W. R. Sprague, A. L. Jago, Kenneth H. Wartbman PARTIES TO DISPUTE:

STATE1d;NT OF CLAIM: 'This is to serve notice, as required by the rules of the
 National Railroad Adjustment Board, of our intention to file an ex parts submission on October 12, 1982 covering an unadjusted dispute between us and the Chesapeake and Ohio Railway involving the question:

 W. R. Sprague is working at Kanauga, Ohio as Opr-Clerk Kenneth H. Warthman retired from the Chesapeake and Ohio Railway July 16, 1981 as opr-clerk at Kanauga, Ohio and Allan L. Jago, who is still working at Kanauga, Ohio as opr-clerk. Oa being older operators, we are claiming that ' we should have received one years severance pay when Hobson.Yard was closed, as the railway had always done before in closing offices."

 OPINION OF BOARD: Claimants were Operators at Carrier's Robson Yard. On or
 about February 13, 1981, Carrier closed Hobson Yard. Claimants exercised their seniority to other Operator positions at Kanauga, Ohio. The claim that is presently befare this Board for adjudication is for severance pay which the Claimants believe they are entitled to as a result of the closing of Hobson Yard. .

 The primary difficulty with.Petitiomrs' claim is that it has not been "handled in the usual manner" an the property. Rule No. 2q'* of the negotiated Rules Agreement; Section 3, First (i) of the Railway Labor Act; and Circular No. 1 of this Board all require that claims be filed, progressed and conferenced in the usual -=-r on the property prior to submission to this Board for resolution. Although Claimants may not be experienced in the required procedures, that does not overcome the obvious procedural defect which exists in this case. Therefore, given the fact that these requirements were not fulfilled, we have no choice but to dismiss the claim.

 Even if we were somehow able to overcome the fatal procedural defect described above, we would be left with the unassailable fact that the action which was taken in this situation was in complete compliance with the provisions of a negotiated Agreement which was specifically entered into to cover situations such as that which exists here. Because the Claimants are not in consonance with the negotiated Agreement does not give this Board the right to go behind the Agreement or question its validity.

 FINDINGS: The Third Division of the Adjustment Board, after giving the
 parties to this dispute due notice of hearing thereon., and upon the
 whole record and all the evidence, finds and holds:


                        Docket Number M-24897


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 claim is barred.


                          A W A & D


        Claim dismissed.


                            NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD

                            By Order of Third Division


Attest: Acting Executive Secretary
 National Railroad Adjustment Board

 By
 ,' Rosemarie Breach - Administrative Assistant

 Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 7,3th day of my 1983.

 GEC V E D

 e
 Choogo pkt\oO