Interpretation

United Transportation Union (C, E & T)

and

Union Pacific Railroad Company

1. Does Section 11 of Award 1 of Arbitration Board 518 preclude the Carrier from utilizing assigned North Platte - South Morrill Interdivisional Service crews pursuant to Article VI, Section 1 of the October 31, 1985 UTU National Agreement for the purpose of providing Hours of Service Relief between North Platte and South Morrill, Nebraska?

2. Does Award 1 of Arbitration Board 518 preclude pool freight crews in interdivisional service between North Platte, Nebraska, and Cheyenne, Wyoming, from operating and leaving a train, which is destined for South Morrill, Nebraska, at Egbert, Nebraska, an intermediate point, for subsequent movement to South Morrill?

3. If Question #2 is answered in the negative, can the Carrier utilize Fourth Seniority District crews to man the train from Egbert to South Morrill?

4. Does Award 1 of Arbitration Board 528 preclude pool freight crews in interdivisional service between North Platte and South Morrill, Nebraska (via Egbert, Nebraska) from leaving a train at Egbert, an interdivisional point, for any reason other than Hours of Service, for subsequent movement to South Morrill?

5. If Question #4 is answered in the negative, can the Carrier utilize Fourth Seniority District crews to man the train from Egbert to South Morrill?

The answer to Question 1 is: Yes.

Section 11 specifically provides for Hours of Service Relief, and that provision controls over conflicting provi- sions of Article VI Section 1 of the October 31, 1985, UTU National Agreement.

The answer to Question 2 is: No.

We find no provision which precludes the practice of leaving a train, destined for South Morrill, at Egbert for movement to South Morrill, as outlined.

The answer to Question 3 is: Yes.

The answer to Question 4 is: No.

The answer to Question 5 is: Yes.

Arbitration Board 518 retains interpretative jurisdiction.

Dated this 22nd day of December, 1994, at Omaha,

John B. Criswell, Neutral Member