OCR Text |
Show Southern Utah Produce Co., Asks Clarification of Their 'Recommended Order' Washington County News, St. George, Utah Gentlemen: Clarification of recommended order given to the Southern Utah Produce Co., and exceptions written writ-ten by Stucki & Wittwer Trucking Truck-ing Co., in the last two issues of the News. The two questions to be answered an-swered are: What are the present pres-ent franchise rights of the Southern Sou-thern Utah Produce Co.? And what will be the franchise right if the Interstate Commerce grants the order recommended by Examiner Ex-aminer R. J. Olentine? First: Until the Commission issues is-sues us The Southern Utah Produce Co., a certificate to operate op-erate as a Common Carrier in (Continued on page three) Freight Co. Letter (Continued from first page) Interstate and Foreign Com merce, and it may be several months or years before a Certificate Certifi-cate is issued, we are allowed to f operate as a Common Carrier hauling "General Commodities" to i and from or between Los Angeles, Ange-les, California and various points in Southern Utah including Santa San-ta Clara, St. George, Leeds, To-querville, To-querville, Hurricane, LaVerkin, Virgin, Rockville, Springdale, Kanab, and thence on up the 89 highway to Salina, Utah, also to Bryce Canyon, Ruby's Inn, Tropic, Cannonville, and Henrieville, including in-cluding service at all intermediate j points. Second: When the Commission issues a certificate and if the f conditions are the same as recommended rec-ommended by Examiner R. J. Olentine we will be permitted to operate with restricted commodi- ; ties over the same territory as ; stated above except the terri- tory from Junction, Utah to Sa- Una, Utah, on the 89 highway restricted to produce only, with Cannonville, and Henrieville res- : tricted to produce only, and with : St. George, Utah restricted to : produce and livestock. Yours very truly, SOUTHERN UTAH , PRODUCE CO. |