(Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes
 PARTIES TO DISPUTE: (
 (The Atchison, Topeka and Sant.a Fe Railway Company -
 ( Eastern Lines

 STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhood that:
to dismantle tracks and bridges between Florence and Marion and to load the
 salvaged material for rail shipment for the Carrier to use for track and bt~.dge
 repairs at other points (System File 138-128-93). ''

 (2) The Carrier also violated Article IV of the National Agreement of may 17, 1968 when it failed to give advance notice to General Chairman Tresaler of its intention to contract the work described in (1) above.

 (3) Each employe named in Attachment 'A' to our letter of claim presentation (11-17-79) be allowed pay at his respective straight-time rate, for an equal proportionate share of the toal number of man-hours expended by outside forces in dismantling tracks between M.P. 0 and M.P. 10 between Florence and Marion.

 (4) Each employe named in Attachment 'B' to our letter of claim presentation (11-17-70) be allowed pay at his respective straight-time rate for an equal proportionate share of the total number of man-hours expended by outside forces in dismantling the bridges between M.P. 0 and M.P. 10 between Florence and Marion.

 (5) Each employe named in Attachment 'C' to our letter of claim presentation be allowed pay at his respective straight time rate for an equal proportionate share of the total number of man-hours expended by outside forces in operating three (3) bulldozers, one (1) motor grader and two (2) hi-loaders in connection with the work described in Part (1) above."

 OPINION OF BOARD: In March of 1969 Carrier was granted the right to abandon
 a portion of its operations, from Florence to Marion, Kansas
 (9.1 miles) by the I.C.C. Rails were removed and barricades were installed on
 both ends of the remaining trackage on September 2, 1970 by employes in the
 Carrier's Maintenance of Way Department. On September 28, 1970 an outside con
 tractor began work to dismantle the abandoned track and all other structures
 on the stretch of abandoned line, disposing of much of the material and de
 livering certain salvagable material (such as rails) to Carrier. After the pro
 ject was completed, on November 17, 1970 the Organization submitted its Claim.


Petitioner asserts that Carrier violated the Agreement in the subcontracting of the work, particular 1968 National Agreement. Article IV (which is Appendix 11 of the current Agreement) states in pertinent part:

          "In the event a carrier plans to contract out work within the scope of the applicable schedule Agreement, the carrier shall notify the General Chairman of the Organization involved in writing as afar in advance of the date of the contracting transaction as it practicable and in any event not less than 15 days prior thereto."


Admittedly Carrier did not file an Article IV notice. Additionally, the Organization states that its members, covered employees, were capable of carrying out the work in question and in fact had done so on a prior occasion. This is not denied by Carrier.

 Carrier first argues that "any rights to maintenance of way work which employees subject to the terms of the Foreman's and Laborer's Agreement might have are limited to the maintenance of way work which is necessary to be performed on those portions of the Carrier's tracks or structures which are in actual operation, and do not extend to those portions of the Carrier's railroad which have been abandoned and are no longer a part of the Carrier's operations". The Organization's rejoinder is that Carrier is responsible for any and all work performed on its property; it controlled, assigned and paid for the work; and most significantly, Carrier retained ownership of the property and of the salvaged materials. Petitioner concludes that Carrier had an obligation "to assign such w it.
    _


Since Article IV relates to "work within the scope of the applicable schedule agreement", the principle issue herein is whether the work of dismantling the abandoned lin held in a long line of awards that work on facilities owned by Carrier, but used for purposes other than the operation or maintenance of the railroad, do not come under the scope rule of the agreement (Awards 19639, 19253, 9602, 4783 and others). With respect to abandoned facilities we have ruled similarly. For example, in Awar
          "Since the Agreements pertain to work of carrying on Carrier's business as a common carrier, we must conclude that the work of dismantling and removing completely the abandoned property does not fall within the contemplation of the parties. This work cannot be considered maintenance, repair or construction."

                    Award Number 19994 Page 3

                    Docket Number MW-19890


We are not persuaded by Petitioner's argument with respect to the continued ownership by Carrier of the salvaged rails and other material. The critical question is not the continued ownership of the salvaged rails and real property, but the purpose for which the work was intended; was the work performed related to the operation and/or maintenance of the railroad or not. (Award No. 12 of S.B.A. No. 570 ) We think not. We must conclude that work on abandoned facilities, even though Carrier retains ownership of the property, is not work contemplated by the parties to the Agreement and such work is not within the scope of the applicable schedule Agreement.

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


        That the parties waived oral hearing;


That the Carrier and the Employes involved in this dispute are respectively Carrier and Employes within the meaning of the Railway Labor Act, as approved June 21, 1934;

 That this Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the dispute involved herein; and

        That the Agreement was not violated.


                      A W A R D


        Claim denied.


                          NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT HOARD

                          By Order of Third Division


ATTEST

        A -Z

        Executive ecretary


Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 12th day of October 1973.

 a~..'Si ~y~' n'~