BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SENATE COMMITTEE ON ENERGY, UTILITIES AND COMMUNICATIONS
Senator Ben Hueso, Chair
2015 - 2016 Regular
Bill No: AB 385 Hearing Date: 6/13/2016
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Author: |Chu |
|-----------+-----------------------------------------------------|
|Version: |5/9/2016 As Amended |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------
|Urgency: |No |Fiscal: |Yes |
------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Consultant:|Jay Dickenson, Genesis Tang |
| | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUBJECT: Daylight Saving Time
DIGEST: This bill would place a question before the voters
regarding whether to keep Daylight Saving Time (DST) as it
currently exists or switch to year round standard time. As a
result, a change would require the Legislature's approval of an
initiative to be placed on the ballot giving California voters
the option of deciding to remain in DST or eliminate it
entirely.
ANALYSIS:
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 2:00 a.m. on
the second Sunday of March of each year and ending at 2:00
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 1:00 a.m. on the last Sunday of April, until
2:00 a.m. on the last Sunday of October, the standard time
AB 385 (Chu) PageB of?
within the state to be one hour in advance of United States
Standard Pacific Time.
The bill would place a question before the voters regarding
whether to keep DST as it currently exists or switch to
year-round Standard Time. As a result, a change would require
the Legislature's approval of an initiative to be placed on the
ballot giving California voters the option of deciding to remain
in DST or eliminate it entirely.
Background
Benjamin Franklin (1784) is credited with the basic idea of DST
after observing that people were sleeping during sunlit hours in
the early morning and burning candles for illumination in the
evening. However, it didn't "officially" begin in the U.S.
until World War I (1918), when it was enacted primarily to
extend the length of the production day and save fuel by
reducing the need to use artificial lighting.
Although some states and communities observed DST after the war
ended, DST wasn't officially observed nationally again until
1942, when it was re-enacted for World War II, then repealed
after the war in 1945.
From 1945 to 1966, there was no federal law regarding DST, so
states and localities were free to choose whether 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.<1>
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 Uniform Time Act of 1966. This federal act established a
standardized system of operating DST throughout the U.S. and its
---------------------------
<1> "Daylight Savings Time". WebExhibits.
http://www.webexhibits.org/daylightsaving/e.html
AB 385 (Chu) PageC of?
territories, exempting only those states and territories that
enacted laws to keep their entire state or territory on standard
time. Most states opted for a coordinated DST. However, the
Uniform Time Act allows states to choose only to remain on
standard time as an alternative but not to choose to remain on
DST.
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.<2>
Energy Policy Act of 2005. Extended DST in the U.S. by three
weeks in the spring and one week in the fall, beginning on March
11 2007, in the hope that the extension would save energy.
Since then, 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 enact legislation to allow a state to
adopt DST year round, the change would have to be approved by
California voters.
Findings:
Today, the Uniform Time Act provides that either
Congress or the Secretary of Transportation can change a
time-zone boundary.<3>
DST is currently practiced in 76 countries and directly
affects more than 1.6 billion people worldwide.<4>
States and territories in the United States that do not
observe DST include: most of Arizona, Hawaii, American
Samoa, Guam, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands.
Some parts of Indiana did not observe daylight saving
time in the past.
--------------------------
<2> "Daylight Savings Time"
<3> US Department of Transportation
<4> Matthew J. Kotchen and Laura E. Grant, "Does Daylight Saving
Time Save Energy? Evidence form a Natural Experiment in
Indiana". The National Bureau of Economic Research.
http://www.nber.org/papers/w14429
AB 385 (Chu) PageD of?
According to a national telephone survey of 1,000 adults
conducted March 5-6, 2014 by Rasmussen Reports concluded
that only 33 percent of American adults think DST is worth
the hassle. 48 percent do not think the clock changing
ritual is worth it, but percent are not sure.
Estimates of DST effects. The California Energy Commission (CEC)
conducted a research on DST published in 2007 that examined
whether and how much the Policy Act of 2005 changed daily
electricity. The extension of DST to March 2007 had little or
no effect on energy consumption in California, according to a
statistical analysis. The most likely approximation is a 0.2
percent decrease during these three weeks.
In 2008 a study was published by the National Bureau of Economic
Research, who studied energy use in Indiana. The experiment in
the state of Indiana provided the first empirical estimates of
DST effects on electricity consumption in the United States
since the mid-1970s focusing on residential electricity demand.
The main finding, contrary to the policy's intent: DST
increases residential electricity demand. An estimate of the
overall increase is approximately one percent. DST causes the
greatest increase in electricity consumption in the fall, when
estimates range between two percent and four percent.
Potential cost in California. According to a 2008 a study by
the National Bureau of Economic Research, Indiana households pay
an additional $9 million per year in energy bills because of
DST. Also it was estimated a social costs of increased
pollution emissions that range from $1.7 to $5.5 million per
year. The study concluded that the effect is likely to be even
stronger in other regions of the United States.
Another step away from uniformity. The purpose of the UTA of
1966 was to put states on a relatively uniform time schedule
within their specific times zones. Granted, the fact that
Hawaii, most of Arizona, and the eastern portion of Indiana have
exercised the option under the UTA not to move to DST during the
summer means that states already aren't operating on a uniform
time system. However, this proposal, if enacted by the federal
government, gives states the option to move even further away
from the notion of a uniform time system by going to DST on a
year-round basis.
AB 385 (Chu) PageE of?
Intended benefits. Reports indicate that in regions with a
temperate climate, DST results in energy savings and year round
DST could potentially increase these savings as well as,
industrial efficiency. Additionally, extra daylight in the
evening hours could provide a boost to the tourism and shopping
industries.<5>
According to the US National Library of Medicine National
Institutes of Health
studies have connected DST with a reduction in pedestrian and
driver fatalities, as well as a decrease in robberies.
According to research presented at the American College of
Cardiology's 63rd Annual Scientific Session it seems moving the
clock forward or backward may alter the timing of when heart
attacks occur in the week following these time changes.
Final thoughts. Studies have shown ongoing debate about whether
DST is needed anymore. Widely implemented during World War I, it
was primarily adopted to save energy. Still some experts
question whether it really saves energy and if it has negative
health effects beyond just leaving people feeling groggy and out
of sorts.<6>
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. The bill is pending referral at the Assembly Desk.
AJR 28 (Obernolte, 2016) memorializes the Congress and the
President to enact legislation that would allow a state to adopt
daylight saving time year round. The bill is also being
considered in this committee.
AJR 56 (Longville, Chapter 127, Statutes of 2000) memorializes
---------------------------
<5> American College of Cardiology. "Daylight saving impacts
timing of heart attacks." ScienceDaily. ScienceDaily, 29 March
2014. .
<6> American College of Cardiology. "Daylight saving impacts
timing of heart attacks." ScienceDaily. ScienceDaily, 29 March
2014. .
AB 385 (Chu) PageF of?
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.
SJRX2 1 (Karnette, Chapter 1, Statutes of 2001) this measure
would memorialize the Congress to approve legislation that
allows a state to uniformly apply daylight saving time year
round.
FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal
Com.: Yes Local: No
SUPPORT:
An individual
OPPOSITION:
None received
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: According to the author:
Californians lose an hour in the spring to adjust to
Daylight Saving Time. Whether it increases in the number of
recorded heart attacks, greater likelihood of industrial
and workplace injuries, or a noticeable uptick in traffic
accidents and fatalities, there is correlative evidence
that the loss of one hour each year constitutes an
unnecessary public health emergency. The burden must be on
the supporters of preserving DST to demonstrate what
tangible reasons are there to continue the status quo when
doing so causing demonstrable harm to the public.
-- END --