Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No. 26826
 THIRD DIVISION Docket No. MW-26049
 88-3-84-3-413
 The Third Division consisted of the regular members and in
 addition Referee Robert W. McAllister when award was rendered.

 (Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes PARTIES TO DISPUTE:

STATEMENT OF CLAIM: "Claim of the System Committee of the Brotherhood that:

 (1) The Carrier violated the Agreement when it assigned Mechanical Department forces instead of Maintenance of Way Department Work Equipment Repairmen to repair and maintain cranes, trucks, forklifts, etc. on the Susquehanna, Champlain, Saratoga and Pennsylvania Subdivisions on and subsequent to December 22, 1982 (System File 3-83).

 (2) The Carrier violated the Agreement when it assigned Bridge and Building Department employes (one foreman and three mechanics) instead of work equipment repairmen to replace wheels on a motorized track car on December 28, 1982 (System File 4-83).

 (3) Because of the aforesaid violations, furloughed Work Equipment Repairman R. B. Barton shall be allowed eight (8) hours of pay each day for December 22 and 23, 1982, sixteen (16) hours of holiday pay for December 24 and 27, 1982 (Christmas Eve and Christmas Day 1982) and eight (8) hours of pay for December 28, 1982 and for each day subsequent thereto on which Mechanical Department forces perform work as described in Part (1) hereof."

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

 The carrier or carriers and the employe or employes involved in this dispute are respectively carrier and employes within the meaning of the Railway Labor Act as approved June 21, 1934.

 This Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the dispute involved herein.

As Third Party in interest, the International Brotherhood of Boilermakers and Blacksmiths was ad not to file a Submission with the Division.
 Form 1 Award No. 26826
 Page 2 Docket No. MW-26049
 88-3-84-3-413

 On December 22, 1982, and subsequent thereto, Carrier used a Mechanical Department Blacksmith to such as cranes, trucks, forklifts and wheel cranes. On December 28, 1982, Carrier used Bridge and Building Department employees to replace wheels on a motorized track car. The Organization filed two separate claims on behalf of a furloughed Work Equipment Repairman contending that he should have been used to complete this work. The letter covering the December 22, 1982, incident did not cite a single rule in support of the claim. The letter covering the December 28, 1982, incident cited Rule 40 as being violated. Letters of appeal did not specifically identify any rules of the Agreement as being involved. When the matter was being handled on the property, Carrier observed that the Organization had failed to cite a rule as being violated in the first claim and that it failed to establish any rule support for the alleged violations in both claims.

 After carefully reviewing all of the material in this matter, we must conclude that, with the exception of a passing reference to Rule 40, the Organization, on the property, failed to cite any rules in support of its claim that work of the furloughed Work Equipment Repairman was improperly assigned. For the first time in its Submission before this Board, it relies on Rules 1, 3 and 36 as being involved. It does not mention Rule 40 anywhere in its Submission. We have often held that such defects preclude our consideration of the Organizati stated:

We must, therefore, conclude that the claim is not properly before this Board. For similar rulings, see Third Division Awards 15835, 19857, 19858, 19902, and 19970.




                          By Order of Third Division


A t to s d5~~

      Nancy J. ~r/er - Executive Secretary


Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 25th day of February 1988.