the Washington Water Power Company and the Pacific Northwest Bell Telephone Company, as well as by the Spokane newspapers, these facts are insufficient to show that the proposed areas are commercially a part of Spokane, because the areas serviced by power and telephone companies and the news media are often far extensive than commercial zones surrounding base municipalities. Thus, while the evidence of record, though extremely general, may show a connection between the areas in question and the Spokane commercial zone, there is virtually no showing of an economic or other tie to Spokane itself. We conclude, therefore, that the petition for redefinition and enlargement of the Spokane commercial zone should be denied.

One further matter requires discussion. It is well established that the availability of existing motor common carrier service is not a proper issue for consideration in commercial zone proceedings. Compare Kansas City, Mo.-Kansas City Kans., Commercial Zone, 118 M.C.C. 462, 465 (1973). However, petitioners Taylor-Edwards and Grimmer state that they have been providing service between Spokane and the Spokane Industrial Park in the mistaken belief that the entrance to the park is within the existing zone. The entrance is approximately 80 feet beyond the limits of the zone. Interveners state that some of their member companies have used Grimmer's service in connection with pool-car arrangements to distribute interstate freight in the Spokane commercial zone. While there is no evidence that petitioners have continued to provide such service since they were advised that the industrial park is not within the Spokane commercial zone, they are cautioned not to perform such service in the future unless they obtain appropriate authority from this Commission.

FINDINGS

We find that proposed redefinition and enlargement of the zone adjacent to and commercially a part of Spokane, Wash., contemplated by section 203(b)(8) of the Interstate Commerce Act, has not been shown to be warranted; that this decision is not a major Federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment within the meaning of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969; and that the petition should be denied. An appropriate order will be entered.

EX PARTE No. MC-30 (SUB-NO. 2)

CINCINNATI, OHIO, COMMERCIAL ZONE

Decided October 7, 1976

Petition for redefinition and enlargement of the limits of the zone which is adjacent to and commercially a part of Cincinnati, Ohio, within the meaning of section 203(b)(8) of the Interstate Commerce Act, denied. Prior reports herein: 26 M.C.C. 49, 41 M.C.C. 227, 46 M.C.C. 733, 88 M.C.C. 789, 92 M.C.C. 180, 94 M.C.C. 766, 106 M.C.C. 267, 112 M.C.C. 112, 113 M.C.C. 430, and 113 M.C.C. 760.

Norbert B. Flick for petitioners.

REPORT OF THE COMMISSION

REVIEW Board Number 2, Members BOYLE, EATON, AND LIBERMAN

BY THE BOARD:

By joint petition filed January 2, 1976, the Northern Kentucky Chamber of Commerce and Homart Development Co. seeks enlargement of the present commercial zone limits of Cincinnati, Ohio, by replacing the last two paragraphs of the present description as reflected in 49 CFR 1048.7 with the following:

That part of Boone-Kenton County, Ky., bounded by a line beginning at the intersection of Boone-Kenton County line and Richardson Road thence northwest along Richardson Road to its intersection with U.S. Highway 25, thence in a straight line southwesterly to its joinder with Sunnybrook Drive and thence west along Sunnybrook Drive to its joinder with Gunpowder Creek Road, thence northwest along Gunpowder Creek Road to its junction with U.S. Highway 42 and 127, thence northwest along Kentucky State Highway 237 to its junction Kentucky State Highway 20 and thence along Highway 20 to its junction with Kentucky Highway 8 and thence eastward to Kenton-Boone County line.

That part of Kenton County, Ky., beginning at the junction of Boone-Kenton County line and Richardson Road thence southeast along Richardson Road to its junction with Kentucky State Highway 1303 (Turkeyfoot Road) thence north along Kentucky State Highway 1303 (Turkeyfoot Road) to the southern boundary of Edgewood, Kenton County, Ky.

Pursuant to section 553 of the Administrative Procedure Act, notice of the filing of the petition was published in the Federal Register on February 12, 1976 (41 F.R. 6346). The notice stated that no oral hearing was contemplated, and persons desiring to participate in, the proceeding were invited to file representations supporting or opposing the relief sought. Representations in support were filed by the parties listed in the appendix to this report. No representations in opposition to the proposed zone expansion were

filed.

EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF ZONE EXPANSION GEOGRAPHIC AND
DEMOGRAPHIC FACTORS

The area sought to be included in the Cincinnati commercial zone lies in that part of Florence, Ky., not presently part of the commercial zone and that area west of Florence and east of Kentucky Highway 237. Within the proposed area, the Florence Shopping Mall is nearing completion. The latter is a $50 million shopping center which will employ thousands of persons now living within the presently prescribed commercial zone. The proposed area is approximately 12 miles south of Cincinnati. Florence has a population of 15,000 persons and Boone County, Ky., has a population of 40,000. The construction of the mall and the relocation of certain highways caused by new construction at the Greater Cincinnati Airport (some 5 miles from Florence) have led petitioners to seek expansion of the zone. The proposed area is presently part of the Department of Commerce Standard Metropolitan Statistical Survey for Cincinnati and population statistics indicate a decline in the inner city and increase in outlying areas of Cincinnati. In fact, Boone County experienced a 50-percent population increase during the 1960's. The statement of Mr. James Ward of the Northern Kentucky Chamber of Commerce indicates that certain roads and boundaries presently employed in the commercial zone description are in the process of being eliminated or relocated.

GOVERNMENTAL AND UTILITIES FACTORS

Gas and electric service in the proposed area is furnished by the Union Light Heat and Power Company, a subsidiary of Cincinnati Gas & Electric Company, and telephone service is provided by Citizens Telephone Co., a subsidiary of Cincinnati Bell Telephone Company. Water is supplied to the proposed area by the Kenton

County Water District and the city of Florence operates its own sewage treatment system. Florence has an independent police and fire department. The Boone County Planning Commission serves Florence and is assisted by the Northern Kentucky Area Development District and the Ohio-Kentucky-Indiana Regional Council of Governments.

ECONOMIC AND INDUSTRIAL FACTORS

Boone County, Ky., and specifically Florence, is one of the fastest growing areas of Northern Kentucky. Since 1968, it has experienced a large increase in the number of manufacturing establishments. The new Florence Shopping Mall will contain four major department stores (Sears, Pogues, Shillito's, and one other) and will house between 110 and 130 stores. It is expected to open in 1976. Other facilities near the mall in the proposed area include a Gold Circle supermarket-department store, Scanlon Drugs, the new Booth Hospital, and Latonia Race Track. Many of the parties indicating their support for the proposed zone expansion are doing so to enable them to have expanded transportation services (notably the statements from Shillito's, Scanlon Drugs, Richter & Phillips, Pogues, Kentucky Jockey Club, Sears, Roebuck & Co., Boone County Businessmen's Association, North American Management and Development Co., F. Krumpleman, and others). Some of the parties assert that the zone should be expanded as the proposed area is surrounded on the north, east, and south by the present commercial zone boundaries. Two Cincinnati newspapers serve the proposed area as do various radio and television stations located in the "greater Cincinnati area."

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

Section 203(b)(8) was enacted with a purpose partially to exempt from regulation purely local transportation by motor vehicle within communities and their immediately adjacent commercial zones, see Commercial Zones and Terminal Areas, 46 M.C.C. 665, 679 (1946); and St. Louis, Mo.-East St. Louis, Ill., Commercial Zone, 1 M.C.C. 656, 661 (1937). It has been repeatedly found that the limits of a commercial zone are an economic fact to be determined on the basis of existing conditions and that a commercial zone is not "established" or "created" by the Commission but already exists by reason of trade practices, the uses to which a proposed area is put, and geographical and political considerations. See Commercial

Zones and Terminal Areas, supra, at 672, St. Louis, Mo.-East St. Louis, Ill., Commercial Zone, 61 M.C.C. 489 (1953); Philadelphia, Pa., Commercial Zone, 94 M.C.C. 172 (1963); and Chicago, Ill., Commercial Zone Extension-Sag Area, 94 M.C.C. 568 (1964). Thus, the crux of a proceeding seeking the redefinition of a commercial zone lies in a myriad of indicia, including such factors as economics, geography, demography, trade practices, the flow of goods and services, land use, labor markets, public utilities provisions, news and communications media, shipping patterns of residents, entertainment and recreation, and the relationship of these factors to the base municipality (here Cincinnati).

In this regard we would emphasize that the extent of a commercial zone adjacent to and commercially a part of a given point is not an issue to be decided in relation to any public need which may or may not exist for the transportation service which would be partially exempted from regulation thereby. See Cincinnati, Ohio, Commercial Zone, 88 M.C.C. 789 (1962). Nor is the desire of a shipper or shippers or any interested party to avoid economic regulation by having included within a particular commercial zone facilities which are planned to be constructed or maintained a proper factor for consideration. Chicago, Ill., Commercial Zone Extension-Sag Area, supra. Finally, it is vital that all of the factors presented to demonstrate that the proposed area is a part of the involved commercial zone must be presented in such a way as to show that the proposed area is tied to the underlying municipality and not merely to those areas of the commercial zone outside of the limits of the underlying municipality. Commercial Zones and Terminal Areas, 117 M.C.C. 797 (1973).

Under these long-established standards which are well designed to govern this determination, we have no alternative but to conclude that the evidence adduced herein is insufficient to demonstrate that the proposed area is a part of the Cincinnati commercial zone. The petitioners and parties in support of the petition have presented little concrete evidence to support their position. They fail to state how many residents of the proposed area work in Cincinnati or vice versa, compare, Commercial Zones and Terminal Areas, supra, 117 M.C.C. at 801, and Seattle-Tacoma, Wash., Commercial Zone, 111 M.C.C. 718 (1970). The proposed area is wholly independent of Cincinnati in regard to such factors as police and fire protection, and water and sewage systems. Indeed the only concrete indicia of nexus presented were the common gas, electric, and telephone service supplied by Cincinnati utilities. Scant information was