Fcrin 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No. 7096
 SECOND DIVISION Docket No. 6941-T
 2-C&O-BM-' T6
 The Second Division consisted of the regular members and in
 addition Referee David P. Twomey when award was rendered.
 ( System Federation No. 4, Railway Employes'
 ( Department, A. F. of L. - C. I. 0.
 Parties to Dispute: ( (Boilermakers) .

Dispute: Claim of Employes:




Findjn
The Second Division of the Adjustment Board, upon the whole record and alb, the evidence, finds that:

 The carrier or carriers and the employe or employes involved in ttr$.s dispute are respectively carrier and employe within the meaning of the Railway Labor Act as approved June 21, 1934.

 This Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the dispu~e involved herein.

The Boilermakers', claimed a violation of Rules 79 and 32 of the Agreement based on, "Cutting down and scrapping bar mill furnace and all of its component parts by machinist (Leon Bledsoe)" (Employes' Exhibit "K": original, claim submitted by the Local Representative). In their Submission to this Board the Boilermakers contend that the Carrier violated the A gregment when the Carrier assigned a Machinist "to dismantle the component parts of the Bar Mill Furnace" (Statement of Claim): the Organisation makes this contention based on Employes' Exhibit A:

          Mr. William B. Mochrie, Jr. General Chairman


          Kindly be referred to your note about the deck plates and steps, some was scrapped and some was put

Form 1 Award No. 7096
 Page 2 Docket No. 6941-T
 2-C&O-BM-'76
 "in the Boilermakers Stock for reclaim but as yet
 we never have used any of it for any job so far. I
 hope this will help you in some way.
 Fraternally yours,
 Earl V. Gibson
 Local Chairman!'

 The Carrier contends that under Rule 55 of the Agreement it is the Carrier's sole prerogative to assign scrapping work. Furthers the Carrier refers to United States Railroad Labor Board Decision, Docket 1877 dated June 6, 1924, Interpretation of Rules 7, 33$ 55 and 81, wherein it was held that scrapping work of machinery may properly be performed by Machinists.

 The Machinists filed a Third Party Submission in which they support the Carrier's contention on the meaning and applicability of Rule 55.

 First of all there can be no doubt that what took place in the instant case was the scrapping of a piece of shop machinery, the Bar Mill Furnace. We find that there is no specific language in Rule 79 of the Agreement which gives the scrapping of a piece of shop machinery to the Boilermakers. Nor have the Boilermakers alleged or proven a system-wide practice which would entitle them to,such work.

 We find that Rule 55 is the properly applicable rule for the instant case,. It states:

          "Work of scrapping engines, b oilers...or other machinery will be done by crews under the direction of a mechanic."


We find that Rule 55 does not specify which craft or class of employes shall perform the actual work of scrapping. Therefore the Carrier is entitled to make the appropriate assignment based on factors such as past practice and the United States Railroad Labor Board decision referred to above.

 The fact that some component parts, that is some deck plates and steps, were later put into the Boilermakers' Stock for reclaim (Employes' Exhibit A) is of no contractual consequence in this case. The fact is that the piece of shop machinery was scrapped, and the Carrier properly used a member of the Machinist Craft to perform the scrapping work.
 Form 1
 Pa ge 3

 Claim denied.

 Attest: Executive Secretary
 National Railroad Adjustment Board

 Award No. 7096
 Docket No. b941-T
 2-C&O-BM-'7G

 A W A R D
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
 By Order of Second Division

 ~osemrarie Brasch - Administrative Assistant

 Dated at Chicago, Il.linoisp this 14th day of July, 1976.