Talk:Uniform Time Act

DoE Report
The DoE report entitled "Impact of Extended Daylight Saving Time on National Energy Consumption" came out in October 2008 and it can be found here: This page needs updating to reflect this.
 * http://www1.eere.energy.gov/ba/pba/pdfs/epact_sec_110_edst_report_to_congress_2008.pdf

Open Questions
I intentionally obfuscated these points: --Jerzy(t) 17:38, 2004 Apr 6 (UTC)
 * What does the law say? Did it offer incentives to states for getting with the program, and if so are states free to change their mind later? Does it require them to do so, under the authority of the federal power to regulate interstate commerce, and if so, was the applicability considered an open-and-shut case, or if not, was it adjudicated? (IMO, this might be a good illustrative case for federal/state relations.)
 * An Indian reservation in AZ (Navajo?) is an example of DST within a non-DST state. Is the exception official? Is there a practical reason for putting up with the confusion, or is it primarily an assertion of tribal sovereignty?  Is there an explicit exception in the act for some or all tribes, or an uncontestedly applicable provision in another law?  What is the history of DST there since the act? (Is it a carry-over from before the act?)  Do Federal officials comply with reservation practice or the no-variation-within-state pattern in their dealings with the tribal authorities and the populace?
 * Are there exceptions besides those cited in the Time zone article?

"External links" vs "External link"
Some editors use the header External link if there is only one link, but others use External links in all cases. There is currently no consensus on the preferred style. Editors who always use the plural form may prefer it for any of the following reasons:
 * 1) Experience shows that future editors often add links without changing the section heading.
 * 2) Some contributors may be dissuaded from adding links to a section titled External link, since it seems to suggest that there should only be one link.
 * 3) Using External links gives greater stylistic consistency to Wikipedia.
 * 4) Changing a heading breaks any links directly to the External links section.
 * 5) The purpose of the section is to provide External links rather than a single External link, so it does not matter how many actual links are listed.

The converse arguments are:
 * 1) Wikipedia's community-editing usually leads to prompt correction of such oversights.
 * 2) There is no evidence to show that a significant number of contributors may be dissuaded from adding links to a section titled External link.
 * 3) In one sense, the use of External links to head a section containing a single link is grammatically incorrect.

It is my belief that the former approach brings more uniformity to wikipedia, thus the style edit. Kukini 06:30, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

What state?
In the "Non-observers" section, I find:

"The various Native American nations within the state ..."

In the context, it's not clear what state is being referred to, so the quote needs to be reworded here. Was the quote taken from another Wikipedia article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.63.16.20 (talk) 15:41, 24 April 2013 (UTC)


 * The wording is from earlier versions of this article that were modified by later editors who did realize that their rewording made "the state" ambiguous. The image clearly indicates that the state is Arizona. No other state has Native American nations who disagree with the DST/non-DST choice of the state within which they are located. I am modifying the paragraph accordingly, and adding missing states and territories where appropriate. — Joe Kress (talk) 23:34, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Uniform Time Act. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130518104926/http://www1.eere.energy.gov/analysis/pdfs/epact_sec_110_edst_report_to_congress_2008.pdf to http://www1.eere.energy.gov/analysis/pdfs/epact_sec_110_edst_report_to_congress_2008.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 02:07, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

DST start date combined with Orthodox (Eastern) Easter
Since the Uniform Time Act of 1966 was passed, years 1967, 1970, 1973, 1976, 1978, and 1981 had Daylight Saving Time begin on Orthodox Easter.

Then beginning in 1987 the dates seldom match, as Daylight saving time in the United States moved from the last Sunday of April to the first Sunday of April, so the start of Daylight Saving Time in the United States in 1987 was on

However before the Uniform Time Act of 1966 was passed, most places that observed DST had the last Sunday in April as start date, so 1924, 1927, 1935, 1938, 1940, 1949, 1951, 1954, 1962, and 1965 had also shared the same dates

In 1943 both the Western and Eastern Easters occurred on, but however in 1943 since World War II was happening, and Daylight Saving Time was year round and was called War Time from 02/09/1942 to 09/30/1945.

--98.31.29.4 (talk) 02:13, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

What were all the DST start dates from end of World War II and Uniform Time Act passed in 1966
In most locations that did observe Daylight Saving Time from 1946 to 1966, years 1946-1954 begin DST on last Sunday in April at 02:00 local time, end DST on last Sunday in September at 02:00 local time

From 1946 to 1954 (DST begins local time 02:00 on last Sunday in April, DST ends local time 02:00 on last Sunday in September), starting in 1955 the end date of Daylight Saving Time was the last Sunday in October.

From 1955 to 1966 (DST begins local time 02:00 on last Sunday in April, DST ends local time 02:00 on last Sunday in October), extending the end date to the last Sunday in October start date remains the same.

--98.31.29.4 (talk) 03:36, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

bad article
This article has a couple of significant problems. First it claims the Act was a law. As far as I know, it IS a law. (as of Feb 26, 2020). (If the law has been amended, then the amendments /addendums/etc. should be noted here, but I doubt any have been signed or passed into law. (There is currently (at least) one (Congressional) bill proposing to make DST permanent, but that's been "sent" to committee.)) Unless there is a good reason for the "was", it should be changed immediately. Second, the claim that (under certain circumstances) a State may exempt itself is contradicted by the US DOT information which claims there are two ways to exempt (or change) the time of an area (not just a state). One is by CONGRESSIONAL statute (i.e. a change in Federal Law). The other is by a change in the regulations (currently USDOT/Commerce Regulations, i.e. the Secretary of Commerce decides/signs the reg. based on a request from the "highest" civil authority of that area. This article implies that only states and only ones with a time-line boarder within the state or at the boarder of the state can become exempt. That is obviously wrong, since the article shows a map where the Hopi nation is neither a state nor on/by a time-line boarder. Thirdly, the claim that the American Indian nations within AZ have the right to use or not to use DST needs authoritative citation. As I mentioned above the Dept of Commerce regulates this and decides on exceptions - not a local political entity (e.g state, city, county, AmInd nation)(but I haven't read the relevant Federal Regulation, it may delegate that power to them (I'm unclear if that is even possible)) Fourth, NIST has a map which includes times for Puerto Rico, Aleutian Islands, Chamorro, and Samoa but does not mention U.S. Virgin Isls., N. Mariana Isls. nor Guam. (N. Mari. & Guam make up the Chamorro TZ). The article should mention both the territories themselves and the Time Zone they are part of, obviously. Finally, the (unrealized) efforts to eliminate the time change from Std Time to DST should be mentioned, imho. As well as the fact that the date of the change has varied since (and before) the Act was signed into law, and that various entities (Indiana for sure, since I experienced it) have changed their status/use of DST over the years. A table might be a good idea, or perhaps a timeline.40.142.179.222 (talk) 22:34, 26 February 2020 (UTC)


 * it would help if you actually read the act. Section 3(a) says "except that any State may by law exempt itself from the provisions of this subsection...".  Obviously the text of the law supercedes any "information" from the DOT or Department of Commerce.

DST start date 2044
Under the current law, Daylight Saving Time will start on, however Orthodox Easter falls on , Daylight Saving Time will start weeks earlier than Orthodox Easter. 04/24/2044 would be the start date under the old-old schedule, the reason why it won't start on 4/24/44 is because the Energy Policy Act moved the start date to the second Sunday in March that went into effect in 2007, however the Energy Policy Act also moved the end date. Under the old schedule the start date would be.

--98.31.29.4 (talk) 18:58, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

Removing the "issues" header
I've removed the issues header on the grounds that: 1) it now has adequate citations.  2) as it is an article about a specific US law, it is inherently mostly based on a single source, to wit that specific law's text. 3) whoever put the header on the article did not provide any reasoning for it here on the talk page. 4) in the 9 years since the header was added no-one has made specific edits to address the susposed issues, or discussed them in the talk page, thus there is "silent consensus" that issues do not exist. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.48.95.185 (talk) 14:03, 7 May 2021 (UTC)