Board of Contract Appeals
                    General Services Administration
                         Washington, D.C. 20405
 
 
                                                                    
 
                      DISMISSED:  January 7, 1999
                                                                   
 
 
                             GSBCA 14062   
 
 
                    PARCEL 49C LIMITED PARTNERSHIP,
 
                                                Appellant,
 
                                   v.
 
                    GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION,
 
                                                Respondent.
 
        Richard J.  Conway of  Dickstein Shapiro  Morin &  Oshinsky,
   Washington, DC, counsel for Appellant.
 
        Jeffrey Dunn, Office  of Regional Counsel, General  Services
   Administration, Washington, DC, counsel for Respondent.
 
   GOODMAN, Board Judge.
 
                                 ORDER
 
        On October 24, 1996, appellant filed a certified claim  with
   the  contracting officer  concerning  lease number  GS-11B-40155.
   The claim involved  the interpretation of various  lease terms as
   they relate to the  schedule for the design,  buildout, delivery,
   and  acceptance  of  the  leased  space.   On  January  7,  1997,
   appellant filed with this Board  an appeal from the deemed denial
   of the claim, and the Board docketed the appeal as GSBCA 14062.
 
        The Board  convened  the parties  in  a conference  call  on
   January  21,  1997,   during  which  respondent  stated   that  a
   contracting officer decision would be issued by close of business
   that day.   A copy of  the decision was filed  with the Board  on
   January  22, 1997.   On  January  31, 1997,  the Board  suspended
   proceedings  while the parties  attempted to settle  the dispute.
   After  settlement discussions  proved  unsuccessful, the  parties
   agreed  to an  alternative dispute  resolution  (ADR) proceeding.
   The  Board convened  an ADR  proceeding on  April 4,  1997, which
   resulted in a  settlement of the appeal.  Upon  conclusion of the
   ADR  proceeding,  the  Board  agreed  to  a  suspension  of   the
   proceedings  until such time  as "the substantial  completion and
   delivery of  all of  the  phases of  leased  space."   That  time
   occurred in October 1998.
 
 
        On  December 17,  1998, the  Board issued  an Order  to Show
   Cause why the  appeal should not  be dismissed, as the  lease was
   complete  and  the Government  was  moving  in to  the  building.
   Appellant's  response was filed  on January  5, 1999.   Appellant
   moved that the Board dismiss the appeal.  Respondent concurs with
   appellant.
 
        Accordingly,  pursuant  to  Rule  128(a),  this  appeal   is
   DISMISSED.
 
                                      ___________________________
                                      ALLAN H. GOODMAN
                                      Board Judge