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 --