Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No. 12241
 SECOND DIVISION Docket No. 11904
 92-2-90-2-10
 The Second Division consisted of the regular members and in
 addition Referee Donald E. Prover when award was rendered.
 (International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers
 PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
 (Duluth, Missabe and Iron Range Railway Company

 STATEMENT OF CLAIM:
1. Under the current Shop Craft Agreement, dated October 1, 1979, Keith Miernicki, Crane Operator, Proctor Car Shop, Duluth, Missabe and Iron Range Railway Company, Proctor, Minnesota was unjustly dismissed on date of October 12, 1988 in violation of the current agreement, in particular Rule 28_ as a result of an unfair and partial investigation held on September 1, 1988.

 2. That accordingly, Electrician Keith Miernicki be made whole, restored to Carrier service with all seniority rights, vacation rights, holidays, sick leave benefits and all other benefits that are a condition of employment unimpaired and compensated for all lost time plus seven percent (7z) annual interest on all such lost wages. Also reimbursement for all losses sustained on account of loss of coverage under health and welfare and life insurance agreements during the time held out of service, all commencing on the date of October 12, 1988, and ending on the date the Claimant Keith Miernicki is restored to service, both dates inclusive and records show that Mr. Miernicki was on the payroll during this time for accumulation of retirement months, also that the Duluth, Missabe and Iron Range Railway Company remove from all its files and records any allusions or references to the investigation and action.

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

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

 This Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the dispute involved herein.

Claimant was assigned to Carrier's Car Shop. On July 27, 1988, an Investigation was held pertaining to a charge of theft of company property by Claimant on July 18, 1988. Following that Investigation, the Carrier concluded the Claimant was guilty of the charge and dismissed him from service on August 9, 1988.
 Form 1 Award No. 12241
 Page 2 Docket No. 11904
 92-2-90-2-10
 On August 4, 1988, the Claimant was charged with being dishonest at
 the July 27, 1988 Investigation. Following an Investigation on September 1,
 1988, the Carrier concluded the Claimant was guilty of the charge and dis
 missed him from service a second time on October 12, 1988.

 A Claim that Claimant was unjustly dismissed on August 9, 1988, was submitted to the Board. Under date of September 25, 1991, the Board rendered Second Division Award 12140 denying his Claim that he was unjustly dismissed, stating in part:

In light of the decision in Award 12140 we consider the instant question to now be "moot," because the issue of Claimant's honesty at the July 27, 1988 Investigation is academic, i.e., it no longer has a practical or useful significance.




                          By Order of Second Division _rrAttest:


        ncy J. r -.Executive Secretary


Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 15th day of January 1992.