of some extraordinary event is not essential to the extension of a commercial zone, that the area involved has always in fact been part of the zone but was omitted through oversight when the zone was defined, and they ask that the examiner's recommendation be approved.

Full consideration has been given to the evidence, the examiner's recommendation, the exceptions, and the reply thereto. We find the statement of facts in the examiner's report to be accurate in all material respects, and it is adopted as our own. Those facts which assume greater importance in the light of the pleadings will be restated.

As now defined, the Illinois portion of the zone includes Monsanto, which lies immediately south of East St. Louis along the Mississippi River. The portion of Cahokia now sought to be included within the zone shares a common boundary of 5,600 feet with Monsanto, is comprised of about 0.86 square mile, and is wholly situated within 5-mile radii of both the St. Louis and East St. Louis post offices.

Since 1931 Phillips has operated a pipeline terminal which has barge facilities in Monsanto but is principally located on two nearby tracts in the described portion of Cahokia. A large part of this acreage is used for tank storage and distribution, and wheat and corn are grown on the remainder. In 1961 Phillips distributed therefrom about 13 million barrels of gasoline and related petroleum products, and about 68,000 tons of anhydrous ammonia. Phillips was not a party to the proceeding wherein the zone was initially defined in 1937, because at that time its traffic was handled entirely by rail and it had no business interest in the permissible extent of exempt motor carrier operations, nor in the terminal areas of the motor carriers themselves.

Midwest operates a rubber reclaiming plant on a 28.5-acre tract which is bisected by the Monsanto-Cahokia boundary line and it maintains receiving docks in both jurisdictions. It receives packaged, processed materials and machinery at its Monsanto docks and scrap rubber and heavy machinery at its Cahokia docks. Carriers whose interstate authority is limited to points in the commercial zone must effect Cahokia deliveries by entering the property in Monsanto and traversing a road which has proved unsatisfactory because of a narrow clearance between petitioner's building and the right-of-way of Illinois Highway 3. If the same carriers could enter the property in Cahokia, Illinois Highway 3 could be used and the delivery problem obviated.

The Cahokia Trust is a liquidating trust which owns land in Monsanto and Cahokia, including nearly half of the area sought to be included herein in three tracts located north, east, and west of the largest Phillips property. The land is zoned for industry but has not been developed. The owner supports the proposed extension of the commercial zone, because it believes that sales and development would follow upon the concomitant increase in motor transportation facilities. 2 Extension of the zone is also supported by Laclede Steel Company, by East Side Associated Industries, and The Traffic Board of the St. Louis Chamber of Commerce, representing various shippers, and by Viking Freight Company, Texas-Arizona Motor Freight, Inc., and Nighthawk Freight Service, Inc., motor common carriers authorized to serve St. Louis-East St. Louis.

Northwest is a common carrier by motor vehicle authorized, as pertinent here, to transport general commodities, with exceptions, (1) between points in the commercial zone and (2) between points in the commercial zone, on the one hand, and, on the other, Cahokia. It serves the Cahokia site of Midwest as a delivering carrier for certain line-haul carriers who do not serve Cahokia directly, and it opposes any extension of the zone because it fears a diversion of some of this traffic. When serving Cahokia from St. Louis it uses equipment different in type from that used in its operations between points in the zone, and it considers the Cahokia movements to be line-haul in character.

Under appropriate circumstances we may of course take official notice of prior reports in a proceeding, so that all pertinent facts can be collected upon which a decision should be based. See the 12th and 20th supplemental reports in Commercial Zones and Terminal Areas, 66 M.C.C. 709, and 81 M.C.C. 726. The prior report of November 26, 1962, however, to which petitioners refer us, deals with a much broader geographical area than that with which we are concerned here. Upon examining the statement of facts therein we conclude that the application of statements made about the village of Cahokia as a whole to the small and in

2Under section 203(b)(8) of the act, interstate transportation wholly between points in a zone adjacent to and commercially a part of a municipality does not require operating authority. Furthermore, by virtue of the decision in Commercial Zones and Terminal Areas, 54 M.C.C. 21, a motor carrier holding authority to serve a specific municipality may serve all points within that municipality's commercial zone, with certain exceptions which need not be described herein.

dustrially specialized area of this petition would not be justified, and that we should make our determination on the record actually made at the instant hearing.

It is demonstrably true, as pointed out by the opposing intervener, that there has been no unusual industrial development in the area under consideration such as would normally indicate its commercial integration with the base municipalities. The composition of a particular commercial area, however, can sometimes be unique, and the factors which normally would prompt a redefinition of the commercial zone limits may then be superseded by one or more factors which have a particular relevance to a special situation. See, for example, New York, N. Y., Commercial Zone, 88 M.C.C. 336, Chicago, Ill., Commercial Zone, 86 MC.C. 735, and Commercial Zones and Terminal Areas, 81 M.C.C. 726. The situation here is indeed anomalous. Both petitioners maintain large industrial establishments which are in part located within the commercial zone; yet the present definition of the zone erects an artificial barrier between a portion of each industry and those points which have been determined to be commercially a part of St. Louis-East St. Louis. This is particularly true in the case of Midwest whose loading terminal is actually astride the boundary, and it is also applicable to the storage tanks of Phillips although the tract on which they are situated is not quite contiguous to that petitioner's Monsanto property. Though this obviously would not as a general rule in itself be controlling, we are convinced that in the particular geographical circumstances involving these petitioners there is no justification for dividing their properties and excluding portions of them from the zone; and we conclude, therefore, that the zone should be expanded at this time. That portion of petitioner Phillips' property which is used as farmland is not very large and Phillips' holding of it is consistent with its future development of the pipeline facility; it should also be included in the revised definition.

As already indicated, the proposed redefinition would encompass some 250 acres of undeveloped land. Nevertheless, readily ascertainable boundaries must be selected, and in general the addition of bizarre boundaries to a relatively uncluttered perimeter should be avoided. The boundaries proposed by petitioners meet both of these objectives, and should be adopted. Northwest's opposition to extending the zone limits has not been ignored, but it is well settled that commercial zones exist about any municipality as an economic fact; hence in defining the limits

of a zone we would err by considering instead the potential effect upon the operations of a protesting motor carrier. Northwest's testimony that transportation between St. Louis or East St. Louis and Cahokia is line-haul in character is simply not persuasive in view of the geographical considerations discussed above.

No additional determination is necessary with respect to transportation between Belleville, on the one hand, and, on the other, points in the remainder of the St. Louis-East St. Louis commercial zone. The statutory exemption for such transportation was removed in prior reports herein and is codified in 49 C.F.R. § 170.3(b). Our findings below will affect only paragraph (a) of § 170.3.

On further hearing, we find that the zone adjacent to and commercially a part of St. Louis, Mo., and East St. Louis, Ill., contemplated by section 203(b)(8) of the Interstate Commerce Act, includes and is comprised of all points as follows: (1) All points within the corporate limits of St. Louis, Mo.; (2) all points in St. Louis County, Mo., within a line drawn 0.5 mile south, west, and north of the following line, but not including any point north of the Meramec River and west of Kirkwood, Mo., or points beyond the established corporate boundaries of Kirkwood, Huntleigh, and St. Ferdinand, Mo.: Beginning at the Jefferson Barracks Bridge across the Mississippi River and extending westerly along Missouri Highway 77 to its junction with U. S. Highway 61 Bypass, thence along U. S. Highway 61 Bypass to its junction with U. S. Highway 66, thence westerly along U. S. Highway 66 to its junction with Bowles Avenue, thence northerly along Bowles Avenue actual or projected to the Meramec River, thence easterly along the south bank of the Meramec River to a point directly south of the western boundary of Kirkwood, thence across the Meramec River to and along the western and northern boundaries of Kirkwood to the western boundary of Huntleigh, Mo., thence along the western and northern boundaries of Huntleigh to U. S. Highway 66, thence in a northerly direction along U. S. Highway 66 (Lindbergh Boulevard) to its junction with Natural Bridge Road, thence in an easterly direction along U. S. Highway 66 to the western boundary of St. Ferdinand (Florissant), Mo., thence along the western, northern, and eastern boundaries of St. Ferdinand to U. S. Highway 66, and thence along U. S. Highway 66 (Taylor Road) to the corporate limits of St. Louis (near Chain of Rocks Bridge); and (3) all points within the corporate limits of East St. Louis, Belleville, Granite City, Madison, Venice, Brook

lyn, National City, Fairmont City, Washington Park, and Monsanto, Ill., and that part of the village of Cahokia, Ill., bounded by Illinois Highway 3 on the east, First Avenue and Red House (Cargill) Road on the south and southwest, the east line of the right-of-way of the Alton and Southern Railroad on the west, and the corporate limits of Monsanto, Ill., on the northwest and north.

An appropriate order will be entered.

95 M.C.C.