Many thanks, Patrick, for your reply. Checking further, I find that Waugh has done something similar for Feb 29th and EoT. Also, I did find one error in the EoT table. For April 21, the EoT is listed as 1 00 but going by the adjacent data, 1 09 would be more correct. Just a typesetting error, I am sure.
I keyed the data for both the EoT and decl. tables into Excel so I can fool around with it a little. It's easy to spot anomalies if you plot. John B
