Mr. BROOKS. They do not? So, that if this body is identified, then, there is no provision of the Department to pay the next of kin the expenses incurred in attending the funeral?

Colonel WARDLE. Sir, if a body is individually identified, the Government then pays the charges of preparing the remains and shipping them anywhere in the world, which is designated by the person who is authorized to direct the disposition of the body.

Mr. BROOKS. But, now, if the burial is in a national cemetery, and there is no national cemetery available, is there any provision of law to take care of the expenses of the next of kin, in that case, to attend the funeral, and direct the disposition of the remains?

Colonel WARDLE. Let me answer it this way, Mr. Chairman: In addition to the cost to the Government of preparing and shipping the remains, the next of kin is authorized an amount to defer costs of interment. It it is in a private cemetery, this amount is $125. If it is in a national cemetery, this is limited to $75.

Mr. BROOKS. So, there is an in-lieu payment rather than an expense payment rather than mileage?

Colonel WARDLE. There is no authority for paying transportation to the cemetery whether it be national or private in the case of individual identification.

or

Mr. BROOKS. There is an in-lieu payment to take care of expenses,

Colonel WARDLE. My experience indicates that there is not.
Mr. BROOKS. As such, there is no attendance payment.

Colonel WARDLE. The only transportation expense which could be considered is the transportation charges from the rail terminal or air terminal to the cemetery, and return.

Mr. BROOKS. Now, the regulations would dispose of this problem: How many people would be entitled to come at Government expense? Colonel WARDLE. According to the bill, sir, there would be a maximum of three.

Mr. BROOKS. A maximum of three from each family?

Colonel WARDLE. Yes, sir.

Mr. BROOKS. Any questions?

Mr. PHILBIN. The Department is in favor of the bill, and you appear in favor of the bill?

Colonel WARDLE. Yes, sir; we do.

Mr. PHILIBIN. Have you requested the funds to implement it?
Colonel WARDLE. We have not.

Mr. PHILBIN. Do you have funds available that could be legally used for the burial purposes?

Colonel WARDLE. They are not available and we have not included them in our estimate for 1960.

Mr. PHILBIN. But since the Department favors it, you probably would bring the matter up and testify for the bill before the Appropriations Committee?

Colonel WARDLE. Yes, sir.

Mr. BROOKS. I want to ask you this, before we report the bill: Haven't you some estimate of the number who might have been covered in the past years, something that we can give the House; for instance, we had a bill that was very similar to this the other day and our estimate was very hazy and as a result of it, we were not able to present the House the cost.

Now, personally, I think cost should be purely incidental, if it is something of this sort, and we ought to do it regardless, but it is a practical matter of getting the legislation through.

Can't you estimate, over the past years, the number of persons that would be entitled to this expense so that we can tell the Members of the Congress what, approximately, we would estimate the cost to be?

Colonel WARDLE. I can, sir.

Mr. BROOKS. Well, could you do it now?
Colonel WARDLE. Yes, sir.

Mr. BROOKS. All right, fine.

Colonel WARDLE. Let me explain one thing, first; prior to World War II, we did not have any group burials, as such. We had a few cases of remains which had not or which could not be segregated, buried in national cemeteries prior to the time, but group burials, themselves, came into existence in 1942 because of an air crash down at Orlando, Fla., and, at that time, they asked for our position on it. I have a list here of the group burials that have been made in national cemeteries.

Mr. BROOKS. Fine. Can you give us that list?

Colonel WARDLE. I can give you how many groups and how many remains are in the groups.

Mr. BROOKS. All right, how many groups are there?

Colonel WARDLE. One thousand, five hundred and twenty-nine since 1948, sir; this includes two wars.

Mr. BROOKS. Can you give them to us by year?

Colonel WARDLE. Yes, sir; I have them broken down.

Mr. BROOKS. If you do that, we could figure our peacetime years as against the wartime years.

Colonel WARDLE. You could; you have to take into consideration that the years that show the heaviest here will be the years that we were doing the repatriation program on World War II, and Korea.

Mr. BROOKS. Now, have you any figures to show the number of such accidents producing a mass burial in times of peace, resulting from action in times of peace?

Colonel WARDLE. I do not, sir. That would be very difficult to come up with.

I do have here from the National Cemetery Register the number of group burials and the number of decedents in those groups, and that

Mr. BROOKS. And that shows accidents in peacetime?

Colonel WARDLE. That is true, sir.

Mr. BROOKS. And do you have those figures?

Colonel WARDLE. I do, sir.

Mr. BROOKS. Could you include those in the record?

Colonel WARDLE. I can, sir.

Mr. BROOKS. How many do they cover?

Colonel WARDLE. For 11 years, since 1948, and up through June of this year, we have had a total of 1,529 groups with a total of 8,670 remains.

Mr. BROOKS. That brings us down to date?
Colonel WARDLE. Yes, sir.

Mr. BROOKS. Do you know how many during the current year we had?

Colonel WARDLE. Yes, sir; we had 8 for a total of 44 remains.
Mr. BROOKS. Since the first of the year?

Colonel WARDLE. Yes, sir.

Mr. BROOKS. How many did we have last year?

Colonel WARDLE. Three groups for a total of 10, sir.

Mr. BROOKS. Well, that brings us down to normal peacetime, at least we hope so.

Colonel WARDLE. Since 1953, the highest year has been eight groups. Mr. BROOKS. Well, thank you very much.

Mr. VAN ZANDT. Colonel, is there anything in existence now, any existing law that denies you the right now to extend this courtesy to dependents of the deceased servicemen?

Colonel WARDLE. We are not permitted by present law to pay the transportation charges.

Mr. VAN ZANDT. And you will do it now?

Colonel WARDLE. If this bill is enacted.

Mr. VAN ZANDT. I am not talking about the bill, I am talking about in the event of an accident and therefore, a half dozen servicemen are aboard that plane, and the remains were buried, we will say, in Arlington National Cemetery in Washington; is it the policy of the military to extend the courtesy to the next of kin, flying them to the funeral and sending them back home?

Colonel WARDLE. It is not.

Mr. VAN ZANDT. It is not the policy of the military? Is that your answer?

Colonel WARDLE. That is my answer.

Mr. VAN ZANDT. Is it done, though, by the various services?
Colonel WARDLE. I am not prepared to answer that.

Mr. VAN ZANDT. Well, what I am trying to develop here, Colonel, is that it is already a practice, that this bill will simply make—if it is enacted in law-make it official, and I do think that we should not, as a committee, sit here and ignore the fact that already, this courtesy, and I approve of it, is already extended to the next of kin. Now, it may not be with the Army because the Army does not have the transportation facilities that the Air Force and the Navy and the Marines have.

Mr. BROOKS. Any further questions?

Mr. DUCANDER. Mr. Chairman, a couple of matters for the record. Mr. BROOKS. All right.

Mr. DUCANDER. Colonel, would the representative of the decedent have to make an application for these benefits, or is this to be automatic?

How will you know whether the representative of the decedent wants to appoint two people to attend the interment?

Colonel WARDLE. We would have to determine that by correspondence with the next of kin.

Mr. DUCANDER. But you would ask him, he would have to, in other words, make an application or some expression that he wanted the next of kin to go along. You wouldn't just make this available, the funds available to the representative of the decedent.

20066-58-No. 96-3

Colonel WARDLE. No, sir. They would have to make application or at least, an indication that they desired to take advantage of this. Mr. DUCANDER. Under the bill, you are going to authorize the representative of the decedent to select two additional persons, is that right?

Colonel WARDLE. That is true.

Mr. DUCANDER. And the bill says, “*** who are closely related to the decedent." What do you mean by "closely related to the decedent"?

Could you tie that back to the provisions of the code, which specifies who the personal representative is?

Colonel WARDLE. Yes, sir. In subsection (c) of the code.

Mr. DUCANDER. Would you most likely do that by regulation? Colonel WARDLE. We would do it according to this, that is presently in effect.

Mr. DUCANDER. As I understand, though, this only relates to the personal representative, the provisions of the code.

Mr. PHILBIN. That is right.

Colonel WARDLE. Well, as

Mr. DUCANDER. It does not relate to the two additional persons to be selected by the personal representative.

Colonel WARDLE. Well, we have said, "closely related." I think the feeling of the Department in that matter would be that three under normal circumstances, would take care of the widow, and the mother and father. Now, of course, if the widow decided to attend, herself, and bring along 2 of her children, if she had 2 children, there is nothing that would prevent that.

Mr. DUCANDER. Well, I am thinking of the obvious thing that might happen where a sister-in-law might want to attend and wasn't named by the personal representative of the decedent.

Colonel WARDLE. I think to implement the law, there would be regulations written to this effect to pin it down.

Mr. DUCANDER. To something like it is in the code for the personal representative of the decedent?

Colonel WARDLE. Yes, sir.

Mr. DUCANDER. Would this legislation authorize payment of transportation expenses to national cemeteries overseas? Would the bill authorize payment of transportation expenses if the common burial was to be made overseas?

Colonel WARDLE. No, sir; it would not. We have returned the majority, or I would say, all of the group burials to the United States. That is the policy of the Department.

Mr. DUCANDER. However, there is nothing in the legislation to prevent that, is there? If a plane accident happened in Hawaii, there is nothing to prevent your paying the transportation of the three people, if they were to be buried in the national cemetery in Hawaii?

Colonel WARDLE. I think, in that event, sir, we would bring them to the United States. If the next of kin of one of those lived in Hawaii, there would be nothing to prevent the Government from paying her bill from Hawaii here and return, but I think where the majority of the next of kin were in the States, they would be returned to the United States for interment in the United States.

Mr. DUCANDER. Does the personal representative of the decedent have any authority to name where the unknown is to be buried; that is, the unknown, who is to be commingled?

Colonel WARDLE. They do not, sir.

Mr. BROOKS. Any further questions?

Mr. VAN ZANDT. One question, Mr. Chairman.

Colonel, what was the policy of the Government concerning the return of the dead after World War II in regards to making provisions for dependents to attend a funeral?

Colonel WARDLE. Those who were individually identified, sir?
Mr. VAN ZANDT. Yes, sir.

Colonel WARDLE. They were given the choice of returning the remains to the United States for interment in a private cemetery, or a national cemetery, or of leaving them overseas in one of our cemeteries there. All the cemeteries of Europe have now been turned over to the American Battle Monuments Commission.

Mr. VAN ZANDT. But, let us assume, now, that Corporal X was killed in France and buried there temporarily, and his body was returned to the United States some years after World War II, and his interment, we will say, was in Arlington National Cemetery, and his folks lived out in Clinton, Iowa. Did the Government assume the cost of the transportation of the folks from Clinton, Iowa, to Arlington and return again?

Colonel WARDLE. They did not, sir.

Mr. VAN ZANDT. In other words, this policy did not then apply to the dependents of the deceased as far as World War II was concerned?

Colonel WARDLE. It did not.

Mr. BROOKS. How retroactive would this be? Would this cover any mass burials overseas?

Colonel WARDLE. No, sir. The known group burials, where we know who is included in the group, have all been returned to the United States.

Mr. BROOKS. You would not have a retroactive effect. You wouldn't disinter, for instance, the remains of those overseas and bring them back and things of that sort?

Colonel WARDLE. No, sir.

Mr. BROOKS. And you wouldn't be able to give us an estimate of the average cost on this, for our records?

Colonel WARDLE. I have only this breakdown. I have that on a separate piece of paper.

Mr. BROOKS. Would you read that separate piece of paper?

Colonel Wardle. For a total, and as I said, for a total of 11 years, which included 2 wars, we have had 8,670 remains in groups. If there were 3 persons that would have attended those interment services, it would come to the cost of $200 a person, it would have cost the Government $5,202,000. If that were broken down per year for 11 years, it would have been a total of $472,909, sir.

Mr. BROOKS. And now, at the rate that these accidents are occurring, what will the cost projection be?

Colonel WARDLE. In peacetime, sir? I have not figured that out, however, in 1953, we had 8 groups for a total of 56 remains. The highest has been a total of 185 remains.