of the economy. the success we have had in implementing the sanctions strategy as depended on a lot of flexibility. the reason for that is we have, as jason mentioned, or is not significant u.s. exposure to the russian economy, that they only consist of 1/10 of 1% of our gdp in terms of u.s. exports to russia. some of our partners in europe have bigger impacts. by working close concert with those european allies, we have been able to maximize the impact of our sanctions strategy against russia. tried to do is optimize the impact on russia's theomy while mitigating impact of sanction regimes on american impacts. we do not want american businesses to be held at a significant competitive this

advantage, but we want to make sure we are targeting the impact on the russian economy in a way that does not have dramatic spillover effects into the broader economy. you cannot eliminate that but we can make sure the focal point is russia, and we have been able to do that. the president does intend to sign the peace legislation passed by congress, but we have concerns about that legislation because while it preserves flexibility, it does send a confusing message to our allies because it includes some sanctions language that does not reflect the consultations ongoing. consultations that we have had that allowed the successful implantation of strategy have allowed us to have, and private conversations with our european allies, about their strategies and their steps

forward. there are other areas of our strategy that we prefer not to have. preserves because it the president's flexibility to carry out the strategy, he intends to sign the bill. i would anticipate it would get done before the end of the week. that would be contingent on the receipt of the fully-enrolled version of the bill. >> the russian economy has h been having a difficult time for some time and president putin has not changed his behavior towards ukraine. the current situation comedy a thing that will finally get him to change his behavior towards ukraine? >> ultimately, he is the only one that knows. but i think is crystal clear to everyone around the world is that what we have said about this strategy has come to pass.

we have suggested that the longer the sanctions regime is in place, the more isolated the russians would be and the greater the impact it would have on the broader russian economy. every weekend months that goes isthat the sanctions regime in place, we see the toll on the russian economy grow. we are now starting to see, as is clear from the extraordinary action that was taken by the tosian government overnight dramatically increase the interest rate as an indication that the bite on the russian economy is only becoming stronger. ultimately, it will be up to resident per -- president putin to decide whether the economic costs are worth it to him and the russian people. the president has been clear and the president was clear on this even at the news conference that

he did at the nato summit. this was obviously discussed in some detail. our president and partners stand ready to begin to roll back the sanctions regime against russia as soon as russia demonstrates a commitment to the escalate -- the escalate the situation in ukraine. as a result, the sanction regime is in place. as long as that remains in place, the costs on the russian economy will continue to increase. roberta? >> what does the u.s. prefer to do, if anything, to address the school attack in pakistan or provide assistance in the wake of that? >> use of the statement from the president that went out earlier today and what he said is something that i will repeat, which is that the united states

condemns these contacts in the strongest possible terms and our thoughts and prayers go out to the victims and our families. it is also and the manic -- is also endemic of a few things. the depraved decision one has to make to storm a school children and opened fire on them is a testament to how cold-blooded these extremists are. it is a clear indication of something we have said on a number of occasions, which is that many of these religious extremists are carrying out attacks that have a substantial impact in terms of the number of victims upon muslims. i know that many of these extremists like to characterize ofir struggle as a struggle muslims against the western world, but that clearly is not true as the largest numbers of

victims we are seeing are muslims. that makes the situation all the more heartbreaking and all the more tragic. i can tell you that through a variety of channels, the united states has been in touch with pakistan officials to offer assistance. much of the outreach has been driven by u.s. ambassador olson in pakistan. i know that ambassador olson traveled with one of the senior pakistani officials to donate blood at the pakistani red crescent today. that is emblematic of the kind of support that we in the united states have for the people of pakistan. are there concrete actions united states can take to assist or respond to the attack? >> that kind of assistance you are referring to has been offered. this is a situation that has only recently been result and i

anticipate we will continue to be in touch with pakistani leaders in the days to come. jim? >> does the attack in pakistan cause any concern on part of the administration that perhaps this withdrawal from afghanistan is wise? i know the president authorized more troops, 1000 more troops than was previously planned for next year and those soldiers may be engaging counterterror operations. is that capacity for reserved only for afghanistan or might it also be portable to pakistan as well? >> this troop commitment you are referring to is merely a bridge through the end of this year as our nato allies and other partners in this conflict in afghanistan make their troop commitments and deploy them to the region. this is only a temporary expansion of the previous policy. the president does believe

that's the present is committed to make sure we remain on track for the possible drawdown in terms of military presence in afghanistan. the strategy, or mission, our troops in afghanistan are pursuing right now is one that is focused on counterterrorism in a way that will ensure, assist the afghan government but ensure the protection of american personal still in the country. it also will entail training afghan security forces so they can continue the process of taking responsibility for the security situation in their country. i think this scenario and terrible event that occurred in pakistan highlights the violent tendencies of some of these extremist groups, which in turn to do alls the need we can to strengthen and support

afghan security forces as they try to protect their country and citizens from some of these extremist groups that are not just carrying out acts of violence against muslims in pakistan, they are carrying out acts against muslims in afghanistan. >> so they will soon be on their own, essentially? >> the united states will they with our partners in afghanistan in the way with that we stay with our partners in pakistan as well. there are a variety of reasons for that. we are closely invested in the stability of afghanistan and continuing to work with the central government that is making important decisions that will preserve that security and make the kind of investments that are critical to maintaining a stability. the united states has invested in working closely with pakistan. we have an important counterterrorism relationship with pakistan and i think that relationship will indoor because it primarily benefits the citizen of both pakistan and the united states. these kind of relationships and

our involvement in these areas will continue and indoor because it is in the best interest of the people and national security. the kind ofange is military footprint that has been in place in afghanistan for more than 13 years. >> about the on the bus -- om nibus, some of this got covered last week, and the president was not happy about some of the regulations in.-frank. -- dodd-frank. you have heard about that position and how it was slipped in by congressman yoder. the claim has been made in news reports that citibank wrote that provision. know for a fact that citibank word for word wrote that his vision -- that provision in this bill? the president is not happy about this bill.

this the response match with some of the discussion out there? this is an outrage to a lot of people that allegedly citibank has put this provision in. >> this is a bill that was written by congress. biller one element of that was plagiarized from a cit ibank lobbyist come you'll have to ask it member of congress. the white house, regardless of who wrote the provision, strongly opposes it and does not think it is a good idea because it does water down the one element of wall street reform and the president leaves we should be implementing wall wayet reform in a robust that will ensure that american taxpayers, businesses, and middle-class families have the protection they need to ensure that taxpayers are never again on the hook for the risky bets

made by wall street funds. >> you are not sure whether citibank or the people at citibank wrote that provision? >> i don't know. congress is responsible for drafting the legislation, so you should as someone in congress. >> speaking of the omnibus and what happened on the weekend, senator reid's office appears to be thinking ted cruz for delaying the debate or prolonging the debate on that to the extent that it allowed the senator allowed for some of the rough or.o be in the spirit of the holidays, we be sending the sanitary fruitcake? [laughter] are you saying that tread cruise fored cruz is responsible getting the surgeon general through? >> i'm no expert in senate floor procedure. this white house has worked very closely with senator reid and

toer senate democrats ensure the prompt and fair consideration of the president's nominees across the united states government. we are gratified that some of these nominees are finally moving forward. dr. murphy is a tremendous example of this. this is an individual who is eminently qualified for this will standd i think to offer quite a bit to the american people in servicing this country and this role. we are gratified. in relation to senator cruz's role, i'm not sure how responsible he is for this. i understand based on the news reports that i've read that some the shenanigans he carried out on the senate floor did create an opening and additional time for the highly-qualified nominees to be confirmed. be ans the case, it may

indication that senator cruz does not know much more about senate floor proceedings that we do. >> the u.s. senate today is moving forward with the last of the executive nominations in the 113th congress earlier today, moving forward with the head of the immigrations and customs enforcement. moverocedural vote to that anthony link one would be the deputy secretary of state is underway, and you can watch that on c-span 2. they are watching a -- there watching for a tax extension program. he is hearing now that it is the packagem risk insurance gets punted into the next year, the senate could adjourn tonight for the year. next up, e-house veterans affairs subcommittee look at military cemetery operations. we hear about the expansion of the national cemetery system to include additional burial

facilities as well as improvement in grave accountability practices. it is an hour and 45 minutes. >> good afternoon, everyone. this oversight hearing of the subcommittee on memorial affairs will come to order. ourre here to examine military veterans' cemetery. our goal is to learn more about the operations of the national cemetery administration, arlington national cemetery, and the american mind my commission -- monument commission. over the last year, as well as the commentary on several focused issues i will be highlighting momentarily. we will also like to welcome mr. walters. he has stepped up to perform duties as acting undersecretary of memorial affairs after the

retirement of undersecretary morrow. we look forward to hearing about his visions for overseeing the honorable mission at nca. secretary cleland, it is nice to hear you as well. the people with these organizations work day in and day out to honor veterans and serviceman with dignified burials and to assist families and loved ones who must deal with the lost and tremendous gray. our nation's solemn obligation is to honor those who have served does not cease at the end of their service, retirement, or ultimately upon their death and it is the responsibility of these organizations to see this commitment through. i would like to take a moment to note that today we will be -- today will be my last hearing as subcommittee chair and i'm extremely pleased that they's

focus is on the tremendous work of these organizations. your commitment to these timeless on rings of the nation's veterans and the compassionate missions of nca, arlington cemetery, and nbac. i have been proud to work with you over the recent years and i will trust you will continue to go above and beyond the care for our nation and our international shrines. today the committee is interested in hearing from the national cemetery administration on several focused areas including continued efforts to provide burial access initiatives for rural veterans, those planned for urban areas and other future outlooks for burial options. we will hear about new regulation which was introduced to address an issue regarding requests for headstones and

markers made by those other than next of kin. i look forward to hearing updates on arlington national cemetery and i know for the record that mr. hallinan has done a tremendous job at nac. i thank you for your truly tireless commitment in your evident passion for the mission that you serve. , i understand 2014 is a significant commemorative year for the nation and the american battle monuments commission. we will be hearing updates on the far-reaching operations of abmc, which operates in 16 foreign countries and many other locations. secretary cleland, thank you for your continued service and for being here today.

abmc is a remarkable organization and we appreciate hearing from you. i would formally welcome our witnesses as noted. they play significant roles in ensuring that we as a nation for fill our responsibilities to honor those who observed all of us. we hope that through discussion and questions such as what will occur today that we are collectively -- we work collectively not only to meet the challenges, but exceed the standard. mr. ronald walters, acting secretary of memorial overseess here, which 130 cemeteries nationwide. mr. walters is accompanied by mr. glenn powers. next, we have mr. patrick hallinan, executive director of army national military centers. he will also testify on power

one. is charged with overseeing arlington national cemetery. finally, secretary max cleland. the american battle monuments commission is with us today. sector will offer an update on abmc's mission plans and recent commemorations. we will be hearing from second panel, including this amy miller , who is the director of outreach and education for tragedy outreach for survivors,. with those introductions complete, i also think the member who is not on this committee but has expressed an interest in this and i ask consent that representative stivers be allowed to participate in this hearing.

curing all objections, so ordered. thank you all for being with us today and i yield to the ranking member for her opening statement. >> thank you, mr. chairman, and thank you for holding this hearing. i guess this is our grand finale. i suspect this will be the last time the subcommittee me stirring the session and i want to thank you for your leadership and tell you what a pleasure it has been to work with you and your staff on this committee and beennk veterans have well-served by your compassionate and fair approach to these issues. >> i want to thank you for this also, because it is a two-way street. >> i also want to thank the witnesses for being here. it is a special treat to see secretary cleland, a longtime friend from georgia. welcome to all of you. i know that you share our feelings that a proper burial for nation's veterans and their families is a solemn obligation that we need to uphold.

the national cemetery administration as rose dramatically since its creation in 1862 and only 14 cemeteries were created to service resting places for veterans after the war between the states. the administration has also expanded its geographic diversity to better serve veterans across the country, and i know recent legislation added to your ability to do that. there are now 131 national cemeteries. new york has seven. three other states have six, and puerto rico has two. your access has grown considerably but that brings me to my point. there is still a problem. there is still a problem where veterans do not have the ability to be buried in national cemeteries that are close to home and accessible for their families. this is especially true in the west stay with the largest veterans population that is not

served by a national cemetery continues to be a nevada, which is home to over 230,000 veterans, 153,000 of whom live in the las vegas area. total there are 11 states with a combined veteran total of 1.8 million that do not have an active national cemetery. because most of those states are in the west, that is a lot of square miles covered that does not have that access. many of the largest cities in the west like las vegas exceed the nca's eligibility of 80,000 veterans. they do not have a national cemetery. burialsnded by placing by places that arnie have cemeteries. these urban initiatives are already great, but you propose them for new sign -- for los

angeles, who is served by two cemeteries, and new york, who is served by three. this is good but a matter of convenience, not a matter of necessity. have perfect not access, but they are in better shape than a veteran in las vegas who has to travel four hours to california and bakersfield to get to a national cemetery. in salt lake city, you have to travel eight hours for burial in the closest cemeteries in denver. of theseu place more facilities of convenience, i would like to closer at cities that exceed the 80,000 member requirement to steve we might not want to put facilities there. i look forward to hearing your plans to address that issue because as long as i'm here, i'm not going to let it go. keep bringing it up. i appreciate working with you on a. a couple of issues i hope we can address. rch, i that last ma

sent a letter to secretary shinseki, commending him for allowing same-sex marriage couples in cemeteries. we need a policy on that. right now it is case-by-case. even if it were for national cemeteries, state cemeteries have their own policies and that does not seem fair to me. something that has recently come to my attention is that veterans who served in the armed services are in a disadvantage in the other way. if you are the spouse of a , youan and you pass away can be buried in a veteran cemetery even if the veteran is still alive. the family members will be able to stay together. unfortunately, current law prohibits the v.a. from burying a family member of an active duty serviceman who passes away while in the service. i think that is something that we also need to look at the work on legislation to correct.

some of these things only make it fair for veterans and their families. all veterans and their families and rather than dealing with them in one way that national cemeteries, another in-state, and on a case-by-case basis, let's work together to build a policy. i look forward to your testimony and especially the battle monuments commission about how certain resources will affect the services you provide. thank you. advised the witnesses that your complete and written statements will be entered into the record. we will move on to our first witness from the ncaa -- ncaa. nca. football on the mind for some reason. [laughter] mr. walters, you are recognized for five minutes for your testimony. runyon, ranking

member titus, thank you for the chance to provide review of the national cemetery's administration operations and our plans for continuing to meet the needs for veterans and their families. i'm accompanied today by glenn powers, the pity undersecretary for field programs. -- deputy undersecretary for field programs. i would like to acknowledge our partners from the american battle monuments commission. our shared commitment to memorialize our nation's veterans is strengthened to our continued partnership. as to chairman, undersecretary mcdonnell's leadership the department recently launched myv.a., and ambitious attempt to reorganize the department to one that is centered around the customer, the veteran. effort,ncawith the

measure success about the ultimate outcome from veterans.] direct feedback from our customers let us know of we were achieving those outcomes. as reported in 2014, for the fifth consecutive time nca achieve the highest score ever recorded for a public or private organization on the american customer satisfaction index. thanks to our employees, nca scored 96. it was 28 points above the 68-point average for federal government agencies. our employees are nca's best assets and we value their feedback. this year i am pleased to report that nca increased is v.a.'s allon rate in employee survey by 10%. nca employee engagement, along with all the employees, is invaluable to be successful

design of my v.a.. this is especially true of nca's workforce, 74% of which are veterans. the highest percentage in the federal government. our employees are also more than willing to reach out to those in need of a second chance. i'm pleased to report that we continue our efforts to end veteran homelessness. established a nca cemetery caretaker apprenticeship program designed to help homeless veterans. our second class of apprentices completed their training on december 5. since the program's inception, 32 formerly-homeless veterans are now employed full-time at nca. our third class of apprentices will convene this spring. thanks to the dedication of our entire workforce, nca successfully met increasing

workload requirements in 2014. to our operation and maintenance program, we maintained over 3.4 million gravesites, performed , issued,000 interments over 600,000 presidential memorial certificates, provided over 300 60,000 headstones, markers, and medallions, and awarded $28.8 million to repair great sites -- gravesites. planning andreful management of construction in grant funds, no interruptions in burial services occurred at any national or state veterans cemetery. we continue to make progress on and lamenting new burial access policies previously approved by congress. nca plans to eventually open 18 new cemeteries which will provide new or enhanced access to burial options for over 2 million veterans. the new facilities include five

new national cemeteries, two in florida which will open this year, and one each in colorado, nebraska, and new york, as well as a national cemetery presence in eight highly rural and five urban locations. we strive to better serve veterans and their families in the future. received the results on an independent study on emerging burial practices that addresses green burials and additional ways to memorialize veterans. we will be happy to brief the committee on the study in greater detail after we have completed our view -- our review. nca is planning to expand the use of gps technology in national cemeteries to enhance overall gravesite accountability. this technology will provide state-of-the-art mapping, gravesite, and headstone information and will serve as the basis for our ongoing gravesite accountability efforts. -- weend to display or

can to explore how to best display our rich history of our national cemeteries and the stories of our nations heroes with the public. we look forward to our continued work with this committee to care who went into battle and we are appreciated of your leadership and all your done for the nation's veterans. thank you again for the opportunity to be here today and i would be pleased to answer any questions you may have. >> thank you, mr. walters. we will hear from mr. hallinan for his testimony. your recognize for five minutes. >> chairman runyon, ranking member titus, distinguished members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to provide an update on operations at national ceremony -- a cemetery. we continue to build on our tremendous progress. we are setting industry

standards for best practices, becoming a center of excellence by working closely with with our partnered organizations which i am proud to testify with today. we have one of the most stringent accountability processes of any national cemetery. we have leveraged cutting edge technology to develop an integrated solution that uses eight digital record of internment system to provide real-time mapping updates and a real-time picture for activities at the cemetery. her internment system perform systematic backups. it provides access to all digitized burial records and stores photographs of the caskets at each electronic interment record. -- headstoneone functionality and extended and uses the strictest levels of --

gravesite and headstone gps location which are accurate to within three centimeters. the systems working in concert accountabilityre at arlington cemetery. to keep up with the pace for aerials, we have continued to reduce wait times and we continue to treat the public with respect and sensitivity. we are working with several projects. in october we began the renovation of our welcome center restrooms to improve visitor experience. we are currently renovating the basement of the welcome center to provide workspaces for our staff. another one of our goals for fiscal year 2015 is the redesign and approving the manner of

which we gather and escort funeral processions. funeralroviding a new procession cueing manner to make it more intuitive and easier to negotiate. i'm pleased to inform the sub committee about the tomb of remembrance. this project will allow the place to honor ashes of those who were cremated that may be co-mingled are identified. we have recently completed an acticans with disability accessibility study which will help us program studies and make sure our national shrine is excessive less possible to all those who wish to visit it. we are active by -- we're

actively improving access throughout the cemetery. we continue to replace much of our dated utility infrastructure. we identified a proximally $74 million in deferred maintenance and to date we have spent $40 million on improvements to the water lines, roads, buildings, and hvac systems. project isium currently within budget and on schedule to be completed in the summer of 2016, and we will -- this will provide the cemetery with an additional 27,282 burial spaces for caskets and earns. we have begun the design of our southern expansion project. once completed, both projects are expected to extend longevity to the 2050's. i personally thank you for your

leadership and dedicated support during your tenure. i commit that your diligent procedures,ablished repeatable processes, embeddable technologies, and loose to those who show eyes to -- and institutionalized services, every service at arlington national cemetery will be conducted with the honor and dignity are service members have earned and their families will be treated with compassion and respect. thank you, and i look forward to answering any questions you may have. >> thank you. we recognize secretary cleland for his desolate. >> may i say it is an honor to chairman, andr. members of the committee. we will miss you. we will miss talking football, miss talking our mission, and miss, is ms. titus said, your

fair, even-headed approach these issues in a bipartisan way. it is rare in this town and i for one really appreciate it. we will miss you. a lot of the people here with me at this table over the last two years, i've really gotten to know them and i can tell you patrick hallinan has been doing a great job out there, but now he is the tip of the spear. he is the guy leading the pack out there. i was asked by the secretary of the army about four years ago to ond up an advisory committee the arlington national cemetery. they have come light years in four years, i can tell you that. four years ago they were operating off of 3x5 cards. now they have technology to launch a satellite. thes quite amazing

transformation have put together out there. the veterans administration mr. chairman, ice to head many years ago. we are working closely with the v.a.. i met with secretary mcdonald and we are in agreement, particularly on some sensitive issues regarding the punch bowl cemetery in hawaii in the visitor experience there. we are working closely with all of the people at the table. i say in terms of arlington that the american battle monuments commission has put no charge to arlington, a charge to the american battle monuments commission. the liaison officer on their site has done a great job. he spent 17 years in western europe and he is an added benefit for arlington. one of our staff members, tom soul, is on the advisory council for cemeteries and works at the v.a.

i have with me today people who have labored in the vineyard of the american battle monuments commission a very long time. our chief financial officer, and mike conley, our interest-rate officer. we are honored to be with him today. officer.ministrative we are honored to be with him today. last night, i saw a movie based book, laura hillenbrand "unbroken." it was a powerful testimony of one man's incredible endurance in world war ii. louise m parini -- louie zamparelli. million caught0 up in world war ii. it was worldwide conflagration.

work of thethe american monuments battle commission. we have 95,000 names of the missing from world war i and world war ii on our tablets of the missing. you see a movie like "unbroken, and you realize why you are in this business. as general pershing said, and we like to quote at the american battle monument's commission, that time will not dim the glory of their deeds. i would be glad to answer any questions. the one issue that the congress gave the american battle monuments commission was clark's cemetery. 1967, ie to vietnam in went by the old clark air base. it is now closed. the philippine government asked the american government to leave a number of years ago. baseleft clark airfield

cemetery, which has been around was 100 years, with about 8000 in tournaments -- 8000 interments, unattended. congress gave that mission to the american battle monuments commission. we've taken that mission seriously. we are in it with both feet. we are doing an assessment of what it will take to bring that cemetery up to respectable cemeteries. it is not going to be the arlington of the pacific. we will maintain it with dignity. that is going to cost some money. we will be coming back to a couple of years for that. again.are on that case thank you. >> thank you for that, mr. secretary, because i know that was one of the issues in the

forefront when i first took this position. with that, we will start a round of questioning. this question is really for the whole panel. the collective expertise at the nca, army nationals cemeteries, and abmc is unique and frankly, i want to say impressive. each organization needs strict standards to properly honor those who served the nation. mr. hallinan touched on the operation of sharing best practices and the secretary talked about that. that is tremendously valuable and should be in courage. out of each of your organization share the information and innovation and how did that relationship of collaboration begin? start with mr. walters. >> thank you, mr. chairman. we work very, very closely with army and american battle monuments commission in our shared mission to serve veterans.

organizationsboth have a representative on our advisory committee, on nca's advisory committee, and their input on that committee, which ranges over a variety of issues, we have found extreme the helpful over the years. with army we have also established a board that meets two times a year to discuss areas of mutual interest and to share best practices. mr. hallinan mentioned the use of gis-gps technology. it is something that the national cemetery administration is beginning to use and we can certainly learn best practices from arlington's success in that regard. i would also submit that there are many things that nca has shared with arlington that has worked equally well in their favor.

, we are currently working on a project to construct an interpretive center at the punch bowl in hawaii. mr. powers was recently at the punch bowl to check on the progress of that. we have many collaborative efforts abmc with as well, to share in the historical aspects of our veterans at cemetery grounds. >> mr. hallinan, anything to add? direct answer to the question of how this all began, i fondly worked with mr. ron walters and former undersecretary steve morrow for .3 years with nca when i came over to arlington in 2010 during difficult and challenging times, one of the first things i did was create a written miranda of agreement between both agencies that the secretary of the army approved. it has been put in place based

on 33 years of experience. .hat relationship with them we extended that relationship and continue to share all the last couple of years. --relationship with abmc former senator cleland is my old boss when we worked at the v.a.. we have known each other for many years, both professionally and veterans. the relationship professionally and personally was there. we reached out inside a -- and signed a written mo you -- m .o.u. the committee is aware of what we have them with technology, standard operating procedures, what we have done to train our staff, the sensitivity when we do with families. the mechanisms are in place. the vehicles are there. we're working together as mr. cleland pointed out.

he is assigned a permanent liaison that is outside of my office, proactively engaged, looking at what we are doing with technology, at the same time sharing the wealth experience on teaching history of those who of worn the uniform. across the board here at this table and going forward into the future, excellent working relationship that has been documented in this place. , do youtary cleland have anything to add? >> actually, the corporation between these agencies is one of the things i'm most proud of. hasn't always been that way, as you well know. it is unusual for a government agency to work with than the government agency because budgets and policies usually tovepiped and- s everything is lined up for your accountable to your congressional counterparts and

oversight people and you don't really talk to your colleagues even though they are in the same business. we are in the same business, all of us. we are in the business of honoring those who served, particularly when they get killed in action and particularly when they die and looking after their families. that is the business we are in. patrickure that hallinan and his associate came over to the 70th anniversary of the normandy invasion. ,hey were with a commission with us, with the president of the united states on june 6 of this year. the next day, they went back for a professional to work to look at the cemetery at normandy and especially the interpretive center that we have their which

we think is world class. arlington is looking at that kind of thing themselves. there is a massive change back and forth. our computer people, our i.t. people have shared information for number of years. in terms of the v.a., like i mentioned, i've met with secretary mcdonald's. a memorial the v.a. has cemeteries. their unique. cemeterythe punch bowl in january. they have been up to the last few days. we have been working with them to magnify the interpretive experience and make sure the experience at the punch bowl is something that future generations can grab. i am proud to work with these folks and they are the best in the business as far as i can tell. >> thank you for that. my time has expired. i just want to say one thing because i think what you will do that there is a

personal relationship there with a lot of good professional structure around it, and i just wanted to highlight that point. i will yield to the ranking member. >> mr. walters, i would like to talk you about that urban and ask yourogram -- maybe you can explain the justification of why you don't that haveban areas people who have difficulty getting to state cemeteries, if they don't have a federal cemetery, like in las vegas. you have to go out to boulder city. if you take public transit, that takes you two hours and you start the walk six miles. there aren't many widows who can make that trip. why wouldn't those kind of urban areas be considered for this initiative? the purpose of the urban initiative, at least as it is

defined now, is to provide ancillary service to existing national cemeteries where we have data that shows there are problems with time and distance barriers at those locations. specificive very criteria against which we evaluate a potential location for the placement of a columbarium-only cemetery. it is designed to supplement national cemeteries and address gaps in service that customers are telling us to formal surveys through other feedback. >> would it take sense to look to expanding that to also include access to state cemeteries when there is no access to a national cemetery? i think it makes sense to begin to engage those who use state cemeteries similar to the way we

are doing with national cemeteries. couldhat point on, we then examine whether or not it is most appropriate for the v.a. to step in to provide those columbarium-only facilities, or if we can work with the states to provide them or have a better rationale for the placement of the cemeteries to begin with at the state level. >> do you think there is something in the funding formula that discriminates against the location of the cemeteries in the west that could be addressed? >> in the state grant funding formula? >> or in the location of a national cemetery, the funding for it. >> absolutely not. there is formula for the allocation of money. what determines the allocation of money for the placement of new national cemeteries is our access policies, which is where we have 80,000 veterans with any

75-mile radius of a proposed site, that is what we place a new national cemetery. regardless of what state it is in or whether it cross-cuts states or other factors. >> that does not seem to be working very well in the west, does it? there are more than 80,000 veterans in las vegas. >> yes, ma'am. as you know, our access policies at this point consider veterans covered with a burial option if they have convenient access to either a national with state cemetery. but i would argue that that is not a convenient access if you have to write two hours each way on mass transit and walk six miles. that is not very convenient. >> our access standards does not take into driving time and distance. it is mileage. my understanding is that boulder city is approximately 30 miles from las vegas. i'm not aware of what the driving time would be.

i think the bottom line, ma'am, is that we do not consider burial in a state cemetery to be an inferior option to be buried in a national cemetery. choice, whichthe are rather be buried in a state cemetery or national cemetery? >> i would prefer to be buried in a place that is a national shrine and states can achieve national shrine standing and be cared for by individuals who are committed to the perpetual care of our nation's hero. >> let me ask you this. i think the cemetery in boulder city is great, but how much oversight you have on state cemeteries after you provide some of the funding? because state cemeteries vary quality, in terms of policy, burial of same-sex couples. do you go back and oversee these, or once you give the money you just trust the state's

veterans association to be sure they keep the national standard? >> no, ma'am. we have a fairly rigorous compliance review program which we just revamped about a year or so ago. we go to state facilities and applied the same scorecard, the same operational standards and measures that we do to our national cemeteries to the states were apical -- where applicable. some are only applicable to state facilities. we do review them. we have scorecards for them. we have opportunities to submit corrective action plans were in shortcomings and we work with them to come to closure on problems. mention one other thing about the acceptance of state cemeteries. we recently conducted the

first-ever customer satisfaction survey with those who use state cemeteries, who bury their loved ones in state cemeteries. we don't have the full results, but we were able to extract some overall results. of the respondents believe the appearance of the state cemeteries were excellent. 95% agreed that the quality of service provided at the state facilities was excellent, and 98% said they would recommend the state cemetery to a family member. >> i appreciate that. i think those are good statistics. that is like asking a person and ice cream store was eating ice cream if they like ice cream. you're not asking other people to have chosen not to use the facility what they think about it. i just worry about state cemeteries having different policies in different states, just like your homeless program. it is a great program, but it is

only in national cemeteries rate of i think we need to work together on trying to fix that. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i'm going to thank you for your service. you are an all-pro on the football field, a champion for her veterans and i really appreciate it. you are tremendous advocate. thank you. senator, thank you for your service to our country. i got an opportunity to visit the clark cemetery in the philippines and i want to also thank the vfw and the other service organizations who have maintained this cemetery up though now. they have done an outstanding job. private funding has come from our veterans over the years. .'ve a question for mr. walters there have been a few instances

in the past were individuals have highlighted concerns of the committee on pacific sites are issues in my constituents have come to me as well. visitor saidce, if headstones looks like they had been run over by construction vehicles. to committee has found nca be very responsive when contacted on these issues in the last two years. how do individuals and constituents who visit national cemeteries raise concerns to nca and what actions are taken upon receiving those complaints or questions? >> thank you for the question. we have a friday of forms through those who miss it -- visit our cemeteries and voice their concerns, getting with complaint logs that are

maintained at the cemeteries. if an individual has a concern about something he or she encountered, whether it be the physical appearance of the cemetery or the service that was received, they can record in the complaint log their observations. that is reviewed through the organizational assessment program and all of the complaints are followed up on in a timely manner. there are other ways to do it. we have received a we've received letters and we apply the same level of aggressive resolution to those complaints as well. >> do you respond to the individuals? >> yes, sir. we respond to individual letters, absolutely. >> how long does it take? is it a timely basis? give me an example. >> sure. i think it would depend on the nature of the complaint and how

quickly we can resolve it. we usually try to put out an interim response, at first say we're working on the issue. that usually goes out if we send one within a few days and then the actual resolution can vary depending again on the nature of the issue. there was an issue recently at riverside national cemetery for example where we had contractors that were treating headstones and the grounds in a manner that was inconsistent with what we regard as national shrines. this complaint came to us. we acted very aggressively. we corrected the situation and, in fact, we added language referred to as a dignity clause to all of our national shrine contracts where contractors now have to be especially conscious of what they're doing at our grave sites to make sure they're honoring the dignity of

the burials. >> thank you very much. i have one more question, mr. chairman. you testified mr. walters on the current proposed rule and implementation of the dignified burial act of 2012. it is my understanding the national funeral director's association expressed concern with one of the details of the proposed rule. under previous rules, funeral homes were able to apply directly to the v.a. for partial reimbursement or other associated benefits. their view refused to allow funeral homes to easily provide veterans with a timely and dignified burial. that is what i'm concerned about, convenience for the family and of course with the veteran. without any concern for not being compensated. additionally in situations without a next of kin under the proposal funeral directors would have to apply to become the authorized representative, which would add difficulty and additional costs to a process

where funeral directors are trying on our nation's fallen heroes. can you explain why n.c.a. is not allowing funeral homes to apply directly to the v.a.? were there any comments supporting or opposing the change during the public comment period? i just don't want to delay the process for the families and particularly when it's no next of kin. if you can elaborate i'd appreciate it. >> yes. the administration of that particular program falls under the veterans benefits administration. so i would be happy to, for the record, provide a response. i will say that the intents of the direct payment to the veteran was to do precisely what i thought you said toward the end of your comment, which is to make sure that the family receives the money as quickly as possible and then to pay

their expenses with it. i also know that under secretary hickey's leadership the automation of burial claims has been put into place such that nearly half of them at this point are processed that way without human intervention. that frees up staff time to perform other work. and the processing time for those burial claims has been reduced from a peak of 190 days days uary of 2013 to 64 in december of 2014. again, sir, i will take -- the funeral homes want to help out families and, you know, i just don't want to delay the process and make it inconvenient for the families or if they don't have a next of kin they can take care of it

directly. so i appreciate it very much, mr. chairman. again, thank you for your service. we'll miss you. >> thank you very much. recognize mr. o'rourke. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i also join my colleagues in thanking you for your service and the way you've led this committee. i've enjoyed working with you in my first term in congress and have learned a lot and look forward to watching the great things you'll do in the future after you leave this institution. thank you. to the secretary, to mr. walters, first of all, i want to thank you for the great job that you do and that your team does. you have a new person in el paso, texas, the community have the honor of representing, who is doing a terrific job, incredibly responsive, works well with our team, works well and is attentive to veterans and their families in el paso, so through you i want to thank her and her team in el paso who do a phenomenal job.

thank you. >> as was your predecessor mr. morrow you've been very responsive to us, to me personally. we're able to talk on the phone about concerns before they become real problems and so i want to thank you for that as well. i think the cemetery in el paso at fort bliss is in many ways remarkable. it's very clean, well kept, a great staff, and the response, i think you probably have the data to back it up in terms of the survey, from those customers that you serve has been great. as you know, there's one disconnect between the n.c.a. in el paso and our offices. that is the fact that el paso is one of three water wise i think is the term you use cemeteries out of the 131 in the system. it is deeply unpopular amongstt those people whose opinion i care about the most and that is the veterans and their families, widows and widowers,

the children, the descendents of those buried there. you have approached this as an either/or proposition. either we have turf and grass and i think your argument is that when el paso and fort bliss had that it was suboptimal. or you have the water wise scaping, doesn't require a lot of management or maintenance, is cost efficient, and in the opinion of some is as thetcli pleasing. to remind everybody when we talk about water wise scaping we're talking about crushed rock and dirt on ground not a desert landscaping though there is some landscaping with shrubs and some trees. imagine you are in el paso, texas visiting a family member there and it's 110 degrees outside and you're asked to or want to kneel and you can't because you're asked to kneel on this crushed gravel. i'm looking for some way we can

work together to get past what is unacceptable to my community and we're also asking to know the criteria you used to make these decisions. my understanding is only 3 out of 131. i don't know if mr. hale nan would be comfortable converting arlington cemetery into a water wise facility to save money and time and maintenance costs. i'm going to guess the answer our contention in el paso is if a water wise n.c.a. cemetery is not sufficient for the best in our system then it should not be sufficient for el paso. i want your comments and your thoughts on that and perhaps a suggested path on which we can work to resolve the situation for el paso. >> thank you for the question. congressman o'rourke. our decision to turf or zero

scape a cemetery is not arbitrary. it is based on a variety of factors to include climate conditions, as well as the availability of water. in the case of el paso, as you know, the decision to zero scape that cemetery was based on a congressionally mandated study in 1999. the results of that study indicated that if el paso were to be maintained as a national shrine there was not a sufficient amount of water to do so. the study recommended zero scaping the entire cemetery. at that point we made the decision to make the investment to zero scape the cemetery. >> if i can interrupt you because i only have 20 seconds you're giving me the history. i ask for the future. how are we going to work together to resolve this situation? what we have today is unacceptable.

>> okay. well, just to say, i mean, our survey results, just to put them on the record, our survey results from those who are using the cemetery suggest a high degree of acceptance but in answer to your question -- >> i refer to my colleague's ice cream shop analogy. i don't know that we're asking those whose family members were already interred, buried at that cemetery, who did not have a choice in whether it was converted from grass to rocks and who are deeply disappointed in that and asking me as their federal representative to do something about it. what i get is the process that you used to arrive at this decision that is deeply unpopular and unacceptable to me and the people i represent. what i'm asking for now is how can we work together to do something? perhaps we cannot turf the entire cemetery. perhaps there is some water wise solution that is an improvement upon the crushed rock that cover the grave sites we have in el paso at fort bliss today. because i'm out of time and it

probably involves a longer conversation, i would just like to gain your commitment that we can work together to do that. >> absolutely. congressman, we are always willing to work with you and your staff. we have done so in the past. we will continue to do that with you. i think a good launching point ay very well be the study that el paso is currently undertaking when examining soil conditions and perhaps coming up with some recommendations or things we can consider. absolutely. we're more than willing to work with you and your staff. >> great. thank you. >> with that i recognize mr. stivers. >> mr. chairman i thank you for accepting unanimous consent allowing me to sit in and i appreciate your leadership. it's been an honor to serve with you in congress. going to t other than the university of michigan you had a distinguished career. happen to be a buckeye so that

part, you know, i wish you'd come to ohio state. > good luck in the playoffs. >> i really appreciate the way you treated our veterans and this committee with respect and worked with both sides to come to common ground. thank you for allowing me to be here. i have a couple questions for mr. walters and then i want to do, i have one question with mr. hale nan. . walters, i appreciate your new october 1 draft of regulation that would deal with the old policy caused homeless veterans and folks whose next of kin couldn't be identified because they served in a conflict much further back our history real hassles in getting head stones. i appreciate the updated version. there are only a few questions

that i have about it because there are some folks that are historians and other archivists interested in helping and there are a few pieces of language they don't quite understand and i wanted to talk with you about it. the first part involves where you say any individual who provides documentation of such lawful duty basically can provide information on these head stones. a lot of the interested parties are having trouble nderstanding what the language of such duty means. i assume it means the duty of the v.a. to provide a head stone but is there any way you could clarify that in this hearing or maybe in writing later? >> to make sure, congressman stivers, that i get it right, i would prefer to answer that and submit it for the record. >> i appreciate that. i knew that might be the

result. the second is your proposed rule creates an actual date on the calendar. it uses april 6, 1917, the date we entered world war i, but as you know, our akifle records and procedures on archives actually say basically anything 62 years back and further. they don't use a date on the calendar. i think it would make much more nse to have those two things e the same and use the archival records as 62 years back instead of the drop dead date of april 6, 1917, because, you know, it just -- consistency makes a lot of sense. i'd ask you to take a look at whether you could consider that change as well. >> sure. we've received 383 comments on this particular proposed rule and we're going through them right now. i'm sure that's one of them.

in general, sir, what i will say is that our primary motivation in establishing the april 17, 1917 date was to really honor family members' wishes to the extent possible. if we establish the 62-year timeline, that would be in place through nara we are basically establishing a date of 1952 as the launching point. and we felt that family members would be alive for veterans who 1952. prior to so because of that we thought it would be best to move the date back to just a standard date of our entrance into world war i and then go from there. >> i certainly appreciate that. i would ask you to look at it. certainly many of our veterans

during the draft were more socio economically disadvantaged. there were more broken families. and so i just would ask you to take a look. if you can have consistency, i think it makes sense. i don't think the april 6, 1917 is the worst thing in the world, but i think consistency, one of the rules we need to live by up here is if we can create things that are consistent, it just makes it asier for everybody. please take look at that. the last thing i would ask is if you could consider the sort of community of historians, every state has a state historic preservation officer and if you can include some that, that state governor appointed position, if you could, you know, allow those folks to be included in this by name and by spelling

them out i think it would be really helpful, because there's one in every state. there's actually i believe one for federally recognized indian tribes separately from our 50 states and the four territories as well. so they are everywhere and it's a position that could and should be recognized in this regulation. i'd ask you to take a look at it. i'm not asking for a response to that. take a look at that as well. >> sure. i would be happy to do that, sir. >> thank you so much. mr. hale nan, i just want to thank you -- mr. hallinan i want to thank you for the tomb of remembrance i've worked on for almost four years in congress. i had a bill dealing with it. you guys took it and did it by regulation. i appreciate what you're doing to implement that. you mentioned it a little earlier in your comments. i want to thank you. it sets forward a place so that what happened a few years ago where some identified --

unidentified remains of servicemen and women ended up in a landfill. this will make sure it never happens again. i really appreciate the efforts you put in and i want to say thank you. >> congressman, on behalf of my staff you are most welcome. they exist, the only reason they have a job is to serve our nation's heroes. it was a sensitive subject. we understood your concern. we were out front. we've worked the process. i'm happy to update the committee that we will advertise that project in march of 2015. we anticipate a contract being awarded in april of 2015 with 180 days to start and complete that project. so october or november of 2015 i anticipate having the tomb of remembrance. >> i appreciate that. even our unidentified soldiers, sailors, airmen, marines, and even their fragments of array deserve a place of honor and i really appreciate that. >> you are most welcome, sir. >> thank you. last i'd like to thank senator

cleland for employing one of my constituents john marshall and i certainly -- it is good to see john here but i really appreciate you and what you do for our veterans and thank you for serving our veterans that happen to be buried around the globe. i happened to visit one of your places in france, one of your cemeteries in france this year. it was very well kept up. i really appreciate that you take your mission seriously and honor our heroes regardless of where they happen to have their final resting place. >> thank you very much, mr. congressman. >> thank you. i yield back the balance and i want to thank the chairman and wish him great luck on his future. i know you've got great things. >> thank you very much. >> we'll miss you as a blocker. >> thanks.

only because the first meeting that i had with secretary mcdonald, he sat down and he said something that really got the wheels turning. i know arlington is a kind of strategic plan. i want to address the statement mr. walters about n.c.a. and strategic plan moving forward specifically after these conflicts. are we prepared for the volume that we're going to have? what studies, plans do we have to be able to deal with this oving forward? >> thank you, mr. chairman. the national cemetery administration has a very robust strategic planning effort of, as far as predicting he future grave site need or inter rates we use the vet pop

2011 model we received from another office within the v.a. that model provides veteran level data at the county level. using that data which is based the 2010 census, using that data, we then look at historical patterns down to the individual cemetery level, and make projections and assumptions 20, 30 years into the future. i will say that we've been historically extremely successful with these predictions. in most years, we're -- we have our iance of about 1% from projected internment rates which in turn information the need for additional grave sites and construction projects. so any, you know, any cohort in the future would be reflected in these models.

we would reflect it in our utilization rates, our prior year utilization rates. and that would be translated into our future projections and our construction planning models. as a result of our planning models we have never had an interruption in burial service at a national cemetery. and we intend to continue that record. >> thank you for that response because i know we all said with what we deal with with v.b.a. or v.h.a. and how we're unable to predict a lot of that stuff so thank you for that response. ranking member? >> thank you. i would just ask secretary cleland if the typhoon that recently hit the philippines has impact on our cemetery there and what's happening. second, what y'all are doing with norm &y and the french government to have that site declared a unesco international

heritage site, how that affects our cemeteries. >> thank you very much. the last question i don't know the answer to. i will call upon my colleague who might know an answer to it. the first question about the typhoons, typhoons hit the philippines from time to time. sometimes the trees are blown down. grave sites are impacted. so we're subject to the weather like everyone else. however, we have a great crew t there and a great leader and they are always johnny on the spot in responding and setting things right. >> thank you. i'd just be curious to know about the heritage site. >> the heritage site i'll have to ask mike conley does he know anything about the heritage site at norm &y? >> forgive my voice.

i've got a cold. >> thank you. >> but we are in contact with the unesco folks. our overseas operations office just outside paris has reviewed paperwork and we are considering whether we want to endorse that. our concern obviously is that if it is declared a world heritage site, that there's nothing in there that would prevent us from maintaining and improving upon the site as we deem appropriate as the years go ahead. clearly the nature of the events that happened there clearly fall under the criteria and deserve to be so recognized. >> i agree with that. thank you. >> mr. secretary, can you identify him for the record, please? >> that was mike conley, our chief administrative officer. >> thank you very much. mr. o'rourke? > a question for mr. hallinan. a constituent of mine and her husband are both eligible for

burial at arlington but my understanding is the rules do not allow them to reserve a plot next to each other and if they do want to be buried together they'll be buried one on top of the other and they'll share the headstone with one's name on one side and the other on the other. is that a rule in place because of space limitations? in other words you're not allowed to reserve a plot next to your spouse that you might at another national cemetery because i think it's 2015 that we're running out of room? your ressman, to answer question, there were prior reservations at arlington which ended in 1962 by law. there are no legal reservations anymore. arlington is unique. it is a space issue. there are different types of burial patterns at our national cemeteries as mr. powers and mr. walters and former senator cleland are aware of.

but that would be a driver to bury people side by side to give them their own grave would quickly use up the remaining capacity at arlington national cemetery. that was part of the process that developed. you are 100% accurate. both are eligible. i'm taking that as a given. but it would be buried together . the same grave site the remaining spouse when he or she passed would go in on top and would share the information on a government head stone, yes. >> is there a plan in place to add additional grounds post 2050? >> i don't want to say no, congressman. i believe when we approach that era or decade there may be some opportunities but it is very difficult in the area we're in, in washington. we've taken space from fort

meyer, the possibility of flipping at fort meyer again but when one looks for available space, the southern expansion, you have to look at what's going to be gained. not just a matter of maximizing burial space, a place like fort myers where the support is on a daily basis it has a small footprint already. any future expansion will probably come at great financial cost. there may be land toward the current iwo jima memorial but we're really starting to get out there. i'm sure any interest we show beyond our current footprint and where we're going to 2050 will be a rather difficult and sensitive issue but we are looking. we do project beyond what comes after 2050 for arlington. >> and lastly for mr. walters, thank you for your commitment to work with me. i appreciate that. while i feel very strongly

about the position that we hold related to the cemetery, i do and want to commend you your team for the way you take care of it. it looks very clean and really nice for what it is. i just heard from too many veterans and their families at this point who desperately want something more accommodating for them as they pay tribute to their loved one. i know there is a way we can work together to get this done. appreciate your willingness to work with me on that. >> we look forward to working with you, sir. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you. with that, gentlemen, on behalf of the subcommittee thank you for your testimony. i wish you all success in 2015 and you are now excused. we'll wait a few minutes to switch over the witness table.

>> at this time we welcome our second panel, ms. ami neiberger-miller who is the director of outreach and education for the tragedy assistance program and for survivors and miss diane zumatto national legislative director for amvets. we appreciate your attendance here today, your complete and written statements will be entered into the hearing record. ms. neiberger-miller you are recognized for five minutes for our testimony. >> the tragedy assistance program for survivors. this is a nonprofit organization that provides comfort and care to anyone grieving the death of someone who died while serving in our armed forces regardless of where they died or how they died. we appreciate the subcommittee's continuing interest in insuring our nation's veterans and service members have final resting places that are honorable and

well maintained. these issues touch my family, my brother was killed action in iraq and is buried in arlington national cemetery and my father-in-law is also buried at arlington. we hope you will review our submitted testimony, which includes opinions on legislative initiatives related to national cemeteries in arlington. the scandal that envelopes the department of veterans affairs also touched the national cemetery administration last year. unfortunately, the previous under secretary retired after an o.i.g. report revealed he had engaged in prohibited practices and preferential treatment but new leadership is now in place and we very much appreciate the opportunities we have had to meet with v.a. secretary robert mcdonald and under secretary sloan gibson. we know they have a commitment to assisting survivors and it is our hope that new v.a. leadership will move forward in a positive and honorable way.

we're pleased to report the number of pending burial allowance claims has declined significantly since last year at this hearing with 17,818 on last week's v.a. report. while these benefits do not route through the national cemetery administration, delay in their delivery hurts families by forcing them to delay settling estates and impacts their view of the v.a. at arlington national cemetery we are in a different place today than a year ago when surviving families were upset mementos removal of at grave sites in section 60 where those who paid the ultimate price in iraq and afghanistan are buried including my brother. superintendent hallinan met with families and reached a compromise allowing small laminated photos at grave sites. initially this was a pilot during the nongrowing season

last year and the compromise was extended into the growing season and is currently in place. the families are very grateful for the compromise. they have worked to educate each other about the rules and the majority follow them. a few still do not follow the policies but the appearance of the section is much more uniform and improved. one town hall meeting was held earlier this year with families and we're hopeful lines of communication will remain open between the families and the administration. because some families were turned away due to logistics on the bridge with security we are also working with cemetery leadership to help better distribute logistics information to survivors in advance of major events so no one is turned away. we would like to see greater survivor involvement in an advisory capacity. no survivor has served on the advisory committee for arlington national cemetery ince janet manion's death in

2012. while the members of the committee all have exemplary military and veterans service credentials and the chair of that committee just touched on by the previous panel we believe their deliberations would benefit from the insight of a survivor's perspective. we thank you for the opportunity to submit our testimony and welcome any questions. >> thank you, ms. neiberger-miller. with that recognize ms. zumatto for her testimony. >> chairman runian, ranking member titus, and distinguished members of the subcommittee on behalf of am vets i thank you for the opportunity to assist you in the important job of overseeing our national cemeteries. previously, my testimony before this committee has been somewhat limited to a repetition of facts and statistics. however, today's testimony will be much more heart felt and personal. because i love history, am a

trained historic preservationist, love my country, and grew up visiting and documenting cemeteries in the new england area, today's topic is important to me both personally and professionally. i think it's safe to say that everybody in this room knows and appreciates the sacred responsibility entrusted to the national cemetery administration to honor the memory of america's military men and women. i'd like to set the stage briefly to convey the true importance of our national cemeterys not only to our nation's veterans but to all american citizens. historically, cemeteries, especially military cemeteries, were much more than established sites of burial with regimented, internal layouts conducive to both the expression of personal grief

and accepted societal funeral rituals. few individuals are aware i believe of some of the equally important social and political aspects of cemeteries including promoting and preserving the individuality and status of the deceased, the setting aside of landscaped spaces in or near communities delineated by defined boundaries. the organized commemoration of significant events and/or persons. serving at places of beauty and tranquility where friends and family can gather. as expressions of national identity and pride, especially in the case of military cemeteries. and sites of pilgrimage and permanence. i'm hopeful this brief introduction has sparked a greater appreciation of

historic national value of the many unique and irreplaceable cemeteries held in trust within the n.c.a. system. the monuments, grave stones, architecture, landscape, and related memorial tributes within each n.c.a. cemetery are richly steeped in history and represent the very foundations of these united states. how can we do any less than our absolute best to develop and maintain these truly american shrines? after having spent several weeks this summer visiting national cemeteries, there were seven i was able to get to in four different visits. my impression of n.c.a. cemeteries and its employees is higher than ever. having had the rare opportunity for in depth visits where i was able to observe every facet of

cemetery operations, i was both moved and impressed with the care and professionalism at every level of the organization. none of the cemeteries i visited displayed any blatant short comings that would be obvious to the casual observer. this level of attention to detail, dedication, and commitment to providing the highest quality of service to veterans and their families would not be possible without positive role models and strong leadership throughout the n.c.a. system. i certainly acknowledge that perfection does not exist in this world and that i have not yet had the opportunity to visit every cemetery under the stewardship of the n.c.a. but getting the resources both human and financial, i must equally acknowledge that n.c.a.

continually strives to meet its most important obligation -- providing dignified resting places for our nation's veterans and their eligible family members. this conclude uds my testimony and i'll be happy to answer your questions. >> thank you very much. we'll begin a round of questions. s. neiberger-miller, to inform surviving families who visit arlington national cemetery about the enhanced security procedures resulting in access during major holidays and time when many families choose to visit their fallen loved ones. how successful has the average been as your testimony noted veral areas where taps has volunteered assistance spreading word and how do you think outreach could be more effective while also compassionate? >> well, sir, i think for us

it's about reaching out to our families and distributing information. we've made improvements in our survivor data base so we can better track our families around burial location of their loved one. one challenge is many family members do not live in the washington area so unlike people who reside here, they're not familiar with the security precautions that occur when the president or the vice president travel to an event and so sometimes those families especially when coming in from out of town get caught on the bridge or in very serious traffic issues and are not familiar with the security lockdown procedures. our role has been to compile the information and distribute it by e-mail to families. i would say we still have some improvements that we're trying to make but we're working hard at that and we've also met with the cemetery administration over the summer to actually make additional improvements because of some concerns over

memorial day. >> and very similar to information and i wanted to thank taps for participating in the discussion with the gold star families. you said in your testimony that it's an agreement and it's not a formal -- do you have any suggestions on how to move forward and kind of ease that anxiety? >> well, i think for all of us it's been about keeping the lines of communication open. you know, the situation a year ago we had a group of very upset families and for our families to really talk with the administration, to see them as people for the administration to meet them as people and to look them in the eye and say, we, you know, want to work with you on this, that went a long way. and so i think it became about how to humanize the conversation and then how to

figure out what could work for everyone recognizing that the cemetery has to be at a certain standard as a national shrine but also recognizing that grieving is different today. and for some people leaving an object or a photograph is extremely important. and so how could we work out something that would work for everyone? so the families have really done a lot i think to help educate each other and they've kept those lines of communication open. and that's been key. >> thank you. ms. zumatto, you're talking about the consistency you've seen across your visits. is there anything that stood ut to you when you visited the sites that was different, that wasn't -- because the object is to obviously be uniform. is there any specific things hat stood out? >> i'm going to say, not

really. e seven sites that i visited ahn they were not just brief run in and out. i usually spent a minimum of two days or more at each site. i just did not -- i mean, i wasn't going through there, their records. this was more observing, for instance, at jefferson barracks i spent one day just at their training center. spent another day at the scheduling office, so i could see the process and then i spent a day at the cemetery, itself. but every site that i went to, i was truly -- i was surprised, care of ecause the he chain of custody if you

will. i had no idea what the process was like until i went to jefferson barracks where i tarted and the redundancy at ery point to ensure it was the right veteran and that the site where they were going to be interred was the right site and, i mean, there is -- they use maps. they draw, you know, this stone is here. this stone is here. just the detail so that there are no errors is perhaps one of the things that really struck me. hat and as i was riding around with different employees during my visits, i would constantly see they would stop the vehicle if they saw somebody walking around who looked like they

needed help or if they saw a piece of trash in the road or, you know, in the cemetery, itself, they just got out, took care of it. it was just really very reassuring to see that level of care at every step of the way. >> thank you. good to hear. with that i'll yield to the ranking member ms. titus. >> thank you. thank you both for all the good work you do with families during this most difficult time. i would ask ms. neiberger-miller, if you have the same experience dealing with people and talking to families that we heard reported in the surveys that the n.c.a. does. they say their surveys show 95% of people are satisfied. it's got the best marks of any government agency. does that -- is that compatible with what you hear on the ground from families? >> we hear from families that they're often very satisfied

with the burial process. unfortunately, we do work with people who are bereaved and many of these people are struggling with short-term memory loss issues or some other issues going on. they're often in a great state of shock. these are people who died young, who were not expected to die, who often died in very violent ways. and so their family is often in a great degree of shock. the burial is often very quickly after the death. there's not a wait typically for an active duty service that's extremely long. and so the family is sometimes even needs the photographs or other things from the service to really recall it very well. and that's unfortunate. but they always will say they feel their loved one was honored and they feel that a placement at arlington or a national cemetery honors their loved one's service and

sacrifice for their country. >> do you ever talk to families who feel like they don't live close enough to a national cemetery to be able to access it so they resort to some other kind of more private funeral? >> well, there are families sometimes who really have to make very difficult decisions. also because this was someone who wasn't expected to die so there was no family plan in place for say there might be for say an older veteran like my father-in-law who knew for several decades he wanted to be buried at arlington and he told all of us that. so families sometimes don't always recognize the travel distances that they may be realize or may not they want to visit as often as they do after a death. that can be challenging to make a long distance trip to go visit a location. we don't hear often from families about that but it certainly is something that is discussed sometimes. >> thank you.

ms. zumatto did you visit any state cemeteries or just national? >> i have not yet had the opportunity to visit a state cemetery, no, ma'am. >> do you think some of your veterans would like to see more cemeteries in the west where they could be buried in a national cemetery not just a state cemetery or some convenient facility? >> well, i personally just from my knowledge, not personal experience, but from research really ill, i don't believe that being buried in a state cemetery, state veterans cemetery is any less honorable or -- i just don't see it as a negative. if there is no national cemetery, or if that national cemetery has no more available space, then i don't see why as

long as the state cemetery is being maintained to the shrine standard that that should be an issue. however, i did have a member tell me the other day about a problem in alaska having to do with access. and apparently there are two national cemeteries in alaska. one of which is only accessible by boat and the other apparently is on an active military installation. the issue that he brought up was the fact that it's difficult. not everybody has access to a boat. but that if there is any sort of security issues going on, on the base, then the base is closed and you can't access the cemetery. but as far as i say as far as state cemeteries go i haven't been to one. it's on my list. i'm going to continue visiting

cemeteries. >> thank you. i just worry about policy varying from state to state even with the checklist. for example, a same sex couple might be able to get buried together in a state that recognizes it but not in a state that doesn't if it's a state cemetery not a national cemetery. so i think while state cemeteries, i think the one in nevada in boulder city is great, i think there are still differences that we need to address. appreciate it. thanks, mr. chairman. >> mr. o'rourke? >> thank you, mr. chairman. ms. neiberger-miller, thank you for your testimony. i really enjoy hearings like these that our chairman and ranking member put together. other than your testimony i really didn't know about a lot of these issues. i appreciate you bringing your perspective directly to us and likewise ms. zumatto really appreciate all of the work and time that you took to go to these different cemeteries,

including the one in fort bliss in el paso, texas. i just want to note for the record that mr. walters and mr. hallinan are here as well which i really appreciate. the fact you're listening as well to gain insight. ms. zumatto, i really appreciated your remarks and your testimony, in your written testimony about the national cemetery at fort bliss. and you described it as serene and beautiful and very well maintained. a little bit of a surprise because you had heard there was some discontent in el paso about the cemetery. i really can't argue with your conclusions. i think it is a very serene, very beautiful place. ageven, so clean and well maintained and for the resources that they have, if you're going to have the crushed rock and some small areas of grass and trees and landscaping, it is excellently maintained. i think the disconnect might

me when we talked to the families, survivors who can also appreciate everything that you describe in your assessment but then that act of actually kneeling at the grave site or being close to the head stone is a lesser experience for them. this is, you know, their experience as they related to me because of that environment and not having that grass and that expectation because it was there before and because it's in the vast majority of other cemeteries in el paso and almost every other single national cemetery. you also said something i thought was so important in your testimony or wrote in your testimony, which was that when you visited with v.s.o.'s prior to visiting the cemetery you found they were not as upset with the aesthetics as with the process. and they felt like they had been disconnected from the process used to choose the zero scaping or water wise.

talk a little bit -- i had a great exchange with mr. walters in the previous panel where we agreed we'd try to work together to find a way to make an improvement. maybe it's not turf and maybe it's not staying with the status quo but something better for all concerned. talk a little bit about a process you might recommend from your experience that we could use in working with survivors, working with veterans, working with v.s.o.'s in our community and working with the n.c.a. >> well -- >> not to put you on the spot. since you had that great conversation with the v.s.o.'s i thought you might have some thoughts on it. >> well, i have not done a study of zero scaping, so i'm t sure what other types of low maintenance or water wise options there might be. i would doubt that what is currently at fort bliss is the only avenue available.

i have seen pictures of fort bliss back when it was turfed and in the picture i can see a lot of brown and bare patches. >> doesn't look good. >> so i can't imagine that that would be any better. >> right. >> i don't know if i said this in my written testimony or not. this is my first experience being in a desert but when you stand in the cemetery and you look at the environment all around it's perfectly suited the way it is. i did ask, i went to a local v.f.w. post actually the day he was there. the day before i went to the cemetery to talk to veterans and see what they thought about it. you mentioned a couple of

things. i asked if it was difficult to walk on. somebody was saying an elderly person perhaps or somebody with some disability did they have difficulty either with a wheelchair on that surface or walking on that surface so that possibility came up. i didn't try either myself when i was there. it was 120 degrees that day so i didn't try kneeling. there were people visit ling the cemetery when i was there nd i did notice at least two individuals had brought almost like a small prayer rug. something to put on the ground to kneel on which i thought was, you know, a pretty good option. but one of the things that i'll mention is i recently came back from a visit to a national

military cemetery in israel. and they did not have any grass in that cemetery. >> i saw your picture from the cemetery in israel and it looks the here is grass on ground and surrounded by stones and some material in between the graves. is that grass or some other covering? >> the ground is mainly flat stone type material and then each individual grave is sort of built up. there is a wall, a surround if you will. on top of that, there is grass. excuse me. there is soil. it's not grass. >> got you. >> there are plants there and there were a variety of different things. i don't know. because of that variety i wonder if family members would try to personalize their loved one's site but it wasn't grass.

any place that didn't have flag stones was bare dirt. >> i've got the pictures in front of me and it provides another option. it's not a choice, say a false choice between bad turf and grass which is what fort bliss had and the crushed rock. but as you saw in the desert it's full of life and there are forms of grass and plant life that thrived there. i think there is some middle ground we can reach and maybe look at what others have done including in israel and gives us some options. thank you for doing the work and providing perspective. >> my pleasure. >> anything further? >> on behalf of the subcommittee i'd like to thank you for your testimony and the works taps does to honor our veterans and care for their families and loved ones. you are now excused. i thank everyone for being here today. the status reports from our

cemetery memorial representatives and the input from the v.s.o. community was well presented and the subcommittee appreciates the work that went into preparation for today's hearing. i'm certain the subcommittee will continue to engage in these issues in the next congress as the final resting place for our veterans and the families left behind deserve the highest standard of care. i would like to once again thank our witnesses for being here today and ask unanimous consent that all members have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include any extraneous material. hearing no objection, so ordered. i thank the members for their attendance today and this earing is adjourned.

>> herer some of the programs you'll find this weekend on the c-span net works. saturday night at 9:30 on c-span actor seth roguean discussing politics and humor at the harvard institute of politics. sunday evening at 8:00 on c-span's q & a author and town hall.com editor katy pavlich on what she perceives as the hypocrisy of liberals in their war on women rhetoric. on c-span 2 saturday night at 10:00 on book tv's afterwards william deresiewicz argues the

top universities are missing the mark in education and students should learn lessons in how to think critically, be creative, and have a goal in life beyond the material. sunday morning just before 11:00 book tv visits lafayette west lafayette, indiana to interviewself of the city's authors and tour its literary sites. on american history tv on c-span 3 saturday at 6:00 p.m. eastern on the civil war historian damian shields talks about the life of irish american soldier patrick clayburn and his role in the confederate army during the battle of tennessee. sunday afternoon at 4:00 on "reel america" a 1974 investigative piece by san francisco's kron tv on the history of police brutality in neighboring oakland. find our complete television schedule at c-span.org and let us know what you think about the programs you're watching. call us at 202-626-3400. e-mail us at comments@c-span.org. send us a tweet at c-span #

comments. join the c-span conversation. like us on facebook. follow us on twitter. >> coming up tonight, british prime minister david cameron in front of the british liaison committee. an interview with jeb bush and brad and dallas woodhouse. the washington post headline, jeb bush jump starts the 2016 election. they say he became the first they'd name potential gop presidential candidate to make a major 2016-related comment saying he will actively explore a run. this kind of announcement will be followed with an exploratory committee which is legally and practically the same thing as launching a campaign. he