BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AJR 28
Page A
Date of Hearing: April 27, 2016
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON UTILITIES AND COMMERCE
Mike Gatto, Chair
AJR 28
(Obernolte) - As Amended March 28, 2016
SUBJECT: Daylight saving time
SUMMARY: Urges the Congress of the United States and the
President of the United States to enact legislation that would
allow a state to adopt daylight saving time (DST) year round.
Specifically, this resolution makes the following legislative
findings:
1)DST was a widely used 20th century energy reduction tool that
can be expanded to meet 21st century energy shortages.
2)Although neither standard time nor DST produces much energy
reduction for the coldest states during the more frigid months
of the year, California enjoys a temperate climate that would
afford greater reductions in energy use by utilizing a
year-round DST plan.
3)The federal Uniform Time Act of 1966 allows states to decline
application of DST and provides states with the option of
practicing standard time year round, but does not allow states
to practice DST year round.
4)By applying DST uniformly, the state could avoid any
AJR 28
Page B
inconsistencies in time application that would otherwise
impact and confuse the broadcasting, rail, airline, and motor
coach industries.
5)In House of Representatives Report No. 99-185 from the
Committee on Energy and Commerce, numerous benefits are listed
in support of the extension of DST, including significant
energy conservation, improved traffic safety, reduction in
crime, economic growth, and overwhelming public support.
6)The state would greatly benefit from having the option of
extending DST year round.
EXISTING LAW:
1)Federal law establishes the standard time of the United States
for each of nine zones and advances the standard time of each
zone by one hour during the period commencing at 2 a.m. on the
second Sunday of March of each year and ending at 2 a.m. on
the first Sunday of November of each year.
2)The DST Act, which was adopted as an initiative measure by the
voters at the November 8, 1949, special election, provides
that the standard time within the state is that which is
known, described, and designated by federal law as United
States Standard Pacific Time.
3)Requires, from 1 a.m. on the last Sunday of April, until 2
a.m. on the last Sunday of October, the standard time within
the state to be one hour in advance of United States Standard
Pacific Time.
AJR 28
Page C
FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown. This resolution is keyed non-fiscal by
the Legislative Counsel.
COMMENTS:
1)Author's Statement: "Switching our clocks to observe daylight
saving time twice a year is an outdated practice that is
hazardous to our health and well-being and it is time to end
it. While opting to stay on standard time year round is one
solution to this problem, there are number of advantages to
staying on permanent daylight saving time that make it a more
attractive option. Permanent daylight saving time would result
in a reduction in traffic accidents and robberies, offer net
energy savings and could potentially provide a great boost to
the tourism industry and local businesses. Ultimately, it
should be up to the voters to decide whether or not to observe
permanent daylight saving time. However, under federal law,
states only have the option of opting for standard time. ACR
28 would urge Congress to enact legislation to allow states to
observe daylight saving time permanently and give the voters
the power to decide."
2)Background: DST has been used in the United States (U.S.) and
in many European countries since World War I. At that time, in
an effort to conserve fuel needed to produce electric power,
Germany and Austria took time by the forelock, and began
saving daylight at 11:00 p.m. on April 30, 1916, by advancing
the hands of the clock one hour until the following October.
Other countries immediately adopted this 1916 action: Belgium,
Denmark, France, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway,
Portugal, Sweden, Turkey, and Tasmania. Nova Scotia and
Manitoba adopted it as well, with Britain following suit three
weeks later, on May 21, 1916. In 1917, Australia and
Newfoundland began saving daylight.
The plan was not formally adopted in the U.S. until 1918. An
Act to preserve daylight and provide standard time for the
AJR 28
Page D
United States was enacted on March 19, 1918. It both
established standard time zones and set summer DST to begin on
March 31, 1918. DST was observed for seven months in 1918 and
1919. After the War ended, the law proved so unpopular (mostly
because people rose earlier and went to bed earlier than
people do today) that it was repealed in 1919 with a
Congressional override of President Wilson's veto. DST became
a local option, and was continued in a few states, such as
Massachusetts and Rhode Island, and in some cities, such as
New York, Philadelphia, and Chicago.
During World War II, President Franklin Roosevelt instituted
year-round DST, called "War Time," from February 9, 1942, to
September 30, 1945. From 1945 to 1966, there was no federal
law regarding DST, so states and localities were free to
choose whether or not to observe DST and could choose when it
began and ended. This understandably caused confusion,
especially for the broadcasting industry, as well as for
railways, airlines, and bus companies. Because of the
different local customs and laws, radio and TV stations and
the transportation companies had to publish new schedules
every time a state or town began or ended DST.
In the early 1960s, observance of DST was quite inconsistent,
with a hodgepodge of time observances, and no agreement about
when to change clocks. The Interstate Commerce Commission, the
nation's timekeeper, was immobilized, and the matter remained
deadlocked. Many business interests were supportive
of standardization, although it became a bitter fight between
the indoor and outdoor theater industries. The farmers,
however, were opposed to such uniformity. State and local
governments were a mixed bag, depending on local conditions.
3)The Uniform Act (Federal Law): By 1966, some 100 million
Americans were observing DST based on their local laws and
customs. Congress decided to step in and end the confusion,
and to establish one pattern across the country. The Uniform
Time Act of 1966 (15 U.S. Code Section 260a), signed into law
on April 12, 1966, by President Lyndon Johnson, created DST to
AJR 28
Page E
begin on the last Sunday of April and to end on the last
Sunday of October. Any State that wanted to be exempt from DST
could do so by passing a state law - only Arizona and Hawaii
have done so. The Federal Law does not, however, give states
the option to remain on DST year round. The Uniform Time Act
of 1966 established a system of uniform (within each time
zone) DST throughout the U.S. and its possessions, exempting
only those states in which the legislatures voted to keep the
entire state on standard time.
In 1972, Congress revised the law to provide that, if a state
was in two or more time zones, the state could exempt the part
of the state that was in one time zone while providing that
the part of the state in a different time zone
would observe DST. The Federal law was amended in 1986 to
begin DST on the first Sunday in April.
Under legislation enacted in 1986, DST in the U.S. began at
2:00 a.m. on the first Sunday of April and ended at 2:00 a.m.
on the last Sunday of October.
The Energy Policy Act of 2005 extended DST in the U.S.
beginning in 2007, though Congress retained the right to
revert to the 1986 law should the change prove unpopular or if
energy savings were not significant. Going from 2007 forward,
DST in the U.S. begins at 2:00 a.m. on the second Sunday of
March and ends at 2:00 a.m. on the first Sunday of November.
4)The Daylight Saving Time Act: California voters passed
Proposition 12 in 1949, approving DST in the state, and that
the standard time within the state is that which is known,
described, and designated by federal law as United States
Standard Pacific Time. The act also requires, from 1 a.m. on
the last Sunday of April, until 2 a.m. on the last Sunday of
October, the standard time within the state to be one hour in
advance of United States Standard Pacific Time, which is
consistent with the federal law enacted in 1966 and 1986.
However, as stated above, the Energy Policy Act of 2005
extended DST in the U.S. beginning in 2007. Since then,
AJR 28
Page F
California has begun DST at 2:00 a.m. on the second Sunday of
March and ended at 2:00 a.m. on the first Sunday of November.
Should Congress act and enact legislation that would allow a
state to adopt DST year round, the change would have to be
approved by California voters.
5)Potential Energy Savings Nationally: In 2008, the U.S.
Department of Energy issued a report to Congress regarding the
impact of extended DST on national energy consumption.
According the report, key findings include:
a) Total energy savings was about 0.5% savings each day or
0.03% savings each year. In reference, the total 2007 U.S.
electricity consumption in the United States was 3,900 TWh.
b) Electricity savings translated to a reduction of roughly
0.02% of total U.S. energy consumption during 2007.
c) Changes in traffic volume and motor gasoline consumption
for passenger vehicles in 2007 were statistically
insignificant and, therefore, could not be attributed to
extended daylight saving time.
6)Potential California Energy Savings: According to a study
published by the California Energy Commission (CEC):<1>
"?if people do maintain their daily schedules then spring
-------------------------
<1>http://www.energy.ca.gov/2007publications/CEC-200-2007-004/CEC
-200-2007-004.PDF
AJR 28
Page G
and fall Daylight Savings Time extension would probably
cause a 2 to 5% drop in the evening peak load. Meanwhile,
morning electricity use would grow some, but probably not
enough to offset evening savings. The net effect is small
and uncertain: a best guess of total net energy savings on
the order of of one percent, but savings could just as
well be zero. Moreover, our statistical analysis leaves us
with one change in four there could be a very small
increase in electricity use."
7)Potential economic disruptions: It is unclear whether changing
DST would save more than it costs. For example, if a business
has already adapted to California's daylight savings time
schedule, would a change in current practice cause an expense
to re-program devices that are automatically set to adjust to
Daylight Savings Time (computers, clocks, automated
machinery).
8)Suggested amendments: In the body of the resolution a number
of statements are made that are discussed below:
Page 1, line 5: WHEREAS, It is the responsibility of the state
to employ any and all means of energy reduction that will
reduce reliance and pressure on energy infrastructure in the
state; and
The author may wish to consider striking this statement as
there it no current law that requires the state to employ any
and all means to reduce energy use.
Page 2, line 1: WHEREAS, A report by the State Energy
Resources line 2 Conservation and Development Commission,
issued in May 2001, line 3 and titled "Effects of Daylight
Saving Time on California line 4 Electricity Use," indicates
that winter daylight saving time, as that line 5 term is
defined in the report, would likely reduce electricity use
line 6 by 3,400 megawatt hours per day and that summer double
AJR 28
Page H
daylight line 7 saving time, as that term is defined in the
report, would likely line 8 reduce electricity use by 1,500
megawatt hours per day, producing line 9 a cost savings of
$300,000,000 to $1,025,000,000 per year for line 10 California
ratepayers; and
The author may wish to consider striking this statement as
there is a more recent CEC study that offers a different
conclusion.
Page 2, line 23: WHEREAS, Scientists have connected a number
of health line 24 consequences with the act of switching
between standard time and line 25 daylight saving time,
including greater risks of heart attacks, more line 26
frequent traffic accidents and workplace injuries, and
increased line 27 suicide rates in the days immediately after
the switch; and
The author may wish to consider an amendment to cite the
sources of these studies.
Page 2, line 28: WHEREAS, The citizens of California are being
asked to make major changes in their personal and professional
lives to conserve energy and would be grateful to receive the
benefits of year-round daylight saving time in return; and
The author may wish to consider striking this statement as it
does not cite a source of the requests to make major changes
in their personal and professional lives to conserve energy.
AJR 28
Page I
9)Suggested amendments:
WHEREAS, The State of California is committed to attaining 50
percent of its energy generation from renewable sources and to
the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions to 40 percent below
its 1990 level by 2030; and
WHEREAS, It is the responsibility of the state to employ any
and all means of energy reduction that will reduce reliance
and pressure on energy infrastructure in the state; and
WHEREAS, Daylight saving time was a widely used 20th century
energy reduction tool that can be expanded to meet 21st
century energy shortages; and
WHEREAS, A report by the State Energy Resources Conservation
and Development Commission, issued in May 2001, and titled
"Effects of Daylight Saving Time on California Electricity
Use," indicates that winter daylight saving time, as that term
is defined in the report, would likely reduce electricity use
by 3,400 megawatt hours per day and that summer double
daylight saving time, as that term is defined in the report,
would likely reduce electricity use by 1,500 megawatt hours
per day, producing a cost savings of $300,000,000 to
$1,025,000,000 per year for California ratepayers; and
WHEREAS, A 2004 study from Rutgers University titled "The
Effects of Daylight and Daylight Saving Time on United States
Pedestrian Fatalities and Motor Vehicle Occupant Fatalities"
found that year-round daylight saving time would reduce
pedestrian fatalities by 171 or 13 percent of all pedestrian
fatalities per year in the 5 to 10 a.m. and 4 to 9 p.m. time
periods and reduce motor vehicle occupants fatalities by 195
or 3 percent per year in the same time period; and
WHEREAS, A 2015 study in The Review of Economics and
Statistics titled "Under the Cover of Darkness: How Ambient
Light Influences Criminal Activity" estimated a 7 percent
decrease in robberies following the shift to daylight saving
time; and
WHEREAS, Scientists have connected a number of health
consequences with the act of switching between standard time
and daylight saving time, including greater risks of heart
attacks (New England Journal of Medicine, 2008), more frequent
AJR 28
Page J
traffic accidents (New England Journal of Medicine, 1996) and
workplace injuries (Journal of Applied Psychology, 2009) , and
increased suicide rates in the days immediately after the
switch (Sleep and Biological Rhythms, 2008) ; and
WHEREAS, The citizens of California are being asked to make
major changes in their personal and professional lives to
conserve energy and would be grateful to receive the benefits
of year-round daylight saving time in return; and
WHEREAS, Although neither standard time nor daylight saving
time produces much energy reduction for the coldest states
during the more frigid months of the year, California enjoys a
temperate climate that would afford greater reductions in
energy use by utilizing a year-round daylight saving time
plan; and
WHEREAS, The federal Uniform Time Act of 1966 allows states to
decline application of daylight saving time and provides
states with the option of practicing standard time year round,
but does not allow states to practice daylight saving time
year round; and
WHEREAS, By applying daylight saving time uniformly, the state
could avoid any inconsistencies in time application that would
otherwise impact and confuse the broadcasting, rail, airline,
and motor coach industries; and
WHEREAS, In House of Representatives Report No. 99-185 from
the Committee on Energy and Commerce, numerous benefits are
listed in support of the extension of daylight saving time,
including significant energy conservation, improved traffic
safety, reduction in crime, economic growth, and overwhelming
public support; and
WHEREAS, The state would greatly benefit from having the
option of extending daylight saving time year round; now,
therefore, be it
Resolved by the Assembly and the Senate of the State of
California, jointly, That the Legislature of the State of
California respectfully memorializes the United States
Congress and the President of the United States to enact
legislation that would allow a state to adopt daylight saving
time year round; and be it further
Resolved, That the Chief Clerk of the Assembly transmit copies
AJR 28
Page K
of this resolution to the President and Vice President of the
United States, to the Speaker of the House of Representatives,
and to each Senator and Representative from California in the
Congress of the United States.
10) Prior/Related legislation:
AB 2496 (Chu) 2016: Declares the intent of the Legislature to
enact legislation to establish United States Standard Pacific
Time as the standard time within the state during the entire
year. Pending referral at the Assembly Desk.
AJR 56 (Longville), Resolution Chapter 127, Statutes of 2000.
Memorializes the President and the Congress to enact legislation
to allow states the opportunity to choose year-round daylight
saving time, in addition to standard time or the current system
of "traditional" daylight saving time.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:
Support
None on file.
Opposition
None on file.
AJR 28
Page L
Analysis Prepared by:Darion Johnston / U. & C. / (916) 319-2083