Board of Contract Appeals
                    General Services Administration
                         Washington, D.C. 20405
 
                       _________________________
 
                        GRANTED:  June 20, 2000
                       __________________________
 
 
                            GSBCA 12961-REM
 
 
                   HERMAN B. TAYLOR CONSTRUCTION CO.,
 
                                           Appellant,
 
                                   v.
 
                    GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION,
 
                                           Respondent.
 
        Christina Stone  of  Gaughan  & Stone, Houston,  TX, counsel
   for Appellant.
 
        Sharon  J. Chen, Office of General Counsel, General Services
   Administration, Washington, DC, counsel for Respondent.
 
   Before Board Judges BORWICK, NEILL, and HYATT.
 
   BORWICK, Board Judge.
 
        This   appeal    involves   respondent    General   Services
   Administration's (GSA's) termination  for default  of a  contract
   for  the renovation  of  the United  States  Courthouse and  Post
   Office  Building, Galveston, Texas.   The contract  contained the
   standard form  Termination for  Convenience and  Default clauses.
   See  Appeal  File, Exhibit  1,  GSA  Form  3506 at  41  (  98(d),
   (f)(1)(i)--FAR  52.249-2--TERMINATION  FOR   CONVENIENCE  OF  THE
   GOVERNMENT  (Fixed Price)(Alternate 1) (APR 1984)) ,43 (  99(e)--
   FAR 52.249-10-DEFAULT (FIXED PRICE CONSTRUCTION) (APR 1984)).
 
        In Herman  B. Taylor  Construction Co.  v. General  Services
   Administration, GSBCA 12961, 98-2 BCA   29,833, rev'd in part sub
   nom. Herman  B. Taylor Construction  Co. v. Barram, 203  F.3d 808
   (Fed. Cir.  2000), the  Board rejected all  of GSA's  grounds for
   terminating  the contract for default save for alleged violations
   of the Davis-Bacon Act.  The Department of Labor had entered into
   a consent decree regarding alleged Davis-Bacon Act violations.
 
        The United States Court of  Appeals for the Federal  Circuit
   concluded that under the Federal Acquisition Regulation, disputes
   arising out  of labor standards  provisions of contracts  are not
   subject to the Contract Disputes  Act, but are to be  resolved in
   accordance with the  procedures of the Department of  Labor.  The
   Court stated  that a  board of contract  appeals must  accept the
   Department of Labor's  adjudication of such a dispute  and that a
   board has no  jurisdiction itself to determine a labor provisions
   dispute or to review  the Department of Labor's ruling  on such a
   dispute.  Herman  B. Taylor Construction Co. v.  Barram, 203 F.3d
   at 811.  The  Court ruled that the consent decree  entered by the
   Department  of   Labor  could  not   be  construed  as   a  final
   adjudication  of Davis-Bacon Act violations by the appellant that
   would enable the  Board to sustain the termination.   Id. at 813.
   The  Court therefore reversed the Board's decision sustaining the
   termination  for  default   based  on  alleged   Davis-Bacon  Act
   violations.  Id. at 815.  
 
 
        Since the  Board  and the  Court  of Appeals  have  rejected
   respondent's reasons  for terminating  the contract  for default,
   the Board grants  the appeal.  In accordance  with the contract's
   Default clause, the  default termination shall be  converted to a
   termination for the convenience of the Government.  
 
                                Decision
 
        The appeal is GRANTED.  Respondent's termination for default
   is reversed  and the  termination for default  is converted  to a
   termination for the convenience of the Government.
 
 
                                 __________________________
                                 ANTHONY S. BORWICK
                                 Board Judge
 
   We concur:
 
 
 
   __________________________         ____________________________
   EDWIN B. NEILL                CATHERINE B. HYATT
   Board Judge                        Board Judge