Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 138 / Thursday, July 19, 2007 / Proposed Rules 39593 

an EIRP of ¥10 dBm or, alternatively, 

a power density of 90 pW/cm2 at a 

distance of 3 meters. If a power density 

measurement is performed and 3 meters 

is not within the far field, the 

measurements shall be performed at 

whatever greater distance is necessary to 

result in the measurement being in the 

far field and the results shall be 

extrapolated to a distance of 3 meters as 

specified in section 15.31(f)(1) of this 

part. 

* * * * * 

(e) Except as specified below, the total 

peak transmitter output power shall not 

exceed 500 mW. Depending on the gain 

of the antenna, it may be necessary to 

operate the intentional radiator using a 

lower peak transmitter output power in 

order to comply with the power density 

limits or EIRP limits specified in 

paragraph (b) of this section. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. E7–13832 Filed 7–18–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Office of the Secretary 

49 CFR Part 71 

[OST Docket No. 2007–28746] 

RIN 2105–AD71 

Standard Time Zone Boundary in 

Southwest Indiana 

AGENCY: Office of the Secretary (OST), 

the Department of Transportation 

(DOT). 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: DOT proposes to relocate the 

time zone boundary in Indiana to move 

Knox, Daviess, Martin, Pike, and Dubois 

Counties from the Central Time Zone to 

the Eastern Time Zone. This action is 

taken at the request of the Boards of 

Commissioners of each of the counties. 

DOT requests comment on whether this 

change would serve the convenience of 

commerce, the statutory standard for a 

time zone change and whether the time 

zone boundary should be changed for 

other contiguous counties in 

southwestern Indiana. Persons 

supporting or opposing the change 

should not assume that the change will 

be made merely because DOT is making 

the proposal. The final rule will be 

based on all of the information received 

during the entire rulemaking proceeding 

and whether the statutory standard has 

been met. 

DATES: Comments should be received by 

August 20, 2007 to be assured of 

consideration. Comments received after 

that date will be considered to the 

extent practicable. If the time zone 

boundary is changed as a result of this 

rulemaking, the effective date would be 

November 4, 2007. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

by any of the following methods: 

• Web site: http://dms.dot.gov. 

Follow the instructions for submitting 

comments on the DOT electronic docket 

site. 

• Fax: 1–202–493–2251. 

• Mail: Docket Management Facility; 

U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 

New Jersey Avenue, SE., Room W12–

140, Washington, DC 20590–0001. 

• Hand Delivery: Room W12–140 on 

the plaza level of the U.S. Department 

of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 

9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, except Federal holidays. 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

online instructions for submitting 

comments. 

General Instructions: All submissions 

must include the agency name and 

docket number (OST Docket Number 

2007–28746) or Regulatory 

Identification Number (RIN 2105–AD71) 

for this rulemaking. Note that all 

comments received will be posted 

without change (including any personal 

information provided) to http:// 

dms.dot.gov. Please refer to the Privacy 

Act heading under Regulatory Notices. 

Docket: For access to the docket to 

read background documents or 

comments received, go to http:// 

dms.dot.gov at any time or to Room 

W12–140 on the plaza level of the U.S. 

Department of Transportation, 1200 

New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, 

DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday 

through Friday, except Federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Judith S. Kaleta, Office of the General 

Counsel, U.S. Department of 

Transportation, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, 

indianatime@dot.gov, (202) 493–0992. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Current Indiana Time Observance 

Indiana is divided into 92 counties. 

Under Federal law, 75 counties are in 

the Eastern Time Zone and 17 are in the 

Central Time Zone. There are six 

Central Time Zone counties in the 

northwest (Lake, Porter, La Porte, 

Starke, Newton, and Jasper) and eleven 

in the southwest (Knox, Daviess, Martin, 

Gibson, Pike, Dubois, Posey, 

Vanderburgh, Warrick, Spencer, and 

Perry). Neighboring states differ as to 

whether they observe Eastern or Central 

Time. Illinois and western Kentucky 

observe Central Time, while eastern 

Kentucky, Ohio, and the portion of 

Michigan adjoining Indiana observe 

Eastern Time. 

Federal law provides that an 

individual State can decide whether or 

not to observe daylight saving time. In 

2005, the Indiana General Assembly 

adopted legislation (Pub. L. 243–005 or 

the Indiana Act) that provides that the 

entire State of Indiana would observe 

daylight saving time beginning in 2006. 

In addition, the Indiana Act addressed 

the issue of changing the Eastern and 

Central Time Zone boundaries. 

In January 2006 (71 FR 3228) and 

February 2007 (72 FR 6170), DOT 

completed rulemaking proceedings 

establishing new time zone boundaries 

that resulted in the current time zone 

observance. Knox, Daviess, Martin, Pike, 

and Dubois Counties (the Petitioning 

Counties), which were moved to the 

Central Time Zone in January 2006, 

have now filed a Joint Petition 

requesting a time zone change back to 

the Eastern Time Zone. 

Statutory Requirements 

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 to modify 

a boundary contained 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.’’ 15 

U.S.C. 261. 

DOT Procedures To Change a Time 

Zone Boundary 

DOT has typically used a set of 

procedures to address time zone issues. 

Under these procedures, DOT will 

generally begin a rulemaking proceeding 

to change a time zone boundary if the 

highest elected officials in the area 

submit a petition requesting a time zone 

change and provide adequate data 

supporting the proposed change. We ask 

that the petition include, or be 

accompanied by, detailed information 

supporting the requesting party’s 

contention that the requested change 

would serve the convenience of 

commerce. The principle for deciding 

whether to change a time zone is 

defined very broadly to include 

consideration of all impacts of such a 

change on a community. We also ask 

that the supporting documentation 

address, at a minimum, each of the 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
39594 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 138 / Thursday, July 19, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

following questions in as much detail as 

possible: 

1. From where do businesses in the 

community get their supplies, and to 

where do they ship their goods or 

products? 

2. From where does the community 

receive television and radio broadcasts? 

3. Where are the newspapers 

published that serve the community? 

4. From where does the community 

get its bus and passenger rail services; 

if there is no scheduled bus or passenger 

rail service in the community, to where 

must residents go to obtain these 

services? 

5. Where is the nearest airport; if it is 

a local service airport, to what major 

airport does it carry passengers? 

6. What percentage of residents of the 

community work outside the 

community; where do these residents 

work? 

7. What are the major elements of the 

community’s economy; is the 

community’s economy improving or 

declining; what Federal, State, or local 

plans, if any, are there for economic 

development in the community? 

8. If residents leave the community 

for schooling, recreation, health care, or 

religious worship, what standard of time 

is observed in the places where they go 

for these purposes? 

In addition, we consider any other 

information that the county or local 

officials believe to be relevant to the 

proceeding. We consider the effect on 

economic, cultural, social, and civic 

activities, and how a change in time 

zone would affect businesses, 

communication, transportation, and 

education. 

2005–2006 Indiana Time Zone 

Rulemaking Proceedings Involving the 

Petitioning Counties 

On August 17, 2005, DOT published 

a notice in the Federal Register inviting 

county and local officials in Indiana that 

wished to change their current time 

zone in response to the Indiana Act to 

notify DOT of their request for a change 

by September 16, 2005, and to provide 

data in response to the questions 

identified in the previous section on 

DOT Procedures to Change a Time Zone 

Boundary. DOT received 19 petitions 

from counties asking to be changed from 

the Eastern Time Zone to the Central 

Time Zone, including the five 

Petitioning Counties. 

The Petitioning Counties are located 

between Evansville and Indianapolis, 

near the geographic center of North 

America and the median center of the 

U.S. population. The Petitioning 

Counties are bordered to the north and 

east by counties in Indiana that are 

currently located in the Eastern Time 

Zone. The Petitioning Counties are 

bordered to the west by Illinois and to 

the south by counties in Indiana that are 

currently located in the Central Time 

Zone. According to data from STATS 

Indiana (an information service of the 

Indiana Business Research Center at 

Indiana University’s Kelly School of 

Business), the Petitioning Counties had 

a total population of 132,842 in 2005. 

The Petitioning Counties were five of 

the eight counties that moved from the 

Eastern Time Zone to the Central Time 

Zone under DOT’s January 2006 final 

rule. 

In the original 2005 rulemaking 

proceeding, the Petitioning Counties 

submitted their petitions individually. 

In their 2005 petitions, they enumerated 

reasons for a move to the Central Time 

Zone based in large part on comments 

made during open, local public 

meetings in the respective counties. The 

Daviess County petition emphasized 

Evansville (in the Central Time Zone) as 

the place with the closest airport and 

the place where its residents shop, 

conduct business, and receive television 

broadcasts, with ‘‘numerous citizens’’

employed in Gibson County (in the 

Central Time Zone). The Dubois County 

petition pointed out that while many 

services are obtained within-county, the 

decision to move to the Central Time 

Zone was supported by ‘‘60 to 70% of 

the general public, by representatives of 

three local school districts, and by 

approximately 50% of local business 

and industry.’’ The Knox County 

petition stated that many of its residents 

work in the Central Time Zone, creating 

‘‘time zone issues during substantial 

portions of the year’’ and those residents 

who leave for schooling, recreation, 

healthcare and religious worship go to 

areas in the Central Time Zone. The 

Martin County petition stated that 

‘‘inclusion in the Central Time Zone is 

preferred by a majority of those 

responding,’’ that 40% of its residents 

work outside of the County (mainly in 

the Central Time Zone), and that the 

primary providers of goods and 

recipients of products to and from the 

County are already located in or are 

petitioning to be in the Central Time 

Zone. The Pike County petition cited 

television and radio broadcasting, the 

interests of its mining industry and an 

increasing number of employees 

commuting to counties in the Central 

Time Zone. 

Based on these petitions and 

comments that were submitted to the 

docket and made at the public hearings, 

as well as an analysis of Indiana 

economic, workforce, transportation, 

and education regions as well as media/ 

commerce data, DOT concluded that the 

Petitioning Counties have stronger ties 

to each other and to other counties to 

their south in the Central Time Zone 

than to the counties on their northern 

and eastern borders in the Eastern Time 

Zone. DOT, therefore, granted the 

petitions and changed the time zone 

boundaries for the Petitioning Counties 

from the Eastern Time Zone to the 

Central Time Zone. The change to the 

Central Time Zone became effective on 

April 2, 2006. 

Only a few months later, on August 

18, 2006, the Boards of Commissioners 

of the Petitioning Counties jointly 

submitted a petition (Joint Petition) in 

which they enumerated the reasons that 

the Petitioning Counties, as a unit, 

should be changed back to the Eastern 

Time Zone. As compared to the original 

petitions from the Petitioning Counties, 

the Joint Petition includes updated 

answers to the questions DOT considers 

in making time zone determinations as 

well as exhibits in support of these 

answers. The Joint Petition provides 

more detailed responses to DOT’s 

questions related to community imports 

and exports, television and radio 

broadcasts, newspapers, bus and 

passenger rail services, airports/airline 

services, worker commuting patterns, 

the community’s economy/economic 

development, and schooling, recreation, 

health care, or religious worship. 

The Joint Petition requests a change 

that is contrary to the Petitioning 

Counties’ positions in their original 

individual petitions. The Joint Petition 

claims the original petitions ‘‘were 

incomplete and conclusory, and the 

information they contained was limited 

and largely based on opinion and not 

backed by substantial and verifiable 

evidence.’’ The Joint Petition states that, 

since the January 2006 ruling, there has 

been ‘‘a groundswell of support for 

returning to the Eastern Time Zone, 

which has been a product of residents 

and businesses having been 

inconvenienced in ways that they could 

not have fully anticipated until the 

switch occurred.’’ Accordingly, the Joint 

Petition claims ‘‘to contain more 

extensive and thorough research on this 

issue.’’

The Joint Petition was accompanied 

by letters from Indiana Governor 

Mitchell Daniels, the Indiana Economic 

Development Corporation, and the 

Indiana Department of Workforce 

Development. The Governor wrote in 

support of the Joint Petition, stating that 

putting more of the State in the same 

time zone will provide clarity on the 

time questions and advance economic 

growth. The two organizations 

addressed regional connectivity. They 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 138 / Thursday, July 19, 2007 / Proposed Rules 39595 

noted that they established their 

respective State regions based on their 

ability to deliver services. They did not 

establish regions based on time zones or 

‘‘convenience of commerce.’’

After reviewing the Joint Petition and 

its accompanying exhibits and letters of 

support, on September 28, 2006, DOT 

sent a letter to the Petitioning Counties 

requesting that certain procedural 

concerns be addressed. Specifically, 

DOT requested the submission of 

amended signature pages for each 

county, certifying that the request was 

the result of official action by the Board 

of County Commissioners, the vote of 

the Board members concerning the 

submission of the Joint Petition, the date 

of the vote, and the signature for each 

Board member. The Petitioning 

Counties complied with this request on 

November 13, 2006 (First Supplemental 

Response). 

On November 14, 2006, the DOT sent 

a second letter seeking clarification and 

additional information from the 

Petitioning Counties before making any 

determination on whether to propose a 

time zone boundary change for the 

Petitioning Counties. In turn, on 

December 6, 2006, the Petitioning 

Counties submitted to DOT a 

supplemental response (Second 

Supplemental Response) and appendix 

to DOT’s request for this additional 

substantive information. 

Upon reviewing the Second 

Supplemental Response, DOT 

determined that while the Petitioning 

Counties provided answers to most of 

DOT’s inquiries, in some instances gaps 

remained, and there were 

inconsistencies in the responses. 

Information provided by the Petitioning 

Counties needed to be corrected or 

clarified. On April 2, 2007, therefore, 

DOT sent another letter to the 

Petitioning Counties requesting 

additional information and verification 

of the data submitted. This request was 

necessary in light of the lack of 

complete and accurate information 

previously provided to DOT by the 

Petitioning Counties. DOT noted, 

‘‘While the clarification of particular 

facts may not be dispositive to DOT’s 

determination that a time zone change 

would serve the convenience of 

commerce standard, we want to ensure 

the integrity of the data we rely upon.’’

On May 29, 2007, the Petitioning 

Counties responded by letter (Third 

Supplemental Response), accompanied 

by numerous exhibits. 

Comments to the Docket 

There are currently nearly 300 entries 

to the docket addressing the request of 

the Petitioning Counties to be changed 

back to the Eastern Time Zone and the 

information submitted by the 

Petitioning Counties. These comments 

express the preferences of the residents 

of the Petitioning Counties and the 

views of businesses and individuals on 

how a particular time zone has 

impacted or would impact the 

Petitioning Counties. The focus of this 

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking is on 

the Joint Petition and Supplemental 

Responses. Before making a final 

determination on whether to change the 

time zone boundaries for the Petitioning 

Counties, we will carefully review the 

Joint Petition and Supplemental 

Responses in conjunction with any 

additional comments received and data 

gathered during the rulemaking process. 

DOT Determination 

Based on the Joint Petition and the 

three Supplemental Responses, DOT 

finds that the Petitioning Counties have 

provided enough information to justify 

proposing to change their boundary 

from the Central Time Zone to the 

Eastern Time Zone. As set forth below, 

the Petitioning Counties addressed all of 

the factors that we consider in these 

proceedings and overall made a 

reasonable case that changing back the 

Petitioning Counties to the Eastern Time 

Zone would serve ‘‘the convenience of 

commerce.’’

Community Imports and Exports 

The 2005 individual petitions from 

each Petitioning County to move from 

the Eastern Time Zone to the Central 

Time Zone did not include very detailed 

analyses of community imports and 

exports. On the other hand, in the Joint 

Petition and the Second and Third 

Supplemental Responses, the 

Petitioning Counties provide additional 

evidence in support of the contention 

that, when considered as a single unit, 

the balance of the evidence supports 

placement in the Eastern Time Zone. 

The original Daviess County petition 

stated that the largest metropolitan area 

where its residents transact business is 

Evansville. In contrast, the Joint Petition 

quotes the Executive Director of the 

Daviess County Economic Development 

Corporation as stating that businesses in 

Daviess County ‘‘uniformly desire to be 

on Eastern Time’’ and that the top 

businesses and industries there ship 

most of their products into the Eastern 

Time Zone. The original Dubois County 

petition stated that its businesses 

‘‘acquire and ship supplies and 

products nationally and internationally, 

and probably as to purchase and sales 

no time zone would have priority over 

any other zone.’’ On the other hand, 

citing the Directors of the Jasper and 

Huntingburg Chambers of Commerce, 

the Joint Petition states that the major 

employers in Dubois County ship their 

products to major metropolitan areas up 

and down the East Coast and that ‘‘the 

dollar volume of commerce in the 

county is driven by customers and 

suppliers in the Eastern Time Zone.’’

The original Knox County petition 

stated that its businesses ‘‘obtain 

supplies and ship goods and products 

from and to locations in various time 

zones’’ and to ‘‘all parts of the United 

States and the Northern Hemisphere.’’

The Joint Petition makes a similar 

assertion, stating specifically that 

Futaba Indiana of America 

manufactures door frames for Toyota’s 

Princeton, Indiana plant in the Central 

Time Zone and also ships products to 

Toyota’s Georgetown, Indiana plant in 

the Eastern Time Zone. The Joint 

Petition adds that another large 

employer in Dubois County, Gemtron/ 

Schott, ships products all over the 

United States. The original Martin 

County petition declared that the 

primary providers and recipients of its 

products were counties petitioning for 

placement or currently in the Central 

Time Zone. On the other hand, the Joint 

Petition refers to a business manager for 

EG&G Crane Operations located at the 

Naval Surface Warfare Center Crane 

Division (NSWC Crane) and identifies 

NSWC Crane as the largest employer in 

the County, and claims that although 

NSWC Crane ships its products 

throughout the United States, its two 

largest customers are located in the 

Eastern Time Zone. (We note that this 

information comes from the Joint 

Petition, not directly from NSWC Crane 

or its officials.) Finally, while the 

original Pike County petition made no 

mention of its community imports and 

exports, it noted that Pike County has a 

significant coal mining industry. The 

Joint Petition reiterates the importance 

of the coal mining industry in Pike 

County and that the bulk of coal mined 

in the County is used by two of the 

County’s largest employers (Indiana 

Power & Light and Hoosier Energy), 

which maintain headquarters and 

generating plants in the Eastern Time 

Zone. 

In addition to focusing on the imports 

and exports in each of the Petitioning 

Counties, the Joint Petition takes a 

broader perspective. Citing statistics 

compiled by the Indiana Chamber of 

Commerce (Chamber), it notes that over 

one-third of all Indiana’s exports are 

sent to the Eastern Time Zone, whereas 

only one-fourth of all Indiana’s exports 

had a final destination in the Central 

Time Zone. The Chamber’s statistics 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
39596 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 138 / Thursday, July 19, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

also indicate that over one-half of 

Indiana’s imports come from a ‘‘point of 

origin’’ in the Eastern Time Zone, 

whereas less than one-half of all Indiana 

imports had a point of origin in the 

Central Time Zone. However, DOT 

questioned the Petitioning Counties on 

whether these facts support a move to 

the Eastern Time Zone, noting that these 

statistics also reveal that two-thirds of 

products are exported to locations other 

than the Eastern Time Zone and that 

just less than one-half come from a 

point of origin other than the Eastern 

Time Zone. In their Second 

Supplemental Response, the Petitioning 

Counties nonetheless contend that, 

although the total import/export data 

may not support a change to the Eastern 

Time Zone, they wanted to ensure that 

they addressed all the criteria 

considered by DOT and asserted that the 

balance of the evidence presented in the 

Joint Petition supports a move from the 

Central Time Zone to the Eastern Time 

Zone. 

The Joint Petition also points out that 

‘‘if the Petitioning Counties are put on 

Eastern Time, all of the nearest WalMarts for residents in the Petitioning 

Counties would be on Eastern Time.’’

The Joint Petition claims that, although 

the majority of these stores are open 24 

hours a day, the Jasper location in 

Dubois closes during the night and has 

a different schedule than its distribution 

center (located in Jackson County, in the 

Eastern Time Zone), thereby adversely 

affecting its shipping schedule. The 

Joint Petition contends this is important 

for the counties because many 

‘‘[i]ndividuals and small businesses 

* * * depend on Wal-Mart Stores and 

Supercenters for their goods and 

supplies.’’ Thus, the Joint Petition 

concludes that the convenience of 

commerce would be best served if all 

stores and distribution centers were 

located in the same zone, in order to 

reduce confusion for just-in-time 

delivery systems and to accommodate 

work schedules. 

In the Third Supplemental Response, 

the Petitioning Counties clarify that the 

Jasper Wal-Mart is open 24 hours a day. 

Nevertheless, the Third Supplemental 

Response notes that, because the 

pharmacy and automotive department 

operate under limited hours, it might 

better serve the convenience of 

commerce if the store was located in the 

Eastern Time Zone. 

The Joint Petition also states that 

product manufacturers (the major 

employers in Dubois County) ship their 

products mainly to ‘‘major metropolitan 

areas up and down the East Coast,’’

while the ‘‘majority of suppliers are 

likewise located in, or are in areas 

petitioning to be in, the Eastern Time 

Zone.’’ In fact, ‘‘over 50% of the dollar 

volume of commerce is driven by 

customers in the Eastern Time Zone’’ for 

those companies. In response to DOT’s 

inquiry regarding the fact that Dubois 

County has historically been on a 

different time than its suppliers and 

customers during seven months of the 

year (before Indiana began to observe 

daylight saving time in 2006), the 

Second Supplemental Response notes 

that the convenience of commerce 

would nonetheless be even better served 

if businesses could communicate in 

‘‘real time’’ (communicating at the same 

hour in both places) with their 

customers during the course of an entire 

year. They claim that this move would 

shift resources away from coping 

mechanisms and toward more 

productive business activities. 

In the Second Supplemental 

Response, the Petitioning Counties 

address DOT’s questions about 

commerce in Knox County arising from 

the Joint Petition. The Second 

Supplemental Response claims that a 

move to the Eastern Time Zone would 

put Futaba Indiana of America (FIA), 

identified as a major Knox County 

automobile parts producer, in the same 

time zone as its two important 

customers in the Eastern Time Zone. 

Although FIA also ships its products to 

locations in the Central Time Zone 

(including Chicago and Texas), the 

Second Supplemental Response asserts 

that harmonizing the manufacturing 

plant with at least two of its customers 

located in the Eastern Time Zone would 

positively advance the convenience of 

commerce. DOT requested support for 

these assertions and, in the Third 

Supplemental Response, the Petitioning 

Counties cite to an FIA receptionist, 

newspaper articles, and the Director of 

the Knox County Development 

Corporation in support of their position 

on this issue. 

While DOT remains unconvinced by 

the assertions of the Petitioning 

Counties as they relate to FIA and the 

Knox County economy, the Petitioning 

Counties have submitted sufficient 

information to show that many 

businesses and industries located in the 

Petitioning Counties have substantial 

business connections in the Eastern 

Time Zone that would justify proposing 

to move the time zone boundary for the 

Petitioning Counties to the Eastern Time 

Zone. In addition, the Petitioning 

Counties have submitted sufficient 

information to justify proposing to move 

the time zone boundary based on their 

claims that the convenience of 

commerce would better be served if 

businesses did not have to adjust for 

time zone differences. DOT solicits 

further information concerning 

community imports and exports that 

would aid in determining whether a 

change in the time zone for the 

Petitioning Counties would serve the 

convenience of commerce. 

Television and Radio Broadcasts 

With regard to television and radio 

broadcasts, the original petitions 

submitted by each Petitioning County 

made general statements about 

transmissions that each Petitioning 

County receives. The original Daviess 

County petition stated that it receives its 

television broadcasts from both 

Evansville and Terre Haute. The original 

Dubois County petition stated that it 

receives radio transmissions from 

within the county and television 

broadcasts from Evansville, Louisville, 

Terre Haute, and Indianapolis. The 

original Knox County petition pointed 

out that it is the second-largest 

television audience for Terre Haute and 

the fourth-largest for Evansville. The 

original Martin County petition noted 

that it is served by television stations 

located in Evansville in Vanderburgh 

County and Vincennes in Knox County. 

Finally, the original Pike County 

petition stated that the majority of its 

broadcasts originate out of Evansville. 

The Joint Petition and Second and 

Third Supplemental Responses provide 

more detailed information regarding 

television and radio broadcasting in the 

Petitioning Counties. The Joint Petition 

states that the majority of the Petitioning 

Counties (Knox, Daviess, and Martin) 

are in the Terre Haute Designated 

Market Area (DMA), in the Eastern Time 

Zone. The remaining Petitioning 

Counties (Pike and Dubois) are part of 

the Evansville DMA, in the Central 

Time Zone. 

The Joint Petition claims that every 

radio station with the strongest signal in 

the Petitioning Counties is currently 

located, or petitioning to be, in the 

Eastern Time Zone. In support of this 

statement, the Joint Petition includes 

two charts that list the stations (both FM 

and AM) with the three strongest signals 

that reach each of the five petitioning 

counties. These charts also indicate the 

city and county where the station is 

currently located, as well as the time 

zone of the station’s location if the 

petition were granted. DOT questioned 

the decision to include only the signals 

with the three strongest frequencies, 

whether these were the strongest 

frequencies, and the choice to include 

certain frequencies themselves in the 

chart. 

In the Second Supplemental 

Response, the Petitioning Counties 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 138 / Thursday, July 19, 2007 / Proposed Rules 39597 

again claim that the chart in the Joint 

Petition ‘‘demonstrates that the 

Petitioning Counties are oriented toward 

the Eastern Time Zone.’’ In order to 

supplement that claim, the Petitioning 

Counties submitted a second set of 

charts in Appendix C to the Second 

Supplemental Response (not ‘‘Appendix 

B’’ as referenced in the Second 

Supplemental Response). Rather than 

including the three strongest signals 

available in each of the respective 

counties, these charts provide more 

specific information, including all radio 

stations (both FM and AM) and the 

major city of the listening audience of 

each petitioning county: Washington in 

Davies, Jasper in Dubois, Vincennes in 

Knox, Loogootee in Martin, and 

Petersburg in Pike. Based on 

classifications by http://www.radiolocator.com, the chart arranges the 

stations in order of strength of signal to 

the listening area, with the strongest 

signals listed first. The chart also 

includes the current time zone of the 

radio signal’s origin and the time zone 

if the petition were granted. The only 

difference between the chart in the Joint 

Petition and the chart in the Second 

Supplemental Response is the differing 

time zone origin. Stations (both FM and 

AM) that originated in the Petitioning 

Counties would move from the Central 

Time Zone to the Eastern Time Zone. 

With such a uniform shift, it is not clear 

that a change in time zone would serve 

the convenience of commerce. 

Furthermore, DOT questions whether 

signal strength is sufficient evidence to 

support the conclusion that the 

particular time zone matters for radio 

broadcasting. The Petitioning Counties 

have not shown how having a strong 

signal translates into an increased 

audience nor have they accounted for 

the type of radio programming that is 

being offered. 

With regard to television 

broadcasting, the Joint Petition includes 

a chart listing the TV stations for the 

Petitioning Counties, the city and 

county where each station is located, 

and the time zone of the station if the 

petition were granted. In addition, the 

Joint Petition indicates that the National 

Weather Service Center serving four of 

the Petitioning Counties (Daviess, Knox, 

Martin, and Dubois) is in the Eastern 

Time Zone, while only one county 

(Pike) has the National Weather Service 

Center in the Central Time Zone. The 

Petitioning Counties claim that because 

‘‘most of the radio and television 

stations that cover local news and 

weather in the Petitioning Counties is 

either located within the Petitioning 

Counties themselves or are in counties 

in the Eastern Time Zone, the 

convenience of commerce is best served 

by moving the Petitioning Counties to 

Eastern Time.’’

Because the Joint Petition’s claims 

that ‘‘these counties are served by 

various cable systems and a variety of 

satellite systems,’’ DOT requested that 

the Petitioning Counties list the 

channels offered by any cable providers 

in each county that are locally generated 

and the location and time zone of those 

broadcasts. In the Second Supplemental 

Response, the Petitioning Counties 

provide a chart indicating the 

Designated Market Area and the 

significantly viewed channels for each 

County with the city and county where 

the station is located as well as the 

current time zone and the projected 

time zone if the Joint Petition were 

granted. The only significant change in 

time zone involves stations located 

within the Petitioning Counties 

themselves, which move from the 

Central Time Zone to the Eastern Time 

Zone. 

In further support of a change to the 

Eastern Time Zone, in the Second 

Supplemental Response, the Petitioning 

Counties state that, under the status 

quo, ‘‘viewers in the Petitioning 

Counties may miss their news because 

it comes on at 5 a.m. in the morning and 

at 4 p.m. in the evening.’’ On the other 

hand, if the Joint Petition were granted, 

the Petitioning Counties simply argue 

that ‘‘the majority of viewers in the 

Petitioning Counties who work 8 a.m. to 

5 p.m. (and currently receive their 

programming from a station operating 

on Eastern Time) will receive their local 

news before going to work in the 

morning and after they return from work 

in the evening.’’ Seeking clarification of 

this argument and additional 

justification, DOT wrote to the Petition 

Counties and noted that each of the 

Petitioning Counties receives a signal 

that originates in the Central Time Zone. 

In the Third Supplemental Response, 

the Petitioning Counties assert, 

‘‘Convenience of commerce is served by 

providing viewers with better access to 

the market designated to provide them 

coverage’’ and refer to significantly 

viewed stations, which are the most 

viewed stations. The significantly 

reviewed stations in the three 

Petitioning Counties that are in the 

Terre Haute Designated Market Area are 

in the Eastern Time Zone. 

The Petitioning Counties have not 

provided sufficient information 

concerning the television/radio 

broadcasting aspect of the convenience 

for commerce standard to justify 

proposing to change the time zone 

boundary. DOT questions whether radio 

signal strength is enough evidence to 

support proposing a change in time 

zone. In addition, the majority of 

television signals become aligned with 

the Eastern Time Zone because the 

Counties have petitioned to move as a 

single unit. DOT seeks comments on the 

information submitted by the 

Petitioning Counties and requests any 

additional information on television and 

radio broadcasting, including audience 

size in the Petitioning Counties, that 

would aid in determining whether a 

time zone change for these Counties 

would serve the convenience of 

commerce. 

Newspapers 

Only three out of the five original 

individual petitions, Dubois, Knox, and 

Martin Counties, discussed newspaper 

distribution numbers within their 

counties. These three petitions 

emphasized that the primary 

newspapers delivered are local daily 

newspapers. Nevertheless, the original 

Dubois County petition acknowledged 

receipt of newspapers from Evansville 

in the Central Time Zone and Louisville 

in the Eastern Time Zone. The original 

Knox County petition also noted that 

there is a ‘‘substantial circulation’’ of 

the Evansville Courier, and that 

residents also receive newspapers from 

Terre Haute and Indianapolis, both in 

the Eastern Time Zone. 

The Joint Petition expounds on the 

idea that the Petitioning Counties are 

largely served by their local 

newspapers. The Joint Petition states 

that residents of the Petitioning 

Counties rely on other newspapers 

published in or adjacent to their own 

counties, ‘‘all of which are already in or 

are petitioning to be in the Eastern Time 

Zone’’ and thereby ‘‘likely serve the 

advertising needs of local businesses.’’

The Joint Petition acknowledges that the 

Petitioning Counties are served by both 

the Indianapolis Star (with a total 

circulation of 4,251) and the Evansville 

Courier & Press (with a total circulation 

of 12,740). However, the Joint Petition 

claims that these papers focus almost 

exclusively on national news and the 

local news particular to their cities, 

Indianapolis and Evansville. The 

Second Supplemental Response 

supports this claim by stating that 

‘‘[t]here is very little if any advertising 

by companies doing business in the 

Petitioning Counties.’’ The Second 

Supplemental Response also notes that 

the ‘‘vast majority’’ of businesses 

advertising in the Courier and Press are 

located in Evansville or Henderson, 

Kentucky (both in the Central Time 

Zone) to support the claim that those 

newspapers primarily serve the 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
39598 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 138 / Thursday, July 19, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

communities in the immediate vicinity 

of the city. (The Second Supplemental 

Response also corrected the Joint 

Petition and acknowledged that the 

Courier and Press is distributed in 

Martin County.) 

The Joint Petition includes a chart 

that lists the names and circulation 

numbers of the local newspapers 

serving each of the Petitioning Counties, 

as well as the County and the time zone 

of publication if the petition is granted. 

For example, for Daviess County, the 

chart indicates that the Washington 

Times-Herald, with a weekly circulation 

of 6,459, is published in Daviess, which 

will be moved to the Eastern Time Zone 

if the petition is granted. In addition, 

the Washington Extra, another local 

newspaper identified in the chart, is 

published in Daviess County and (like 

the Washington Times-Herald) has a 

significantly higher weekly circulation 

in Daviess County than either the 

Indianapolis Star (496) or the Evansville 

Courier & Press (92). In total, all four 

local newspapers serving Daviess 

County are published within the 

Petitioning Counties. This pattern is 

consistent with the circulation patterns 

in the other Petitioning Counties as 

well, where the total circulation for the 

main local newspaper published in each 

county far outweighs the circulation for 

either the Indianapolis Star or the 

Evansville Courier & Press. 

There are only two local newspapers 

shown in the chart that are published 

outside of the Petitioning Counties: the 

Paoli News Republican, which is 

published in Orange and has a weekly 

circulation of 400 in Dubois County; 

and the Bedford Times-Mail, which is 

published in Lawrence County and has 

a negligible weekly circulation in both 

Dubois and Martin Counties. Both of 

these newspapers are published in the 

Eastern Time Zone and would continue 

to be published in the Eastern Time 

Zone if the Joint Petition were granted. 

The remaining local newspapers are all 

published in one of the five Petitioning 

Counties. According to the Joint Petition 

and reiterated in the Second 

Supplemental Response, these counties 

are served by a number of papers 

published locally, which ‘‘likely serve 

the advertising needs of local 

businesses.’’ The Second Supplemental 

Response claims, ‘‘the lack of 

advertising by companies located in the 

Petitioning Counties suggests a lack of 

connection to the Evansville area.’’

(Emphasis added.) The Second 

Supplemental Response concludes that, 

with regard to newspaper circulation, 

‘‘[t]his factors in favor of treating the 

Petitioning Counties as a unit and 

moving them all to Eastern Time as a 

block.’’ Because the overwhelming 

majority of local newspapers in 

circulation within the Petitioning 

Counties are currently on Central Time, 

moving them as a ‘‘block’’ would simply 

represent a universal shift of local 

newspapers to Eastern Time if the 

petition were granted. 

In the Third Supplemental Response, 

the Petitioning Counties responded to 

DOT’s question on whether the 

residents of the Petitioning Counties 

might shop or use the services of 

businesses that advertise in the 

Indianapolis Star or the Courier and 

Press. The Petitioning Counties 

admitted that discussions with 

individuals in the Petitioning Counties 

‘‘yielded different responses.’’ There 

were no overwhelming preferences for 

either the Eastern or Central Time Zone 

shops or businesses advertising in these 

papers. 

The Petitioning Counties have not 

submitted sufficient information 

concerning the newspaper aspect of the 

convenience for commerce standard to 

justify proposing to change the time 

zone boundary based. DOT seeks 

comments on the information submitted 

by the Petitioning Counties and requests 

any additional information on 

newspaper circulation in the Petitioning 

Counties that would aid in determining 

whether a time zone change for these 

Counties would serve the convenience 

of commerce. 

Bus and Passenger Rail Service 

Only three out of the five original 

individual petitions, from Dubois, Knox, 

and Pike Counties, discussed bus and 

rail service within their Counties. The 

original Dubois County petition stated 

that Dubois County is not served by 

passenger bus or rail service; however, 

such service is available out of 

Louisville, Indianapolis or Evansville. 

The original Knox County petition 

stated that its citizens can obtain bus 

service from Evansville and Terre 

Haute, and that passenger rail service is 

available in Effingham, Illinois and 

Indianapolis. The original Pike County 

petition stated that the closest major 

passenger rail and bus service is 

generally located in Evansville. 

With regard to bus service, the Joint 

Petition points out that three of the four 

Greyhound bus stations that are closest 

to the Petitioning Counties are on 

Eastern Time. It states that these stations 

are located in Indianapolis, Terre Haute, 

and Louisville in the Eastern Time 

Zone, and in Evansville in the Central 

Time Zone. The Joint Petition also 

claims that, although the Evansville 

station is relatively close to many 

residents of the Petitioning Counties, ‘‘it 

only offers transportation to western 

and southern routes.’’ On the other 

hand, the stations located in the Eastern 

Time Zone offer much broader service 

to the Petitioning Counties. For 

example, the Terre Haute station offers 

connections both to southwest 

destinations and to Indianapolis, which 

in turn provides service to all 

destinations. In addition, the Louisville 

station offers transportation to north, 

northeast, and southern destinations. 

Accordingly, the Joint Petition uses 

these bus service routes as support to 

change back to the Eastern Time Zone. 

With regard to rail service, the Joint 

Petition focuses on commercial rail 

carriers. The Joint Petition points out 

that, because most of the existing major 

junction and division points for 

common carriers are located in the 

Eastern Time Zone, it would best serve 

the convenience of commerce to place 

all of the Petitioning Counties on 

Eastern Time. Answering DOT’s inquiry 

concerning the availability of passenger 

rail service to its residents and how 

changing to Eastern Time would impact 

such services, the Second Supplemental 

Response states that ‘‘[n]one of the 

railroad companies that run through 

southwest Indiana provides passenger 

service in the area.’’ Moreover, it states 

that Amtrak, the only passenger rail 

company in Indiana, runs on 

commercial lines only through northern 

and central Indiana (in the Eastern Time 

Zone), far from the Petitioning Counties. 

As such, the Petitioning Counties assert 

that ‘‘[p]assenger rail schedules are not 

a factor here.’’

The Petitioning Counties have 

submitted sufficient information based 

on the bus service aspect of the 

convenience of commerce standard to 

justify proposing to change the time 

zone boundary. The Petitioning 

Counties have provided information on 

the broader bus service available in 

locations in the Eastern Time Zone. 

According to the Petitioning Counties, 

passenger rail service is not at issue. 

DOT seeks comment on the information 

submitted by the Petitioning Counties 

and requests any additional information 

on bus and rail services in the 

Petitioning Counties that would aid in 

determining whether a change in the 

time zone for the Petitioning Counties 

would serve the convenience of 

commerce. 

Airports/Airline Services 

The original petitions for Daviess, 

Knox and Pike Counties stated that the 

closest airport providing passenger 

service to their respective counties is 

located in Evansville. The original 

petition for Dubois County stated that 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 138 / Thursday, July 19, 2007 / Proposed Rules 39599 

the airport in the County serves 

primarily private business planes and 

lists Louisville, Evansville, and 

Indianapolis as ‘‘major airports 

providing service’’ to its residents. The 

original petition for Martin County 

noted that the nearest general airport is 

in Vanderburgh County in the Central 

Time Zone, and also noted that Martin 

County residents are served by local 

airports in Daviess and Dubois Counties. 

The Joint Petition discusses the three 

major airports that could potentially 

serve residents of the Petitioning 

Counties for commercial passenger 

service: one in the Central Time Zone in 

Evansville and two in the Eastern Time 

Zone in Indianapolis and Louisville. 

The Joint Petition acknowledges that the 

Evansville Regional Airport is the 

closest geographically for many 

residents in some parts of the 

Petitioning Counties. However, despite 

this proximity, the Joint Petition claims 

that, according to ‘‘travel agents who 

serve residents in the Petitioning 

Counties,’’ it is more expensive to fly 

out of Evansville and that the Evansville 

airport offers ‘‘very few direct 

connections.’’ The Joint Petition also 

states that Evansville offers direct flights 

to only six destinations: Chicago 

(O’Hare), Cincinnati, Atlanta, Memphis, 

Detroit, and Dallas. In contrast, the Joint 

Petition notes that the Indianapolis 

International Airport in the Eastern 

Time Zone services 34 destinations, 

while the Louisville International 

Airport, also in the Eastern Time Zone, 

services 28 destinations. The Joint 

Petition declares that ‘‘Indianapolis is 

one of the top jumping-off points for air 

travelers from the Petitioning Counties.’’

To support this claim, the Joint Petition 

again relies on travel agents who serve 

residents in the Petitioning Counties 

and have reported that ‘‘70 to 75% of 

their customers fly out of Indianapolis 

or Louisville for reasons of cost or 

convenience.’’ The Joint Petition does 

not offer any specific information 

regarding whether these are business or 

leisure travelers, the destination of these 

travelers, or whether the location, and 

therefore, the relevant time zone of the 

airport affected their choice. In addition, 

the Joint Petition, citing information 

obtained from an employee of NSWC 

Crane, points out that 80% of the 

employee travelers from Crane military 

base (located in Martin County) use the 

Indianapolis airport. 

The Joint Petition also provides 

detailed information regarding local 

service airports that are situated within 

or near the Petitioning Counties, and 

states that such ‘‘airports provide 

county-based business with direct air 

travel access.’’ The Joint Petition 

maintains that nearly all of these 

Indiana-based local airports would be in 

the Eastern Time Zone if the Petition 

were granted. However, the Second 

Supplemental Response clarifies that, 

although they are the ‘‘nearest airports’’

in terms of geographic location, none of 

the local airports situated in the 

Petitioning Counties provides 

commercial passenger service. 

The Joint Petition also notes that the 

two closest hubs of the largest private 

express package carriers serving the 

Petitioning Counties, United Parcel 

Service and Federal Express, are 

situated in the Eastern Time Zone, in 

Indianapolis and in Louisville, and that 

air travel for cargo is thus oriented 

toward counties that are already in the 

Eastern Time Zone. 

The Petitioning Counties have not 

submitted sufficient information 

concerning the airports/airline services 

aspect of the convenience of commerce 

standard to justify proposing to change 

the time zone boundary. DOT seeks 

comment on the information submitted 

by the Petitioning Counties and requests 

any additional information on airport 

and airlines services in the Petitioning 

Counties that would aid in determining 

whether changing the time zone for the 

Petitioning Counties would serve the 

convenience of commerce. 

Worker Commuting Patterns 

The Joint Petition claims that the 

majority of workers in the Petitioning 

Counties live and work in their home 

counties. For those who work outside of 

their home counties, the Joint Petition 

states, ‘‘Of those migrating to a 

Petitioning County for work, the 

majority come from locations in the 

Eastern Time Zone. Of those leaving a 

Petitioning County for work, the 

majority go to locations in the Eastern 

Time Zone.’’ The Joint Petition relies on 

commuting patterns data from the 

Indiana Department of Revenue. In the 

Third Supplemental Response, the 

Petitioning Counties explained that the 

basis of their statement was their 

consideration that the Petitioning 

Counties were in the Eastern Time 

Zone, ‘‘as Eastern Time is the 

Petitioning Counties’ desired time 

zone.’’ The Third Supplemental goes on 

to say that the commuting patterns 

demonstrate the strong connection 

among the Petitioning Counties and 

recognizes that the commuters do not 

have a large impact on the overall 

workforce in most of the Petitioning 

Counties, with the exception of Martin 

County where commuters make up 

46.9% of the Martin County workforce. 

The Petitioning Counties have not 

submitted sufficient information 

concerning the worker commuting 

patterns aspect of the convenience of 

commerce standard to justify proposing 

to change in the time zone boundary. 

DOT seeks comment on the information 

submitted by the Petitioning Counties 

and requests any additional information 

on worker commuting patterns in the 

Petitioning Counties that would aid in 

determining whether changing their 

time zone boundaries. 

The Community’s Economy/Economic 

Development 

While the original Daviess County 

petition did not mention anything about 

the elements of the Daviess County 

economy, each of the other original 

petitions discussed each County’s 

individual economy and economic 

development as one of the matters to 

consider as part of the convenience of 

commerce standard. The original Dubois 

County petition stated that the principle 

element of its economy is wood 

furniture manufacturing, followed by 

agriculture. The original Knox County 

petition mentioned healthcare and 

education as the major elements of its 

economy. The original Pike County 

petition stated that its economy is 

largely dependent on the local mining 

industry. The original Martin County 

petition noted that the major elements 

of its economy are ‘‘agriculture, timber, 

and technology connected to’’ NSWC 

Crane. In addition, the original Martin 

petition mentioned that the local 

economy is expected to improve with 

the continued operation of NSWC 

Crane, and that Martin County is 

working along with Daviess and Greene 

Counties to develop a technology park 

adjacent to NSWC Crane. 

The Joint Petition provides additional 

information about the major elements of 

each County’s economy, the state of the 

economy, and economic development. 

The Joint Petition states that 

manufacturing and agriculture are two 

of the leading industries in the local 

economies of several of the Petitioning 

Counties. Consequently, in order to 

increase their competitive edge over 

international competitors, Dubois 

County seeks placement in the same 

time zone as a significant number of its 

companies’ suppliers and customers. 

Dubois County employers have reported 

that 60–90% of their business 

relationships remain in the Eastern 

Time Zone. Moreover, the Joint Petition 

refers to the President of the Knox 

County Development Corporation who 

anticipates that manufacturing growth 

experienced in that county should 

continue and does not foresee a shift to 

the Eastern Time Zone as having a 

negative impact. On the other hand, in 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
39600 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 138 / Thursday, July 19, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

Pike County, local business and 

industry have been tied to coal mining 

and power generation and ‘‘the 

industries that support them,’’ including 

‘‘fabricating, welding, and shipping.’’

One of the main coal mine operators in 

Pike County, Solar Sources, Inc., has its 

headquarters in Indianapolis and 

several mines in the Petitioning 

Counties. As such, the Joint Petition 

states that shifting Pike County to the 

Eastern Time Zone would serve the 

convenience of commerce by helping to 

prevent the scheduling and shipping 

problems that have coincided with the 

placement of the Petitioning Counties in 

the Central Time Zone. 

The Joint Petition also focuses on the 

economy of the Petitioning Counties as 

a block, and states that the Petitioning 

Counties have stronger economic and 

cultural connections to each other, and 

the Indiana counties currently in the 

Eastern Time Zone, than they do with 

other southern Indiana counties and the 

Evansville-based economy in the 

Central Time Zone. The Petitioning 

Counties assert that one major economic 

development project potentially shared 

by all of the Petitioning Counties is the 

proposed extension of Interstate 69 (I–

69) through central and southwestern 

Indiana. The Petitioning Counties point 

out that the expansion of I–69 will 

provide more economical and efficient 

access to Indianapolis, although they 

cannot ‘‘precisely quantify the economic 

impact to the region of the planned 

highway expansion.’’ Nonetheless, 

because traffic will be able to flow north 

from southwest Indiana to the larger 

network of highways that go through 

Indianapolis, the highway will provide 

‘‘a crucial link to central Indiana and 

beyond.’’ As such, the Petitioning 

Counties contend that they should be 

placed in the Eastern Time Zone in 

order to stay associated with the 

infrastructure and markets that will be 

made more accessible through the 

extension of I–69. The Second 

Supplemental Response notes that 

updated information on the project ‘‘has 

yet to be completed.’’

The Joint Petition also emphasizes the 

economic impact in both Daviess and 

Martin Counties of the NSWC Crane, 

which it asserts serves as a large 

regional employer and has entrances 

that currently span two time zones and 

three counties. The Joint Petition notes 

that Daviess County has partnered with 

the local and county redevelopment 

commissions of Martin County and 

Greene County, which is located in the 

Eastern Time Zone, to create a major 

technology park called ‘‘The West Gate 

@ Crane,’’ which is ‘‘expected to become 

Indiana’s showcase technology facility 

for intelligent and environmentally 

balanced development.’’ Moreover, the 

Joint Petition states that a shift to the 

Eastern Time Zone would ‘‘greatly 

simplify communications and improve 

the support’’ of NSWC Crane’s primary 

customers, which are located in the 

Eastern Time Zone. The Joint Petition 

notes that 67% of Crane’s employees 

commute from the Eastern to the Central 

Time Zone for work, causing business 

efficiency and productivity to drop as a 

consequence of irregular business hours 

and meetings, relying on information 

provided by leaders of six employee 

organizations on NSWC Crane. 

Moreover, the Second Supplemental 

Response points out that this situation 

has gotten worse with the 

implementation of daylight savings time 

in Indiana, which ‘‘has moved 76% of 

NSWC Crane’s workforce to the Eastern 

Time Zone while the plant has 

remained on Central Time.’’ The Second 

Supplemental Response quotes the 

President of Crane Technology, Inc. as 

stating that this has created a 

‘‘nightmare for scheduling and 

employee productivity’’ because ‘‘the 

plant must operate two sets of clocks to 

complete its business’’ and ‘‘virtually all 

employees strongly desire a move that 

would bring all workers on the same 

time.’’ The Third Supplemental 

Response says that EG&G Technical 

Services, Crane, is ‘‘a major contractor 

supporting’’ NSWC Crane and states 

that, according to this contractor, ‘‘core 

business hours have been reduced’’ and 

this change ‘‘adversely impacts 

workload execution and delays 

meetings and decisions.’’ No 

information was provided by officials 

from NSCW Crane. 

The Petitioning Counties have 

submitted sufficient information 

concerning the community’s economy/ 

economic development aspect of the 

convenience of commerce standard to 

justify proposing to change in the time 

zone boundary. DOT solicits further 

information and data supporting or 

rebutting the information supplied by 

the Petitioning Counties and how it 

supports a change in the time zone for 

the convenience of commerce. 

Schools, Recreation, Health Care, or 

Religious Worship 

With regard to schools, the original 

Daviess County petition stated that the 

closest State college is the University of 

Southern Indiana (USI) in Evansville in 

the Central Time Zone. The original 

Dubois County petition stated that the 

majority of students leaving the 

community for post-high school 

education attend universities in the 

Eastern Time Zone, although ‘‘a 

number’’ attend schools in Evansville. 

The original Knox County petition 

pointed out that residents who leave the 

community for school go to Illinois, or 

Gibson or Vanderburgh Counties, all in 

the Central Time Zone. The original 

Martin County petition stated that the 

primary local outlets for higher 

education were in the Central Time 

Zone and include USI , IVY Tech, and 

the University of Evansville, in 

Vanderburgh County; Vincennes 

University with campuses in Knox and 

Dubois Counties; and Oakland City 

University in Gibson County. The 

original Pike petition did not mention 

where its citizens go for higher 

education. 

Unlike the original petitions which 

focused on higher education, the Joint 

Petition focuses on primary and 

secondary education, including sporting 

events, and also on vocational students. 

The Joint Petition notes that there are 15 

school districts covering the five 

Petitioning Counties. No school district 

in the Petitioning Counties is in more 

than one time zone. The Joint Petition 

points out, however, that schools in 

these districts compete in athletic 

events against schools that are located 

in other time zones. Consequently, 

‘‘many away games have to be played in 

counties that are already in the Eastern 

Time Zone,’’ which causes ‘‘time-related 

confusion of both students and 

parents.’’ To support this claim, the 

Joint Petition cites to the football 

schedule for North Daviess High School 

in Daviess County, which includes 6 

games in the Eastern Time Zone (or 67% 

of its games). In the Second 

Supplemental Response, the Petitioning 

Counties provide their high school 

basketball schedules stating, ‘‘If the 

Petitioning Counties are shifted to the 

Eastern Time Zone, there will be a 

reduction in the number of games 

played in differing time zones from 27 

to 18.’’ The Second Supplemental 

Response explained that this would 

‘‘reduce the games played in different 

time zones to between 6% and 17%,’’

depending on the school. The Second 

Supplemental Response also points out 

that only one high school, Pike Central, 

would play more games in a time zone 

different from their own, if the Joint 

Petition were granted. The Second 

Supplemental Response concludes, 

‘‘Based on the significant reduction of 

games played outside the school’s time 

zone in four out of the five Petitioning 

Counties, a move to Eastern Time best 

serves the convenience of commerce by 

easing time-related confusion of both 

students and parents.’’

The Joint Petition states that students 

in the Petitioning Counties who attend 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 138 / Thursday, July 19, 2007 / Proposed Rules 39601 

vocational schools would also benefit 

from their counties being switched to 

the Eastern Time Zone and provided 

statistics for vocational students in 

Martin County. The Exhibit to the Joint 

Petition indicates that 15 students must 

travel back and forth across time zones 

in the Shoals Community School 

Corporation in Martin County. The 

Second Supplemental Response 

provides information on vocational 

students in Pike and Dubois Counties, 

but not for Daviess and Knox Counties, 

noting an inability to obtain statistics for 

these Counties. The Second 

Supplemental Response mentions Twin 

Rivers Vocational School (a cooperative 

between school corporations in Knox 

County, and Greene and Sullivan 

Counties, which are already in the 

Eastern Time Zone) as a school that 

currently has scheduling difficulties 

related to the different time zones. In 

summary, approximately 67 vocational 

students are affected by the time zone 

differences. 

With regard to recreation, the original 

Daviess County petition stated that the 

largest metropolitan area where its 

citizens transact business is Evansville. 

The original Dubois County petition 

noted that ‘‘major recreational events’’

would be in either the Eastern or Central 

Time Zones. The original Knox County 

petition pointed out that residents who 

leave the community for recreation go to 

Illinois, or Gibson or Vanderburgh 

Counties, all in the Central Time Zone. 

The original Martin County petition 

listed Daviess, Dubois, Knox, and 

Vanderburgh Counties as the primary 

recreational outlets for its citizens. The 

original Pike County petition states that 

‘‘by far the majority of any 

entertainment available to the citizens 

of Pike is located in Evansville.’’

The Joint Petition notes, ‘‘Recreational 

facilities are distributed fairly evenly 

throughout the Petitioning Counties,’’

and that ‘‘residents therefore typically 

do not have to cross time zones to 

participate in a sporting activity.’’ The 

Joint Petition specifically refers to a 

variety of sporting events and 

opportunities for golfers, boaters, tennis 

players, and fishers. On the other hand, 

the Joint Petition states that if residents 

want to go to a college athletic event at 

one of the State’s three major 

universities, they must cross into the 

Eastern Time Zone. 

DOT requested comments from the 

Petitioning Counties on time zone 

change as it relates to recreation and 

tourism surrounding the Holiday World 

& Splashin’ Safari amusement park in 

Spencer County because of strong 

economic ties between several of the 

Petitioning Counties and Spencer and 

Perry Counties, with its 1450 seasonal 

employees many who come from the 

Petitioning Counties, and its nearly 

900,000 visitors a year. In the Second 

Supplemental Response, the Petitioning 

Counties state that, ‘‘Due to its lengthy 

hours of operation, Holiday World will 

not be negatively impacted if the 

Petitioning Counties move to Eastern 

Time.’’ Rather, Holiday World stands to 

benefit, ‘‘as visitors from Petitioning 

Counties might arrive earlier in the day 

due to their being an hour ahead.’’ The 

Second Supplemental Response did not 

provide a source for these assertions. 

In the Second Supplemental 

Response, the Petitioning Counties 

identify the two other attractions in the 

region: the French Lick Casino and 

Resort, located in Orange County, in the 

Eastern Time Zone, and Patoka Lakes 

located in Dubois, Orange, and 

Crawford Counties, in both the Eastern 

and Central Time Zones. In the Third 

Supplemental Response, the Petitioning 

Counties provide more detailed 

information about these attractions. The 

French Lick Casino re-opened at the end 

of October, 2006 and employs 1400 

workers. From its opening through 

March 2007, there had been 520,367 

visitors. The fishing tournaments at 

Patoka Lakes attract between 750,000 

and 1,000,000 visitors. The Third 

Supplemental Response adds an 

attraction not mentioned in the Joint 

Petition or the Second Supplemental 

Response, Paoli Peaks, a ski resort in 

Orange County that attracts 100,000 

visitors annually. 

With regard to health care, the 

original individual petitions for Dubois 

County stated that the citizens of their 

counties receive ordinary medical care 

within their respective county. For more 

specialized medical care, the original 

Dubois County petition stated that its 

citizens go to Evansville, Indianapolis, 

and Louisville. The original Knox 

County petition pointed out that 

residents who leave the community for 

health care go to Illinois, or Gibson or 

Vanderburgh Counties, all in the Central 

Time Zone. The original Martin County 

petition stated that a vast majority of its 

residents utilize hospitals in Daviess, 

Dubois, and Knox Counties. The 

original Martin County petition cites 

Evansville as the closest location with a 

major medical center. The original 

petitions for Daviess and Pike Counties 

did not mention where its citizens 

receive medical care. 

The Joint Petition includes a chart 

indicating that, with the exception of 

Lawrence County Memorial in 

Lawrence County, Indiana, all of the 

hospitals located closest to the 

Petitioning Counties are currently 

located in the Central Time Zone. The 

Joint Petition also states that the best 

and closest specialty hospitals are 

located in Indianapolis and Louisville, 

both in the Eastern Time Zone, and that 

‘‘there are no comparable hospitals with 

world-renowned specialists and 

facilities located in the Petitioning 

Counties.’’ In the Second Supplemental 

Response, the Petitioning Counties 

correct the location of the Lawrence 

County Memorial Hospital, which is 

located in Lawrence, Illinois, in the 

Central Time Zone. In the Third 

Supplemental Response, the Petitioning 

Counties attempt to provide some 

justification for its assertions that 

patients from the Petitioning Counties 

seek treatment in Indianapolis or 

Louisville. The Third Supplemental 

Response refers to a report from the 

Daviess County Hospital that indicates 

that the majority of patients were 

transferred to another Petitioning 

County and more to a Central Time 

Zone hospital than to a hospital in the 

Eastern Time Zone. The Third 

Supplemental Response states, ‘‘For 

many of the Petitioning Counties 

(Daviess, Knox, and Martin) the majority 

of transfers outside of the Petitioning 

Counties went to hospitals on Eastern 

Time;’’ however, it does not provide a 

reference to support this assertion. 

The Joint Petition does not mention 

any specific information regarding 

religious worship, but concludes that, 

based on the numerous places of 

worship in each Petitioning County, the 

majority of people worship in or near 

the same county in which they live. 

The Petitioning Counties have 

submitted sufficient information 

concerning the recreation aspect of the 

convenience of commerce standard to 

justify proposing to change in the time 

zone boundary based on sporting 

activities and area attractions. The 

Petitioning Counties have also 

submitted sufficient information 

concerning the education aspect of the 

convenience of commerce standard to 

justify proposing to change the time 

zone boundary based on after school 

activities and higher education. The 

Petitioning Counties have not submitted 

sufficient information concerning the 

religious observance or health care 

aspect of the convenience of commerce 

standard to justify proposing to change 

the time zone boundary. DOT questions 

the number of residents of the 

Petitioning Counties that go to the more 

specialized hospitals located in the 

Eastern Time Zone, especially in light of 

the fact that, if the petition were 

granted, there would be more local 

hospitals in a different time zone than 

the current alignment. DOT seeks 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
39602 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 138 / Thursday, July 19, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

comment on the information submitted 

by the Petitioning Counties and requests 

any additional information that would 

aid in determining whether a change in 

the time zone for the Petitioning 

Counties would serve the convenience 

of commerce. 

Regional Connections 

In the original rulemaking proceeding 

to change time zone boundaries from 

the Eastern Time Zone to the Central 

Time Zone, the Petitioning Counties and 

commenters advocated for a move by 

referring to their ties to other Indiana 

counties currently in the Central Time 

Zone. Many referred to data from 

STATS Indiana, including the Indiana 

Annual Commuting Trends Profile, 

based on Indiana IT 40 returns. 

Commenters who supported the change 

to Central Time also referred to data 

from the Indiana Economic 

Development Corporation, the Indiana 

Department of Workforce Development, 

the Indiana Department of 

Transportation, the Indiana Department 

of Education, and Designated Market 

Areas as defined by Nielsen Media 

Research for use in television ratings. 

DOT carefully reviewed and used this 

data when it reached its prior decision 

to change the time zone boundaries of 

the Petitioning Counties to the Central 

Time Zone. Recognizing the importance 

of regional connections, the benefits of 

similar time zones, and regional ties 

among counties, DOT stated in the 

January 2006 final rule, ‘‘While Daviess, 

Dubois, Knox, Martin, and Perry border 

other Indiana counties in the Eastern 

Time Zone, their ties to those counties 

are not as strong as they are to each 

other and to other counties to their 

south, which are currently in the 

Central Time Zone. Along with Pike, 

these counties are located in the same 

workforce, commerce, transportation, 

and education regions designated by 

Indiana.’’ DOT also noted that, in 

general, remaining in the same time 

zone and maintaining their regional ties 

better position counties to realize 

advantages in economic, cultural, social, 

and civic activities, thereby serving the 

convenience of commerce. 

Contrary to the original statements 

about ties to the Central Time Zone and 

DOT’s determination, the Joint Petition 

now asserts ties to the Eastern Time 

Zone. The Joint Petition concludes, 

‘‘The Petitioning Counties are on the 

periphery of the regional, Evansvillebased economy and have stronger 

economic and cultural connections to 

each other and the interior counties 

currently on Eastern Time than they do 

with the relatively few counties at the 

southern tip of Indiana on Central 

Time.’’

While the Joint Petition refers to ties 

to the Eastern Time Zone, the Joint 

Petition also mentions the United States 

Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) in 

its discussion of Martin County. It uses 

the BEA information to explain the 

major elements of the community’s 

economy. 

According to BEA’s Web site, ‘‘BEA 

produces economic account statistics 

that enable government and business 

decision-makers, researchers, and the 

American public to follow and 

understand the performance of the 

Nation’s economy * * * BEA’s 

economic areas define the relevant 

regional markets surrounding 

metropolitan or micropolitan statistical 

areas. They consist of one or more 

economic nodes—metropolitan or 

micropolitan statistical areas that serve 

as regional centers of economic 

activity—and the surrounding counties 

that are economically related to the 

nodes.’’ (Emphasis added.). The 

economic areas are based on commuting 

patterns, statistical areas, and on 

newspaper circulation data. With the 

exception of Knox County, the 

Petitioning Counties are in BEA 

economic area 54 (the Evansville, KY 

area), along with other counties that are 

in the Central Time Zone. Knox County, 

on the other hand, is in a BEA economic 

area with counties in both the Central 

and Eastern Time Zones. 

DOT asked the Petitioning Counties to 

address these differences in the Joint 

Petition’s assertions of connections to 

the Eastern Time Zone and the BEA 

data. Despite the BEA classification, in 

their Second Supplemental Response, 

the Petitioning Counties now insist that 

their strongest economic connections 

are among themselves and the 

surrounding counties on Eastern Time 

rather than to the other counties in BEA 

economic area 54. The Second 

Supplemental Response states, ‘‘A better 

assessment of regional connectivity can 

be seen on the State and local level.’’

The Second Supplemental Response 

notes that State and local economic 

development agencies may consider 

commuter patterns and also ‘‘look to the 

types of businesses in the area upon 

which communities rely to sustain 

growth’’ as well as funding, and 

transportation opportunities. More 

specifically, the Second Supplemental 

response refers to the Indiana 

Association of Regional Councils 

(IARC), an organization that supports 

regional planning efforts that prioritize 

and categorize local community and 

economic development needs and 

projects as well as the transportation 

and special needs of the communities. 

Under IARC, none of the Petitioning 

Counties considered to be within the 

Evansville region and are connected 

with other Petitioning Counties and 

counties. 

The Second Supplemental Response 

also refers to other connections to 

counties already on Eastern Time. 

Under Region 15 Economic Area, 

Dubois and Pike Counties are paired 

with Orange and Crawford Counties in 

the Eastern Time Zone. The Second 

Supplemental Response also notes that 

Daviess, Knox, and Martin Counties are 

served by the Southern Indiana 

Development Commission (SIDC) along 

with two other counties currently in the 

Eastern Time Zone. According to the 

Second Supplemental Response, SIDC 

counties have collaborated on Federal 

and State grant applications. As an 

example of these collaborative efforts, 

the Second Supplemental Response 

refers to a demand-based rural transit 

system funded by a Federal grant. The 

Second Supplemental Response asserts 

that placing all participating counties in 

the same time zone will preserve the 

cohesiveness and viability of the 

system. 

Another regional economic 

development project referenced in the 

Second Supplemental Response is 

Crane Diversification, which is 

composed of six counties, including 

Daviess and Martin Counties and four 

others counties which are on Eastern 

Time. According to the Second 

Supplemental Response, the goal of 

Crane Diversification ‘‘is to develop an 

economic diversification plan that will 

result in an orderly transition of this 

block of counties * * * from economic 

dependence on national defense 

spending to a more balanced local 

economy with a mix of private and 

public sector employment opportunities 

for the area’s citizens.’’ The Petitioning 

Counties believe that projects such as 

Crane Diversification would be 

negatively impacted by the current time 

zone disparity, affecting planning, 

integration, and strategic development. 

The Second Supplemental Response 

also mentions other projects that it says 

define the economic region in terms of 

counties tied to each other through 

potential business development. These 

include the Indiana Uplands Growth 

Partnership, developed under a gaming 

statute; Economic Growth Region 8; and 

West Gate @ Crane Technology Park. 

The Third Supplemental Response 

explains these in greater detail. 

According to the Third Supplemental 

Response, the Indiana Upland Growth 

Partnership concerns the French Lick 

Casino and arose under State legislation. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 138 / Thursday, July 19, 2007 / Proposed Rules 39603 

The Third Supplemental Response 

states that ‘‘a portion of the admission 

taxes at the casino will go towards 

supporting regional economic activity 

for Orange County (Eastern) and the five 

counties surrounding Orange.’’ While 

the Third Supplemental response refers 

to five counties, it only lists four and 

states, ‘‘These counties have worked 

together to develop a strategic plan for 

the economic development of the six 

county region.’’ With regard to West 

Gate @ Crane Technology Park, the 

Third Supplemental Response notes 

that it was certified by the Indiana 

Economic Development Corporation 

and developed by county and economic 

development commissions from Daviess 

(Central), Martin (Central), and Greene 

(Eastern) counties. The Third 

Supplemental Response states, ‘‘The 

state-of-the-art facilities in development 

are expected to serve major commercial 

technology companies associated with 

the $2 billion NSWC Crane military 

technical center. Facilities are also being 

designed for academic and training 

operations.’’ As for Economic Growth 

Region 8, the Third Supplemental 

Response explains that the region was 

designated by the Indiana Department of 

Workforce Development ‘‘to promote 

economic growth and serve as a means 

for implementing the State’s Strategic 

Plan Initiative.’’

The Third Supplemental Response 

concludes that failing to change the time 

zone boundary to the Eastern Time Zone 

and ‘‘cement the connection between 

the Petitioning Counties and the State 

Capitol, and between a large portion of 

the business in the Petitioning Counties 

and their customer base, is likely to 

have a significantly negative impact on 

the already struggling economies of this 

region.’’

The Petitioning Counties’ references 

to Region 15 Economic Area and 

Economic Growth Region 8 are also 

addressed in letters from the Indiana 

Economic Development Corporation 

and the Indiana Department of 

Workforce Development. As noted 

above, these organizations explained 

that they established their respective 

State regions based on their ability to 

deliver services. They did not establish 

regions based on time zones or 

‘‘convenience of commerce.’’

Nevertheless, the Petitioning Counties 

have submitted sufficient information 

concerning the regional connections and 

ties to the Eastern Time Zone to justify 

proposing to change the time zone. DOT 

seeks comment on the information 

submitted by the Petitioning Counties 

and requests any additional information 

concerning regional connections that 

would aid in determining whether 

changing the time zone for these 

counties would serve the convenience 

of commerce. 

Request for Comments 

To aid us in our consideration of 

whether a time zone change would be 

‘‘for the convenience of commerce,’’ we 

ask for comments on the impact on 

commerce of a change in the time zone 

and whether a new time zone would 

improve the convenience of commerce. 

The comments should address the 

impact on such things as economic, 

cultural, social, and civic activities and 

how time zone changes affect 

businesses, communication, 

transportation, and education. The 

comments should be as detailed as 

possible, providing the basis of the 

information including factual data or 

surveys. For example, with regard to 

major bus, rail, and air transportation, 

information such as the average time it 

takes for a county resident to travel to 

a transportation terminal or the average 

distance to the terminal for a county 

resident would be useful. With regard to 

the impact of the time zone on 

education, if a school district crosses 

county lines, the number of students in 

each county in that district would be 

helpful. Information on school activities 

such as sporting events or academic 

competitions that take place in other 

counties or locations that are not on the 

same time zone as the school district 

would also be useful. Similar 

information on community colleges 

could also be beneficial. Finally, we 

would appreciate information on how 

the different time zones affect the 

students and the schools. 

We specifically invite comment from 

neighboring Indiana counties and 

counties in other States that may also be 

impacted by changing the Petitioning 

Counties’ time zone boundary. 

Although the Petitioning Counties 

have submitted sufficient information to 

begin the rulemaking process, the 

decision whether actually to make the 

change will also consider information 

submitted in writing to the docket. 

Persons supporting or opposing the 

change should not assume that the 

change will be made merely because 

DOT is making the proposal. DOT here 

issues no opinion on the ultimate merits 

of the Petitioning Counties’ request. We 

note that the Petitioning Counties and 

their residents have had only a short 

time to experience the effects of 

changing from Eastern to Central Time 

and now the Petitioning Counties 

request to change back again. We also 

understand that this proposal may have 

an impact on surrounding Counties, 

particularly Perry County which 

changed time zone boundaries at the 

same time as the Petitioning Counties. 

This may result in many comments to 

the docket. Our decision in the final 

rule will be made on the basis of 

information and comments developed 

during the entire rulemaking 

proceeding. In our experience, time 

zone boundary changes can be 

extremely disruptive to a community 

and, therefore, should not be made 

without careful consideration. At the 

close of the comment period, we will 

analyze the comments submitted and 

decide whether to withdraw the 

proposal (and deny the Joint Petition) or 

issue a final rule. 

Comment Period 

We are providing 30 days for public 

comments in this proceeding. Although 

we normally provide 60 days for public 

comments on proposed rules, we 

believe that 30 days is an adequate 

public comment period in this instance. 

It is important to resolve this 

rulemaking expeditiously so that we can 

provide ample notice if a change to the 

Petitioning Counties’ time zone 

boundaries is adopted. Since the 

introduction and passage of the Indiana 

Act in 2005 and through DOT’s time 

zone regulatory proceeding and review 

of three Supplemental Responses, the 

time zone boundary issue has been 

actively discussed and analyzed. In this 

regard, we expect that 30 days is 

adequate time to submit the necessary 

data, which is based on currently 

available information. 

Regulatory Analysis and Notices 

This proposed rule is not a 

‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under 

section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 

and does not require an assessment of 

potential costs and benefits under 

section 6(a)(3) of that Order. It has not 

been reviewed by the Office of 

Management and Budget under that 

Order. It is not ‘‘significant’’ under the 

regulatory policies and procedures of 

the Department of Transportation (44 FR 

11040; February 26, 1979). We expect 

the economic impact of this proposed 

rule to be so minimal that a full 

Regulatory Evaluation under paragraph 

10e of the regulatory policies and 

procedures of DOT is unnecessary. The 

rule primarily affects the convenience of 

individuals in scheduling activities. By 

itself, it imposes no direct costs. Its 

impact is localized in nature. 

Small Entities 

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act 

(5 U.S.C. 601–612), we considered 

whether this proposed rule would have 

a significant economic impact on a 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
39604 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 138 / Thursday, July 19, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

substantial number of small entities. 

The term ‘‘small entities’’ comprises 

small businesses, not-for-profit 

organizations that are independently 

owned and operated and are not 

dominant in their fields, and 

governmental jurisdictions with 

populations of less than 50,000. This 

proposal, if adopted, would primarily 

affect individuals and their scheduling 

of activities. Although it would affect 

some small businesses, not-for-profits 

and, perhaps, a number of small 

governmental jurisdictions, it would not 

be a substantial number. In addition, the 

change should have little, if any, 

economic impact. 

Therefore, I certify under 5 U.S.C. 

605(b) that this proposed rule would 

not, if adopted, have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. If you think 

that your business, organization, or 

governmental jurisdiction qualifies as a 

small entity and that this rule would 

have a significant economic impact on 

it, please submit a comment to the 

Docket Management Facility at the 

address under ADDRESSES. In your 

comment, explain why you think it 

qualifies and how and to what degree 

this rule would economically affect it. 

Under section 213(a) of the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121), 

we want to assist small entities in 

understanding this proposed rule so that 

they can better evaluate its effects on 

them and participate in the rulemaking. 

If the rule would affect your small 

business, organization, or governmental 

jurisdiction and you have questions 

concerning its provisions or options for 

compliance, please call Judith Kaleta at 

(202) 366–9315. 

Collection of Information 

This proposed rule would call for no 

new collection of information under the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 

U.S.C. 3501–3520). 

Federalism 

We have analyzed this proposed rule 

under E.O. 12612 and have determined 

that this rule does not have sufficient 

implications for federalism to warrant 

the preparation of a Federalism 

Assessment. 

Unfunded Mandates 

The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) and E.O. 

12875, Enhancing the Intergovernmental 

Partnership, (58 FR 58093; October 28, 

1993) govern the issuance of Federal 

regulations that impose unfunded 

mandates. An unfunded mandate is a 

regulation that requires a State, local, or 

tribal government or the private sector 

to incur direct costs without the Federal 

Government’s having first provided the 

funds to pay those costs. This proposed 

rule would not impose an unfunded 

mandate. 

Taking of Private Property 

This proposed rule would not result 

in a taking of private property or 

otherwise have taking implications 

under E.O. 12630, Governmental 

Actions and Interference with 

Constitutionally Protected Property 

Rights. 

Civil Justice Reform 

This proposed rule meets applicable 

standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of 

E.O. 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to 

minimize litigation, eliminate 

ambiguity, and reduce burden. 

Protection of Children 

We have analyzed this proposed rule 

under E.O. 13045, Protection of 

Children from Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not 

an economically significant rule and 

does not concern an environmental risk 

to health or risk to safety that may 

disproportionately affect children. 

Environment 

This rulemaking is not a major 

Federal action significantly affecting the 

quality of the human environment 

under the National Environmental 

Policy Act and, therefore, an 

environmental impact statement is not 

required. 

Privacy Act 

Anyone is able to search the 

electronic form of all comments 

received into any of our dockets by the 

name of the individual submitting the 

comment (or signing the comment, if 

submitted on behalf of an association, 

business, labor union, etc.). You may 

review DOT’s complete Privacy Act 

Statement in the Federal Register 

published on April 11, 2000 (Volume 

65, Number 70; Pages 19477–78) or you 

may visit http://dms.dot.gov. 

List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 71 

Time zones. 

For the reasons discussed above, the 

Office of the Secretary proposes to 

amend Title 49 part 71 as follows: 

1. The authority citation for part 71 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: Secs. 1–4, 40 Stat. 450, as 

amended; sec. 1, 41 Stat. 1446, as amended; 

secs. 2–7, 80 Stat. 107, as amended; 100 Stat. 

764; Act of Mar. 19, 1918, as amended by the 

Uniform Time Act of 1966 and Pub. L. 

97–449, 15 U.S.C. 260–267; Pub. L. 99–359; 

Pub. L. 106–564, 15 U.S.C. 263, 114 Stat. 

2811; 49 CFR 1.59(a). 

2. Paragraph (b) of § 71.5 is revised to 

read as follows: 

§ 71.5 Boundary line between eastern and 

central zones. 

* * * * * 

(b) Indiana-Illinois. From the junction 

of the western boundary of the State of 

Michigan with the northern boundary of 

the State of Indiana easterly along the 

northern boundary of the State of 

Indiana to the east line of LaPorte 

County; thence southerly along the east 

line of LaPorte County to the north line 

of Starke County; thence east along the 

north line of Starke County to the west 

line of Marshall County; thence south 

along the west line of Marshall County; 

thence west along the north line of 

Pulaski County to the east line of Jasper 

County; thence south along the east line 

of Jasper County to the south line of 

Jasper County; thence west along the 

south lines of Jasper and Newton 

Counties to the western boundary of the 

State of Indiana; thence south along the 

western boundary of the State of Indiana 

to the north line of Gibson County; 

thence easterly and northerly along the 

north line of Gibson County to the west 

line of Pike County; thence south along 

the west line of Pike County to the north 

line of Warrick County; thence east 

along the north line of Warrick and 

Spencer Counties to the west line of 

Perry County; thence easterly and 

southerly along the north and east line 

of Perry County to the Indiana-Kentucky 

boundary. 

* * * * * 

Issued in Washington, DC on July 16, 2007. 

D.J. Gribbin, 

General Counsel. 

[FR Doc. 07–3516 Filed 7–16–07; 12:13 pm] 

BILLING CODE 4910–9X–P 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS