Starting at eight eastern on cspan. Cspan2, providing live coverage of the u. S. Senate floor proceedings and key Public Policy events. And every weekend, booktv. Now for 15 years the only Television Network devoted to nonfiction books and authors. Cspan2, created by the cable tv industry and brought to you as a Public Service by your local cable or satellite provider. Watch us in hd, like us on facebook and follow us on twitter. Iraq war veteran Travis Fugate says he may have gone p blind because his v. A. Center doctor didnt have the right information. Mr. Fugate says the v. A. s failure to fix issues was depressing. Veterans Affairs Department officials also testified at this hearing with members questioning why it was taking so long for the departments records to mirror the defense departments. This is just over two hours. [inaudible conversations] good morning. This hearing will come to order. I want to welcome everybody to todays hearing titled assessing inadequacies in v. A. Data usage for and Services Provided to visuallyimpaired veterans. My names mike coffman, and prior to hearing testimony and asking questions of our witnesses, i ask each member state his or her name to assist our witnesses in identifying who is speaking. Thank you for your cooperation. Now let us begin. This hearing focuses on continued problems within v. A. That have caused its contribution to the Vision Center of excellence to stagnate, allow ared v. A. Systems to continue to operate in noncompliance with section 508 of the americans with disabilities act and compromised other Services Provided to veterans with visual impairments. The creation of the Vision Center of excellence or vce as we will refer to it today, was mandated by the National Defense authorization act of fy2008. It stated that the department of defense was required to create the facility and to collaborate with the department of Veterans Affairs in doing so. One of the Main Responsibilities required in the 2008 ndaa for the operation of the vce was to, quote enable the secretary of Veterans Affairs to assess the registry and add information pertaining to additional treatments or surge call procedures surgical proceed juries and procedures and outcomes for veterans who were entered into the registry and subsequently received treatment through the Veterans Health administration. The reference to the registry is that the department of veterans eye injury and vision [inaudible] which we will also refer to as the registry today for convenience. The dod has done a commendable job of populating the rem industry with over 20,000 registry with over 20,000 unique patient entries. However, the most recent number v. A. Has provided the Committee Regarding the contribution of the vision registry is one entry. One compared to 20,000. Notably, in an october 2013 briefing v. A. Staff stated that the one entry was just a test case to insure that the transfer of information would work. So, essentially, v. A. Had not entered in any veterans information into the registry which precludes v. A. From meaningfully contributing to the very purpose the registry was created. Quote to collect the diagnosis, surgical intervention, operative procedures and related treatments and follow up on each significant eye injury incurred by members of the armed forces while serving on active duty can. We will hear from a veteran today who will articulate the importance hofstra fulfilling its obligation to contribute to the registry. Another major issue we will address today is v. A. s continued failure to bring its Information Systems into full compliance with section 508 of the americans with disabilities act. The two separate section 508 addresses access for people with physical, sensory or cognitive disabilities in various types of technologies. Two separate memoranda dated july 26th, 2012, issued by thenassistant secretary for information and technology roger baker, illustrated the ongoing problems with v. A. Regarding section 508 compliance. Both memoranda recommend how recent reference how recent audits conducted by v. A. Show that most of the content and information on v. A. Web sites was not section 508 compliant. Further, in a 2012 v. A. Dashboard summary analysis, every site review showed a status of less than 50 compliance with section 508. Some notable examples include v. A. Jobs, ebenefits and v. A. Forms. V. A. Jobs at 80 critical, ebenefits at 95 critical and v. A. Forms 100 critical. The rating of critical in the analysis staged that the listed percentage is the amount of that web site that is completely inoperable. We will hear today in v. A. s testimony that they are making Great Strides in bringing v. A. Systems into compliance with section 508. However, we will also hear from a blinded veteran who must actually navigate these pages himself. He may be inclined to disagree. With that, i now recognize Ranking Member kirkpatrick for her opening statement. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Im Ranking MemberAnn Kirkpatrick from Congressional District 1 in arizona. The hearing topic today is an important one, and i look forward to an indepth discussion with our ps with our witnesses. Today we are examining the department of Veterans Affairs role in the Vision Centers of excellence and section 508 of rehabilitation act of 1973 compliance as they relate to proper access and services for blinded veterans. We will also a hear the testimony of mr. Glenn minney on a bill introduced by my colleagues on health. This bill will expand the v. A. s beneficiary travel Coverage Program for some veterans who are not currently eligible for beneficiary travel but who are in need of treatment at one of the v. A. s Blind Rehabilitation Centers or spike cord injury low spinal cord injury locations. Mr. Minney, i look forward to hearing your testimony, and as a result of being a cosponsor of h. R. 1284, i believe this bill will help remove another access to care obstacle within the v. A. Medical system for our veterans. Many of our visuallydisabled veterans would greatly benefit and become capable of living independently in their own homes if able to receive rehabilitation. However, some of these veterans are not able to receive these treatments because of high travel costs and ineligibility for beneficiary travel under the v. A. Programs. And this is a special problem in my district which has a very large rural district in arizona. And my veterans have to go to three different veterans hospitals depending on where they live and travel hundreds of mails. Miles. This bill will expand eligibility for beneficiary travel so that more veterans are able to receive rehabilitative treatments. I understand that in the current conflicts eye injuries have accounted for approximately 15 of all battlefield traumas. We also know that as many as 75 of traumatic brain injuries in patients, those patients also suffer visual dysfunctions that can affect their quality of life. When the Vision Center of excellence was envisioned and established through the 2008 National Defense authorization act, the department of defense in collaboration with the d. Of Veterans Affairs was tasked with prevention, diagnosis, mitigation, treatment and rehabilitation of eye injuries. While it took some time, i understand that the center is now functioning although problems such as staffing, funding and clear policy remain challenging. In addition to the center, the 2008 National Defense authorization act also required the establishment of a vision registry. I look forward to hearing from our Witnesses Today on the progress of that collaboration especially enrollment and seamless transfer hofstra vision care of v. A. Vision care data to the registry. Mr. Chairman, while the wars may be winding down, we know that the need for research, treatment and rehabilitation will remain for eye injury vet aarons veterans for decades to come. Today we are also looking at the department of Veterans Affairs compliance with section 508 of the 1973 rehabilitation act. Section 508 addresses access for the disabled to different types of technology. According to v. A. Testimony, v. A. Systems are still not compliant with the law. One of our Witnesses Today described the difficulty of navigating through the v. A. Web sites because they are not 508 compliant, causing him frustration and a lot of extra time to get the information he is looking for. Eyeinjured veterans are already challenges, and we should be working as fast as we can to insure that their next encounter on the v. A. Web site will not be so difficult. I would like to hear from our v. A. Panel what they are doing to become compliant, why is it taking so long, and what resources are needed, if any, to aid in becoming compliant. We need to get this right sooner rather than later. Thank you, mr. Chairman, and i yield back. Thank you, Ranking Member kirkpatrick. I ask that all members waive their opening remarks as per this committees custom. With that, i welcome the first panel. On the witness, at the witness table. On in this panel we will hear from many Travis Fugate, Kentucky National guard, retired. Mr. Terry kebbel, did i say that right . United states army, retired. And mr. Glenn minney, director of Government Relations for the blamedded Veterans Association. All of your blinded Veterans Association. Mr. Fugate, you are now recognized for five minutes. Thanks, chairman and Ranking Member, for inviting me here to speak again. It was over five years ago that i came here to speak about the vce. It had been the creation had been mandated the year prior to the time that i spoke before which was march of 2009. Only a week before the day before that i spoke id been told that my vision was totally gone and i wouldnt see again. Most people who reviewed the case agreed that the vision that i had lost let me explain something further. When i was injured, i had some remaining vision. And i had it for three years, and then i got an infection, went to the v. A. , and the doctors didnt have access to the proper medical data. So they failed to do preventive surgeries, and when i had an emergency situation, they didnt have access to the medical documentation which may have led to the vision loss that resulted. After the surgery. Since i was here before, ive went on, ive went to school, ive worked to improve myself, my life. Ive been active in the v. A. And the blinded Veterans Association trying to help other blinded veterans. I meet new, young blind men coming from the wars every year. Im interested in hearing you ask questions about how things have changed since the testimony in march 2009 in which i participated. If some young man went into the v. A. Tomorrow, as i did, would his doctors be able to have access to electronic data that allowed them to perform preventive surgeries and see all the surgeries he had in the past . Or she . Im open for questions. [inaudible] mr. Fugate. Mr. Kebbel, you are now recognized for five minutes. [inaudible] as a blinded veteran, ive had an opportunity to assist other blinded veterans on how to use web sites. Weve done a good job of describing what 508 is, compliance. Weve dope a good job of weve done a good job of stating that we need to do something about it. I want to talk about what we havent done yet, okay . As i i was asked to investigate ten web sites or ten web pages for this testimonial. I had the opportunity to design, with some help from some other blind veterans, a form that helped us to evaluate each of those web payments. In my web pages. In my opinion, each of those web pages failed. Each of those web pages failed in different areas, some very major and some very minor. When i get the opportunity to read a web page, i would like to be able to navigate properly, and i can do that with headings. And headings is a way for a nonvisual person like myself to to navigate a web page. One of the pages i evaluated had no heading level, heading on page which means that i have to navigate the whole web page to find out what the purpose of that web page is. A sighted person can visualize it and see what that purpose is right away. Another page that i had the opportunity to evaluate was one with link problems. And i was kind of interested when you said that the forms page failed 100 , well, im in total agreement with that one. I had the, you know, when i went to the web page, i listed the links on the page, and there was 217. And these are links to forms. Every one of those links were named by a numerical number, had no description on what that form us was. Another one was, another one i evaluated is where i went to it, the web page, first one i downloaded was a form to fill in, okay . The first thing i noticed was that it was an image file. Well, for those of us who use a Screen Reader and who are blind, we know that we cant look at pictures. And that is an image file. So i cannot read that image file. The second thing is, is that it was a form i was supposed to be able to fill out. Well, if its an image file and there are no formal edit boxes on that page, i cant till in the information fill in the information needed to fill out that form. So when i, when i hear that were making progress on it, its difficult for me believe. I would like the same opportunity to read a web page as a sighted perp, sighted person. And i can do that on web pages. I can go to a web site from Stanford University and access all their information. I can take courses there, i can do a lot of things on that particular web page. I can go to library of congress and do the same thing. I can go to the National Federation of the blind which is probably one of best web sites that i know of and read as if i was a sight ad perp. Sighted person. What concerns me the most is that were sitting here arguing about are we compliant or not. When i went to vietnam, i went to vietnam as a volunteer. I didnt go because it was the law, you know . I went because i thought it was the right thing to do. And as we sit here now, i think that, i think the right thing to do is to make it compliant. Whether its not the law or not. I just think its an issue of that you have the right to do it. As i look back, you know, in the 20th century the law became in effect, okay . Were now 13 into the 21st century, and as far as im concerned we have not made any progress. [laughter] i just, and im not going to be around for the 22nd century, so i dont think im really going to see anything happen. Thank you. [inaudible] care is really no different than a denial of care. Mr. Mi, this ney . Minney . You have five minutes for your remarks. Chairman coffman, Ranking Member kirkpatrick and other distinguished members of the house Veterans Affairs subcommittee on oversight and information, thank you for allowing the blind Veterans Association and its members to appear before you today. The blind Veterans Association is here to express our views and concerns regarding specific bva issues. The issue im going to discuss is h. R. 1284, the beneficiary travel. As a director of the Government Relations for bva, ive already spent many hours and days with members of the House Committee on Veterans Affairs regarding this bill. For veterans or who are currently ip eligible, which are nonserviceconnected veterans for beneficiary travel, title 38, us csection 111 does not cover travel to one of the 13 blind Rehab Centers. Or to any of the 28 spinal cord injury locations. If the law continues to stay as written, the nonserviceconnected veteran must purchase their own mode of travel to one of these Rehab Centers. The costs will certainly continue to discourage the nonserviceconnected veteran from traveling to a behind rehab or spinal cord injury center. At this time most of our nonserviceconnected veterans are of the age of 67 years old, and their blindness or Vision Impairment is due to agerelated conditions. They have to live on Social Security which is approximately 1450 a month. And with that, having that limited income and requiring them to pay for their own mode of travel to a rehab center, thats really going to pay dividends and be detrimental to their monthly income. The chief Business Office has scored this bill, h. R. 1284, as 3 million which, to be honest, i dont think that is true. Because as the language states in title 38, what we want changed is for it to say that it covers nonserviceconnected veterans. Were not wanting 3 million, we are just wanting the wording, the language to state that 1284 covered nonserviceconnected veterans as well as serviceconnected veterans so they can have the access to the Rehab Centers that the v. A. Has out there, the 13 blind