DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE: September 24, 1992
                                                  
 
 
                              GSBCA 11370
 
 
                             BFI STEPHENS,
 
                                           Appellant,
 
                                   v.
 
                    GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION,
 
                                           Respondent.
 
        Tyrrell L. Garth of Moore, Landrey, Garth & Jones, Beaumont,
   TX, counsel for Appellant.
 
        Arthur Troilo III, Office  of General Counsel, and Marie  N.
   Adamson,  Real  Property  Division,  Office of  General  Counsel,
   General  Services  Administration,  Washington,  DC, counsel  for
   Respondent.
 
   DANIELS, Board Judge.
 
                           ORDER OF DISMISSAL
 
        On July 28, 1991, BFI Stephens appealed the General Services
   Administration's  (GSA's) termination for  default of  a contract
   between the two parties for  removal of asbestos from the federal
   building in Juneau, Alaska.
 
        Eight months later,  on the eve  of trial, counsel  reported
   that the  parties had  reached an agreement  to settle  the case;
   they asked that proceedings be held in abeyance while the actions
   required by the agreement were taken.  The Board entered an order
   suspending proceedings.
 
        On  September 4,  1992, GSA  filed a  motion to  dismiss the
   appeal with prejudice pursuant to the settlement agreement.   The
   motion sets out the following information:
 
        1.   The  agreement  provides  that  GSA  will  convert  the
   termination   for  default  to  a  no-cost  termination  for  the
   convenience  of the  Government, in exchange  for payment  by TGI
   Stephens, Inc. (as  appellant is now known) of  $100,000 in three
   installments of nearly  equal amounts.  The  installments were to
   be paid on or before April  1, May 26, and July 31, 1992.   After
   receipt of the third payment, GSA  was to ask the Board to  enter
   judgment for appellant on prescribed terms.
 
 
        2.   Paragraph 3 of the agreement states:
 
             In the event a check is returned for lack  of
             sufficient  funds, or is  not honored  by the
             issuing  bank for  any other  reason, or  TGI
             [Stephens,  Inc.]  fails to  make  payment as
             required, the balance of the total Settlement
             Amount shall be  immediately due and payable,
             and  if  not  received   by  the  contracting
             officer within  five working  days after  the
             cure  notice,  the  termination  for  default
             shall  become  final,   with  the  Government
             retaining all associated  rights and remedies
             arising  under the  termination for  default,
             and with TGI waiving all rights to appeal the
             termination for default.
 
        3.   The  third  installment  payment was  not  made  by the
   specified  date.   On  August 10,  GSA  issued a  cure  notice to
   appellant, demanding payment.  As  of September 2, the money  had
   still not been received.
 
        Appellant  responded  to  the  motion  on  September  23  by
   admitting that it had not  made the third installment payment and
   stating that it did not contest GSA's motion.
 
        The unopposed motion  is GRANTED.   The appeal is  DISMISSED
   WITH PREJUDICE.  Rule 28(a).
 
                                      _________________________
                                      STEPHEN M. DANIELS
                                      Board Judge