Hon. OREN HARRIS, GENERAL COUNSEL OF THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, Chairman, Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: This is in further reply to your requests for the views of this Department concerning H.R. 76, H.R. 1581, H.R. 2424, H.R. 3385, H.R. 5055, H.R. 6134, H.R. 6481, and H.R. 7167, all of which relate to establishing time zones and standard time for the United States. The bills, except for H.R. 2424 and H.R. 5055, also make provision for daylight saving or advanced time. This Department has reviewed the above-mentioned bills and also S. 1404, a related measure which has passed the Senate and is now pending before your committee. We prefer the provisions of S. 1404 as passed by the Senate. S. 1404, if enacted, would be known as the Uniform Time Act of 1965. Section 2 states the policy of the United States to promote the adoption and observance of uniform time. The Interstate Commerce Commission, which is designated as the agency to administer and enforce the act, is authorized and directed to foster and promote widespread and uniform adoption and observance of the same standards of time within and throughout each standard time zone. Section 3(a) would require that if daylight saving time is adopted by a State or political subdivision thereof it shall commence at 2 a.m. on the last Sunday in April and shall end at 2 a.m. on the last Sunday in October. Section 3 (b) would supersede State and local law establishing different changeover dates. Section 4 would amend existing law relating to the legal effect of time zone designation (15 U.S.C. 262) to provide that a time specified in a statute, order, rule, or regulation affecting Federal activity shall be understood to be, insofar as practicable, the federally established standard time, or the daylight saving time where established, for the area in question. Section 5 of the bill would amend the Standard Time Act of 1918 to enlarge from five to eight the number of time zones established under the law. A new easternmost time zone based upon the mean solar time of the 60th degree of longitude west from Greenwich, to be known as Atlantic standard time, would be established. The present Alaska standard time zone would be redesignated Alaska-Hawaii standard time and two additional zones to be known as Yukon standard time and Bering standard time would be established. Section 6 would make the Administrative Procedure Act applicable to proceedings under the act and to proceedings under the Standard Time Act of 1918. The Department of Commerce recommends enactment of S. 1404. There are two basic causes of the present confusion over time in the United States. The first is that a great number of political units make separate decisions on whether to adopt daylight savings time or remain on standard time during the summer months. In some cases the final decision is made by the State, in others by the locality. The result in many areas of the country is a patchwork of small areas using different time standards. The second cause of confusion is that States and political subdivisions select different dates for starting and stopping the use of daylight saving time. Some areas adopt daylight saving time for 6 months, others for 3 months, others for differing periods in between. S. 1404 is aimed at correcting one of these two existing sources of confusion, namely, variations in the time of adoption and termination of daylight saving time. In those jurisdictions where daylight saving time is adopted its duration would be fixed by law. The bill does not make an attempt, however, to encourage greater uniformity in selecting standard or daylight saving time within a State or among a group of States. Although we believe that greater regional uniformity in the selection of standard or daylight saving time would be valuable for facilitating interstate commerce and should be an early objective, we believe that S. 1404 would make a valuable contribution by standardizing the period during which daylight saving time would be in effect. The other principal feature of the bill, the establishment of three new time zones, would give appropriate recognition to the position of our two newest States, Alaska and Hawaii, in our time zone nomenclature. It would also provide a convenient method of designation of the off-shore time of our eastern seaboard. In our report to the Senate on S. 1404, we referred to certain ambiguities in the bill and to certain technical difficulties which the bill could cause if enacted. The Senate Commerce Committee recommended amendments to S. 1404 which were adopted by the Senate. We believe that those amendments have removed the ambiguities and technical difficulties to which we earlier referred. The Department of Commerce strongly supports S. 1404 and recommends favorable action thereon. We have been advised by the Bureau of the Budget that there would be no objection to the submission of our report from the standpoint of the administration's program. Sincerely, JAMES L. PARRIS, Acting General Counsel. ADVISORY COMMISSION ON INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS, Hon. HARLEY O. STAGGERS, Chairman, Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, DEAR MR. CHAIRMANS This is in response to your invitation to make our views known on H.R. 1581 and a number of other bills concerned with the establishment of a more uniform system of time and a standard of time measurement within the United States. The principal and most significant difference in the bills appears to be that H.R. 1581, among others, would establish a uniform national system of time standards in the United States, while H.R. 6785, among others, would establish uniform dates throughout the United States for those State and local jurisdictions choosing to observe daylight saving time. The existing Standard Time Act, enacted in 1918, is devoid of enforcement procedure, and the deficiencies of the act in general undoubtedly have contributed to the prevailing lack of uniformity of time observance across the Nation. In 1965. there were 36 States which observed daylight-saving time. Of the 36 which observed it, 18 did so on the basis of local option, and only 16 of them observed the same switchover dates for going on and off daylight time. Under such unsystematic procedures, with State and local governments acting independently, great confusion prevails with regard to time standards. In fact, there does not appear to be any single agency or other central source of information available today that can with certainty provide information as to precisely what time prevails on a given date on a community-to-community basis. The major justification for Federal legislation establishing uniform practice throughout the country is that the present situation causes great confusion and unnecessary and wasteful practices in many areas of our economy. The most extreme problems are in the transportation industries where the railroads and busline estimate that the present nonuniformity in the adoption of daylight saving time costs them annually $1,250,000 in the mere printing of schedules, not to mention the man-hours that go into actual revision of schedules. Similar problems are cited in the communications industries. It is a matter of concern to Federal, State, and local governments generally. It obviously has potentially significant implications for military preparedness and civil defense. Because of the intergovernmental implications of the time uniformity question, our Commission specifically considered this matter at its January 1964 meeting. A current list of members is enclosed. In brief, the Commission considered these alternatives: (a) the status quo; (b) Federal legislation requiring uniformity of practice within a State; and (c) Federal legislation mandating uniform practice throughout the country. The Commission, without dissent, favored the third course. Consequently, the Commission strongly recommends that the Congress take action to establish national time uniformity, so that the present costly and often confusing disparities in governmental policies in promulgating daylight saving time may be eliminated. We believe that H.R. 1581 best accomplishes this objective. Major progress toward uniform practice throughout the country would also be achieved by H.R. 6785, S. 1404 as proposed in the Senate, and related bills. If such legislation were adopted by the Congress, the Commission would urge enactment by the States of a uniform time law. Such legislation is already contained in our Commission's 1966 State legislative program. It is designed to achieve intrastate uniformity, wherein either the entire State would remain on standard time or would go to daylight saving time on a statewide basis with the beginning and ending dates coinciding with those specified in the Federal legislation now being considered by your committee. A copy of the Commission's proposed model State legislation is enclosed. Sincerely yours, WM. G. COLMAN, ADVISORY COMMISSION ON INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS, JANUARY 1966 Frank Bane, Chairman. Thomas H. Eliot, Vice Chairman. William O. Beach, county judge, Montgomery County, Tenn. Neal S. Blaisdell, mayor, Honolulu, Hawaii. Edward Connor, supervisor, Wayne County, Mich. Marion Crank, House of Representatives, Arkansas. John Dempsey, Governor of Connecticut. C. George DeStefano, member of the State Senate, Rhode Island. L. H. Fountain, Member of the House of Representatives. Orville L. Freeman, Secretary of Agriculture. Herman Goldner, mayor, St. Petersburg, Fla. Eugene J. Keogh, Member of the House of Representatives. Karl E. Mundt, Member of the Senate. Edmund S. Muskie, Member of the Senate. Arthur Naftalin, mayor, Minneapolis, Minn. Nelson A. Rockefeller, Governor of New York. Carl E. Sanders, Governor of Georgia. Robert E. Smylie, Governor of Idaho. Adelaide Walters, Mrs., citizen member, Chapel Hill, N.C. Robert C. Weaver, Secretary, Department of Housing and Urban Development. Barbara A. Wilcox, Mrs., county commissioner, Washington County, Oreg. The variation in the use of daylight saving time throughout the country has caused significant problems. These problems are particularly acute for industrial and commercial concerns engaged in transportation and communication but involve many others, particularly when individual communities exercise local option in deciding whether or not to go on daylight saving time. The problem exists because of the variation within the standard time zones both in the decisions by States and their subdivisions to use daylight saving time and in the decisions regarding the time to commence and end daylight saving time. During 1965 36 States have some provision for the observance of daylight saving time, but in only 18 does it apply throughout the State. In the other 18 States, a form of local option or limited authorization by the State legislature provides the means for adoption of daylight saving time. Furthermore, daylight saving time begins and ends at different times in different jurisdictions. Sixteen States, all but one of which are among the 18 States in which daylight saving time applies throughout the State, have a uniform period for its use which begins the last Sunday of April and ends the last Sunday in October. Daylight saving time in the other 20 States, whether on a statewide or local option basis, begins and ends at various times during the calendar year. In only three areas do contiguous States uniformly observe daylight saving time on a statewide basis. These are: (1) California and Nevada; (2) Illinois and Wisconsin; and (3) a group of 10 Northeastern States comprised of Maine, Vermont, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Delaware, and Pennsylvania. Variations can become so complex that in one State with local option there were 23 different combinations of starting and stopping dates for daylight saving time in 1964. 1 Included in the Council of State Governments' Suggested State Legislation. It should also be noted that two States currently observe daylight saving time "in reverse," i.e., they are located in the central standard time zone but portions of the two States (North Dakota and Texas) observe mountain standard time. Various solutions to the problem of time confusion in the United States have been proposed. Present Federal legislation consists of the Standard Time Act which was enacted in 1918 and has been substantially unchanged since that time. It gives the Interstate Commerce Commission the responsibility of fixing the boundaries between standard time zones in the continental United States but does not refer to daylight saving time. The standard time zones are not mandatory with the States; but the act does declare that in statutes or regulations which specify a time of performance by any Federal officer or time within which rights shall accrue, it is intended and understood that the time shall be standard time. Bills have been introduced in Congress to require national time uniformity, including daylight saving time, within nationally established time zones. Such bills have frequently been limited in their mandatory provisions to apply only to interstate travel and Federal Government business. Bills have also been introduced to require intrastate uniformity, either as to the observance of daylight saving time, its duration, or both. Another approach, and that which is taken in the suggested legislation, is for the States that wish to observe daylight saving time to require by State legislation its adoption throughout the State, beginning and ending on a uniform basis. The most widely accepted dates for this purpose are the last Sunday of April and the last Sunday of October. If the objective of intrastate uniformity in the observance of daylight saving time and interstate uniformity to the extent that States observe daylight saving time is to be achieved, it is essential that these two dates be specified. SUGGESTED LEGISLATION [Title should conform to State requirements. The following is a suggestion: "An Act to provide for uniform time."] (Be it enacted, etc.) Section 1. Standard of Time. (a) The standard time in this State shall be the solar time of the [ meridian west of Greenwich commonly known as [ ] standard time. [Notwithstanding the foregoing, the standard time in this State, between 2 o'clock antemeridian on the last Sunday in April and 2 o'clock antemeridian on the last Sunday in October of each year, commonly known as daylight saving time, shall be one hour in advance of that prescribed above.] 2 (b) All departments of the State government, and all [counties, cities, towns, and villages] shall use the standard of time prescribed in subsection (a) hereof. (c) All persons operating or maintaining places of business or engaged in business activity shall use the standard of time prescribed in subsection (a) hereof. Section 2. Effective Date. [Insert effective date.] Hon. OREN HARRIS, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY, Washington, D.C., July 15, 1965. Chairman, Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, House of Representatives, Washington, D.C. DEAR MR. HARRIS: This responds to your requests for the views of this Department on H.R. 6481, a bill to establish uniform dates throughout the United States for the commencing and ending of daylight saving time in those States and local jurisdictions where it is observed, and for other purposes, and H.R. 6134, a similar bill to provide a uniform period for daylight saving time. We recommend enactment of one of the bills. The bill would require that whenever any State or political subdivision thereof or the District of Columbia adopts daylight saving time, such time shall commence at 2 a.m. on the last Sunday in April and shall end at 2 a.m. on the last Sunday in October. The bill does not require that daylight saving time be 2 The bracketed language is designed for those States wishing to use daylight saving time. It should be emphasized that if uniformity is to be achieved, it is essential that the two dates shown be specified. States located in more than one time zone would have to revise this section to identify and refer to the two zones. adopted, it merely provides that whenever it is adopted it must be on a uniform basis throughout the Nation. We believe that the enactment of the bill will be of considerable benefit in conducting the business of the Government. Our experience has been that there is always confusion during the months of the daylight saving period as to what areas use it and regarding the date on which it begins and ends in any given area. The enactment of the bill would solve the second problem and, we would hope, would serve to promote the adoption of daylight saving time in all areas engaging in interstate business. We believe that enactment of the bill should make for a more efficient use of telephone and teletype communications and, therefore, result in a savings for the Government. The Bureau of the Budget has advised that there is no objection to the presentation of this report from the standpoint of the administration's program. Sincerely yours, D. OTIS BEASLEY, Assistant Secretary of the Interior. OFFICE OF THE POSTMASTER GENERAL, Hon. OREN HARRIS, Chairman, Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: This is in response to your request for our views concerning the bill H.R. 6481, which proposes to establish uniform dates throughout the United States for the commencing and ending of daylight saving time in those areas where it is observed. The measure would standardize the dates on which daylight saving time would begin in the spring and end in the fall. It provides that every State and local jurisdiction would be free to determine for itself whether or not it wanted to observe daylight saving time, but if it adopted such time it would be required to observe that time from the fourth Sunday in April to the last Sunday in October. In addition, the bill would revise the present law (15 U.S.C. 261–263) relating to the present standard time zones (eastern, central, mountain, Pacific, and Alaska) by establishing eight standard time zones: (1) Atlantic, (2) eastern, (3) central, (4) mountain, (5) Pacific, (6) Yukon, (7) Alaska-Hawaii, and (8) Bering; and require that the Administrative Procedure Act apply to proceedings of the Interstate Commerce Commission relating to boundaries of such standard time zones. We favor the general objectives of this legislation because it will eliminate much of the confusion resulting from a lack of uniformity in the adoption of daylight saving time by various jurisdictions. The measure, however, though providing for a desirable uniformity in dates for the daylight changeovers for all those jurisdictions which will voluntarily use daylight time, falls short of the goal of complete uniformity by failing to make daylight time mandatory for all jurisdictions. Though a mandatory and uniform daylight saving time for the country as a whole would best serve the interest of mail transportation, the proposed legislation is a step in the right direction. For that reason we favor its enactment. It will, we believe, in some measure benefit mail transportation by definitely fixing daylight saving time areas and standardizing the date periods. The Bureau of the Budget has advised that from the standpoint of the administration's program there is no objection to the submission of this report to the committee. DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: This is in reply to your request of March 25, 1965, for a report on H.R. 6481, a bill to establish uniform dates throughout the United |