(Fred Garland
 PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
 (Consolidated Rail Corporation

 STATFMT OF CLAIM: This is to serve notice, as required by the rules
 of the National Railroad Adjustment Board, of my
 intention to file an ex pane submission on 4-13-V9-Ma April 13th 1979
 covering an unadjusted dispute between me and ConRail involving the
 question:

OPINIQTT OF BOARD: Petitioner entered service of the Carrier as a trackman
 on May 25, 1976. Petitioner was cited and hearing held
 January 5, 1977 on alleged charge of "Drinking alcoholic beverage while on
 duty on December 28, 1976 in violation of Safety Rule 3002 and Rule G of the
 Book of Rules for Conducting Transportation." On January 14, 1977, Petition
 er's service with Carrier was terminated. Under date of March 14, 1979,
 Petitioner filed Notice of Intention to this Division of unresolved dispute
 between himself and Carrier involving the question: "Rule 'G' drinking on
 the job; Causing termination. I should like an oral hearing." Petitioner
 followed April 13, 1979 with letter to Division reiterating the question at
 issue set forth in his March 14, 1979 Notice of Intention to file submission
 on the unresolved dispute. However, Petitioner did not set forth facts
 relating to the dispute nor his position in defense of Carrier's action of
 terminating his service which resulted from hearing held January 5, 1977.
 Petitioner was afforded opportunity at hearing scheduled September 4, 1979
 to make full answer oral or in writing to all matters covered in Carrier's
 submission. Petitioner did not appear nor submit written response.

 The Division has reviewed and considered the record as submitted by the Parties and conclude testimony adduced at the hearing January 5, 1977 contained substantial evidence of Petitioner's conduct December 28, 1976 to support the charge of violation of Rule "G" and with consideration of prior discipline assessed Petitioner, termination was neither arbitrary nor unreasonable.


Carrier raised certain procedural objections; however, in view oof our findings here, they need not be further discussed.

 FINDINGS: The Third Division of the Adjustment Board, after giving the
 Parties to this dispute due notice of hearing thereon, and upon the whale record and all the evidencep finds and holds:

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

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

      That hearing thereon has been held and concluded; and


      That the Agreement was not violated.


                      A W A R D


      Claim denied.


                            NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD

                            By Order of Third Division


ATTEST
          Executive Secretary

                                  e


Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 17th day of September 1979.