Docket No. 2005-22114

[Olson, Arthur David (NIH/NCI) [E]]

> This cannot be exactly what was intended, because 2:00 a.m. EST
corresponds to 1:00 a.m. CST, at which point clocks in the Central time
zone will not
> spring forward for another hour.  Therefore, as written, the rule
requires that a clock in the affected area must jump backwards from
02:00 EST to 01:00
> CST, and then an hour later jump ahead from 02:00 CST to 03:00 CDT.
In other words, the currently-required clock transitions would look like
this:
> 
>    01:59:59 EST
>    ... and then, one second later,...
>    01:00:00 CST
>    ...
>    ...
>    ... and then, one hour later,...
>    01:59:59 CST
>    ... and then, one second later,...
>    03:00:00 CDT
> 
> We doubt whether you really intended that the citizens of Vincennes,
Indiana should stay up in the middle of the night and change their
clocks twice.

The DOT-related problem is the over-zealous railroad engineer who parks
his train for an hour when the clock falls back and then runs at high
speed (increasing the chance of an accident) to make up time when the
clock springs forward. I will not tempt fate by putting a smiley face
here.

In an unrelated matter, page 57 of the docket reads (in part) "We expect
the economic impact of this proposed rule to be so minimal that a full
Regulatory Evaluation...is unnecessary." Which raises the question: if
changing clocks by an hour has such minimal economic impact, why are we
playing the DST game in the first place?

				--ado