[House Hearing, 113 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.A.S.C. No. 113-114]
FILIPINO VETERANS EQUITY COMPENSA-
TION FUND: EXAMINING THE DEPART-
MENT OF DEFENSE AND INTERAGENCY
PROCESS FOR VERIFYING ELIGIBILITY
__________
HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND INVESTIGATIONS
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED THIRTEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
HEARING HELD
JUNE 24, 2014
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
___________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
89-507 WASHINGTON : 2015
________________________________________________________________________________________
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office,
http://bookstore.gpo.gov. For more information, contact the GPO Customer Contact Center,
U.S. Government Publishing Office. Phone 202-512-1800, or 866-512-1800 (toll-free).
E-mail, [email protected].
SUBCOMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND INVESTIGATIONS
JOSEPH J. HECK, Nevada, Chairman
K. MICHAEL CONAWAY, Texas NIKI TSONGAS, Massachusetts
MO BROOKS, Alabama JACKIE SPEIER, California
WALTER B. JONES, North Carolina TAMMY DUCKWORTH, Illinois
AUSTIN SCOTT, Georgia TULSI GABBARD, Hawaii
JIM BRIDENSTINE, Oklahoma
Christopher Bright, Professional Staff Member
Michael Amato, Professional Staff Member
David Baker, Clerk
C O N T E N T S
----------
CHRONOLOGICAL LIST OF HEARINGS
2014
Page
Hearing:
Tuesday, June 24, 2014, Filipino Veterans Equity Compensation
Fund: Examining the Department of Defense and Interagency
Process for Verifying Eligibility.............................. 1
Appendix:
Tuesday, June 24, 2014........................................... 29
----------
TUESDAY, JUNE 24, 2014
FILIPINO VETERANS EQUITY COMPENSATION FUND: EXAMINING THE DEPARTMENT OF
DEFENSE AND INTERAGENCY PROCESS FOR VERIFYING ELIGIBILITY
STATEMENTS PRESENTED BY MEMBERS OF CONGRESS
Heck, Hon. Joseph J., a Representative from Nevada, Chairman,
Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations................... 1
Tsongas, Hon. Niki, a Representative from Massachusetts, Ranking
Member, Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations........... 2
WITNESSES
Almeda, Celestino, Filipino Veterans Equity Compensation Fund
Claimant....................................................... 19
Baltazar, Jesse, Filipino Veterans Equity Compensation Fund
Claimant....................................................... 21
Flohr, Brad, Senior Advisor for Compensation Service, U.S.
Department of Veterans Affairs................................. 4
Lachica, Eric, Executive Director, American Coalition for
Filipino Veterans, Inc......................................... 24
Levins, Scott, Director of the National Personnel Records Center,
National Archives and Records Administration................... 6
MacEwen, BG David K. ``Mac,'' USA, The 59th Adjutant General of
the U.S. Army, Department of the Army.......................... 3
APPENDIX
Prepared Statements:
Almeda, Celestino............................................ 49
Baltazar, Jesse.............................................. 57
Flohr, Brad.................................................. 40
Lachica, Eric................................................ 64
Levins, Scott................................................ 45
MacEwen, BG David K. ``Mac''................................. 33
Documents Submitted for the Record:
Statement of U.S. Senator Dean Heller........................ 75
Joint statement from Jose L. Cuisia, Jr., the Philippine
Government's Ambassador to the United States, and Major
General Retired Delfin N. Lorenzana, Head of the Philippine
Government's' Office of Veterans Affairs................... 77
Testimony by Major General Antonio Taguba, USA (ret.)........ 78
Witness Responses to Questions Asked During the Hearing:
Dr. Heck..................................................... 91
Questions Submitted by Members Post Hearing:
Ms. Bordallo................................................. 95
FILIPINO VETERANS EQUITY COMPENSATION FUND: EXAMINING THE DEPARTMENT OF
DEFENSE AND INTERAGENCY PROCESS FOR VERIFYING ELIGIBILITY
----------
House of Representatives,
Committee on Armed Services,
Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations,
Washington, DC, Tuesday, June 24, 2014.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 2:45 p.m., in
room 2212, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Joseph J. Heck
(chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JOSEPH J. HECK, A REPRESENTATIVE FROM
NEVADA, CHAIRMAN, SUBCOMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND INVESTIGATIONS
Dr. Heck. Well, good afternoon. Thanks everybody for
coming. Before we begin today, I would like to take a moment to
welcome and thank Ranking Member Tsongas and all the members of
the subcommittee who hopefully will be showing up, as we just
finished votes, for their participation today.
Although the Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee has
been engaged on several important topics, and we have convened
for other purposes in recent months, this is the first hearing
since I assumed the gavel from Representative Roby. Mrs. Roby
did an outstanding job as chairwoman, and was ably assisted by
Ms. Tsongas. And I look forward to advancing that work with
everyone in the months remaining in this Congress.
We stand at a critical moment for our Nation's military and
national defense. And I believe the subcommittee's jurisdiction
provides us a great opportunity to have a profound effect on
policies both at home and abroad.
Today, we convene to learn more about a program meant to
compensate Filipino veterans for service to this Nation during
the Second World War. Filipinos have a long and distinguished
history fighting on behalf of the United States.
In 1941, more than 260,000 Filipino soldiers responded to
President Roosevelt's call to arms, and fought under the
American flag during the World War II. Many made the ultimate
sacrifice as soldiers or guerrilla fighters during the Japanese
occupation of the Philippines. However, most World War II
Filipino veterans did not receive compensation similar to what
U.S. veterans received.
The Filipino Veterans Equity Compensation Fund was
established to provide a one-time payment to Filipino veterans
as settlement for all future benefits claim based on service.
To date, over 18,000 payments have been approved by the U.S.
Veterans Administration. However, some Filipino veterans have
expressed concern that they were impeded from filing claims or
that their claims were improperly denied.
The plight of denied Filipino veterans has been a
consistent focus of mine since I first met the members of the
Las Vegas ``Mighty Five.'' The ``Mighty Five'' are five
Filipino veterans who fought bravely under American commanders
in the Philippines and helped us win the war in the Pacific.
The risks they took were no less daring than their American
counterparts, their sacrifices made no less selfless.
Now, these brave veterans find themselves engaged in a new
fight for recognition, respect, and honor. I have spoken with
these proud men and their families on many occasions. They are
certainly not getting any younger. In fact over the past 3
years the ``Mighty Five'' was reduced to only two with the
passing of Silverio Cuaresma, Augusto Oppus, and Romeo
Barreras. In addition, we lost Commander Francisco Cedulla in
2011, all of which were residents of southern Nevada.
It is not about the money for these men. They don't need
another dime to live out their years comfortably. They are,
however, eager to have their service recognized. They want to
know that the United States Government, the Department of
Defense, and others consider their service was equivalent to
many others who served proudly.
The purpose of today's hearing is to receive testimony from
relevant government witnesses regarding the claims approval
process, and from Filipino veterans regarding their experience.
Before recognizing my distinguished ranking member, I note that
we will be joined potentially by some Members who are not
members of the subcommittee. Accordingly, I asked unanimous
consent that non-Armed Services Committee Members be allowed to
participate in today's hearing after all committee members have
had an opportunity to ask questions. Hearing no objections, so
ordered.
Now, I turn to Ms. Tsongas for any remarks she may wish to
make.
STATEMENT OF HON. NIKI TSONGAS, A REPRESENTATIVE FROM
MASSACHUSETTS, RANKING MEMBER, SUBCOMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND
INVESTIGATIONS
Ms. Tsongas. Good afternoon, and thank you Chairman Heck.
And I would like to thank the chairman, the panel of witnesses,
the Filipino veterans and their families who are here with us
today.
We as a nation owe a debt of gratitude, not only to our
U.S. veterans, but to all those who have taken up arms to join
our military in pursuit of a common purpose. In this sense,
recognizing the significant contributions of Filipino veterans
who provided invaluable support to the United States military
during World War II is an important issue. And I look forward
to your testimony on the Philippine Veterans Equity
Compensation Fund and the claims approval process.
And for your information, those of you--those of you
veterans here who or did participate in World War II, my father
was a survivor of the bombing of Pearl Harbor, and he went on
to help build runways across the South Pacific. So I thank you
for all that you have done on our behalf. And I look forward to
your testimony.
Dr. Heck. Thank you Ms. Tsongas. Now, I have also received
various materials on this topic. I ask by unanimous consent
that the following be entered into the record: a letter from
Nevada Senator Dean Heller; a joint statement from Jose L.
Cuisia, Jr., the Philippine Government's Ambassador to the
United States and Major General Retired Delfin N. Lorenzana,
Head of the Philippine Government's' Office of Veterans
Affairs; a statement from Major General Retired Antonio Taguba,
United States Army.
Is there any objection? Without objection, so ordered.
[The information referred to can be found in the Appendix
beginning on page 75.]
Dr. Heck. This hearing will include two panels. On our
first panel, we will hear testimony from three witnesses
representing the Department of the Army, the Department of
Veterans Affairs [VA], and the National Personnel Records
Center of the National Archives and Records Administration. In
our second panel, we will receive testimony from the head of
the Filipino Veterans Organization and two Filipino Veterans
Equity Compensation Fund claimants.
For the first panel, we have Brigadier General David
``Mac'' MacEwen, the 59th Adjutant General of the United States
Army. Mr. Bradley Flohr is the Senior Advisor for Compensation
Service at the Department of Veterans Affairs. Mr. Scott Levins
is the Director of the National Personnel Records Center at the
National Archives and Records Administration. We will hear
prepared statements from the witnesses in that order, followed
by questions from the members.
I thank you all for joining us today. I look forward to
hearing your testimony. General MacEwen, we will start with
you.
STATEMENT OF BG DAVID K. ``MAC'' MacEWEN, USA, THE 59TH
ADJUTANT GENERAL OF THE U.S. ARMY, DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
General MacEwen. Chairman Heck, Ranking Member Tsongas,
distinguished members of the committee, I thank you for the
opportunity to appear before you on behalf of America's Army to
discuss Filipino Army verification of service and measures your
Army has taken to improve and streamline the process. This is
personal to me because my father served in the Philippines
during World War II. And so, ensuring accurate recognition of
service of Filipino Army members is critical.
Between late 1942 and June of 1948, the United States Army
developed and administered a program to extend formal
recognition to Filipino guerrilla units and individuals who
contributed to the defeat of Japanese forces in the Philippines
during World War II. This Guerrilla Recognition Program was
robust. An immense number of documents were collected and
investigated to ensure document accuracy. The results of this
program were authenticated rosters of recognized guerrilla
units, individual letters of recognition, certified witness
affidavits and AGO [Adjutant General's Office] Form 23
Affidavit for Philippine Army Personnel. These remain the basis
for the determination of service.
The Army maintains complete confidence that the records and
files completed in 1948 provide the best and most accurate
determinations that could have been made from that time until
today. The Army transferred the Philippine veterans service
verification process to the National Personnel Records Center
[NPRC] in 1998. The Army, using NPRC as our agent, maintains a
close relationship also with the Veterans Administration. The
Army has a long-standing and close working relationship with
both NPRC and the VA. And together we are committed to
sustaining an efficient claims processing program for Filipino
veterans.
The issue of service verification has remained constant
over the years. In October 2012, the White House Initiative on
Asian-Americans and Pacific Islanders in collaboration with OMB
[Office of Management and Budget] and the Domestic Policy
Council, created the Filipino Veterans Equity Compensation Fund
Interagency Working Group. The working group increased the
transparency and concluded the process we use is sound. This
effort represented the first time all organizations involved in
the verification process were brought together to examine the
process from start to finish.
The Army believes the decisions made 66 years ago were made
by a competent authority that had the benefit of extensive
postwar field work in conducting investigations with firsthand
evidence to determine claims validity. The Army is well
positioned and committed to meeting the claims processing needs
for Filipino veterans. It is not possible for the Army to
conduct a better, more detailed and more thorough investigation
today than that which was conducted between 1942 and 1948. We
have worked in the past with Members of Congress regarding
eligibility rules and the criteria for service on individual
cases and concerns that they may have. And we will continue to
do so.
Chairman Heck, Ranking Member Tsongas, and members of the
subcommittee, we wish to thank you for your continued support
which has been vital in sustaining our All-Volunteer Army
through an unprecedented period of continuous combat operations
and will continue to be vital to ensure the future of our Army.
I look forward to answering your questions today.
[The prepared statement of General MacEwen can be found in
the Appendix on page 33.]
Dr. Heck. Thanks, General. Next we will hear from Mr.
Flohr.
Excuse me, Mr. Flohr, is your mic on?
STATEMENT OF BRAD FLOHR, SENIOR ADVISOR FOR COMPENSATION
SERVICE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS
Mr. Flohr. Is this better? Sorry. Chairman Heck, Ranking
Member Tsongas, and subcommittee members, thank you for the
opportunity to provide an update on the Department of Veterans
Affairs administration of the Filipino Veterans Equity
Compensation [FVEC] Fund. As you said, Mr. Chairman, in 1941
more than 260,000 Filipino soldiers responded to President
Roosevelt's call to arms and fought under the American flag
during World War II. Many served as both soldiers in the United
States Armed Forces in the Far East and as recognized guerrilla
fighters during the Imperial Japanese occupation in the
Philippines. Later many of these brave individuals became proud
United States citizens.
In 1946, the Congress passed the Rescission Act, providing
Filipino World War II service does not qualify for the full
range of benefits available to the United States veterans.
Congress and this administration recognizes the extraordinary
contribution made by Filipino veterans. The American Recovery
and Reinvestment Act of 2009, enacted on February 17, 2009,
included a provision creating the Filipino Veterans Equity
Compensation Fund. Eligible veterans who are U.S. citizens
receive a one-time payment of $15,000. Eligible veterans who
are not U.S. citizens receive a one-time payment of $9,000.
Philippine veterans were required under the law to file a
claim by February 16, 2010. To qualify for this payment, an
individual must have served before July 1st, 1946, in the
Philippine Commonwealth Army, including recognized guerrillas,
or in the New Philippine Scouts. In determining whether
claimants are eligible for any VA benefit, including FVEC, VA
is bound by U.S. military service department determinations as
to whether the claimant has the qualifying service in
accordance with statutes and regulations.
Less than 2 months after the law was passed, VA established
an adjudication process, payment system, accounting system, and
payment delivery system to successfully issue the first FVEC
payment on April 8, 2009. VA conducted numerous successful
outreach programs to inform veterans and their families about
this benefit. This outreach continued until February 16, 2010,
at the end of the 1-year filing period.
VA's Manila regional office established a dedicated team of
employees who solely processed these claims. The Manila
regional office also sent letters to all veterans found
eligible for the benefit, advising them of their potential
eligibility for VA disability compensation benefits.
The Manila office received 42,755 claims for FVEC between
February 2009 and February 2010. As of June 1, 2014, of the
claims received the Manila regional office granted 18,900
payments totaling $225,341,204 million. Currently there are
23,855 claims that have not been granted due to ineligibility.
All original claims have received a decision, but there are
currently 19 reopened claims, and 31 appeals pending with VA.
Approximately 48 appeals of these decisions are pending with
the Board of Veterans Appeals, and another 16 are before the
United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims.
If all individuals with reopened claims or pending appeals
are found to be eligible for the payment, the Manila regional
office would pay additional funds of approximately $1.7 million
out of the fund. This assumes that all pending claims and
appeals that are granted would be paid at the maximum of
$15,000. In addition, $14.5 million has been returned to the
Treasury for returned checks which results when a veteran dies
with no eligible surviving spouse claimant. A total of $53.9
million remains in the appropriation.
The primary reason for denial of claims was the inability
of these individuals to establish qualifying service required
by section 1002(d) of the Recovery Act. These denied claimants
included individuals from all walks of life who exercised their
right to make an application to VA including children,
grandchildren, and other family members of alleged veterans,
widows of long-deceased veterans, and thousands of duplicative
claims that we received.
In determining whether a claimant is eligible for VA
benefit including FEVC, VA is legally bound under its
regulations by military service department determinations as to
service. Currently, unless VA has a genuine document issued by
a U.S. military service department containing needed
information to establish eligibility, VA regulations applicable
to all claimants require that VA request verification of
military service in the appropriate service department.
Requests for service verification are sent to the National
Personnel Record Center for World War II service and the U.S.
Army and the Philippine Service who is the custodian of the
U.S. Army's collection of records.
This concludes my testimony Mr. Chairman. I would be happy
to address any questions you or the other members of the
subcommittee may have.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Flohr can be found in the
Appendix on page 40.]
Dr. Heck. Thank you, Mr. Flohr. And we will complete this
first panel with Mr. Levins.
STATEMENT OF SCOTT LEVINS, DIRECTOR OF THE NATIONAL PERSONNEL
RECORDS CENTER, NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS ADMINISTRATION
Mr. Levins. Good afternoon, Chairman Heck, Ranking Member
Tsongas, and members of the subcommittee. Thank you for calling
this hearing and for your continuing efforts to recognize the
extraordinary contributions of Filipino veterans, including
those who served in guerrilla units, for the service they
provided in support of the United States during World War II.
I am proud to represent the staff of the National Personnel
Records Center, many of whom are veterans themselves. I am
pleased to appear before you today to discuss the work that the
center does to serve those who have served. We appreciate your
interest in this important work.
The NPRC is an office of the National Archives and Records
Administration [NARA] located in multiple facilities in the St.
Louis, Missouri, area. The center stores and services over 4
million cubic feet of military and civilian personnel, medical
and related records dating back to the Spanish-American war.
NPRC holds approximately 16 million official military
personnel files. These holdings also include service treatment
records, clinical records from military medical treatment
facilities, auxiliary records such as pay vouchers and service
name indexes, and organizational records such as morning
reports and unit rosters.
NPRC's military records facility receives approximately
4,000 correspondence requests each day from veterans, their
next-of-kin, various Federal agencies, Members of Congress, the
media, and other stakeholders. Nearly half of these requests
come from veterans seeking a copy of their separation
statement, their DD Form 214 or equivalent, because they need
it to pursue a benefit. The center responds to 90 percent of
those requests in 10 business days or less.
In addition to this correspondence work, the center
normally receives between 5,000 and 10,000 requests each week
from the VA and other Federal agencies requiring the temporary
loan of original records. These requests are normally serviced
in 2 to 3 business days. Also included in these holdings are
claim folders pertaining to Filipino nationals that were
adjudicated by the U.S. Army after World War II, and unit
rosters created by the U.S. Army in conjunction with this
postwar recognition program.
In 1998, NARA entered into an agreement with the Department
of the Army to accept the physical transfer of these records,
though they remain today in the legal custody of the Department
of the Army. Also as part of the agreement, beginning in fiscal
year 1999, NPRC has assumed the responsibility for referencing
these records consistent with procedures previously established
by the Army.
In doing so, NPRC reviews its holdings to authenticate
service determinations previously made by the Department of the
Army. NPRC does this by examining claim folders, finding aids,
and a variety of rosters compiled by the Army during the
postwar recognition program. Most often this is done in
response to requests from the Department of Veterans Affairs
regarding compensation claims. Recognizing the urgency of these
requests, NPRC strives to respond to these requests in 10
business days or less.
The technical instructions applied by NPRC technicians in
referencing these records and responding to such requests, have
been furnished to the American Coalition for Filipino Veterans
and have been posted online for public viewing. The
instructions are consistent with longstanding policies and
practices of the Department of the Army and were applied by
Army staff prior to the transfer of the reference function to
NPRC.
On multiple occasions since the establishment of the
Filipino Veterans Equity Compensation Fund, officials in the
Department of the Army have visited NPRC, reviewed its
technical instructions, examined its work process, and
confirmed that NPRC was providing reference services consistent
with the long established policies and practices of the
Department of the Army.
NARA has also preserved records of historical value,
documenting events that transpired in the Philippines during
and after World War II. Included are records describing actions
taken by the U.S. Army to recognize the service of Filipino
nationals who supported the United States Army Forces in the
Far East, including those who served in the guerrilla units.
These records are available for public review at the National
Archives Building in College Park, Maryland.
NARA is pleased to work with the subcommittee and other
stakeholders to ensure Filipino veterans, including those who
served in recognized guerrilla units, are recognized for their
extraordinary service and support of the United States during
World War II.
We have briefed interested congressional staff and other
stakeholders on NARA's role in the process. We actively
participated in the interagency working group established by
the White House to analyze the process, and we have shared
information with the Filipino veterans advocacy groups to help
provide greater understanding of the reference process.
Working with the Department of the Army, we modified our
response letters to provide more specific details regarding our
reference results in instances where we are unable to
positively authenticate a prior service determination. And at
the suggestion of the White House interagency working group, we
digitized and posted online a report titled ``U.S. Army
Recognition Program of Philippine Guerrillas.'' This report
explains how the recognition process was developed at the close
of World War II.
We again extend our thanks to the subcommittee for
expressing such interest in the role that NPRC provides in this
important process. I am happy to answer any questions you may
have.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Levins can be found in the
Appendix on page 45.]
Dr. Heck. Thank you, Mr. Levins. I thank all of you for
being here today and for providing your testimony. As a prelude
to my questions, I want to show a quick kind of a 2-minute
video that has several points to make about this presentation.
[Video shown.]
Dr. Heck. I ask unanimous consent to include into the
record the video material pertaining to the Department of
Veterans Affairs.
Any objection? Hearing none, so ordered.
[The information referred to is retained in subcommittee
files and can be found at http://www.youtube.com/
watch?v=1zuRM43nu
JUn ]
Dr. Heck. So that video I think is part of the issue and
that--while it is great to have the outreach, that may have
created some misperceptions when you hear that is open to every
World War II Filipino veteran, that it can be applied for very
easily, simple one-page, very simple, don't attach any
information. We will call you if we need anything else. And
then we see a lot of, or a fair number of denied claims that
seem to keep coming back for appeal or those that just simply
gave up.
NPRC documents provided to me by my constituents state that
in order to establish service, the veteran's name must appear
in the archives, and claim folders must contain compatible
information. So can you tell me or define or outline what
compatible information is acceptable?
Mic?
Mr. Levins. I think I turned it off instead of on, I am
sorry about that. I can give you an overview of how the process
works. And first, let me note that the standard operating
procedures are online and available to the public. It included
a lot of nuances that I won't cover in my verbal overview.
When a request comes in, we enter it into a tracking system
and we digitize it. The request comes in from the VA, and then
we assigned it to a small team of technicians. Because the
volume of work that we received that relates to Philippine Army
veterans is so small relative to the rest of the volume of work
that we get, and because the holdings are specialized, they are
different than a typical military personnel folder, and the
process we follow is different than what we do to pull a
typical military personnel folder and extract that DD-214, we
assigned these cases to a specifically small group of people
who are especially trained to work on them.
One of the staff members--a woman named Connie Tauzer, who
has been doing this work for decades, and actually did it with
the Department of the Army, and was transferred to the National
Archives and Records Administration at the time the records and
the function was transferred to us.
The first step in the process is to locate a claim folder.
And it requires someone to physically go into a stock area
where there are about 10,000 boxes of records of claim folders
that were submitted by Filipino nationals to the Army during
the recognition process, and they are arranged alphabetically.
And so, the person will have to go out and try to
alphabetically find the responsive record. When they do that,
they will consider multiple ultimate spellings of the name,
phonetics spellings, recognizing that the name Felipe could
have been spelled with an F or P. And eventually, they will
exhaust their efforts to find a claim folder. Once they find
the claim folder, when they review its contents, what they are
looking for is what is called the Form 23, which is an
affidavit that was submitted by the Filipino national at the
time of the recognition program.
The next thing they are going to do is then attempt to find
a roster, and to do that, what they will do is to go to a
finding aid. Finding aids are cabinets full of index cards. And
they will--again, they are arranged alphabetically. They will
try to find the corresponding index card, and that will direct
them to a specific number unit roster. Then they will go and
retrieve that unit roster. And they will compare the unit
roster with the Form 23.
The unit roster is a list of names and ranks and units. But
back then, there were no Social Security numbers or service
numbers assigned. So you have to compare the Form 23 to make
sure that it is consistent with what is on the roster, and the
roster is the definitive source. If those two pieces of
information match, they extract information, furnish documents
to the VA, and they use that to adjudicate the claim.
Dr. Heck. So then the claim that they have has to be both
on a roster and have that piece of paper in the folder--is what
is required to be certified?
Mr. Levins. Yes. Yes, sir.
Dr. Heck. So I would----
Mr. Levins. And--I am sorry to interrupt you. That process
is for guerrillas. For members of the Philippine Army, it is
identical to that, except the procedures allow us, for members
of the Philippine Army to consider--if they are not on a
roster, to consider some secondary information that might also
be in that claim folder.
Dr. Heck. Okay. So an AGO Form 23 is the acceptable
document to demonstrate proof of service?
Mr. Levins. Not on its own.
Dr. Heck. No, but that is the document that has to match
with a roster?
Mr. Levins. Yes.
Dr. Heck. Or some other document if it is a regular Army
not a guerrilla?
Mr. Levins. Right.
Dr. Heck. Okay. So I mean, is it possible that back in 1948
when hostilities concluded and everything was drawing down,
that somebody didn't make it onto a roster, but they still have
an AGO Form 23? And so, what is the mechanism by which an
individual who may not be on the roster, but has an AGO Form
23, can apply and be approved for services, is that--there is
no option for that individual, because they are not on a roster
that was constructed back in 1948?
Mr. Levins. In the case of guerrillas, that would be the
case. What you could do is there are historical records at the
National Archives in College Park that could be researched if
you are trying to figure out why you were not recognized.
I had an opportunity yesterday to actually look at some of
those records. And I looked at a case where someone had written
into our center on multiple occasions. And we had not been able
to authenticate the service. And when I went back to the
Archive Records in College Park, I was able to find the history
that shows that they were in the unit they said they were in.
But it was a very deliberate decision by the Army to exclude
two companies from that unit from official recognition. There
were multiple letters appealing to the Army to reconsider its
decision, and there were multiple responses indicating that
this was a very deliberate decision that was not an oversight;
this was back in the late 1940s or early 1950s time period.
Dr. Heck. So despite any other verifiable information they
may have, particularly in AGO Form 23, and this is the one form
one of my constituents who has been re-denied and also denied
on appeal, because the name doesn't appear on a roster, as the
guerrilla roster, they will not be eligible for compensation?
Mr. Levins. In the case of guerrillas, that is correct. We
have, like I said, nearly 10,000 cubic feet of people who
stepped forward and submitted those Form 23s, and a lot of
those folks are not on rosters.
Dr. Heck. Okay. I will perhaps come back on a second round.
But I will yield back and recognize Ms. Tsongas.
Ms. Tsongas. Thank you. As we will hear in our subsequent
panelists and as Congressman Heck is beginning to get at, the
issue of service verification really seems to be the main issue
at hand. And more specifically, it seems that much of the
disagreement hinges on the question of which service records
are currently required for positive determination of service
versus which documents could be used and considered acceptable.
So, General MacEwen, a question I have for you is, in your
testimony, you note that the Army maintained ``complete
confidence'' in the records and files it compiled in 1948. What
gives the Army such certainty that its records from nearly 70
years ago are the best and most accurate determination of
qualifying Filipino service possibility? And if the best, why
is it not--why are they not necessarily not the only? And isn't
it possible that individuals who served honorably under U.S.
command did not make it onto approve rosters? And as we hear
the sort of nature of the record keeping, given that it is as
old as it is, as rudimentary in its way as it is, given sort of
modern techniques, I just would like to hear your testimony as
to why you are so certain that this should be the primary if
not the only route to verification of service?
General MacEwen. Yes, ma'am, thank you--thank you for that
question. The process that they went through in 1942 to 1948
was a very deliberate process, a sophisticated process, field
work done, lots of public work with the people of the
Philippines and there were decisions made, and that is the
reason these records were classified originally.
These files were classified ``Secret/No Foreign'' at the
time. They were declassified about 20 years ago, but--or about
20 years ago. But they were classified for a purpose, because
there was all kinds of information in those files that got to
the entire service, because it wasn't just the time in service
that the requirement was when we started with this verification
and determination process between 1942 and 1948.
It had a number of different parts to it. Not only that it
had a time period, but it also had a participation period.
There were--I mean, 1.2 million claims during the 1940s for
verification--determination of qualifying service, but only
260,000 of those were deemed to be qualifying service based on
this very deliberate process.
So it is that deliberative process that they have made and
documented so clearly is the reason that I have confidence that
I--we couldn't do it any better under the rules that were
established by the Congress in the 1940s of what qualifying
service was.
Ms. Tsongas. Did the rules that you applied in the 1940s
that are the challenge here or because I still--we will hear
from a subsequent panelist that did not appear in the list that
you have put together. And yet, it is very clear from the
records that he has been able to provide, that he did actually
serve.
So I am just--so as a result, you know, for whatever
reason, if he didn't make it onto the list back in the 1940s,
why he should automatically be ruled out given that
subsequently he was able to show his service?
General MacEwen. Yes, ma'am. The name on the roster means
that that person, their documents were scrutinized, verified
and authenticated at the time. And that was--that is a decision
that I can't see where I could go back and see under those same
criteria that were in place in 1942, that I can't second-guess
their view.
Ms. Tsongas. All right. Another question, is there a
process in place for people who did not hear, perhaps didn't
see the public announcement that this was available to them, as
they come forward, they learned post 2010 about this? Is there
any process in place for those people?
Mr. Flohr. Ranking Member Tsongas, unfortunately there is
not. The statute limited that time period to a 1-year period
ending in February of 2010. We are talking a lot here about
guerrilla service and being unable to verify that. You know, VA
has granted a number, thousands and thousands of claims from
Philippine veterans, they were eligible Commonwealth Army and
guerrillas were eligible for disability compensation for
injuries incurred while they were on active duty. And their
surviving spouses were eligible for death benefits if they died
of a service connected disability or while on active duty.
So we don't have an issue with verifying that type of
service, because this has always been verified. Because we have
got that information, we had verified service and we granted
benefits to--as I said thousands of Philippine veterans.
It is only the cases of the guerrillas that have not come
forward or have not been found to be a guerrilla on a
reconstructed roster. I can tell you there is an issue with the
way the names may have been recorded. We have several hundred,
a number of hundreds of appeals of denials for this benefit.
And as of May of last year, we have granted about 450
appeals we had overturned because we found that the individual
served under a slightly different name. Served with the middle
name or did not serve with the middle name, and once we got
that information, we provided it to NPRC. They were able to
verify that person's eligibility. And then we granted the
benefits immediately.
So it is really as General MacEwen said, there is a lot
about going backwards. And right now, it would be very
difficult to go back and find unfortunately a number of these
individuals.
Ms. Tsongas. Thank you. My time is up.
Dr. Heck. So I guess, following up on Ms. Tsongas's line of
questioning, I guess, you know, it certainly is possible that
individuals who served honorably in a recognized guerrilla unit
may have been omitted from the reconstructed roster for several
reasons, it would appear. Some is that perhaps the service
wasn't determined to be valid service, some maybe that they
just didn't show up to get their name put on the roster for
whatever reason. They just, you know, missed the time when the
rosters were reconstructed, and their name didn't show up on it
for whatever reason.
So in that regard, and I think Mr. Levins, you mentioned
that if they were able to find some other type of documentation
of service whether it was, you know, in the National Archives
in College Park, that showed them participating in a unit that
was recognized, that somehow they would then be eligible for
the benefit, is that correct?
Mr. Levins. Did I turn it off? I am not aware of that ever
happening before. Yesterday, it was the first time I laid eyes
on those materials at College Park. And what they showed me was
a historical accounting of the effort that the Army only went
through during this recognition program. And that that would be
a good source to go to if you were looking for a legitimate
reason as to why your unit may have been excluded.
I have never been to the Philippines, and I wasn't born
until 25 years after the war. So I don't consider myself an
expert at this. But in preparation for this hearing, I read a
lot of the historical documents about the Army effort. And
there were--there is--MacArthur had five points that
established the criteria for units to be recognized.
And those five points, they dealt with things like they had
to be organized in a specific manner that was similar to a U.S.
Army unit or to a Philippine Army unit. There had to be record
keeping. It had to be a full-time commitment, not a part-time.
So the impression I got from reviewing those materials is that
there are probably a number of people who supported the United
States in some way or another, but fell short of the threshold
to have their service recognized by the Department of----
Dr. Heck. It kind of segues into my next question. So I am
looking at an AGO 23 now. And on it there are kind of three
categories of service. There is a USAP Regular or Reservist,
USAP Guerrilla, and then Civilian Guerrilla. Can you address
the issue of a Civilian Guerrilla, and whatnot as a category?
Those individuals are eligible for the benefit or would they
not as a category be eligible, because it was a part-time--
perhaps a part-time service and not a recognized force?
General MacEwen. Sir, I don't--I don't know the answer. I
will take that for the record. I can tell you though, that this
whole thing about--I mean, there were thousands and thousands
of people fighting alongside us, and as well as just fighting
for their own country. They just unfortunately weren't eligible
under the criteria that were established, you know, under the
command of MacArthur and all those--the rest of those five
things.
[The information referred to can be found in the Appendix
on page 91.]
Dr. Heck. Thank you. I will yield back the balance of my
time. And we now will go to Ms. Duckworth.
Ms. Duckworth. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I--well, I would
like to start off by recognizing Major General Taguba, who is
here in the audience. And thank you for your many, many years
of dedicated service, not just to this country, but your
leadership on this issue.
I am absolutely astounded, gentlemen. These men are dying.
These men did not wait when the United States asked for help.
They stepped forward immediately and volunteered to serve. Why
are we making them wait 70 years?
Mr. Flohr, I am sorry, is that how you pronounce your name?
Thank you. What is the backlog? What is the total number of
claims that are pending right now waiting to be approved or
having a decision?
Mr. Flohr. Are you asking about backlog itself or the total
number of claims pending?
Ms. Duckworth. The total numbers of claims pending from
Filipino veterans or veterans trying to access this
compensation.
Mr. Flohr. Ma'am, I am not aware of--as I have said in my
statement, we have completed all original applications.
Ms. Duckworth. Okay. How many are on appeal?
Mr. Flohr. There are 19 reopened claims that, as they have
been able to furnish additional evidence, that we are looking
at. And there were 31 on appeal in the Veterans Benefits
Administration, 48 of the Board of Veterans Appeals and 16 at
the court.
Ms. Duckworth. How many have been denied?
Mr. Flohr. 23,000-plus.
Ms. Duckworth. 23,000-plus, okay. Mr. Levins, do you know
how many are waiting to be looked at that have that Form 23,
but have not--we have not found the piece of paper or maybe it
is a rock that somebody has chiseled in this information into
one of these--I mean, archaic doesn't even begin to describe
the process that you are explaining to me. But how many are
stuck in this limbo where we are still trying to marry up the
two different--the Form 23 and the whatever records there are?
Mr. Levins. There are very few pending with us. We--this
morning I called in to the office and I think the number
wasn't--was 40 something, and they dated back from like mid-
June. We recognize the urgency of this request. And we are
trying to respond as quickly as we can. And year to date, this
fiscal year, I think our response time is like 8\1/2\ business
days, we get the information back to the VA.
Ms. Duckworth. Okay. So there is $50 million in the
account, and we are quibbling with these men, less than 200 men
probably, who have been denied, who are on appeal, waiting for
them to die so this goes away. And we are quibbling over--
what--$1.5 million if they were all approved, is that what we
said it was going to be Mr. Flohr--if they are all approved?
Mr. Flohr. The estimate is approximately $1.7 million, yes.
Ms. Duckworth [continuing]. $1.7 million; there is $50
million in the account, there is $1.7 million, and we are
quibbling with them over this. And we are just basically
dragging our--we are just waiting for them to die, which is
unconscionable, because they were not waiting for Americans to
die before they came forward to help.
And General MacEwen, I understand what you are saying about
the record keeping and the very clear directive from General
MacArthur. But we have to also remember that the United States
Army and the United States itself at that time had some racist
tendencies. And that some of those decisions may have been not
necessarily based on the actual facts of how these men served.
We had our own Senator, a great Senator, Daniel Inouye had his
Medal of Honor downgraded to a Silver Star simply because of
his race. And he was not the only one. And the Asian-Americans
have seen this time and time again.
I have also seen it in Iraq many instances, and I deal with
this in my own congressional service of veterans coming forward
who have not had records kept on their service who are trying
to get a Combat Action Badge [CAB]. In fact the members of my
own crew who were blown up with me, two of them did not get a
Combat Action Badge because they said they were told there was
no proof. Yet, they were in the same aircraft with me. And I
had to intervene in order to get them their CABs.
So let's not talk about how great the Army's record keeping
is because as best as the Army does, we all understand what
happens in a wartime situation. I just think it is ridiculous
that we just don't approve these, get these men their
compensation and then audit. We are punishing the majority of
folks because we think that some of them are cheaters. I am
sure there are cheaters out there. But we should go after the
cheaters through an audit process. I don't understand why we
don't just approve it, thank them for their great service, in
addition to their nation, but for the great nation--for the
United States, as well. And I am sure that the Americans whose
lives they saved would want that to happen. I yield back, Mr.
Chairman.
Dr. Heck. Thanks, Ms. Duckworth. You know, just quick, of
the initial claims that were denied, do you know how many, what
percentage were then approved on appeal?
Mr. Flohr. Yes, sir, Mr. Chairman; approximately 10
percent, 150-plus as of May of last year. I don't believe there
would be much more than that. I don't have that number as of
today. But there are only 31 still pending in the VA.
Dr. Heck. Okay. Thank you. And I want to echo, you know,
Ms. Duckworth's comment is that, I understand the record
keeping, and I understand everything that was tried to be done
back in 1942 to 1948 with the reconstructing rosters. But it
would seem that if somebody comes in with an AGO 23, that has
got a stamp on it, you know, stamped by the U.S. Government
certifying they have served, that it should be the document
that qualifies the individual for service. And we have a piece
of legislation that is trying to do that. And we are going to
see if we can continue to push that. I know that will make it
much easier for you, General. I understand you are just
interpreting the law and the regulations as they are written.
And we have got to take the steps necessary to open up that
pathway for more Filipino veterans.
Ms. Gabbard.
Ms. Gabbard. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I too would
just like to recognize my colleague Ms. Duckworth, and echo her
comments about really understanding that this piddling over
details when we are talking about constituents of ours,
veterans who are here today, who are literally dying as they
are waiting for the bureaucracy to recognize their service
after decades and decades of waiting.
The other issue I think that we need to address is this
one-stop opportunity of saying that you have until this date,
and that is it, and then the door is closed to you when clearly
there are still many more issues that need to be dealt with and
recognized in verifying and recognizing their service, and for
those who maybe didn't get the message or who were not able to
put their claims in before that 2010 date. And again, the
resources are there, they have been allocated to be able to
recognize them.
I have a question about how helpful the Philippine Army
documents have been in being able to successfully turn around
some of the appeals or some of these claims in verifying
records of service or whoever would like to take that question?
Mr. Flohr. Thank you, Congresswoman. I think I stated
earlier, it was because something like 450 appeals had been
granted on further review when we were able to contact the
individual, the veteran, and find out that they had served
under a slightly different name. And when we sent, we are able
to use the name that they had served under which was somewhat
like I said, they used their middle name, which they don't use
now. And we were--just to be able to send that to NPRC, they
were able to then find the individual on the roster as a
recognized guerrilla, and we immediately granted that benefit.
Ms. Gabbard. And those 450 overturned claims, that was
because the veteran had appealed after they had been rejected?
Mr. Flohr. Yes.
Ms. Gabbard. So you have 24,977 applications that have been
disapproved which is a few--what--6,000 more than have been
approved. Has your organization gone through, yourselves, at
those that are disapproved to see what other veterans who may
not have filed an appeal will face the same situation where it
may be a slightly different name, which is basically a clerical
error?
Mr. Flohr. I can't say that we have. The numbers that have
been denied, as I said in my opening statement, many of those
were from children, and grandchildren, and uncles and aunts,
and deceased, you know, survivors of deceased veterans, and
they are not entitled under the law to that benefit. And we
have duplicates, many, many thousands of duplicate claims
filed.
Ms. Gabbard. Do you know what percentage----
Mr. Flohr. That all goes into that 23,000.
Ms. Gabbard. What percentage of those disapproved claims
were from family members versus the veteran themselves?
Mr. Flohr. I am sorry, I don't have that number. But, you
know, it has been a large number. But the efforts to get the
word out, like John Skelly did on that video, regional office
personnel in Manila, from the day the law was passed, they
started going out to all the provinces, there are like a
thousand islands that make up the Philippine Islands. They went
out to all of the provinces, they partnered with the Philippine
Veterans Affairs Office, they held intake--they took claims on
the islands that they visited, they had them come to--they went
to Memorial Hospital, VA Memorial Hospital, took claims from
patients there at the hospital. They did all--they did outreach
up until the last day of the filing period that ended. So there
may be some that didn't hear about it. But I think they did
pretty much all of the outreach they could have done.
Ms. Gabbard. And I think there are also many Filipino
veterans who are not residing in the Philippines, which is a
point that needs to be recognized. And to do justice for these
veterans, for clerical errors which they had no part in, it
seems the least you could do is to go back and review their
applications, which are disapproved through no error of their
own, to correct them and not sit around and wait for them to
file those appeals. I yield back.
Dr. Heck. Mr. Flohr, if you could take that question for
the record, percentage of the denials that were the family
members versus the veterans themselves?
Mr. Flohr. Yes, sir.
[The information referred to can be found in the Appendix
on page 91.]
Dr. Heck. Thank you. We will now recognize Ms. Speier.
Ms. Speier. Mr. Chairman, thank you. This issue to me is
more than, than vexing. We make mistakes as a government from
time to time. Ones we deeply regret. I would hope that one of
the mistakes that we deeply regret is telling the Filipinos who
served with us in World War II that they would be treated like
veterans at the end of their service, and then rescinding that
promise after the war, would be something we would regret, and
if so, we would want to fix. It is the only group of nationals,
of many groups of nationals that served with us across the
world, that were given that pledge that then had it reneged on.
And that is pretty shameful. So for us to now go through this
process where we are only talking about giving $15,000 in
benefits or $9,000 of benefits.
And basically of all those who have applied only 20 percent
have actually been approved, which would suggest that 80
percent of the applications were by people who were lying, who
were just trying to rip off the American government. I mean, I
find that pretty preposterous that we would have that kind of
presumption. And to Ms. Duckworth's point of presuming they are
truthful until proven otherwise, would seem to make a lot of
sense.
Now one of the complicating factors is that there was fire
that burned a lot of records. And we somehow just disregard
that and presume like it didn't happen I guess. But the truth
is many of those Filipino Scouts were probably on that list and
there is this sense of well we think we've kind of recreated
it.
So I am really troubled by this, this really I think,
embarrassing process that we are going through where we've got
boxes of records that we are flipping through and trying to see
if we can somehow identify people and then going through index
cards. I mean it is pretty laughable at this point when if you
go back to the original supposition it was that they were going
to get full veterans benefits and then we reneged on that.
So shouldn't we be erring on the side of providing the
benefit to the few remaining Filipino vets that are alive? I
mean we already know the numbers are really reduced. So my
question is, can you administratively reopen the application
time period without legislation?
Mr. Flohr. Ma'am, I do not believe so. Not without
legislation, no.
Ms. Speier. So you couldn't by regulation do that?
Mr. Flohr. No.
Ms. Speier. In the statute itself?
Mr. Flohr. It is in the statute, yes.
Ms. Speier. All right. According to the VA some records for
the New Philippine Scouts were damaged or destroyed in the
fire. However, in most instances the service department can
verify New Filipino Scout servicing using alternative methods--
that is a quote from the VA. So the presumption is even though
these records were burned, we can pretty much figure out who
they were even though the records were burned.
So I am kind of confused by it. How many individuals does
this impact and how did you make the assessment given that the
documents were destroyed?
Mr. Levins. I think that statement came from the VA, but I
would like to clarify a little bit about the fire and the
impact. Last fiscal year we were seeing about 2,500 requests
related to service in the Philippine Army or as a guerrilla or
as a Scout.
The majority of those were guerrillas or else people
claiming to have served in the Philippine Army; a very, very
small number were Scouts. If you were in the Philippine Scouts
you were actually inducted into the regular army and you would
have had a military personnel record just like any other member
of the army.
And that is why if you were in the Scouts your records
would have been stored among the records of World War II
service men and could have been damaged or lost in that fire.
As far as the collection of the guerrilla rosters and the claim
folders that I have been speaking about, those were not
impacted by the fire.
Ms. Speier. So what is the harm done at this point in
granting these pending applications and having a claw-back
opportunity, if in fact it is determined that they are not
legitimate?
Mr. Flohr. Congresswoman, we are--unfortunately we are--
saying unfortunately--we are subject to laws and regulations
that describe and direct how we process claims. If a veteran
from World War II who served in Europe, an American veteran who
now came forward--and they are still living of course--veterans
come forward at this time and file a claim for anything--a
disability that they incurred, say they incurred in World War
II, and we have never received anything from that veteran in
the past, we would have to go through the same process we are
going with this. And so we have to contact NPRC if we didn't
have a DD-214 or they didn't provide, a veteran could not
provide one to verify the service.
Everything starts with service verification. In order to
receive benefits you have to have verified military service.
Ms. Speier. Well, I know but let's be--my time is up, Mr.
Chairman and I will--if you are going to do a second round, I
will ask questions on the second round.
Dr. Heck. We're going to have time for second round--on
this panel because we have the second panel. We have votes
again at 4:40. So I think with Ms. Tsongas, did you have one?
Okay, all right, Ms. Bordallo, yes.
Ms. Bordallo. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman for calling
this hearing. And frankly I am disheartened and embarrassed by
what I am learning today. I am from Guam so, ``mabuhay.'' And I
salute all of the veterans, and I know there has to be a few
veterans in the audience today.
And most of my constituents on Guam are Filipinos. We went
through World War II, one of my first pieces of legislation to
be introduced into Congress was the war claims for our people.
People from the commonwealth of the Northern Marianas received
claims; we never received any claims for what we went through,
and we were occupied just as the Philippines for 4\1/2\ or
about 4 years by the Japanese.
It is going through the House, the bill, and approved five
times but just last week again, it was denied by the Senate,
even though I found an offset for these claims. So I know what
you are going through and frankly, I am shocked. I really am.
I thought we did--I was part of the legislation that gave
benefits to the Filipino veterans, health benefits, and so
forth. But I didn't know that all of this existed. Now from
what I hear 2 million claimants in--is that true that you
started out with as many as 2 million? I thought I heard that
here.
General MacEwen. Ma'am, when we did the original
verification--it was 1.2 million.
Ms. Bordallo. 1.2 million, all right. And thousands and
thousands were denied. And I go along with Congressman
Duckworth here, how many are alive? I don't have many veterans
left in Guam you know, now; I mean they are in their 80s and 90
years old. Now I am suggesting in fact with your records how
many of those original claimants are still alive? You have
those figures?
Mr. Levins. No, we would have no way of knowing.
Ms. Bordallo. No, we have no way of knowing. Well, I am
sure that many of them are gone. Now I am suggesting that we
have to go through legislation again to renew this because
your--you said it is--time is running out, is that correct?
When is the last?
Mr. Flohr. Congresswoman, the period ended in February of
2010.
Ms. Bordallo. Oh my, okay. So we probably will have to go,
and I am suggesting that for all of those who originally
claimed and have died, that perhaps this small amount of
$15,000 or $8,000 could be given to at least one survivor. And
we can legislate this to use up this money that is sitting in
this account. And right now if you took care of all the
claimants what, it would only come to about $1 million or $2
million, is that correct? And you--it is $50 million in the
account?
Mr. Flohr. Yes, ma'am. And if a veteran filed an
application for this benefit and before it was--a decision was
made and it was granted, died, if he had a surviving spouse,
she would be eligible for the----
Ms. Bordallo. That is part--well I suggest we go back and
take a look. And certainly those survivors are still there,
aren't they?
Mr. Flohr. Well, I am sure that they are. And the veteran,
on his application would have indicated he was married and we
would have reached out to his surviving spouse and made that
payment.
Ms. Bordallo. Well, Mr. Chairman, I am just, you know, I
have been through this now for 12 years here in the Congress,
trying to work for the people on Guam. And incidentally, we
have a number of Philippine Scouts on Guam. Most of them have
passed on.
So, this is truly sad. And I think we ought to look and
maybe open this up again, if there is money there, and continue
to work on trying to find the few that are left, and perhaps,
give some kind of compensation to the survivors to appease the
Filipino people.
I think this is truly--I am embarrassed and I just think it
is wrong. They were there; they fought with us, many of them
died. And we promised and we haven't held out on that.
So, Mr. Chairman, with that, I yield back.
Dr. Heck. Thank you, Ms. Bordallo. Thank you for taking the
time to participate in today's hearing.
All right, gentlemen, we appreciate your testimony,
realizing that you are just the messenger and that you are
interpreting the regulations and the law as it was written. And
it is incumbent upon us to make the necessary changes to be
able to continue to try to expand the benefit--to get to those
that rightfully deserve.
So again, thank you for your service and thank you for
being here today. And thank you for your testimony.
So what we will do now is we kind--we will move into the
second panel. And as we are flipping the panels, I will
introduce the next set of witnesses. We have Mr. Celestino
Almeda, who is a 97-year-old Filipino-American World War II
veteran and an SVEC claimant. Mr. Jesse Baltazar, who is also a
Filipino Veterans Equity Compensation Fund claimant. And Mr.
Eric Lachica who is the son of a Filipino-American veteran and
serves as the executive director of the American Coalition for
Filipino Veterans Incorporated. As well, we have other
distinguished Filipino veterans in the audience with us today.
And I thank you, gentlemen, for being here.
We will hear a testimony from the witnesses in the order
that I just named them. Mr. Almeda, whenever you are ready, you
may begin.
STATEMENT OF CELESTINO ALMEDA, FILIPINO VETERANS EQUITY
COMPENSATION FUND CLAIMANT
Mr. Almeda. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of
this committee. My name is Celestino Almeda, a 97-year-old
Filipino-American World War II veteran. I am the spokesman of
the American Coalition for Philippine Veterans advocacy
national organization. I reside in Gaithersburg, Maryland.
I have walked the halls of Congress together with a few
dedicated veterans and volunteers over the past 15 years. We
seek justice, honor, recognition, and equitable benefits for my
comrades and their dependents.
In the years past, we had joined Senators Daniel Inouye,
Daniel Akaka, as well as Congress Members Ben Gilman, Bob
Filner, Mike Honda, Darrell Issa, and Nancy Pelosi in countless
hearings to pass several bills.
In addition, we had been arrested in front of the White
House to get the attention of George W. Bush. Pictures
presented when we were chained at the fence of the White House.
Thus, it is my honor to testify before this committee on
the eligibility problems my comrades and I faced when we
applied for Filipino Veterans Equity Compensation benefits.
Allow me to use my case as an unfortunate example.
The VA Department and the U.S. Army had repeatedly denied
my requests for official recognition and my application for the
Filipino Veterans Equity $15,000 veteran's benefit in minimal
amount.
Allow me to tell my story. I was a vocational industrial
arts instructor in a high school in the Philippines before the
World War II. The Philippines was then a commonwealth territory
of the United States. I was a national--a U.S. national who
pledged allegiance to America.
In anticipation of hostilities with Imperial Japan,
President Franklin Roosevelt ordered on July 26, 1941, the
Philippine Commonwealth Army into the service of the Armed
Forces of the United States, later named USAFFE, or U.S. Armed
Forces in the Far East.
When the war was started, I was a ROTC graduate and in a
Reserve Officer Training Corps. Thus, I was inducted into the
active duty in December 1941, in the Anti-Sabotage Regiment in
the Philippine Commonwealth Army Forces.
After the fall of Bataan and Corregidor, I joined the
Filipino guerrillas. When the war was about to end, I reported
for processing at Camp Murphy, now Camp Aguinaldo, and was
mustered and given my discharge papers by the U.S.-Philippine
Commonwealth Army personnel on April 2, 1945, with AS number 0-
34642 by U.S. Army Lieutenant John B. Staples, summary court
officer.
Later, I returned to military control and was assigned to
the Construction Corps of the Philippines, a U.S. Army Engineer
Corps. I had meticulously kept service records of my USAFFE,
Philippine Army Special Orders in 1941, 1942, and 1945 from my
Philippine Army and American officers with payment records from
the Philippine Commonwealth Army Headquarters.
Let me show you a portion of my records. They are brown in
color, crispy to be broken upon handling. I used these
documents as evidence when I applied for U.S. naturalization
based on my USAFFE military service under the 1990 Immigration
Law.
This is my first U.S. passport issued in Manila in 1996.
And with the same record, I got my universal access card to the
VA hospital; this is my access card.
To make it short, I contested this NPRC decision with the
help of a prominent immigration lawyer in Los Angeles and
USAFFE documents I had. After appealing, as I have said, I was
granted citizenship. In 2003, after George W. Bush signed the
healthcare for Filipino veterans, I applied for VAI hospital
identification card--that I have shown already my international
card.
Incredibly, despite this crucial U.S. Army personnel
account provided by the NPRC, the VA Board of Appeal decided on
February 27, 2013, to deny my FVEC application based on a
faulty legal opinion of their VA general counsel.
I have elevated my disagreement with the VA to the U.S.
Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. I am waiting for a
decision up to now. I truly believe I have satisfied the
provision of the law by filing my claim within 1-year period
from the enactment of the law. I have complied with all the
requirements for payment that are documents were issued by U.S.
military department and contained the needed information as to
length, time, and character of service and my documents are
genuine and contain accurate information.
I have submitted to the VA the following key documents
about my service: USAFFE Adjutant General Office Form 23,
affidavit for military personnel, signed by American officer
Lieutenant John Staples, dated April 2, 1946; officers and
warrant officers qualification card from my file; U.S.
Department Form 336 Revised--Revised Pay and Allowance Account;
affidavit from my USAFFE comrades, who attested to my service;
and U.S. Armed Forces Recovered Personnel Division (PHILRYCOM)
document of my missing person status and USAFFE service by NPRC
on March 19, 2012.
In closing, I stand to challenge any government agency or
private institution with expertise regarding this matter to
declare my documents fraudulent and I am ready to be punished
to the full extent of the law.
I look forward to answering your questions. Forgive me if I
cannot hear you well. I am not as young as I want to be.
Mr. Chairman, thank you again for your opportunity before
your committee. In addition, personally, I will directly say
that NPRC is not a service department. And there is no contract
between the Army and the NPRC, but the records are from a
service department.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Almeda can be found in the
Appendix on page 49.]
Dr. Heck. Thank you, Mr. Almeda. Thank you. Now, hear from
Mr. Baltazar.
Mr. Baltazar, you have 5 minutes, if you can, to keep your
statement.
STATEMENT OF JESSE BALTAZAR, FILIPINO VETERANS EQUITY
COMPENSATION FUND CLAIMANT
Mr. Baltazar. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and the members
of the committee. My name is Jesse Baltazar. I am 93 years old,
American World War II veteran of Korea and Vietnam. I am a
member of the American Coalition of Filipino Veterans advocacy
national organization, where Mr. Lachica is the chairman.
On behalf of my comrade here, I am here today--may I thank
you for asking me to be here today and recommend solutions to
these eligibility problems of other thousands of surviving
Filipino World War II veterans.
I am here to support my friend, Celestino Almeda in his
fight for the original recognition for the U.S.--United States
Army and the VA. I have known Mr. Almeda for the past decade
and worked with him in several veterans association.
Even these days, thousands of Filipino veterans who served
in Bataan like him are still fighting for his rights and for
the benefits for the $15,000 veteran's benefits. I was an
exception because I kept all the records, my original records
in my possession, needed to satisfy the entitlement for those
benefits.
This is an injustice, Mr. Chairman. Even President Truman,
in his letter to the president of the Senate and the Speaker of
the House in November--in May 15--May 18, 1945, stated the
records of the Philippine soldiers for bravery and loyalty is
second to none. And that there can be no question that what the
Philippine veterans is entitled to benefits to very reasonable
relation to those recovered--received by the American veterans
with whom he fought side by side.
First, I would like to introduce myself. I am a retired Air
Force major. I was born in Manila, Philippines. I began my
career in 1941 when I was inducted in the United States of the
Armed Forces in the Far East, USAFFE as we call it.
I was a POW [prisoner of war] and a survivor of the
infamous Bataan Death March. After the war, I came to the
United States to continue my military career. Upon arrival in
San Francisco in 1946, I re-enlisted in the Army. I was the
first and only U.S. inductee on record who did this.
In 1945, I was commissioned as a Second Lieutenant in the
United States Air Forces being--I served in the United Air
Force for 20 years assigned primarily overseas with the Office
of Special Investigations of the United States Air Force. I
served as a Russian interrogator in Korea, and Berlin, Germany.
After each--after which--after retirement from the
military, I worked in the State Department starting in 1966 and
continuing to the present time. I am still considered the
oldest employee of the State Department. I began in Vietnam as
a deputy provincial advisor in Region IV and currently, as a--
currently, my job as a construction security commissioned in
the State Department.
I graduated from Georgetown University in 1955 with a B.S.
degree in languages and linguistics. In 1979, I received my
Masters in education from the University of Virginia.
I fought in the battle of Bataan in 1942. I became a
prisoner of war of the Japanese when the Americans surrendered
in April 9, 1942. I was wounded and injured during combat. I
survived the Death March. When I escaped with Filipino
fishermen who smuggled me and a comrade in the middle of the
night through infested swamps of Bataan.
I was determined to do whatever it took to survive
individually. The thought of not surviving never occurred to me
even in Korea or Vietnam, even with that bomb that went off in
our company.
I am one of the few 80,000 Filipinos who walked in the
infamous Bataan Death March in April 1942. Of this number,
25,000 men, women, and children lost their lives. We suffered
brutal and inhumane treatment from the Japanese soldiers aside
from the malnutrition, dysentery, malaria, beriberi, and
exhaustion. We were fed only a cup of boiled rice with a few
flakes of salmon each day. Then, we laid down on the filthy
bare ground of the compound at the mercy of the mosquitoes,
scorpions, leeches, ants, and crickets.
Over 100,000 Filipinos of the Commonwealth of the Army
fought alongside the other allies to reclaim the Philippine
Islands from Japan in the name of democracy. We served as
courageously as our counterparts during the Pacific War.
Our contribution helped to disrupt the initial offensive
timetable in 1942 at--for 90 days, Philippine Army and American
soldiers, despite shortage of food, lack of ammunition,
obsolete and malfunctioning military hardware, and hostile
jungle terrain, had battled the well-equipped invading Japanese
Army.
Without the assistance of the Filipinos units, liberation
of the Philippines would have taken much longer and with
greater casualties of the United States.
We suffered brutal and inhumane treatment from the Japanese
soldiers, aside from the malnutrition again and the different
diseases. We were all--I lost my brother--my older brother and
my younger brother when they fought the Japanese. My two sons,
Melchior and Thomas, are here. Thomas is a former U.S. Army
Officer and my son, Melchior, a U.S. Navy Seal.
For my World War II service in the Philippines Army
soldier, I was awarded the $15,000 Filipino Veterans Equity
Compensation in April 19--2010. However, that was not easy. I
was initially denied when the Department of Veterans Affairs,
when they said the NPRC did not have any records in their
possessions.
It was only after I found the following records in my
possession to these days. One, the Philippine Army Discharge
Certificate dated 24 May 1946; two, Army of the United States
Discharge Certificate dated 12 December 1946; three, Report of
Medical Examination dated 23 February 1966; Verification of
Military Retiree in Service Non-Wartime Campaigns and
Expeditions dated 27 March 1975.
Mr. Chairman, I respectfully request that the VA Secretary
should recognize the deserving claimants of the 4,500 remaining
who have appealed to the VA denials of officials as they show
or one of them my comrade here, Mr. Almeda.
Philippine Commonwealth Army, authentic discharge military
papers as certified by the Philippine Government Veterans
Affairs Administration or Adjutant General's Office. Filipino
guerrillas whose names are on the recognized roster agreed by
the U.S. Army and provide proof of their identity as certified
by the Philippine Government Veterans Affairs Administration or
Adjutant General's Office. Have no significant information,
questioning their loyalty--their loyalty during World War II.
Dr. Heck. Mr. Baltazar, I have to ask you to try to close
up if you can, so we can get to Mr. Lachica and ask some
questions. I hate to do that to you sir, but you need to kind
of finish up if you could with your statement.
Mr. Baltazar. Pardon me.
Voice. Finish your presentation.
Mr. Baltazar. Application?
Voice. Finish your presentation.
Mr. Baltazar. Oh, yes, yes, yes. Mr. Chairman, I ask
respectfully request that VA's Secretary should recognize the
deserving claimants of the 4,500 remaining veterans who have
appealed to the VA--appealed, the denials of the VA officials.
If they show a Philippine Commonwealth authentic discharge
papers as certified by the Philippine Government Veterans
Affairs Administration or General Office.
Filipino guerrillas whose names are on the recognized
roster agreed to by the U.S. Army and provide proof of other
identity as certified by the Philippine Government Veterans
Affairs Administrators or Administrative Office.
These two requirements must be met before their
applications may be heard. I look forward to answer the
questions, Mr. Chairman.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Baltazar can be found in the
Appendix on page 57.]
Dr. Heck. Thank you Mr. Baltazar. Mr. Lachica, we will look
to you to wrap it up for the panel and then, we will get you
some questions.
STATEMENT OF ERIC LACHICA, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, AMERICAN
COALITION FOR FILIPINO VETERANS, INC.
Mr. Lachica. Thank you. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and
Ranking Member Tsongas and members of the committee. My name is
Eric Lachica, volunteer executive director of the American
Coalition for Filipino Veterans, a non-profit organization
based here in Arlington, Virginia.
Over the past two decades as Mr. Almeda said, we have been
lobbying Congress with the help of our champions, Daniel Inouye
in the Senate and Senator Akaka, and their colleagues in the
House. I would like to recognize, sir, Congressman Benjamin
Gilman who has been a big champion of a Filipino--champion for
the World War II veterans and Bob Filner and Daryl Issa and
sympathetic staff of the White House of the Clinton-Bush
administrations and to all the Members here who have been our
sponsors over the years for our bills in Congress.
We would like to thank our allies, the VFW [Veterans of
Foreign Wars], American Legion, and DAV [Disabled American
Veterans] and community partners like the National Federation
of Filipino-American Associations that led to victories like
full burial benefits in 2000, full war-related disability
compensation in 2001, and VA healthcare in 2003, and the
Filipino Veterans Equity Compensation Law in 2009. And many of
you were there to help get those bills passed.
So it is my honor to help Mr. Almeda and Mr. Baltazar in
this--in the interest of their comrades who are not here today
and the sons and daughters who are in the room with us. The
eligibility issue at hand is very dear to me because my dad
also got a hard time when he was alive getting healthcare
benefits back in the 1980s. Luckily for us because of the laws
we passed earlier, he and my mom are buried in National
Cemetery in Riverside, California, in the National Cemetery,
thank you very much.
So, I would like to just jump as--you have my written
testimony and to address two issues, which I think will go to
the heart of the matter. Mr. Almeda's case is a classic example
that happens to many of our veterans. He has full documentation
and we just realized over the past weekend why the Army directs
the NPRC, the National Personal Records Center to deny service.
And this--I explain this in my email to some of your staff.
For one thing even if they--for example this document, the NPRC
documents of Mr. Almeda, which we only got 2 years ago. This
was withheld from Mr. Almeda over the past 20, 30 years. I was
trying to figure out, why was the NPRC who were instructed by
the Army not to do so.
It is in my opinion, thanks to the earlier research done by
the interagency working group of the White House in de-
classifying that U.S. Army recognition process, which was
secret. I think we know why now, this afternoon, for one thing
Mr. Almeda got this in his records in NPRC, it took us almost 3
or 4 years just to get that in 2012.
It says, Mr. Almeda who got on the Recovered Personnel
Division was supposed to be issued his document. All right, it
says right there, subject individual was a member of the
Philippine Army ordered into the service of the Armed Forces of
the United States.
Okay. Why was--why did NPRC not give this to Mr. Almeda
until 2 years ago? It took the [unintelligible] of the
Philippine Embassy, we had to personally appeal to the Mr.
Levins and Mr. Scott there, to give Mr. Almeda his records.
They confirmed that there were records, all right.
And one thing about this record is that it confirms
something amiss. Mr. Almeda was supposed to be paid. He was
supposed to be paid 3,000 pesos for his back pay. And a check
was issued, item number three, of 6,000 pesos. That is a lot of
dollars back then. That is about $3,000, 1948 dollars, okay.
Guess what? Never--Mr. Almeda never got that check or got
paid for his back pay.
Mr. Almeda. Who are they--who received this money? I didn't
receive it, I don't have it in my record.
Mr. Lachica. And we only realized this weekend, when we
were doing our research. Who is this C.D. Sullivan, who was the
Assistant Director of the Camp Murphy? He had to file this
form. Who got the money? Where is the check?
Now that is one issue. The bottom line here upon research,
thanks to the efforts of the interagency working group, the
White House, and General Taguba in the room. They finally got
out--they got this de-classified, the U.S Army Recognition
Program, the Philippine Guerrillas.
You know, why there are so many Filipino veterans in my
opinion are being denied because some of their American
officers who served--who recognized them got into a fight with
U.S. Army. These four names mentioned, and guess what, those
four American officers, their Filipino soldiers were
recognized, were paid, then the recognition revoked and that is
the bottom line of the U.S. Army de-classified report.
One of them was one of our leaders, Colonel Edwin Ramsey,
he is a World War II hero. He was the last American cavalry man
to lead a charge against the Japanese invaders on a horse in
the Philippines. He was buried in the National Cemetery in
Arlington Cemetery last year.
He has a Filipino wife in Los Angeles and guess what,
because of that Army in-fighting back then about who is going
to be recognized, they claim this secret U.S. Army recognition
program document that Mr. Ramsey engaged--what does it say
here--of fraud basically of getting Filipino veterans.
The guy is dead, all right. And he is a hero. They could
have resolved this, but why did they keep it secret? Why did
they keep Mr. Almeda secret or is the general here? Is he
still, you know--he should answer these questions; why did the
Army come out with a recognition program with no authors?
There are no authors on this document, which basically
revokes recognition of at least 40,000. It says right there--
24,000 of Colonel Ramsey's folks and almost 35,000. See that
is--I think a big, big issue that they haven't been upfront
about us. They could have told us, ``Hey, if you are affiliated
with certain American officers like Colonel Ramsey, you might
have been recognized in 1945, 1946, 1947.'' Guess what, they
were taken off the list--so-called list, these guerrillas.
Now, I just want to bring this to attention of the
committee, we have to get straight answers, we can't afford the
Army to besmirch the reputations of at least 40,000 Filipino
veterans. Who have--many of these who have applied and were
denied.
So, I would like to close, Mr. Chairman, we would like your
committee to investigate this issue further. Why the Army have
been making all of these secret allegations against World War
II heroes like Colonel Ramsey. Denying Filipino veterans a copy
of their records that they have, saying it is not compatible
with our archives.
We had to complain to President Obama himself, to the Vice
President which Mr. Almeda met with, to get the attention of
NPRC. I would like to recognize Mr. Levins and Scott for taking
pity basically on Mr. Almeda, of releasing his folder because
they knew that something was amiss, the NPRC.
That the Army was not treating our veterans right. So, I
would like to appeal to the committee that look into this, that
is 40,000 of us of our veterans. Thank you very much, sir.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Lachica can be found in the
Appendix on page 64.]
Dr. Heck. Thanks Mr. Lachica. And I want to thank both of
the gentlemen who provided testimony for their service. Mr.
Baltazar, I can only hope I look half as good as you do when I
hit 93. But thank you for your service, thank you for taking
the time to be here to tell your stories and to put a face to
this problem that we are trying to tackle here on this
committee.
I have no questions for the panel. I yield my time to Ms.
Tsongas.
Ms. Tsongas. Yes. I want to thank you, Mr. Almeda and Mr.
Baltazar, for making so very real in your testimony the issues
that we have been trying to address here today. And I want to
thank Congressman Heck for organizing and holding this hearing,
and it obviously merits further attention. And I thank you so
much for being here, but I also have no questions.
Dr. Heck. Ms. Duckworth.
Ms. Duckworth. I also have no questions. But I wanted to
thank Mr. Almeda and Mr. Baltazar for being here today and for
your hard work. You are still looking out for your buddies and
your comrades and I thank you for that, and I am just deeply
awed by your presence.
Dr. Heck. Ms. Bordallo.
Ms. Bordallo. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I too would like
to go on any kind of if we decide to introduce legislation to
expand this, to look at it again, because as they said earlier
really, by law it was finished at 2010, is that correct?
Yes, no longer. I want to thank Mr. Almeda and Mr. Baltazar
and of course, you, Mr. Lachica, for your testimony. And it is
really shocking to hear that, you know, you have records here
that show moneys and checks to be distributed and nothing was
done.
I mean, it is--I am sure Mr. Chairman will be looking into
this. And Mr. Chairman, I would like to be a part of any
legislation that is introduced, to be a part of it because I
have so many Filipino friends on Guam and----
Dr. Heck. Okay. There being no questions, I want to thank
everybody for attending and for your participation. We will
continue to look into this matter. The hearing stands
adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 4:20 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]
=======================================================================
A P P E N D I X
June 24, 2014
=======================================================================
PREPARED STATEMENTS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD
June 24, 2014
=======================================================================
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
=======================================================================
DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD
June 24, 2014
=======================================================================
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
=======================================================================
WITNESS RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS ASKED DURING
THE HEARING
June 24, 2014
=======================================================================
RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY DR. HECK
General MacEwen. Civilian guerrillas are eligible for the Filipino
Veterans Equity Compensation provided they meet the criteria
established by the Army for Philippine Guerrillas, which means the
claimant served full time in a unit that was recognized by the Army,
and there is a claim folder and roster on file to verify service. The
Adjutant General Office Form 23 includes a box check for Civilian
Guerrilla which allows a claimant to request verification of service
based solely on this status. [See page 13.]
Mr. Flohr. In February 2010, the Manila Regional Office began
manually tracking reasons for denial of FVEC claims. However, the
Manila RO does not record whether FVEC claims were filed by Veterans or
family members. Obtaining this information would be cost-prohibitive,
requiring a manual review of over 23,000 FVEC claims that were denied.
[See page 16.]
=======================================================================
QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MEMBERS POST HEARING
June 24, 2014
=======================================================================
QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MS. BORDALLO
Ms. Bordallo. You advocate for this committee to produce
legislation that directs that alternative documentation should be
recognized, and standardized criteria should be set to verify service
for payment under the FVEC law. What about what Army or the NPRC can do
at this time? The onus is on you as the keeper of the lists and the
process to ensure that these claims and the appeals are expeditiously
processed given the ages of the Filipino veterans. Is there anything
that can be done administratively that could improve the consideration
of alternative documentation provided by claimants?
General MacEwen. I firmly believe there is nothing more the Army or
the National Personnel Records Center can do internally at this time to
improve the process. Yes, we are the keeper of the lists and the
process, and yes, it is our responsibility to ensure that claims and
appeals are expeditiously processed, but we believe we are executing
this function to a very high standard. When a former or current U.S.
Soldier presents a claim to the Army Board for Correction of Military
Records, the highest level Board and only Board which exists today in
the U.S. Army authorized to change a Soldier's official record, the
Board looks for and accepts official documents which can be
authenticated to justify changing the Soldier's record. This Board
would not accept a hand-written note from a deceased commander; nor
would it accept any document that could not be proven authentic.
Throughout the verification process, we must ensure a certain level of
integrity exists throughout the entire process; otherwise, the
confidence in the process is lost. The introduction of new documents
and information outside of the current process would make it even more
difficult, if not impossible, to validate the authenticity of such
documents today.
Ms. Bordallo. In your testimony, you are also asking that the
committee provide for a separate and expedited appeals process, and
there are multiple bills circulating that address some facet of fixing
the FVEC administration and appeals processes. Well, we appreciate that
and will do what we can in this committee, but what about what can be
done now by the Army, the VA, and the NPRC?
General MacEwen. I cannot answer for the Veterans Administration
specifically; however, the Army, the National Personnel Records Center,
and the Veterans Administration, as a whole and independently, are each
committed to executing our roles in this process to the highest
standard possible. The Army, National Personnel Records Center and the
Veterans Administration have partnered to ensure we provide timely and
accurate processing of these claims, as well as providing greater
transparency to the requesters. We look forward to working with the
Committee if legislation is passed to modify the existing process.
However, at the completion of a thoughtful, deliberate collaboration as
conducted during the Filipino Veterans Equity Compensation Fund
Interagency Working Group (comprised of the Department of Veterans
Affairs, the Department of Defense, and the National Archives and
Record Administration), which was specifically tasked with analyzing
the process faced by Filipino Veterans in demonstrating eligibility for
compensation, we have found no substantial or efficiency-gaining
enhancements that could be injected into the current process without
compromising the overall verification process.
Ms. Bordallo. Could you describe how an expedited appeals process
would work, and if there's anything that can be done with the current
process internally that would improve the response time, even before it
gets to the BVA?
General MacEwen. As the Army's agent to verify service for Filipino
Veterans, the National Personnel Records Center strives to complete all
requests under the Filipino Veterans Equity Compensation Fund in 10
days or less. They are also committed to reviewing cases a second,
third, or fourth time if there is new information that leads to a
corresponding claim folder or roster. We believe that the current
process is sound, and cannot offer any changes to the internal
operating procedure that might improve the response time.
Ms. Bordallo. General MacEwen, in your testimony, you assert that
your ``Guerrilla Recognition Program,'' which is the basis for your
service verification process, is robust and thorough. And I have full
faith that at the time, the compilation of the 1948 list was as
thorough as the Army had intended.
It has come to the attention of many of us that there are unusual
cases of claimants to the FVEC where decisions do not seem consistent.
One veteran, Romeo de Fernandez was denied FVEC because there is no
record of his service with the NPRC, though he was awarded a P-O-W
medal, and has been receiving service-connected disability compensation
from the VA. Another veteran, Mr. Ciriaco Cruz was denied FVEC even if
NPRC found a verification of his military service. Mr. Ceferino Palad,
also a veteran, received FVEC, but his claim for service-connected and
pension benefits were denied. These are just three of many Filipino
veterans who have been denied pension benefits with these
inconsistencies.
I quote your testimony: ``It is not possible for the Army to
conduct a better, more detailed, and more thorough investigation today
than that which was conducted between 1942 and 1948.''
Could you explain then, that with a robust list and a process that
you have determined does not need changing, why such discrepancies
exist? When even my iPhone software needs to be updated every few
months, how can a process established in 1948 not need improvements?
General MacEwen. I am not in a position to address the merits of
the three cases you cited. Those specific claims appear to be within
the purview of the Veterans Administration. Although the Army, National
Personnel Records Center, and Veterans Administration work together in
executing our roles to process claims for the Filipino Veterans Equity
Compensation Fund, we still maintain complete independence in making
determinations specific to our responsibilities and authority.
Each agency is a steward of the government's resources and each
will be held accountable accordingly; thus, we are not expected to
agree on 100% of the cases 100% of the time, and we welcome new
information at all levels and in every part of the process.
Again, the Veterans Administration is best equipped to answer this
question as they have overall ownership of both functions. The Army
stands by to provide additional information and/or clarify the
information provided.
Ms. Bordallo. How does the NPRC or the BVA make the determination
whether or not a claim contains information compatible with the NPRC
archives?
Mr. Levins. Thank you for your follow-up questions concerning the
role of the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA), and
specifically its National Personnel Records Center (NPRC) in
referencing records to authenticate service determinations made by the
Department of the Army regarding Filipino nationals who supported the
United States Army Forces in the Far East, including those who served
in guerrilla units, during World War II.
Before addressing the specific questions, it may be helpful to
clarify the role of NARA and specifically NPRC in the verification
process. The NPRC serves as an agent for the U.S. Army, providing
storage and reference services for records of the U.S. Army. Among the
Army records held by NPRC are claim folders pertaining to Filipino
nationals, which were adjudicated by the U.S. Army after World War II,
and unit rosters created by the U.S. Army in conjunction with its
recognition program. NPRC does not make service determinations but
rather reviews the records described above to authenticate claims
previously adjudicated by the U.S. Army. Most often, this is done in
response to requests from the Department of Veterans Affairs regarding
compensation claims.
NARA has also preserved records of historical value documenting
events that transpired in the Philippines during and after World War
II. Included are records describing actions taken by the U.S. Army to
recognize the service of Filipino nationals who supported the United
States Army Forces in the Far East, including those who served in
guerrilla units. These original records are available for public review
at the National Archives Building in College Park, Maryland.
Regarding this specific question, in authenticating guerrilla
service, NPRC reviews the information provided from the claimant to
identify the responsive claim folder. The claim folders are arranged
alphabetically by subject name. In searching for the responsive claim
folder, NPRC considers alternate spellings of the subject's name. Once
a claim folder has been located, its contents are examined by a
technician. In this examination, the technician is looking for an
affidavit (AGO Form 23) submitted to the Army during its post-war
recognition program. If an affidavit is located, the technician
retrieves the corresponding unit roster and attempts to locate a
matching name on the roster. If the corresponding unit roster includes
a matching name, the service is authenticated. The process for
authenticating service in the Philippine Commonwealth Army is similar,
but allows for consideration of additional documentary evidence in the
claim folder in instances where the subject's name does not appear on a
roster.
The term ``archives'' is used in a generic sense to refer to the
rosters created as a result of the Army's post war recognition program,
as opposed to permanent records which have been legally accessioned
into the National Archives of the United States. A claim is deemed to
contain information ``compatible with the archives'' where a claim
folder contains acceptable documentation that matches information
appearing on a corresponding unit roster. As described above, this is
the threshold that must be met to authenticate guerrilla service. The
process for authenticating service in the Philippine Commonwealth Army
is similar, but allows for consideration of additional documentary
evidence in the claim folder in instances where the subject's name does
not appear on a roster. While NPRC provides reference services required
to authenticate prior service determinations, it does not adjudicate
claims or appeals. Questions about proceedings before the Board of
Veterans' Appeals should be directed to the Department of Veterans
Affairs.
Ms. Bordallo. The case of veteran Mr. Gaudencio Pablo indicates
that this was the first instance that official Army documents at the
National Archives were used to determine Mr. Pablo's service after the
NPRC initially could not verify Mr. Pablo's claim. Is it necessary for
a veteran to have to appeal to the BVA, given that there are existing
records that could augment the 1948 list?
Mr. Levins. Thank you for your follow-up questions concerning the
role of the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA), and
specifically its National Personnel Records Center (NPRC) in
referencing records to authenticate service determinations made by the
Department of the Army regarding Filipino nationals who supported the
United States Army Forces in the Far East, including those who served
in guerrilla units, during World War II.
Before addressing the specific questions, it may be helpful to
clarify the role of NARA and specifically NPRC in the verification
process. The NPRC serves as an agent for the U.S. Army, providing
storage and reference services for records of the U.S. Army. Among the
Army records held by NPRC are claim folders pertaining to Filipino
nationals, which were adjudicated by the U.S. Army after World War II,
and unit rosters created by the U.S. Army in conjunction with its
recognition program. NPRC does not make service determinations but
rather reviews the records described above to authenticate claims
previously adjudicated by the U.S. Army. Most often, this is done in
response to requests from the Department of Veterans Affairs regarding
compensation claims.
NARA has also preserved records of historical value documenting
events that transpired in the Philippines during and after World War
II. Included are records describing actions taken by the U.S. Army to
recognize the service of Filipino nationals who supported the United
States Army Forces in the Far East, including those who served in
guerrilla units. These original records are available for public review
at the National Archives Building in College Park, Maryland.
Regarding this specific question, NPRC has in its holdings multiple
claim folders pertaining to individuals named Gaudencio Pablo. Based on
a review of each folder, it appears your question concerns Mr.
Gaudencio Pagaduan Pablo, as this is the only Gaudencio Pablo that has
been the subject of recent reference requests from the Department of
Veterans Affairs. Over the years, NPRC and the Department of the Army
(before this function was transferred to NPRC) have responded to at
least seven requests for authentication of Mr. Pablo's prior service.
Based on the documents they reviewed, neither NPRC nor the Department
of the Army was able to authenticate Mr. Pablo's prior service.
In instances where a claimant's prior service could not be
authenticated, NPRC remains willing to re-examine its holdings and to
make additional efforts to authenticate service. NPRC will undertake
these efforts regardless of whether the individual has submitted a
formal appeal to the Board of Veterans' Appeals involving a claim for
Department of Veterans' Affairs benefits. However, unless new
information is provided by the requester, such as a different spelling
of the name or the use of an alias during the period of service, the
outcome is likely to be the same. While NPRC provides reference
services required to authenticate prior service determinations, it does
not adjudicate claims or appeals. Questions about proceedings before
the Board of Veterans' Appeals should be directed to the Department of
Veterans' Affairs.
[all]