National Cemetery to be Built at Fort Jackson

Military.com ^ | August 08, 2008 | Army News Service

[BloodOrFreedom]

FORT JACKSON, S.C. - A new national cemetery, which will be adjacent to Fort Jackson, is scheduled to open in the fall and will be named the "Fort Jackson National Cemetery."

Columbia, S.C., is one of four sites nationwide where national cemeteries are being built and the land for the 585-acre facility was donated by Fort Jackson

"(The) VA is keeping its promise to our nation's veterans by building this new shrine, said Secretary of Veterans Affairs Dr. James B. Peake. "The Columbia area deserves a magnificent, lasting tribute to the service of its military veterans."

Construction began earlier this month, according to the cemetery's director, Gene Linxwiler. He expects the first burials to take place beginning in November. VA officials are planning an official dedication ceremony this fall, but the exact date has not yet been selected.

Construction will take place in several phases, and the first has two parts (Phase 1A and 1B). Phase 1A, currently under construction, will consist of 1,400 full-casket graves and 1,100 in-ground sites for cremated remains. The cost for Phase 1A is $2.53 million. The VA has budgeted about $19 million for the entire site.

In mid-2009, work is scheduled to begin on the 68 acres of Phase 1B.

When completed, the first two phases will have room for 5,000 full gravesites, 4,200 pre-placed crypts, 5,000 in-ground cremation sites and 2,000 indoor cremation burial sites.

An administration and public information facility, maintenance facility, two committal shelters for interment ceremonies, a flag/assembly area, and supporting infrastructure, including utilities and irrigation, will also be included.

A complete list of who is eligible for burial in a national cemetery can be found on the burial and memorials page of the VA Web site at www.cem.va.gov.

For more information about the Fort Jackson National Cemetery, call the cemetery staff at (866) 577-5248.

To make burial arrangements, call the national scheduling office at (800) 535-1117.

[Slings and Arrows]

SC ping!

[Ciexyz]

My uncle, who's a WW II Navy vet, looked into the new national cemetery in western PA, and says the cost of interment is very reasonable. He said the wife could be buried in the same space, one grave on top of the other. So my uncle and aunt signed up for it.

[doodad]

I believe my Dad is signed up for Arlington, but he would probably prefer this as he spends his Veteran’s Day holiday here every year.

[yefragetuwrabrumuy]

While such monuments are great, I dislike the idea of burying human remains as a poor use of land. Cremation is also terribly consumptive of energy.

For this reason, I like a third alternative for cadaver disposal. And while it sounds unattractive at first, it is actually less unattractive than either of the other two common means of disposal.

Natural history museums use insects to clean the bones of animals of tissues prior to display. Maggots are used when the tissue is still moist, and cadaver beetles when it has dried. Between the two, all that is left are dry, clean bones.

Since most people shy away from insects, it should be pointed out that they still do most of the work with burial, just different insects.

A cadaver could be put in a warm, dry container, then later the extra dead insects can be used for high quality animal fodder for zoo animals, if that is a desired option, or just disposed.

Any artificial parts can be removed, which is advisable under any circumstance, as they can either be toxic or explosive with great heat. Even tooth fillings and gold caps can be removed without offense.

The dry bones are then much easier and safer to dispose, either with much lest space wasteful or polluting internment, or using much less energy to burn.

[BloodOrFreedom]

Interesting perspective, though I’m not sure I am totally convinced by the prospect. I understand your desire to conserve space and provide a “greener” means for the disposal of a deceased being, however, often having a marked and designated area for the deceased individual provides for the families a specific place to where they may return and pay respects and honor their relative. I believe that such acts of devotion and respect are essential to the rememberence of our history and are a means by which families can keep alive the memory of their ancestors.

[yefragetuwrabrumuy]

I agree that such a space is good and valuable. However, putting it over what amounts to a toxic disposal site is less good. Some human bodies today have accumulated any number of toxic substances, from heavy metals and radioisotopes to non-biodegradable industrial chemicals.

And incineration often doesn’t help either. There was a rash of crematorium ovens being damaged some years ago by exploding pacemakers, and putting toxic gases into the air isn’t a solution in many cases.

This was less of a problem in the past excepting those cases of large caliber lead poisoning. But just burying people back then was much less of a problem.

Even today, with what I proposed, it would not be a bad idea to test cadavers for such things when disposed. Since the insects would consume any serious pollutants, they could be disposed of as toxic waste.

But in places where land is at a premium, there could still be a respectably sized memorial, and even using more durable materials than rock and cement tombstones, which tend to degrade over time.

The emphasis on remembrance being placed on the lives of those remembered, not their remains.

I might add, however, that the old practice of the ossuary, a chapel decorated with human bones, could be restored for the religious. It is a way to respectfully retain human bones for hundreds of years. Though rare, they were always respected for creating a mood of spiritual catharsis among believers who used them.