Legislature(2011 - 2012)CAPITOL 106
02/15/2011 08:00 AM House STATE AFFAIRS
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB71 | |
| SB33 | |
| HB92 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | HB 71 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | SB 33 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 92 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
SB 33-DISPOSITION OF SERVICE MEMBERS' REMAINS
9:02:39 AM
CHAIR LYNN announced that the next order of business was CS FOR
SENATE BILL NO. 33(STA), "An Act relating to the disposition of
remains of a member of the armed forces if the member dies while
in a duty status."
9:02:57 AM
MICHAEL CAULFIELD, Intern, Senator Bill Wielechowski, Alaska
State Legislature, presented SB 33 on behalf of Senator
Wielechowski, joint prime sponsor. He stated that it is
important to treat those on active duty in the military with
respect, especially in honoring their final wishes in the event
of their tragic death while on active duty. Mr. Caulfield said
the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) requires active duty
service members, reservists, and National Guard members to
complete a Record of Emergency Data, called a DD Form 93,
annually or prior to deployment, in which the service member
stipulates who should manage their remains in the event of their
death. The U.S. Coast Guard, which falls outside the U.S.
Department of Defense, but follows the same federal statutes,
has its own form, the Designation of Beneficiaries and Record of
Emergency Data or CG-2020D.
MR. CAULFIELD said many states, including Alaska, do not comply
with these forms because no laws exist that recognize a legal
designee as the person in charge of remains. Instead, he said,
they default to a predetermined list, generally starting with a
spouse. Clearly a name on a form differing from one on the
default list can lead to disputes when both parties wish to have
authority over the remains. He said this situation can draw out
an already painful process of mourning and burial.
MR. CAULFIELD said SB 33 would solve this problem by amending
Alaska's statutes so that the person on the form is recognized
as the primary manager of the remains. He said this will not
only stop disputes over who should have the authority, but also
should protect against the worst-case scenario when no one can
be found to deal with the remains. He noted that 20 states
already have laws that comply with the federal form, and
adopting SB 33 would mean that Alaska's soldiers' remains are
handled by the people they choose. Mr. Caulfield relayed that
SB 33 is supported by the Alaska Veterans Association, the
Office of the Deputy Undersecretary of Defense, the Alaska
Chapter of Vietnam Veterans of America, and the National Funeral
Directors Association. He urged the committee to support SB 33.
9:05:28 AM
MR. CAULFIELD, in response to Representative Gruenberg, said he
is not aware of any stated opposition to SB 33.
9:05:49 AM
MR. CAULFIELD, in response to Representative P. Wilson, said if
a husband who is estranged from his wife goes overseas to serve
in active duty, finds someone else to designate to be
responsible for his remains, and is killed while on active duty,
then the person he designated would be in charge, not the
estranged wife.
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON said sometimes a military person might
go overseas to serve on active duty and, while there, designate
someone else without telling his/her spouse back home. She said
this does happen and can be devastating to the spouse back home.
She asked what would happen under that scenario.
MR. CAULFIELD said he would have to defer that question to Mark
San Souci of the U.S. Department of Defense, but indicated that
the bottom line is to honor the wishes of the soldier.
9:08:58 AM
CHAIR LYNN said it seems to him that a person serving on active
duty in the military has the most right of anyone to choose who
will be responsible for his/her remains in the event of his/her
death.
9:10:15 AM
MARK SAN SOUCI, Regional Liaison Northwest, Defense State
Liaison Office, Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary of
Defense, Deputy Under Secretary of Defense (Military Community
and Family Policy), U.S. Department of Defense (DoD), stated
that the DD Form 93 allows the service member to choose between
a surviving spouse, a blood relative, or an adopted relative;
therefore, the case that Representative P. Wilson described
could not happen. The person could choose a brother rather than
a spouse. In response to the question asked by Representative
Petersen, he offered his understanding that the military does
not have an obligation to notify the former designee when the
active duty military person chooses another designee.
9:12:51 AM
RIC DAVIDGE, Vietnam Veterans of America; Alaska Veterans
Foundation, said he has been actively involved with Senator
Wielechowski on SB 33, particularly as chair of the Alaska
Veterans Foundation. He related that last year there was a two-
tour marine who died in his home, and next of kin could not be
found, so the Alaska Veterans Foundation held of service for him
with an honor guard. He expressed delight that the state is
making an effort to come into compliance with federal forms. He
said every member of the military must update this form annually
and when going overseas to serve in active duty; therefore, he
said he hopes the forms best reflect the intention of the
member.
9:14:26 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG said the issue of remains is highly
personal, and choices are made such as whether to be buried or
cremated, and whether to donate organs. He asked if federal law
trumps state law when a soldier writes a will designating
someone other than those persons allowed by the federal
government to be in charge of his/her remains.
MR. SAN SOUCI replied that the aforementioned forms are
congressionally mandated, whereas a will, which may even be
outdated, is not. He said he has been counseled that if a
current will is in conflict with a DD Form 93, the matter would
likely end up in litigation.
9:18:01 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GRUENBERG said he supports the proposed bill and
will vote "do pass," but is concerned that the decedent's wishes
are followed as closely as possible.
9:19:00 AM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHANSEN noted that in the committee packet is a
two-page handout with the heading, "Comport State Laws with DoD
Rules on Disposition," which addresses this issue and shows that
ten states recognize in statute the DD Form 93 as the official
form. He observed that absent that statutory reference, "it
goes back to the state's ... order of disposition of apparently
nonmilitary folks." He said he does not know if Alaska has
designated the DD Form 93 as the official document or not. He
suggested that the bill sponsor may consider having Alaska
designate the DD Form 93 as the official form.
9:20:44 AM
MR. SAN SOUCI said that handout comes from the
USA4MilitaryFamilies. He said last year ten states recognized
in law the DD Form 93 as the official form. He further related
that in 2009, this issue was taken on as one of the entity's top
ten priorities and, at that time, lawyers said they thought nine
states had sufficient latitude in existing statute to recognize
the DD Form 93. He further relayed that eleven states are
considering legislation this year to adopt the DD form 93 as the
official form, and he said he thinks SB 33 has been crafted
expressly for that purpose - to honor the desires of the person
who has died while on active duty.
9:22:15 AM
CHAIR LYNN, after ascertaining that there was no one else who
wished to testify, closed public testimony.
9:22:41 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER moved to report CSSB 33(STA) out of
committee with individual recommendations and the accompanying
fiscal notes. There being no objection, CSSB 33(STA) was
reported out of the House State Affairs Standing Committee.