DISMISSED: July 30, 1996 GSBCA 13234 CONTINENTAL MANUFACTURING COMPANY, Appellant, v. GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION, Respondent. James E. Chervitz of Husch & Eppenberger, St. Louis, MO, counsel for Appellant. David L. Frecker, Office of General Counsel, General Services Administration, Washington, DC, counsel for Respondent. GOODMAN, Board Judge. ORDER On July 13, 1994, appellant was awarded contract number GS07F72310 by respondent for the supply of plastic waste receptacles with lids. Appellant states in its complaint that in late summer or early fall of 1994, it advised respondent of its inability to secure the quantities of resins needed for the performance of its contract and of the extreme price increases in effect for such quantities. Appellant also states that it advised respondent at that time that the product shortages and the price increases were due to fires and/or explosions at the manufacturer/processor facilities. Appellant alleges that as a result of this, it sought to invoke a force majeure approach to a problem that appellant claims was not caused by its own act or negligence. On February 24, 1995, however, respondent terminated appellant s contract for default for failure to make timely deliveries, stating that appellant s failure to perform did not arise out of causes beyond its control. It is from that decision that appellant appealed to this Board on April 6, 1995. After the filing of the complaint and answer, the Board convened the parties in a conference during which a discovery schedule was established and the parties were advised of the option of alternative dispute resolution. Subsequent to the conference with the Board, the parties engaged in settlement discussions and on May 6, 1996, advised that they had settled the case. Appellant filed a memorandum of dismissal on July 29, 1996, which reads, in part: COMES NOW Appellant, and having entered into a certain settlement with Respondent under which the alleged termination for default is modified and converted into a no cost termination for the convenience of the government . . . Appellant does hereby Dismiss this Appeal. Counsel for respondent has no objection to the memorandum of dismissal. Accordingly, pursuant to Rule 28(a), this appeal is DISMISSED. ALLAN H. GOODMAN Board Judge