{ "id": "RL34670", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "number": "RL34670", "active": false, "source": "EveryCRSReport.com, University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department", "versions": [ { "source": "EveryCRSReport.com", "id": 365757, "date": "2010-06-02", "retrieved": "2016-04-07T01:39:02.045754", "title": "The Defense Base Act (DBA): The Federally Mandated Workers\u2019 Compensation System for Overseas Government Contractors", "summary": "Many overseas federal contractors are covered by the Defense Base Act (DBA), which mandates that they provide workers\u2019 compensation insurance for their employees. As the U.S. military has increased operations in Iraq, the size of the DBA program has grown. Since September 2001, there have been 49,472 DBA cases, including 1,584 cases involving the deaths of contractors in Iraq and Afghanistan. Nearly $200 million in cash and medical benefits were paid to DBA claimants in 2008.\nCongress has become increasingly concerned with the costs involved in the DBA program because the federal government usually reimburses its contractors for their DBA premiums. The Department of State (DOS) and the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) have seen some cost savings since adopting single-source models for their DBA insurance in which contractors for each agency are required to purchase insurance from a single company selected by the agency. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) is currently testing such a model for its DBA system. For the rest of the Department of Defense (DOD), however, including the Army\u2019s large Logistics Civil Augmentation Program (LOGCAP) contract, individual contractors are free to select their own DBA insurers and negotiate their own rates, and one contractor, KBR, has been criticized by DOD auditors for failing to demonstrate that it sought to control DBA premium costs when selecting an insurer.\nAlthough not directly related to the Defense Base Act, Congress has expressed concern over negligent contractor behavior that may jeopardize the health and safety of both contractors and government personnel. Accordingly, H.R. 5136, the proposed National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year (FY) 2011, includes a provision that requires the Secretary of Defense to report to the House and Senate Armed Services Committees, by September 1, 2011, on incidents where contractors have earned reduced award fees or been denied award fees because of incidents where the contractor jeopardized the health or safety of government personnel. P.L. 111-84, the NDAA for FY2010, authorizes the Secretary of Defense to reduce or deny award fees due to such incidents, as defined in Section 823 of P.L. 111-84.\nThe NDAA for FY2009 (P.L. 110-417) includes a provision that requires DOD to change the way its contractors provide DBA coverage for their workers. In a report issued pursuant to this legislation, DOD concluded that making improvements to the current open-market DBA insurance system would best meet the criteria for reform recommended by Congress and the agency. The report also found advantages that could result from having the federal government self-insure, with third-party administration, for DBA costs. However, there may be limitations to the utility of the report as a guide for Congress in making overall changes to the DBA program.\nThis report provides an overview of the DBA and the systems used to provide DBA insurance at DOS, USAID, DOD, and USACE. Also included are criticisms of the current DOD DBA policy raised by GAO and Army auditors as well as responses to those criticisms by DOD and USACE. The report concludes with a discussion of several DBA reform options suggested by the House of Representatives in recent legislation and analyzed by DOD. A list of acronyms used in this report is provided in the Appendix.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "HTML", "encoding": "utf-8", "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/RL34670", "sha1": "e01fe27e11411c7449d30a1f349b69d3decee1a3", "filename": "files/20100602_RL34670_e01fe27e11411c7449d30a1f349b69d3decee1a3.html", "images": null }, { "format": "PDF", "encoding": null, "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/RL34670", "sha1": "31519f8858f24b44239e32fae4173a40fbfcded7", "filename": "files/20100602_RL34670_31519f8858f24b44239e32fae4173a40fbfcded7.pdf", "images": null } ], "topics": [] }, { "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department", "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc491499/", "id": "RL34670_2010Apr09", "date": "2010-04-09", "retrieved": "2015-01-27T19:40:46", "title": "The Defense Base Act (DBA): The Federally Mandated Workers' Compensation System for Overseas Government Contractors", "summary": "This report provides an overview of the Defense Base Act (DBA) and the systems used to provide DBA insurance at the Department of State (DOS), the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), the Department of Defense (DOD), and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). Also included are criticisms of the current DOD DBA policy raised by GAO and Army auditors as well as responses to those criticisms by DOD and USACE. The report concludes with a discussion of several DBA reform options suggested by the House of Representatives in recent legislation and analyzed by DOD.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORT", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "PDF", "filename": "files/20100409_RL34670_31fd7f80c6df62396b9a371c285c88e46c1461f8.pdf" }, { "format": "HTML", "filename": "files/20100409_RL34670_31fd7f80c6df62396b9a371c285c88e46c1461f8.html" } ], "topics": [ { "source": "LIV", "id": "Workers' compensation", "name": "Workers' compensation" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Military pay", "name": "Military pay" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Defense policy", "name": "Defense policy" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Executive departments", "name": "Executive departments" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Defense budgets", "name": "Defense budgets" } ] }, { "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department", "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc822017/", "id": "RL34670_2009Jul22", "date": "2009-07-22", "retrieved": "2016-03-19T13:57:26", "title": "The Defense Base Act (DBA): The Federally Mandated Workers\u2019 Compensation System for Overseas Government Contractors", "summary": null, "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORT", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "PDF", "filename": "files/20090722_RL34670_aa2c60014d58c8a673dd7ae41354db54405d8071.pdf" }, { "format": "HTML", "filename": "files/20090722_RL34670_aa2c60014d58c8a673dd7ae41354db54405d8071.html" } ], "topics": [] }, { "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department", "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc817023/", "id": "RL34670_2008Oct20", "date": "2008-10-20", "retrieved": "2016-03-19T13:57:26", "title": "The Defense Base Act (DBA): The Federally Mandated Workers\u2019 Compensation System for Overseas Government Contractors", "summary": null, "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORT", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "PDF", "filename": "files/20081020_RL34670_735a2209e47a8130d9bda879e78a59e4bd739032.pdf" }, { "format": "HTML", "filename": "files/20081020_RL34670_735a2209e47a8130d9bda879e78a59e4bd739032.html" } ], "topics": [] }, { "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department", "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc461901/", "id": "RL34670_2008Sep15", "date": "2008-09-15", "retrieved": "2014-12-05T09:57:41", "title": "The Defense Base Act (DBA): The Federally Mandated Workers' Compensation System for Overseas Government Contractors", "summary": "This report provides an overview of the Defense Base Act (DBA) and the systems used to provide DBA insurance at the Department of State (DOS), the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), the Department of Defense (DOD), and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). Also included are criticisms of the current DOD DBA policy raised by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) and Army auditors as well as responses to those criticisms by DOD and USACE. The report concludes with a discussion of several DBA reform options suggested by the House of Representatives in recent legislation.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORT", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "PDF", "filename": "files/20080915_RL34670_645241418ab3c2075151508e8d717955f3f90f69.pdf" }, { "format": "HTML", "filename": "files/20080915_RL34670_645241418ab3c2075151508e8d717955f3f90f69.html" } ], "topics": [ { "source": "LIV", "id": "Workers' compensation", "name": "Workers' compensation" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Military pay", "name": "Military pay" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Defense policy", "name": "Defense policy" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Executive departments", "name": "Executive departments" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Defense budgets", "name": "Defense budgets" } ] } ], "topics": [ "Intelligence and National Security", "National Defense" ] }