Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No. 27483
 THIRD DIVISION Docket No. CL-27137
 88-3-86-3-324
 The Third Division consisted of the regular members and in
 addition Referee Elliott H. Goldstein when award was rendered.
 (Brotherhood of Railway, Airline and Steamship Clerks,
 (Freight Handlers, Express and Station Employees
 PARTIES TO DISPUTE:
 (The Belt Railway Company of Chicago

1. Carrier violated the effective Clerks' Agreement when, following an investigation held on Jul from service for period of twenty-nine (29) days, commencing on July 22, 1985;

 2. Carrier shall now compensate Mr. Milan for all time lost and as a result of this suspension from service, including all potential overtime, and shall clear his record of the charges placed against him."

 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 employees 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.

Claimant has a seniority date of April 30, 1964. On June 21, 1985, he was directed to report for investigation:
Form 1 Award No. 27483
 Page 2 Docket No. CL-27137
 88-3-86-3-324

 An investigation was held on July 17, 1985, and Claimant was subsequently issued a notice of dis from actual service for twenty-nine days.

 The record discloses that Claimant is a Clerk and on June 15, 1985, was working Position No. 384, the West Outbound Clerk. His tour of duty began at 10:05 p.m. and ended on June 16, 1985, at 6:05 a.m. During the shift following the Claimant's, the Carrier's Chief Clerk, received a telephone call from the C& was informed that the C&NW was missing twenty-seven waybills and instead had in its possession a pouch containing forty waybills belonging to the Milwaukee Railroad. He informed the Trainmaster, who testified that an examination of the the West Departure Yard waybill box produced a pouch of bills that was labeled "Milwaukee" but instead contained the twenty-seven missing C&NW waybills. Further investigation of the incident revealed that the twentyseven waybills were improper 6:00 a.m. on June 16, 1985, during the Claimant's tour of duty.

 The Organization contends that Carrier has failed to prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, Organization's view, the record supports the conclusion that the waybills could have been handled by any number of other employees and that there was no evidence to prove that Claimant was responsible for the error. Additionally, the Organization argues that, even assuming, arguendo, that the evidence supported the charge and unreasonably harsh under the circumstances, since, at worst, Claimant's alleged error did not result in any financial liability or any other adverse effect upon the Carrier.

 Upon careful review of the record and the evidence adduced at the Hearing, we are satisfied that no basis exists for disturbing the discipline assessed in this case. The substance of the Organization's argument is based upon an incorrect premise; i.e., th a "preponderance of the evidence." As numerous Board Awards have established, Carrier's burden of proof is one of "substantial evidence," meaning "such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion." Third Division Award 24308. Also see, First Division Award 16785, Third Division Award 9449.

 The evidence elicited at the investigation is clearly substantial and sufficient to prove Claimant's culpability. Claimant himself admitted during the investigation that he handled all the waybills during his shift on the night in question; that all handwriting on these bills was his handwriting; and that he sent all the bills to the conductor of the C&NW train. Although the Organization maintained that someone else who had access to the waybills could have been responsible for the error committed here, we find that arguwant speculative at best. utilized by him, we find that Carrier has met its burden of proof.
 Form 1 Award No. 27483
 Page 3 Docket No. CL-27137
 88-3-86-3-324

 Nor do we find that the discipline imposed was excessive as urged by the Organization. Claimant's prior disciplinary record indicated that he has exhibited similar misconduct in the past, and that most recently he had been assessed a fifteen-day suspension for misrouting waybills. Under these circumstances, Carrier's asse improper.




                        By Order of Third Division


Attest: __ _
      Nancy J. Aofr - Executive Secretary


Dated at Chicago, Illinois, this 22nd day of September 1988.