Notice of Final Determination To Remove Uzbek Cotton From the List of Products Requiring Federal Contractor Certification as to Forced or Indentured Child Labor Pursuant to Executive Order 13126, 11123-11126 [2019-05360]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 57 / Monday, March 25, 2019 / Notices
• Mail: Teri Barnett, Departmental
Privacy Officer, U.S. Department of the
Interior, 1849 C Street NW, Room 7112,
Washington, DC 20240.
• Hand-delivering comments to Teri
Barnett, Departmental Privacy Officer,
U.S. Department of the Interior, 1849 C
Street NW, Room 7112, Washington, DC
20240.
• Email: DOI_Privacy@ios.doi.gov.
All submissions received must
include the agency name and docket
number. All comments received will be
posted without change to https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided. You
should be aware your entire comment
including your personal identifying
information, such as your address,
phone number, email address, or any
other personal identifying information
in your comment, may be made publicly
available at any time. While you may
request to withhold your personal
identifying information from public
review, we cannot guarantee we will be
able to do so.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Rowena Dufford, Associate Privacy
Officer, Bureau of Safety and
Environmental Enforcement, 45600
Woodland Road, Mail Stop VAE–MSD,
Sterling, VA 20166, email at privacy@
bsee.gov or by telephone at (703) 787–
1257.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
former Minerals Management Service
(MMS) described the requirements for
lessees and operators to train their
personnel in 30 Code of Federal
Regulations Part 250, Subpart O, Well
Control and Production Safety Training.
This regulation assigned responsibility
to MMS for oversight of training for well
control and production safety systems,
and oversight of MMS accredited
institutions to train and certify lessee
and operator personnel to work
competently and safely on the Outer
Continental Shelf. Training
organizations were required to provide
copies of training certificates, which
included the individual’s full name,
Social Security number, and training
completion date, among other categories
of records, which were maintained
under Privacy Act system of records
notice (SORN), INTERIOR/MMS–12,
Lessee/Operator Training Files.
In October 2000, the regulation was
amended to reassign responsibilities for
overseeing well control and production
safety training to lessees and operators.
When the regulation went into effect,
the records associated with the
regulation no longer met the Privacy Act
standard for a system of records and
eliminated the need for the SORN. The
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:47 Mar 22, 2019
Jkt 247001
records covered by this SORN were
disposed of in accordance with the
prevailing records retention schedule.
In May 2010, Secretary’s Order 3299
directed the division of MMS into three
independent entities with separate and
clearly defined missions: The Bureau of
Safety and Environmental Enforcement
(BSEE), the Bureau of Ocean Energy
Management, and the Office of Natural
Resources Revenue. Responsibilities for
this system of records notice transferred
to BSEE. Pursuant to the provisions of
the Privacy Act of 1974, as amended,
the Bureau of Safety and Environmental
Enforcement is formally rescinding the
INTERIOR/MMS–12, Lessee/Operator
Training Files system of records notice
from its system of records inventory.
Rescinding the INTERIOR/MMS–12,
Lessee/Operator Training Files system
of records notice will have no adverse
impacts on individuals as the records
were disposed of in accordance with the
records retention schedule. This
rescindment will also promote the
overall streamlining and management of
Department of the Interior Privacy Act
systems of records.
SYSTEM NAME AND NUMBER:
INTERIOR/MMS–12, Lessee/Operator
Training Files.
HISTORY:
64 FR 8118 (February 18, 1999);
modification published at 74 FR 42922
(August 25, 2009).
Teri Barnett,
Departmental Privacy Officer, Department of
the Interior.
[FR Doc. 2019–05286 Filed 3–22–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–VH–P
INTERNATIONAL TRADE
COMMISSION
[Investigation No. 337–TA–1146]
Certain Taurine (2Aminoethanesulfonic Acid), Methods
of Production and Processes for
Making the Same, and Products
Containing the Same; Institution of
Investigation; Correction
U.S. International Trade
Commission.
ACTION: Correction of notice.
AGENCY:
Correction is made to notice 84 FR
8110, which was published on March 6,
2019, Respondent JSW Enterprises, LLC
d/b/a Nurtavative Ingredients address
number and doing business as name are
erroneously incorrect in the Notice. The
name and address should read as: JSW
Enterprises, LLC, d/b/a Nutravative
PO 00000
Frm 00079
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
11123
Ingredients, 601 Century Parkway, Suite
200, Allen, TX 75013.
By order of the Commission.
Issued: March 19, 2019.
Katherine Hiner,
Acting Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2019–05578 Filed 3–22–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020–02–P
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
[DOL–2018–0004]
Notice of Final Determination To
Remove Uzbek Cotton From the List of
Products Requiring Federal Contractor
Certification as to Forced or
Indentured Child Labor Pursuant to
Executive Order 13126
Bureau of International Labor
Affairs, U.S. Department of Labor.
ACTION: Notice of final determination.
AGENCY:
This notice is a final
determination to revise the list required
by Executive Order No. 13126
(‘‘Prohibition of Acquisition of Products
Produced by Forced or Indentured Child
Labor’’, hereafter the E.O. List). The E.O.
List identifies a list of products, by their
country of origin, that the Department of
Labor (DOL), in consultation and
cooperation with the Department of
State (DOS) and the Department of
Homeland Security (DHS) (collectively,
the Departments), has a reasonable basis
to believe might have been mined,
produced, or manufactured by forced or
indentured child labor.
The Departments proposed removing
cotton from Uzbekistan from the E.O.
List in a Notice of Initial Determination
that was published in the Federal
Register on July 31, 2018. After a
thorough review of the comments
received and information available, the
Departments have determined that the
use of forced child labor in the cotton
harvest in Uzbekistan has been
significantly reduced to isolated
incidents. As a result, this product no
longer meets the criteria for inclusion in
the E.O. List.
This final determination is the fifth
revision of the E.O. List required by E.O.
13126 in accordance with DOL’s
Procedural Guidelines for the
Maintenance of the List of Products
Requiring Federal Contractor
Certification as to Forced or Indentured
Child Labor (Procedural Guidelines).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:
I. Initial Determination
On July 31, 2018, DOL, in
consultation and cooperation with DOS
and DHS, published a Notice of Initial
E:\FR\FM\25MRN1.SGM
25MRN1
11124
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 57 / Monday, March 25, 2019 / Notices
Determination in the Federal Register
proposing to remove cotton from
Uzbekistan from the E.O. List.1 The
initial determination stated the
Departments had preliminarily
determined that the use of forced or
indentured child labor in the
production of that product had been
significantly reduced and invited public
comments until August 30, 2018 on
whether cotton from Uzbekistan should
be removed from the E.O. List, as well
as any other issues related to the fair
and effective implementation of E.O.
13126. The initial determination, and
the public comments submitted, can be
viewed at Docket ID No. DOL–2018–
0004 or requested from Austin Pedersen
at: Office of Child Labor, Forced Labor,
and Human Trafficking (OCFT), Bureau
of International Labor Affairs, Room S–
5317, U.S. Department of Labor, 200
Constitution Avenue NW, Washington,
DC 20210; telephone: (202) 693–4843,
email: Pedersen.Austin.M@dol.gov.
Individuals with hearing or speech
impairments may access the telephone
number above via TTY by calling the
Federal Information Relay Service at 1–
877–889–5627.
II. Public Comment Period
During the public comment period,
six comments were submitted. Two
comments were letters: One from the
Cotton Campaign on behalf of 36
members of the Cotton Campaign
coalition, opposing the initial
determination, and one from the
Government of Uzbekistan, supporting
the initial determination. Two
comments were summaries of DOL
meetings: The first with the
International Labor Rights Forum (ILRF,
a lead organization of the Cotton
Campaign coalition) and the second
with the Ambassador of Uzbekistan to
the United States, both of which
occurred during the comment period.
Finally, two comments were electronic
messages related to those meetings. All
comments are available for public
viewing at https://www.regulations.gov
(reference Docket ID No. DOL–2018–
0004).
In its letter,2 the Cotton Campaign
indicated its opposition to the removal
of cotton from Uzbekistan from the E.O
List. The letter stated that there were
incidents during the 2017 cotton harvest
of forced child labor in the
Karakalpakstan region and of child labor
in the Andijan region, and that some
cotton pickers had been coached to tell
1 83
FR 36969.
Campaign. Letter. August 29, 2018.
https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=DOL2018-0004-0004.
2 Cotton
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:47 Mar 22, 2019
Jkt 247001
observers they worked voluntarily. It
stated that there was no conclusive
evidence that forced child labor had
ended. Additionally, it asserted that,
due to pressure stemming from the
government’s quota system, parents
sometimes brought their children to
cotton fields to pick cotton, and it
pointed to evidence that children in a
few schools were required to bring
cotton to school in order for the school
to meet the cotton quota imposed on it.
It further stated that the government’s
investigations and prosecutions of
officials who violated laws against
forced child labor were sporadic.
In their meeting with DOL on August
9, 2018,3 the ILRF representatives
encouraged DOL not to issue a final
determination until after the 2018
cotton harvest season and pointed to
instances of forced child labor in
Uzbekistan in 2017 as indicated in an
Uzbek-German Forum report.4 The ILRF
representatives also discussed the
Cotton Campaign’s forthcoming report
on the spring weeding season.5
Email messages exchanged by DOL
officials and the ILRF 6 were sent to
schedule the aforementioned meeting
and inform the ILRF of the comment
period.
In its letter,7 the Government of
Uzbekistan supported the initial
determination. The government
discussed the country’s legal framework
prohibiting forced labor and its work
with human rights organizations,
activists monitoring the 2017 cotton
harvest, and the World Bank Third Party
Monitoring system implemented by the
International Labor Organization (ILO).
The Government of Uzbekistan also
cited its efforts to investigate child labor
and forced labor complaints and to
punish violators. It noted the creation of
3 DOL. Record of Contact with Outside Party—
ILRF. August 9, 2018. https://www.regulations.gov/
document?D=DOL-2018-0004-0002.
4 Uzbek-German Forum for Human Rights. ‘‘We
Pick Cotton Out of Fear’’: Systematic Forced Labor
and the Accountability Gap in Uzbekistan. May 19,
2018. https://uzbekgermanforum.org/we-pick-cottonout-of-fear-systematic-forced-labor-and-theaccountability-gap-in-uzbekistan/.
5 Uzbek-German Forum for Human Rights. ‘‘We
want farmers to have full freedom’’: No Need for
Forced Labor when Farmers are Empowered to Pay
Decent Wages: Spring Cotton Fieldwork 2018.
September 10, 2018. https://uzbekgermanforum.org/
we-want-farmers-to-have-full-freedom-no-need-forforced-labor-when-farmers-are-empowered-to-paydecent-wages-spring-cotton-fieldwork-2018/.
6 DOL. Record of Contact with Outside Party—
Email Correspondence with ILRF. Sent between
July 31 and August 10, 2018. https://
www.regulations.gov/document?D=DOL-2018-00040006.
7 Government of Uzbekistan. Aide-Memoire on
Measures to Eradicate Child and Forced Labor.
August 2018. https://www.regulations.gov/
document?D=DOL-2018-0004-0003.
PO 00000
Frm 00080
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
a Parliamentary Commission on Labor
Rights and explained the Commission’s
responsibility to work with state and
local authorities to ensure compliance
with international labor standards and
national law. It further noted the
accomplishments of its Decent Work
Country Program agreement with the
ILO and the extension of that agreement
to 2020. The Government of
Uzbekistan’s submission also detailed
its ongoing efforts to improve working
conditions in the cotton sector,
including through raising pickers’
payment rates and piloting structural
reforms of the industry to improve
productivity and encourage private
competition.
During a meeting with DOL officials
on August 10, 2018,8 the Ambassador of
Uzbekistan discussed his government’s
goals of reducing forced labor in all
cotton fields. In addition, the
Ambassador noted efforts to improve
transparency of the cotton harvest to
international civil society organizations.
The email from the Embassy of
Uzbekistan 9 thanked DOL officials for
the meeting.
III. Analysis of Comments Submitted
Following the close of the public
comment period on August 30, 2018,
the Departments have carefully
reviewed and considered all public
comments received.10 In so doing, the
Departments considered and weighed
the factors identified in the Procedural
Guidelines: The source of the
information presented, the date of the
8 DOL. Record of Contact with Outside Party—
Ambassador of Uzbekistan. August 10, 2018.
https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=DOL2018-0004-0005.
9 Record of Contact with Outside Party—Email
Correspondence with Uzbek Ambassador. Sent
August 13, 2018. https://www.regulations.gov/
document?D=DOL-2018-0004-0007.
10 The Departments also note available reporting
on the 2018 cotton harvest season. See, e.g., Cotton
Campaign. Forced Labor in Uzbekistan’s Cotton
Fields Was Present in 2018 Harvest. December 14,
2018. https://laborrights.org/releases/forced-laboruzbekistan%E2%80%99s-cotton-fields-waspresent-2018-harvest.
Grove, Thomas. ‘‘Uzbekistan Says It Is Working
to End Forced Labor in Cotton Fields.’’ Wall Street
Journal. December 17, 2018. https://www.wsj.com/
articles/uzbekistan-picks-away-at-forced-labor-inits-cotton-fields-11545042600.
Guilbert, Kieran. ‘‘Campaigners challenge U.N.
over forced labor in Uzbekistan’s cotton industry.’’
Reuters. November 23, 2018. https://
www.reuters.com/article/us-uzbekistan-labourworkers/campaigners-challenge-un-over-forcedlabor-in-uzbekistans-cotton-industryidUSKCN1NS1S6.
Uzbek-German Forum for Human Rights. Despite
Commitment and Efforts, Systematic Forced Labor
in Uzbekistan’s Cotton Fields was Present During
the 2018 Harvest. December 14, 2018. https://
uzbekgermanforum.org/despite-commitment-andefforts-systematic-forced-labor-in-uzbekistan-scotton-fields-was-present-during-the-2018-harvest/.
E:\FR\FM\25MRN1.SGM
25MRN1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 57 / Monday, March 25, 2019 / Notices
information, the extent of corroboration
of the information, whether the
information involved more than an
isolated incident, and whether recent
and credible efforts are being made to
address forced or indentured child labor
in the country and industry.11
The reports cited in the Cotton
Campaign’s letter document no more
than five cases of forced child labor,
including cases in which, according to
sources cited in the letter, children were
required to pick cotton and bring it to
school in order for it to meet the cotton
quota. In one of these cases, a local
inspector imposed fines on the school
director for requiring students to bring
cotton.12 The submission does not
indicate whether the government took
actions to remedy the other cases.
However, based on other information
that DOL collected, as a general matter,
the government made improvements in
investigating and remedying such
cases.13 For example, during a research
trip to Uzbekistan in the spring of 2018,
DOL found that, unlike previous years,
upon receiving allegations of child labor
from independent activists, the
government made efforts to investigate
and remediate such cases, and that at
least three individuals were convicted 14
and 14 local officials were subjected to
administrative penalties.15
The Cotton Campaign letter also refers
to other cases of child labor, rather than
forced child labor. However, these cases
highlight that the government has made
improvements in investigating and
remedying such cases. ILO monitoring
in 2017 identified 12 children ages 10
to 14 engaged in child labor in one field
in Karakalpakstan. In this case,
according to the ILO, the district hokim
(governor) and other community
members took the situation seriously
and immediately removed the children
from the field. The local mahalla
(community association) leader, the
11 66 FR 5351, at 5352. (Jan. 18, 2001). https://
www.federalregister.gov/documents/2001/01/18/01952/bureau-of-international-labor-affairsprocedural-guidelines-for-the-maintenance-of-thelist-of.
12 Uzbek-German Forum for Human Rights. ‘‘We
Pick Cotton Out of Fear’’: Systematic Forced Labor
and the Accountability Gap in Uzbekistan. May 19,
2018. https://uzbekgermanforum.org/we-pick-cottonout-of-fear-systematic-forced-labor-and-theaccountability-gap-in-uzbekistan/.
13 Ibid. Kozyreva, Anna. ‘‘The Fields of
Hopelessness: Uzbekistan’s Children Remain as
Hostages in the Battle for the Cotton Crop,’’ Fergana
News. November 14, 2017. On File.
14 U.S. Embassy—Tashkent. Reporting. January 9,
2018.
15 International Labor Organization. Third-Party
Monitoring of Measures Against Child Labor and
Forced Labor During the 2017 Cotton Harvest in
Uzbekistan. February 1, 2018. https://www.ilo.org/
ipec/Informationresources/WCMS_543130/lang--en/
index.htm.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:47 Mar 22, 2019
Jkt 247001
local Ministry of Education
representative, the district prosecutor,
and the hokim all participated in the
investigation of the issue. ILO monitors
concluded that the case was an isolated
incident based on the fact that the
farmer, the children’s parents, the
mahalla leader, and a representative of
the local Department of Education all
appeared unaware of the children’s
presence in the fields.16 Separately, the
Uzbek government-led Coordination
Council on Decent Work’s national
monitoring effort, without specifying
the location, identified 18 children in
the cotton fields, four of whom were
picking cotton.17 The Government of
Uzbekistan issued administrative
penalties when investigations identified
violations of labor laws.18 These two
cases were not considered directly
relevant to E.O. List, since they were
cases of child labor, rather than forced
child labor.
With respect to the evidence
submitted by the Cotton Campaign
regarding the ability to freely conduct
monitoring in the sector, DOL notes that
there are three monitoring mechanisms
active during the cotton harvest, as well
as other mechanisms in place to receive
complaints.19 The existence of such
mechanisms, and their increased use
each year, points to the opportunity that
workers have to be candid about the
terms and conditions of their work,
including forced child labor.
The first of these mechanisms is
monitoring by the Coordination
Council.20 The second is monitoring
conducted by independent human
rights activists; for example, the UzbekGerman Forum for Human Rights, a
Berlin-based NGO, releases reports on
the harvest based on these activists’
monitoring.21 Third, the ILO, in
collaboration with the Federation of
Trade Unions of Uzbekistan, conducts
Third-Party Monitoring of the cotton
harvest.22 This mechanism was
16 International Labor Organization. Third-Party
Monitoring of Measures Against Child Labor and
Forced Labor During the 2017 Cotton Harvest in
Uzbekistan. February 1, 2018. https://www.ilo.org/
ipec/Informationresources/WCMS_543130/lang--en/
index.htm.
17 U.S. Embassy—Tashkent. Reporting. January 9,
2018.
18 Ibid.
19 Department of Labor. ‘‘Uzbekistan’’ in Findings
on the Worst Forms of Child Labor. September
2018. https://www.dol.gov/agencies/ilab/resources/
reports/child-labor/uzbekistan.
20 Government of Uzbekistan. Response to FRN.
On File.
21 Uzbek-German Forum for Human Rights.
Cotton Harvest 2017: Summary of Key Findings.
March 2018. On File.
22 International Labor Organization. Third-Party
Monitoring of Measures Against Child Labor and
Forced Labor During the 2017 Cotton Harvest in
PO 00000
Frm 00081
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
11125
established in 2015 through an
agreement between the World Bank and
the ILO; it is funded by a Bank-managed
multi-donor trust fund to monitor labor
issues under World Bank development
projects for agriculture, water, and
education in Uzbekistan.23
DOL also notes the existence of
multiple, active feedback mechanisms
for worker complaints. Uzbekistan’s
Ministry of Employment and Labor
Relations operates a hotline 24 and the
Federation of Trade Unions operates
legal clinics in each province to process
labor complaints.25 Two World Bank
projects have their own specific
feedback mechanisms for participant
concerns.26 In addition, the President of
Uzbekistan in 2017 established a general
hotline for members of the public to
raise issues with the Uzbek
government.27
Portions of the comments submitted
in response to the initial determination
were not directly related to the use of
forced child labor in the cotton harvest
in Uzbekistan, but do point to the
continued existence of adult forced
labor in the sector. For instance, the
Cotton Campaign referred to the quota
system for the cotton harvest in
Uzbekistan and, in a meeting with DOL,
ILRF stated that the forced labor of
adults continues to be prevalent. These
comments cited incidents of school
officials denying pupils the right to
attend class if their parents did not pick
cotton or pay for a replacement. The
government’s letter pointed to various
efforts it had made to, in part, combat
the forced labor of adults in the cotton
sector, such as the mechanization of the
cotton harvest, diversification of
agricultural crops, increasing cotton
pickers’ wages by 40 percent or more,
increasing the price of cotton so that
farmers could hire voluntary workers,
and government directives to strictly
prosecute violators.
Uzbekistan. February 1, 2018. https://www.ilo.org/
ipec/Informationresources/WCMS_543130/lang--en/
index.htm.
23 International Labor Organization. Third-Party
Monitoring of Measures Against Child Labor and
Forced Labor During the 2017 Cotton Harvest in
Uzbekistan. February 1, 2018. https://www.ilo.org/
ipec/Informationresources/WCMS_543130/lang--en/
index.htm.
24 U.S. Embassy—Tashkent. Reporting. January 9,
2018.
25 International Labor Organization. Third-Party
Monitoring of Measures Against Child Labor and
Forced Labor During the 2017 Cotton Harvest in
Uzbekistan. February 1, 2018. https://www.ilo.org/
ipec/Informationresources/WCMS_543130/lang--en/
index.htm.
26 Ibid.
27 U.S. Embassy—Tashkent. Reporting. January 9,
2018.
E:\FR\FM\25MRN1.SGM
25MRN1
11126
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 57 / Monday, March 25, 2019 / Notices
IV. Final Determination
The Departments have carefully
reviewed, analyzed, and considered the
comments submitted in determining
whether to remove cotton from
Uzbekistan from the E.O. List. In
addition, the Departments have
continued to monitor the cotton harvest
since the issuance of the Initial
Determination, and will continue to
monitor future cotton harvests in the
course of maintaining the E.O. List. The
Departments conclude that based on
available information, the use of forced
child labor in the cotton harvest in
Uzbekistan has been significantly
reduced to isolated incidents and, as a
result, this product no longer meets the
criteria for inclusion in the E.O. List.
In 2010, when DOL added cotton from
Uzbekistan to the E.O. List, forced child
labor was pervasive in Uzbekistan’s
cotton sector. The Environmental Justice
Foundation reported that tens of
thousands of children were forced to
pick cotton in the annual harvest,
including an estimated 200,000 children
in the Ferghana valley. School children
were coerced into participation in the
harvest with threats of physical and
verbal abuse, threats of expulsion, and
threats that their grades would suffer if
they did not meet assigned quotas.28
The Human Rights Report noted that
between 2 and 19 percent of children
participated in the cotton harvest, based
on statistics available in 2006. While
most child pickers were reportedly
older than 15, children as young as 11
were also forced to work in the harvest.
Living conditions for cotton pickers,
including children, were reportedly
poor, and children were exposed to
harmful chemicals and pesticides in the
fields.29 DOS confirmed that children
were mobilized by their schools as a
result of national cotton production
quotas, also noting that many schools
closed for a full month during the
harvest while children picked cotton.30
In contrast, during the 2017 harvest
season, available reporting documented
five cases of forced child labor: (1) A
class of children from a school in the
Ulugnor District of the Andijan Region
picked cotton; (2) a class of children
from a school in the Balichki District of
28 Environmental
Justice Foundation. Child Labor
and Cotton in Uzbekistan. https://
www.ejfoundation.org/page145.html and White
Gold: The True Cost of Cotton. 2005. https://
www.ejfoundation.org/pdf/white_gold_the_true_
cost_of_cotton.pdf.
29 U.S. Department of State. ‘‘Uzbekistan’’ in
Country Reports on Human Rights Practices 2007.
March 11, 2008. https://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/
hrrpt/2007/100623.htm.
30 U.S. Embassy—Tashkent. Reporting. June 6,
2008.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:47 Mar 22, 2019
Jkt 247001
the Andijan Region picked cotton, and
the head of the school was later fined
for sending the children to pick cotton;
(3) one child stated that he and other
students were instructed by school
officials to pick cotton in their spare
time in the Balichki District of the
Andijan Region; (4) students of a school
in the Balichki District of the Andijan
Region were told to pick cotton in their
free time 31 and (5) a mahalla leader in
the Turtkul District of the
Karakalpakstan Region ordered every
house in the area to send someone to
pick cotton, some of whom were
children.32
As a result of the significant reduction
in the use of forced child labor to
isolated incidents, the Departments
have determined to remove cotton from
Uzbekistan from the E.O. List.
V. Background
E.O. 13126 was signed on June 12,
1999, and published in the Federal
Register on June 16, 1999. 64 FR 32383.
E.O. 13126 declared that it was ‘‘the
policy of the United States Government
. . . that executive agencies shall take
appropriate actions to enforce the laws
prohibiting the manufacture or
importation of goods, wares, articles,
and merchandise mined, produced, or
manufactured wholly or in part by
forced or indentured child labor.’’ The
E.O. defines ‘‘forced or indentured child
labor’’ as:
[A]ll work or service (1) exacted from any
person under the age of 18 under the menace
of any penalty for its nonperformance and for
which the worker does not offer himself
voluntarily; or (2) performed by any person
under the age of 18 pursuant to a contract the
enforcement of which can be accomplished
by process or penalties.
Pursuant to E.O. 13126, and following
public notice and comment, DOL
published in the January 18, 2001
Federal Register the first E.O. List of
products, along with their respective
countries of origin, that DOL, in
consultation and cooperation with the
Department of State and the Department
of the Treasury (relevant responsibilities
now within DHS), had a reasonable
basis to believe might have been mined,
produced or manufactured by forced or
indentured child labor.33
The Department also published the
Procedural Guidelines on January 18,
31 The
information available about this case is
limited. It is possible that this case may overlap
with the third one outlined in this paragraph.
32 The Departments note that according to
available reporting, during the 2018 harvest season,
limited evidence pointed to isolated incidents of
possible child labor in the cotton harvest. U.S.
Embassy—Tashkent. Reporting. December 21, 2018.
33 66 FR 5353.
PO 00000
Frm 00082
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
2001, which provide procedures for the
maintenance, review, and, as
appropriate, revision of the E.O. List.34
The Procedural Guidelines provide that
the E.O. List may be revised through
consideration of submissions by
individuals and on the Department’s
own initiative. When proposing a
revision to the E.O. List, DOL must
publish a notice of initial determination
in the Federal Register, which includes
any proposed alteration to the E.O. List.
The Departments will consider all
public comments prior to the
publication of a final determination of a
revised E.O. List. The E.O. List was
subsequently revised on July 20,
2010; 35 on May 31, 2011; 36 on April 3,
2012; 37 and on July 23, 2013.38 The
most recent E.O. List, finalized on
October 3, 2016, includes 35 products
from 26 countries.39
Under a final rule by the Federal
Acquisition Regulatory Council, which
also implements E.O. 13126, federal
contractors who supply products that
appear on the E.O. List are required to
certify, among other things, that they
have made a good faith effort to
determine whether forced or indentured
child labor was used to mine, produce,
or manufacture any product furnished
under the contract and that, on the basis
of those efforts, the contractor is
unaware of any such use of child
labor.40
The current E.O. List and the
Procedural Guidelines can be accessed
at https://www.dol.gov/ilab/reports/
child-labor/list-of-products/ or can be
obtained from: OCFT, Bureau of
International Labor Affairs, Room S–
5313, U.S. Department of Labor, 200
Constitution Avenue NW, Washington,
DC 20210; telephone: (202) 693–4843;
fax (202) 693–4830.
Authority: E.O. 13126, 64 FR 32383.
Signed at Washington, DC, on March 13,
2019.
Martha E. Newton,
Deputy Undersecretary for International
Affairs.
[FR Doc. 2019–05360 Filed 3–22–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–28–P
34 66
FR 5351.
FR 42164.
36 76 FR 31365.
37 77 FR 20051.
38 78 FR 44158.
39 81 FR 68062.
40 See Prohibition of Acquisition of Products
Produced by Forced or Indentured Child Labor, 66
FR 5346, 5347 (Jan. 18, 2001) (codified at 48 CFR
22.1503(c)).
35 75
E:\FR\FM\25MRN1.SGM
25MRN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 57 (Monday, March 25, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 11123-11126]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-05360]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
[DOL-2018-0004]
Notice of Final Determination To Remove Uzbek Cotton From the
List of Products Requiring Federal Contractor Certification as to
Forced or Indentured Child Labor Pursuant to Executive Order 13126
AGENCY: Bureau of International Labor Affairs, U.S. Department of
Labor.
ACTION: Notice of final determination.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This notice is a final determination to revise the list
required by Executive Order No. 13126 (``Prohibition of Acquisition of
Products Produced by Forced or Indentured Child Labor'', hereafter the
E.O. List). The E.O. List identifies a list of products, by their
country of origin, that the Department of Labor (DOL), in consultation
and cooperation with the Department of State (DOS) and the Department
of Homeland Security (DHS) (collectively, the Departments), has a
reasonable basis to believe might have been mined, produced, or
manufactured by forced or indentured child labor.
The Departments proposed removing cotton from Uzbekistan from the
E.O. List in a Notice of Initial Determination that was published in
the Federal Register on July 31, 2018. After a thorough review of the
comments received and information available, the Departments have
determined that the use of forced child labor in the cotton harvest in
Uzbekistan has been significantly reduced to isolated incidents. As a
result, this product no longer meets the criteria for inclusion in the
E.O. List.
This final determination is the fifth revision of the E.O. List
required by E.O. 13126 in accordance with DOL's Procedural Guidelines
for the Maintenance of the List of Products Requiring Federal
Contractor Certification as to Forced or Indentured Child Labor
(Procedural Guidelines).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Initial Determination
On July 31, 2018, DOL, in consultation and cooperation with DOS and
DHS, published a Notice of Initial
[[Page 11124]]
Determination in the Federal Register proposing to remove cotton from
Uzbekistan from the E.O. List.\1\ The initial determination stated the
Departments had preliminarily determined that the use of forced or
indentured child labor in the production of that product had been
significantly reduced and invited public comments until August 30, 2018
on whether cotton from Uzbekistan should be removed from the E.O. List,
as well as any other issues related to the fair and effective
implementation of E.O. 13126. The initial determination, and the public
comments submitted, can be viewed at Docket ID No. DOL-2018-0004 or
requested from Austin Pedersen at: Office of Child Labor, Forced Labor,
and Human Trafficking (OCFT), Bureau of International Labor Affairs,
Room S-5317, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue NW,
Washington, DC 20210; telephone: (202) 693-4843, email:
Pedersen.Austin.M@dol.gov. Individuals with hearing or speech
impairments may access the telephone number above via TTY by calling
the Federal Information Relay Service at 1-877-889-5627.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 83 FR 36969.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Public Comment Period
During the public comment period, six comments were submitted. Two
comments were letters: One from the Cotton Campaign on behalf of 36
members of the Cotton Campaign coalition, opposing the initial
determination, and one from the Government of Uzbekistan, supporting
the initial determination. Two comments were summaries of DOL meetings:
The first with the International Labor Rights Forum (ILRF, a lead
organization of the Cotton Campaign coalition) and the second with the
Ambassador of Uzbekistan to the United States, both of which occurred
during the comment period. Finally, two comments were electronic
messages related to those meetings. All comments are available for
public viewing at https://www.regulations.gov (reference Docket ID No.
DOL-2018-0004).
In its letter,\2\ the Cotton Campaign indicated its opposition to
the removal of cotton from Uzbekistan from the E.O List. The letter
stated that there were incidents during the 2017 cotton harvest of
forced child labor in the Karakalpakstan region and of child labor in
the Andijan region, and that some cotton pickers had been coached to
tell observers they worked voluntarily. It stated that there was no
conclusive evidence that forced child labor had ended. Additionally, it
asserted that, due to pressure stemming from the government's quota
system, parents sometimes brought their children to cotton fields to
pick cotton, and it pointed to evidence that children in a few schools
were required to bring cotton to school in order for the school to meet
the cotton quota imposed on it. It further stated that the government's
investigations and prosecutions of officials who violated laws against
forced child labor were sporadic.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Cotton Campaign. Letter. August 29, 2018. https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=DOL-2018-0004-0004.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In their meeting with DOL on August 9, 2018,\3\ the ILRF
representatives encouraged DOL not to issue a final determination until
after the 2018 cotton harvest season and pointed to instances of forced
child labor in Uzbekistan in 2017 as indicated in an Uzbek-German Forum
report.\4\ The ILRF representatives also discussed the Cotton
Campaign's forthcoming report on the spring weeding season.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ DOL. Record of Contact with Outside Party--ILRF. August 9,
2018. https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=DOL-2018-0004-0002.
\4\ Uzbek-German Forum for Human Rights. ``We Pick Cotton Out of
Fear'': Systematic Forced Labor and the Accountability Gap in
Uzbekistan. May 19, 2018. https://uzbekgermanforum.org/we-pick-cotton-out-of-fear-systematic-forced-labor-and-the-accountability-gap-in-uzbekistan/.
\5\ Uzbek-German Forum for Human Rights. ``We want farmers to
have full freedom'': No Need for Forced Labor when Farmers are
Empowered to Pay Decent Wages: Spring Cotton Fieldwork 2018.
September 10, 2018. https://uzbekgermanforum.org/we-want-farmers-to-have-full-freedom-no-need-for-forced-labor-when-farmers-are-empowered-to-pay-decent-wages-spring-cotton-fieldwork-2018/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Email messages exchanged by DOL officials and the ILRF \6\ were
sent to schedule the aforementioned meeting and inform the ILRF of the
comment period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ DOL. Record of Contact with Outside Party--Email
Correspondence with ILRF. Sent between July 31 and August 10, 2018.
https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=DOL-2018-0004-0006.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In its letter,\7\ the Government of Uzbekistan supported the
initial determination. The government discussed the country's legal
framework prohibiting forced labor and its work with human rights
organizations, activists monitoring the 2017 cotton harvest, and the
World Bank Third Party Monitoring system implemented by the
International Labor Organization (ILO). The Government of Uzbekistan
also cited its efforts to investigate child labor and forced labor
complaints and to punish violators. It noted the creation of a
Parliamentary Commission on Labor Rights and explained the Commission's
responsibility to work with state and local authorities to ensure
compliance with international labor standards and national law. It
further noted the accomplishments of its Decent Work Country Program
agreement with the ILO and the extension of that agreement to 2020. The
Government of Uzbekistan's submission also detailed its ongoing efforts
to improve working conditions in the cotton sector, including through
raising pickers' payment rates and piloting structural reforms of the
industry to improve productivity and encourage private competition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Government of Uzbekistan. Aide-Memoire on Measures to
Eradicate Child and Forced Labor. August 2018. https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=DOL-2018-0004-0003.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
During a meeting with DOL officials on August 10, 2018,\8\ the
Ambassador of Uzbekistan discussed his government's goals of reducing
forced labor in all cotton fields. In addition, the Ambassador noted
efforts to improve transparency of the cotton harvest to international
civil society organizations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ DOL. Record of Contact with Outside Party--Ambassador of
Uzbekistan. August 10, 2018. https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=DOL-2018-0004-0005.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The email from the Embassy of Uzbekistan \9\ thanked DOL officials
for the meeting.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ Record of Contact with Outside Party--Email Correspondence
with Uzbek Ambassador. Sent August 13, 2018. https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=DOL-2018-0004-0007.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Analysis of Comments Submitted
Following the close of the public comment period on August 30,
2018, the Departments have carefully reviewed and considered all public
comments received.\10\ In so doing, the Departments considered and
weighed the factors identified in the Procedural Guidelines: The source
of the information presented, the date of the
[[Page 11125]]
information, the extent of corroboration of the information, whether
the information involved more than an isolated incident, and whether
recent and credible efforts are being made to address forced or
indentured child labor in the country and industry.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ The Departments also note available reporting on the 2018
cotton harvest season. See, e.g., Cotton Campaign. Forced Labor in
Uzbekistan's Cotton Fields Was Present in 2018 Harvest. December 14,
2018. https://laborrights.org/releases/forced-labor-uzbekistan%E2%80%99s-cotton-fields-was-present-2018-harvest.
Grove, Thomas. ``Uzbekistan Says It Is Working to End Forced
Labor in Cotton Fields.'' Wall Street Journal. December 17, 2018.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/uzbekistan-picks-away-at-forced-labor-in-its-cotton-fields-11545042600.
Guilbert, Kieran. ``Campaigners challenge U.N. over forced labor
in Uzbekistan's cotton industry.'' Reuters. November 23, 2018.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-uzbekistan-labour-workers/campaigners-challenge-un-over-forced-labor-in-uzbekistans-cotton-industry-idUSKCN1NS1S6.
Uzbek-German Forum for Human Rights. Despite Commitment and
Efforts, Systematic Forced Labor in Uzbekistan's Cotton Fields was
Present During the 2018 Harvest. December 14, 2018. https://uzbekgermanforum.org/despite-commitment-and-efforts-systematic-forced-labor-in-uzbekistan-s-cotton-fields-was-present-during-the-2018-harvest/.
\11\ 66 FR 5351, at 5352. (Jan. 18, 2001). https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2001/01/18/01-952/bureau-of-international-labor-affairs-procedural-guidelines-for-the-maintenance-of-the-list-of.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The reports cited in the Cotton Campaign's letter document no more
than five cases of forced child labor, including cases in which,
according to sources cited in the letter, children were required to
pick cotton and bring it to school in order for it to meet the cotton
quota. In one of these cases, a local inspector imposed fines on the
school director for requiring students to bring cotton.\12\ The
submission does not indicate whether the government took actions to
remedy the other cases. However, based on other information that DOL
collected, as a general matter, the government made improvements in
investigating and remedying such cases.\13\ For example, during a
research trip to Uzbekistan in the spring of 2018, DOL found that,
unlike previous years, upon receiving allegations of child labor from
independent activists, the government made efforts to investigate and
remediate such cases, and that at least three individuals were
convicted \14\ and 14 local officials were subjected to administrative
penalties.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ Uzbek-German Forum for Human Rights. ``We Pick Cotton Out
of Fear'': Systematic Forced Labor and the Accountability Gap in
Uzbekistan. May 19, 2018. https://uzbekgermanforum.org/we-pick-cotton-out-of-fear-systematic-forced-labor-and-the-accountability-gap-in-uzbekistan/.
\13\ Ibid. Kozyreva, Anna. ``The Fields of Hopelessness:
Uzbekistan's Children Remain as Hostages in the Battle for the
Cotton Crop,'' Fergana News. November 14, 2017. On File.
\14\ U.S. Embassy--Tashkent. Reporting. January 9, 2018.
\15\ International Labor Organization. Third-Party Monitoring of
Measures Against Child Labor and Forced Labor During the 2017 Cotton
Harvest in Uzbekistan. February 1, 2018. https://www.ilo.org/ipec/
Informationresources/WCMS_543130/lang_en/index.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Cotton Campaign letter also refers to other cases of child
labor, rather than forced child labor. However, these cases highlight
that the government has made improvements in investigating and
remedying such cases. ILO monitoring in 2017 identified 12 children
ages 10 to 14 engaged in child labor in one field in Karakalpakstan. In
this case, according to the ILO, the district hokim (governor) and
other community members took the situation seriously and immediately
removed the children from the field. The local mahalla (community
association) leader, the local Ministry of Education representative,
the district prosecutor, and the hokim all participated in the
investigation of the issue. ILO monitors concluded that the case was an
isolated incident based on the fact that the farmer, the children's
parents, the mahalla leader, and a representative of the local
Department of Education all appeared unaware of the children's presence
in the fields.\16\ Separately, the Uzbek government-led Coordination
Council on Decent Work's national monitoring effort, without specifying
the location, identified 18 children in the cotton fields, four of whom
were picking cotton.\17\ The Government of Uzbekistan issued
administrative penalties when investigations identified violations of
labor laws.\18\ These two cases were not considered directly relevant
to E.O. List, since they were cases of child labor, rather than forced
child labor.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ International Labor Organization. Third-Party Monitoring of
Measures Against Child Labor and Forced Labor During the 2017 Cotton
Harvest in Uzbekistan. February 1, 2018. https://www.ilo.org/ipec/
Informationresources/WCMS_543130/lang_en/index.htm.
\17\ U.S. Embassy--Tashkent. Reporting. January 9, 2018.
\18\ Ibid.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
With respect to the evidence submitted by the Cotton Campaign
regarding the ability to freely conduct monitoring in the sector, DOL
notes that there are three monitoring mechanisms active during the
cotton harvest, as well as other mechanisms in place to receive
complaints.\19\ The existence of such mechanisms, and their increased
use each year, points to the opportunity that workers have to be candid
about the terms and conditions of their work, including forced child
labor.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ Department of Labor. ``Uzbekistan'' in Findings on the
Worst Forms of Child Labor. September 2018. https://www.dol.gov/agencies/ilab/resources/reports/child-labor/uzbekistan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The first of these mechanisms is monitoring by the Coordination
Council.\20\ The second is monitoring conducted by independent human
rights activists; for example, the Uzbek-German Forum for Human Rights,
a Berlin-based NGO, releases reports on the harvest based on these
activists' monitoring.\21\ Third, the ILO, in collaboration with the
Federation of Trade Unions of Uzbekistan, conducts Third-Party
Monitoring of the cotton harvest.\22\ This mechanism was established in
2015 through an agreement between the World Bank and the ILO; it is
funded by a Bank-managed multi-donor trust fund to monitor labor issues
under World Bank development projects for agriculture, water, and
education in Uzbekistan.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ Government of Uzbekistan. Response to FRN. On File.
\21\ Uzbek-German Forum for Human Rights. Cotton Harvest 2017:
Summary of Key Findings. March 2018. On File.
\22\ International Labor Organization. Third-Party Monitoring of
Measures Against Child Labor and Forced Labor During the 2017 Cotton
Harvest in Uzbekistan. February 1, 2018. https://www.ilo.org/ipec/
Informationresources/WCMS_543130/lang_en/index.htm.
\23\ International Labor Organization. Third-Party Monitoring of
Measures Against Child Labor and Forced Labor During the 2017 Cotton
Harvest in Uzbekistan. February 1, 2018. https://www.ilo.org/ipec/
Informationresources/WCMS_543130/lang_en/index.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOL also notes the existence of multiple, active feedback
mechanisms for worker complaints. Uzbekistan's Ministry of Employment
and Labor Relations operates a hotline \24\ and the Federation of Trade
Unions operates legal clinics in each province to process labor
complaints.\25\ Two World Bank projects have their own specific
feedback mechanisms for participant concerns.\26\ In addition, the
President of Uzbekistan in 2017 established a general hotline for
members of the public to raise issues with the Uzbek government.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ U.S. Embassy--Tashkent. Reporting. January 9, 2018.
\25\ International Labor Organization. Third-Party Monitoring of
Measures Against Child Labor and Forced Labor During the 2017 Cotton
Harvest in Uzbekistan. February 1, 2018. https://www.ilo.org/ipec/
Informationresources/WCMS_543130/lang_en/index.htm.
\26\ Ibid.
\27\ U.S. Embassy--Tashkent. Reporting. January 9, 2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Portions of the comments submitted in response to the initial
determination were not directly related to the use of forced child
labor in the cotton harvest in Uzbekistan, but do point to the
continued existence of adult forced labor in the sector. For instance,
the Cotton Campaign referred to the quota system for the cotton harvest
in Uzbekistan and, in a meeting with DOL, ILRF stated that the forced
labor of adults continues to be prevalent. These comments cited
incidents of school officials denying pupils the right to attend class
if their parents did not pick cotton or pay for a replacement. The
government's letter pointed to various efforts it had made to, in part,
combat the forced labor of adults in the cotton sector, such as the
mechanization of the cotton harvest, diversification of agricultural
crops, increasing cotton pickers' wages by 40 percent or more,
increasing the price of cotton so that farmers could hire voluntary
workers, and government directives to strictly prosecute violators.
[[Page 11126]]
IV. Final Determination
The Departments have carefully reviewed, analyzed, and considered
the comments submitted in determining whether to remove cotton from
Uzbekistan from the E.O. List. In addition, the Departments have
continued to monitor the cotton harvest since the issuance of the
Initial Determination, and will continue to monitor future cotton
harvests in the course of maintaining the E.O. List. The Departments
conclude that based on available information, the use of forced child
labor in the cotton harvest in Uzbekistan has been significantly
reduced to isolated incidents and, as a result, this product no longer
meets the criteria for inclusion in the E.O. List.
In 2010, when DOL added cotton from Uzbekistan to the E.O. List,
forced child labor was pervasive in Uzbekistan's cotton sector. The
Environmental Justice Foundation reported that tens of thousands of
children were forced to pick cotton in the annual harvest, including an
estimated 200,000 children in the Ferghana valley. School children were
coerced into participation in the harvest with threats of physical and
verbal abuse, threats of expulsion, and threats that their grades would
suffer if they did not meet assigned quotas.\28\ The Human Rights
Report noted that between 2 and 19 percent of children participated in
the cotton harvest, based on statistics available in 2006. While most
child pickers were reportedly older than 15, children as young as 11
were also forced to work in the harvest. Living conditions for cotton
pickers, including children, were reportedly poor, and children were
exposed to harmful chemicals and pesticides in the fields.\29\ DOS
confirmed that children were mobilized by their schools as a result of
national cotton production quotas, also noting that many schools closed
for a full month during the harvest while children picked cotton.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ Environmental Justice Foundation. Child Labor and Cotton in
Uzbekistan. https://www.ejfoundation.org/page145.html and White Gold:
The True Cost of Cotton. 2005. https://www.ejfoundation.org/pdf/white_gold_the_true_cost_of_cotton.pdf.
\29\ U.S. Department of State. ``Uzbekistan'' in Country Reports
on Human Rights Practices 2007. March 11, 2008. https://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2007/100623.htm.
\30\ U.S. Embassy--Tashkent. Reporting. June 6, 2008.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In contrast, during the 2017 harvest season, available reporting
documented five cases of forced child labor: (1) A class of children
from a school in the Ulugnor District of the Andijan Region picked
cotton; (2) a class of children from a school in the Balichki District
of the Andijan Region picked cotton, and the head of the school was
later fined for sending the children to pick cotton; (3) one child
stated that he and other students were instructed by school officials
to pick cotton in their spare time in the Balichki District of the
Andijan Region; (4) students of a school in the Balichki District of
the Andijan Region were told to pick cotton in their free time \31\ and
(5) a mahalla leader in the Turtkul District of the Karakalpakstan
Region ordered every house in the area to send someone to pick cotton,
some of whom were children.\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\31\ The information available about this case is limited. It is
possible that this case may overlap with the third one outlined in
this paragraph.
\32\ The Departments note that according to available reporting,
during the 2018 harvest season, limited evidence pointed to isolated
incidents of possible child labor in the cotton harvest. U.S.
Embassy--Tashkent. Reporting. December 21, 2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As a result of the significant reduction in the use of forced child
labor to isolated incidents, the Departments have determined to remove
cotton from Uzbekistan from the E.O. List.
V. Background
E.O. 13126 was signed on June 12, 1999, and published in the
Federal Register on June 16, 1999. 64 FR 32383. E.O. 13126 declared
that it was ``the policy of the United States Government . . . that
executive agencies shall take appropriate actions to enforce the laws
prohibiting the manufacture or importation of goods, wares, articles,
and merchandise mined, produced, or manufactured wholly or in part by
forced or indentured child labor.'' The E.O. defines ``forced or
indentured child labor'' as:
[A]ll work or service (1) exacted from any person under the age of
18 under the menace of any penalty for its nonperformance and for
which the worker does not offer himself voluntarily; or (2)
performed by any person under the age of 18 pursuant to a contract
the enforcement of which can be accomplished by process or
penalties.
Pursuant to E.O. 13126, and following public notice and comment,
DOL published in the January 18, 2001 Federal Register the first E.O.
List of products, along with their respective countries of origin, that
DOL, in consultation and cooperation with the Department of State and
the Department of the Treasury (relevant responsibilities now within
DHS), had a reasonable basis to believe might have been mined, produced
or manufactured by forced or indentured child labor.\33\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\33\ 66 FR 5353.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Department also published the Procedural Guidelines on January
18, 2001, which provide procedures for the maintenance, review, and, as
appropriate, revision of the E.O. List.\34\ The Procedural Guidelines
provide that the E.O. List may be revised through consideration of
submissions by individuals and on the Department's own initiative. When
proposing a revision to the E.O. List, DOL must publish a notice of
initial determination in the Federal Register, which includes any
proposed alteration to the E.O. List. The Departments will consider all
public comments prior to the publication of a final determination of a
revised E.O. List. The E.O. List was subsequently revised on July 20,
2010; \35\ on May 31, 2011; \36\ on April 3, 2012; \37\ and on July 23,
2013.\38\ The most recent E.O. List, finalized on October 3, 2016,
includes 35 products from 26 countries.\39\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\34\ 66 FR 5351.
\35\ 75 FR 42164.
\36\ 76 FR 31365.
\37\ 77 FR 20051.
\38\ 78 FR 44158.
\39\ 81 FR 68062.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under a final rule by the Federal Acquisition Regulatory Council,
which also implements E.O. 13126, federal contractors who supply
products that appear on the E.O. List are required to certify, among
other things, that they have made a good faith effort to determine
whether forced or indentured child labor was used to mine, produce, or
manufacture any product furnished under the contract and that, on the
basis of those efforts, the contractor is unaware of any such use of
child labor.\40\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\40\ See Prohibition of Acquisition of Products Produced by
Forced or Indentured Child Labor, 66 FR 5346, 5347 (Jan. 18, 2001)
(codified at 48 CFR 22.1503(c)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The current E.O. List and the Procedural Guidelines can be accessed
at https://www.dol.gov/ilab/reports/child-labor/list-of-products/ or can
be obtained from: OCFT, Bureau of International Labor Affairs, Room S-
5313, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington,
DC 20210; telephone: (202) 693-4843; fax (202) 693-4830.
Authority: E.O. 13126, 64 FR 32383.
Signed at Washington, DC, on March 13, 2019.
Martha E. Newton,
Deputy Undersecretary for International Affairs.
[FR Doc. 2019-05360 Filed 3-22-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-28-P