Joseph A. Sidr3.es, Referee


                (C. J. Rhoades


PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
                (Southern Pacific Transportation Company

                ((Terms and Louisiana Lines)


STATEMENT OF CLAIM: "I am asking that the Southern Pacific Transportation
 Company shoal proof that the cashier work is still at the Austin Freight station, or to pay my claim for 360 days separation pay as agreed in section 3 of the union agreement."

 OPINION OE BOARD: Prior to a consideration of the merits of this dispute,

 we must consider a jurisdictional challenge. Carrier argues that the National Railroad Adjustment Board is without authority to consider this dispute because the claim was progressed on the basis of an alleged violation of Article 7V, Section 3 of the Agreement of September 16, 1977, and claims arising under the terms of this agreement are only referable to a Public Law Board. We have examined Article X of the Agreement of September 16, 1977 and do not interpret the dispute resolution language as precluding instituting proceedings befor this Board. Article X is permissive, rather than mandatory, and does not bar sut mitting claims to the N.R.A.B. We will consider the claim on its merits.

 Claimant argues that the Carrier "piece-mealed" his Cashier work to another seniority district and to another (terrier over a period of years. This activity, he claims, eventually affected him when his position was abolished on July 6, 1979. Therefore, he claims an entitlement to severance pay,

 We have carefully searched the record, and find that Claimant has produced absolutely no proof whatsoever to support his claim. Claimant has merel submitted broad and. general allegations in a very brief and incomplete one-page submission. We cannot base a sustaining Award on such incomplete data. The clai must therefore be denied.

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


        That the parties waived oral hearing;

                        Award Number 23521 Page 2

                        Docket Number MS-23463


That the Carrier and the Employes involved in this dispute are-ctIvely Carrier and Employes within the meaning.arP the Railway Letbmr Aet, ac approved June 21, 1934;

 That this Division of the Adsualsment Board hers ~urEsdiction over the d1wpWbe involved herein, and

        That the .kgreemeat wens not violated.


                          A W A R D


        CSar 9m teed,.


                            ruTioNxt, M::,MrOOrrnm scAM

                            By Order of Trl soon


ATTEST: -Ea~
 Mw"CUt&nM :ieesetwy

 Dated-e:t 611iawsm, Ilifnods, this ?-9th doY of January 19&-

    C'I Vi


      E T"y~l 1 " "~^ r


C5.
          d.

c°~^o~Gffice ~ .

        ..