(Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes
 PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
 (Soo Line Railroad Company

(1) The Agreement was violated when the members of B&B Crew No. 602 were not called to perform overtime service on their assigned territory on March 12, 13 and 14, 1976 but Carrier called and used the members of B&B Crew No. 603 for such service (Carrier's File 500-46-B-146).

 (2) BBB Foreman D. 0. Jagla, Assistant B&B Foreman F. M. Rogan, Truck Driver D. Betry, Carpenters R. L. Krauss and R. Corbett and Helper N. Manteufel each be allowed twenty-four and one-half (24-1/2) hours of pay at their respective time and one-half rates because of the violation referred to is Part (1) hereof."

While we recognize the clear and unambiguous language of Rule 14(1) and its apparent application to the circumstances herein, we must, of necessity, note that the geographical district claimed by Crew #602 as its exclusive work area is not so precisely determinate.

 The record shows that Crew #603 was assigned to work in that locale on March 12, 1976. There was no emergency that morning warranting their presence or specific concern expressed by claimants that potential overtime work would be lost. Both crews, periodically, executed the task responsibilities of the temporarily retrenched members of Crew #601. Even assuming arguendo that the contested districts were more than convenient administrative sectors, the work patterns of the respective crews suggest flexible force deployment. We are certainly mindful that Crew #603 was purposely equipped for mobile assignments but even conceding claimants' argument that it would have been relatively easy for Crew #602 to utilize temporarily Crew #603's outfit car and tools, the sudden nature and destructive impact of the high intensity winds at Schiller Park, Illinois, demanded prompt and decisive action.


We will not review the legion of cases eloquently detailing the variant characteristics and imperatives of unanticipated emergencies, except to emphasize the relevancy of Third Division Award 13566, which held in pertinent part, that "under emergency conditions, in the absence of an express prohibition, Carrier has greater latitude in selecting its employes than under normal circumstances." We do not believe that an expressed prohibition existed. We do find, however, that an emergency existed.

        FILINGS: 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, fy,;~ _.,-


        A W A R D~%'.;~.=' ` ,l

        \h

        Claim denied. _I I 1 n, ~.;, `:?


                                                i.


                          J E

                          NATIONAL, RAILROAD BOARD

                          By Order of Third Division


ATTEST: al4l. a4~p
        Executive Secretary


Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 30th day of June 7.978.