON, Indiana 
MICHAEL BILIRAKIS, Florida 
THOMAS J. RIDGE, Pennsylvania 
FLOYD SPENCE, South CaroUna 
TIM HUTCHINSON, Arkansas 
TERRY EVERETT, Alabama 
STEVE BUYER, Indiana 
JACK QUINN, New York 
SPENCER BACHUS, Alabama 
JOHN LINDER, Georgia 
CLIFF STEARNS, Florida 
PETER T. KING, New York 



Mack Fleming, Staff Director and Chief Counsel 



SUBCOMMITTEE ON HOUSING AND MEMORIAL AFFAIRS 
GEORGE E. SANGMEISTER, Illinois, Chairman 



SANFORD BISHOP, Georgia 

MIKE KREIDLER, Washington 

G.V. (SONNY) MONTGOMERY, Mississippi 



DAN BURTON, Indiana 

FLOYD SPENCE, South Carolina 

STEVE BUYER, Indiana 



(11) 



CONTENTS 



Page 

OPENING STATEMENTS 

Chairman Sangmeister 1 

Hon. Dan Burton 6 

WITNESSES 

Bowen, Jerry W., Director, National Cemetery System, Department of Veter- 
ans Affairs accompanied bv Roger Rapp, Director, Field Operations; Doro- 
thy MacKay, Director, Budget and Planning; and Vincent Barile, Director, 

Operations Support 2 

Prepared statement of Mr. Bowen 45 

Brown, Jerry, Executive Director, National Concrete Burial Vault Association, 

Inc 36 

Prepared statement of Mr. Brown 93 

CuUinan, Dennis, National Legislative Service, Veterans of Foreign Wars 27 

Prepared statement of Mr. Cullinan 81 

Davis, Gen. Ray, USMC, (ret.). Chairman, Korean War Veterans Memorial 
Advisory Board accompanied by Robert L. Hansen, Executive Director, 

Advisory Board 32 

Prepared statement of General Davis 84 

Dola, Steven, Assistant Secretary, Management and Budget, Department of 

the Army accompanied by John Metzler, Superintendent 14 

Prepared statement of Mr. Dola 49 

Foltynewicz, Richard, public witness 40 

Prepared statement of Mr. Foltynewicz 100 

Goldfarb, Lee, President, National Pearl Harbor Survivors Association 39 

Prepared statement of Mr. Goldfarb 98 

Grandison, Terry, Associate Legislative Director, Paralyzed Veterans of Amer- 
ica 23 

Prepared statement of Mr. Grandison 65 

Rhea, Larry D., Deputy Director of Legislative Affairs, Non Commissioned 

Officers Association 21 

Prepared statement of Mr. Rhea 59 

Ryan, Col. William E., Jr., Director of Operations and Finance, American 

Battle Monuments Commission accompanied by Col. Frederick C. Badger ... 18 

Prepared statement of Colonel Ryan 55 

Surratt, Rick, Associate, National Legislative Director, Disabled American 

Veterans 26 

Prepared statement of Mr. Surratt 75 

Vitikacs, John R., Assistant Director, National Veterans Affairs and Rehabili- 
tation Commission, The American Legion 24 

Prepared statement of Mr. Vitikacs 71 

MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD 

Statement: 

Michael P. Cline, Master Sergenat (ret.). Executive Director, The Enlisted 

Association of the National Guard of the United States 107 

Written committee questions and their responses: 

Congressman Burton to Department of Veterans Affairs Ill 

(III) 



OVERSIGHT OF H.J. RES. 131, NATIONAL CEM- 
ETERY SYSTEM, AMERICAN BATTLE MONU- 
MENTS COMMISSION, AND ARLINGTON NA- 
TIONAL CEMETERY 



TUESDAY, MAY 24, 1994 

House of Representatives, 
Subcommittee on Housing and Memorial Affairs, 

Committee on Veterans' Affairs, 

Washington, DC. 
The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 9:30 a.m., in room 
334, Cannon House Office Building, Hon. George E. Sangmeister 
(chairman of the subcommittee) presiding. 
Present: Representatives Sangmeister, Kreidler, and Burton. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN SANGMEISTER 

Mr. Sangmeister. I will call the subcommittee to order. I am 
pleased to welcome all of our witnesses to discuss the programs 
and operation of the VA's National Cemetery System, the Arlington 
National Cemetery and the American Battle Monuments Commis- 
sion. 

I am particularly pleased to acknowledge the presence of Mr. 
Richard Foltynewicz, who flew in from my district to share his 
views on H.J. Res. 131, my bill to designate December 7th of each 
year as national Pearl Harbor Remembrance Day. Dick has already 
felt his presence known as I have seen him working the crowd out 
here. Dick, welcome. 

The VA's National Cemetery System consists of 114 national 
cemeteries, 59 of which are open to first family interments, while 
55 are closed except to eligible family members of those already 
buried. 

Over the next decade we must focus our attention on identifying 
additional gravesites in our national cemeteries to meet the needs 
of an aging veteran population. Not only must we ensure that the 
honor of burial in our national shrines is available to our veterans, 
but we must strive to ensure that all graves are perpetually main- 
tained at the highest standards possible. 

In two separate reports to the Congress, as required by Public 
Law 99-576, the VA identified 10 areas of the country most in need 
of a national cemetery. While only one of the 10, San Joaquin Val- 
ley National Cemetery in California, has opened, I look forward to 
receiving updates on the status of the remaining sites. 

In addition to hearing fi-om officials of Arlington National Ceme- 
tery and the American Battle Monuments Commission, I would ap- 

(1) 



predate it if the witnesses would comment on my bill, H.J. Res. 
131. I know it does not fall within this subcommittee's jurisdiction. 
However, I believe that it is of importance to all veterans to com- 
memorate the bombing of Pearl Harbor. 

That attack, killing more than 2,000 citizens of the United States 
and wounding another 1,000 marked the entry of the United States 
into World War H. Between the period of December 7, 1941, and 
December 31, 1946, over 16 million Americans served in the Armed 
Forces of the United States. Of that number, 671,000 were wound- 
ed in action, 292,000 were killed in action, and an additional 
114,000 died of nonbattle causes for a total of 406,000 Americans 
making the ultimate sacrifice in defense of freedom around the 
world. I believe that H.J. Res. 131 will promote a greater under- 
standing and appreciation of this sacrifice. 

There are 231 cosponsors as of this date in the House indicating 
strong support. Although the House Post Office and Civil Service 
Committee, which has jurisdiction over this bill, does not plan to 
move it out of committee because of a rule which prohibits perma- 
nently establishing commemorative days, I plan to file a discharge 
petition later this week so that we may bring this resolution to the 
Floor for a vote, £ind I am going to ask all the veterans' organiza- 
tions to help support that with your various Members of Congress 
so that we can successfully discharge the committee and bring this 
before the Floor. 

Mr. Burton is not here yet. Mr. Kreidler, do you have any open- 
ing statement you would like to make? 

Mr. Kreidler. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, just to commend you 
for holding this hearing and looking very much forward to hearing 
fi-om the witnesses here today. This is an issue that has a growing 
importance to my State because of us being one of the designated 
areas where a new cemetery is going to be built. 

Mr. Sangmeister. That is right, it is, and we are planning on 
holding a hearing out there in July, and we will be setting on the 
date shortly. We will commence with the witnesses. 

The first panel will be Jerry Bowen, Director of the National 
Cemetery System. He will be accompanied by Mr. Roger Rapp, the 
Director of Field Operations, Ms. Dorothy MacKay, Director of 
Budget and Planning, and Mr. Vincent Barile, Director of Oper- 
ations Support. Welcome to all of you. 

Jerry, it is always good to see you. We have your written testi- 
mony. You may proceed as you see fit. 

STATEMENTS OF JERRY W. BOWEN, DmECTOR, NATIONAL 
CEMETERY SYSTEM, DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS 
ACCOMPANIED BY ROGER RAPP, DIRECTOR, FIELD OPER- 
ATIONS; DOROTHY MACKAY, DIRECTOR, BUDGET AND PLAN- 
NING; AND VINCENT BARILE, DIRECTOR, OPERATIONS 
SUPPORT 

Mr. BowEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Distinguished members 
of the subcommittee, I welcome the opportunity to appear here 
today to address the status of the National Cemetery System. Your 
continued support and interest in our program is greatly appre- 
ciated. 



Mr. Chairman, it is with deep personal regret that I note your 
departure from Congress after this current session. Your leadership 
has been outstanding, your concern for our Nation's veterans has 
been sincere, and your accomplishments have been truly signifi- 
cant. We will sorely miss your leadership. 

On behalf of the men and women of the National Cemetery Sys- 
tem, I wish you continued success in your future endeavors. 

Mr. Sangmeister. Well, thank you very much. It has been a mu- 
tual relationship. All I can say at this point is let's look forward 
to the 7 months left to get a lot of things done. Go ahead. 

Mr. BOWEN. The National Cemetery System is one of VA's three 
operating agencies providing direct services and benefits to the Na- 
tion's almost 27 million veterans and their families. Burial in one 
of our national shrines is the final tribute of a grateful Nation hon- 
oring the memory and sacrifice of those who have served in our 
Armed Forces. 

Last year we provided burial for 67,329 veterans and eligible 
family members. We are projecting 70,200 interments in fiscal year 
1994. This is a 4.2 percent increase over last year. 

In January of 1994 we reached a significant milestone. We now 
maintain over two million gravesites within our system of 114 na- 
tional cemeteries. In fiscal year 1994 we project that we will pro- 
vide 313,000 headstones and 294,000 Presidential Memorial Cer- 
tificates. 

Through our services, NCS reaches out and touches the lives of 
hundreds of thousands of American veterans and their families 
each year. In recognition of the fact that demand for burial in a na- 
tional cemetery will continue to increase until well into the next 
century, we have developed a three-pronged strategy to meet this 
challenge. 

First, establishing new national cemeteries when feasible; sec- 
ond, acquiring additional land to extend the service life of existing 
cemeteries; and, third, encouraging States to participate in the 
State Cemetery Grants Program. 

Now, concerning new cemeteries. As you previously mentioned, 
the 1987 Report to Congress identified 10 areas of the country in 
greatest need of a new national cemetery. You also said that since 
1987, only one new national cemetery has been constructed — the 
San Joaquin Valley National Cemetery in Northern California, 
which was opened in June of 1992. 

We are pleased to report, however, that funding has been ap- 
proved for land acquisition and master planning at five other sites: 
Albany, Chicago, Cleveland, Dallas, and Seattle. Construction 
funds for the Seattle cemetery are contained in the fiscal year 1995 
budget request. Given current budgetary realities, it is no longer 
considered viable to plan for additional construction other than 
those five sites until after the year 2000. 

The second prong of our strategy involves acquiring adjacent 
land so that existing national cemeteries can remain open. I am ex- 
tremely pleased with our progress this year. We have completed 
purchase of 16 acres of land adjacent to Fort Gibson National Cem- 
etery in Oklahoma and accepted a 10-acre donation of land at Fort 
Scott National Cemetery in Kansas. These acquisitions will permit 
both cemeteries to continue operations beyond the year 2030. 



In Port Hudson, Louisiana, we have been negotiating with the 
Georgia-Pacific Corporation to acquire 12 acres of land adjacent to 
the Port Hudson National Cemetery, which was closed in 1992. 

Our third approach is to utilize the State Cemetery Grants Pro- 
gram to complement our national system. This program has been 
very successful to date; however, interest has declined in recent 
months. Most state officials appear to have taken a wait-and-see 
attitude concerning passage of legislation changing the Federal/ 
State share from 50/50 to 65/35 funding as provided for in House 
Resolution 949. Recent requests from States have involved im- 
provements to existing cemeteries rather than applications for new 
State cemeteries. 

I am pleased to bring to your attention a recently completed NCS 
initiative to improve customer service, the reintroduction of the up- 
right granite headstone option. Initially, the new granite 
headstones will only be available in private or state veterans ceme- 
teries. We will then assess their acceptability by the veteran com- 
munity before deciding their suitability for use in our national 
cemeteries. 

In closing, the National Cemetery System continues to seek ways 
to meet the increasing workload demand and to satisfy the high ex- 
pectations of the public we serve. Our fiscal year 1995 budget re- 
quest contains an additional 25 FTEE to perform interment and 
maintenance functions within our national cemeteries. In addition, 
we have initiated a streamlining effort which has resulted in a re- 
duction of seven FTEE in our Central Office. These FTEE will be 
rechanneled to our field facilities beginning 1 October. 

I plan to continue these efforts to decentralize functions and to 
streamline our organization when and wherever possible. I appre- 
ciate the opportunity to provide this update concerning the Na- 
tional Cemetery System, and I welcome your questions at this 
time. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Bowen appears on p. 45.] 

Mr. Sangmeister. Well, thank you, Jerry. I don't think you 
would anticipate the first question that I am going to ask, but obvi- 
ously fi*om a parochial standpoint, Chicago is one of the areas that 
we are looking at for a new national cemetery. When can we expect 
a decision to be made by the Secretary? 

Mr. Bowen. As you are aware, Mr. Chairman, Chicago was one 
of those 10 areas that were identified in the 1987 Report to Con- 
gress and was revalidated in 1994. Last week we completed the 
final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement on the HofF 
Woods site on the Joliet Army Arsenal. It was signed by the Sec- 
retary last week, and has gone back to the contractor, the engi- 
neers that did the environmental impact study, for publication in 
the Federal Register, 

This information should be published next week on the 3rd of 
June. We then have a mandatory 30-day waiting period, that would 
then conclude approximately on the 5th of July. Within 2 weeks of 
that date, I will recommend the site to the Secretary and we expect 
him to sign the record of decision in mid-July of this year. 

Mr. Sangmeister. Okay. Well, it is nice you are getting down to 
a final date of when that is going to be done. If Joliet, and, of 
course, it is an if at this point, should become the site, does the VA 



anticipate obtaining the land at no cost from the Department of the 
Army based on the provisions of P.L. 100-180? 

Mr. BOWEN. Yes, sir. We have a written opinion from VA's Gen- 
eral Counsel, which states the more reasonable interpretation of 
Section 2337 of the law that you mentioned, that the land transfer 
is to be consummated without compensation. I will recommend that 
the VA assert such a position in future discussions with the Army. 

Mr. Sangmeister. Well, that is good to hear. I need to talk to 
you. I have been thinking about different things that we need to 
do with the Joliet arsenal and I am thinking about some legislation 
which will affect the whole 23,500 acres. I want to make sure that 
the legislation is drafted properly if, in fact, Joliet is selected as a 
site — that we are in sync as far as getting that property at no cost 
to you. 

Mr. BowEN. At your convenience, sir. 

Mr. Sangmeister. All right. H.R. 949, which is sitting over in 
the Senate, would enhance the State Cemetery Grant Program by 
paying the $150 plot allowance to States for burying any veteran 
eligible for burial in a national cemetery, including peacetime vet- 
erans, and would increase the VA's proportion of the matching 
grant program from 50/50 to 65/35. 

We are currently in negotiation with the Senate, and I know that 
the VA is opposed to these two provisions. Do you have any per- 
sonal opinion as to which proposal would you consider to be the 
most beneficial provision of H.R. 949? 

Mr. BowEN. It would be difficult to speak for the States as a 

froup. I think that certain provisions of H.R. 949, for example, the 
150 plot allowance for all veterans would greatly assist those 
States that already have established State cemeteries because this 
would reduce their operating costs. 

The plot allowances would be used to defray the operating cost 
of the cemeteries because matching funds are only for the construc- 
tion, expansion, or improvement of cemeteries. So plot allowances 
are one of the ways that they receive their operating capital. 

For example, Maryland has five State cemeteries, Tennessee has 
three. North Carolina has two. For these States the $150 plot al- 
lowances would help them more. But for those States that are con- 
templating constructing new State cemeteries, the increase from a 
50/50 to a 65/35 ratio would be more helpful initially. In conjunc- 
tion with that idea, in March of this year we sent a letter to each 
of the Governors advising them of the availability of Federal funds. 
We didn't mention any pending legislation or that the share may 
be increased, but just wanted to make sure that they all knew 
about the opportunity to establish or expand State veterans' ceme- 
teries. 

One of the interesting letters that we received back was from 
Alabama. In that letter, the Governor mentioned that should Con- 
gress pass legislation to provide States with more financial support 
in the creation and operation of the State Cemetery Program, he 
was confident that Alabama would be most interested in pursuing 
such an effort. So we do have the interest out there, but as I men- 
tioned in my statement, there seems to be a wait-and-see attitude 
right now. 



Mr, Sangmeister. So actually H.R. 949 is in some respects creat- 
ing a problem as we just sit on it here because the anticipation it 
may pass, it may not, is affecting the States' view of this whole 
thing? 

Mr. BOWEN. That appears to be the case, yes, sir. 

Mr. Sangmeister. Okay. I have more questions here, but at this 
point does the gentleman from Washington have anything in par- 
ticular he would like to explore with the director? 

Mr. Kreidler. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have a rather spe- 
cific question that Mr. Bowen probably can anticipate, too. First, 
though, I would like to express my appreciation personally and cer- 
tainly for the veterans and their families in the State of Washing- 
ton for your work on the Seattle/Tahoma National Cemetery. As 
you pointed out, in the President's fiscal year 1995 Budget Request 
there is a request for the construction of the Seattle cemetery 
which is certainly very great news for our State. I need to and do 
most willingly express my appreciation and gratitude to Secretary 
Brown and to the President for their support in seeing that this is 
included in this fiscal year budget request. 

I am wondering, Mr. Bowen, if you could respond to giving me 
any update as to where we are at right now relative to the Tahoma 
National Cemetery. Is it still on schedule for completion in 1996 as 
originally planned or not? 

Mr. Bowen. Right now, sir, we are anticipating an opening date 
of Veterans Day 1997. That gives us a little bit of wiggle room, but 
we hope that would be the latest date. As we proceed, it appears 
that that date will become a reality. We are moving forward with 
the award of the contract for design. These steps take time, but ev- 
erything is on track. 

We are waiting for the approval of our 1995 budget request, 
which includes construction dollars for Seattle. 

Mr. Kreidler. Well, there certainly are certain provisions of that 
budget request that I am going to be most interested in supporting, 
along with many other things. Thank you very much, Mr. Bowen. 

Mr. Bowen. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Sangmeister. The Ranking Minority Member of the Sub- 
committee has arrived, Mr. Burton, the gentleman fi'om Indiana. 

Mr. Burton. 

Mr. Burton. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, I have 
a statement I would like to submit for the record, and I congratu- 
late you for holding this hearing. I think it is very timely. 

Mr. Sangmeister. Okay, without objection, we will so do. 

[The prepared statement of Congressman Burton follows:] 

Prepared statement of Hon. Dan Burton 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I too, beUeve that we should permanently designate 
December 7th of each year as "National Pearl Harbor Remembrance Day." So, I 
would like to commend you for introducing House Joint Resolution 131, and hope- 
fully, it will come to the House Floor for a vote before this session of Congress ends. 

I also want to commend you for calling this hearing to discuss the state of the 
VA's National Cemetery System. The 1994 VA Benefit Handbook states that "burial 
benefits in a VA national cemetery include the gravesite, opening and closing of the 
grave, and perpetual care." In my opinion, providing a final resting place for veter- 
ans who have served in defense of this country should be a simple way to dem- 
onstrate our government's commitment to veterans. 



I am very interested to learn if we are meeting this commitment. Unlike past 
years, I have not heard any horror stories of unsightly cemeteries. At the same time, 
testimony provided by the representatives of the veterans' service organizations, 
who are here today, causes me some concern. In testimony provided by The Amer- 
ican Legion, concern was expressed about the growing equipment backlog, which is 
projected to total $6.7 million by end of this year and $7.8 million by the end of 
fiscal year 1995. In testimony provided by the Paralyzed Veterans of America, con- 
cern was expressed about the aging infrastructure in our cemeteries, and it was rec- 
ommended that $2 million be spent on repair projects. These are not good signs. 

The solutions to the National Cemtery System's problems are easy. If some grass 
is brown, a VA cemetery should water it. If some dirt needs seeding, then a VA cem- 
etery should seed it. If the VA lacks the money to maintain a cemetery, then it 
should ask for more. If the VA won't ask for the money necessary to provide a prop- 
er burial and a dignified resting place for our Nation's war dead, then our Sub- 
committee and the Appropriations Committee must find some way to provide it. 

Mr. Chairman, once again, thank you for calling this hearing, and I am looking 
forward to hearing the testimony of our witnesses. 

Mr. Sangmeister. This is kind of a broad question to you admit- 
tedly, but some of the veterans groups have testified that the VA 
must do more to expedite the processes involved in site selection, 
environmental assessments and construction to establish new 
cemeteries. What recommendations do you have that would 
streamline and shorten the number of years to build new national 
cemeteries if you have any ideas along that line? 

Mr. BOWEN. Well, my primary effort right now has been to get 
the process moving in the same fashion as we have done in Seattle 
and we hope to do in Chicago. There is an initiative that we have 
undertaken with the Seattle Cemetery, called design build. 

There are about six or seven processes that we go through for 
new cemetery construction. We do the Environmental Impact 
Statement, then the master plan to get a concept of what the ceme- 
tery is going to look like, and then the design phase which actually 
outlines the various details of the administration building and 
other cemetery facilities. Then we develop the construction docu- 
ments, and from that actually award the construction contract. 

What we are planning to do with Seattle is combine the design 
and the build phase and which will compress that process by about 
8 to 10 months. That is a comcept that we are testing in the Na- 
tional Cemetery System and which has been utilized by VHA in 
their construction of hospitals. By doing this, we can combine at 
least two steps in this process and eliminate almost a year of plan- 
ning time. 

Mr. Sangmeister. I think you are to be commended for that. I 
think that is exactly what the various veterans' organizations are 
talking about. Like most things that happen through here, it seems 
like a long, prolonged area to work through and we need the ceme- 
teries and we need to progress. 

You touched on this question, but I would like to explore it a lit- 
tle bit more, and that is extending the life of currently open na- 
tional cemeteries. With 55 cemeteries closed and more than 10 
scheduled to close before the year 2000, how has the VA deter- 
mined its plans to acquire additional land for gravesite expansion 
at existing national cemeteries? I believe you mentioned in your di- 
rect testimony. Fort Gibson, was it, where you bought additional 
land? 

Mr. Bowen. That is correct. 

Mr. Sangmeister. Was there one other? 



8 

Mr. BOWEN. We purchased the land at Fort Gibson National 
Cemetery in Oklahoma, a 16-acre tract from a private Igindowner, 
with appropriated funds. At Fort Scott National Cemetery in Fort 
Scott, ife, several veterans organizations there combined to have a 
fund-raising project to purchase 10 acres of land, and then donated 
it to VA to keep that cemetery open. 

This is an interesting item to note here. I have focused my efforts 
on keeping those cemeteries open that are scheduled to close before 
the year 2000. If we did nothing, 12 cemeteries would have to close 
between 1990 and 2000. With the efforts we have now, we are still 
going to have to close seven; there just isn't any way that those 
cemeteries can be expanded. This is primarily true for those Civil 
War era cemeteries that are now surroiuided by cities. But here's 
what happened at Fort Scott. That cemetery was not scheduled to 
close until the year 2012, so we did not have it on our priority list 
to acquire additional land. But the veterans didn't want to wait, so 
they purchased the land and then donated it to us although we 
won't start burying there until after the year 2012. 

Mr. Sangmeister. For all the national cemeteries there is always 
a survey of the surrounding land to find out if there is any avail- 
able that may be used? You have an ongoing program for that? 

Mr. BowEN. That is correct. And even in one case I mentioned 
Port Hudson, LA earlier. That cemetery actually closed in 1992. 
Now, with negotiation with Georgia-Pacific we hope to acquire al- 
most 12 acres, and then reopen that cemetery. So we are not only 
keeping the ones open if we can, but we will go back and reopen 
those where possible; however, I don't know of any other situation 
where we will be able to do that. 

Mr. Sangmeister. The 1995 fiscal year budget for the general 
operation of the National Cemetery System is $72.6 million. Al- 
though this reflects a $2.2 million increase over 1994, how does the 
NCS plan to prevent a decline in services to veterans and in the 
physical appeareuice of our cemeteries as workloads continue to in- 
crease based on an aging veteran population? And then to supple- 
ment that question a little bit further, would burials be delayed as 
cemeteries reduce the number of interments performed on a daily 
basis, and would lawn and maintenance be curtailed, grass cut 
once every seven versus 5 days, one versus two applications of fer- 
tilizer? In other words, where is the economy going to come under 
the money you have got to work with? 

Mr. BowEN. Yes, sir. There are two ways that we are going to 
increase the number of FTEE that are actually working in the 
cemeteries. One of those was through our budget request for 1995 
with 25 additional FTEE. 

Now, those will all go to the cemeteries. None of those will go to 
the Central Office. None of those will go to our three area offices. 
One of the interesting things here, we can take that 25 FTEE and 
hire temporaries in the summer and we in effect get 50 people. 

Now, the other way that we put more people working in the 
cemeteries is through the streamlining efforts that I mentioned in 
the Central Office. This will move an additional seven spaces out 
to the field. 

We are also looking at the varieties of grass that we use, particu- 
larly the improved varieties that will not require mowing as fre- 



quently. We can also apply chemicals in some areas to retard the 
growth of grass. These are some of the action that we are under- 
taking to economize. 

I think that we can continue to maintain the high level of main- 
tenance that the public expects, and we are certainly not going to 
deny burial services. We provide service on demsind. When the cor- 
tege pulls up to the gates of a national cemetery, we provide the 
service, and we don't anticipate that we are going to make any 
changes to that. 

Mr. Sangmeister. Not that I have visited a lot of our veterans 
national cemeteries, but the directors with whom I have met, 
raised questions about their equipment. The equipment is getting 
older and older, and they are just patching and trying to make do. 
The fiscal year 1995 budget states that the equipment backlog will 
be reduced to $6.7 million at the end of fiscal year 1994, and that 
an additional $2.7 million is scheduled for replacement in fiscal 
year 1995. 

If this is the case, and considering the current budget climate, 
it appears that increases will continue to mount in the area of 
equipment backlog. I presume this is a concern of yours. I appeared 
before the Appropriations Committee and asked for, I believe, $8 
million, the fiill amount needed to bring the equipment backlog up 
to date. I would like to think I got a little bit of their ear down 
there, but you never know when shove comes to push because it 
is easy to say they can get by another year on the equipment. What 
have you got to say about this equipment backlog? 

Mr. BOWEN. I appreciate your efforts on our behalf in this area. 
This is a real problem. Our equipment backlog is projected to go 
up. We had worked our backlog down to $5.0 million at the end of 
fiscal year 1993. At the end of 1994, we project that will go up to 
$6.7 million. That is going to be an increase in our backlog of $1.7 
million. 

At the end of 1995, even though we are putting effort in that 
area, our backlog will continue to increase to $7.8 million, and that 
will be an increase of $1.1 million. The good news is that even 
though the backlog is increasing, it is increasing at a decreasing 
rate. You mentioned your visits to the cemeteries. I have been on 
board exactly one year this week, and during that time I have vis- 
ited 36 of our 114 national cemeteries, and equipment backlog is 
one of the questions that I always ask the directors. 

For fiscal year 1995, we made the decision that of the $2.2 mil- 
lion increase that we are requesting, the bulk of that will go to pay 
for our additional 25 FTEE. Because when I talked to the cemetery 
directors and I presented them with that choice, do you need newer 
equipment or do you need more people, not unanimously, but most 
of the directors told me to give them the people. Good people can 
make the equipment last longer, so that is a conscious effort on my 
part to try to stretch the service life of our equipment by providing 
them with more people in the field. 

Mr. Sangmeister. Well, it is obviously an important area that 
you are addressing and it is needed because we certainly want to 
keep these cemeteries looking the way they should. All of our veter- 
ans' organizations and people in general are very impressed when 
they go to a national cemetery. To go there to see one falling into 



10 

disrepair because of lack of equipment would not be a good thing 
for us. 

Does the gentleman from Indiana have any questions? 

Mr. Burton. I do, Mr. Chairman. Thank you very much. First 
of all, I want to congratulate the chairman on going to the Appro- 
priations Committee and fighting to get adequate funding for the 
equipment that is necessary to maintain these cemeteries. We have 
made a commitment to, I believe, the people who have served in 
our military to provide them an adequate final resting place. If we 
don't have the equipment and if they don't take care of the ceme- 
teries and they don't look right, then I think there is a real prob- 
lem. We ought to do everything we can on this committee and the 
Appropriations Committee to make sure there is adequate funds to 
t^e care of those who served in the Armed Services. So, Mr. 
Bowen, I hope that if you and your colleagues find in the future 
that there is going to be a shortfall, you will take the initiative and 
contact the chairman or myself or somebody on the committee and 
let us know so that we can be ahead of the curve and try to deal 
with it. 

We were just talking about the construction of columbaria, and 
we were discussing whether or not it would be cost-effective in the 
long term to have more of those facilities built because of the budg- 
etary constraints we are facing. If there are some real economies 
to be made, could you illuminate that issue a little bit, and tell us 
if you have any projections long term what kind of impact that 
would have on the cemetery system. 

Mr. BowEN. Yes, I would like to ask Mr. Roger Rapp, who is Di- 
rector of our Field Operations, to answer that question. That is one 
of the things when I first came on board that I wanted to look into. 
I think there are some opportunities in that area, but there are 
also some problems and some challenges that I was not aware of. 
Mr. Rapp has been working with this particular problem for quite 
some time, so I would ask him to respond. 

Mr. Rapp. Generally, we try to include columbarium in our de- 
sign of new cemeteries. Our hope when we design the Seattle ceme- 
tery would be to include a columbarium. By using the major con- 
struction funding, we have, I believe, the right amount of money 
available to build columbaria. In our existing cemeteries where we 
have land, in-ground cremation is probably a better use of our dol- 
lars than trying to construct a columbarium at an older cemetery. 
The cost of a columbarium is quite expensive. It is hard to fund 
and get a 5deld that is equal to what the cost of land might be at 
a cemetery that has adequate acreage. 

At some of our closed cemeteries in California we have been of- 
fering cremation options even though we have no room for casketed 
burials, and we have used in-ground cremations to a point where, 
at one site. Fort Rosecrans in San Diego, we have exhausted all the 
in-ground space available. We have constructed columbaria there. 

We have constructed columbaria in two phases using our minor 
construction dollars, and the cost per niche, when we prepare the 
site and comply with some other issues, is $200 to $250, even using 
economy of scale. We have built approximately 1,200 niches for 
around $400,000 or $500,000, and we filled that columbarium up 
in one year. So then we built another one that is in the several mil- 



11 

lion dollars range. We are getting that ready, which will have a few 
thousand niches available. 

We are told there are about a thousand cremations ready to fill 
up that columbarium. We are finding that in some cases we can't 
build them quickly enough and large enough to accommodate the 
demand, yet the costs are such that at $200 to $300 a niche, that 
is a niche per family, we have to ask ourselves how many dollars 
can we spend just building columbaria. The best answer would be, 
it is a selective option that makes sense at places where we have 
the funding in our major construction program where we are mas- 
ter planning and building brand new cemeteries. 

At existing cemeteries where we have the space, in ground seems 
to be the way to go in terms of cost, and in terms of choice. We 
have found that when we have had columbaria and in-ground space 
available, generally people choose the in-ground option. If we have 
only columbaria available, then that is their choice. 

Mr. Burton. You have alluded to the comparative cost. Can you 
give us a comparison or does it vary greatly by area? 

Mr. Rapp. Per columbarium? 

Mr. Burton. You said that the per columbarium cost was ap- 
proximately $250. What is the expense for interment in the 
ground? 

Mr. Rapp. Around $30 to $40. 

Mr. Burton. Is that all? 

Mr. Rapp. In terms of the space. That would be in places where 
we actually have the land available and we can fit cremations in 
the ground in a much more convenient manner because of the 
smaller gravesite size. 

Mr. Burton. So the initial cost is about seven or eight times 
higher? 

Mr. Rapp. Yes. 

Mr. Burton. How about the long-term maintenance costs? You 
have to cut the grass and maintain the grounds and everything. I 
just wondered 

Mr. Rapp. Well, there are some folks who believe that the long- 
term maintenance costs of the columbarium are much cheaper, in 
that the structure itself may not require maintenance for quite a 
while. Generally, for the cremation areas in ground, the mainte- 
nance would be a little bit more, but not as much as a gravesite 
with a casket in it. Once the cremains are placed in the ground we 
don't have the same maintenance challenges that we do in casketed 
sites in terms of sinking graves and refilling graves. 

Mr. Burton. One more question, Mr. Chairman. Over a long pe- 
riod of time, have you done any projections over, say, a 10 or 15 
or 20-year period as far as maintenance cost comparisons? 

Mr. Rapp. Not 

Mr. Burton. We are looking at long-term costs now and long- 
term budget problems. Maybe you could provide some cost compari- 
son figures for the record that show the maintenance costs, over 
the next 12 to 20 years, of a columbarium proposal as compared 
to a conventional cemetery. Those comperative figures would be 
helpful in giving us an idea of what the long-term costs were going 
to be. 



12 

Mr. Rapp. We will be willing to provide that information, to take 
a look at it. I just want to emphasize one part of my answer. The 
dollars that we use to build columbaria in existing cemeteries come 
out of our minor construction program. Those are the same dollars 
that we use to buy land to keep cemeteries open, and that we use 
to develop land at places like the examples that Mr. Bowen has 
given at Fort Scott, Fort Gibson, Fort Sam Houston — places where 
we are expanding existing cemeteries. We use the same minor con- 
struction dollars to develop casketed gravesites, so much like the 
equipment dilemma, we have the same dilemma on using our 
scarce resources most effectively. 

We are trying to balance that and use columbaria at selected 
sites. 

[The information follows:] 

LONG TERM MAINTENANCE COSTS 

COLUMBARIA TO IN-GROUND BURIAL OF CREMAINS 

The National Cemetery System (NCS) has carefully reviewed the issue of 
columbaria construction for the interment of cremated remains in national ceme- 
teries. The focus to date has been to compare the initial cost to construct columbaria 
to that of the cost to provide in-ground sites for cremains. Columbaria units must 
be adapted to existing terrain features at individual sites (i.e. sloping hillside; need 
for a retaining wall, etc.) which results in a considerable increase in the cost per 
niche. 

Columbaria niches generally cost between $300-$400 per niche, once the project 
is scoped. This cost is contrasted with the cost for burial of cremated remains in 
in-ground cremain sites. The estimated cost to develop land is between $55,000 and 
$75,000 per acre, including roads, curbs, irrigation, landscaping, and site grading. 
Approximately 2000 plots, measuring 3' x 3', could be developed for the burial of 
in-ground cremains at a cost of $30 to $40 per plot. There is a distinct disparity 
between the initial cost of one niche and one cremain site. 

NCS has conducted no formal studies on the long-term costs associated with 
columbaria versus in-ground burial of cremated remains. We are, however, in the 
process of developing unit costs associated with our workloads, such as cost per 
casketed interment, cost per cremain interment, cost per gravesite maintained, and 
other relevant indicators. These will be developed over the next several years as we 
are challenged to comply with the Government Performance and Results Act. 

Currently, we do have considerable experience in both types of burials and have 
reviewed and analyzed their associated costs and benefits. As with any structure, 
columbaria units require upkeep. Exposure to the elements necessitates periodic 
washing of the unit to clean off accumulated dust, dirt, and bird droppings; repair 
of cracks; caulking of seams; and maintenance of the landscaping surrounding the 
columbaria. In-ground cremain sites require trimming and mowing; however, the 
same maintenance challenges that exist with casketed sites, such as sinking and re- 
filling of graves, do not exist. 

The real issue here is how to best utilize available NCS resources. Since both de- 
velopment of in-ground sites and construction of columbaria are funded through the 
Minor Construction Appropriation, it becomes more an issue of available funds. The 
initial high cost to construct columbaria has led NCS to be prudent and selective 
in choosing the cemeteries that would benefit most from this option. As NCS be- 
comes more experienced with the use and placement of columbaria, the issue will 
continue to be reviewed and analyzed for its application within the system. 

Mr. Burton. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Sangmeister. Do we have any further questions from the 
gentleman from Washington? 

Mr. Kreidler. I would be curious in just following up if you 
had — I would be interested in a written response, too, to Mr. Bur- 
ton's question, but also curious as to whether you have at some 
point kind of penciled it out as to what the long-term costs are over 



13 

a number of years, maintenance and operation of a cemetery as op- 
posed to a columbarium? 

Is there any rule of thumb that you have right now that you can 
say that over 20 or 30 years what the difference is in cost, con- 
struction up front as opposed to construction plus maintenance and 
so forth? 

Mr. Rapp. If we have a brand new cemetery like the one we will 
be building in Seattle, developing a gravesite is more reasonable. 
We can provide the exact figures and provide a paper to you. It is 
much cheaper to develop a gravesite than it is a columbarium 
niche, even though gravesites are on land that we have bought. 
The project to develop 90,000 gravesites, for example, at Calverton 
National Cemetery was around $5 million or $6 million; to develop 
a columbarium of a thousand niches would be close to $3 million. 
So there is an example of how you get a lot more gravesites in the 
ground developing turf than structuring a marble-type mausoleum. 

Mr. Kreidler. How about the salaries and operating expenses 
over a very extended period of time, what the differences would be 
if you calculated that into the equation. I am assuming the col- 
umbarium is much lower intensive maintenance than with all of 
the grass and turf and so forth for a cemetery. 

Mr. Rapp. That is true. While the interest in cremation as an op- 
tion has increased, by and large the majority choice is still for 
casketed burials, and that is where our most ideal opportunity is 
with a brand new cemetery. Let's build a cemetery that has the 
funding to allow us to construct the appropriate ratio of casketed 
gravesites, in-ground cremation, and columbaria. In regard to the 
initial question, columbaria make sense at our brand new ceme- 
teries. 

To go back into a confined existing cemetery that has been devel- 
oped and then try to, in addition to the maintenance that we are 
going to have to do there, forever build another columbarium out 
of a funding pot that is not as large as we would like ti to be, that 
is where the tough choices are and that is where, frankly, we have 
had to decide not to do it. 

Mr. Kreidler. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Sangmeister. Thank you. Director. We appreciate your 
being here this morning and we have all, as usual, learned some- 
thing. As I said to you earlier on this other item, I will be calling 
you to discuss if I, in fact, do some legislation along that line. 

Mr. BOWEN. Well, Mr. Chairman, thank you for your interest, 
your concern, your questions, and those of the other distinguished 
Members. We will provide that and other information to you as 
soon as possible. Thank you. 

Mr. Sangmeister. All right. Thank you. 

Panel number two for this morning, pertaining to Arlington Na- 
tional Cemetery, we have Mr. Steven Dola, who is the Deputy As- 
sistant Secretary for Management and Budget, the Department of 
the Army. He is accompanied by Mr. John Metzler. Both the gen- 
tlemen are here. And from the American Battle Monuments Com- 
mission, Col. William E. Ryan, Jr., Director of Operations and Fi- 
nance, accompanied by Col. Frederick Badger. Welcome one and 
all. Mr. Dola, we have, as you know very well, all of your written 



14 

testimony as part of our record, which is read and digested by all 
of us, but you proceed as you see fit this morning. 

STATEMENTS OF STEVEN DOLA, ASSISTANT SECRETARY, MAN- 
AGEMENT AND BUDGET, DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY AC- 
COMPANIED BY JOHN METZLER, SUPERINTENDENT; AND 
COL. WILLIAM E. RYAN, JR., DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS AND 
FINANCE, AMERICAN BATTLE MONUMENTS COMMISSION 
ACCOMPANIED BY COL. FREDERICK C. BADGER 

STATEMENT OF STEVEN DOLA 

Mr. DOLA. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman and members of 
the subcommittee. I do appreciate the opportunity to appear before 
the subcommittee to testify on the operation of Arlington National 
Cemetery. The Superintendent of Arlington National Cemetery, as 
you indicated, Mr. John C. Metzler, Jr., is with me and will assist 
with the testimony. 

With your permission, as you indicated, I ask that my full state- 
ment be included in the record of the hearing and, if I may, I would 
like to briefly, very briefly highlight two topics. First, the 1995 
budget request. The budget request for fiscal year 1995 is 
$12,017,000. This amount will finance operations at both Arlington 
and Soldiers' and Airmen's Home National Cemeteries. 

It supports the work force, will assure adequate maintenance of 
the buildings and grounds and will permit the superintendent to 
acquire necessary supplies and equipment. Major new construction 
projects proposed for fiscal year 1995 include repairs to existing 
structures. A total of $1.3 million is requested for design and con- 
struction to repair and restore the McClellan Gate, the Kennedy 
gravesite electrical system and the upper deck pavement at the 
parking facility, and a totsd of $1.1 million is requested for design 
only of the two remaining unstarted projects in the 1967 master 
plan; namely, Project 90 land development, which involves 52 acres 
of land and over 30,000 potential gravesites, and the Custis Walk 
Replacement Project. 

Second, Mr. Chairman, I would like to mention Public Law 103- 
160, which was enacted on November 30, 1993. Section 1176 of this 
law extended eligibility for interment in Arlington National Ceme- 
tery to any former prisoner of war who, while serving in the active 
military. Naval or air service and who dies or died on or after No- 
vember 30, 1993. 

A proposed rule implementing this provision is anticipated to be 
published in the Federal Register next month, that is, June 1994. 
That completes my summary, Mr. Chairman. We will be pleased to 
attempt to answer your questions. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Dola appears on p. 49.] 

Mr. Sangmeister, One of the things that was on everybody's 
minds yesterday was Mrs. Kennedy or Mrs. Onassis' funeral. When 
an event of this magnitude takes place, how is this coordinated 
among the other funerals? I understand you had 23 other funerals 
yesterday. How do you coordinate something like that? 

Mr. Dola. Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask the superintendent 
to answer that question since he was deeply and intimately in- 
volved yesterday and all weekend. 



15 

Mr. Sangmeister. Mr. Superintendent good to see you again. Go 
ahead. 

Mr. Metzler. Good morning, Mr. Chairman. Yes, we had 23 
other funerals yesterday, and I am very happy to report that none 
of those funerals were impacted and that we conducted our busi- 
ness as we normally would and that we worked right around the 
Kennedy service, and the other funerals were serviced as they 
would be each day. 

Mr. Sangmeister. Obviously, people were not only not encour- 
aged to come out, they were prohibited. I imagine you had to sepa- 
rate out the families and the other funerals. That must have been 
difficult. 

Mr. Metzler. It was. We had a security ring around the Ken- 
nedy gravesite at the famil^s request so that the funeral itself 
would be private, and that the media was limited to a very small 
area, but the other funerals that were in the adjacent area of the 
security ring were allowed to come in and conduct their normal 
service. At the same time that the Kennedy service was going on 
there was a funeral being conducted less than 500 yards away in 
the adjacent section. 

Mr. Sangmeister. Do you get supplemental funds for something 
special like that or does that come out of your existing funds? 

Mr. Metzler. No, that comes out of our existing funds. 

Mr. Sangmeister. If it comes out of your existing funds, maybe 
it is not that much, but does that affect the overall operating budg- 
et? Maybe it is not that significant an expenditure, I don't really 
know. 

Mr. Metzler. There is some overtime involved, obviously. We 
worked all weekend, and we worked last night to complete the 
gravesite closure, but overall it was a minor expense to the ceme- 
tery overall budget. 

Mr. Sangmeister. What do you anticipate is going to be the im- 
pact of Public Law 103-160, which provided burial eligibility for 
former prisoners of war? 

Mr. DOLA. Mr. Chairman, the increase in burial activity related 
to former prisoners of war who are not already eligible will prob- 
ably be very small in overall numbers at Arlington. As best we can 
determine, most former prisoners of war will have received the 
Piuple Heart, 30 percent disability or greater before 1949 and re- 
mained in the military until retirement. 

The ones who are not in this category will not have a severe im- 
pact. The superintendent has estimated that probably no more 
than one or two burials a month would be the impact. 

Mr. Sangmeister. How is the new graveliner program proceed- 
ing? 

Mr. DoLA. Mr. Superintendent. 

Mr. Metzler. The new graveliner program is proceeding very 
well. It has cost us a little bit more per unit and more units are 
being used than we originally anticipated. The program has become 
very popular. To date we have spent $175,000. We will need to add 
some more money into that program to finish out this fiscal year, 
but the overall cost benefit for the long-term maintenance of the 
cemetery will greatly be appreciated by this program being imple- 



16 

merited and I certainly want to thank you and the other Members 
of Congress for allowing us to do that. 

Mr. Sangmeister. Okay. I think you stated that the Federal 
Government is going to receive approximately $500,000 in income 
from the parking garage to Arlington. Do you directly receive those 
proceeds and if not, who makes the determination where that is 
going to go? 

Mr. DOLA. Mr. Chairman, the amoimt under the new lease agree- 
ment that we have put into effect on January 16, 1994, provides 
for $500,000 plus an amount in addition to that. Depending on the 
usage we have of the parking facility, for example, if we had the 
same usage for buses and cars as we had in 1992, and if the aver- 
age stay of the people who visited Arlington and used the cemetery 
was the same, we estimated that we would receive some $929,000. 
That money would not go to Arlington, because, you may recall, in 
1986, when Congress appropriated the funds for the parking facil- 
ity, proceeds from the lease of property under DOD control were to 
be deposited by law into the miscellaneous receipts category of the 
general Treasury, and consistent with that statutory requirement 
at the time and consistent with the understanding that we had 
with the Appropriations Committees and, namely. Chairman Bo- 
land, we consistently have followed that practice. We haven't 
changed it. 

I want to say, however, that in 1990 Congress amended the Mili- 
tary Leasing Act to require the military departments to deposit 
such funds into a special treasury account, for property that pro- 
duced rental income under their control, and we have had an indi- 
cation that that money could be appropriated for later use at Ar- 
lington. In fact, some monies were, but we have not, in fact, used 
it. We are going to honor the original agreement in 1986 to return 
the funds that are collected until the parking facility is paid. That 
is our position, the Army position on what should be done with 
those funds. 

Mr. Sangmeister. Until the facility is paid for? 

Mr. DoLA. Yes. That certainly is our view. 

Mr. Sangmeister. What was the figure that that was estimated 
at, the cost of the facility? 

Mr. DoLA. As I recall, it was something over $9 million, so 
maybe nine or nine-and-a-half milhon dollars would be the ulti- 
mate cost of construction, and, to date the information we have in- 
dicates that three-and-a-half million dollars has been collected in 
revenues and deposited in the account. 

Mr. Sangmeister. In your statement you outline a number of 
projects for the 1995 budget. Is your funding going to be adequate 
to do what you want to do? 

Mr. DOLA. Mr. Chairman, yes. There are some new construction 
projects. We are very pleased to have those projects, and we think 
that the monies that we have requested will be adequate to carry 
out the new projects that I mentioned, and we do think these are 
the important ones to be done in 1995 budget. 

I obviously heard the discussion on the columbarium and I want 
you to know that Congress has supported our request at Arlington 
for funds to design the third phase of the columbarium which we 
have, and we would hope that in the 1996 budget we could submit 



17 

to the Office of Management and Budget and then later to Con- 
gress a proposal to construct a third phase of the columbarium. 

Mr. Sangmeister. The gentleman from Indiana. 

Mr. Burton. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I think the gentleman 
on the previous panel indicated that when you have an existing 
conventional cemetery like we have at Arlington that when you 
build a columbarium, it is never going to be economically feasible. 
Has that been taken into consideration since you are talking about 
expanding the columbarium up there at Arlington? 

Mr. Metzler. The columbarium at Arlington is a little bit dif- 
ferent. Its original concept was to provide eligibility for burial for 
those veterans who lost their eligibility in 1967 when the burial 
regulations changed that restricted eligibility at Arlington, so the 
cost factor is not the driving motivation here. The driving motiva- 
tion is to provide the service to all those veterans who lost the eli- 
gibility. 

In our case we had a 50,000 niche complex which was divided 
into five phases. The first phase was completed in 1980, and we 
have continued to provide a columbarium complex since that time. 
We are getting ready to start phase three now, which would be 
10,000 additional niches or two more buildings of 5,000 each. 

The cost is estimated right now at a very rough figure of about 
$8 million, which is about $800 per niche. It is certainly expensive, 
but I agree that in the long run the cost benefit is much greater 
to Arlington Cemetery to have the columbarium complex and to 
provide the service to those deserving veterans. 

Mr. Burton. I have one more question, Mr. Chairman. Some of 
the people on our staff have been noticed wheelchair veterans wait- 
ing in line following national ceremonies for the two-chair elevator 
at the memorial amphitheater. That problem might be alleviated if 
there were a ramp of some kind built there. 

Have you considered building a ramp at the amphitheatre to 
take care of that problem, because in the cold of November those 
people are sitting in wheelchairs for long periods of time waiting 
for that two-member elevator. 

Mr. Metzler. We have not considered a ramp at this point. The 
elevator has been the primary means for moving wheelchair veter- 
ans from the ground level up to the amphitheater itself. We will 
definitely consider that in our renovation project of the amphi- 
theater. However, that was not one of the primary items that we 
had looked at, but I will take that back and ask that question. 

Mr. Burton. When we passed the Americans With Disabilities 
Act, one of the provisions in it was that there be accessibility for 
people with handicaps. A lot of us agreed with parts of the bill and 
disagreed with other parts of it, but that was the thrust of the law 
that was passed, and if you have got a problem over there when 
it is cold and there are a lot of these veterans sitting out there in 
those wheelchairs, it could be a health hazard as well being very 
uncomfortable. So if you could give this committee some idea what 
it would cost to build a ramp at the amphitheatre and if it is rea- 
sonable, maybe we could incorporate that into our budgetary think- 
ing for the future. 

Mr. Metzler. Yes, sir. One of the things I would like to point 
out that we do work very closely with the Paralyzed Veterans Asso- 



18 

elation each Memorial Day and each Veterans Day or any time we 
have a major activity to ensure their members' participation is the 
maximum effort we can do for them, providing them ushers, pro- 
viding them assistance, and we will continue that support, but I 
will look into the feasibility of a ramp to see if that will be worked 
into our projects. 

Mr. Burton. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Sangmeister. Okay, switching over to the American Battle 
Monuments Commission, Colonel Ryan. 

STATEMENT OF COL. WILLIAM E. RYAN, JR. 

Colonel Ryan. Yes, sir. Mr. Chairman and members of the sub- 
committee, the American Battle Monxmients Commission thanks 
you for the opportunity to be here today and to provide information 
to the subcommittee on its operations and the Korean War Veter- 
ans Memorial. 

The President has just appointed Lt. Gen. Joseph S. LaPosada, 
U.S. Army, retired, as the Secretary of the American Battle Monu- 
ments Commission. He is looking forward to representing the com- 
mission at the next oversight hearing. 

As you have copies of my prepared statement and it will appear 
verbatim in the record, with your permission I will summarize its 
consents. 

Mr. Sangmeister. Go right ahead. 

Colonel Ryan. The principle functions of ABMC are to commemo- 
rate the achievements and sacrifices of the U.S. Armed Forces 
where they have served since April 6, 1917 through the erection of 
suitable memorial shrines; to design, construct, operate and main- 
tain permanent American military burial grounds on foreign soil, 
and to control the design, construction and care of military monu- 
ments erected in foreign countries by other Americans, both public 
and private. 

You can be assured that the guardianship of our war dead in- 
terred on foreign soil is a sacred trust which all of us here in 
ABMC hold in the highest regard and one for which we are ex- 
tremely proud to be responsible. 

Currently, ABMC administers, operates and maintains 24 per- 
manent American military buri^ grounds and 49 memorial struc- 
tures in 12 foreign countries and the commonwealth of the North- 
em Marianas. Additionally, it administers four memorials on Unit- 
ed States soil. Interred in ABMC cemeteries are 125,000 U.S. war 
dead, 31,000 of World War I, 93,000 of World War II, and 1,000 of 
the Mexican War. 

Additionally, 6,600 American veterans and others are interred in 
the Mexico City and Corozal American cemeteries. ABMC's budget 
authority for the current year is $20,211,000. Its appropriation re- 
quest for fiscal 1995 is $20,265,000, $54,000 more than the current 
year. 

Beginning in 1968, this commission will have experienced a 16 
percent reduction in authorized personnel by the end of the next 
fiscal year, even though it has assumed responsibility for an addi- 
tional cemetery and a number of memorials around the world. De- 
spite the mandated reductions in personnel, being a service organi- 



19 

zation, over 75 percent of ABMC's budget still must go to defray 
personnel and benefits costs. 

The remaining funds must defray all other administrative, care, 
maintenance and repair costs. Each year the foreign governments 
where our installations are located decree cost-of-living salary in- 
creases of at least $400,000. When our budget does not increase by 
a similar amount, we must deft-ay these increases with funds budg- 
eted for the care, maintenance and repair of the shrines for which 
we are responsible and the scheduled replacement of supplies, ma- 
terials, spare parts and equipment. 

Final construction of the Korean War Veterans Memorial has 
begun. It is scheduled to be completed in June of next year and to 
be dedicated the following month. The total cost will be about $17 
million, of which $16 million was raised and $1 million was appro- 
priated. 

Last fall. Public Law 102-32 was enacted authorizing ABMC to 
establish the World War II Veterans Memorial in the Washington, 
DC area. Shortly thereafter, the Department of the Interior was re- 
quested to petition the Congress to enact legislation authorizing 
placement of the memorial in area one as defined by the Com- 
memorative Works Act. 

Once this has been done, a site can be selected, a concept for the 
memorial established, and a fund-raising campaign placed into full 
swing. Regarding H.J. Res. 131, the American Battle Monuments 
Commission supports its enactment, designating December 7th 
each year as Pearl Harbor Remembrance Day. This completes my 
summary. We will be pleased to respond to your questions. 

[The prepared statement of Colonel Ryan appears on p. 55.] 

Mr. Sangmeister. One of the questions I presume you antici- 
pated in light of the discussion that we had in my office some 
months ago is the question of a cop5n-ight as it relates to the Ko- 
rean War Memorial. As you know, the veterans £ire concerned that 
if they make copies of that memorial and put it on T-shirts or 
something that tney are going to have to pay a royalty to the archi- 
tect. We discussed how that was going to be handled, and if I recall 
correctly, at that time you indicated that when Cooper/Lecky sub- 
contracted with the sculptor and the muralist for their work, that 
their contracts did not address copyrights. The two individuals as- 
sumed they would own the copyrights, so I guess my question to 
you is where are we today with this thing? 

Are we any further than when we discussed it in my office? I an- 
ticipated also possibly filing some legislation addressing this mat- 
ter. It gets rather technical. I have talked with staff on the Judici- 
ary Committee on which I also serve. There are some problems; but 
at the same time veterans that believe once a memorial is created, 
it is theirs. It doesn't belong to the sculptor or the architect; and 
if they want to make copies of it or sell replicas to help fund their 
own organizations, they ought to be able to do that without paying 
a royalty to the sculptor or architect. 

Anything further, particularly as to the Korean War Memorial? 

Colonel Ryan. Yes, sir. Let me go back a little bit and tell you 
what occurred. The Army Corps of Engineers, on behalf of the com- 
mission, wrote the contracts for the AE firm of Cooper/Lecky Archi- 
tects of Washington, DC to develop the design concept for the me- 



20 

morial into a final design solution acceptable to the Commission of 
Fine Arts, National Capital Planning Commission, and the Sec- 
retary of the Interior, and, of course, ourselves. Included in that 
contract in error was a statement that the American Battle Monu- 
ments Commission retained the copyrights for the memorial. Sub- 
sequently, Cooper/Lecky 

Mr. Sangmeister. Did I hear the words in error? 

Colonel Ryan. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Sangmeister. Go ahead. 

Colonel Ryan. Subsequently, Cooper/Lecky contracted with the 
sculptor and muralist to assist in the work. The artists later 
learned that the copyrights for their own artistic work on the 
project had been retained by ABMC. They immediately informed 
Cooper/Lecky that they would withdraw from their contract unless 
they received the copyrights for their own work. 

If they had withdrawn, completion of the memorial would have 
been delayed at least for an additional 2 years. Believing it to be 
in the best interests of the Government to complete the memorial 
in a timely fashion, ABMC at that time agreed to relinquish the 
copjTights to the artists. In the negotiations with the artists to re- 
linquish the copyrights, they made reference to Title XVII, Section 
101 of the United States Code. 

On researching it, we learned to our and the Corps of Engineers' 
chagrin that artists who create sculptor, murals and architectural 
designs own the copyrights for their work even though the work is 
being performed for somebody else. In short, the U.S. Government 
has never owned the copyrights for the memorial and will not re- 
ceive any of the royalties paid for their commercial use. 

Mr. Sangmeister. Well, I understand that one of the problems 
was potential delay of the Korean War Memorial. No one really 
wanted to see that happen, after 2 years of hard work and negotia- 
tions. A World War II Memorial is now authorized under Public 
Law 103-32. Are we going to be faced with the same situation 
there? 

Colonel Ryan. Sir, unless the law is changed, the copyrights will 
belong to the artists concerned. 

Mr. Sangmeister. Okay. 

Colonel Ryan. We use the Corps of Engineers legal counsel as 
much as we can. We don't have one of our own, but we have no 
choice but to comply with the law. 

Mr. Sangmeister. If we file that legislation and we call you to 
come forward and testify regarding it, what is going to be your po- 
sition? 

Colonel Ryan. I would suspect that we would support it, sir. 

Mr. Sangmeister. Okay, good to hear that. I think that may be 
what we will have to do in the long run because I don't think that 
is right. The architect and the sculptor ought to be paid a good 
wage for whatever their work is worth in the open market; and be- 
yond that I don't see why they should have in perpetuity royalty 
rights for, what, the next 20 some — I don't know how many years 
it is under the copjrright law? 

Colonel Ryan. It is a large number of years, yes. 

Mr. Sangmeister. And meanwhile we find veterans' organiza- 
tions are being sued because they make copies of this stuff mostly 



21 

because they are not cognizant of what the law is. I think we need 
to do something about that. I would say to you that we want to 
consider legislation on that. Any questions? 

Mr. Burton. No, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Sangmeister. All right, gentlemen, thank you both for being 
here. We will proceed accordingly. 

Colonel Ryan. Thank you, sir. 

Mr. Sangmeister. The third panel is Mr. Larry Rhea, Non- 
commissioned Officers Association, John Vitikacs, from the Amer- 
ican Legion; Mr. Terry Grandison from the Paralyzed Veterans; 
Rick Surratt from the Disabled American Veterans, and Mr. Den- 
nis Cullinan from the VFW. It is good to have everyone here. 

You have heard our discussions that we have had this morning. 
Mr. Rhea, why don't we start with you and hear your comments 
on the subject of the day. 

STATEMENT OF LARRY D. RHEA, DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF LEG- 
ISLATIVE AFFAIRS, NONCOMMISSIONED OFFICERS ASSO- 
CIATION; JOHN R. VITIKACS, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, NA- 
TIONAL VETERANS AFFAIRS AND REHABILITATION COMMIS- 
SION, THE AMERICAN LEGION; TERRY GRANDISON, ASSOCI- 
ATE LEGISLATIVE DIRECTOR, PARALYZED VETERANS OF 
AMERICA; RICK SURRATT, ASSOCIATE, NATIONAL LEGISLA- 
TIVE DIRECTOR, DISABLED AMERICAN VETERANS; AND 
DENNIS CULLINAN, NATIONAL LEGISLATIVE SERVICE, VET- 
ERANS OF FOREIGN WARS 

STATEMENT OF LARRY D. RHEA 

Mr. Rhea, Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and good morning to you 
and to the subcommittee members. The Noncommissioned Officers 
Association thanks you for the invitation to appear and testify this 
morning. As we began: in our prepared remarks, I think it is ap- 
propriate to begin in my oral comments here to express to you and 
to the subcommittee members our deep appreciation for the rec- 
ognition that was recently extended to members of the National 
Guard and Reserve. 

I am referring to the action taken in 1992 to provide burial flags 
and grave markers and the recent signing into law of H.R. 821, 
which extends burial in national cemeteries to retired or retire- 
ment-eligible Guard and Reserve Members. It is clear, Mr. Chair- 
man, that these successes would not have occurred had it not been 
for your persistent efforts. 

NCOA commends the subcommittee's efforts to recognize with 
dignity and respect all members of the total force and for that ef- 
fort you have our deep and abiding thanks. NCOA does not con- 
sider it necessary in these brief oral remarks to recite the numbers, 
the percentages and so forth which depict the current situation and 
the future outlook for the National Cemetery System. Those facts 
are presented in our prepared statement, and they are well known 
to the subcommittee. 

The situation, as reflected in the 1995 budget and as reflected in 
the 1994 report of the National Cemetery System paints a pretty 
clear picture, and that is that the National Cemetery System con- 
tinues to fall farther behind in its efforts to keep pace with an in- 



22 

creasing workload, mounting equipment backlogs, and insufficient 
resources in both funding and employees. 

I will point out, though, that NCOA is pleased with the work of 
Director Bowen, his staff at the national level, and the employees 
across the Nation who comprise the National Cemetery System. 
Given the constraints under which Mr. Bowen is required to oper- 
ate, he and his people are doing an admirable job. NCOA extends 
our thanks to him and his employees. 

In these brief remarks, Mr. Chairman, NCOA would like to high- 
light one concern regarding the National Cemetery System and to 
address a specific concern regarding Arlington National Cemetery. 

First, NCOA is concerned about the slow, but steady defining 
down of the goals for national cemetery construction and expan- 
sion. NCOA remains committed to the goal that was established 
several years ago of burial in a national or State veterans cemetery 
for 90 percent of veterans within 50 miles of their home. Even in 
the face of rather harsh fisc£d realities, NCOA believes that this 
overall goal should not be compromised. 

Admittedly, it will be difficult to achieve in the foreseeable fu- 
ture, but that alone should not be cause to dilute the goal and in 
the process disenfi*anchise even more veterans. Secondly, NCOA 
does have one overriding concern regarding Arlington that we are 
compelled to address. The association's concern is that the epithat 
that Arlington National Cemetery symbolizes to the men and 
women of the United States Armed Forces not be diminished. 

Putting this in as delicate terms as I possibly can, NCOA was 
disappointed by congressional approval of S.J. Res. 129 to place a 
memorial cairn in Arlington that will, in effect, honor 245 non- 
military individuals, 81 of which are non-U.S. citizens. 

Mr. Chairman, it is not the association's intent to rehash that de- 
cision by the Congress. The association is obliged, though, to re- 
mind this subcommittee and the Congress of the purpose of Arling- 
ton National Cemetery and of its legacy to the men and women of 
the Armed Forces of the United States. For more than a century 
it has become the preeminent and cherished shrine commemorat- 
ing the lives and sacrifice of service in the Armed Forces. It is 
NCOA's humble wish that Arlington National Cemetery remain so 
always. 

Therefore, we request that Congress reaffirm the purpose and 
legacy of Arlington National Cemetery to the men and women of 
the Armed Forces of the United States by codifying the qualifica- 
tions of eligibility for burial or commemoration in Arlington Na- 
tional Cemetery. 

In closing, Mr. Chairman, NCOA wholeheartedly and fully sup- 
ports H.J. Res. 131, the joint resolution to designate December 7th 
of each year as National Pearl Harbor Remembrance Day. Rest as- 
sured, Mr. Chairman, you will have NCOA's fiill support in your 
efforts to discharge the bill. Also, NCOA would like to thank the 
members of the American Battle Monuments Commission for their 
stellar work. 

Again, we appreciate the opportunity you have given us today, 
Mr. Chairman. In our opinion, aggressive oversight of NCS will 
continue to be needed if we are to ensure that veterans, as a final 



23 

act of a grateful nation, are bestowed with the honor, respect, and 
dignity that they have earned. Theink you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Rhea appears on p. 59.] 

Mr. Sangmeister. Thank you. Very nicely said. 

Mr. Grandison. 

STATEMENT OF TERRY GRANDISON 

Mr. Grandison. Good morning, Mr. Chairman and members of 
the subcommittee. Paralyzed Veterans of America appreciates this 
opportunity to present testimony concerning the oversight of the 
Department of Veterans Affairs, National Cemetery System, the 
Korean War Veterans Memorial, and House Joint Resolution 131. 
PVA strongly believes this Nation must continue to provide a dig- 
nified resting place for the men and women who have honorably 
served in the Armed Forces. 

In order to maintain an efficient and responsive National Ceme- 
tery System, PVA believes it is incumbent on Congress to address 
the following problems: Chronic underfunding, lack of burial space, 
equipment backlog, aging infi*astructure, significant workload 
growth, and lack of an adequate information system. 

Mr. Chairman, I am going to touch briefly on each of those 
points. First, funding. The National Cemetery System has shown 
no real dollar growth in programs, with the exception of a congres- 
sionally mandated fiscal year 1991 infusion of $10 million. 

PVA recommended an appropriation of $81 million for fiscal year 
1995. In addition, this request included an increase of 90 FTEE. 
This would insure the proper maintenance and the preservation of 
the park-like beauty of these national shrines. Moreover, funding 
at this level would allow the NCS to meet increasing demands of 
the aging veteran population. 

Second, lack of burial space. The need for burial space is ex- 
pected to peak in the year 2009. To meet this great demand, suffi- 
cient funds will be needed to acquire adjacent lands to keep exist- 
ing cemeteries open, to open new cemeteries, and seriously under- 
served areas and to develop columbaria in existing cemeteries to 
preserve a burial option for veterans and their families. 

In addition, PVA continues to advocate for the location of a VA 
cemetery in every State and a national cemetery within reasonable 
driving distance of each major veterans' population center. 

Third, the equipment backlog. The equipment backlog within the 
system is unacceptable. A 1990 study revealed that more than 50 
percent of the heavy equipment was well beyond its scheduled re- 
placement date of 5 years. The current equipment backlog stands 
at $6 million. This figure does not fully capture the seriousness of 
the situation. This figure does not reflect lost productivity of staff 
because of equipment breakdowns or graves that cannot be ade- 
quately maintained. PVA recommends funding of at least $2.3 mil- 
lion to begin partial reduction of the equipment backlog. 

Four, the aging infi-astructure. PVA is concerned with the aging 
infrastructure of the NCS. The NCS is composed of numerous his- 
torical buildings, hundreds of maintenance buildings, and other 
purpose buildings. The NCS has more than 10,000 acres of land 
intersected with hundreds of miles of roads. In many cases, repairs 



24 

to old roads and structures are simply beyond the capability of 
cemetery personnel. 

In order to maintain the shrine-like quality of national ceme- 
teries, PVA recommends that $2 million should be directed for 
funding of repair projects. 

Five, the workload growth. The rapidly aging veteran population 
will increase the NCS workload in all program areas. The NCS 
must have sufficient personnel to facilitate this growth efficiently. 
PVA recommends $1.4 million and 40 FTEE for incremental work- 
load increases. 

Lastly, adequate information system. NCS's information needs 
are critical to its overall operations. The computer system for the 
Office of Memorial Programs is antiquated and often unreliable. 
PVA believes the procurement of an updated computer support sys- 
tem could provide an FTEE savings to the system. Therefore, PVA 
urges Congress to appropriate $800,000 for this system in fiscal 
year 1995. 

At this time, Mr. Chairman, I would like to shift to discussion 
of the Korean War Veterans Memorial. PVA is a proud supporter 
of the establishment of the Korean War Veterans Memorial. PVA's 
support and commitment to the erection of a Korean War Veterans 
Memorial is longstanding. Actual construction began on the memo- 
rial in April 1994. The dedication of the memorial is planned for 
July 27, 1995. 

PVA, the veterans community, and all Americans look forward to 
the completion of this well-deserved acknowledgment and tribute to 
Korean War Veterans. 

H.J. Res. 131. This joint resolution would designate December 
7th of each year as National Pearl Harbor Remembrance Day. 
President Franklin D. Roosevelt characterized the attack on Pearl 
Harbor as "a day that will live in infamy." PVA believes that a Na- 
tional Pearl Harbor Remembrance Day is necessary to make Presi- 
dent Roosevelt's prophecy a fact. PVA strongly supports the pas- 
sage of this resolution, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Chairman, that concludes my testimony. I will be happy to 
answer any questions that you or this subcommittee might have. 
Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Grandison appears on p. 65.] 

Mr. Sangmeister. We will hold all questions to the end. Mr. 
Vitikacs. 

STATEMENT OF JOHN R. VITIKACS 

Mr. Vitikacs. Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, 
the American Legion appreciates the opportunity to comment on 
the operations and strategic planning activities of the National 
Cemetery System. Mr. Chairman, a veteran who dies today can be 
buried in a national cemetery or State veterans cemetery provided 
an open veterans cemetery is geographically accessible. 

In this scenario, the veteran's family or State would not have to 
incur some of the expenses associated with burial in a private cem- 
etery. Fortunately, the option of interment in a national or State 
veterans cemetery is available for veterans and their families. On 
the other hand, only a small portion of eligible veterans are in- 
terred in veterans cemeteries. 



25 

For many veterans, burial in a national or State veterans ceme- 
tery is not a realistic option. Due to recent legislation, many veter- 
ans are no longer eligible to receive a plot burial or headstone al- 
lowance. Mr. Chairman, the American Legion believes that similar 
burial benefits should apply to all honorably discharged veterans. 
Oftentimes the only benefit a veteran will ever consider using is 
the burial benefit. 

Now, the eligibility for this benefit is as conftising to veterans as 
is the eligibility for medical care. In the long term restoring, the 
prel990 burial benefits would provide veterans an alternative 
choice to burial in a national or State veterans cemetery. Current 
VA plans call for the construction of new national cemeteries in 
five urban locations. 

The American Legion supports these projects. We hope the pro- 
posed construction of the new Seattle-Tacoma, Washington Na- 
tional Cemetery takes place as proposed beginning in fiscal year 
1995. In addition to Seattle, it is essential that the Congress pro- 
vide funding for the construction of new national cemeteries by the 
end of this decade near the cities of Chicago, Cleveland, Dallas-Fort 
Worth, and Albany, New York. 

Additional planning for the construction of new national ceme- 
teries should proceed in the locations identified in the February 
1994 VA report to Congress on the National Cemetery System. VA 
also needs to explore the possibility of expanding acreage at exist- 
ing national cemeteries where feasible, as we heard this morning 
they are in the process of doing. Mr. Chairman, the Congress needs 
to do more to fiirther encourage participation in the State Ceme- 
tery Grants Program. 

The Legion supports legislation to adjust the Federal-State allo- 
cation for funding of State veterans cemeteries from the current 50/ 
50 share to 65 percent Federal, 35 percent State. We also strongly 
support providing a plot allowance of a minimum of $150 for each 
eligible veteran buried in a State veterans cemetery. 

We hope legislation, H.R. 949, which has passed the full House, 
will be favorably considered in the Senate. It is ironic, however, 
that H.R. 949 would reinstate most initial provisions of Public Law 
95-476, enacted in 1978, which created a Federal program of aid 
to States for the establishment, expansion, and improvement of 
veterans cemeteries. 

With regard to House Joint Resolution 131 designating December 
7th of each year as National Pearl Harbor Remembrance Day, the 
American Legion is mandated to support the establishment of such 
an initiative. 

Mr. Chairman, in closing, the American Legion deeply appre- 
ciates the continuing involvement of the advisory board to the Ko- 
rean War Veterans Memorial. This advisory board has played a 
large role in the accomplishments of the Korean War Veterans Me- 
morial. The board should remain an active component of the dedi- 
cation planning process. 

Mr. Chairman, that concludes our statement. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Vitikacs appears on p. 71.] 

Mr. Sangmeister. Okay, thank you. 

Mr. Surratt. 



26 

STATEMENT OF RICK SURRATT 

Mr. SURRATT. Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, 
good morning. On behalf of the DAV, I would like to thank you for 
inviting us to participate in this hearing on the four matters on the 
agenda today. The primary mission of the national cemetery sys- 
tem is to maintain the national cemeteries and provide for the in- 
terment of the remains of eligible deceased service members and 
veterans, their spouses, and eligible family members. 

To fulfill that mission, new cemeteries must be established, exist- 
ing cemeteries must be expanded where possible, and States must 
be assisted in establishing State veterans cemeteries. In meeting 
that mission, it must not only be noted that an aging veterans pop- 
ulation is expected to increase demand for space in national ceme- 
teries over the next 10 to 15 years, but also in addition to those 
cemeteries already closed, several others are expected to become 
full within that period. 

The rate of interments is expected to increase from an estimated 
73,000 this year to a high of about 100,000 in the year 2008. VA 
is in the process of increasing its capacity. New cemeteries are al- 
ready slated for Seattle, Washington, where land has been pur- 
chased; Cleveland, Ohio; Dallas, Texas; and Albany, New York, 
where VA is close to purchasing land; and Chicago, Illinois, where 
site options are being studied, as we heard. 

VA has acquired or is acquiring land for expansions at other lo- 
cations. H.R. 949, passed by the House in September of 1993, 
would make State participation in the State Cemetery Grants Pro- 
gram more attractive by increasing the Federal grant for State 
cemeteries fi-om 50 to 65 percent of the cost. 

Mr. Chairman, as is the case throughout VA, the cemetery sys- 
tem is operating under the effects of budget restraints. However, 
it is striving to fulfill its mission, and the DAV applauds these ef- 
forts. 

House Joint Resolution 131 would designate December 7th of 
each year as National Pearl Harbor Remembrance Day in recogni- 
tion of the historical and patriotic importance of this anniversary 
of the infamous attack on Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941. The 
DAV certainly supports this admirable expression of appreciation 
for the sacrifices of those who were affected by this event that 
marked our entry into World War II. 

Many of our members are among that group of distinguished vet- 
erans, and I am certain they appreciate your initiative and this 
subcommittee's initiative on this resolution. 

As with the other national cemeteries, Arlington National Ceme- 
tery, under the jurisdiction of the Department of the Army, must 
expand if it is to provide burial spaces after the year 2025. 

Currently, the cemetery has 612 acres of land with approxi- 
mately 50 remaining acres undeveloped. There is space for approxi- 
mately 76,000 more gravesites within the existing developed and 
undeveloped land. Cemetery officials are therefore considering a 
new master plan for expansion. 

We are also informed that Arlington, like the National Cemetery 
System, has so far been able to cope with the budget restraints, al- 
though there may be an increased demand for resources as the 
aging veterans population places more demand on the cemetery. 



27 

Mr. Chairman, in October 1986, Congress, by Public Law 99-572, 
authorized a memorial for Korean War veterans to be built in 
Washington, DC from predominantly private contributions. This 
law also established the Korean War Veterans Memorial Advisory 
Board, whose 12 members were to be appointed by the President. 

The advisory board, working in conjunction with the American 
Battle Monuments Commission, was charged with recommending a 
site and selecting a design for the memorial. The advisory board 
was also given the responsibility of promoting establishment of the 
memorial and encouraging donation of private funds. Although 
Congress authorized the advisory board to expend up to $125,000 
a year out of donations for its operation, the advisory board has 
funded its expenses solely from interest earned on contributions. 

Nearly $17 million has been donated, and this is sufficient to 
meet the budget for construction of the memorial. The second 
phase of construction began in April of this year and is well under- 
way. It is expected that construction will be completed in May or 
June 1995 with dedication of the memorial set for July 1995. 

Mr. Chairman, the DAV wishes to acknowledge the contributions 
of the Korean War Veterans Memorial Advisory Board. It is by the 
perseverance of the distinguished members of this board that we 
are about to see the realization of this memorial. It is through their 
tenacity and vision that generations yet to come will appreciate Ko- 
rean War veterans' sacrifices and dedication to the cause of free- 
dom. This concludes our remarks, Mr. Chairman. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Surratt appears on p. 75.] 

Mr. Sangmeister. Thank you. 

Mr. CuUinan. 

STATEMENT OF DENNIS CULLINAN 

Mr. CULLINAN. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman and mem- 
bers of the subcommittee. On behalf of the 2.2 million members of 
the Veterans of Foreign Wars, I wish to thank you for inviting us 
to participate in today's important hearing. The VFW remains com- 
mitted to the proposition that all veterans should have convenient 
access to a national cemetery so that they are not denied the final 
veterans benefit. 

Also under discussion today will be the operation of the Arlington 
National Cemetery, the American Battle Monuments Commission, 
and of course your legislation, Mr. Chairman, H.J. Res. 131. We 
will be pleased to comment on all of these important areas. 

In recent congressional hearings, and as articulated through the 
independent budget for VA, the VFW has complimented NCS man- 
agement on a job well done and we do so here again today. None- 
theless NCS is not without problems. 

Equipment replacement backlogs within the National Cemetery 
Service continue to be of major concern. Additionally, the National 
Cemetery Service must implement critical maintenance and repair 
projects to maintain the cemetery's infrastructure of 400 buildings 
and 100 miles of roads. 

The National Cemetery System has shown no real dollar growth 
in its programs in recent years. The VFW recommends an appro- 
priation of $81 million or an increase of $7.5 million over the fiscal 
year 1994 appropriation level. This is to ensure proper mainte- 



28 

nance and the preservation of the park-hke beauty of these na- 
tional shrines. We further recommend a total of 1,405 employees in 
order to go along with the required budget figure. This would allow 
the National Cemetery System to address the increasing demand 
to the aging veteran population and will also enable the system to 
maintain the cemetery grounds at a level befitting a national 
shrine. 

With respect to the Arlington National Cemetery, the VFW con- 
tinues to view this as a well-run cemetery and compliments its 
management. We do note, however, that Arlington is rapidly run- 
ning out of burial space and we recommend that Fort Myers land 
adjacent to Arlington be turned over to it so that veterans may con- 
tinue to be properly buried there. 

The VFW also views the American Battle Monuments Commis- 
sion as being very well run and of unquestionable importance in 
memorializing the sacrifices and accomplishments of America's vet- 
erans. We can only ask that it continue to serve so admirably in 
this capacity. 

In closing, Mr. Chairman, the VFW strongly supports the enact- 
ment of your legislation, H.J. Res. 131. On December 7, 1941, over 
2,000 American men and women in uniform died for our fi-eedom 
and many thousands more were injured. It is absolutely inconceiv- 
able to us that there are those who would hinder making December 
7th an annual day of Pearl Harbor remembrance, and I can assure 
you of our ongoing support in this regard. 

I would also say that if you choose to undertake the very tough 
and tricky proposition of assuring a copyright empowerment for the 
various veterans' organizations for the Korean War Memorial, for 
the World War II Memorial, for any veterans memorial, we will 
back you on that to the hilt. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Cullinan appears on p. 81.] 

Mr. Sangmeister. Mr. Burton advises me that he is going to 
have to leave and he would like to make a statement before he does 
that. 

Mr. Burton. Yes. First of all, I think the chairman and I and 
probably everybody on the Veterans Affairs Committee agree with 
you on 99 percent of the issues that have been raised, maybe 100 
percent. 

One of the problems we are facing right now is severe fiscal con- 
straints, and I am sure you are aware of that. So I would just urge 
all the veterans' organizations and all of you who came to testify 
today who are concerned to follow up with this at the appropriate 
Appropriations Committee meetings because that is where the rub- 
ber hits the road, and we really need you to help make the case 
that we are going to be making as well. 

The Chairman has made the case before the Appropriations Sub- 
committee dealing with Veterans Affairs, and others have as well, 
but we really need for you to help put the pressure on those appro- 
priators as well because if you don't we probably won't get the 
money necessary to do the things that, you and I know, need to be 
done. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Sangmeister. Thank you, Dan. In listening to all of your 
testimony, one thing I guess you certainly agree on is we need to 
have more national cemeteries within, Mr. Rhea, did you say 50 



29 

miles, to pick out a particular distance, but that is a concern of all 
of yours that it is filling up — and we are getting a no from Mr. 

Mr. VITIKACS. That is not the position of the American Legion, 
Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Sangmeister. Okay. So you are not concerned about the 
amount of burial sites that are within the metropolitan areas, how 
close the cemeteries may be? 

Mr. ViTlKACS. I believe I heard you ask the question of whether 
we would support a national cemetery within 50 miles of peo- 
ple 

Mr. Sangmeister. I guess that is very arbitrary. 

Mr. VlTlKACS. I am responding to that particular comment. 

Mr. Sangmeister. The question is, are we locating our national 
cemeteries close enough to our metropolitan areas? 

Mr. Rhea. Mr. Chairman, let me clarify what I said there. Back 
several years ago, the Veterans' Administration had a goal of estab- 
lishing national or State veterans cemeteries so that 90 percent of 
veterans could be buried within 50 miles of their home. My point 
that I was making, and I will reiterate here, is NCOA believes that 
that remains an admirable goal. 

What we are concerned with is because of fiscal constraints and 
all of the other problems that we are having to deal with here is 
that that goal is being compromised. We were going to a 75-mile 
radius. There is new talk of a 100-mile radius, all the time fewer 
will be buried closer to home. We can include more veterans in a 
broader radius, but I think that misses the point. 

The point that I was trying to make is that the goal was widely 
ascribed to and endorsed at the time. NCOA believes that it re- 
mains a good goal, and we just hate to see it continually reduced 
and further disenfranchising more veterans. That was the point I 
was trjdng to make, sir. 

Mr. CULLINAN. Mr. Chairman, by a national resolution, the VFW 
is asking for at least one open national cemetery in every State. 
The spirit of that resolution is such, though, that we are highly 
supportive of a national cemetery or at least 90 percent of the vet- 
eran population being within 50 miles of a national cemetery, and 
that is not something that is going to go away within our organiza- 
tion, so we are very concerned about space. 

Mr. Grandison. Mr. Chairman, PVA is very flexible. We define 
the need in regards to reasonableness. If 50 miles is reasonable or 
75 miles is reasonable, then we can agree on that, but it has to be 
in terms of a reasonable distance, specifically those areas where 
the veteran population is heaviest. 

I think the question is whether or not veterans in heavily popu- 
lated areas are being underserved or not. That is the real question, 
are they being underserved, and it should be based on a case-by- 
case or State-by-State or geographic-by-geographic analysis. 

Mr. Sangmeister. Mr. Vitikacs, you wanted to reply. 

Mr. Vitikacs. Yes, thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to ar- 
ticulate the views of the American Legion on this subject. We cer- 
tainly support the development of new national cemeteries in major 
urban locations, and that is what the planning currently is under- 
taking right now. The five sites that are now under active planning 
as well as the other sites identified in the 1987 and the February 



30 

1994 VA report on future needs. Let it be noted that the areas of 
Detroit, Miami, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, Oklahoma have also 
been identified in various reports of VA. 

Considering the fiscal situation that Congress is operating under, 
it would be desirable, but I don't think realistic to have an open 
national cemetery in every State. Desirable but not realistic. I 
think that there is a combination of factors that would work most 
appropriately, and that would be new national cemeteries in major 
urban locations, the development of State veterans cemeteries 
through the various initiatives that are currently in place, as well 
as being considered, H.R. 949 for one. 

Mr. Sangmeister. You heard the director testify that he thinks 
H.R. 949 sitting where it is sitting is really hurting the situation. 
Do you have any feel for that or do you agree with him? 

Mr. ViTiKACS. I am not certain what his meaning was behind his 
statement, "it is sitting where it is sitting," you mean in the 
Senate? 

Mr. Sangmeister. Yes, right. 

Mr. ViTiKACS. It has to be moved forward. It has to be moved 
along, and that is our goal. It has to be moved along. It is hurting 
the situation right now in States coming forth with new applica- 
tions, and as you heard, they are coming forward with applications 
for improving existing cemeteries, but not for new cemeteries. 
Those are two initiatives. New national cemeteries in major urban 
areas. State veterans cemeteries, we would certainly encourage the 
development of a State cemetery in every State, minimally in every 
state. 

Thirdly, the expansion of existing national cemetery space where 
feasible, and lastly, Mr. Chairman, and very importantly, the res- 
toration of burial plot and headstone allowances to provide veter- 
ans with a realistic option of where they will be buried. Many vet- 
erans no longer have a realistic choice of being buried in a national 
cemetery or State cemetery because of geographic inaccessibility, 
and penny-wise, pound-foolish, eliminating these allowances. 

In the long run, it is going to cost more to maintain the veterans 
burial program by eliminating these allowances, so it is a four- 
pronged approach here that that is the position of the American 
Legion. Thsuik you. 

Mr. SURRATT. Mr. Chairman, in answer to your question, the 
DAV also has a resolution supporting a national cemetery in each 
State, but certainly to the extent that the 50-mile goal would ex- 
ceed that, we would not oppose it. 

Mr. Sangmeister. Okay. Let's switch things for just a little bit. 
You heard the Battle Monuments Commission testify here. Are you 
hearing from your members regarding copy rights? I am certainly 
hearing, not from a lot of them, but I am hearing from a number 
of them. 

The Korean War veterans are the ones that are most upset at 
what is going on with the current memorial, and you heard what 
the testimony was. We couldn't change anything because the law 
has to be changed, £ind they couldn't do anything in their contracts 
at this time because it would slow down the memorial for a couple 
of years and all this kind of stuff. I would like to know, if I am 
going to introduce legislation, and I just might do that because I 



31 

also sit on the Judiciary Committee that would hear that, but I 
would certainly want all of your support for that. Is that something 
worth getting involved in or not? WHioever wants to respond. 

Mr. CULLINAN. Mr. Chairman, I have already expressed the 
VFWs support of such an undertaking. We admire you for taking 
something like that up. It is a tough proposition. 

Mr. Sangmeister. Don't you think it is kind of abhorrent that 
we hire somebody, pay them, as I understand it, very good money 
to design or sculptor these things and then all of a sudden they 
hang on to all of the copyrights. I was not aware of that until I got 
involved in this, that that was the situation. 

Mr. CULLINAN. I remember when it came up, Mr. Chairman, and 
we were hoping that some resolution could be struck. 

Mr. Sangmeister. It is not going to be now. Apparently the only 
thing is legislation. Could we get support from you, from the rest 
of you for that? 

Mr. VlTlKACS. Mr. Chairman, from the American Legion, we at 
this time do not have any resolution on that issue, but it is some- 
thing that I will discuss once this hearing is completed, and I 
would be glad to provide your office with a response. 

Mr. Sangmeister. I would appreciate your organization doing 
that. I would like to know if we are going to have support from the 
veterans' organizations because I think that legislation will be vig- 
orously opposed for a lot of legal reasons and the practicalities of 
long-time copyright law. I can see all the arguments against it that 
are going to come, so we need your support. 

Mr. Surratt. Mr. Chairman, on behalf of the DAV I, too, will 
have to consult with the organization. 

Mr. Sangmeister. I would like to hear from each one of you in 
writing as to whether or not you would support that legislation. I 
am not going to file it until I hear from you, okay? 

Mr. Rhea. NCOA can state pubHcly today that we would support 
your efforts on that, but we will also provide that in writing, sir. 

Mr. Grandison. PVA will also provide a written statement to 
you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Sangmeister. The other issue I want to discuss with you is 
H. J. Resolution 131 to make Pearl Harbor Day a national com- 
memorative day, which falls under the jurisdiction of the Post Of- 
fice and Civil Service Committee. The rules of the Committee are 
that you have got to do it every year. I have one of my own veter- 
ans here who will be testifying a little later. 

The only way we are going to get this done is to discharge the 
committee to get that bill out on the Floor. A lot of people think 
if you have 231 cosponsors, you just go back and ask them to sign 
a discharge petition. 

Well, there is a lot of hesitancy to sign discharge petitions, even 
though you are a cosponsor of that legislation, because obviously 
there is a problem with going against the committee Chairman and 
the individual committee rules. I think that is the only way we are 
going to get this done. I think it is important. I wouldn't have filed 
that legislation if I didn't think so. But here again, I am going to 
need the support of everybody. When the petition is ready, you are 
going to have to contact your individual Congressmen and tell 



32 

them to go down to the well and sign that discharge petition so we 
can get it out because that is the only way it is going to be done. 

I will obviously contact everybody that is a cosponsor and ask 
them to do that. There will be a natural reluctance, but if they 
hear from you, I don't think there will be. 

Is there anything else that you would like to have this committee 
know about? I think we have discussed the main issues, so if not, 
thanks to all of you. Again, it is always a pleasure to have all the 
service organizations here because you represent the people that 
we represent, and we want to make sure we are on the right track. 

Thank you all. The next panel is Gen. Ray Davis, United States 
Marine Corps, Retired, Korean War Veterans Memorial Advisory 
Board, and Jerry Brown from the National Concrete Burial Vault 
Association. General, we are pleased to have you here this morn- 
ing. You know the topics that we are talking about, £ind from your 
perspective we would like to hear what you have to say. We obvi- 
ously have your written testimony, but you may proceed as you see 
fit. 

STATEMENTS OF GEN. RAY DAVIS, USMC, (RET.), CHAIRMAN, 
KOREAN WAR VETERANS MEMORIAL ADVISORY BOARD AC- 
COMPANIED BY ROBERT L. HANSEN, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, 
ADVISORY BOARD; AND JERRY BROWN, EXECUTIVE DIREC- 
TOR, NATIONAL CONCRETE BURIAL VAULT ASSOCIATION, 
INC. 

STATEMENT OF GEN. RAY DAVIS 

General Davis. Mr. Chairman, and distinguished Members, ini- 
tially I would like to indeed support the establishment of Pearl 
Harbor Day on a permanent basis on behalf of the many friends 
I have who served there, and I was impressed by the actions of 
these gallant warriors who fired the spirit of this Nation and point- 
ed us towards a total victory in that conflict. 

Mr. Sangmeister. We agree with you, sir, and any help you can 
give me would be greatly appreciated. 

General Davis. Certainly, my full support, sir. I would like to 
thank those who commended the work of our advisory board here. 
That was unsolicited but appreciated. We have struggled with it for 
7 long years, but we see the light at the end of the tunnel. It is 
an honor, indeed, to brief you on the significant progress of the Ko- 
rean War Veterans Memorial in the Nation's Capital. 

Under Public Law 99-572 of October 28, 1986 we did several 
things. First, it authorized the American Battle Monuments Com- 
mission to erect the memorial in Washington on Federal land with 
funds obtained from private contributors. Second, it directed the 
President to appoint our board, 12 Korean War veterans who had 
the following task: recommend a site, and we got the ideal site by 
the Lincoln Memorial; select a design through a national competi- 
tion; and to promote the establishment of the memorial and encour- 
age donations of private funds. 

Another part of the law was directed compliance with the Com- 
memorative Works Act, Public Law 99-652. Our tasks are nearly 
complete, the site selected, known as Ash Woods, south of the re- 
flecting pool near the Lincoln Memorial, gives balance to that end 



33 

of the mall. A perfect triangle is formed with the Lincoln Memorial, 
the Korean War Veterans Memorial and the Vietnam Veterans Me- 
morial at each vertex. The memorial and design is unique, one of 
a kind. We consider it a masterpiece. 

Three main features. There is a column of 19 troops representing 
those who fought the war on foot; a wall to commemorate and dis- 
play the array of those in support in three segments, the air, the 
sea, the ground support; a commemorative area for those killed in 
action, missing in action and the POWs. The troops are positioned 
in an open field with several emerging fi'om the woods giving an 
impression of legions which might follow. 

The highly polished granite wall is 164 feet long and will have 
thousands of images etched into a mural recognizing, as Congress 
intended, the totality of the Armed Forces effort. These photo- 
graphic images on the wall are from the National Archives in oper- 
ational mode, the nurses, the chaplains, the airmen, the gunners, 
the mechanics, the cooks, the helmsmen, among many others, sym- 
bolize the vast effort which sustained the foot troops. 

Whenever you look at the photograph, you can usually see some- 
one you think you might recognize, and for that reason this memo- 
rial should live forever. The commemorative area, a still reflecting 
pool, is a suitably solemn tribute to our fallen comrades. 

The advisory board and the Battle Monuments Commission in 
addition have approved a computerized database of all the known 
lost. The visitor will not only be able to see the name, the rank, 
the serial number, and the home of record and even a picture, but 
with the details such as the date, time and location of the action 
that had caused his loss or her loss. 

The visitor can then take a printout of the information with them 
as a memento for their visit to our memorial. The advisory board 
is acutely aware that it is a surrogate to nearly five-and-a-half mil- 
lion Americans who served in the Armed Forces during the Korean 
War and those patriotic Americans who have contributed so much 
to its reality, $14 million in actual contributions, with the balance 
coming from interest raised on the principal. 

About 80 percent of these came from veterans themselves or 
their organizations. They have either contributed directly or bought 
coins from the silver dollar commemorative coins authorized by the 
Congress. 

Korean American corporations contributed near $2 million, 
American corporations near $1 million. The formal ground break- 
ing took place on Flag Day, June 14, 1992. Site stabilization start- 
ed last spring. Phase II of the construction began April of this year 
and due to be completed May/June of next year. Dedication is 
planned for July 27, 1995, the 42nd Anniversary of the Armistice 
that ended the armed hostilities of the war. 

It has taken this country nearly 40 years to appreciate that this 
armistice not only stopped the spread of Communist aggression to 
the Pacific Rim countries, but in fact led us towards the demise of 
communism today throughout Europe. It is no longer, as we said 
before, a forgotten war, but in fact a forgotten victory which this 
memorial will document for all time to come, and thus, a fitting 
celebration for several days including a muster, a parade, enter- 



34 

tainment and fireworks, all these will accompany the actual dedica- 
tion ceremonies in July of next year. 

The ceremonies will be funded by private donations, 
nonappropriated funds designated for these specific purposes. The 
Korean War Veterans Memorial in our national capital is a great 
tribute to all Korean War veterans, those who came home, as well 
as those who did not. Korean War veterans, in particular, but all 
veterans, I am convinced, will stand tall with pride when they visit 
this memorial knowing that they, too, served the cause of fi*eedom 
so nobly, indeed, a memorisd for all veterans of all times. 

This is my brief summary. Thank you very much and may I re- 
spond to any questions. 

[The prepared statement of General Davis appears on p. 84.] 

Mr. Sangmeister. Well, thank you. It must have been very inter- 
esting serving on the committee. It must have also been very frus- 
trating at times. I think the amount of private money you were 
able to raise is outstanding. I served during the Korean conflict 
myself. I will be looking forward to July 27, 1995, for the dedica- 
tion. We will certainly be here for that. 

Seeing as you have gone through this and now we have the 
World War II Memorial that we are talking about, is there any- 
thing that you have gleaned along the way that you could tell us 
that is the right way to do things or the wrong way to do things? 
If some things went awry, maybe we can avoid it with the Korean 
War Memorial. 

General Davis. I could make a speech about that, but I won't. 
Very briefly, they need some clarification in the review process. 
You know, six entities, our board, the Battle Monuments Commis- 
sion, the Fine Arts Commission, the historical board, the memorial 
board, the fine arts, there was inadequate coordination between 
those. 

We would actually go through with a concept, have it approved 
and come back with the final product, and it had enough members 
change on the board where they would disapprove the whole thing 
and we would start over. That is why it took 7 years, but if any- 
thing could be done to firm up that organization so that those 
boards and commissions could 

Mr. Sangmeister. Are working together and not working against 
each other and doing duplicate work. Okay. I don't know whether 
you want to get involved in it or not because it is past tense for 
you, but you heard the discussions regarding copyrights as far as 
these memorials are concerned. Do you have any thoughts about 
where that copyright ought to go? 

General Davis. Yes, I do. To me, it was a fairly simple process. 
I know the artist and the sculptor and I believe them when they 
said they made a contract under the law which provided them with 
copyright, so if we are not going to give them the copyright we 
should give them — buy them off somehow to take care of that gap 
in the money that they had conceived that they would do. 

A main point to me is I worked for this thing for 7 years without 
any idea of anybody making a profit off of it. I made none. I have 
put more money in than I have got out. So if somebody is going 
to make a profit out of it, under the law, if they are going to sell 
15 million T-shirts and make $20 million profit, they ought to give 



35 

a few pennies to the guy that designed it. That is the way the law 
says, so if you change it, I don't think it will change our situation 
at all. 

Mr. Sangmeister. I was told that there are limited number of — 
which I find a little hard to believe — a limited number of artists, 
sculptors, muralists I guess they are called, who have the capabil- 
ity of doing that kind of work. Through your work did you find that 
was true? Were you in charge — the commission actually itself is- 
sued the contract, did they not? 

The question is how much of a relationship did you have when 
it came to the selection of the artist or the sculptor? 

General Davis. We sat in on it and discussed it, but we had no 
decision authority, so they made the selection, but again I think 
they were honest in their — they knew what the law was. The law 

f)rovided them with a copyright, so they made a contract under the 
aw where they rated a copyright, so I think they went into it hon- 
estly. 

Mr. Sangmeister. I don't think there is any question about that. 
As I understand, they get paid quite well for their work. I suppose 
that is a matter of how you view it, but if that is the case, maybe 
they ought to be paid a little bit more and then whatever can be 
generated off" of that memorial should go to some of our veterans' 
organizations, but that is something to be discussed in the future. 

General Davis. Mr. Chairman, could I ask our Executive Direc- 
tor, Mr. Hansen, who has been involved with this to make a brief 
statement about the cop3rright. 

Mr. Sangmeister. Go right ahead, sir, 

Mr. Hansen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, General 
Davis. Mr. Chairman, I would like to try to put the copyright in 
a little bit different perspective, if I could. Simply from the stand- 
point of the entrepreneurs out there who would think they are pos- 
sibly losing something if the artist holds the copyright, if you can 
think for a moment of the T-shirts as an example that are sold cur- 
rently all throughout Washington, that T-shirt in quantity costs ap- 
proximately $5 to produce. They can sell them on the mall for $15 
or more, providing a margin of profit of $10. 

The law stipulates that the royalty to be received by the artist 
holding the copyright cannot exceed 10 percent, so at best of that 
$10 margin of profit, $9 is going to the entrepreneur who has had 
the risk of producing the T-shirt and $1 is going to the artist, so 
the concerns expressed by some of the veterans that I have heard 
from and that the advisory board has heard fi*om that the artists 
are going to get rich is, I think, a misplaced concern. And secondly, 
sir, as a Korean War veteran yourself, I would like to say that we 
don't build memorials as fund-raising mechanisms. We build them 
to honor the dedication and service that the veterans have given 
to this country for the cause of freedom and that they are not a 
fund-raising mechanism. 

Mr. Sangmeister. You are probably right in theory on your last 
point, but I think all the veterans' organizations are always looking 
for some way to raise some money to support themselves, and that 
seems kind of a natural way to do it, and I could see where they 
are coming fi*om. I don't know what the exact figures are. If you 
are correct, then, you are making a point that it is not as big as 



36 

it is, but I guess trying to play devil's advocate on the other side, 
we do know of a number of veterans' organizations apparently that 
have been sued by the architects or the sculptors because either ig- 
norance of the law, didn't realize that they had to pay a portion of 
what they took in on those projects or not. 

Well, we will see how the future goes on that, but thank you, ap- 
preciate your being here and giving us your feeling on that. 

Mr. Hansen. Thank you. 

Mr. Sangmeister. All right. Now, Mr. Jerry Brown. 

STATEMENT OF JERRY BROWN 

Mr. Brown. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The National Concrete 
Burial Vault Association was founded in the 1930s, and is made up 
of concrete burial vault msmufacturers from the United States and 
Canada. Our association represents the national franchisers as well 
as a host of independent burial vault and graveliner companies. 

We thank the members of this subcommittee for your continued 
involvement with and the oversight of the National Cemetery Sys- 
tem. The National Cemetery System is a source of pride, tradition, 
£ind profound national awareness. Programs within the jurisdiction 
of this subcommittee are critical to preserving and perpetuating the 
quintessential concept of memorializing the lives and deeds of 
Americans who have died in the service of our Nation. 

The National Cemetery System provides the means for the prop- 
er perpetual memorialization of our deceased veterans. In all soci- 
eties, when a death occurs, we feel the need to respond individ- 
ually, as a family, as a commimity, and culturally. Our national 
cemeteries are an integral part of this cultural response. National 
shrines such as the Arlington Cemetery are visited by thousands 
of veterans and family members each year, furnishing a sense of 
continuity with the past and reinforcing the importance of the role 
the veterans played in our history. 

For over two centuries, the courage and patriotism of our Na- 
tion's armed servicemen and women have been enshrined in the 
monuments and memorials bearing proud testament to their sac- 
rifice and dedication for a fi-ee and Democratic society. The Na- 
tional Concrete Burial Vault Association vigorously supports House 
Joint Resolution 131, designating December 7th of each year as 
National Pearl Harbor Remembrance Day, and certainly the Ko- 
rean War Memorial as integral parts of the memorialization proc- 
ess. 

Since the dawn of human kind, world cultures have responded to 
death with ceremony, sensitivity, and sociological and religious fer- 
vor. The funeral embodies the fundamental equation for the recov- 
ery process, as it provides order and direction in the time of loss 
and certainly manifests our beliefs through the ceremony of choice. 

The ceremony brings people together to share their feelings of 
grief and sorrow and bears testimony to the life of one who was 
known, loved, honored cuid remembered. Within the circle of the 
death guid memorialization experience, the place of bestowal, the 
cemetery, emerges as the final chapter of the death and fiineral ex- 
perience and becomes the place where family and fiiends may re- 
turn to reflect, remember, and recreate the images of a life that 
has been lived and as a footnote, the flags that have been flown 



37 

at half staff in our Nation this past month and certainly the touch- 
ing and moving ceremony that occurred yesterday at Arlington Na- 
tional Cemetery punctuates and underscores our culture's need to 
memorialize and to remember. 

Throughout the long and mobile history of the national cemetery 
network, what has been phrased as the dynamics of earth inter- 
ment has played a significant role in the operational, logistical and 
economic and political profiles of the cemetery system. Specifically, 
the position and fiinction of the burial vault and/or graveliner with- 
in the sphere of national cemetery policies, regulations and oper- 
ations has become one of the primary focal issues of the past two 
decades. 

For millenniums, the dynamics of earth burial have evoked var- 
ious forms of entombment or protective enclosures to encase, sur- 
round, protect and memorialize the deceased. Even today, ancient 
pyramids, catacombs and sealed crypts remain as silent testament 
to man's compelling need to safeguard the dead and memorialize 
the place of interment. 

In recent decades, the preference for some form of outer burial 
receptacle to encase and protect the casketed body in earth burial 
has expanded to include the aesthetic, functional and economic con- 
cerns of cemetery management, as well as fulfilling the cultural 
values and traditions of our society. 

Since 1968, the National Concrete Burial Vault Association has 
worked with the National Cemetery System and the House Com- 
mittee on Veterans Aflfairs, Subcommittee on Housing and Memo- 
rial Affairs to develop and implement a graveliner program. 

In 1984, our association submitted to the subcommittee a study 
entitled, "The Economic and Aesthetic Impact of Using Outer Bur- 
ial Receptacles in National Cemeteries," which detailed the dynam- 
ics of earth interment and its subsequent effects upon the physical 
and fiscal condition of the National Cemetery System. 

The NCB VA continues to support the fundamental position of 
requiring outer burial receptacles for interments within the Na- 
tional Cemetery System, which corresponds with the policies of 
over 90 percent of the Nation and public, private and denomina- 
tional cemeteries with the enactment of Section 504 of Public Law 
101-237, effective January 1990. 

The Government must provide a graveliner for each new grave 
in an open cemetery within the National Cemetery System in 
which remains are interred in a casket unless a burial vault has 
been selected by the next of kin. Proper maintenance of the Na- 
tional Cemetery System is enhanced by the use of outer burial re- 
ceptacles such as those manufactured by our association. 

When a casket is interred without some form of outer burial re- 
ceptacle, anywhere from 5 to 11 restorations of the gravesite would 
be required in a 25- to 50-year period. In order to provide the high- 
est quality product to the national cemetery system, the member- 
ship of the NCB VA adopted performance standards at its annual 
meeting in 1991. The NCB VA promotes safety and training in its 
member plants and in the handling and delivery system of concrete 
burial vaults and graveliners throughout the cemeteries with a vig- 
orous comprehensive inspection and certification program for its 
members. 



38 

Our World War II veterans are now in their late sixties and 
early seventies and by the end of the century will be in their late 
seventies and early eighties. Korean veterans are now in their late 
fifties and by the year 2000, Vietnam veterans will be in their fif- 
ties. There are nine million living World War II veterans, five mil- 
lion Korean veterans and eight million Vietnam era veterans. The 
strain on our national cemeteries to provide an appropriate burial 
benefit to these veterans along with the proper and continued 
maintenance of these national shrines will be immense. The Na- 
tional Concrete Burial Vault Association supports this committee 
and your endeavors. Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Brown appears on p. 93.] 

Mr. Sangmeister. Thank you, Mr. Brown. If you can, it may be 
a difficult question to answer, but how many graveliners do you es- 
timate your members provide to the national cemetery? Our facts 
are that there are about 67,000 burials a year. 

Can you give us an idea how many graveliners? 

Mr. Brown. Roughly, sir, approximately of the 67,000 veterans 
interred in national cemeteries annually, and I can speak for the 
Snelling National Cemetery, which I believe is the third largest na- 
tional cemetery within the system. The percentage of graveliners to 
burial vaults that are selected by the next of km is probably run- 
ning about 70 percent, and I think extrapolating that with 

Mr. Sangmeister. Seventy percent are choosing graveliners? 

Mr. Brown. Are selecting the graveliners; that is correct. 

Mr. Sangmeister. If you had a recommendation to make to us 
to either improve the work relationship with the national ceme- 
teries system or the graveliner program, do you have any rec- 
ommendation you would like to make? Or is the program going 
well? 

Mr. Brown. Well, the program, I do believe, is going well. We 
have testified at this hearing in the past relative to some of the fis- 
cal constraints, I believe, the budget concerns relative to the Na- 
tional Cemetery System, and fi'om time to time we have felt num- 
ber one, I believe, that all of the superintendents of the various na- 
tional cemeteries will concur that the graveliner program or some 
form of permanent outer receptacle is indeed cost-effective. 

I indicated in my report that we did a study and a burial that 
takes place without some form of outer receptacle, the grave will 
require restoration anywhere fi'om five to eleven times during the 
life cycle of the grave, so it is cost-effective. I believe that we have 
suggested that maybe to improve the fiscal condition of the Na- 
tional Cemetery System that some thought might be to retain the 
requirement and have the next of kin provide some form of either 
burial vault or graveliner fi*om other sources, but as far as the pro- 
gram itself, sir, it does seem to be going very well. 

Mr. Sangmeister. Well, that is what we are here to find out and 
are pleased that it is. So thanks to both of you. General Davis, for 
taking time to come over and updating us on the memorial. And 
Mr. Brown, thank you for your comments. 

Mr. Sangmeister. We will move on to Lee Goldfarb. 

The other witness is fi*om my district, Mr. Richard Foltynewicz. 



39 

STATEMENT OF LEE GOLDFARB, PRESmENT, NATIONAL 
PEARL HARBOR SURVIVORS ASSOCIATION; AND RICHARD 
FOLTYNEWICZ, PUBLIC WITNESS 

STATEMENT OF LEE GOLDFARB 

Mr. GOLDFARB. Mr. Chairman, before I give my testimony, I 
think I would be remiss if I did not thank you for your leadership 
in this fight to make December 7th a national day of remembrance. 
Your dedication has been a terrific boost to the Pearl Harbor survi- 
vors since, as you know, we have run into a stone wall with the 
Post Office and Civil Service Committee. However, it is your lead- 
ership, sir, which we believe will breach that wall and make De- 
cember 7th a national day of remembrance a reality, and for that 
we thank you. 

Just one other statement, if I may, one quick one, I would like 
to thank the fellows behind me with the white caps who came here 
in support of our position. They are Pearl Harbor survivors fi'om 
Maryland and fi"om Virginia, and I am truly grateful for their ap- 
pearance here. 

Mr. Sangmeister. You are more than welcome. Thank you for 
your kind comments. 

Mr. GoLDFARB. I want to thank you, Mr. Chairman, for allowing 
me to testify on behalf of H.J, Resolution 131. As you know, to our 
organization, December 7, 1941, is one of the most important days 
on the calendar. It brings to mind a day in which 2,403 shipmates 
and comrades lost their lives in what can best be described as a 
sneak attack. This attack took place while the representatives of 
the Japanese Government were in Washington talking peace. We 
should never allow the events of that day to be forgotten or over- 
looked. That is why it is important that H.J. Resolution 131 be 
passed. 

Mr. Chairman, I believe I can explain our feelings if you will 
allow me to read the letter I wrote to the Honorable William Clay, 
Chairman, Post Office and Civil Service Committee concerning H.J. 
Resolution 131. It is the Committee policy for consideration of com- 
memorative legislation for the 103rd Congress which provides the 
stumbling block, and before I read the letter, I would like to quote 
paragraph two, line (e), which says: "The following types of propos- 
als shall not be reported: Any proposal providing for recurring an- 
nual commemoratives," and the letter follows. 

Mr. Sangmeister. You may proceed with that letter, if you want 
to read the letter into the record, that is fine. 

Mr. GOLDFARB. Yes, sir, I do, may I? 

Mr. Sangmeister. Go right ahead. 

Mr. GoLDFARB. "Dear Chairman Clay: It is with more sadness 
than anger that I write this letter. It is inconceivable that with in 
excess of 200 cosponsors who have signed on in support of H.J. 
Resolution 131 you would not permit this bill to be released. I un- 
derstand the reason behind your reticence, but I find it difficult to 
understand. 

"The thought that many finvolous organizations would seek in 
one form or another a day of remembrance leaves you with the con- 
clusion not to have any. On behalf of the 2,403 who were killed 
that Sunday morning, I find it unconscionable that you would 



40 

equate the Pearl Harbor Survivors Association with the Pickle 
Growers Association or the 42nd Street Ballet Dancers, ad nau- 
seam. Perhaps my language is slightly strong, but perhaps it will 
help make my point. 

"The reason we are determined to pursue the matter at this time 
is because it is now evident that we are in the final stages of our 
allotted time on this mortal coil, and we see no one in the foresee- 
able future who will labor annually for a National Pearl Harbor Re- 
membrance Day. Let the last of us depart and the slogan, 'Remem- 
ber Pearl Harbor' will depart with us. 

"Mr. Chairman, please understand our concern, please under- 
stand our fear, and please understand you are our only hope. 

"Mr. Chairman, please join us in our crusade and please be our 
ally. Perhaps it is not fitting, but I subscribe to the adage that for 
every rule there is an exception. With much gratitude." 

And at this time, if you have any questions I will be glad to an- 
swer them, Mr. Chairman. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Goldfarb appears on p. 98.] 

Mr. Sangmeister. The obvious question has got to be did you get 
an answer to your letter? 

Mr. Goldfarb. Did Congressman Clay answer the letter? 

Mr. Sangmeister. Yes. 

Mr. Goldfarb. Not yet, sir. Maybe being from the Post Office 
Committee he can't afford the 29 cent stamp. 

Mr. Sangmeister. Well, not commenting on that, what is the 
date of your letter? 

Mr. Goldfarb. I don't see a date on here, but it is approximately 
3 weeks ago. 

Mr. Sangmeister. Three weeks ago you sent that? Okay, well, 
we are glad you sent that letter, and I presume you will be getting 
a response. Before we go into any further discussion on this, Dick, 
it is nice to have you here. 

You know, Mr. Goldfarb, you gave me credit for going ahead and 
doing this and I feel very sincerely about it. It is a pleasure to do 
it, but the one man who has been a stimulus for me, and, of course, 
we always try to respond to people from our district, but beyond 
that, as you know, he is not a Pearl Harbor survivor, but he feels 
so firmly about this that he moved me to do this. 

Mr. Goldfarb. Well, you know, we were aware of this gen- 
tleman, and we certainly honored him at our convention and 50th 
anniversary. 

Mr. Sangmeister. It was very fitting. We are very glad you did. 

Mr. Goldfarb. To be very honest, we will take any help we can 
get in this direction. 

Mr. Sangmeister. Dick, what do you have to say? 

STATEMENT OF RICHARD FOLTYNEWICZ 

Mr. FOLTYNEWICZ. Well, one gentleman before us said one thing 
about the cemetery. He stated that you are going to retire, and that 
you are going to be missed by his group and the group here. Well, 
I am personally going to miss you because I represent the veterans 
in our area, as you well know, and I know they are going to miss 
one heck-of-a-good supporter for our veterans' rights. 



41 

Mr. Sangmeister. Thank you for that, Dick, but no one is irre- 
placeable, and I am sure someone is going to come along. 

Mr. FOLTYNEWICZ. I know, but that letter last Friday that we re- 
ceived from you to Secretary Jesse Brown, that was the most won- 
derful respect that anybody could do. This was in regards to the 
outpatient hospital. I appreciated that. 

Mr. Sangmeister. Okay, you are more than welcome for that. 

Mr. FOLTYNEWICZ. Again, I certainly do want to thank you for in- 
viting me to come here. It is, indeed, a great honor and privilege 
to come here and represent what I have been doing, something that 
is very dear to my heart. 

As in my statement, I have an article in the World War II Times. 
Getting our congress to recognize December 7th as National Pearl 
Harbor Remembrance Day is a tough job, a task. It has been very 
tough. 

Although the Japanese attack there on December 7, 1941, is one 
of the most significant events of this century, the bill to establish 
an annual commemoration date is stalled in a subcommittee with 
little chance of release because of Federal rules governing com- 
memorative days. 

House Joint Resolution 131 has 231 cosponsors of now. The re- 
quirement is 218 to have it come out of committee, to have the bill 
come to the Floor for a vote. Even so. Representative William Clay, 
Chairman of the House Post Office and Civil Service Committee, 
has not authorized the bill's release from the Population and Cen- 
sus Subcommittee. 

It should be noted that the House Joint Resolution bill 131 des- 
ignates December 7th as a working holiday similar to Flag Day on 
June 14th. It also requests the President to issue an annual procla- 
mation calling upon citizens to observe the day with appropriate 
ceremonies and activities. The United States flag, our flag would 
be flown at half staff that day by all Federal agencies and inter- 
ested groups in honor of those Americans who died in the sneak 
attack. 

Representative George Sangmeister, who is retiring this year 
from Congress, said that in the 1970s the subcommittee estab- 
lished rules which prohibit commemorative days in the belief that 
eventually every day would become a commemorative day. How- 
ever, Sangmeister added, this is not just another event we are talk- 
ing about. This is an event which changed the course of history for 
America and also the world, the whole world, not just the United 
States. 

Interestingly, since the subcommittee's rules were adopted, there 
have been days set aside for perpetual commemorations. Those 
were accomplished by tacking them on to legislative bills which is 
one way of doing it. Included among the commemorations are Fed- 
eral Lands Cleanup Day, National Disability Awareness Month, 
and National Forest Products Week. Thus, tacking House Joint 
Resolution 131 on to a piece of must-pass legislation as a rider 
could be an alternative course to get the bill out of the subcommit- 
tee and on to the Floor for a vote. 

We certainly didn't want to do that. It is not in the middle of the 
night. It is too significant of an event to do that. The idea to offi- 
cially commemorate December 7th came to me during my sister's 



42 

birthday party in March of 1990. The next day, I contacted Rep- 
resentative Dennis Hastert of Saint Charles with the suggestion. 

He sponsored a resolution that would designate December 7th as 
Pearl Harbor Remembrance Day, December 7, 1991. At that time 
I didn't know that the word of each year should have been incor- 
porated in that, but it wouldn't have made any difference. He 
wouldn't have done it because they wouldn't have passed it then 
as they are not doing it now, so in order to get this bill passed and 
on its way, we went along with the appropriate way at the time. 

Since then, I have formed the Foimdation for a National Pearl 
Harbor Day to push for the commemoration. I also set up the Pen- 
nies for Pearl Fund, which raised funds for a bronze plaque which 
I presented to the Pearl Harbor Survivors Association at Pearl 
Harbor on December 7, 1991. They honored me by letting me 
march with our Pearl Harbor survivors of our State of Illinois that 
day, and I have wonderful movies of that. It is very gratifying to 
me to have that privilege. 

Why is this legislation so important? Well, I was 15 years old 
when the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor. That event left an indel- 
ible impression on me, and 18 months later I joined the Marines 
to serve in the Pacific theater. 

This commemoration will enable future generations of Americans 
to recognize the significance of the date and to be reminded of what 
can happen if our country is unprepared to protect our cherished 
freedom. I second that very highly. We should never, never let our 
country be in such a position as it was then. 

Congressman Sangmeister recently said, as a result of the at- 
tack, 16-and-a-half million Americans rallied to fight World War II, 
with 460,000 eventually losing their lives. As a military veteran, it 
saddens me to think that the significance of this event may be lost 
to future generations. I hope it doesn't. I hope we will get House 
Joint Resolution 131 passed, and with this I have just one more. 
Please let your voice be heard today. Please help pass House Joint 
Resolution Bill Resolution 131. Please be aware that there is no fi- 
nancial obligation here. It will not cost the taxpayer nor will it in- 
crease the deficit. 

It will, however, put a warm glow within you to know that you 
did what you could to honor the military men and women who of- 
fered the ultimate sacrifice on that infamous Siuiday morning, De- 
cember 7, 1941, in Hawaii at Pearl Harbor by establishing for them 
a permanent day of remembrance. I certainly thank you, sir, for 
having me. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Foltynewicz appears on p. 100.] 

Mr. Sangmeister. I want to thank you both for being here, and 
I want to thank all the Members sitting in the back, too. You are 
kind of special to all of us. You really are, and I think we need to 
fight this thing through. I can understand where the committee is 
concerned about starting some kind of a precedent, but Dick indi- 
cated a few places, I believe those were passed by tacking it on in 
the Senate. It is more difficult to do that in the House, but an5rway 
regardless of that, we need to get this job done, and of course the 
only way we are going to get it done is through organizations such 
as yourself. 



43 

You heard all the veterans' organizations are willing to sign on. 
We need a massive writing. What I will provide to you and to all 
the other veterans' organizations is a list of the cosponsors broken 
out by State, and I think that is one way that your Members from 
each of the States can say look, thank you very much for signing 
on to H.J. Res. 131. We now need this additional step in order to 
get the job done or something like that, and each of you from the 
respective States get into those particular representatives already. 
That doesn't mean you shouldn't be talking to people that are not 
cosponsors. You can do that as well. 

Mr. GOLDFARB. May I say one thing, sir? 

Mr. Sangmeister. Surely. 

Mr. GOLDFARB. We had a fact-finding sheet that we used. We put 
it in our magazine. The fellows were able to extract that from the 
magazine, and sent it to their Congressman and also some of the 
fellows sitting back here and myself, we literally walked the halls 
of Congress handing this sheet in just about every office. It is very 
short. I would like to read it. May I, sir? 

Mr. Sangmeister. Surely you may. 

Mr. GOLDFARB. Then I will explain why I want to do that. It is 
a fact-finding sheet. "H.J. Resolution 131. Honorable George E. 
Sangmeister, Member of Congress from Illinois has introduced H.J. 
Resolution 131, which asks that December 7th of each year be per- 
manently designated as National Pearl Harbor Remembrance Day. 
We, the members of the Pearl Harbor Survivors Association, re- 
spectfully ask your support of this resolution. We look to the future 
when we will be no more, when there will be none of us left to ask 
every year for a national day of remembrance. If the legacy of Pearl 
Harbor is to be remembered, we can think of no better vehicle than 
H.J. Res. 131. This will tell the children of our beloved country 
what occurred on December 7, 1941, and this will explain why the 
flags are at half staff. Won't you join so many of your fellow Con- 
gressmen in cosponsoring H.J. Res. 131? This will indicate to the 
Pearl Harbor survivors that you truly remember Pearl Harbor." 

Now, you mentioned that you were going to have — and I am not 
sure I know the proper wording — a discharge petition. 

Mr. Sangmeister. That is correct. 

Mr. GOLDFARB. Does that have certain wording in it? 

Mr. Sangmeister. It will have a number assigned to it that will 
make it a lot easier for you. 

Mr. GOLDFARB. If we could get that information, I promise you, 
sir, that Tony de Lorenzo and the rest of these fellows and myself 
will once again walk around the halls with that, plus the fact-find- 
ing sheet and do it again. I promise you. 

Mr. Sangmeister. My staff will be happy to help you. All you 
need to do is just slightly amend your original declaration and we 
will give you the information as to the discharge petition number 
that they should go down and ask for when they want to sign it. 

Mr. GOLDFARB. If we get that information, you will have our 
word. 

Mr. Sangmeister. Also, I guess we can break this out by State 
for the number of people who are already cosponsors, and I think, 
you know, you did such a great job before, I obviously solicited ev- 
erybody I could, but I didn't get all those signatures. I know that. 



44 

You got them. If you could just redo that, we could get this thing 
done. 

Mr. GOLDFARB. Does that discharge petition only go to those who 
have cosponsored or to anybody? 

Mr. Sangmeister. No, no, it goes to anyone. I want to make that 
very clear. You don't have to be a cosponsor of the resolution to ask 
for it to be discharged. Any member, so someone who is not a co- 
sponsor who is now willing to help discharge that can sign just as 
well. In fact, you should approach everyone. 

Mr. GOLDFARB. Well, we promise you we will, sir. The only re- 
ward we want is a new pair of shoes when we get done, that is all. 

Mr. Sangmeister. We will see what we can do. I don't know if 
we have the money to provide that for you. Dick? 

Mr. FOLTYNEWICZ. Congressman Sangmeister, I have the com- 
mitment of all these fellows that were sitting here, all these veter- 
ans because I belong to most of their organizations out here in the 
hall, and especially the most important one was the VFW Action 
Corps, and now all they asked me to have you to do is get that pe- 
tition number to them, and this one VFW, Dennis the Menace, he 
said that get that and they will give a double whammy because I 
am on that action corps, and I have given them heck along the way 
because they haven't supported it. 

Mr. Sangmeister. Have you really? That surprises me, Dick. 

Mr. FOLTYNEWICZ. Well, anyhow, they assured me that we have 
unity, we have strength, and it will be out. 

Mr. Sangmeister. I think we can do it, then. If you will just 
defer one minute here, can we as of tomorrow have that petition 
number? We got all the mechanics worked out to get that laid to- 
gether so by tomorrow we can let them know what the petition 
number is? Okay. Fine, we should have it all by tomorrow. 

Mr. GOLDFARB. Thank you very much. Thank you. 

Mr. FOLTYNEWICZ. Thank you. 

Mr. Sangmeister. Thank you all. Take care. The subcommittee 
is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 12:10 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.] 



APPENDIX 



statement of the Honorable Jerry W. Bowen 
Director, National Cemetery System 
Before the House of Representatives Committee on Veterans' Affairs 
Subcommittee on Housing and Memorial Affairs 
Hay 24, 1994 

Good morning, Mr. Chairman and distinguished Members of this Subcommittee. Z 
welcome the opportunity to appear here today to address the status of the 
National Cemetery System. Your continued support and interest in our program 
is greatly appreciated. Mr. Chairman, it is with deep personal regret that I 
note your departure from the Congress after this current session. Your 
leadership has been outstanding, your concern for our nation's veterans has 
been sincere, and your accomplishments have been truly significant. We will 
sorely miss your leadership. On behalf of the men and women of the National 
Cemetery System, I wish you continued success in your future endeavors. 

Let me begin my testimony by stating that after 26 years of active Army 
service, it was a great personal honor to be asked by the President to direct 
this fine organization. NCS is one of VA's three operating agencies providing 
direct services and benefits to the nation's 27 million veterans and their 
families. Burial in one of our national shrines is the final tribute of a 
grateful nation honoring the memory and sacrifice of those who served in our 
Armed Forces. This memorialization is everlasting through the provision of 
perpetual care of our national cemeteries. It is a benefit available to all 
veterans, without regard to gender, race, religious affiliation or econoaic 
circumstances. We are projecting 70,000 interments in FY 1994. In January 
1994, we reached a significant milestone — we now maintain over two million 
gravesltea. Approximately 313,000 headstones and markers and 294,000 
Presidential Memorial Certificates are projected to be provided in FY 1994. 
Through our services, NCS reaches out and touches the lives of hundreds of 
thousands of Amarlcan veterans and thsir familiss ssch yssr. 

In rseognitloa of tha fset that dsasnd for burial in • nstioosl rrssMts ry will^ 
eoBtiniM to iacr—mm until ««11 into tiM ttmmt eaotury, ««• bsv* ds»slop«d • 

(45) 



46 



three-pronged strategy to carefully manage existing resources and to identify 
future opportunities to acquire additional burial space. The strategy 
includes (1) establishing, when feasible, new national cemeteries; (2) 
acquiring additional land through purchase or donation to extend the service 
of existing cemeteries; and (3) encouraging states to provide additional 
gravesites through participation in the State Cemetery Grant Program. 

The expectation of the aging World War II veterans is that there will be 
burial space available near their community at their time of need. Our 
strategy is designed to meet that expectation to the greatest extent possible. 
We are focusing our efforts on large population centers which currently are 
not served by an open national or state cemetery. The first report to 
Congress required by Public Law 99-576 identified ten areas of the country in 
greatest need of a new national cemetery. The second report submitted this 
year re-validated eight of the original ten sites identified in the first 
report and identified three new areas. Since 1987, only one new national 
cemetery has been constructed — the San Joaquin Valley National Cemetery in 
Northern California was opened in June 1992. Funding has been provided for 
land acquisition and master planning at five other sites: Albany, Chicago, 
Cleveland, Dallas and Seattle. Construction funds for the Seattle cemetery 
are contained in the FY 1995 budget request. Given current budget 
constraints, it is no longer considered viable for NCS to construct new 
national cemeteries, other than those just mentioned, before the year 2000. 

The second prong of our strategy involves acquiring adjacent land so that 
existing national cemeteries can remain open. I am extremely pleased with our 
progress this year to accjuire additional acreage through purchase and 
partnerships with veterans service organizations and other private concerns. 
In March 1994, the VA announced the purchase of 16 acres of land adjacent to 
Ft. Gibson National Cemetery in Oklahoma. The land, which was purchased from 
a private owner, will yield approximately 10,000 gravesites and allow Ft. 
Gibson to remain open beyond 2030. In Fort Scott, Kansas, the veteran 
community banded together to purchase and then donate ten acres of land, which 
will allow the Ft. Scott National Cemetery to give full service to veterans 
and their families beyond the year 2030. And in Port Hudson, Louisiana, th« 



47 



VA has been negotiating with the Georgia-Pacific Corporation to acquire nearly 
12 acres adjacent to the Port Hudson National Cemetery, which closed in 1992. 
Alexandria National Cemetery, the only open national cemetery in Louisiana, is 
scheduled to close later this year; therefore, the re-opening of Port Hudson 
will permit continuing service to Louisiana veterans and families. We are 
pursuing other efforts to acquire land for other national cemeteries wherever 
it is feasible and cost effective to do so. 

Our third approach is to utilize the State Cemetery Grants Program to 
complement our national system of cemeteries. This program has been very 
successful to date; however, interest has declined in recent months. Most 
state officials appear to be taking a "wait and see" approach on the viability 
of paaeage of leqialation changing the federal/state share from 50/50 to 
65/35% funding aa provided for in H.R. 949. Recent requests from states have 
involved improvements to existing cemeteries rather than applications for new 
state cemeteries. This program remains an integral and important component of 
our strategy to meet the increasing need for burial space. We must continue 
to pursue ways to increase the participation of states in this worthwhile 
program. 

A recently completed initiative to improve customer service was the 
reint reduction of the upright granite headstones. Initially, the new granite 
uprights will only be available to marlc veterans' graves in private or state 
veterans cemeteries. We will then assess their acceptability by the veteran 
coaamunity before deciding their suitability for use in national cemeteries. 

The National Cemetery System continues to seek ways to meet the increasing 
worlcload demand and to satisfy the high expectations of the public we serve. 
Our FY 1995 budget contains an additional 25 FTE to perform interment and 
maintenance functions within our national cemeteries. In addition, I have 
initiated a streamlining effort which has resulted in a reduction of 7 FTE in 
Central Office which will be re-channeled to our field facilities. I plan to 
continue these efforts to decentralize functions and streamline our 
organisation whenever possible. 



48 



I thank you for the opportunity to provide an update on the National Cemetery 
System and welcome your questions. Thank you. 



49 



STATEMENT OF STEVEN DOLA 

DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY (MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET), 

OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF THE ARMY (CIVIL WORKS) 

BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON HOUSING AND MEMORIAL AFFAIRS 

COMMITTEE ON VETERANS' AFFAIRS, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ON THE OPERATION OF ARLINGTON NATIONAL CEMETERY 

MAY 24, 1994 



MR. CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE: 

INTRODUCTION 

I am pleased to be testifying before this subcommittee on the 
operation of Arlington National Cemetery. I am the Deputy Assistant 
Secretary for (Management and Budget), Office of Assistant Secretary 
of the Army (Civil Works). Assisting me today is Mr. John C. Metzler, 
Jr., Superintendent of Arlington National Cemetery. We are appearing 
on behalf of the Secretary of the Army, who is responsible for the 
operation and maintenance of Arlington and Soldiers' and Airmen's 
Home National Cemeteries. 

My statement covers the following topics: 

> Fiscal Year 1995 Cemeterial Expenses, Army, Budget; 

> History and Present Day Significance; 

> Eligibility; 

> Funerals; 

> Parking Facility; 

> Fiscal Year 1995 New Construction; 

> Previously Funded Construction; and 

> Main Entrance Hemicycle Rehabilitation. 

FISCAL YEAR 1995 CEMETERIAL EXPENSES, ARMY, BUDGET 

The budget request for Fiscal Year 1995 is $12,017,000. The funds 
requested are sufficient to support the work force, to assure 
adequate maintenance of the buildings, and to acquire necessary 
supplies and equipment. The funds requested will finance operations 
at Arlington and Soldiers' and Airmen's Home National Cemeteries. 
Construction funds in the amount of $2,690,000 are included in the 
budget for repair of the McClellan Gate, Memorial Amphitheater inte- 
rior, and roads; upgrade of the electrical system at the Kennedy 
gravesite; and design for Project 90 land development and Custis Walk 
replacement. 



50 



HISTORY AND PRESENT DAY SIGNIFICANCE 

From its origin during the Civil War, Arlington National Cemetery 
has become a great national and military shrine. The 1,100 acre 
estate which comprises Arlington National Cemetery and the Fort 
Myer military reservation has a rich, historical background. It 
became the property of John Parke Custis in 1778 and descended to 
his son, George Washington Parke Custis, who built the handsome 
Greek revival mansion, now known as Arlington House. The grounds 
and house were owned by Robert E. Lee's family at the outbreak of 
the Civil War, when the house was taken over by the government for 
military purposes. 

The establishment of the cemetery dates back to 1864. Today, the 
cemetery consists of 612 acres. Over the years, representatives 
of all the Nation's wars and conflicts have been buried in Arlington 
National Cemetery. Among the more commonly known and deeply cherished 
memorials in Arlington National Cemetery are the Arlington Memorial 
Amphitheater and the Tomb of the Remains of Unknowns from World War 
I, World War II, Korea, and the Vietnam era. 

Arlington National Cemetery has become this Nation's principal 
shrine to honor the men and women who serve in the Armed Forces. 
It is a visible reflection of America's appreciation for those who 
have made the ultimate sacrifice to maintain our freedom. During 
Fiscal Year 1993, Arlington National Cemetery accommodated approxi- 
mately H million visitors, making Arlington one of the most visited 
historic sites in the National Capitol Region. In addition to the 
thousands of funerals, with military honors, held there each year, 
hundreds of non-funeral ceremonies are conducted to honor those 
who rest in the cemetery. Thousands of visitors, both foreign and 
American, visited Arlington in Fiscal Year 1993 to participate in 
about 1,900 non-funeral ceremonies and the President of the United 
States hosted the ceremony on December 21, 1993, breaking ground for 
a memorial to the victims of the Pan Am Flight 103 disaster. 



ELIGIBILITY 

The interment eligibility criteria for Arlington National Cemetery 
are stated in 32 CFR 553.15. The following categories of decedent are 
generally eligible: 

> Members of the Armed Forces who die while serving on active 
duty. 

> Former members of the Armed Forces who have retired with 20 
or more years of active service or reserves. 

> Honorably discharged veterans who have held certain high 
government positions. 

> Honorably discharged veterans who have been awarded either 
the Medal of Honor, Distinguished Service Cross, Navy Cross, Air 
Force Cross, Distinguished Service Medal, Silver Star or the Purple 
Heart. 



51 



> Honorably discharged veterans separated prior to October 1 , 
19'<9, for medical reasons with a service connected disability rated 
at 30 percent or more. 

> Family members such as spouses and children also are 
eligible under certain circumstances. 

Public Law 103-160, which was enacted on November 30, 1993, extended 
eligibility for interment in Arlington National Cemetery to any 
former prisoner of war who, while a prisoner of war, served honorably 
in the active military, naval, or air service and who dies or died on 
or after the date of enactment of the Public Law. This section is to 
be carried out under regulations prescribed by the Secretary of the 
Army. A proposed rule has been drafted cind is being circulated for 
internal coordination prior to publication in the Federal Register . 
It is anticipated that the proposed rule will be published in June, 
199 i*. 

In addition, any honorably discharged veteran whose remains have been 
cremated is eligible for inurnment in the Arlington National Cemetery 
Columbarium. 



FUNERALS 

In Fiscal Year 1993, there were 3,056 interments and 1,583 
inurnments; and 3,500 interments and 1,500 inurnments are estimated 
in Fiscal Year 199^4. 

Inurnment activities in the Columbarium continue to increase. 
In 1980, the first year of operation, there were 657 inurnments. 
Because of the advanced age of World War I and World War II 
Veterans, inurnments are now averaging approximately 1,500 per 
year. At this rate, all available space in the existing Columbarium 
will be exhausted in FY 1998. Design of the next increment of the 
Columbarium has begun so that a valid construction cost estimate 
could be developed in time for consideration in connection with the 
Fiscal Year 1996 budget submission. 

At the end of Fiscal Year 1993, there were 191,118 used gravesites 
to accommodate 217,153 interments. The total gravesite capacity 
is 268,089, leaving 73,971 gravesites available. Current projections 
indicate that all available gravesites will be used by the year 
2025. The Department of the Army is cognizant of this projected 
closing date and remains alert to such possibilities as may present 
themselves for expansion of the capacity of the cemetery. 



PARKING FACILITY 

The Arlington National Cemetery visitors center parking facility 

opened to the public in January 1989. This modern facility combines 

convenience aind information for visitors to Arlington National 

Cemetery. There is parking for 570 cars and U2 buses in the three 

story parking facility. There is a fee for parking at this facility. 



52 



The method of operating the parking facility is by lease to a 
private vendor. A new lease began for a term of 1 year, beginning 
January 16, 199'*, with a Government option to renew at the same 
annual rate, on a yearly basis for the next U years. The fee for 
cars under the new lease is $1 .25 per hour for the first three 
hours. The fee for buses is unchanged - $5.00 per hour for the first 
three hours. 

The new lease provides for an annual payment of $500,000 to the 
government. In addition, of every dollar earned after $74U,I|22, 
ninety six percent is received by the government and four percent 
goes to the vendor. Based on the 1992 usage of the facility and the 
new fee structure, the annual payment to the government would be 
$929,277 compared to $756,861 that was actually received in 1992. 



FISCAL YEAR 1995 NEW CONSTRUCTION 

Major new construction projects planned for Fiscal Year 1995 include 
repairs to existing structures and design for the remaining two 
unstarted projects in the 1967 Master Plan. 



McClellan Gate - The Fiscal Year 1995 request includes $660,000 
for design and construction required to repair and restore the 
Gate. Work will include removal and resetting of stone including 
some stone replacement, structural repairs, repointing, patching and 
cleaning of the entire arch, a new concrete ring foundation, new 
copper roofing and flashing, repair and painting of the iron gate, 
and new granite cobblestone paving around the arch. 



Project 90 Land Development - One of two remaining projects in 
the 1967 Master Plan is the development of the final 52 acres of 
land in the cemetery for burial purposes. The Fiscal Year 1995 
request includes $800,000 to design this project. This development, 
providing approximately 31,000 gravesites, will include construction 
of new roads, paving, curbing, a new drainage system, installation 
of a potable and non-potable water distribution system, 1,500 feet 
of ornamental boundary wall and wrought iron fencing, fine grading 
and topsoiling, establishment of turf, and landscaping. Design of 
the project will be timed to take advantage of and be consistent 
with the work being done on the new Master Plan. 



Custis Walk - The other remaining project from the 1967 Master 
Plan is the replacement of the Custis Walk. The Fiscal Year 1995 
request includes $250,000 to design this project. This project will 
consist of removing and replacing 2,000 feet of existing deteriorat- 
ing bluestone walk and retaining cheek wall constructed in the 
1870 's. The replacement with new flagstone and concrete retaining 
cheek wall will be compatible with the new walkways throughout the 
cemetery. 



53 



Kennedy Gravesite Electrical System - The Fiscal Year 1995 
request includes $300,000 for design and construction required to 
relocate existing above ground, pad-mounted electrical equipment 
into an existing underground vault, which will be enlarged; remove 
the no longer used electrical equipment presently in the vault; and 
add a new switch gear to facilitate future electrical maintenance 
for the Kennedy gravesite area. 



Parking Facility Upper Deck Repair - Pavement on the upper deck 
of the parking facility is deteriorating because of heavy usage by 
buses. The asphalt pavement in this area will be replaced with 
concrete at an estimated cost (including design effort) of $350,000. 



PREVIOUSLY FUNDED CONSTRUCTION 



Master Plan - Arlington is developing a new Master Plan. The new 
plan, which is estimated to cost $1,000,000, will address projected 
improvements for the next 30 years, including expansion of the 
capacity of Arlington National Cemetery and development of out-year 
construction projects. The original 1967 Master Plan consisted of 
28 projects. Of the 28, 25 projects are completed. The West Boundary 
wall project, which has been partially funded, is not completed. The 
two unstarted projects are, one, replacement of the Custis Walk; 
and, two, the development of 52 acres of land in the cemetery for 
burial purposes. 

Memorial Amphitheater Combined Project - In Fiscal Year 1992, 
$U.82 million was appropriated for repair of rainwater leaks at the 
Memorial Amphitheater. In FY 1993, $^.5 million was appropriated for 
a marble restoration to be undertaken in conjunction with the rain- 
water leaks repair project. The design for the combined project is 
now complete. Although we had expected the construction would now 
be underway, resolution of three award protests is required. Actions 
required to resolve the protests have resulted in substantial delay 
in the construction start; and the previously scheduled completion 
date of July 1995 will be delayed by approximately six months. 



Facility Maintenance Complex - The construction contract for the 
new facilities maintenance complex was awarded on January 25, 199'», 
at a cost of $5.8 million, and construction is now underway. The 
facilities maintenance complex will consist of work and storage 
areas for three divisions (Facility Maintenance, Horticulture, and 
Field Operations), in three separate buildings. There will be another 
building for warehouse operations and a building for the administra- 
tive functions associated with all of these operations. In addition, 
the project will include a vehicle storage area, as well as employee 
break rooms, locker and shower rooms, and meeting rooms. This facili- 
ty will replace buildings constructed in 1930 that were originally 
used as horse stables and converted to a cemetery maintenance facili- 
ty in the late 19^0 's. They were not designed to house or service 



54 



modern cemetery maintenance equipment and they do not meet OSHA 
standards. The proposed new facility is sited to facilitate the 
efficient performance of the daily operations of the cemetery in 
proximity to the planned new grave site development. The facility is 
expected to be ready for occupancy in June 1995. 



MAIN ENTRANCE HEMICYCLE REHABILITATION 

The main gate structures, center plaza, and Hemicycle of Arlington 
National Cemetery are located on land belonging to the National Park 
Service. The 199^ Department of Defense Appropriations Act provides 
$9,538,000, to be available through the U.S. Air Force, only for a 
grant to the Women in Military Service for America Memorial Foun- 
dation, Inc., to be used solely to perform the repair, restoration 
and preservation of the main gate structures, center plaza, and 
Hemicycle. These funds shall be made available solely for project 
costs, and none of the funds are for remuneration of any entity or 
individual associated with fund raising for the Memorial project. 

The Hemicycle restoration is envisioned to occur simultaneously with 
the construction of the Women in Military Service for America 
Memorial, which will be located inside and directly behind the 
Hemicycle. As designed the memorial will be composed of an enhanced 
and restored hemicycle, as well as a visitor facility behind the 
wall. The National Park Service, National Capital Planning Commission 
and Commission of Fine Arts have all approved this facility as 
a Memorial to Women in Military Service to America. Because the 
memorial is to be located on National Park Service lands, the Park 
Service is the lead Federal agency responsible for overseeing design 
and construction of the memorial. The National Park Service has 
indicated that, in an effort to ensure coordination between all 
affected parties, it will take the lead in preparing a memorandum of 
understanding between the National Park Service, Women in Military 
Service for America Memorial Foundation, Inc., the U.S. Air Force, 
and Arlington National Cemetery. This memorandum will identify the 
responsibilities of the affected parties and address the design, 
construction, and operation of the memorial. 

The Army supports the memorial to honor women who have served in the 
Armed Forces of the United States. As design and construction of the 
memorial progresses, Arlington and the Army will endeavor to ensure 
that the memorial, in its location at the entrance to Arlington, is 
compatible with the sacred character and vision of Arlington National 
Cemetery as a national shrine. 

This completes my statement, Mr. Chairman. We will be pleased to 
respond to questions from the Subcommittee. 



55 

Prepgired statement of Colonel William E. Ryan, Jr. 



BEFORE THE 

U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

COMMITTEE ON VETERANS AFFAIRS 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON HOUSING AND MEMORIAL AFFAIRS 

MAY 24, 1994 

The Americaui Battle Monxunents Commission (ABMC) welcomes the opportunity to 
provide information to the Subcommittee on its operations amd the Korean War 
VeteroUis Memorial . 

The principle functions of 7VBMC are to commemorate the achievements and 
sacrifices of the United States Armed Forces where they have served since 
i^ril 6, 1917, through the erection and maintenance of suitable memorial 
shrines; to design, construct, operate and maintain permcuient American 
military cemeteries in foreign countries; to control the design cuid 
construction on foreign soil of U.S. military monuments and markers by other 
U.S. citizens and organizations both public and private; and to encourage 
these orgemizations and individuals to maintain adequately the monuments euid 
markers that they have erected. The guardiainship of our War Dead interred 
on foreign soil is a sacred tjrust for which all of us in the Commission are 
extreme proud. 

Currently, ABMC administers, operates and maintains 24 permanent American 
military burial grounds and 4 9 memorial structures in twelve foreign 
countries amd the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands eind four 
memorials here in the United States. These cemeteries, monuments and 
memorials are among the most beautiful and meticulously maintained shrines 
of their nature in the world. Few others anywhere combine such fitness of 
design, beauty of Icuidscaping and memorial features auid immaculate care. 
ABMC presently is establishing a Korean War Veterauis Memorial in Ash Woods 
at the foot of the Lincoln Memorial . It recently also was charged with 
establishing a World War II memorial in the Washington, D.C. environs. 

Interred in ABMC's cemeteries are 124,912 U.S. War Dead -- 30,921 of World 
War I, 93,241 of World War II, amd 750 of the Mexicaui War. Additionally, 
6,573 American veterans and others are interred in its Mexico City and 
Corozal Americaui Cemeteries . The World War cemeteries and the Mexico City 
Cemetery are closed to further burials except for the remains of American 
War Dead still found from time to time in the battle areas . In addition to 
their burials, the World War I and II cemeteries together with 3 memorials 
on United States soil commemorate individually by name the 94,100 U.S. 
service personnel Missing in Action or lost or buried at sea during the two 
World Wars, the Koreain War auid the Vietnam War. 

The care of these shrines to our War Dead requires a formidable auinual 
program of maintenauice and repair of stiructures, facilities, vehicles and 
equipment and grounds maintenauice. This care includes upkeep of 131,000 
graves and headstones; 53 memorial structures; 41 quarters, utilities auid 
maintenauice facilities; 67 miles of roads auid paths; 911 acres of flowering 
plamts, fine lawns auid meadows; 3 million square feet of shrubs and hedges; 
auid 11 thousauid ornamental shrubs and trees. The estimated replacement cost 
of these structures aind facilities is almost 1/3 of a $billion. All of the 
plamtings including the lawns and to some extent the meadows must be 
cultivated, cut auid/or shaped, fed and treated with insecticides auid 
fungicides at regular intervals during the growing season. Additionally, 



56 



the plantings must be replaced when their useful lives are exhausted or they 
receive major storm or other damage. Much of this maintenance and care must 
be performed by casual labor as the cemetery staffs are not large enough to 
provide it adequately on a daily basis. 

ABMC's budget authority for the current year is $20,211,000. Its 
appropriation request euid budget authority for fiscal 1995 is $20,265,000, 
$54,000 more thcin the current year. The expenses of the Commission fall 
into two categories, commemoration of the Armed Forces where they have 
served and care and maintenance of the shrines for which ABMC is 
responsible. Because of the large number of memorial structures, sculpture, 
buildings, headstones, flowering shrubs, ornamental trees, vehicles and 
equipment and the meuiy acres of fine lawns eind meadows, ABMC is very lal>or 
intensive. Last year, over 75% of ABMC's Budget Authority went to defray 
personnel salaries and benefits. The foreign governments where our 
installations are located annually decree cost of living increases for our 
foreign national employees of at least $400,000. When our Budget Authority 
does not increase by a similar amount, there are times we must defray these 
cost of living increases with funds budgeted for care and mainteneince and 
replacement of supplies, materials, spare parts eind equipment. 

The following information eind services are provided on request without cost 
to relatives and friends of those seirvicemen and women who are interred in 
ABMC cemeteries or commemorated individually by name on its Tablets of the 
Missing: name, location and general information cibout the cemetery, monument 
or memorial in which they are interested; plot, row and grave numbers if 
appliccible; best routes and modes of travel in-country to these shrines; 
general information about accommodations in their vicinity; letters 
authorizing fee free passports for members of the immediate family 
travelling overseas specifically to visit sm ABMC grave or memorial site; a 
black cind white photograph of the headstone or section of the Tablets of the 
Missing where the name of the decedent is engraved mounted on a large color 
lithograph of the cemetery or memorial, together with a booklet describing 
the cemetery or memorial in detail; arrangement for floral decoration of a 
gravesite or section of the TeQjlets of the Missing where the name of the 
decedent is engraved utilizing funds provided by the donor; euid provision to 
the donor of a color Polaroid photograph of the decoration in place, weather 
permitting. 

On August 7, 1992, ABMC dedicated the Guadalcanal American Memorial on 
Skyline Drive overlooking Honiara, Guadalceinal in the Solomon Isleinds. It 
honors those servicemen who lost their lives during the Guadalcanal 
Campaign. The memorial was a joint project of ABMC eind the Guadalcanal/ 
Solomon Islcinds War Memorial Fovindation. It consists of an inscribed four 
foot square pylon of red calca granite rising twenty- four feet cibove its 
base and four radiating directional walls. Engraved on these walls are 
descriptions of the major battles towards which they point, Savo Island 
where four major naval battles took place, "Iron Bottom Sound" named for the 
meUiy ships that lay on its floor, Edson's ridge commonly called "Bloody 
Ridge" for the fierce fighting in defense of Henderson Field that took place 
there, eind Mount Austen where infeuitry units engaged a heavily intrenched 
enemy. Two ABMC Commissioners who fought in that campaign; Colonel Badger, 
Acting Secretary of ABMC; approximately 300 veterans of the 1st Marine 
Division and the Army Americal Division; and other Marine Corps, Naval and 
Army veterans of the campaign attended the dedication. General Raymond G. 
Davis, USMC(Ret) represented the President at the ceremony. 



57 



Piiblic Law 99-572 was enacted on October 28, 1986 authorizing ABMC to 
establish a Koream War Veterans Memorial in the Nation's Capital utilizing 
fimds obtained primarily through private donations. Since then, legislation 
was sought euid enacted authorizing erection of the memorial on the Mall; a 
superb site for it was obtained in Ash Woods directly across the Reflecting 
Pool from the Vietnam Memorial; at the request of the Koream War Veterans 
Memorial Advisory Board (KWVMAB) , a national competition was held to obtain 
a design concept; and the architecture/engineering firm of Cooper/Lecky was 
employed to assist us in obtaining approval of the winning design concept 
from the Commission of Fine Arts, the National Capital Planning Commission 
amd the Secretary of the Interior. Simultaneously, a fund raising campaign 
was initiated to raise the funds needed to establish the memorial, over and 
above the $1 million which was authorized to be appropriated by P.L. 99-572. 
With the assistance of the KWVMAB, $7,808,000 was raised in private 
contributions, $5,820,000 was raised from sale of the commemorative coin and 
$2,487,000 in interest is being raised by investing in government securities 
funds not immediately needed to esteiblish the memorial, for a total of 
$16,115,000. With the $1,000,000 that was appropriated, adequate funds 
should availaJDle to complete the memorial. Among its many provisions, the 
Commemorative Works Act provides 7 years from the date of enactment of a 
memorial's authorizing legislation for the sponsor to obtain a building 
permit from the Secretary of the Interior. In order to do so, the following 
conditions had to be met: the site and design had to be acceptcible to all 
approving authorities; knowledgeable persons qualified in preservation and 
maintenance had to be consulted to ensure that the structural soundness amd 
durability of the commemorative work would meet high professional standards; 
contracts for construction and drawings of the commemorative work had to be 
submitted to the Secretary of the Interior; and sufficient funds had to be 
available to construct the memorial. As the Korean War Veterans Memorial is 
being erected with funds obtained primarily through private contributions, 
cui additional sum equal to 10% of the construction cost had to be made 
available to the Secretary of the Interior to defray future maintenauice and 
repairs to the memorial . The construction permit was issued by the 
Secretary of the Interior on October 4, 1993. Installation of utilities and 
soil stabilization were completed in March of this year. Construction of 
the memorial should be completed in June of next year. Target date for 
dedication of the memorial is July 27, 1995, the 42 Anniversary of the 
signing of the Armistice in Korea. 

Last fall, P.L. 103-32 was enacted authorizing ABMC to esteiblish a memorial 
in the District of Columbia or its environs honoring members of the U.S. 
Armed Forces who served in World War II and to commemorate the participation 
of the United States in that War. The memorial is to be funded by private 
contributions and surcharges from the sale of three commemorative coins 
minted last year by the U.S. Mint, a $5 gold piece, a $1 silver coin amd a 
$0.50 clad coin. There was a surcharge of $35 on each gold coin, $8 on each 
silver coin auid $2 on each clad coin. In accordance with P.L. 102-414, 
after recovery of minting costs, the first $3 million in surcharges went to 
the Battle of Normandy Foundation, a U.S. private nonprofit orgamization, to 
erect a World War II Memorial Garden at a French museum in Caen, France. 
The next $7 million was to go to ABMC for the World War II Memorial. After 
that, any surcharges received were to be split monthly between the two 
organizations with 30% going to the Normandy Foundation and 70% to ABMC. 
Had all coins authorized to be minted been sold, the total value of the 
surcharges would have been $22.5 million. By law, minting of the coins 



58 



ceased on 31 December 1993. The U.S. World War II Memorial received 
$4,599,804 from the surcharges. Last July, the Secretary of the Interior 
was asked to petition the Congress to enact legislation authorizing 
placement of the World War II Memorial in Area I of the Nation's Capital. 
It is anticipated that the petition will reach the Congress shortly. In 
accordance with the Commemorative Works Act, the Congress will have 150 days 
to enact the legislation, otherwise the petition is disapproved. 

ABMC's memorial shrines will be featured prominently in the 50th Anniversary 
of World War II Commemorations being held this June. President Clinton, 
foreign Heads of State, other U.S. and foreign diplomats, members of 
Congress senior military officers and many tens of thouscuids of veterans 
will be attending ceremonies at ABMC's Sicily-Rome Cemetery near Anzio, its 
Normandy American Cemetery and Memorial overlooking Omaha Beach, . its 
memorials at Utah Beach and Pointe du Hoc, and its Cemetery Memorial at 
Cambridge, Englcuid. We hope that you will be among those in attendamce. 

This concludes my prepared statement. We will be pleased to respond to your 
questions . 



58 



statement of Larry D. Rhea, Deputy Director of Legislative Affairs, Non 
Commissioned Officers Association of the United States of America 



Mr. Chairman, the Non Commissioned Officers Association of the USA (NCOA) sincerely 
appreciates the opportunity to present its views on oversight of the National Cemetery System 
(NCS), American Battle Monuments Commission (ABMC) and to comment on H.J. Res 131. 
The Association remains generally satisfied with the management and operation of the NCS 
although that is not intended to imply that the Association does not have any concerns. NCOA 
trusts that its observations will prove useful to the Subcommittee. 

A WORD OF THANKS 

NCOA considers it appropriate to begin by expressing to the Subcommittee our deep 
appreciation for the recognition that has been recently extended to members of the National 
Guard and Reserve. The Association is grateful for the action taken in 1992 to provide burial 
Flags and grave markers as well as for the recent passage by the Congress of H.R. 821. The 
action in 1992 in company with the enactment of H.R. 821, to extend burial in National 
Cemeteries, now provides full recognition for the valuable service of Reserve component 
members. 

These recent accomplishments would not have occurred were it not for the persistent efforts of 
the distinguished Chairman and members of this Subcommittee. The Association's 160,000 
members commends your efforts to recognize, with dignity and respect, all members of the Total 
Force. You have our deep and abiding thanks. 

THE NATIONAL CEMETERY SYSTEM 

Today's hearing is timely with the recent publication and release of the Secretary of Veterans 
Affairs second report on the NCS. The first report in 1987 identified ten areas of the country 



60 



in "greatest need" (the largest number of veterans without reasonable access to a national or state 
cemetery). Similarly, the 1994 report identified the ten most needy areas. A comparison of 
the two reports indicates that little has changed between 1987 and 1994 regarding the overall 
needs and outlook for the NCS. 

A total of 114 national cemeteries comprise the NCS. In September 1992, 53 of the 114 
national cemeteries were closed to full-casketed remains. NCS is projecting that in six years an 
additional eleven sites will close bringing the total to 64 by the year 2000. Nine other 
cemeteries are projected to close between the period 2000 and 2010. In other words, if the NCS 
remains on its present course, 65% of national cemeteries will be considered closed in the next 
sixteen years. 

Nationally, the number of internments for veteran or eligible individuals will continue to 
increase. Another annual record of internments (73,000) is expected in Fiscal Year 1995, a 55 % 
increase in the last ten years. Similarly, the number of gravesites maintained is estimated to 
reach 2.1 million by 1995, a 35% increase in ten years. Since the system's establishment in the 
Department of Veterans Affairs in 1973, approximately 1 ,014,000 decedents have been interred 
in national cemeteries and 5.6 million headstones and markers have been furnished to mark 
gravesites. A total of 330,000 gravemarker applications are projected for Fiscal Year 1995. 

VA estimates that staffing shortages of 244 wage grade employees and 41 general schedule 
employees will exist in Fiscal Year 1995. During the period 1984 to 1995, full-time wage grade 
employees of the NCS have risen from 830 in 1984 to 847 projected for 1995, a 3% increase. 
VA estimates that staffing shortages of 244 wage grade employees and 41 general schedule 
employees will exist in Fiscal Year 1995. 

These staffing shortages requires that VA prioritize its efforts. First priority is given to timely 
burial. Second in priority are enhancements of cemetery appearance and infrastructure such as 
maintenance and repair of the NCS's approximately 400 buildings and 100 miles of road. 



61 



The backlog for essential operating equipment remains a critical issue. Although VA has 
pursued an aggressive service life extension and maintenance program, there inevitably are 
eventual limits. With available funding in 1994, the equipment backlog increased to S6.7 million 
and VA projects an additional $2.7 million in equipment due for replacement in 1995. Funding 
requested in 1995 to reduce the backlog of equipment replacement is $1.6 million. It is noted 
with gratitude that the House Veterans Affairs Committee recommended the addition of $7.8 
million for equipment replacement. 

NCOA is pleased to note that the DVA has recently purchased land in the Seattle/Tacoma area 
to establish a new national cemetery and that construction funds have been provided in the 1995 
budget. The Association appreciates the action by Congress to provide land acquisition funds 
for cemeteries in Albany, Cleveland, Dallas/Ft. Worth and Chicago. These four sites were 
included in the 1987 report as among the areas of the country in greatest need. NCOA also 
notes that four other locations identified in the 1987 report (Miami/Fort Lauderdale, Detroit, 
Pittsburgh and Oklahoma City) remain as priorities in the VA's 1994 report for establishment 
of new cemeteries. NCOA is concerned about the slow progress on these latter four sites and 
it now appears that it will be after the year 2000 before VA will focus on these areas. The 
reality of the 1995 budget and future indicators clearly show that the establishment of new 
national cemeteries will not proceed at a pace to meet expanding veterans needs. 

NCOA continues to support the State Cemetery Grants Program and its funding mechanism 
because studies have shown that veterans prefer to be buried close to their home. As VA notes 
in their 1994 NCS report, the federal government cannot rely though upon the States to open 
State veterans cemeteries to compensate for all national cemetery closures. Hence, while this 
is a worthy and attractive alternative, the need for new national cemeteries and/or expansion of 
existing cemeteries will continue. In NCOA's view, the federal government retains the primary 
responsibility to provide a final, dignified resting place for the Nation's veterans. That 
responsibility must be protected and continued. 



62 



NCOA remains committed to the goal of burial in a national or state veterans cemetery for 90% 
of veterans within 50 miles of their home. Even in the face of rather harsh fiscal realities, 
NCOA believes that this overall goal should not be compromised. Admittedly it will be difficult 

to achieve in the foreseeable future but that alone should not be cause to dilute the goal. 

The 1995 budget and the 1994 NCS Report reveals that the NCS continues to fall farther behind 
in its efforts to keep pace with an increased workload and maintenance of national cemeteries. 
NCOA remains hopeful however that this trend can be reversed. In this regard, NCOA urges 
the Subcommittee to remain vigilant in its oversight responsibilities to the following areas in 
particular: 

> Employee levels 

> Acquisition, construction and expansion 

> Equipment needs and backlog . 

ARLINGTON NATIONAL CEMETERY 

AND THE 

AMERICAN BATTLE MONUMENTS COMMISSION 

NCOA continues to view Arlington National Cemetery as the preeminent shrine of honor to the 
Nation's veterans. The Association extends its sincere gratitude to the Administrators of the 
Arlington National Cemetery for their excellent management and support to the veterans of this 
Nation. 

Similarly, NCOA would like to thank the members of the American Battle Monuments 
Commission for their stellar work in commemorating the services and achievements of United 
States Armed Forces in foreign countries. 



63 



NCOA does have one overriding concern regarding Arlington National Cemetery that the 
Association is compelled to address in this testimony. The Association's concern is that the 
epitaph that Arlington National Cemetery symbolizes to the men and women of the United States 
Armed Forces not be diminished. 

NCOA was disappointed by Congressional approval of S.J. Res 129 to place a memorial cairn 
in Arlington that will, in effect, honor 245 non-military individuals, 81 of which are non-U. S. 
citizens. It is not the Association's intent though to rehash that decision by the Congress. In 
stating our concern, the Association wants to be implicitly clear that NCOA shares the deepest 
regret, sympathy and outrage for the senseless act of terrorism which occurred on December 2 1 , 
1988, over Lockerbie, Scotland. Likewise, the Association is deeply grateful to the people of 
Scotland for donating to the United States a memorial cairn to honor the victims and families 
of Pan Am Flight 103. 

The Association is obliged though to remind this Subcommittee and the Congress of the purpose 
of Arlington National Cemetery and of its legacy to the men and women of the Armed Forces 
of the United States. For more than a century, Arlington National Cemetery has become the 
preeminent and cherished shrine commemorating the lives and services of members of the United 
States Armed Forces. Within the boundaries of Arlington rest the mortal remains of the honored 
dead, the known and the unknown, the great and the humble, who have served our Nation's 
Armed Forces from the time of the Revolutionary War. Arlington National Cemetery is a 
national "Shrine of Each Patriot's Devotion" for their service and sacrifice in the Armed Forces 
of the United States. It is NCOA's humble wish that Arlington National Cemetery remain so 
always. 

It is difficult for NCOA to articulate this concern regarding Arlington National Cemetery without 
the risk of being characterized as unsympathetic for the grief, pain and loss suffered. As a 
military and veterans service organization, the 160,000 members of NCOA are all too familiar 
with the agony and grief associated with the loss of a loved one or fellow comrade-in-arms, 
regardless of the circumstances surrounding that loss. 



64 



NCOA requests that Congress reaffirm the purpose and legacy of Arlington National Cemetery 
to the men and women of the Armed Forces of the United States by codifying the qualifications 
of eligibility for burial or commemoration in Arlington National Cemetery. 

H.J. Res. 131 

NCOA fully supports H.J. Res. 132, a joint resolution to designate December 7 of each year 
as "National Pearl Harbor Remembrance Day." 

CONCLUSION 

Mr. Chairman, NCOA sincerely appreciates the opportunity you have provided to discuss the 
National Cemetery System. In the Association's opinion, aggressive oversight of the NCS will 
continue to be needed if we are to ensure that veterans, as a final act of a grateful Nation, are 
bestowed with the honor, respect and dignity that they have earned. 

Thank you. 



65 



STATEMENT OF 

TERRY GRANDISON, ASSOCIATE LEGISLATIVE DIRECTOR 

PARALYZED VETERANS OF AMERICA 

BEFORE THE 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON HOUSING AND MEMORIAL AFFAIRS 

OF THE 

HOUSE COMMITTEE ON VETERANS' AFFAIRS 

CONCERNING 

THE DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS NATIONAL CEMETERY SYSTEM 

THE KOREAN WAR VETERANS MEMORIAL 

AND 

H.J. RES. 131 

MAY 24, 1994 

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee, Paralyzed Veterans 
of America (PVA) appreciates this opportunity to present testimony 
concerning the oversight of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) 
National Cemetery System (NCS) , the Korean War Veterans Memorial, 
and H.J. Res. 131. 

NATIONAL CEMETERY SYSTEM 

For over two centuries, this nation has provided a dignified 
resting place for the men and women who have honorably served in 
the Armed Forces. PVA strongly believes this longstanding 
tradition embodies the final thanks of a grateful nation and must 
be protected and continued. 

In order to maintain an efficient and responsive NCS, PVA believes 
it is incumbent on Congress to address the following problems: 
chronic under funding; lack o£ burial space; equipment backlog; 
aging infrastructure; significant workload growth; and lack of an 
adequate information system. If these problems are not effectively 



66 



remedied, the system will deteriorate to an unacceptable condition, 
not only in appearance but also in stature. 

Fiinding : 

According to the FY 1995 Independent Budget {IB) , the NCS has 
shown no real dollar growth in programs, with the exception of a 
congressionally mandated FY 1991 infusion of $10 million dollars. 
The IB recommendation for FY 95 is $81 million, or an increase of 
$10.5 million over the FY 1994 appropriation of $70.5 million. In 
addition, the above IB budget request includes an increase of 90 
FTEE. The total FTEE for FY 1994 was 1,315. The IB request would 
raise the total NCS FTEE to 1,4 05. This would ensure the proper 
maintenance and the preservation of the park- like beauty of these 
national shrines. Moreover, funding at this level will allow the 
NCS to meet the increasing demands of the aging veteran population. 

Lack of Burial Space: 

The NCS is comprised of 114 national cemeteries, with thirty-four 
soldiers' lots located within municipal and private cemeteries. 
The IB stated that of the 67,329 burials in national cemeteries, 
25.3 percent or 17,044 were cremains. In addition, the IB revealed 
that the cremation rate in national cemeteries is higher than the 
rate for private or municipal cemeteries. PVA and the IB co- 
authors attribute this higher NCS rate to a number of factors, most 
notably the lack of available casketed grave space in many 
populated areas, coupled with a greater willingness to accept 
cremation burial. Nevertheless, the need for burial space is 
expected to peak in the year 2009. To meet this great demand, 
sufficient funds will be needed to acquire adjacent land to keep 
existing cemeteries open, open new cemeteries in seriously 
underserved areas, and develop columbaria in existing cemeteries to 
preserve a burial option for veterans and their families. In 
addition, PVA continues to advocate for the location of a VA 
cemetery in every state and a national cemetery within reasonable 
driving distance of each major veterans' population center. 



67 



Equipment Backlog: 

PVA has tracked the NCS equipment backlog and has seen it grow 
steadily over the years. A 1990 study revealed that more than 50 
percent of the heavy equipment was well beyond its scheduled 
replacement date of five years. While the current equipment 
backlog stands at $6 million, this figure does not fully capture 
the seriousness of the situation,- this figure does not reflect lost 
productivity of staff because of equipment breakdowns, or graves 
that cannot be adequately maintained. PVA recommends funding of at 
least $2.3 million to begin partial reduction of the equipment 
backlog . 

Aging Infrastructure: 

PVA is concerned with the aging infrastructure of the NCS. The NCS 
is composed of numerous historic buildings, hundreds of maintenance 
buildings and other purpose buildings. The NCS has more than 
10,000 acres of land - intersected with hundreds of miles of roads. 
Because of years of underfunding this infrastructure has suffered. 
In many cases, repairs to old roads and structures are simply 
beyond the capability of cemetery personnel. In order to maintain 
the shrine like quality of national cemeteries, PVA recommends 
that $2 million be directed for funding of repair projects . 

Workload Growth: 

The rapidly aging veteran population will increase the NCS workload 
in all program areas. For example, during FY 1995, interments are 
estimated at 73,000, an increase of 3,000 over FY 1994 estimates. 
As mentioned earlier, this growth is expected to rise until the 
year 2009. The NCS must have sufficient personnel to facilitate 
this growth efficiently. Over the years, the need for significant 
increases in FTEE to meet workload growth has remained unfunded. 
The NCS is estimated to have a shortfall of 250 FTEE for its 
current field staffing needs. PVA and the IB co-authors recommend 
$1.4 million and 4 FTEE for incremental workload increases, along 
with a plan to support, in FY 1995, a substantial reduction in the 



68 



system-wide shortfall of 250 FTEE. PVA recommends SI .8 million and 
50 FTEE to address this shortfall. 

Adequate Information System: 

NCS's information needs are critical to its overall operations. 
The computer system for the Office of Memorial Programs (OMP) is 
antiquated and often unreliable. According to the IB, OMP's 
workload is projected to increase at a rate of 2 to 3 percent per 
year. For FY 1993 OMP provided 330,345 headstones and markers. 
The FY 1993 total for Presidential Memorial Certificates (PMC) was 
269,489. PVA believes the procurement of an updated computer 
support system could provide an FTEE savings to the system. It is 
estimated that 3.0 FTEE savings could be achieved in the PMC 
program and that a 3.5 FTEE savings could be realized in the 
headstone and marker program. A new computer system is also 
necessary to interface with the burial operation's support system 
(BOSS) . PVA urges Congress to appropriate $800.000 for this system 
in FY 1995 . 

PVA would like to thank the Administrators of the Arlington 
National Cemetery and the members of the American Battle Monuments 
Commission for their efforts to provide excellent support services 
to the veterans of this nation. 

KOREAN WAR VETERANS MEMORIAL 

On June 27, 1953, the hostilities ceased throughout the war-torn 
Republic of Korea. During the Korean War's three year duration (21 
June 1950 - 27 July 1953) 5,720,000 Americans served in the Armed 
Forces. Of those servicemen and women, 34,000 were killed in 
action, 8,000 of whom were missing in action and later declared 
dead, and 20,000 others died of non-battle causes, for a total of 
54,000 deaths in service. Also, 103,000 were wounded, and 7000 
were captured or interned; only 4,000 of the latter were returned 
by the enemy. These staggering statistics clearly illustrate the 
magnificent courage, honor, and sacrifice of America's servicemen 



and women during the Korean War. PVA is a proud supporter of the 
establishment of a Korean War Veterans Memorial . PVA's support and 
commitment to the erection of a Korean War Veterans Memorial is 
longstanding. PVA was particularly proud when Public Law 99-572 
was enacted on October 28, 1986, authorizing the American Battle 
Monuments Commission to erect a Korean War Veterans Memorial in 
Washington, D.C. 

Since the enactment of P.L. 99-572, more than $17 million have been 
collected to build the Memorial. PVA contributed $100,000 to-Aard 
the completion of this great memorial. In addition, the contract 
for the first construction phase, site stabilization, began on 
April 28, 1993. Actual construction began on the memorial in April 
1994. The dedication of the memorial is planned for July 27, 1995. 
PVA, the veterans community, and all Americans look forward to the 
completing of this well deserved acknowledgment and tribute to 
Korean War Veterans. 

On another related issue, PVA supports H.J. Res. 332. This joint 
resolution would provide an annual Korean War Veterans Armistice 
Day on July 27th. The passage of H.J. Res. 332 is a fitting 
remembrance of those who served in the Korean War. PVA strongly 
urges members of this Subcommittee to support H.J. Res 332. 

H.J. RES. 131 

This joint resolution would designate December 7 of each year as 
National Pearl Harbor Remembrance Day. President Franklin D. 
Roosevelt characterized the attack on Pearl Harbor as: "a day 
that will live in infamy." PVA believes it is essential that we 
keep the memory of December 7, 1941, alive for the reasons so 
eloquently stated by the President on that fateful day. PVA 
believes that a National Pearl Harbor Remembrance Day is necessary 
to make President Roosevelt's prophecy a fact. 



70 



Mr. Chairman that concludes my testimony. I will be happy to 
answer any questions that you, or this Subcommittee, might have. 



71 



STATEMEKT OF JOHN R. VITIKAC8, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR 
NATIONAL VETERANS AFFAIRS AND REHABILITATION COMMISSION 

THE AMERICAN LEGION 

BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON HOUSING AND MEMORIAL AFFAIRS 

COMMITTEE ON VETERANS AFFAIRS 

O.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 24. 1994 

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee: 

The American Legion appreciates the opportunity to comment 
on the operations of the National Cemetery System (NCS) . We 
value the efforts of the Subcommittee to ensure high standards 
for the operations and functions of the National Cemetery 
System. Also, we commend the National Cemetery System staff for 
the skillful leadership and sound judgement exercised in 
directing cemetery operations. 

Mr. Chairman, the National Cemetery System must carry out 
its mission in a first-class manner because the American public 
demands nothing less. When conditions in a national cemetery 
are not satisfactory to the survivors of deceased veterans, 
those families let us know, and they let their Congressional 
representatives know also. Veterans who choose a national 
cemetery for their interment and the interment of their families 
trust that the federal government will provide an honored 
resting place and proper perpetual care. As this Subcommittee 
knows, limited funding makes the job of the NCS harder each 
year. 

Only about ten percent of eligible veterans choose to be 
buried in a national cemetery. Other veterans and their 
dependents are buried in state veterans' cemeteries. The data 
do not adequately explain why so few eligible veterans choose 
national or state veterans' cemeteries as a final resting 
place. Perhaps one critical factor is that many veterans live 
far away from an active national or state veterans' cemetery. 
That is why The American Legion has called for an expansion of 
existing national cemeteries, where possible, and for the 
construction of new national and state veterans' cemeteries. 
Until new national cemeteries and additional state veterans' 
cemeteries become reality, eligibility for burial benefits will 
not be evenly available to all veterans. 

Mr. Chairman, because the practical option of burial in a 
veterans' cemetery is unavailable to many veterans, The American 
Legion supports the restoration and increase of a burial 
allowance for veterans who are buried in private cemeteries. 
Until 1981, this benefit was available to all veterans. Also, 
we support the restoration of the pre-1990 Omnibus Budget 



72 



Reconciliation Act burial benefits to provide eligibility for a 
government furnished headstone allowance and plot allowance. 
These benefits were eliminated by the Congress due to budgetary 
constraints. The American Legion believes that every veteran 
should be eligible for these benefits until all veterans have a 
realistic option of burial in a national or state veterans' 
cemetery. In the long run these benefits are less costly than 
the expenses associated with new cemetery construction and 
perpetual maintenance. 

For Fiscal Year 1995, the President's budget proposes an 
increase of $2,156 million for cemetery operations and an 
increase of 25 full time employees (FTE) . The Legion commends 
the vision associated with these proposals. Also, we support 
the President's proposal to fund the construction of a new 
national cemetery in the Seattle/Tacoma area of Washington 
State. We believe that the priority areas identified in the 
February 1994 VA report on the National Cemetery System, 
including: Seattle/Tacoma, WA; Cleveland, OH; Albany, NY; 
Chicago, IL; and Dallas/Ft. Worth, TX, should proceed with the 
greatest dispatch. The American Legion recommends that these 
proposed new national cemeteries all receive construction 
funding by the end of this decade. This is an achievable and 
feasible goal. We also support the transfer of 43 acres of land 
from the Department of Defense to VA to expand the active life 
of the Ft. Sam Houston, Texas national cemetery. Since this 
cemetery is scheduled to close by 1998, it is important that no 
delays occur in this process. 

The final supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 
(EIS) on the planned new national cemetery in northern 
Illinois is expected to support the development of 900 acres of 
the Army's Joliet Arsenal for a national cemetery. The 
American Legion supports the construction of a national cemetery 
in northern Illinois, and recommends the VA and Congress move as 
quickly as possible to make this long awaited cemetery a reality. 

Mr. Chairman, the Legion is concerned about the potential 
impact of the Administration's proposed personnel reductions 
under the Reinventing Government Task Force Report. Any FTE 
reductions will degrade the operations of the National Cemetery 
System. Every dollar now appropriated to the NCS is wisely 
spent. We do not believe that contracting services always 
results in reduced costs. In some instances, contracting 
services provides the NCS with needed flexibility for the 
proper use of authorized personnel. However, required 
contracting would not be in the best interest of the NCS. 



73 



Mr. Chairman, for many years, the National Cemetery System 
has not received adequate major construction funding. When 
major construction funding for necessary renovation and 
restoration projects is inadequate, the planned major projects 
are separated into minor projects, adding additional costs of 15 
to 3 percent over a longer period of time. That is not a good 
use of taxpayer dollars. Yet, this practice has continued for 
many years. The Legion believes the National Cemetery System's 
construction program must be fully and properly funded. No one 
would be proud to see these dignified resting places fall into 
the same state of disrepair as many of our nation's private 
cemeteries, old and new. The Congress must get serious about 
providing proper funding for our national cemeteries. 

Another issue that impedes the ability to provide the most 
efficient burial service is the persistent replacement equipment 
funding shortfall. The backlog for replacement equipment at the 
end of Fiscal Year 1992 was $5.9 million. By the end of this 
year, the backlog is projected to total $6.7 million, and $7.8 
million by the end of Fiscal Year 1995. During the current 
fiscal year, the National Cemetery System had allocated $3 
million toward new replacement equipment. Of this amount, $1.7 
million has been redirected as follows: $0.9 million for 
locality pay and other payroll increases; $0.6 million for 
increased funding for M&R projects; $0.2 million for increased 
costs for utilities and data communications. 

For Fiscal Year 1995, of $2.7 million identified for new 
replacement equipment, only $1.6 million will be allocated for 
such purpose. 

Mr. Chairman, The American Legion has testified in support 
of H.R. 949, a bill to adjust the Federal/State allocation for 
construction funding of state veterans' cemeteries from the 
current 50/50 allocation to a 65 percent Federal/35 percent 
State funding formula. The state construction allocation can be 
further reduced up to 50 percent through the donation of land. 
This measure would also provide for a plot allowance of $150 for 
each eligible veteran buried in a state veterans' cemetery. We 
hope this bill, which has passed the House, will be favorably 
considered in the Senate. 

Public Law 95-476, enacted in 1978, created a Federal 
program of aid to States for the establishment, expansion, and 
improvement of veterans' cemeteries. The program was advertised 
as a Federal/ State partnership in the development and 
maintenance of veterans' cemeteries. Originally, VA was to 
participate in all costs associated with the program. The 
original law required a 65/35 percent share in state cemetery 



74 



construction costs, a $150 plot allowance aid program for each 
veteran burial, and an annual $40 maintenance fee for each 
veteran burial. 

Mr. Chairman, the State Cemetery Grants Program is a good 
deal for VA but not for the states. If not for this program, 
VA's national cemetery expenses would be much more costly. On 
the average, it costs the states $650 for each veteran's 
burial. The return to the states is $150 for the burial of an 
eligible veteran. Clearly, the State Cemetery Grants Program is 
not cost-effective to the states. Since 1980, the plot 
allowance paid to the states has been set at $150. While we 
realize the proposal contained within H.R. 949, to pay a plot 
allowance of $150 to the states for each eligible veteran's 
burial is an improvement over current conditions, we also think 
the plot allowance should be increased. With VA participating 
in all costs associated with the development and maintenance of 
state veterans' cemeteries, the program could provide greater 
incentives to the states for their involvement. 

Mr. Chairman, with regard to H.J. Resolution 131, 
designating December 7 of each year as "National Pearl Harbor 
Remembrance Day", delegates to The American Legion 1992 National 
Convention, approved Resolution No. 2 30, urging the Congress to 
name December 7 as National Pearl Harbor Day. The Legion 
enthusiastically supports H.J. Resolution 131. 

Mr. Chairman, The American Legion deeply appreciates the 
continuing involvement of the Advisory Board to the Korean War 
Veterans Memorial, as set forth in Public Law 99-572. This 
Advisory Board has played a large role in the accomplishments of 
the Korean War Veterans Memorial. The Board should remain an 
active component of the dedication planning process. 

Mr. Chairman, that concludes our statement. 



75 



STATEMENT OF 

RICK SURRATT 

ASSOCIATE NATIONAL LEGISLATIVE DIRECTOR 

OF THE 

DISABLED AMERICAN VETERANS 

BEFORE THE 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON HOUSING AND MEMORIAL AFFAIRS 

OF THE 

COMMITTEE ON VETERANS' AFFAIRS 

U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 24, 1994 



MR. CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE: 

I am pleased to appear before you today on behalf of the 
more than 1.4 million members of the Disabled American Veterans 
(DAV) and its Women's Auxiliary to present our views on the 
operation and status of the Department of Veterans Affairs 
National Cemetery System. The DAV appreciates the opportunity 
to participate in the oversight process. Additionally, we wish 
to thank the Subcommittee for inviting our testimony on House 
Joint Resolution 131 designating December 7th of each year as 
"National Pearl Harbor Remembrance Day"; on the operation of 
Arlington National Cemetery; and on the status of the Korean War 
Veterans Memorial. And, I would be remiss if I did not express 
our appreciation for this Subcommittee's continuing watchful 
devotion to the interests of our Nation's veterans. 



THE NATIONAL CEMETERY SYSTEM 

Mr. Chairman, the heritage of the National Cemetery System 
had its beginning with the Civil War. What is now the National 
Cemetery System grew out of the 14 national cemeteries 
established by legislation signed by President Lincoln in July 
1862. Today, after our Nation has endured a number of 
additional military conflicts, there are 114 national cemeteries 
with more than 10,000 acres of land. Of course, these thousands 
of acres are made up of much more than just gravesites. There 
are historic structures, miles of roads, and parking lots, etc., 
which combine for the purpose of meeting the highest standards 
for form and function. 

The perpetual maintenance of the grounds, over 400 
buildings, and other structures requires a variety of trucks, 
tractors, and other equipment and vehicles. The logistics, 
support operations, and other programs under the Cemetery System 
involve data processing systems and a variety of publications 
ranging from Presidential Memorial Certificates to handout maps 
and pamphlets and operations manuals. The varied functions are 
accomplished by 1,315 employees. Since 1973, this system has 
been a part of the Veterans Administration, now the Department 
of Veterans Affairs (VA) . 



76 

(2) 



Although the activities and responsibilities of the 
National Cemetery System generally fall into four broad 
categories, its primary mission is to maintain the national 
cemeteries and provide for the interment of the remains of 
eligible deceased service members and veterans, their spouses 
and eligible family members. If the National Cemetery System is 
to fulfill its mission, it cannot be allowed to fall victim to 
neglect. If it is not properly maintained and preserved, it can 
neither serve as a lasting testimonial to this nation's 
gratitude for the service of the veterans already interred 
there, nor continue to meet the future interment needs of our 
aging veterans' population. 

The National Cemetery System must be seen and appreciated 
as a resource worthy of close and ongoing attention. This 
Nation's strength resides in its citizens' values and sense of 
moral obligation to those who uphold its ideals, particularly 
shown by bestowing honor upon those who have served and 
sacrificed to protect our democratic way of life. The National 
Cemetery System has itself stood as an enduring symbol of the 
special honor the Nation reserves for veterans to memorialize 
their patriotic contributions. Certainly if in disrepair, 
national cemeteries cannot project the necessary appearance of a 
stately shrine, of dignity, and of sanctuary. 

The rate of interments is expected to increase 
significantly in the coming years from an estimated 73,000 this 
year to a peak of about 100,000 in the year 2008. It is 
expected that increased capacity will result in increased 
demand. VA's plan for increasing capacity includes three 
approaches: adding new cemeteries, expanding existing 
cemeteries, and involving more states in the State Cemetery 
Grant Program. 

In Seattle, Washington, the land for a cemetery has been 
purchased and the design phase is about to begin. Four other 
regions are targeted for new cemeteries. VA is close to land 
purchases in Cleveland, Ohio, Dallas, Texas, and Albany, New 
York. In the Chicago, Illinois, area where there are over a 
million eligible veterans, site options are being studied. 

VA has bought land for expansions at Fort Gibson, Oklahoma, 
and Fort Scott, Kansas, and is in the process of acquiring land 
by donation in Port Hudson, Louisiana. There are a number of 
other areas which have been identified for cemetery expansion. 
For example, more land is definitely needed for the cemetery at 
Fort Sam Houston, Texas. 

H.R. 949 would make state participation in the State 
Cemetery Grants Program more attractive by increasing the 
Federal grant from 50 percent to 65 percent of the cost of the 
land for the state cemetery and improvements. The DAV fully 
supports this worthy goal. 



77 

(3) 



The VA is increasing its field personnel to meet the 
increasing demands. At the same time, it is streamlining its 
Central Office staff in order to transfer these FTE 
authorizations to its field staff. 

Mr. Chairman, as is the case throughout VA, the Cemetery 
System is operating under the effects of budget restraints. 
However, it is apparent that the Cemetery System is taking 
appropriate measures to adjust to increased demand under those 
circumstances. The delegates to the DAV annual National 
Convention, in August 1993, adopted a resolution supporting 
legislation to provide for at least one open national cemetery 
in each state. The new cemeteries planned at this time would 
not accomplish that goal but are certainly a step in the right 
direction. The DAV commends this good work, and we are 
confident that this Subcommittee will continue its support. 



H.J. Res. 131 

House Joint Resolution 131 would designate December 7 of 
each year as "National Pearl Harbor Remembrance Day" in 
recognition of the historical and patriotic importance of this 
anniversary of the infamous attack on Pearl Harbor on December 
7, 1941. This action stands on its own merits, but the DAV 
certainly supports this admirable expression of appreciation for 
the sacrifices of those who were affected by this event that 
marked our entry into World War II. Many of our members are 
among that group of distinguished veterans, and I am certain 
they appreciate this Subcommittee's initiative on this 
resolution. 



ARLINGTON NATIONAL CEMETERY 

Arlington National Cemetery, the best known of our national 
cemeteries, is under the jurisdiction of the Department of the 
Army. The cemetery grounds are on 612 acres of land. 

Nearly 235,000 service members and family rest at 
Arlington. There are an average of 18 new burials daily. 
Counting those on 50 undeveloped remaining acres, there are 
approximately 76,000 available gravesites. Without further 
expansion, these available gravesites will only allow Arlington 
to remain open until the year 2025. Cemetery officials are 
therefore considering a new master plan for expansion. 

The Cemetery currently employs a staff of 135, with some 
services performed by outside contractors. A new complex is 
under construction. This will house maintenance and other 
support services. Approximately 4 million people visit the 
Cemetery annually. 



78 



(4) 



We are informed that Arlington, like the National Cemetery 
System, has so far been able to cope with budget restraints. 
However, the aging veteran population can be expected to 
increase demands, as is expected with the National Cemetery 
System. This will be an important factor in Congress' 
consideration of future needs. 



KOREAN WAR VETERANS' MEMORIAL 



Mr. Chairman, Public Law 99-572, enacted October 28, 1986, 
authorized the American Battle Monuments Commission (ABMC) to 
erect a Korean War Veterans Memorial in Washington, D.C., on 
Federal land with funds obtained primarily from private 
contributions. This law also provided for the Presidential 
appointment of the twelve-member Korean War Veterans Memorial 
Advisory Board. 

ABMC was created by an act of Congress in March 1923 to 
erect and maintain memorials in the United States and foreign 
countries where United States Armed Forces have served since 
April 6, 1917, the date of our entry into World War I. ABMC 
is an independent agency of the executive branch of the Federal 
Government. Its eleven members are appointed by the President 
of the United States. 

The Korean War Veterans Memorial Advisory Board was given 
the responsibility of site recommendations and design selection 
for the Memorial subject to the approval of ABMC. The 
Advisory Board was also charged with promoting establishment of 
the Memorial and encouraging donations of private funds. 

There are many notable and unique aspects of the Memorial 
project itself. Congress granted $500,000 toward design costs 
and another $500,000 toward construction costs. Congress 
authorized the Advisory Board to use $125,000 a year from 
donations for its operation. It is noteworthy, however, that 
the public's donations were placed in escrow, and the Advisory 
Board's functions have been funded solely from interest earned 
on these contributions. 

The initial estimate of the cost of the Memorial was 5 
million dollars. Because of unanticipated costs, the current 
budget is just under 17 million dollars, however. The public 
has generously supported the Memorial, and the donations 
received meet the budget. A sum of nearly 17 million dollars 
has been deposited in the Treasury. " Contributions are still 
being accepted to defray the cost of perpetual maintenance of 
the Memorial. 

Approximately 80 percent of the total donations have been 
from individuals and veterans, veterans' organizations, and a 
surcharge on the sale of commemorative coins. The balance, just 



79 

(5) 



under two million dollars, has largely come from Korean-American 
companies. 

The construction plan includes two phases. Phase I was 
ground preparation and installation of utilities. Phase II 
includes all remaining construction. Because of the unforeseen 
problem of a high water table at the site, ground preparation 
required additional time and substantially more money than was 
originally projected. 

One consideration for dealing with the ground water was to 
dig wells and pump it indefinitely. However, to avoid the 
possibility of damage to the foundations of the Lincoln Memorial 
and Reflecting Pool, an elaborately engineered drainage system 
was installed. Site preparation required firm foundations 
because of the unstable ground and the necessity that the 
Memorial be able to withstand the millions of annual visitors 
expected to traverse this striking new addition to the monuments 
already located on the Mall, the area between the United States 
Capitol and the Lincoln Memorial. 

Phase II of the construction began in April of this year 
and is well under way. The contractor is working on the site, 
the granite for the wall is being engraved, and the statues are 
being cast. Construction is expected to be completed by May or 
June of 1995. Thus, in spite of delays and substantially higher 
than expected construction costs, in addition to a somewhat 
stormy and controversial planning and design phase, realization 
of a war memorial for Korean veterans is finally near. 

The design of the Memorial is truly unique. It will be a 
one-of-a-kind work of art, world renowned for its architecture 
and beauty, according to Robert Hansen, Executive Director of 
the Advisory Board. It will be very befitting for the honor our 
nation wishes to bestow upon this group of forgotten heroes. 

The dedication is set for July 27, 1995. The theme of 
dedication is "freedom is not free - a victory remembered." 
This theme is in recognition that the armistice is now 
considered a victory although it was not perceived as a victory 
when signed. The armistice is now credited with marking the 
turning point on the spread of communist aggression to the 
Pacific Rim countries, and indeed, leading to the demise of 
communism throughout Europe. The Memorial reminds all future 
generations that this was once not only a forgotten war but a 
forgotten victory. 

Because there was originally a public perception that we 
left Korea with a lack of victory, there was an inattention and 
indifference to the noble deeds and accomplishments of Korean 
veterans. There were no celebrations nor public welcoming 
home. Korean veterans returned and became citizens who quietly 
lived with their own pride and knowledge of what they had really 



80 

(6) 



accomplished. The dedication will finally express this Nation's 
gratitude to those who served during the Korean War. 

There are currently 4.6 million living Korean War veterans 
out of a total of 5.7 million who served during the Korean War. 
It is expected that more than one-half million people will 
attend the dedication ceremonies. The dedication is expected to 
cost approximately 3 million dollars, but the funding will come 
from corporate America, not the construction funds. 

Mr. Chairman, the DAV wishes to acknowledge the 
contributions of the Korean War Veterans Memorial Advisory 
Board. The Board has overcome a multitude of unexpected 
problems. It is by the perseverance of the distinguished 
members of this Board that we are about to see the fruition of 
this Memorial. It is through their tenacity and vision that 
generations yet to come will appreciate Korean War veterans' 
sacrifices and dedication to the cause of freedom. 

This concludes our remarks, Mr. Chairman. I would be happy 
to respond to any questions you and the members of the 
Subcommittee may have. 



81 



STATEMENT OF 

DENNIS M. CUI.LINAN, DEPUTY DIRECTOR 
NATIONAL LEGISLATIVE SERVICE 
VETERANS OF FOREIGN WARS OF THE UNITED STATES 

BEFORE THE 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON HOUSING AND MEMORIAL AFFAIRS 

COMMITTEE ON VETERANS AFFAIRS 

UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

WITH RESPECT TO 

VA NATIONAL CEMETERY SYSTEM, ARLINGTON NATIONAL CEMETERY 
AND THE AMERICAN BATTLE MONUMENTS COMMISSION 

WASHINGTON, D.C. MAY 24, 1994 

MR. CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE: 

On behalf of the 2.2 million members of the Veterans of 
Foreign Wars of the United States I wish to thank you for 
inviting us to participate in today's important hearing. The VFW 
remains committed to the proposition that all veterans should 
have convenient access to a national cemetery so that they are 
not denied this final veterans benefit. Also under discussion 
today will be the operation of the Arlington National Cemetery 
and the American Battle Monument Commission. We will, of course, 
be pleased to comment on these important subject areas as well. 

The National Cemetery System (NCS) was established in 1973 
pursuant to Public Law 93-43. NCS carries out four main 
activities. It places deceased veterans and deceased active 
members of the armed forces, their spouses, and certain 
dependents in national cemeteries that have available 
grave space and permanently maintains these grave sites; • it 
provides headstones for these burials in national cemeteries and 
private cemeteries; it administers grants to states for state 
veterans' cemeteries; and it prepares and issues Presidential 
Memorial Certificates to surviving family members and others who 
request them. 

In recent Congressional hearings and as articulated through 
the Independent Budget for VA, the VFW has complimented NCS 
management on a job well done. We now do so again. 

However, NCS has not been without problems. One only need 
recall, for example, the deplorable conditions at Riverside 



82 



(California) National Cemetery a few years ago. Riverside 
National Cemetery, due to a lack of equipment and maintenance 
dollars, was unable to cope with unexpected heavy rains that 
reduced its appearance to that of a virtual pauper's field. 

To stop the VA practice of reducing NCS funding due to 
budget cutbacks in GOE, congress established a separate budget 
line item of the National Cemetery System. This welcomed action 
has greatly enhanced the management of NCS. 

Equipment replacement backlogs within NCS also continue to 
be a major concern. Additionally, NCS must implement critical 
maintenance and repair projects to maintain NCS's infrastructure 
of 400 buildings and 100 miles of roads. 

With the exception of a congressionally mandated FY 1991 
infusion of $10 million dollars, the National Cemetery System has 
shown no real dollar growth in its programs. The Independent 
Budget requests an appropriation of $81 million, or an increase 
of $7.5 million over FY 1994 appropriations. To ensure proper 
maintenance and the preservation of the park-like beauty of these 
national shrines, a total of 1,405 FTEE support is requested 
along with this budget figure. This request presents an increase 
of 90 FTEE to the base of 1,315. Funding at this level will 
allow the NCS to address the increasing demands of the aging 
veteran population and will also enable the system to maintain 
the cemetery grounds at a level befitting national shrines. 

With respect to the Arlington National Cemetery, the VFW 
continues to view this as a well run cemetery and compliments its 
management. We do note, however, that Arlington is rapidly 
running out of burial space, and we recommend that the Fort Myers 
land adjacent to Arlington be turned over to it so that veterans 
may continue to be properly buried there. The VFW also views the 
American Battle Monuments Commission as being very well run and 
of unquestionable importance in memorializing the sacrifice and 
accomplishments of America's veterans. We can only ask that it 
continue to service so admirably in this capacity. 



Mr. Chairman, once again, on behalf of the entire membership 
of the veterans of Foreign Wars, I wish to thank you for inviting 
us to take part in today's hearing. 



84 



KOREAN WAR VETERANS MEMORIAL ADVISORY BOARD 

Office of the Executive Director 

U.S. Department of the Interior, Main Building 

18th & C Streets, NW, Room 7424 

Washington, DC 20240-9997 

202-208-3561 

Fax 202-208-3459 

May 24, 1994 

TESTIMONY BEFORE THE 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES COMMITTEE ON VETERANS AFFAIRS 

Subcommittee on Housing and Memorial Affairs 
The Honorable George E Sangmeister, Chairman 



Mr Chairman 

It is indeed an honor to brief you on the significant progress of the Korean War Veterans 
Memorial in the Nations Capita! Public Law 99-572, passed on October 28, 1986 did several 
things, first , it authorized the American Battle Monuments Commission (ABMC) to erect a 
Korean War Veterans Memorial in Washington, DC, on Federal land with funds obtained 
primarily from private contributions, second, it directed the President to appoint a twelve member 
Advisory Board of Korean War veterans to work with ABMC to do the following, a) recommend 
a site; b) select the design, and c) promote the establishment of the memonal and encourage the 
donation of private fijnds, and third , it directed that the Memorial be established in accordance 
with the Commemorative Works Act, Public Law 99-652 The Advisory Board members serve 
without pay The Board membership is listed in Exhibit A 

These tasks are nearly complete The site selected, known as ash woods to the south of 
the reflecting pool near the Lincoln Memorial, balances that end of the Mall A perfect triangle is 
formed with the Lincoln, the Vietnam Veterans Memorial and the newly established Korean War 
Veterans Memorial at each vertex. It is an ideal site and one which gives great credit and 
historical significance to these three events in our country's history 

An open national design competition was held A total of 543 design concepts entered the 
competition. All of them were given the option of including the names of the US military dead 
of the Korean War Neither the first, second nor third place winning design concepts 
incorporated the names of the KIA's from the Korean War The first place winning design 
concept was circulated among all veterans organizations, including the Korean War Veterans 
Association, for their comments None suggested that it include names of the KIA's 

As the selected design concept followed the Commemorative Works Act procedures 
obtaining the approvals from the Commission of Fine Arts, the National Capital Planning 



85 



Commission, the American Battle Monuments Commission, the National Capital Memorial 
Commission and the Historic Preservation Review Board many modifications were required to 
meet their suggestions It took over three years of presentations and negotiations, longer than it 
took to fight the war, to get their full approvals One of the inherent characteristics of the 
Commemorative Works Act is, that not one of the reviewing commissions has final authority So 
it was a little like a tennis match to get everyone satisfied 

This Memorial design is a unique, one-of-a-kind, masterpiece It has three main features, 
they are 1) a column of 19 troops representing those who fought the war on foot, 2) a wall 
depicting the array of combat and combat support troops in operational mode, and 3) a 
commemorative area for the KIA/MIA/POW 

The troops are positioned in an open field with several emerging from the woods giving 
the impression that there are legions to follow The highly polished granite wall is 164ft long and 
will have lOOO's of images etched into a mural recognizing, as Congress intended, the totality of 
the Armed Forces effort. These images are presented in a perspective so that it appears that there 
are thousands more than those visible These photographic images, from the national archives, in 
operational mode - nurses, chaplains, air men, gunners, mechanics, cooks, helmsmen, among 
many others - symbolize the vast effort that sustained the foot troops These thousands of faces 
will provide the basis for telling the story of the Korean War Whenever you look at a 
photograph you usually see someone you think you recognize For that reason this Memorial will 
live forever It is a living Memorial, that will be moving to visitors, for all time to come It is not 
designed to be a grave stone The commemorative area, a still reflecting pool surrounded by a 
grove of trees and benches, is a suitably solemn tribute to our fallen comrades, those still listed as 
missing in action and the POW's 

The Advisory Board and the ABMC have ah^ approved an additional element which will 
include a computerized data-base of names/details of all known KIA/MIA/POW's which will be 
accessible at the Memorial by all visitors The visitor will not only be able to see the name, rank, 
serial number, home of record and a picture but also the details (such as the date, time and 
location of the action) that caused the KIA. The visitor can take a printout of this information 
with them as a memento from visiting the Memorial. The system can be updated as new 
information becomes available and is verified 

It is well to ponder how the three Memorials, at this end of the Mall, will work well 
together There are at least three common characteristics to war It takes people, millions of 
them to fight a war. There are always those who perform heroic acts during the war and there are 
those who make the supreme sacrifice of their lives The single statue of the Great Emancipator, 
Abraham Lincoln - truly a hero, is a symbol of the freedom and unification that resulted In a 



86 



larger context the Vietnam Veterans Memorial, has been referred to by some, as a huge tomb 
stone, yes, specifically for Vietnam veterans but symbolically a tomb stone for the war dead for all 
time; in like manner the Korean War Veterans Memorial will clearly convey the message that it 
takes men and women and lots of them to fight a war That was true in the Civil War, in 
Vietnam, as well as in Korea Each Memorial, therefore, has its own unique message which 
carries over and relates to the other two in a very distinctive way and as such, fits into the Mall 
adding to our Nation's remembrance of veterans and the honor, sacrifice, and hope they represent 
for all our countryman 

The Advisory Board is acutely aware that it is surrogate for the nearly 5 7 million 
Americans who served in the Armed Forces during the Korean War and those patriotic Americans 
who have contributed over $14 million to bring the memorial to reality (The balance of the 
money raised has come from interest earned on the principal ) It is this interest earned on the 
principal that has sustained the administration of the Advisory Board since 1987 Not one penny 
of contributed money has been used for the Board's expenses Although complete statistics are 
not available at this time it is safe to say that about 80% of the contributions have come from the 
veterans and their organizations They have either contributed directly, bought the 
commemorative silver dollar from the US Mint in 1992 or otherwise supported this project. 
Korean American corporations have given over $2 million. American corporations have 
contributed less than $1 million If there are monies left over after the $1 million of appropriated 
monies are repaid to the US Treasury in accordance with PL 99-572, it is the intent of the 
Advisory Board to create a not-for-profit foundation for the long term benefit of Korean War 
veterans and their families 

Formal ground breaking took place on June 14, 1992 with President George Bush turning 
the first shovel of earth The contractor for the first phase. Site Stabilization, started work on 
April 28, 1993 The site is very unstable and will require careful preparation so the final memorial 
has a firm foundation upon which to rest The final site must be able to withstand the millions of 
annual visitors expected to traverse the greatest new addition to the Mall in this decade Phase II 
of the construction began in April, 1994 and is due to be completed in May/June of 1995 

While this site work is ongoing, the artist is developing the final design for the mural on 
the wall and arranging for the engraving of the photographic images into the granite The 
sculptor is finalizing the specific designs for each of the 19 statues They will then be cast in 
stainless steel, 7'3" - 7'6" high The final product fi-om both of these efforts must be reviewed by 
members of the Advisory Board, as it fiilfills its mandate to select the design, and by members of 
the Fine Arts C jmmission 



87 



Dedication is planned for July 27. 1995, the 42nd Anniversary of the Armistice that ended 
the armed hostilities of the war, July 27, 1953 It has taken the country nearly forty years to 
appreciate that this armistice not only stopped the spread of communist aggression to the Pacific 
Rim countries then, but in fact led to the demise of communism today throughout { irope It is 
no longer a forgotten war but m fact a forgotten victory which this Memorial will ilocument for 
all time to come And thus a fitting celebration for several days including a muster, a parade, 
entertainment and fireworks will accompany the actual dedication ceremonies Exhibit B to this 
testimony is the schedule of activities and Exhibit C is our Memorandum of Understanding with 
ABMC to facilitate this schedule These ceremonies will be fijnded by private donations, non- 
appropriated fijnds, designated for this purpose 

This Memorial is intended to honor all those served in the Korean War, particularly those 
killed in action, still listed as missing in action or held as prisoners of war It is not intended to be 
used as a principal flind raising mechanism There is not a need for ongoing fund raising The 
Commemorative Works law requires that lO'-'o of the actual construction costs be set aside with 
the National Park Service for a perpetual maintenance fund That is now part of our budget and 
will be paid when required There is NO ongoing commitment for maintenance fijnds as now 
required by the Vietnam Veterans Memorial The Commemorative Works law was not in effect 
when it was built After dedication in July, 1995, the Korean War Veterans Memorial Fund as it 
now stands will cease to exist, its purpose being fijlly achieved 

Perhaps no monument in Washington has been more widely anticipated than the Korean 
War Veterans Memorial Like so many memorials it began with zealous private initiatives and 
public support that culminated with Congressional authorization and the selection of a Presidential 
Commission Great public memorials have traditionally been conceived and constructed with 
sustained commitment and broad-based participation over extended periods of time It is 
axiomatic to their success 

Public art is collaborative eflFort that demands the active involvement of all parties, from 
those charged with the day-to-day production, to those who are selected to be the keepers of the 
public conscience Out of the false starts and contentious debate that marked the roller coaster 
ride of this Memorial, a truly monumental concept has evolved Site restrictions, legal 
requirements, constraints, precedents, etc can have either inhibiting or salutary effects History 
teaches successfijl projects meet the clialknges that are integral to all of the great 20th Century 
Mall Memorials — the Grant. Lincoln, JetTerson and Vietnam The Korean War Veterans 
Memorial's legacy must simultaneously honor past memories as it anticipates fijture public 
acceptance and criti>. •! accolades 



88 



Rest assured THE KOREAN WAR VETERANS MEMORIAL IN THE NATION'S 
CAPITAL, as it is currently approved, will be a great tribute to all Korean War veterans, those 
who came home, as well as those that didn't Korean War veterans in particular, but all veterans 
will stand tall with pride when they visit this memorial knowing they served the cause of freedom 
so nobly - indeed a memorial for all veterans. 

It will tmly be a work of art and we all will be gratified, especially the forgotten veterans 
of the Korean War, who at last will be remembered in a fitting Memorial long overdue and much 
deserved Our collective goal is to build a suitable Memorial that we can all be proud of as we 
visit it's hallowed ranks and to build it as soon as possible before increasing numbers are 
deceased 
Respectfully submitted. 

General Ray Davis. USMC, (Ret) 
Chairman, Medal of Honor, Korea 



89 



r 



it it • • • 



The Korean War Veterans Memorial 

IN THE NATION'S CAPITAL 



KorcBii Wir Wtenns 

Memorial Adviv>r\ Board 

A Proidnilial Board <PL99'S72| 



McCarthy Ro>«mai> t 

Colonel. L'SA iReliredl 
Vice Chaicmar 

McKEVrrr. Jjmes D Mcke 
Anomey uLt* 
Chairman. Promoiion 

WEBER William E 
Colonel, L'SA (Reiirtdl 
Chairman. Vetcrant Liaison 



COMER. John P Jake 
Pisl Naliona] Commander 
TTie American Legion 

DEHNE. Thomas O 
Adminislralive Director i Retired) 
Disabled American Veterans 

McSWEENY. William F 
Chairman. Fords Theatre 

RODRIGLEZ Carlos 
Associate Executive Director 
Benefits Service 
Eastern Paralyzed Veletans 



STALM. John S 
l^st Commanderin-Chief 
Veterans of Foreign W^rs 
oj the United States 

Deceased Board Members 



General Counsel 



ManagemcDI Advisor 
THOMPSON. Gerald J 
RADM. SC. L'SN iRetiredl 
ftrtiser. Coopers & Lybrand 

EacuUvt Director 

HANSEN. Rohen L 

FAX (202) 208-3459 



FACTS ABOUT THE ^X/Z/S/y . 

KOREAN WAR VETERAJVS MEMORIAL TN THE NATIONS CAPITAL 

o Authorized by Public Law 99-572, October 28. 1986. to honor members of the Armed 
Forces of the United States who served in the Korean War, 1950-1953. particularly those 
who were killed in action, are still listed as missmg in action, or were held as prisoners of 
war $1 million of federal funds were authorized to be applied against design and 
construction costs and must be returned to the government if adequate fijnds are raised 

o On March 28, 1988, Congress approved a Mall site for the Memorial On September 16, 
1988, Ash Woods became the official location directly across the Reflecting Pool from the 
Vietnam Veterans Memorial 

o June 14, 1989, President George Bush unveiled a model of the winning design concept 
submitted by a team of architects from State College, PA, Bums Lucas, Leon, Lucas, 
Pennypacker Oberholtzer Basis for selection was the powerful imagery a column of statues, 
representative of those who fought the war on foot 

o June 14, 1992, President Bush broke ground Construction site preparation began April 
28, 1993 Phase II of construction began April, 1994 Dedication planned for July 27, 1995 

o Design details — The column of troops - the powerful, central feature of the winning 
design concept - constitutes a multi-service formation, clad in ponchos with the cold wintry 
wind at their backs, arrayed for combat, their symbolic objective, the American flag, waves 
aloft at the highest point of the iMemorial The setting is dynamic, individual statues reflect 
the ethnic diversity of America and their faces resolutely convey the trauma and emotions 
generated by front line service in war .'Kn etched mural wall, 164 feet long, recognizes, as 
Congress intended, the totality of the Armed Forces effort Thousands of photographic 
images, in operational mode - nurses, chaplains, crew chiefs, mechanics, cooks, helmsmen, 
among many others - symbolize the vast effort that sustained the foot troopers These faces 
will help tell the story of the Korean War Whenever you look at a photograph you usually 
see someone you think you know For that reason this Memorial will live forever It is not 
meant to be a grave stone, it is a living Memorial that will move visitors for all time to come. 
The flag is surrounded by a still reflecting pool of water with the inscription superimposed 
"To Those Who Made the Supreme Sacrifice " Recognition of the role played by the 
Republic of Korea's Armed Forces and the 20 other nations which rallied under the UN 
banner will be evident The Memorial is a grand and glorious salute to all who served 

o Architect of Record, Cooper-Lecky Architects, PC, of Washington. D C . performed 
same role for Vietnam Veterans Memorial Sculptor, Frank C Gaylord, of Barre, Vermont, 
whose larger-than-life works are displayed throughout the nation, saw action in WW II with 
1 7th Airborne Div Muralist, Louis Nelson, of New York City, principal in a design and 
planning firm experienced in variety of media and environments, US Army, WWII veteran 

o The Memorial will cost about $17 million Those funds have been raised Contributions 
are still being received for perpetual maintenance fund and can be sent to the address below 



9^ 



£-x^/B^r 6i 



__: "o ~ 



H 

y 

Q 

u 

a 







11 

u > 


% 

I 

Hi 

> 


Id 

i 

E 
u 

u 

> 


2 

E 
<u 

4> 

> 






« "5 


Memorial Church 
Services - all 
denominations. Visit 
the Memorial 


4) 

> n 

ii 


Major 

Entertainment**** 
and Fireworks, Visit 
the Memorial 


Mall Activities * 
Entertainment, tours. 
Visit the memorial 








1 

> 


Mass Muster,*** 
Joint Chiefs 
Inspection 


to 

•c 


E 
u 

i> 

> 


Mall Activities* 
Entertainment, tours. 
Visit the memorial 






CO 

3 >, 


Wreath Laying, 
Tomb of the 
Unknowns, Lighting 
Freedom Torch 


z 


H 
< 

y 

Q 
U 

Q 


"to 
1 

■s 
> 


Mall Activities * 
Entertainment, tours. 
Visit the memorial 






-a 

(U vO 
C (N 

^5 


ALL DAY 
Check In, Register, 
Reunite with 
"Buddies" 


ALL DAY 
Check In, Register, 
Reunite with 
"Buddies" 


ALL DAY 
Check In, Register, 
Reunite with 
"Buddies " 


receptions of units, 
hospitality suites. 
Mall Activities * 










a. 


UJ 


00 

c 

1 

c 








91 



MEMORAWDUM Of UMPERSTAMDIMO 



This la a memorandum of understanding between the American 
Battle Monuments Commission (ABMC) and the Korean War Veterans 
Memorial Advisory Board (KWVMAB) for the specific purpose of defining 
responsibilities for the dedication of the Memorial and ancillary 
activities. It is effective from the date of its signing by both 
parties until 30 September 1995, 65 days after the dedication of the 
Korean War Veterans Memorial in the Nation's Capital, 27 July 1995. 

Given the authority implicit in Section 121-138c of Title 36 of the 
U.S. Code and Public Law 99-572, ABMC is authorized to establish a 
Korean War Veterans Memorial in the Nation's Capital. Under ABMC 
supervision, the KWVMAB is hereby authorized: 

1. To plan, develop and execute the program for all ABMC/KWVMAB 
dedication ceremonies and its ancillary activities. 

2. To conduct a joint in-process review with ABMC at least 
quarterly. 

3. To enter into working agreements in support of the dedication 
with any government agency (e.g. The White House, GSA, MDW, DOD, DOI, 
NPS, DOL, DOC, Congress, DC Government, and state and local 
governments) as well as federal and state chartered veterans 
organizations. 

4. To proceed with the following list of activities, though it may 
not be all inclusive, as a basis for dedication week activity 
planning: 

a. A parade of associations, veterans, contingents from active 
military forces and civilian marching units. 

b. A mass muster for Korean War Veterans. 

c. Memorial services. 

d. A film festival of Korean War related movies. 

e. Receptions/open houses at the embassies of the 21 
participating nations. 

f. Production of entertainment shows suitable for the occasion 
within resources available. 

g. Arrangements for the appearance of dignitaries and honored 
guests. 

h. Emplacement of a time capsule on the Memorial site. 

i. Coordination of logistical support (lodging and 
transportation) for visiting Korean War Veterans and their families 
to the Nation's Capital for the dedication. 



92 



All monies donated for dedication activities will be turned over to 
ABMC which will deposit them in the Korean War Veterans Memorial Fund 
of the U.S. Treasury and disburse them for the ABMC/KWVMAB jointly 
approved dedication activities. No more than 3200,000 of the monies 
in the fund at the time of signing will be used to support dedication 
activities. Additional funding requirements must be met with 
donations made specifically for that purpose. Donations of monies, 
services or materials will be applied to the dedication if so 
designated at the time of donation. Acceptance of donations of 
monies, services or materials not designated for the dedication will 
be made only by ABMC. Neither the ABMC nor the KWVMAB will enter 
into commercial ventures to generate funds for the dedication. 

The Director of Operations and Finance of ABMC and the Executive 
Director of the KWVMAB will be the focal points for coordination and 
exchange of information for this memorandum of understanding. 




t,^n~- RAYMOND G. DAVIS Jj^ P. X. KELLEY ^ f 

^ General, USMC (Ret) T General, USMC (Ret) 

Chairman, KWVMAB ^ Chairman, ABMC 

^ Pcbruarv, (99-^ 8 February 1994 



93 



BOARD OF GOVERNORS 

DISTBICTNo I 
N«» iot% Sui« and N«w England 
BOGEB A66ATE 
P O Box 330099 
Wesi Hartlord, CT 06133-0099 
TEL I2C3I 9S3-1060 
FAJ( (203) 953-5681 
DISTBICTNo 2 
i»v*m «nd Soultwm Suits 
WILLIAM CLEMENT2 
2411 CryslaJ Dnve 
Fl Mvere. FL 33907 
TEL (613)936-1053 
FAX (8131936-7565 
DISTBICTNo 3 
Ptnntylvana and N«w Jen«v 
HAROLD T HAU.. JFl 
PO Boi 178 
Manasguan. NJ 08736 
TEL 1908)363-8733 
FAX (908)223-0521 
DISTBICTNO 4 

RALPH SEISLOVE 

2168 S Stale Roula 100 
Titlin, OH 44883 
TEL (419)447-5473 
DISTBICTNo 5 
mtkana and Mcf>^)an 
MARK R MINNICK 
PC Bo> 11100 
f 1 Wavnfl. IN 46855 
TEL (219)432-5031 
FAX (219)432-4568 
OlSTBICT No 6 

HUGH McQUESTION 

12780 w Listxxi Road 
Brooktield. Wl S300S 
TEL (4141 781-6262 
FAX (414) 781-6280 
DISTBICTNO 7 
wmvm and Soumw«tl«m Suies 
JIM WIENS 

1 10 BoyO Avenue 
Newlon KS 671 14 
TEL (316) 283-3790 
FAX (316)284-2541 

ALTERNATES 

DISTBICTNO 1 
JAMES A JACOBS 

70 OConnof Road 

Fa«x>on. NY 14450 

TEL (716)377-5100 

FAX (716) 377-0727 
OlSTBICT No 2 
WARREN CHANDLER 

4700 Ailania Hignway 

Bogan QA 30622 

TEL (706)353-1115 

FAX (706)353^)774 
OlSTBICT NO 3 
LARRY BRUEN 

P O Box 9 

333 Soulh Firsl Street 

Bangor, PA 18013 

TEL (215)588-5259 

FA;< (215) 588-0452 
distbictno 4 
ROBERT DONATEUI 

295 Silver Slreel 

Aluon OH 44303-2229 

TEL (216) 376-2466 

FAX (216) 376-3140 
DISTBICT No 5 
TIMOTHY BRUTSCHE 

PO Boi 1031 

Banle Creels Ml 49016 

TEL (616) 963-1554 

FAX (616)963-6109 
DISTBICTNO 6 
O J BOLANDER 

Hvyy 33 East 

P O Box 323 

Newton. IL 62448 

TEL (618) 783-2416 
DISTBICTNo 7 
WAYNE ELMORE 

P O Box 7361 

Oniana. NE 68107 

TEL (402) 731-1452 

FAX (402) 731-6375 



THE NATIONAL CONCRETE BURIAL VAULT ASSOCIATION, INC 

P.O. Box 130201, SI. Paul, MN 55113 
1-800-538-1423 




President 

SANDY GRAFFIUS 
P O Box 2040 
Sinking Spnnq PA 19608 
TEL. 1215) 678-4537 
FAX (215) 678-7170 

Vice Presiaeni 
HAROLD T HALL. JR 
P.O. Box 178 
Manosquan NJ 06736 
TEL: (908) 363-8733 
FAX: (908) 223-0521 

Secretary /Treasurer 
MARK B. MINNICK 
PO. Box 11100 
Ft Wayne IN 46855 
TEL (219) 432-5031 
FAX: (219) 432-4568 

Executive Director 
JERRY BROWN 

2280 No Hamline Avenue 
SI Paul, MN 55113-4289 
TEL: (612) 631-1234 
FAX. (612) 631-1428 

Executive Directors Ex OHiao 

The National Concrete Burial Vault %"o'"bo''x 4^'^'' 

So. Chelmstona, MA 01824 

Association ("NCBVA") was founded in the 1930's, J|x 'Iob) 2£»5969 



STATEMENT OF NATIONAL CONCRETE BURIAL VAULT 
ASSOCIATION BY JERRY J. BROWN 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON HOUSING AND MEMORIAL AFFAIRS 

HOUSE COMMITTEE ON VETERAN'S AFFAIRS 

MAY 24, 1994 

National Concrete Burial 



O Box 
Battle Creeli Ml 49016 
TEL (616) 963-1554 
(813)795-0268 
FAX (616) 963-6109 

General Counsel 

J. SCOTT CALKINS. ESQ 
223 N Front Street 
P.O. Box 1188 
HamsOurg. PA 17108 
TEL: (717)234-3281 
FAX: (717) 232-8411 



and is made up of concrete burial vault ^po'^b^^Vmi'^^^ 

manufacturers from the United States and Canada. 

Our association represents the national 

franchisors as well as a host of independent 

grave liner companies. We thank the Members of 

this Subcommittee for your continued involvement 

with and oversight of the National Cemetery 

System. The National Cemetery System is a 

source of pride, tradition and profound national 

awareness. Programs within the jurisdiction of 

this Subcommittee are critical to preserving and 

perpetuating the quintessential concept of 

memorializing the lives and deeds of Americans 

who have died in the service of our nation. 

The National Cemetery System provides the 
means for the proper perpetual memorialization 
of our deceased veterans. In all societies, 
when a death occurs, we feel the need to respond 
individually, as a family, as a community, and 
culturally. Our national cemeteries are an 
integral part of this cultural response. 
National shrines such as the Arlington Cemetery 
are visited by thousands of veterans and family 
members each year, furnishing a sense of 
continuity with the past and reinforcing the 



94 



importance of the role the veterans played in our history. For 
over two centuries, the courage and patriotism of our nation's 
armed service men and women have been enshrined in the monuments 
and memorials bearing proud testament to their sacrifice and 
dedication for a free and democratic society. The NCBVA supports 
H.J. Res. 131, designating December 7 of each year as "National 
Pearl Harbor Remembrance Day" and the Korean War Memorial as 
integral parts of the memorialization process. 

Since the dawn of humankind, world cultures have responded to 
death with ceremony, sensitivity and sociological and religious 
fervor. The funeral embodies the fundamental equation for the 
recovery process, as it provides order and direction in the time of 
loss and manifests our beliefs through the ceremony of choice. The 
ceremony brings people together to share their feelings of grief 
and sorrow and bears testimony to the life of one who was known, 
loved, honored and remembered. Within the circle of the death and 
memorialization experience, the place of bestowal - THE CEMETERY - 
emerges as the final chapter of the death and funeral experience 
and becomes the place where family and friends may return to 
reflect, remember and recreate the images of a life that was lived. 

Throughout the long and noble history of the National Cemetery 
network, what has been phrased as "the dynamics of earth interment" 
has played a significant role in the operational, logistical, 
economic and political profiles of the cemetery system. 
Specifically, the position and function of THE BURIAL VAULT and/or 
GRAVELINER within the sphere of National Cemetery policies, 
regulations and operations has become one of the primary focal 
issues of the past two decades. 

For millenniums, the dynamics of earth burial have evoked 
various forms of entombment or protective enclosures to encase, 
surround, protect and memorialize the deceased. Even today, 
ancient pyramids, catacombs and sealed crypts remain as silent 
testament to man's compelling need to safeguard the dead and 
memorialize the place of interment. 



- 2 - 



95 



In recent decades, the preference for some form of outer 
burial receptacle to encase and protect the casketed body in earth 
burial has expanded to include the aesthetic, functional and 
economic concerns of cemetery management as well as fulfilling the 
cultural values and traditions of our society. 

Since 1968, the NCBVA has worked with the National Cemetery 
System and the House Committee on Veterans Affairs, Subcommittee on 
Housing and Memorial Affairs to develop and implement a graveliner 
program. In 1984, our Association submitted to the Subcommittee a 
study entitled "The Economic and Aesthetic Impact of Using Outer 
Burial Receptacles in National Cemeteries," which detailed the 
dynamics of earth interment and its subsequent effects upon the 
physical and fiscal condition of the National Cemetery System. 

The NCBVA continues to support the fundamental position of 
requiring outer-burial receptacles for interments within the 
National Cemetery System which corresponds with the policies of 
over 90% of the nation's public, private and denominational 
cemeteries for the following reasons: 

1. Fiscal; 

2. Ongoing maintenance; 

3. Perpetuity of cemetery aesthetics; 

4. Safety; 

5. Dignity (disinterments/relocations under public law 
99-576); and 

6. Health and environmental considerations (which applies to 
lined/sealed burial vaults) . 

with the enactment of Section 504 of Public Law 101-237 (103 
STAT. 2094), effective January 1, 1990, the government must provide 
"a grave liner for each new grave in an open cemetery within the 
National Cemetery System in which remains are interred in a 
casket. " 

The proper maintenance of the National Cemetery System is 
enhanced by the use of outer burial receptacles, such as those 
manufactured by our association members and used in the national 
cemeteries, including Arlington National Cemetery. The NCBVA has 

- 3 - 



96 



worked closely with the Department of Veterans Affairs to develop 
and implement minimum performance standards for outer burial 
receptacles, as further assurance of their quality and to promote 
the use of standard specifications on sizes, design and 
construction, workmanship and materials. Most importantly, the 
purpose of any outer burial receptacle is to eliminate both short 
and long term maintenance on the part of the cemetery. 

The dynamics of earth burial can create myriad forces, 
pressures and conditions which necessitate a protective outer 
enclosure; for example: 

1. Crushing/compression force of earth backfill and vehicle 
weight plus barometric and freeze-thaw conditions will exert 
several tons of pressure upon unenclosed caskets; 

2. Water pressure and penetration; 

3. Deteriorating effects of soil chemicals; 

4. Potential damage due to opening of adjacent graves; 

5. Pollution/health considerations; 

6. Safety factors; and 

7. Maintenance of monument and marker placement and 
alignment. 

When a casket is interred without some form of outer burial 
receptacle, anywhere from five to eleven restorations of the grave 
site would be required in a twenty-five to fifty-year period. 
Restoration would include the costs of refilling, tamping, 
resodding/seeding and marker or monument realignment. The 
continued use of outer burial receptacles in our national 
cemeteries will prevent the sinking or collapsing of graves and the 
tipping or misalignment of headstones, significantly reducing long 
term maintenance costs. 

In order to provide the highest quality product to the 
National Cemetery System, the membership of the NCBVA adopted 
performance standards at its annual meeting in June, 1991. The 
NCBVA promotes safety and training in its member plants and in the 
handling and delivery systems of concrete burial vaults and 
gravel iners in the cemeteries through a vigorous, comprehensive 

- 4 - 



97 



inspection and certification program for its members. The 
certification program includes facility and equipment inspections 
and comprehensive product testing to promote compliance with the 
adopted performance standards and to insure delivery of the highest 
level of product and service to the cemeteries. 

Our World War II veterans are now in their late sixties and 
early seventies and by the end of the century will be in their late 
seventies/early eighties. Korean veterans are now in their late 
fifties and by the year 2000, Viet Nam veterans will be in their 
fifties. There are nine million living World War II veterans, five 
million Korean veterans and eight million Viet Nam era veterans. 
The strain on our national cemeteries to provide appropriate burial 
benefits to these veterans, along with the proper and continued 
maintenance of these national shrines, will be immense. The NCBVA 
strongly supports the efforts of the National Cemetery System in 
these areas and provides quality products and service which reduce 
the costs of long term maintenance. 



- 5 - 



98 




Pearl Harbor Survivors Association 

National Pre«Id«nl 
gBSTtMOMY ON H.J. RBS 131 



!>« C(>U>FARB 
IB Bunker Hud 
KmI llwMmr, N.J. 0793(< 
(SOI) 887.4Sn 



Thank you Mr. Chairman for alloving ma to testify on behalf 

of H.J. Has. 131. My nam is Lee Goldfarb and I am the National 

President of the Pearl Harbor Survivors Association. To our 

organization December 7 1941 is one of the most important days 

on the calendar. It brings to mind a day in vhich 2403 shipmates 

and comrades lost their lives in vhat can best be described as 

a snaalc attack. This attack took place vhile the representatives 

of the Japanese Government vera in Washington talking peace. 

Ha should navar allov the events of that day to be forgotten 

or overlooked. That is vhy it is important that H.J. Res. 131 

be passed. Mr. Chairman I believe i can explain our feelings if 

you vill allov na to read the letter I vrota to the Honorable 

William Clay, Chairman Post Office and Civil Service Committee 

concerning H.J. Res. 131. It is the Committee Policy for Consideration 

of Commemorative Legislation for the 103rd Congress vhich provides 

the stumbling block and before I read the letter I vould like to 

quote paragraph 2 line (e) vhich sayst 

The following types of proposals shall not be reported t 

Any proposal providing for recurring annual commemoratives. 

The letter reads as follows t 



Thank yon Mr. Chairman and I vonld be delighted to answer any 
questions 



Remember Pearl Harbor — Keep America Alert 




99 



Pearl Harbor Survivors Association 

NatlonoJ Pred<len( 



L£E aiLDFARB 

ID Brniker Hwd 

Em Huiwnr. NJ. 07436 

(201) 1187-4333 



Honorable NIiUbb Clay 

CbairBan Post Office and CItH Service Coamlttee 

309 Cannon Office Building 

Washington DC 20515 

Dear Cbalraan ClBjt 

It is vitb Bore sadness then anger that I vrite this letter. It is 
inconceivable that vith in excess of 200 hondred co-sponsors vho 
have signed on in support of H.J. Resolution 131 you voald::not 
perait this bill to be released. I understand the reason behind 
your reticence but X find it difficult to understand. The thought 
that Bany frivolous organizations vould seek in one' .forn or' another 
a "Day of ReBembrance" leaves you vith the conclusion not to have 
any. On behalf of the 2403 vho vere killed that Sunday Borning 
Decsaber 7 1941 I find it unconscionable that you vould equate 
the Pearl Harbor Survivors Association vith the 'Pickle Grovars 
Association" or the "42nd Street Ballet Dancers", AD Nauaeam. 
Perhaps ay language is slightly strong but perhaps it vill help 
Bake ay point. 

The reason ve are deterained to pursue the aatter at this tiae 
becauss it is nov evident that vs are in the final stages of 
our allotted tiae on this aortal coil and ve see no one In the 
foreseeable future vho vill labor annually for a National Pearl 
Harbor BeaeBbrance Day. I^t the last of us depart and the slogan 
"Heneaber Pearl Harbor" vill depart vith us. Mr. Chairman, please 
understand our concern - please understand our fear, and please 
understand you are our only hope. 

Mr. Chairaan, please Join us in oar crusade and please be our ally. 
Perhaps it is not fitting but I subscribe to the adage that "for 
•very rule there is an exception. 

With Buch gratitude 




PHSA 



Hemember l^arl Harbor — ATw/j America Alert 



100 



Pearl Harbor Day 

FoHynenricK 



G 



etting our Congress to recognize December 7 as National 
Pearl Harbor Remembrance Day is a tou^ task. 

Although the Japanese attack there oo December 7, 1941, is one of the 
most signi6cant events of this century, the biO to establish an annual com- 
mem<H?tion on that date is stalled in a subcommittee with little chance oi 
release because of Federal rules governing commemwative days. 

HJR 131 has 11 more co-sponsors than the 218 signatures needed to bring 
the bill to a floor vote. Even so. Rep. Winiam Clay, chairman of the House 
Post Office and Civil Service Committee, has not authorized the bill's 
rdease from the Population and Census Subcommittee. 

It should be noted that HJR 131 designates Deconber 7 as a working hofi- 
day, similar to Flag Day on June 14. It also requests the President to issue 
an annual proclamation fining upon citizens to observe the day with ap- 
propriate ceremonies and activities. 

The United States flag would be flown at half staff that day by all Federal 
agencies and interested groups in honor of those Americans who died in the 
attack. 

Rep. George Sangmeister (D-M<Aenam IL), who is retiring this year from 
Congress, said that in the 1970's the sub-conunittee established rules viudu 
prohibit commemorative days in the belief that eventually every day would 
become a commemorative day. 

"However," Sangmeister added, "this is not just another event we are 
taiVing about This is an event which changed the course of history for 
America and the world." 

Interestingly, since the sub-committee's rules were adapted there have 
been days set aside for perpetual conmieniarations. This was accomplished 
by tacking them onto legislatives bQIs. 

Included among the commonoratiaDS are: Federal Lands Cleanup Day; 
National Disability Awareness Month, and National Forest Products Week. 
Thus, tacking HJR 131 onto a piece of most-pass legislatioi as a rider 
could be an alternative course to get the bill out of the subcommittee and on- 
to the Hoose floor for a vote. 

Tbe idea to officially commemorate December 7 came to be during my 
sister's birthday party in March 1990. The next day I contacted Rep. Dennis 
Hastert (R-SL Charles, IL) with the suggestion. He sponsored the restrfutian 
that named December 7, 1991 as Peari Harbor Remembrance Day. 

Since then, I have formed the Foundation for a National Peari Harbo- Day 
to push for the eompemraation. I also set up the Pennies for Peari Fund 
wtiich raised funds for a bronze plaque, wfaidi I presented to the Peari Har- 
bor's Survivors Association at Peari Harbor on December 7, 1991. 

Why is this legislation so important? Well, I was 15 years old when the 
Japanese bombed Pearl Hart>or. Tliat event left an indelible imi»ession on 
me and 18 months later I joined the Marines to serve in the Pacific Theater. 
This conunemoration will enable future generations of Americans to 
recognize the significance of the date, and be reminded of what can happen 
if our country is unprepared to protect our cherished freedom. 

Congressman Sangmeisto* recently said: "As a result of the attack, 16V^ 
million Americans rallied to fight World War n, with 460,000 eventually los- 
ing their lives. As a military veteran, it satMfns me to think that the 
significance of this event may be kst to fntore generatioos." 



101 



The Foundation for a National Pearl Harbor Day 

920 Chiestnxat Street Ottawa, II- 61350 <815) 433-4429 

More than 50 years ago, thousands of our loved ones; Mothers, Fathers, Sisters, 
Brothers and Spouses offered the -ULTrMATE SACRIHCE '. giving their Uves for our ' ' 
freedom. . ^.'i <,"'•.■■ • 

Our goal is single minded. It is our intention to petition for the setting aside a PER- 
MANENT DAY OF REMEMBRANCE to bestow rightful honor to those who gave their 
lives so that we and future generations of Americans might live free.' We simply ask that 
our President and Congresspersons join together to designate this PERMANENT DAY OF 
REMEMBRANCE Is this too much to ask? 

You and I have a choice! The brave heroes of Pearl Harbor did not!! We can choose 
to do nothing, or we can choose to write our President, our Congressperson and our Repre- 
sentative letting each know how strongly we feel regarding this issue, and instructing each, 
as your Elected Representative to support RJ. Res/^/ designating December 7th, of each 
year as "National Pearl Harbor Remembrance Day." 

Please, let your voice be heard today!!! Please help pass House Joint Resolution Bill 
#y ^1 Please be aware that there is no financial obligation here; it will not cost the taxpayer 
nor will it increase the deficit. It will, however, put a warm glow within you to know that 
you did what you could to honor the military men and women who offered the ULTI- 
MATE SACRIFICE on that INFAMOUS Sunday Morning, December 7th, 1941 in Hawaii, 
by establishing for them a "PERMANENT DAY OF REMEMBRANCE" 

Thanking you in advance for your interest and cooperation in this matter, I remain. 



Sincerely, 

Richard Foltynewicz, 
Foundation Chairman 
WorldWarll ■ . 
Marine Corps Veteran . 



102 



Editorial 



CongrcBS Should Be Gung Ho - No So So 



There is no other event like the 
bontbing or Pearl Harbor in American 
history. It's occurrence shaped our 
success in World War 11 and our 
ambivalence in the wars or the (iriics and 
sixties. 

We hope ~ we pray - there will never 
be another day like it. And therefore. 
Congress should immediately blast 
through the regulations prohibiting 
recurring days of remembrance and name 

December 7. "Peari Haitor Day." 

It won't cost us any money. It may 
save us a part of our history which 
should never be forgotten. 



SENIOR 
LIFESTYLES 



The rationale thai 'if we do it for you 
well have to do it for everyone else* is a 
so-so. bureaucratic cover. Rest assured, 
in the years to come Congress will do it 
for everyone else -- as Earth Day will no 
doubt be added to the calendar and 
. Columbus Day taken off. 

It's a matter of being politically 
dorrect. Right now, Richard 
Koltynewicz's cause is not politically 
dorrect. But in our estimation it's 
nlorally, historically and vitally correct 
- "Hiank you, Richard, for being gung ho 
for a cause Coogress should be falling 
o«er itself to champion. Keep it up. 
Miw's the lime and you're not alone. 

-'Susan LcBBOx 
President and Publisher 
Joseph F. Reagan 
Vice Picsident and 



■A NATION THAT FORGETS ITS 
VBTEnVkNS IS A NATION "niAT, ITSELF, 
mil, SOON BE PORQOTTEH 



FREEDOM IS NOT FREE 



I watched the flag pass by one day, 
It fluttered in the breeze, 
A your^ Marine saluted it. 
And then, he stocd at ease. 

I looked at him in uniform. 
So young, so tall, so proud, 
Wit:h hair cut square and eyes alert. 
He'd stand out in any crowd. 

I thought how many men like him 
Had fallen through the years. 
How many died on foreign soil? 
Hew many nother's tears? 

How many pilots planes shot down? 

How many died ar sea? 

How many foxholes were soldiers' graves? 

No, freedom is not free. 



I heard the sound of taps one night. 
When everything wcis still, 
I listened to the bugler play. 
And felt a sudden chill. 

I wondered just how many times. 
That taps had meant "Amen", 
When a flag had covered a coffin. 
Of a brother or a friend. 

I thought of all the children. 
Of the mothers ar>d the wives. 
Of fathers, sons, £tnd husbarvls, 
Wit:h interrupted lives. 

I thought about a graveyard. 
At the bottom of the sea. 
Of unmarked graves in Arlington, 
No, freedom is not free. 



Cadet Major Kelly Strong 
Air Force Junior Rote 
Homestead Senior High School 
Itomestead, Florida 



August 26, 1981 



103 



©Ifc iailtt (EimtB 



nnnam,. i^m H. IMi I Mw Y»»— I M»i Ow 



Sangmeister_pushiiig Pearl Harbor biU 



By J«ANN MUSTIt 

Staff Wm«r 



R«p. George SaogmeUter, D- 
Mokena, says it's a tough t>attle to 
get Dec. 7 recognized as National 
. Pearl Harbor Day. 

He said today the bill to estabUsh 
the annual comniemoration is 
lodged in a subcommittee with lit- 
tle chance of release because of its 
rules governing commemorative 
days. 

The Population and Census Sub- 
committee of the Post Office and 
Civil Service Committee has the 
legislation. The subcommittee also 
established rules in the 1970s that 
prohibit commemorative days on 
the belief that every day eventual- 
ly would become a com- 
memorative day, said 
Sangmeister aide David Wilke. 

"It's a very stubborn opponent 
we're up against," he said. "The 
subcommittee is not willing to 
budge on this. But there are other 
tactics we can use." 

Alternatives could Include tack- 
ing the bill onto a piece oflnust- 
pass legislation as a rider, said 
WUke. 

"We're certainly considering it, 
although Sangmeister is not really 
thrilled about doing it that way 
because be believes the proposal 
will stand on its own and does not 
need to be done in the dead of 
night," be said. 

More than 2.000 Americans were 
killed and another 1,000 injured in 
the atUck on Pearl Harbor. The 



battle precipitated the United 
SUtes' entry into Worid War 11. 

Sangmeister introduced the 
legislation in March. 

"I offered It in recognition of the 
men and women who served so 
faithfully and, in particular, to 
honor the 2,400 who died on that 
'day of infamy,'" he said. 

The bill resulted from efforts by 
former World War n Marine 
Richard FoUynewicz of Ottawa to 
commemorate the day. 

The usual procedure is for a bill 
to automatically come to the House 
floor for vote if there are 218 
signatures. 

But in this case, Wilke said the 
subcommittee Mill not release the 
bill t>ecause of the perpetual com- 
memoration provision. 

"This is not just another event 
we are talking about. This is an 
event that changed the course of 
history for Americans and the 
world," Sangmeister said. 

He now Is asking his colleagues 
on Capitol Hill to co-sponsor the 
legislation in a show of strength 
because numbers would make for 
a better case before the subcom- 
mittee, said Wilke. 

"Tlie subcommittee's rules can 
be justified. But Pearl Harbor is a 
significant event in our nation's 
history, not a frivolous or trivial 
day. That's why Sangmeister is 
sort of going against the grain here 
to see how his colleagues feel," he 
said. 

"The World War II guys are the 
biggest chunk of veterans out 



there. And they're the first to tell 
you Pearl Harbor needs to be com- 
memorated in some way." 

Wilke said the subcommittee has 
no provisions for exceptions. Also, 
there is a cost associated with 
passing commemorative bills. 

"It's interesting to note that 
since the subcommittee's rules 
have been in place, there have 
been perpetual commemorations. 
But they were set aside in a sneaky 
way by tacking them onto bills as 
riders," he said. 

For instance. Federal Lands 
Cleanup Day became a perpetual 
commemorative day as a rider in 
August 1966. The day is com- 
memorated the first Saturday 
after Labor Day in September. 
National Disability Awareness 
Month was perpetually com- 
meoiorated in 1988. It is com- 
memorated each October. 

"Each year, our country com- 
memorates National Forest Pro- 
ducts Week. I believe we can do no 
less for Dec. 7, 1941," said 
Sangmeister. 

"Pearl Harbor had an extraor- 
dinary effect In unifying our coun- 
try and I want that to be 
rememt>ered. As a result of this at- 
tack, 16. S million Americans 
raUied to fight World War I! - 
406,000 eventually lost their lives. 
As a veteran, it saddens me to 
think the signiTicance of this event 
may be lost to future generations." 

Sangmeister Is a memtier of the 
House's Veterans Affairs 
Committee. 






RIdutfd Foltynewia Chalnn«n 

Tb« FoundtUon for NsUonal Peart Harbor Dav 

_^ 920 Chcjtinut Su ' 

World Warn Ch«««. D 61350 
Marine Corps Veteran 




104 

APPROVED 

Resolution No. 311 
DESIGNATING DECEMBER 7 OF EACH YEAR AS 
-NATIONAL PEARL HARBOR "REMEMBRANCE DAY* 

WHEREAS, on Dece«.bef 7. 1941. the I«perl*l Japanese Navy and Air Focce 
actacKed units of the Armed Forces of the United States stationed at Pearl 

Harbor. Hawaii: and 

WHEREAS, more than 2.000 citizens of the United States were killed and 
„ore than I. 000 citizens of the United States were wounded in tne attack on " 

Pearl Harbor; and 

WHEREAS, the attack on Pearl Harbor marked the entry of the United States 

into world War 11: and 

WHEREAS, the Veterans of World War II and all other people of the United 
States con,n.en.orate December 7 In remembrance of the attack on Pearl Harbor; and 

WHEREAS, commemoration of the attack on Pearl Harbor will Instill In all 
people of the United States a greater understanding and appreciation of the 
selfless sacrifice of the Individuals who served In the Armed Forces of the 
United States during World War II: now. therefore 

BE IT RESOLVED, by the 93rd National Convention of the Veterans of Foreign 
wars of the United States, that we support legislation to designate Decem.,.r 
7th of each year as "National Pearl Harbor Remembrance Day." 

VETERANS OF FOREIGN WARS 

OF THE UNITED STATES 

NATIONAL HI^AOQUARTE RS 
VFMSUILOlNa • KANSAS CITY. MO. Milt 

Submitted by Department of Illinois 
TO Committee on GENERAL RESOLUTIONS 

Resolution No. 311 




105 

The Foundation for a National Pearl Harbor Day 

920 OHestnut Street Ottawa, I I- 61350 (815) 433-442y 
REMEMBER PEARL BARBOR AS WE CO TO MEET THE FOE; 
REMEMBER PEARL BARBOR AS WE DID THE ALAMO; 
WE WILL ALWAYS REMEMBER TBAT THEY DIED FOR LIBERTY; 
REMEMBER PEARL BARBOR AND CO ON TO VICTORY. 



ODR DEAD 

A story cones to my mind that fits, that ■ TITLE .... OOR DEJLOI I 

A soldier comes to his Commanding Officer... "Hy friend Isn't back 
from the battlefield, sir. Request permission to go and get him.** 

"Permission refused," said the officer. "Z don*t want you to rlslc 
your life for a man who Is probably dead." 

The soldier went, all the same, and, an hour later, cama baclc 
mortally wounded, carrying the corpse ot his friend. 

The officer was furious. "I told you he was dead. Now I've lost 
both of you. Tell me, was It worth going out thero to bring In a 
corpse?" 

The dying man replied, "Oh, It was sir. When I got to hla, he was 
still alive. And he said to me, " Jack. I was sure you'd come." 

It Is In thousands of stories such as this that we say Our dead are 
not unknown soldiers. 

We know who they are and where they seek to go. 

Their passage through this life often was accompanied by great 
pain. Sacrifice and suffering. 

We love our dead. 

Let us pray for them upon their graves. 

A dally garland of prayers last longer than an armful of roses. 

As we approach the Golden Memorial hoxir of the War Veterans, eleven 
o'clock. Let us stand for a moment of silence—- — and let there rise 
from your heart a prayer beseeching Almighty Cod, the Father of us all, 
to grant to the souls of our departed comrades, a peace and glory, be 
theirs because of the bacrlflce they .made so other men might live. 



Semper Fldells, 

Richard A. Foltynevicz, ^^ USMC 
"H II Marine Corps Veteran 
'Once a Marine, always a Marine" 




106 



ittawa. Illinois 



Saturda/. May 29, 1993 149th Year— 127th Day 



Come Visit My Grave 




SOURCE: Thankt to Marg« RowiMir of Ottawa for thailng tl>l» poom wttti ua. 



by Jim Rolf**, ConunandM, 
Plymouth County Ani*ric*n L*£loa - 
W*sm*r Poet No. 241, LaMan, Iowa 
Dat* unknown 

I am a veteran laid under the sod. 

I'm In good company, I'm up here with God. 
Come to my grave and visit with me, 

I gave my life so you could be free, 
Today Is Ivlemortal Day throughout this great land. 

There's Avenue of Rags, parades and bands. 
I can hear music, the firing squad and taps. 

Here come my comrades, the Legionnaires, the Biuecaps. 
One of them Just put a flag by my stone, 

Some day he'll have one by his own. 
They say they have plans, other things to do, 

Don't put us aside as you would an old shoe. 
Come visit my grave In this cemetery so clean. 

This Is what Memonal Day means. 
There are many of us lying in walieiess sleep. 

In cemeteries of green and oceans of deep. 
It's sad that lor many who fought so brave. 

Now no one comes to visit their grave. 
They died so you couid have one whole year free. 

Now can't you save this one day lor me? 
There are soldiers, sailors, airmen up here. 

Who went into battle despite of their fear. 
I've been talking up here to ail of those men. ■ 

If they had to do It over, they'd do it again. 
Look, someone Is coming to my grave. 

it's my family, for them my life I gave. 
My wife, I remember our last embrace. 

As I left the tears streamed down your face. 
I think you knew the day I shipped out, 

I wouldn't return, your life'd be turned about 
There's my daughter that I used to hold. 

Can it be that you're nearly twenty years old? 
Next month Is to be your wedding day. 

I wish I could be there to give you away. 
My son's here too. Dad's little man. 

Always love your county, do for it what yru can. 
There Is one thing that really did bother. 

Seeing you grow up without the aid of a father. ■ 
I wish you could ail hear me from up above. 

That a father's best gift to his children is love. 
And what better way to prove my love to the end. 

Is that a man lay down his life for his friends. 
I see It's time for you to go home. 

Your visit made It easier to remain here alone. 
Don't cry honey, you look so sad. 

Our children are free, you should be so glad. 
Daughter, thanks for the bouquet so cute. 

Thank you son, for the sharp salute. 
Come again, I forgot, you can't hear me from up here. 

But I know you'll come visit me next year. 
The Oaliy Tlmes/TOM tlSTAK | ^^pg gn veterans are treated this way. 

On this day to remember. Memorial Day. 



107 



STATEMENT OF 

MICHAEL P. CLINE 

MASTER SERGEANT (RET) 

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR 

BEFORE THE 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON HOUSING AND 

MEMORIAL AFFAIRS 

COMMITTEE ON VETERANS' AFFAIRS 

ON 

VA NATIONAL CEMETERY SYSTEM., 

ARLINGTON NATIONAL CEMETERY AND 

THE AMERICAN BATTLE MONUMENTS COMMISSION 

24 MAY 1994 



108 



IntrodMction 

The Enlisted Association of the National Guard of the United States (E ANGUS) appreciates the 
opportunity to present its views on oversight of the National Cemetery System (NCS), American 
Battle Monuments Commission (ABMC); and to comment on H.J. Res 131 



Burial Benefits for National Guard and Reserve members with twenty years of service 

EANGUS would like to express its graditude and appreciation to the Subcommittee for the 
recognition recently extended to members of the National Guard and Reserve EANGUS is 
extremely grateful for the action taken, in 1 992, to provide burial Flags and grave markers, as well 
as for the recent passage of HR821 by Congress. The action in 1992, in company with the enactment 
of HR821, to extend burial in National Cemeteries, now provides full recognition of Reserve 
component members for their valuable service. 

These recent accomplishments would not have occurred were it not for the persistent efforts of the 
distinguished Chairman and members of this Subcommittee. The Association's 67,000 members 
commends your efforts to recognize, with dignity and respect, as members of the Total Force 



The National Cemetery System 

Burial in one of our national cemeteries is the final tribute, of a grateful nation, honoring the memory 
and sacrifice of those who served in our Armed Forces. This memorialization is everlasting through 
the provision of perpetual care of our national cemeteries It is a benefit available to all veterans and 
National Guard and Reserve members who contributed 20 years or more of faithful service; without 
regard to gender, race, religious affiliation or economic circumstances A total of 114 national 
cemeteries comprise the NCS. In September 1992, 53 of the 1 14 national cemeteries were closed 
to full-casket remains NCS is projecting that in six years an additional eleven sites will close bringing 
the total to 64 by the year 2000. Nine other cemeteries are projected to close between the period 
2000 and 2010 In other words, if the NCS remains on its present course, 65% of the national 
cemeteries will be considered closed in the next sixteen years 

Nationally, the number of internments for veterans or eligible individuals will continue to increase. 
Another annual record of internments, 73,000 is expected in Fiscal Year 1995 - a 55% increase 
in the last ten years Similarly, the number of gravesites maintained is estimated to reach 2 1 million 
by 1995, a 35% increase in ten years. Since the System's establishment in the Department of 
Veterans' Affairs in 1973, approximately 1,014,000 decedents have been interred in national 
cemeteries and 5 6 million headstones and markers have been furnished to mark gravesites A total 
of 330,000 gravemarker applications are projected for Fiscal Year 1995. 

VA estimates that staffing shortages of 244 wage grade employees and 41 general-schedule 
employees will exist in Fiscal Year 1995 During the period 1984 to 1995, fijll-time wage grade 
employees of the NCS have risen from 830 in 1984 to 847 projected for 1995 - 3% increase VA 
estimates that staffing shortages of 244 wage grade employees and 41 general schedule employees 
will exist in Fiscal Year 1995 

These staffing shortages require that VA prioritize its efforts First priority is given to timely burial. 
Second in priority is the enhancement of cemetery appearance and infrastructure, such as maintenance 
and repair of the NCS's approximately 400 buildings and 100 miles of road. 

The backlog for essential operating equipment remains a critical issue Although VA has pursued an 
aggressive service life extension and maintenance program, inevitably, there are eventual limits With 
available funding in 1994, the equipment backlog increased to $6.7 million and VA projects an 
additional $2 7 million in equipment due for replacement in 1995 Funding requested in 1995 to 
reduce the backlog of equipment replacement is $16 million It is noted, with gratitude, that the 
House Veterans Affairs Committee recommended the addition of $7 8 million for equipment 
replacement. 



109 



In recognition of the fact that demand for burial in a national cemetery will continue to increase until 
well into the next century, the NCS has developed a strategy to carefully manage existing resources 
and identify future opportunities to acquire additional burial space The strategy includes (1) 
establishing new national cemeteries, (2) acquiring additional land through purchase or donation to 
extend the service of existing cemeteries, and (3) encouraging States to provide additional 
gravesites through participation in the State Cemetery Grant Program 

The first part of the NCS strategy involves opening new cemeteries Since 1987, only one new 
national cemetery has been constructed - the San Joaquin Valley National Cemetery in Northern 
California, which was opened in June 1992 Funding has been provided for land acquisition and 
master planning at five other sites: Albany, Chicago, Cleveland, Dallas and Seattle. Construction 
funds for the Seattle cemetery are contained in the FY 1995 budget request. 

The second part of the NCS strategy involves acquiring adjacent land, thereby ensuring that existing 
national cemeteries can remain open In March 1994, the VA announced the purchase of 16 acres 
of land adjacent to Ft Gibson National Cemetery in Oklahoma The land, purchased from a private 
owner, will yield approximately 10,000 gravesites and allow Ft Gibson to remain open beyond 2030 
In Fort Scott, Kansas, the veteran community banded together to purchase and then donate ten acres 
of land This will allow the Ft. Scott National Cemetery to give full service to veterans and their 
families beyond the year 2030 And, in Port Hudson, Louisiana, the VA has been negotiating with 
the Georgia-Pacific Corporation to acquire neariy 12 acres adjacent to the Port Hudson National 
Cemetery, which closed in 1992. Alexandria National Cemetery, the only open national cemetery in 
Louisiana, is scheduled to close later this year; therefore, the re-opening of Port Hudson will permit 
continuing service to Louisiana veterans and families Weare pursuing other efforts to acquire land 
for other national cemeteries wherever it is feasible and cost effective to do so 

The third part of the stragedy is to utilize the State Cemetery Grants Program to complement the 
NCS This program has been very successful to date. Some State officials appear to be taking a 
"wait and see" approach on the viability of passage of legislation changing the Federal/State share 
fi-om 50/50 to 65/35% funding, as provided for in HR949 Recent requests from States have involved 
improvements to existing cemeteries rather than applications for new state cemeteries This program 
remains an integral and important part of the NCS strategy to meet the increasing need for burial 
space. We must continue to pursue ways to increase the participation of States in this worthwhile 
program. 



Information System 

NCS's information system (computers) needs are critical to its overall operations The computer 
system for the Office of Memorial Programs (OMP) is antiquated and often unreliable. According 
to the IB, OMP's workload is projected to increase at a rate of 2 to 3 percent per year. For FY 
1993, OMP provided 330,345 headstones and markers The FY 1993 total for Presidential Memorial 
Certificates (PMC) was 269,489. The procurement of an updated computer support system could 
provide an FTEE savings to the system. It is estimated that 3 FTEE savings could be achieved in 
the PMC program and that a 3 5 FTEE savings could be realized in the headstone and marker 
program A new computer system is also necessary to interface with the Burial Operation's 

Support System (BOSS) . 



American Battlefield Monuments Commission fABMO 

The principle functions of ABMC are to commemorate the achievements and sacrifices of the United 
States Armed Forces where they have served since April 6, 1917, through the erection and 
maintenance of suitable memorial shrines; to design, construct, operate and maintain permanent 
American military cemeteries in foreign countries; to control the design and construction on foreign 
soil of US military monuments and markers by other US. citizens and organizations both public and 
private, and to encourage these organizations and individuals to maintain, adequately, the monuments 
and markers they have erected 



110 



The ABMC administers, operates and maintains 24 permanent American military burial grounds, 49 
memorial structures in twelve foreign countries, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands 
and four memorials in the United States. 

Interred in ABMC's cemeteries are 124,912 US War Dead -- 30,921 of World War I, 93,241 of 
World War II, and 750 of the Mexican War. Additionally, 6,573 American veterans and others are 
interred in Its Mexico City and Corozal American Cemeteries The World War cemeteries and the 
Mexico City Cemetery are closed to further burials except for the remains of American War Dead, 
still found in the battle areas. In addition to their burials, the World War I and II cemeteries, together 
with 3 memorials on United States soil, commemorate, individually by name, the 94,100 US service 
personnel Missing in Action or lost or buried at sea during the two World Wars, the Korean War and 
the Vietnam War. 

The care of these shrines to our War Dead requires a large annual program of maintenance and repair 
of structures, facilities, vehicles, equipment and grounds maintenance This care includes upkeep of 
131,000 graves and headstones; 53 memorial structures; 41 quarters, utilities and maintenance 
facilities; 67 miles of roads and paths; 91 1 acres of flowering plants, fine lawns and meadows; 3 
million square feet of shrubs and hedges, and 1 1 thousand ornamental shrubs and trees. The 
estimated replacement cost of these structures by AMBC is about three hundred million dollars. 
Much of this maintenance and care must be performed by casual labor as the cemetery staffs are not 
large enough to provide it adequately on a daily basis. 

ABMC's budget authority for the current year is $20,21 1,000 Its appropriation request and budget 
authority for fiscal 1995 is $20,265,000, $54,000 more than the current year The expenses of the 
AMBC fall into two categories commemoration of the Armed Forces where they have served, and 
care and maintenance of the shrines for which ABMC is responsible. Last year, over 75% of ABMC's 
Budget Authority went to defray personnel salaries and benefits. The foreign govenunents where our 
installations are located armually decree cost of living increases for our foreign national employees 
ofat least $400,000. 



Arlington National Cemetery 

Arlington National Cemetery, the best known of our national cemeteries, is under the jurisdiction of 
the Department of the Army The cemetery grounds are on 612 acres of land. Nearly 235,000 service 
members and family rest at Arlington There are an average of 16 new burials daily. Including those 
on 50 undeveloped remaining acres, there are approximately 76,000 available gravesites. Without 
further expansion, these available gravesites will only allow Arlington to remain open until the year 
2025. Cemetery officials are therefore considering a new master plan for expansion. 

The Cemetery currently employs a staff of 135, with some services performed by outside contractors. 
A new complex is under construction. This will house maintenance and other support services. 
Approximately 4 million people visit the Cemetery annually. 

We have been informed that Arlington, like the NCS has been able to cope with budget restraints. 
The aging veteran population can be expected to increase demands, as is expected with the NCS. 
This will be an important factor in Congress' consideration of future needs 



H..I. Resl31 

This Joint Resolution would designate December 7, of each year, as National Pearl Harbor 
Remembrance Day President Franklin D Roosevelt characterized the attack on Pearl Harbor as: 
" a day that will live in infamy " EANGUS believes it is essential that we keep the memory of 
December 7, 1941, alive for the reasons so eloquently stated by the President on that fateful day 

Mr Chairman, on behalf of the entire membership of the Enlisted Association National Guard of the 
United States (EANGUS), I wish to thank you for inviting us to provide testimony for the record. 



Ill 

WRITTEN COMMITTEE QUESTIONS AND THEIR RESPONSES 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY 

HONORABLE GEORGE E. SANGMEISTER, CHAIRMAN 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON HOUSING AND MEMORIAL AFFAIRS 

COMMITTEE ON VETERANS' AFFAIRS 

ON BEHALF OF 

RANKING MINORITY MEMBER DAN BURTON 

MAY 24, 1994 
HEARING ON THE OPERATION OF VA NATIONAL CEMETERIES 



Question 1: In your statement you indicate your intention to reintroduce the upright granite 
headstone. Would you give some background on that decision and tell us why VA would 
make them available only in private or State veterans' cemeteries? 

Answer: On January 19, 1994, Secretary Brown authorized the reintroduction of upright 
granite headstones to expand the available headstone and grave marker options for 
veterans buried in private or State veterans' cemeteries. This decision was customer- 
driven; VA/National Cemetery System (NCS) responding to a need identified by the 
Vermont State Veterans' Cemetery in Randolph, Vermont. The reintroduction of upright 
granite headstones was initially limited to private and State veterans' cemeteries, 
representing 70% of our volume, so that NCS could evaluate the acceptance of upright 
granite headstones by the veteran community at a later date. 

Upright granite headstones have not been previously used in national cemeteries. Upright 
granite headstones were provided, however, from 1941 through 1947 to mark and honor 
the graves of America's veterans buried in private cemeteries. They were discontinued in 
1947 by the War Department due to low demand which led to high individual cost. During 
this entire period only 1 ,895 upright granite headstones were provided. 

Since the authorization of upright granite headstones in January 1994, of the 120,000 
headstones and grave markers provided, 1 1 upright granite headstones were ordered as of 
June 17, 1994; eight for the Vermont State Veterans' Cemetery, the remaining three for 
private cemeteries. Demand is low at this time, as upright granite headstones are not 
depicted as available on our application form. The new edition of the application form 
contains upright granite headstones as an available option. As the new form is circulated 
and applicants learn of this option, we expect demand to increase. 

Upright granite headstones are identical to upright marble headstones in dimension, weight 
and inscription. The type and color of granite stock for upright granite headstones is the 
same as that specified for flat granite markers, light gray. 

Question 2: As discussed during the panel's hearing, just as in civilian cemeteries, 
increasing numbers of families are choosing cremation. With a system as large as VA's, 
major items like the construction of columbaria offer the possibility of cost saving through 
single design, modular purchases for system wide use. Central purchasing of this type of 
columbarium design and placement would achieve bulk purchasing economies and, 
therefore, allow placement of columbaria in national cemeteries at reasonable cost. Has 
NCS undertaken a review of its design and purchasing system for the purpose of identifying 
potential cost-effective methods of providing columbaria at national cemeteries? If 
columbaria can be constructed at reasonable costs, wouldn't national cemeteries be able to 
serve veterans' burial needs for periods beyond their current closing dates? 

Answer: Yes, NCS has undertaken a review of costs associated with columbaria and in- 
ground plots. In a comparison of costs, columbarium niches are many times more 
expensive than the in-ground plots. 

The cost of Columbaria is usually approximately $300-400 per niche. The cost in many 
cases cannot be lowered by buying pre-made, bulk purchased columbaria. The pre-cast 
honeycomb unit without marble cover is estimated at $50 a niche, yet when the marble 



112 



cover is added and the entire columbaria unit is adapted to existing terrain features (i.e. 
sloping hillside, retaining wall, etc.) the cost rises to $300-$400 per niche. Further, since 
procurennents costing more than $25,000 must be competitive, we cannot buy "sole source" 
pre-made columbaria unless they are very small yield (48-96 niches). Small yield 
columbaria are not feasible at most cemeteries with large cremation demand. 

The cost of developing an acre of land for burial purposes is generally between $55,000 
and $75,000, including roads, curbs, irrigation, landscaping, and site grading. Thus, when 
the land is used for 3'X3' in-ground plots, the cost would be less than $40 per plot, using a 
yield of 2,000 plots per acre. 

Most of our cemeteries that have high demand for cremated interment are also our largest, 
most active cemeteries which also have available acreage capable of providing in-ground 
cremain plots. In weighing the cost option, we attempt to use in-ground space before 
considering columbaria. 



o 



84-882(120) 



BOSTON PUBLIC LIBRARY 



3 9999 05983 212 9 



ISBN 0-16-046398-X 



780 



60"463983 



90000