[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 174 (Tuesday, September 9, 2003)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 53082-53083]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-22921]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Office of the Secretary

49 CFR Part 71

[OST Docket No. OST-2000-8013]


Standard Time Zone Boundary in the State of North Dakota: Denial 
of Petition to Change Time Zone Boundary

AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, Department of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Denial of petition for rulemaking.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners for Mercer 
County, North Dakota, petitioned the U.S. Department of Transportation 
to move Mercer County from the mountain to the central standard time 
zone. DOT held a hearing in the area and received extensive written 
public comments. Based on the information in the docket and the strong 
objections to a change voiced by the vast preponderance of commenters, 
we are denying the petition.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joanne Petrie, Office of the Assistant 
General Counsel for Regulation and Enforcement, U.S. Department of 
Transportation, Room 10424, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 
20590, (202) 366-4702.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the Standard Time Act of 1918, as 
amended by the Uniform Time Act of 1966 (15 U.S.C. 260-64), the 
Secretary of Transportation has authority to issue regulations 
modifying the boundaries between time zones in the United States in 
order to move an area from one time zone to another. The standard in 
the statute for such decisions is ``regard for the convenience of 
commerce and the existing junction points and division points of common 
carriers engaged in interstate or foreign commerce.''
    In a petition dated August 16, 2000, the Chairman of the Mercer 
County Board of County Commissioners asked the Department to move the 
county from the mountain time zone to the central time zone. The 
Commissioners submitted a memorandum outlining why the change would 
suit ``the convenience of commerce.'' The petition noted that the issue 
had been placed on the June 13, 2000, primary election ballot. The 
results of that election indicated that 1,180 voters favored the change 
while 1,038 voters opposed the change.
    Because of the strong local interest in the proposal, DOT convened 
a public hearing very early in the process. The hearing took place on 
September 28, 2000, at the Civic Center in Beulah, ND, and was attended 
by approximately 100 people. Based on a show of hands conducted several 
times throughout the evening, approximately one-third of those in 
attendance supported the change and two-thirds opposed the change. The 
DOT representative also urged individuals, businesses, and 
organizations to send written comments to the Department's docket so 
that all the relevant facts could be collected and considered 
systematically.
    The rulemaking has been extremely controversial in the community. 
Over 500 written comments were filed in the docket. Some of these 
comments were petitions signed by hundreds of people. Some people filed 
more than one comment and signed more than one petition. Even without 
doing a crosscheck of names, it is clear that the vast majority of 
people commenting on the issue in this proceeding opposed the proposed 
change.
    Under the Uniform Time Act, as amended, the Secretary of 
Transportation can only change a time zone boundary if it would suit 
``the convenience of commerce.'' Traditionally, we give great deference 
to community views on the assumption that the people who would be most 
affected by a proposed change are in the best position to advise us on 
the impact.
    The proponents of central time made many strong arguments, which 
generally echoed the points made in the petition. Almost all noted the 
reliance on goods and services coming from the Bismarck-Mandan area, 
which is on central time. The closest airport is in Bismarck, most 
television and newspapers come from Bismarck, and many residents go to 
the central time zone for work, medical services, and recreation. The 
coal and energy industry, which is a major employer in the area, is 
closely tied to central time.
    Those favoring the current time observance also made many strong 
arguments. One of the central themes was that observance of mountain 
time provides important advantages that make life more convenient, 
productive, and pleasant.
    Many opponents of the change argued that the current time 
observance affirmatively helps business and is more conducive for 
farmers. Farmers opposed to the change were concerned about getting 
replacement parts later in the day and that grain elevators would close 
an hour earlier. Others anticipated a disruption in the farming day by 
having to attend to errands or engagements in town that would occur an 
hour earlier under central time. A number of commenters were concerned 
that a change would put small, local shops out of business, and 
negatively impact the overall economic growth of the area. Others 
noted, and appreciated the fact, that the current observance allows 
mail delivery one hour earlier.
    Some commenters noted that they rely on the local radio station and 
the two weekly newspapers, rather than on media outlets originating in 
the central time zone. Others liked the time zone difference because 
they enjoyed viewing network television broadcasts an hour earlier than 
they would if the change were made.
    Many of the strongest comments argued that the current observance 
benefits children, education, and family life. Many were concerned 
about children waiting for buses in the dark on icy, rural roads. 
Others believed that the current observance was more conducive to 
learning, after-school

[[Page 53083]]

supervision of children, and participation in school and community 
activities.
    Many of the proponents of the status quo argued that the current 
system works well and causes little confusion. Similarly, most appear 
to believe that a change would inconvenience them personally and make 
their lives difficult in some way.
    Under the law, we are required to balance all the information in 
the record. Based on the information presented and the overwhelming 
community sentiment voiced in the record that a change would not ``suit 
the convenience of commerce,'' I am hereby denying the petition. The 
Commission is welcome to file another petition if circumstances change 
in the future.

    Issued in Washington, DC on August 29, 2003.
Rosalind Knapp,
Deputy General Counsel.
[FR Doc. 03-22921 Filed 9-8-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-62-P