MEETING THE MEMORIAL NEEDS OF - AN ANALYSIS OF EXISTING AND PROPOSED CEMETERY SITES
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
Meeting the Memorial Needs of
Virginia Veterans
An Analysis of Existing and Proposed Cemetery Sites
Terance J. Rephann, PH.D
November 2007
Meeting the Memorial Needs of
Virginia Veterans
An Analysis of Existing and Proposed Cemetery Sites
Terance J. Rephann, PH.D
The Weldon Cooper Center for Public Service
University of Virginia
November 2007
Copyright © 2007 by the Rector and Visitors of the University of Virginia
P.O. Box 400206
Charlottesville, VA 22904-4206
(434) 982-5522 • FAX: (434) 982-5536 • TDD: (434) 982-HEAR
Website: www.coopercenter.org/
Richmond
700 East Franklin Street, Suite 700
Richmond, VA 23219-2328
(804) 371-0202 • FAX: (804) 371-0234 • TDD: (804) 982-HEAR
Southwest
1 College Avenue
Wise, VA 24293-0016
(540) 328-0133 • FAX: (540) 328-0233 • TDD (540) 328-0191
Southside
1008 South Main Street
Danville, VA 24541-4088
(434) 791-5174 • (434) 791-5175 • FAX: (434) 791-5176
II Meeting the Memorial Needs of Virginia Veterans
TABLE OF CONTENTS
List of Tables...................................................................................................................................... iv
List of Figures.................................................................................................................................... v
Foreword............................................................................................................................................ vii
Executive Summary........................................................................................................................... 1
Introduction........................................................................................................................................ 5
Section 1. Background....................................................................................................................... 7
Veteran Cemetery History............................................................................................................. 7
Virginia State Veterans Cemetery System..................................................................................... 8
Section 2. Determinants of Burial Needs........................................................................................... 13
Veteran Population and Death Projections.................................................................................... 13
Cemetery Preferences.................................................................................................................... 14
Travel Distance.............................................................................................................................. 15
Interment Type Preferences........................................................................................................... 16
Section 3. Location Analysis............................................................................................................. 21
Existing Cemeteries....................................................................................................................... 21
Service Area Boundaries .............................................................................................................. 23
Cemetery Location Models........................................................................................................... 26
Section 4. Burial Needs Analysis...................................................................................................... 33
Cemetery Service Area Veteran Populations................................................................................. 33
Interment Projections.................................................................................................................... 34
Impact of Extending Interment to Non-residents . ...................................................................... 40
Section 5. Improving Awareness of Veteran Burial and Memorial Benefits...................................... 43
Comparative Costs........................................................................................................................ 43
Outreach and Marketing Efforts.................................................................................................... 45
References.......................................................................................................................................... 49
III
LIST OF TABLES
Tables
1.1 Virginia National Veterans Cemeteries Established During Civil War Era............................... 7
1.2 Top Veteran States, 2000........................................................................................................... 9
1.3 Virginia State Veterans Cemeteries, 2007................................................................................. 9
1.4 State Veterans Cemetery Interments, FY1997-FY2007............................................................ 10
2.1 Veteran Awareness of Burial Benefits, 2001.............................................................................. 15
2.2 Reasons for Choosing National or State Veterans Cemetery, 2001........................................... 15
2.3 Reasons for Not Choosing National or State Veterans Cemetery, 2001.................................... 16
2.4. U.S. Veterans Cemetery Annual Interments by Type, Percentage Distribution........................ 18
2.5 Virginia National Veterans Cemetery Annual Interments by Type, Percentage
Distribution, 2006-2007.......................................................................................................... 18
2.6 State Veterans Cemetery Cumulative Interments by Type,
Percentage Distribution, 2007................................................................................................. 18
2.7 Veteran Interment Plans by Type, Percentage Distribution, 2001............................................. 19
2.8 Virginia Veteran Cemetery Interments by Type based on Pre-applications,
Percentage Distribution, 2007................................................................................................. 19
2.9 General Public’s Plans for Cremains, Percentage Distribution, 2005....................................... 19
2.10 Veteran Plans for Cremains, Percentage Distribution, 2001..................................................... 19
3.1 Veterans Cemetery Capacities, 2006......................................................................................... 22
3.2 Cemetery Location Modeling Scenarios................................................................................... 27
4.1 Veterans Cemetery Service Area Population, 75 Miles and 50 Miles....................................... 33
4.2 Increment in Veteran Service Area Population, 75 Mile Boundary.......................................... 33
4.3 Increment in Veteran Service Area Population, 50 Mile Boundary.......................................... 34
4.4 Regression Results for Veteran Burial Draw Rate..................................................................... 34
4.5 State Cemetery Veteran Interment Projections by Cemetery, 2008-2030................................. 35
4.6 Amelia State Veterans Cemetery Projections, 2008-2030......................................................... 36
4.7 Suffolk State Veterans Cemetery Projections, 2008-2030......................................................... 37
4.8 Dublin State Veterans Cemetery Projections, 2008-2030......................................................... 38
4.9 Nelson County State Veterans Cemetery Projections, 2008-2030............................................ 39
4.10 Cremation Percentage, Actual and Projected, U.S. and Virginia, 2008-2030........................... 40
4.11 Interment Impact of Changing Residency Rule, 2008-2030.................................................... 41
5.1 National, State, and Private Cemetery Interment Costs, 2007.................................................. 44
IV Meeting the Memorial Needs of Virginia Veterans
LIST OF FIGURES
Figures
1.1 Number of Veterans by City and County, 2000........................................................................ 10
1.2 Number of Veterans by City and County as a Percentage of Civilian Population
18 Years and Older, 2000...................................................................................................... 11
2.1 Virginia Veteran Deaths by Year, 2001-2030............................................................................ 13
2.2 Virginia Veteran Population by Year, 2000-2030...................................................................... 14
2.3 U.S. Cremation Percentages, 1958-2005.................................................................................. 17
3.1 Location of National and State Veterans Cemeteries in Virginia and Nearby States................ 21
3.2 75-mile Radii for National Veterans Cemeteries in the Region................................................ 22
3.3 Veteran Burial Draw Rates by City and County, Amelia Cemetery......................................... 24
3.4 Veteran Burial Draw Rates by City and County, Suffolk Cemetery......................................... 25
3.5 Veteran Burial Draw Rates by City and County, Straight Line Distance................................. 25
3.6 Veteran Burial Draw Rates for Amelia Cemetery, Straight Line versus Road Distance.......... 26
3.7 Cemetery Service Areas, 75 Miles............................................................................................ 28
3.8 Cemetery Service Areas , 50 Miles........................................................................................... 28
3.9 Cemetery Service Areas, 75 Miles and Without Culpeper....................................................... 29
3.10 Cemetery Service Areas, 50 Miles and Without Culpeper....................................................... 29
3.11 Cemetery Service Areas, 75 Miles and New Cemetery in Amherst County............................ 30
3.12 Cemetery Service Areas, 50 Miles and New Cemetery in Rockbridge County....................... 30
3.13 Cemetery Service Areas, 75 Miles without Culpeper
and New Cemetery in Amherst County................................................................................ 31
3.14 Cemetery Service Areas, 50 Miles without Culpeper
and New Cemetery in Nelson County.................................................................................. 31
VI Meeting the Memorial Needs of Virginia Veterans
FOREWORD
This study was commissioned by the Virginia The author would like to thank the staff of the
Department of Veterans Services to determine Virginia Department of Veterans Services for
the need for additional veterans cemeteries in the assistance in compiling data and information that
Commonwealth of Virginia and the location(s) were used in this report. Special thanks go to
where the cemetery needs of Virginia’s veterans Mr. Dan Kemano, Director of Cemeteries, and
are not currently being met. The study relies Mr. Steven Combs, Director of Policy and Plan-
on both published and unpublished data as well ning. The staff of Virginia Veterans Cemetery
as literature that address trends in the death- and the Albert G. Horton, Jr. Memorial Ceme-
care industry. The study makes use of standard tery, including Superintendent Becky Harvie and
geographical public facility location modeling Susan Ulrich, provided additional assistance.
techniques to identify the optimal sites for cem- Professor John Knapp of the Weldon Cooper
eteries. It also provides estimates of state veteran Center provided helpful guidance and feedback,
cemetery usage under different scenarios. These and Steve Kulp assisted with data collection and
locations and estimates can provide a common document preparation. W. Grace Ng and Dave
framework for informing future cemetery devel- Borszich provided editing advice. Any errors or
opment and funding decisions. omissions are the responsibility of the author.
Terance J. Rephann, Ph.D.
Regional Economist
Charlottesville, Virginia
November 2007
VII
VIII Meeting the Memorial Needs of Virginia Veterans
Meeting the Memorial Needs of
Virginia Veterans
An Analysis of Existing and Proposed Cemetery Sites
Terance J. Rephann, PH.D
IXMeeting the Memorial Needs of Virginia Veterans
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Commonwealth of Virginia is home to a as Vietnam veterans, may increasingly favor vet-
large number of veterans. According to the 2000 eran cemetery interment.
U.S. Census, their number was approximately In assessing state and national cemetery needs,
786,000 which ranks 10th largest in the U.S. This the National Cemetery Administration (NCA)
higher-than-average veteran population can be uses a 75-mile cemetery service area boundary.
attributed to the number of large military bases in The goal of the NCA is to maximize the number
the eastern portion of the state, a relatively high of veterans who reside within 75-mile straight-
rate of youth military recruitment, and retiree line distance of a national or state cemetery. This
migration trends that favor more temperate cli- boundary is considered to be the outer limit for
mates in the Southern U.S. which veterans will consider burial sites. Using
To meet the burial needs of a large and grow- this criterion, the establishment of a new state
ing veteran population, the Virginia Department cemetery in southwest Virginia at Dublin on
of Veterans Services (DVS) established a State property to be obtained from the U.S. Army, will
Cemetery System with the assistance of funds bring an additional 65,000 Virginia veterans or
obtained from the National Cemetery Adminis- 98 percent of all veterans within 75 miles of a
tration’s State Cemetery Grants Program. The veterans cemetery.
Virginia Veterans Cemetery in Amelia County This study examined interment records of the
was dedicated in 1997 and the Albert G. Horton, two state cemeteries. It finds that the vast major-
Jr. Memorial Veterans Cemetery in Suffolk was ity of veteran interments are drawn from within 50
opened in 2004. Since the establishment of these miles of a state cemetery with even higher likeli-
cemeteries, the number of interments has grown hoods of veteran burial occurring for those areas
nearly every year with a record number of 738 in closer proximity to each cemetery. This result
laid to rest in FY 2007. conforms to some national research that indicates
A number of different factors have influenced that the 75-mile service area boundary may be
the burial needs of Virginia veterans in the too large. In addition, a 75-mile boundary may
immediate past and will continue to do so in the be a poor approximation of travel time because
future. First, while Virginia has historically been geographical travel conditions vary widely due
well served by a number of national cemeter- to differences in road network density, traffic
ies located within the state, most of these cem- congestion, and the presence of natural barriers
eteries have closed in the last four decades, and such as rivers and mountains. A 50-mile service
Culpeper National Cemetery may reach capacity area boundary roughly translates into a 71-mile
in the next 15-20 years unless additional land roadway travel distance for rural Amelia County,
is acquired. Second, the number of annual vet- which can be traveled in less than two hours.
eran deaths projected over the next few decades This study recommends use of a 50-mile dis-
will continue to be high by historical standards. tance service standard in state cemetery plan-
Third, many veterans remain outside a reason- ning. Using this criterion, it is estimated that
able traveling distance of a state or national cem- an existing or planned national or state cem-
etery. Fourth, some aging veteran cohorts, such etery serves fewer than 90 percent of Virginia
veterans. In addition, the strong possibility exists Projections indicate that approximately 1,000
that Culpeper National Cemetery will be closed veterans would be laid to rest within a four-cem-
to casket burial in the planning horizon. If that etery system in FY 2017 and potentially 20,000
closure happens, only 85 percent of Virginia vet- veterans over the period FY 2008-2030. These
erans would be served. It is recommended that figures do not include spouses or eligible depen-
Virginia establish the goal of including at least dents that would contribute an estimated 30 per-
90 percent of its veteran population within 50 cent to the cemetery workload. These projections
miles of a state or national cemetery and plan for are based on U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs
the possible deactivation of Culpeper National veteran death projections and estimates of county
Cemetery. If these guidelines are adopted, a burial draw rates in the vicinity of each cemetery.
new cemetery located in west central Virginia, in Albert G. Horton, Jr. Memorial Veterans Cem-
particular Nelson County, would serve the larg- etery in Suffolk would have the largest volume
est population of unserved veterans including a of burial activity followed by Virginia Veterans
number of veterans who would be displaced by Cemetery in Amelia. A prospective cemetery in
the closure of Culpeper. Dublin would serve approximately 150 veterans
Acquisition and development of a Nelson beginning in FY 2012 and another one in Nel-
County area site should proceed as part of a long- son would serve approximately the same number
term plan. Desirable sites for development would beginning in FY 2017.
have a number of features such as good transpor- Although state veterans cemeteries are cur-
tation access, no major built up areas contiguous rently restricted to state residents or residents of
to the parcel, compatibility with local zoning reg- the state at time of military induction, removing
ulations, no major easements or other restrictions this eligibility requirement is projected to have
on development, the absence of environmental a relatively small effect on state cemetery inter-
hazards and major grades which would escalate ment volumes. The two cemeteries that would
construction costs, and aesthetic characteristics be affected, Albert G. Horton, Jr. Memorial Vet-
such as tree canopy and some topographical relief. erans Cemetery in Suffolk and the proposed state
Property values in the area are relatively low by cemetery in Dublin, would experience a pro-
state standards, and Nelson County is projected jected impact of 20 and 42 burials respectively
to grow slower than the state as a whole. Areas in FY 2012, which represents approximately 10
outside the immediate I-81 and I-64 corridors are percent of their total projected burials volumes
not subject to the same development pressures as otherwise. Virginia Veterans Cemetery in Amelia
the northern and eastern parts of the state. There- and a fourth cemetery in Nelson County would
fore, no sense of urgency or immediacy should not be affected because their service areas lie
guide the acquisition and development decision. in Virginia.
On the other hand, the DVS would incur a num- Two major factors will contribute to decreas-
ber of small administrative costs such as prop- ing consumption of cemetery space over the long
erty maintenance costs and some indirect costs term. First, Virginia veteran deaths are projected
such as legal liability if a decision were made to to drop below FY 2000 estimates beginning in
immediately acquire the land. Moreover, local FY 2020. These decreases will be observed
government(s) would lose some small amount of in all state cemetery service regions. Second,
revenue from foregone property taxes. veterans, like other citizens, are showing an
Meeting the Memorial Needs of Virginia Veteransincreasing preference for cremation over tradi- such as Memorial Day ceremonies. The depart- tional casket burial. The space requirement of ment recently hired a communications specialist inurnment is only a fraction of traditional casket to improve the quality and distribution of public burial. Because of these trends, the total acreage relations materials and will collaborate and coor- requirements of new cemeteries should be less dinate with other units in the department to make than the requirements of cemeteries developed in users of other DVS services aware of their burial the past. benefits. The cemetery division of the DVS has estab- Opportunities may exist to improve outreach. lished performance criteria that include increas- Pre-applications completed by veterans are a ing the number of burials at its existing facilities. potential useful source of data about veterans and In order to achieve burial goals, the department is the effectiveness of outreach activities. Monthly exploring new ways of reducing the cost burden reports generated from this data could be used to to veteran families and increasing outreach and assess strengths and weaknesses and track prog- marketing. State cemeteries provide significant ress from year to year. Mail contact with vet- price advantages to users over private cemeter- erans using both reports of separation (DD214) ies that offer discount burial services such as and commercial marketing databases might also “veteran gardens.” It is estimated that the low- yield additional pre-applications. Since more cost private alternatives would cost veterans and pre-planning and purchasing is occurring over their families approximately $1,500 more for a the Internet, enhancements to the DVS website veteran casket burial and approximately $4,440 (http://www.virginiaforveterans.com) are recom- more if both veteran and spouse were interred. mended. This website would be a useful resource Moreover, the department is exploring the pos- for veterans who are contacted as a result of a sibility of procuring burial vaults at wholesale coordinated print and media outreach campaign. prices and offering them to veterans at cost (an In order to keep pace with changing con- estimated $150). DVS has also made pre-appli- sumer tastes and the private cemetery industry, cation to the National Cemetery Administration some additional products and services might State Cemetery Grants Program for grant fund- be offered. Veterans are increasingly favoring ing to pre-install vaults as part of its Dublin cem- burial modes that utilize less land. Therefore, etery project. Pre-installing liners would have it may also be prudent to plan for offering other the added benefit of stabilizing burial plots and interment services such as scattering gardens and allowing the cemetery to accommodate a larger even mausoleums if federal financial support can number of gravesites. be obtained. Computer technology could also be The department has conducted a number of tapped to offer additional electronic services such outreach activities and more are planned. DVS as kiosks that provide cemetery information, mul- staff visits local funeral homes, veteran organiza- timedia equipment for funeral ceremonies and tion chapters, churches, beauty parlors, and bar- video presentations to educate the general public bershops within a 50-mile radius of the two state about the role of the armed forces in shaping the veterans cemeteries to increase awareness of the nation’s history. state veterans cemeteries and veteran burial ben- Finally, state cemeteries offer a high standard efits. Also, periodic media exposure is gained of appearance and service. In order to main- from local newspaper, radio, and television outlet tain this quality and ensure continued positive features, especially surrounding special events messages by way of word-of-mouth, quality Executive Summary
assessment data may be useful. The use of satis- improvement. Such a survey instrument is being
faction surveys mailed to families of the departed used by the NCA and a similar instrument could
may provide valuable information for perfor- be adopted by the DVS.
mance measurement and planning continuous
Meeting the Memorial Needs of Virginia VeteransIntroduction This report evaluates the burial needs of Vir- Memorial Veterans Cemetery), and a new state ginia’s veterans. It describes the locations and facility to be developed in Dublin. capacities of cemeteries that serve veterans who This report is divided into five additional sec- reside in Virginia, evaluates the need for addi- tions. The next section provides some histori- tional burial capacity, identifies an optimal loca- cal background on national and state veteran tion for a new state cemetery, and examines the cemeteries including the establishment of the issues to consider in procuring additional prop- National Cemetery Administration (NCA), the erty for cemetery expansion. It also investigates State Cemetery Grants Program, and Virginia’s the role of cost and marketing/outreach efforts in veterans cemeteries. The second section exam- shaping veteran burial choices and the potential ines the variables that influence veteran burial effect of expanding interment eligibility to out-of- needs. These variables include veteran popu- state residents. Based on projections of veteran lation and death projections as well as veteran deaths through 2030 and various assumptions interment preferences. In section three, a loca- about veteran burial location preferences (vet- tion analysis is performed to identify optimal eran cemetery versus other interment locations) cemetery sites using several competing modeling and type of internment (ground-casket, crema- assumptions. In addition, the issues surrounding tion burial, or columbarium), the study identi- land acquisition for a fourth state veterans cem- fies alternate scenarios for utilization of existing etery are discussed. The fourth section presents facilities and proposed facilities. In determining veteran service area computations, projections of future expansion needs, the capacities of existing cemetery burial volumes for the period FY2008- national veteran cemeteries at Culpeper (VA), FY2030 and estimates of the impact of allowing Quantico (VA), Mountain Home (TN), Salis- veterans who reside out-of-state to be interred in bury (NC), and Grafton (WV) are considered the cemeteries. The fifth section examines com- as well as Virginia Department of Veterans Ser- parative cost data for private, state, and national vices cemeteries located in Amelia (Virginia Vet- cemeteries and provides outreach, marketing, erans Cemetery), Suffolk (Albert G. Horton, Jr. and product development recommendations Introduction
Meeting the Memorial Needs of Virginia Veterans
Section 1
Background
Veteran Cemetery History Some, such as Seven Pines and Balls Bluff, bear
The origins of the U.S. National Cemetery Sys- the names of significant Civil War battles (See
tem can be traced to the extraordinary burial Table 1.1). Indeed, among the first U.S. mili-
needs that arose near military hospital sites and tary cemeteries was Alexandria which was used
battlefields where there were military engage- for burials that arose from hospital casualties and
ments during the Civil War. After the war, military engagements near Washington D.C. As
additional sites were acquired for the dignified it filled to capacity, Arlington National Cemetery,
re-interment of military casualties that were the Nation’s most prominent military cemetery,
unburied or scattered in temporary, makeshift was established. The property was confiscated in
graves. Seventeen of nineteen national cem- 1862 from the owner, Robert E. Lee, by the U.S.
eteries located in Virginia were created during government in a tax lien case (Holt 1992). Arling-
the Civil War and the period immediately after.1 ton and another national Civil War era cemetery,
1 Hampton VA National Cemetery (not to be confused with Culpeper National Cemetery, continue to accept
Hampton National Cemetery) was created during a Yellow
Fever epidemic for servicemen at the Southern Branch of the
casket interments and Alexandria and Danville
National Home in 1899 (Holt 1992). Quantico National Cem- continue to accept cremated inurnments.
etery was opened in 1983 using land donated by the Marine
Corps military base at Quantico.
Table 1.1: Virginia National Veterans Cemeteries Established During Civil War Era
Cemetery Year Established Acreage Statusa Ownership
Alexandria 1862 5.5 Closed (1967) Department of Veterans Affairs
Arlington 1864 612 Open Department of the Army
Balls Bluff 1865 4.6 Closed (1889) Department of Veterans Affairs
City Point 1866 6.7 Closed (1971) Department of Veterans Affairs
Cold Harbor 1866 1.4 Closed (1970) Department of Veterans Affairs
Culpeper 1867 29.5 Open Department of Veterans Affairs
Danville 1866 3.5 Closed (1970) Department of Veterans Affairs
Fredericksburg 1867 12 Closed Department of the Interior
Fort Harrison 1866 1.5 Closed (1967) Department of Veterans Affairs
Glendale 1866 2.1 Closed (1970) Department of Veterans Affairs
Hampton 1862 27.1 Closed (1993) Department of Veterans Affairs
Poplar Grove 1866 18 Closed Department of the Interior
Richmond 1867 9.7 Closed (1963) Department of Veterans Affairs
Seven Pines 1866 1.9 Closed (1964) Department of Veterans Affairs
Staunton 1868 1.15 Closed (1983) Department of Veterans Affairs
Winchester 1866 4.9 Closed (1969) Department of Veterans Affairs
Yorktown 1866 2.7 Closed Department of the Interior
a
“Closed” means closed to casket burial
Source: U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (2007a), Steere (n.d.), and Holt (1992)
Background The national cemetery system was formally Assistance and Memorial Affairs, 110th Congress.
created by legislative act in 1862 with the Depart- May 8, 2007). The states are also responsible for
ment of the U.S. Army Quartermaster being the cemetery operational costs.2
charged with the responsibility of acquiring land The NCA currently operates a two-tiered
for establishing cemeteries (Steere n.d.). Legisla- system for establishing veteran cemeteries. It
tion in 1863 provided the legal authorization for continues to expand and improve the system of
funding the physical improvements to the cem- national cemeteries in underserved areas where it
etery land. By 1870, seventy-three national mili- can be established that at least 170,000 veterans
tary cemeteries had been created and the process would live within 75 miles of a new cemetery.
of identifying fallen soldiers and re-interment of The most recent additions to the system include
the dead had concluded. The next major expan- cemeteries in Sacramento, CA and Southern Flor-
sion of the national cemetery system occurred in ida. Six national cemeteries are being developed
1873 when burial privileges were extended to all in Bakersfield, CA, Birmingham, AL, Columbia,
honorably discharged Civil War veterans. Later SC, Jacksonville, FL, Sarasota, FL, and South-
in the century, this privilege was extended to eastern Pennsylvania (U.S. Department of Veter-
other war veterans such as those who served in ans Affairs 2007a). The NCA currently operates
the Spanish American War. In 1948, spouses and 125 national cemeteries. However only 65 are
dependent children and some non-military per- accepting all types of interments. Seventeen
sonnel who served in combination with the U.S. accept cremated remains or the remains of fam-
military officially became eligible for interment. ily members in a gravesite of an interred family
The next major phase of national cemetery member. The remaining cemeteries accept only
expansion was motivated by the need to renew the remains of family members in a gravesite of
existing national cemeteries that were approaching an interred family member (U.S. Department of
capacity and to provide more convenient access Veterans Affairs 2007a).
to veterans residing in underserved areas. In The State Cemetery System is viewed as sup-
1938 several existing cemeteries were expanded, plemental to the national system and used to pro-
and twenty new national cemeteries were autho- vide access to veteran populations that fall below
rized on land provided by the states (Steere n.d.). the 170,000 threshold for national cemetery eligi-
A 1974 study for the NCA recommended that a bility. The NCA has funded 65 state cemeteries,
system of regional cemeteries be developed and including two in Virginia. In addition, ten new
that states participate on an equal basis towards state cemeteries are under development (U.S.
development costs. This recommendation was Department of Veterans Affairs 2007a). They are
formalized in 1978 with the establishment of the located in Georgia, Texas, Kentucky, Louisiana,
State Cemetery Grants Program. In 1998, this South Carolina, Iowa, Montana, and Saipan.
50-50 percent cost split was modified with the
Virginia State Veterans Cemetery System
Department of Veterans Affairs providing 100
According to the 2000 U.S. Census, Virginia
percent of development costs but requiring that
was home to approximately 786,000 veterans
the states provide the land for development (U.S.
Congress. House. Subcommittee on Disability 2 The NCA also provides a headstone or marker and $300 reim-
bursement toward burial expenses for each veteran interred at
a state veterans cemetery.
Meeting the Memorial Needs of Virginia VeteransTable 1.2: Top Veteran States, 2000 climates in the Southern U.S. Most of the state’s
State Number of Veterans veterans are located in the heavily populated
California 2,569,340 Northern Virginia suburbs and Hampton Roads
Texas 1,875,597 areas (see Figure 1.1). However, compared to the
Florida 1,754,809 size of the adult civilian population, a relatively
New York 1,361,164 large number of veterans live in western and cen-
Pennsylvania 1,280,788 tral counties of the state (see Figure 1.2).
Ohio 1,144,007 To meet the burial needs of a growing number
Illinois 1,003,572 of elderly WWII and Korea era veterans and com-
Michigan 913,573 pensate for the loss of national cemeteries such
New Jersey 792,646 as Hampton National Cemetery, which closed to
Virginia 786,359 casket burials in the mid 1990s, the State Veter-
Source: U.S. Census Bureau ans Cemetery System was created within the Vir-
and ranked 10th among the states (see Table 1.2). ginia Department of Veterans Affairs (renamed
Virginia’s veteran population as a percentage of the Virginia Department of Veterans Services in
civilian population aged eighteen years and older 2003). The first cemetery was dedicated in 1997
ranked ninth. This higher than average veteran with the acquisition and development of the
population can be attributed to the number of 129-acre Virginia Veterans Cemetery in Amelia,
large military bases in the eastern and northern approximately 40 miles southwest of Richmond
parts of the state (e.g., the Pentagon, Quantico (see Table 1.3). In 2004, another state cemetery
Marine Corps Base, Langley Air Force Base, was opened, Albert G. Horton, Jr. Memorial Vet-
Naval Station Norfolk), a relatively high rate erans Cemetery in Suffolk. It is anticipated that
of youth military recruitment in the state3, and 80 acres of land will be acquired for a third veter-
retiree migration trends that favor more temperate an’s cemetery in Dublin, approximately 50 miles
3 4.5 percent of Virginia’s 15-24 aged population was recruited south of Roanoke, in FY 2009. Pre-application is
by the Army, Navy, Marines, and Air Force in 2005. This currently being made for development costs from
ranked 10th highest in the nation and was above the national the NCA State Cemetery Grants Program with
average of 3.8 percent (National Priorities Project 2006).
Table 1.3: Virginia State Veterans Cemeteries, 2007
Total Projected
Cemetery Location Dedicated Acreage Interments Characteristics Depletion Date
1,920 niche columbaria
(26 developed)
4X4 cremation plots
4X10 burial plots
Albert G. Horton, Jr. November Granite headstones and
Memorial Veterans Suffolk 2004 73 1,243 markers FY 2060+
1,440 niche columbaria
(29 developed)
3X3 cremation plots
5X10 burial plots
Marble headstones and
Virginia Veterans Amelia May 1997 129 1,603 granite markers FY 2080+
Southwest Virginia
(Proposed) Dublin -- 80 -- -- --
Source: Virginia Department of Veterans Services
Background Table 1.4: State Veterans Cemetery Interments, meet the veteran burial needs of their respective
FY1997-FY2007 service areas for the next 60 to 80 years.
Albert G. Horton , Jr. Virginia The state veterans cemeteries provides a final
Year Memorial Veterans Total resting place for a growing number of Virginia
1997 -- 2 2 veterans (see Table 1.4). Moreover, the FY2006
1998 -- 95 95
figure amounts to approximately one-third of all
1999 -- 91 91
Virginia veteran and veteran spouse/dependent
2000 -- 124 124
interments handled by Virginia national and state
2001 -- 121 121
cemeteries. This number will increase with the
2002 -- 175 175
establishment of a new state cemetery in Dublin
2003 -- 169 169
on property to be obtained from the U.S. Army.
2004 -- 179 179
According to Virginia Department of Veteran
2005 255 188 443
Services (DVS) records, the cemetery will bring
2006 478 231 709
an additional 65,000 veterans within 75 miles
2007 510 228 738
of a veteran’s cemetery (DVS 2006a). In addi-
Total 1,243 1,603 2,846
tion, the DVS has stated goals of increasing buri-
Source: Department of Veterans Services
als by 10 percent each year at Amelia and 20
construction expected to commence in FY 2010
or FY 2011.4 These cemeteries are projected to (Principi 2002). The Albert G. Horton, Jr. Memorial Veterans
4 Using the NCA’s 75-mile standard, two Virginia Cemetery opened in 2004 in Suffolk serves the former area.
areas were identified as having large underserved vet- The planned state cemetery in Dublin will serve much of the
eran populations centered on Chesapeake and Roanoke latter area.
Figure 1.1: Number of Veterans by City and County, 2000
Legend
Fewer than 1,000
1,000 to 4,999
5,000 to 9,999
10,000 to 24,999
25,000 and above
Source: U.S. Census Bureau
10 Meeting the Memorial Needs of Virginia Veteranspercent at Suffolk through increased outreach and DD-214) that establishes where the veteran lived
marketing efforts (DVS 2006b). at the time of his induction into military service.
The DVS restricts eligibility for interment to Waivers are granted in special circumstances for
honorably discharged veterans who were legal others who lived in Virginia at one time but did
residents of Virginia at death or upon entering not meet the letter of the residency conditions.
the armed forces, their spouses, and dependent Veterans are responsible for purchasing caskets,
children (DVS 2006a). In this regard, Virginia vaults/grave liners, and urns for cremains. The
is like most other states, the exceptions being DVS covers all interment costs for the veteran
Nevada, Wyoming, and Utah that do not require excluding burial liner or vault. Spouses and
residency (Holt 1992). Legal residency is shown dependents are charged $300 to cover grave
by submission of a report of separation (Form opening and closing.
Figure 1.2: Number of Veterans by City and County as a Percentage of Civilian Population 18 Years
and Older, 2000
Legend
6 to 10%
11 to 12%
13 to 14%
15 to 17%
18 to 22%
23 to 27%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau
Background 1112 Meeting the Memorial Needs of Virginia Veterans
Section 2
Determinants of Burial Needs
Veteran Population and Death Mirroring national trends, the Commonwealth
Projections of Virginia is projected to see a peak in veteran
Veteran population and death figures used in this deaths in FY 2008 (see Figure 2.1) due to the
study are derived from the VetPop2004 Version deaths of a large cohort of WWII and Korean
1.0 projection model (U.S. Department of Vet- War era veterans. Veteran deaths thereafter are
erans Affairs 2007b). The projections are based projected to decline because of the shrinking
on the 2000 U.S. Census, Department of Defense size of the veteran pool (see Figure 2.2). This
data on military separations, and Department decrease is caused by mortality attrition and the
of Veterans Affairs administrative data. State smaller number of veteran separations caused
changes in veteran population numbers are based by reduced peacetime military forces. Though
on subtracting estimated veteran deaths from the veteran deaths are likely to decrease, they are
additional veterans created by separations from not projected to reach the level estimated for FY
the military and estimates of interstate migration. 2000 until FY 2020.
Figure 2.1: Virginia Veteran Deaths by Year, 2001-2030
17,000
16,500
16,000
15,500
15,000
Deaths
14,500
14,000
13,500
13,000
12,500
2001
2003
2005
2007
2009
2013
2015
2017
2019
2021
2023
2025
2027
2029
2011
Year
Source: U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (2007b)
Determinants of Burial Needs 13Figure 2.2: Virginia Veteran Population by Year, 2000-2030
850,000
800,000
750,000
700,000
Veterans
650,000
600,000
550,000
500,000
450,000
400,000
2000
2002
2004
2006
2008
2010
2012
2014
2016
2018
2020
2022
2024
2026
2026
2030
Year
Source: U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (2007b)
County estimates and projections are deter- counties that have a high percentage of active
mined by allocating from the state using 2000 duty military personnel, which have a higher like-
U.S. Census information and locality population lihood of producing veterans. Both of these fac-
projections from Woods and Poole Economics, tors are likely to be important in Virginia which
Inc. As noted by the Department of Veterans has relatively high concentrations of foreign-born
Affairs, counties and cities are the least reli- residents in northern Virginia and armed forces
able geography because of the more limited data members in eastern cities and counties.
available at this level. Moreover, the methodol-
Cemetery Preferences
ogy does not address criticisms that it does not
Veteran burial preferences are shaped by a num-
adequately take into account veteran age compo-
ber of personal and financial factors. Knowledge
sition changes (Prettol and Glace 2001). How-
of the veteran interment benefit also plays a big
ever, a number of improvements have been made
role. According to a 2001 veterans survey, two
in the current release including the incorpora-
in five veterans (see Table 2.1) are not aware
tion of an adjustment factor based on counties
of their national and state burial benefits (U.S.
that have a higher percentage of foreign-born
Department of Veterans Affairs 2001). For those
residents, which have a lower likelihood of pro-
who are likely to choose a veteran cemetery for
ducing veterans, and an adjustment factor for
burial, the honor conferred by being buried there
14 Meeting the Memorial Needs of Virginia VeteransTable 2.1: Veteran Awareness of Burial Benefits, 2001
Item Percent of Respondentsa
Burial in a national or state veterans’ cemetery 58.8
VA headstones and burial markers in private cemeteries 44.2
Presidential Memorial Certificates for next of kin of deceased veterans 13.3
Source: U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (2001)
a
Sums to more than 100 percent because more than one response allowed.
is the overriding factor (see Table 2.2). Cost is years. These increases may be due to greater
secondary but still important. preferences for veteran cemeteries, growing
Veterans’ burial location choices are often influ- comparative cost advantages over private cem-
enced by family considerations (see Table 2.3). eteries, improved accessibility, or other factors.
Many veterans have already made plans for burial Less than 3.5 percent of eligible Civil War/
in a private cemetery. In numerous instances, Spanish American War veterans chose burial in
veterans may have entered into pre-need con- national cemeteries (Steere n.d.). An 1883 study
tracts for funeral and burial arrangements. Dis- of Cyprus Hills National Cemetery estimated
tance is identified as an obstacle by 6.6 percent that 10 percent of New York area veterans would
of respondents. This result may partly reflect the seek burial there. Approximately 12.5 percent
fact that approximately 20 percent of U.S. vet- of WWI servicemen who were killed in action
erans live beyond 75 miles of a national or state were buried in national cemeteries compared to
cemetery that the NCA regards as an outer limit 20 percent of those killed in action during WWII.
for which veterans would be willing to consider Current National Cemetery Administration plan-
burial sites. For veterans already located within ning guidelines recommend that allowance be
75 miles of a veteran cemetery, distance may still made that 20 percent of veterans living within
pose a barrier because of increased search costs 75 miles of a veteran’s cemetery would choose
associated with investigating the burial option, interment there.
a desire to be interred close to home or family,
Travel Distance
or a desire to be interred in a place that is more
Distance is clearly a key factor in veteran burial
accessible for family and friends during funeral
decisions, particularly when it is considered
ceremonies or cemetery visitation.
as a proxy for the strength of local or family
Historical data suggest that veteran cemetery
attachments, increased search costs, or the costs
interment rates have increased over the last 150
of transporting remains, funeral attendees or
Table. 2.2: Reasons for Choosing National or State Veterans Cemetery, 2001
Reason Percent of Respondentsa
Honor of burial in a national shrine 47.2
Cost 26.9
Friends or family buried there 16.9
Quality of services 10.0
Some other reason 23.4
Source: U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (2001)
a
Sums to more than 100 percent because more than one response allowed.
Determinants of Burial Needs 15Table 2.3: Reasons for Not Choosing National or State Veterans Cemetery, 2001
Reason Percent of Respondentsa
Wanted location close to other family members 44.6
Made other arrangements 41.2
Didn’t know eligibility criteria 8.6
Veterans’ cemetery too far away 6.6
Didn’t know how to make arrangements with VA 2.4
VA services don’t accommodate religious preferences 0.7
Too difficult to make arrangements with VA 0.6
Wanted services that weren’t available at veterans’ cemetery 0.3
Quality of service 0.2
Unable to make advance arrangements with VA 0.2
Some other reason 15.5
Source: U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (2001)
a
Sums to more than 100 percent because more than one response allowed.
visitors. Therefore, it is not surprising that the natural barriers such as rivers and mountains.
service area distance threshold standard plays a Because of these issues, the NCA has contracted
central place in the debate about veteran cem- with an independent consultant to study the
etery burial needs. issue further and offer recommendations (U.S.
Initial estimates of a 250 mile service areas Congress. House. Subcommittee on Disability
for planning new cemeteries in the 1940s (Steere Assistance and Memorial Affairs, 110th Con-
n.d.) have given way to a much smaller 75 mile gress. May 8, 2007). This study may result in a
service area estimate in recent years (Holt 1992). future refinement of the service area definition.
Some studies suggest an even smaller service area
Interment Type Preferences
of 50 miles. For instance, a 1948 study found
There are many options for disposition of
that 82 percent of all interments to a national
remains. Casket and cremain burial are the most
cemetery came from veterans living within a 50-
common choices. But, other interment choices
mile radius of the cemetery (Holt 1992). A 1974
include above ground interment in a mausoleum
study states that “experience has shown that the
or columbarium. Cremains can also be scattered
families of deceased veterans, in the vast major-
in cremation gardens, at sea, or other locations.
ity of cases, have preferred and sought burial of
Some people elect to donate their cadavers to sci-
the veterans within 50 miles of the family home”
ence.
(Holt 1992, p. 457). Subsequent studies provide
Cremation has experienced explosive growth
empirical support for a 50-mile service standard.
over the last 40 years in the U.S. (see Figure
In congressional hearings, the 75-mile service
2.3) and is now the leading disposition method in
area standard has been called into question. The
some, mainly western states. It has experienced
75-mile service standard is based on straight-line
dramatic growth in Virginia as well. Cremation
distance and does not recognize the variability
was used for approximately 20 percent of Virginia
in travel times that may result from differences
deaths in 2000 and 28 percent in 2006. This per-
in the quality and connectivity of the local road
centage is just five percentage points lower than
network, traffic congestion, and the presence of
the U.S. average. The Cremation Association
16 Meeting the Memorial Needs of Virginia Veteransof North America (CANA) projects that over 50 identifiable groups have proven somewhat resis-
percent of Americans will choose cremation by tant to the practice, including African Americans
2050 (CANA 2007). and members of conservative religious groups
The Wirthlin Report (O’Meara 2005) identi- such as Baptists and Muslims.
fies several factors that are making cremation Not surprisingly, veteran cremation percent-
more popular. These factors include the lower ages mirror national trends. Cremation inter-
cost of cremation compared to traditional burial, ments made up 20 percent of interments in
increased concern for the environment, and per- national cemeteries in FY 1989 (Holt 1992). In
sonal preferences for simpler methods of dispo- FY 2006, they accounted for approximately 41
sition. Other explanations for growth include percent (see Table 2.4).5 At Arlington National
weakening taboos towards cremation because Cemetery, 65 percent of interments are cremated
of the wider acceptance of the practice by reli- 5 These percentages are somewhat higher than indicated on
gious groups that historically opposed it, nar- veteran preferences survey. However, the percentage may be
rowing regional differences, demographic trends slightly distorted by the fact that 17 national cemeteries now
can accommodate only cremated remains. If restricted to cem-
such as increased migration and immigration, eteries where all burial choices are available, this percentage
and improved education levels. Still, certain would be slightly lower.
Figure 2.3: U.S. Cremation Percentages, 1958-2005
35
30
Percentage of Deaths Cremated
25
20
15
10
5
0
1958
1961
1964
1967
1970
1973
1976
1979
1982
1985
1988
1991
1994
1997
2000
2003
Year
Source: Cremation Association of North America (2007)
Determinants of Burial Needs 17Table 2.4: U.S. Veteran Cemetery Annual Interments by Type, Percentage Distribution, 2003-2006
Percentage of Total
Type 2003 2004 2005 2006
Full-casket burial 62.9 61.8 61.3 59.5
Cremain burial 26.0 25.6 26.5 27.0
Columbarium 11.1 12.6 12.2 13.5
Source: U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (2007a)
Horton, Jr. Memorial Veterans Cemetery in Suf-
remains (Associated Press 2005).6 On the other
folk in May 2007 (see Table 2.6) show higher
hand, Virginia’s two other active national cem-
inurnment percentages, but they are still well
eteries, Culpeper and especially Quantico show
below national percentages. These figures may
much lower inurnment rates (see Table 2.5).
partly reflect the somewhat lower state resident
Results compiled for Virginia Veterans Cem-
preference for cremation compared to the
etery in Amelia in June 2007 and for Albert G.
nation.
6 This high cremation rate may be due to the less restrictive
rules for cremated remains at the cemetery compared to cas- Table 2.6: State Veteran Cemetery Cumulative
keted burials. Also, Arlington is truly a national cemetery Interments by Type, Percentage
with remains coming regularly from all 50 states. The cost Distribution, 2007
of transporting cremated remains is much lower than casketed Percentage of Total
remains.
Type Amelia Suffolk Total
Table 2.5: Virginia National Veterans Cemetery Full-casket burial 76.3 73.2 75.0
Annual Interments by Type, Percentage Cremain burial 8.5 6.7 7.7
Distribution, 2000-2006 Columbarium 15.2 20.1 17.3
Percentage of Total Source: Virginia Department of Veterans Services
Culpeper Quantico
Year Full-casket Cremain Full-casket Cremain
Survey data also indicate that veteran burial
2000 79.7 20.3 89.4 10.6
preferences are much like the general public. The
2001 79.8 20.2 87.9 12.1
Wirthlin Report (O’Meara 2005) indicates that 33
2002 72.6 27.4 85.2 14.8
percent of the general public would “definitely”
2003 74.5 25.5 85.7 14.3
choose cremation and 14 percent are “some-
2004 76.6 23.4 83.2 16.8
what likely” to choose it. Veteran preference
2005 73.4 26.6 84.4 15.6
survey indicates that approximately 30 percent
2006 78.2 21.8 84.0 16.0 of those who indicated an interment preference
Source: National Cemetery Administration would choose cremation (see Table 2.7). DVS
18 Meeting the Memorial Needs of Virginia VeteransTable 2.7: Veteran Interment Plans by Type, Table 2.9: General Public’s Plans for Cremains,
Percentage Distribution, 2001 Percentage Distribution, 2005
Type Percentage of Total Percentage
In-ground casket burial 59.8 Type of Total
Cremation 30.3 Scatter remains 39
Undecided 6.6 Bury ashes (plot) 16
Some other plan 2.7 Keep in urn at home 10
Unknown 0.6 Place in a columbarium at a cemetery 8
Source: U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (2001) Family can decide 5
Let deceased decide 3
Dispose (general) 3
pre-application responses compiled in September
Place in a columbarium at a church 1
2007 suggest that approximately 30 percent of
Other 1
veterans will choose inurnment (see Table 2.8).
Don’t know/Refused 14
Source: The Wirthlin Report (O’Meara 2005)
Table 2.8: Virginia Veterans Cemetery Inter-
ments by Type based on Pre-applications, National cemetery interment data sug-
Percentage Distribution, 2007
gest that in-ground is much more common
Percentage of Total
(74 percent). Holt (1992) believes that this
Type Amelia Suffolk Total
pattern may be due to the fact that families report
Full-casket burial 79.6 63.2 70.0
feeling “closer to the departed” when the cre-
Cremain burial 8.2 22.1 16.3
mains are buried. Curiously, Virginia state cem-
Columbarium 12.2 14.7 13.7
Source: Virginia Department of Veterans Services
eteries do not conform to this pattern. Sixty-nine
percent of inurnments are placed in columbarium
niches. Pre-applications from the state cemeter-
For those preferring cremation, the state ies, on the other hand, indicate a slight majority
veteran cemeteries offer two methods of (54 percent) would select in-ground inurnment.
disposition: urn placement in a columbarium niche
Table 2.10: Veteran Plans for Cremains,
or in-ground niche. According to The Wirthlin Percentage Distribution, 2001
Report, two thirds of the general public choos- Plan Percentage of Total
ing these options prefers in-ground burial (see Placed in a columbarium 7.4
Table 2.9). A similar breakdown (72 percent) Buried 18.8
is evident in veteran survey responses (see Scattered 64.7
Table 2.10). Some other arrangement 9.0
Source: U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (2001)
Determinants of Burial Needs 1920 Meeting the Memorial Needs of Virginia Veterans
Section 3
Location Analysis
Existing Cemeteries provided by (1) national veterans cemeteries
Figure 3.1 shows the locations of state and located within the state of Virginia, (2) those
national cemeteries in Virginia and adjoining national veterans cemeteries located within a 75
states that allow casket burial. Only those cem- mile radius of the state border of Virginia, and (3)
eteries offering casket burial will be considered existing or planned Virginia state veterans cem-
because it is the most common interment choice. eteries (see Figure 3.2). State veterans cemeter-
This means that thirteen national cemeteries ies in adjacent states are not considered because
located in Virginia are excluded from the analy- interments are restricted to residents of those
sis. Three only accept inurnments and eligible states.
family members in an existing gravesite (DVS Finally, this analysis excludes Arlington
2006b). Ten other national cemeteries only National Cemetery, which is operated by the U.S.
accept eligible family members in an existing Army. Arlington is the United States’ most vis-
gravesite. The number of inurnments in the three ible and prestigious national cemetery, but it has
cemeteries accepting cremated remains is negli- more stringent eligibility criteria for in-ground
gible for the purposes of this study and one might casket burials than the national cemeteries run
surmise that the cemeteries are regarded as virtu- by the National Cemetery Administration. Only
ally closed by most veterans. servicemen who died while on active duty, retired
In addition, this analysis assumes that veter- military personnel, certain categories of disabled
ans cemetery services for Virginia veterans are veterans, and highly decorated veterans are
Figure 3.1: Location of National and State Veterans Cemeteries in Virginia and Nearby States
Location Analysis 21You can also read
