Federal Acquisition Regulation; FAR Case 2005-012, Combating Trafficking in Persons, 2741-2745 [E9-548]

Agencies

• General Services Administration
• National Aeronautics and Space Administration
• DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 10 (Thursday, January 15, 2009)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 2741-2745]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-548]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION

48 CFR Parts 12, 22, and 52

[FAC 2005-30; FAR Case 2005-012; Item VII; Docket 2006-0020; Sequence 
25]
RIN 9000-AK31


Federal Acquisition Regulation; FAR Case 2005-012, Combating 
Trafficking in Persons

AGENCIES: Department of Defense (DoD), General Services Administration 
(GSA), and National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA).

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Civilian Agency Acquisition Council and the Defense 
Acquisition Regulations Council (Councils) have agreed to adopt as 
final, with changes, the second interim rule published in the Federal 
Register at 72 FR 46335, August 17, 2007, amending the Federal 
Acquisition Regulation (FAR) to implement 22 U.S.C. 7104(g). This 
statute requires that contracts include a provision that authorizes the 
department or agency to terminate the contract, if the contractor or 
any subcontractor engages in trafficking in persons.

DATES: Effective Date: February 17, 2009.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Ernest Woodson, Procurement 
Analyst, at (202) 501-3775 for clarification of content. For 
information pertaining to status or publication schedules, contact the 
Regulatory Secretariat at (202) 501-4755. Please cite FAC 2005-30, FAR 
case 2005-012.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

A. Background

    The Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act (TVPRA) of 
2003, as amended by TVPRA of 2005, addresses the victimization of 
countless men, women, and children in the United States and abroad. In 
order to implement the law, DoD, GSA, and NASA published a second 
interim rule in the Federal Register at 72 FR 46335, August 17, 2007 
with request for comments by October 16, 2007. Five respondents 
submitted comments on the second interim rule. Those comments, 
summarized as follows, were considered by the Councils in the formation 
of this final rule:
    1. Applicability to Commercial Items. Four comments were received 
from three different respondents regarding the applicability of the 
rule to commercial items.
    (a) One respondent is concerned that although the FAR Matrix 
indicates that FAR clause 52.222-50 is not applicable to commercial 
items, FAR 52.212-5 includes 52.222-50 as a clause that the contracting 
officer may mark as being applicable to commercial items.
    Response: The Councils concur with the respondent's concern and 
agrees to indicate in the FAR clause matrix that clause 52.222-50 is 
required.
    (b) One respondent believes that by making the rule applicable to 
commercial items, the Councils misinterpreted the separate Federal 
crimes created under Chapter 77 of Title 18, United States Code, as 
providing the necessary criminal or civil penalties for the contract 
violations to which the Federal Acquisition Streamlining Act was meant 
to apply. The respondent requests the Councils to reconsider the 
applicability to commercial items.
    Response: The Councils note that application of the rule to all 
contracts for supplies and services, including those for commercial 
items, is consistent with the broad scope of the statutory directive 
and is in compliance with the Federal Acquisition Streamlining Act's 
(FASA) provision concerning commercial contracts. Specifically, the 
statutory language at 22 U.S.C. 7104(g) contained no exceptions or 
limitations with regard to its application to Federal contracts. While 
FASA governs and limits the applicability of laws to commercial items, 
it also provides that if a provision of law contains criminal or civil 
penalties, or if the Federal Acquisition Regulatory Council determines 
that it is not in the best interest of the Federal Government to exempt 
commercial item contracts, then the provision of law will apply to 
contracts for commercial items.
    (c) Another respondent asked the Councils to give further 
consideration to not applying the rule to commercial items 
(subcontracts), indicating that the application will give rise to 
unintended consequences and create an effect inconsistent with Federal 
acquisition goals.
    Response: The Councils believe that the TVPRA of 2003 and 2005 
reflects Congress's intent to allow for the

[[Page 2742]]

termination of all U.S. contracts when specified prohibited acts take 
place. Although the intent of the Federal Acquisition Streamlining Act 
and the Clinger-Cohen Act is to limit the applicability of laws to 
commercial items and commercially available off-the-shelf (COTS) items, 
these laws also provide that if a provision of law contains criminal or 
civil penalties, then commercial items are not to be exempted. The 
Councils believe the rule corresponds to these laws and the mandate of 
the TVPRA.
    (d) The respondent further commented that if the rule's 
applicability to commercial items is to be retained, that it be listed 
in FAR 52.244-6, Subcontracts for Commercial Items.
    Response: The Councils agree with the respondent's comment to add 
FAR 52.222-50 at 52.244-6(c)(1), requiring flow-down to subcontracts 
for commercial items.
    2. Exemption. One respondent recommended creating a general 
exemption from the rule where the Federal Government affirmatively 
contracts for services to support front-line intervention activities 
domestically or internationally. The respondent states that many 
contractors that are involved in both the health and international 
development arena may directly or indirectly be involved in front-line 
intervention contracts and even advocacy programs to increase awareness 
of these and related activities.
    Response: The Councils note the respondent's concern as it relates 
to ``front-line'' intervention contracts. However, the councils are not 
aware of any conflict that this rule may present in relation to those 
efforts. The terms used throughout the rule reflect the terms used in 
the statute. Actions taken to help trafficking victims do not violate 
the rule. Therefore, the Councils do not believe that an exemption is 
necessary and the final rule remains unchanged.
    3. Contractor Employees. Three comments were received regarding 
employees.
    (a) One respondent is concerned with the term ``minimal impact or 
involvement in contract performance'' in the definition of employee. 
The respondent believes that in the acquisition of commercial items 
(commercially available off the shelf supplies), a contractor may not 
know which employees had a minimal impact on contract performance. The 
respondent suggests that a commercial item supplier make a ``good faith 
determination'' regarding the minimal impact requirement.
    Response: The Councils agree that the contractor should make a 
first good faith determination of the employee's involvement. The 
Councils do not agree that use of the term ``minimal impact or 
involvement in contract performance'' is ambiguous. The term narrows 
the scope of the definition of employee and leaves the determination of 
impact/involvement to the contractor. The Councils do not agree that a 
contractor cannot determine if an employee had a ``minimal impact or 
involvement in contract performance'' in the acquisition of commercial 
items. The contractor is in the best position to know and determine 
what role an employee plays in the performance of a contract, major or 
minor. The contractor is responsible for work production as well as 
work assignments. In the case of a violation of the clause, the 
contractor can determine the employee's duties under the contract and 
associate those duties with performance under the contract.
    (b) One respondent is concerned that as written, the rule fails to 
achieve the contractor-accountability provisions of the TVPRA of 2005 
and requests that the Councils reinsert the requirements for 
contractors to obtain written notification of understanding of polices 
and procedures to combat human trafficking.
    Response: As written, the rule requires the contractor to notify 
its employees and take appropriate action against employees that 
violate policies and procedures to combat human trafficking. The 
Councils appreciate the respondent's concern for ensuring that 
contractor employees who engage in trafficking are appropriately held 
accountable. However, the Councils do not believe that requiring the 
contractor to obtain written notification of employees' understanding 
of policies and procedures to combat human trafficking will ensure that 
no violations occur. In fact, such a requirement may impose an undue 
and unnecessary burden on the contractor and taxpayer. The requirement 
for the contractor to notify its employees of the prohibited 
trafficking and other behaviors, as well as the actions that may be 
taken for violations, satisfies the requirements of 22 U.S.C. 7104(g), 
to hold those engaged in trafficking accountable.
    (c) Two respondents are concerned that the rule is directed to 
contractor employees not the contractor and requests that the rule be 
revised to limit it to the contractor and its employees during the 
performance of the contact, not to employee behavior outside work.
    Response: As written, the rule reflects the statutory language 
prohibiting severe forms of trafficking in persons or the procurement 
of a commercial sex act during the period of performance of the 
contract. The Councils believe that limiting the rule in the manner 
suggested by the respondent would inadequately implement the statute 
since employee violations are more likely to occur after working hours. 
Furthermore, contractor employees are often perceived as representing 
the Government, and their actions reflect upon the Government's 
integrity and ethics. Therefore, to ensure that U.S. Government 
contractors do not contribute to trafficking in persons, the rule 
requires the contractor to notify its employees (as defined in the 
clause) of the U.S. zero tolerance policy, and take action against 
those employees who violate the U.S. policy.
    4. Scope of Contractor's Obligation. One respondent suggested that 
the text of the clause at FAR 52.222-50 be revised to further elaborate 
on the scope of the contractor's obligations regarding what actions it 
may take against employees and subcontractors who violate the policy.
    Response: The Councils do not believe that further elaboration is 
necessary. The clause is clear that contractors must notify their 
employees regarding the policy and the actions that may be taken for 
violations. The clause lists examples of actions that contractors may 
take, but does not limit the actions to only those listed. Furthermore, 
the clause already provides contractors with flexibility as to what 
actions they may choose to impose against either employees or 
subcontractors in subparagraph (c)(2) by stating that the contractor 
shall take ``appropriate'' action.
    5. Reporting Allegations and Employment. Three comments were 
received regarding the procedures for reporting allegations and 
employment issues.
    (a) One respondent objected to the obligation in the FAR clause 
52.222-50(d)(1), which requires contractors to notify the contracting 
officer immediately when they learn of allegations that the policy has 
been violated. The respondent proposed that contractors be obligated to 
notify only when they have ``adequate evidence'' of a violation.
    Response: The Councils believes that it is important for the 
contracting officer to learn immediately of alleged violations of U.S. 
trafficking policy. Many such allegations become a subject of interest 
quickly, and it is important in those situations that the contracting 
officer be informed. The Councils further believes that the ``adequate 
evidence'' standard contained in FAR 22.1704(b) properly limits the

[[Page 2743]]

contracting officer's ability to exercise the available remedies with 
respect to allegations of conduct that violate U.S. policy.
    (b) One respondent is concerned that the rule does not provide 
guidance on how employees found to have engaged in trafficking will be 
prevented from working on another Government contract. The respondent 
believes that some ``stop-gap'' measure is required until the 
Government deals with the investigations and prosecution issue.
    Response: The Councils disagree that the rule should provide 
guidance on how employees found to have engaged in trafficking are to 
be prevented from working on another Government contract. Providing 
such guidance would be outside the scope of the rule. Each acquisition 
carries its own unique and special contract requirements and terms and 
conditions for which the contractor is responsible and liable. This 
responsibility and liability includes the contractor's hiring of 
responsible employees and subcontractors that meet the performance 
requirements, and terms and conditions specified in the acquisition. 
This responsibility may include the contractor's responsibility to 
conduct appropriate background investigations prior to hiring its 
employees and subcontractors.
    (c) Another respondent is concerned that the rule provides the 
potential for wrongful discharge filings and collective bargaining 
issues.
    Response: A contractor may need to update the employment contracts 
it forms (whether with unions or non-unionized employees) to reflect 
the anti-trafficking statute, which is intended to have an impact on 
the behavior of Government contractor employees.
    6. Prescriptive Language Applicability. One respondent noted that 
the prescriptive language at FAR 22.1703 and 22.1704(a) provides that 
``Government contracts shall prohibit contractors, contractor 
employees, subcontractors and subcontractor employees'' from taking the 
listed actions. However, the clause at FAR 52.222-50(b) is limited to 
``contractor and contractor employees.'' The prescriptive language and 
clause language should be reconciled.
    Response: It should be noted that provisions and clauses are 
directed to the offeror or contractor. The term ``contractor and 
contractor employees'' refers to the prime contractor only. When a 
prime contractor issues a subcontract, the clause would then be 
applicable to the subcontractor using the term ``contractor and 
contractor employees.'' However, the prescriptive language provides all 
conditions, requirements, and instructions for using the provision or 
clause and is applicable to both contractors and subcontractors. The 
Councils recommends that the final rule remain unchanged.
    7. Administrative Issues. One respondent recommended several 
administrative changes, as follows:
    (a) FAR 22.1703 uses the word ``and'' while FAR 52.222-50(b) uses 
the word ``or.'' This should be reconciled;
    (b) Move the reference to FAR clause 52.222-50 from FAR 52.212-
5(b)(24)(i) and (ii) to FAR 52.212-5(a) because the clause applies to 
all contracts;
    (c) FAR 52.212-5(e)(1)(vii) needlessly cites a reason for listing 
the flow-down clause. By incorporating the clause in paragraph (e), by 
definition the clause flows down to subcontractors; and
    (d) FAR 52.222-50(e) should be reworded to remove awkwardness.
    Responses:
    (a) FAR language at 22.1703(a)(2) has been changed to read ``or'' 
instead of ``and.'' All other conjunctions are used correctly 
throughout the rule.
    (b) FAR clause 52.222-50 has been moved to 52.212-5(a).
    (c) FAR language at 52.212-5(e)(1)(vii) has been revised to remove 
the reason for flow-down.
    (d) FAR 52.222-50(e) has been revised to remove awkward wording of 
remedies.
    8. Clarification of Definitions. Two respondents recommended 
further revisions regarding definitions. One respondent recommended 
adding a definition for ``forced labor'' as defined in the criminal 
statute at 18 U.S.C. Sec.  1589, and another recommended more 
elaboration to the definitions of ``sex act'' and ``employee'' and 
offered suggested language as well.
    Response: The Councils concur that a definition of ``forced labor'' 
should be added. The statute prohibits severe forms of trafficking in 
persons and, separately, forced labor. While forced labor is a severe 
form of trafficking in persons, as defined in 22 U.S.C. 7102, the 
Councils agree that defining the specific term ``forced labor'' would 
add more clarity. Therefore, a definition of ``forced labor'' has been 
added to 22.1702 and the clause at 52.222-50.
    Because the FAR rule reflects the definition of ``commercial sex 
act'' in accordance with 22 U.S.C. 7102, the Councils believe that the 
statutory definition of commercial sex acts should remain as stated in 
the rule without further elaboration.
    Lastly, a respondent requested clarifications in the definition of 
``employee'' to more clearly outline what is meant by ``directly 
engaged'' and ``minimal impact or involvement''. The original rule 
issued on April 19, 2006 (71 FR 20301) used the phrase ``including all 
direct cost employees'' in the definition of ``employee'', similar to 
the language used in FAR 23.503 implementing the Drug-Free Workplace 
Act. The Councils subsequently removed this phrase in the second 
interim rule based on public comment that the phrase caused confusion 
since the term ``direct cost'' appeared to refer to cost-reimbursement 
contracts only. The phrase ``minimal impact or involvement'' is also 
used in the definition of ``employee'' under FAR 23.503 and is not 
further defined. The Councils are not aware that the lack of more 
definitive elaboration has caused any problems in the implementation of 
the drug-free workplace requirements. Also see the discussion under 
Paragraph 3.
    9. Facilitation of Investigations and Prosecutions. One respondent 
suggested the creation of an anti-trafficking hotline that would link 
directly to the Department of Justice to allow contractor employees to 
report trafficking allegations.
    Response: This comment goes beyond the statutory requirements of 
the Act, which requires only that contracts contain provisions allowing 
for termination if the contractor or subcontractor engages in conduct 
that violates U.S. policy on trafficking. However, the Councils 
recommend adding a link to the Department of State's Office to Monitor 
and Combat Trafficking in Persons' (DOS G/TIP) (https://www.state.gov/g/
tip) at FAR 22.1703 for further information on human trafficking and 
links to other Government websites.
    10. One respondent suggested making a distinction between 
trafficking abuses and the procurement of a commercial sex act. The 
respondent further states that trafficking in persons is a felony while 
procurement of a commercial sex act is not covered by Federal law and 
is treated in most states as a misdemeanor, unless it involves a child. 
The lack of distinction in the rule heightens confusion and becomes 
difficult to implement.
    Response: The statute requires that the Government have the 
authority to terminate a contract in cases where the contractor or 
subcontractor engages in severe forms of trafficking in persons, or in 
cases involving the procurement of a commercial sex act. The rule seeks 
to implement both statutory directives and remains unchanged.
    11. Enforcement Issues Where Commercial Sex Acts are Legal. One 
respondent was concerned that certain

[[Page 2744]]

types of sex acts are legal in several jurisdictions of the U.S. and in 
some foreign countries and urged that careful attention be given to how 
the remedies in this rule intersect with otherwise lawful conduct.
    Response: The Councils recognize the challenges contractors face in 
monitoring employee actions during non-work hours. However, contractors 
and their employees need to understand that procuring commercial sex 
acts is an unacceptable behavior that carries penalties. The Councils 
do not believe that a change in the language to distinguish enforcement 
actions for ``unlawful commercial sex acts'' and ``lawful commercial 
sex acts'' is consistent with the statute and therefore the final rule 
remains unchanged.
    12. Investigation and Punishment of Violators. One respondent 
submitted two comments regarding the investigation of trafficking 
violators.
    (a) The respondent recommends revising the text to include specific 
procedures governing the investigation and punishment of contractors 
for violating the rule. The respondent also questions whether there is 
a requirement for the contractor to investigate if the company learns 
that an employee may have been involved in a commercial sex act.
    Response: Violations of the rule should be handled in the same 
manner that the contractor handles other allegations of employee 
misconduct.
    (b) The respondent also suggests creating a decision-tree for 
contracting officers attempting to apply the rule.
    Response: In cases where trafficking is alleged, the FAR is clear 
on what actions the contracting officer may take. After making a 
determination in writing that adequate evidence exists to suspect any 
of the violations in paragraph (a) of FAR 22.1704, the contracting 
officer may pursue any of the remedies specified in paragraph (e) of 
FAR clause 52.222-50.
    13. Public Meeting. One respondent requested that the Councils seek 
an active dialogue with the contractor community in developing the 
final rule.
    Response: The Councils have solicited the public several times for 
comments to assist with the development of this rule. Public comments 
were solicited on April 16, 2006 and August 17, 2007.
    This is a significant regulatory action and, therefore, was subject 
to review under Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, 
dated September 30, 1993. This rule is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 
804.

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Department of Defense, the General Services Administration, and 
the National Aeronautics and Space Administration certify that this 
final rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities within the meaning of the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601, et seq., because the impact will be 
minimal unless the contractor or its employees or subcontractors engage 
in forms of trafficking in persons, use forced labor, or procure 
commercial sex acts that are illegal within the U.S. Although not 
considered significant, additional impact may be associated with 
contract performance in counties/states and locations outside the U.S. 
where certain commercial sex acts are legal. However, the termination 
authorities at 22 U.S.C. 7104(g) apply to Government contracts 
performed in these areas.

C. Paperwork Reduction Act

    The Paperwork Reduction Act (Pub. L. 104-13) applies because the 
final rule contains information collection requirements. Accordingly, 
the Regulatory Secretariat will forward a request for approval of a new 
information collection requirement to the Office of Management and 
Budget under 44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq. Public comments concerning this 
request will be invited through a subsequent Federal Register notice.

List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 12, 22, and 52

    Government procurement.

    Dated: December 24, 2008
Edward Loeb,
Acting Director, Office of Acquisition Policy.

0
Accordingly, the interim rules published in the Federal Register at 71 
FR 20301, April 19, 2006, and at 72 FR 46335, August 17, 2007, are 
adopted as a final rule with the following changes:
0
1. The authority citation for 48 CFR parts 22 and 52 continues to read 
as follows:

    Authority: 40 U.S.C. 121(c); 10 U.S.C. chapter 137; and 42 
U.S.C. 2473(c).

PART 22--APPLICATION OF LABOR LAWS TO GOVERNMENT ACQUISITIONS

0
2. Amend section 22.1702 by adding, in alphabetical order, the 
definition ``Forced Labor'' to read as follows:


22.1702  Definitions.

* * * * *
    Forced labor means knowingly providing or obtaining the labor or 
services of a person--
    (1) By threats of serious harm to, or physical restraint against, 
that person or another person;
    (2) By means of any scheme, plan, or pattern intended to cause the 
person to believe that, if the person did not perform such labor or 
services, that person or another person would suffer serious harm or 
physical restraint; or
    (3) By means of the abuse or threatened abuse of law or the legal 
process.
* * * * *
0
3. Amend section 22.1703 by revising the introductory paragraph; and by 
removing from the end of paragraph (a)(2) ``and'' and adding ``or'' in 
its place. The revised text reads as follows:


22.1703  Policy.

    The United States Government has adopted a zero tolerance policy 
regarding trafficking in persons. Additional information about 
trafficking in persons may be found at the website for the Department 
of State's Office to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons' at 
https://www.state.gov/g/tip. Government contracts shall--
* * * * *
0
4. Amend section 22.1704 in paragraph (b) by adding a new sentence 
after the first sentence to read as follows:


22.1704  Violations and remedies.

* * * * *
    (b) * * * The contracting officer may take into consideration 
whether the contractor had a Trafficking in Persons awareness program 
at the time of the violation as a mitigating factor when determining 
the appropriate remedies. * * *

PART 52--SOLICITATION PROVISIONS AND CONTRACT CLAUSES

0
5. Amend section 52.212-5 by--
0
a. Revising the date of the clause;
0
b. Redesignating paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(2) as (a)(2) and (a)(3), 
respectively; and adding a new paragraph (a)(1);
0
c. Removing paragraph (b)(25); and redesignating paragraphs (b)(26) 
through (b)(42) as (b)(25) through (b)(41), respectively; and
0
d. Revising paragraph (e)(1)(viii) to read as follows:


52.212-5  Contract Terms and Conditions Required to Implement Statutes 
or Executive Orders--Commercial Items.

* * * * *
    CONTRACT TERMS AND CONDITIONS REQUIRED TO IMPLEMENT STATUTES OR 
EXECUTIVE ORDERS--COMMERCIAL ITEMS (FEB 2009)

    (a) * * *

[[Page 2745]]

    (1) 52.222-50, Combating Trafficking in Persons (FEB 2009) (22 
U.S.C. 7104(g)).
    ----Alternate I (Aug 2007) of 52.222-50 (22 U.S.C. 7104(g)).
* * * * *
    (e)(1) * * *
    (viii) 52.222-50, Combating Trafficking in Persons (FEB 2009) 
(22 U.S.C. 7104(g)).
    ----Alternate I (Aug 2007) of 52.222-50 (22 U.S.C. 7104(g)).
* * * * *

0
6. Amend section 52.213-4 by revising the date of the clause and 
paragraph (a)(1)(iv); and removing from paragraph (a)(2)(vi) ``(DEC 
2008)'' and adding ``(FEB 2009)'' in its place to read as follows:


52.213-4  Terms and Conditions--Simplified Acquisitions (Other Than 
Commercial Items).

* * * * *
    TERMS AND CONDITIONS--SIMPLIFIED ACQUISITIONS (OTHER THAN 
COMMERCIAL ITEMS (FEB 2009)

    (a) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (iv) 52.222-50, Combating Trafficking in Persons (FEB 2009) (22 
U.S.C. 7104(g)).
* * * * *

0
7. Amend section 52.222-50 by--
0
a. Revising the date of the clause;
0
b. Adding, in alphabetical order, the definition ``Forced Labor'';
0
c. Removing from the introductory text of paragraph (e) ``render the 
Contractor subject to'' and adding ``result in'' in its place; and 
revising paragraphs (e)(1) and (e)(2); and
0
d. Adding paragraph (g) to read as follows:


52.222-50  Combating Trafficking in Persons.

* * * * *
    COMBATING TRAFFICKING IN PERSONS (FEB 2009)

    (a) * * *
* * * * *
    Forced Labor means knowingly providing or obtaining the labor or 
services of a person--
    (1) By threats of serious harm to, or physical restraint 
against, that person or another person;
    (2) By means of any scheme, plan, or pattern intended to cause 
the person to believe that, if the person did not perform such labor 
or services, that person or another person would suffer serious harm 
or physical restraint; or
    (3) By means of the abuse or threatened abuse of law or the 
legal process.
* * * * *
    (e) * * *
    (1) Requiring the Contractor to remove a Contractor employee or 
employees from the performance of the contract;
    (2) Requiring the Contractor to terminate a subcontract;
* * * * *
    (g) Mitigating Factor. The Contracting Officer may consider 
whether the Contractor had a Trafficking in Persons awareness 
program at the time of the violation as a mitigating factor when 
determining remedies. Additional information about Trafficking in 
Persons and examples of awareness programs can be found at the 
website for the Department of State's Office to Monitor and Combat 
Trafficking in Persons at https://www.state.gov/g/tip.

    (End of clause)
0
8. Amend section 52.244-6 by revising the date of the clause; by 
redesignating paragraph (c)(1)(vii) as paragraph (c)(1)(viii); and 
adding a new paragraph (c)(1)(vii) to read as follows:


52.244-6  Subcontracts for Commercial Items.

* * * * *
    SUBCONTRACTS FOR COMMERCIAL ITEMS (FEB 2009)

* * * * *
    (c)(1) * * *
    (vii) 52.222-50, Combating Trafficking in Persons (FEB 2009) (22 
U.S.C. 7104(g)).
* * * * *

[FR Doc. E9-548 Filed 1-14-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6820-EP-S