GRANTED:  December 14, 1992
                                                  
        
 
                         GSBCA 12040-C(11972-P)
 
 
                         BERRY COMPUTER, INC.,
 
                                                Protester,
 
                                   v.
 
                        DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY,
 
                                                 Respondent,
 
                                                                  
        Ned  W.  Livornese,   Colorado  Springs,  CO,   counsel  for
   Protester.
 
        Gary  W.   Lunter,   Office  of   General   Counsel,   Naval
   Construction  Battalion Center,  Port  Hueneme,  CA, counsel  for
   Respondent. 
 
   Before Board Judges DEVINE, DANIELS, and PARKER.
 
   PARKER, Board Judge.
 
        On  August  13,  1992,   Berry  Computer,  Inc.,  protester,
   challenged   the  decision  of   the  Department  of   the  Navy,
   respondent,  to procure  computers from  another  vendor, on  the
   grounds that respondent had failed  to notify all offerors of its
   precise requirements.   On August  17, 1992, the parties  filed a
   Joint Motion for Dismissal, in which respondent admitted that:
 
        its conduct violated the Competition in Contracting Act
        of 1984,  10 U.S.C.  sec. 2304 et  seq., since  not all
        offerors were notified of the Navy's exact requirements
        in  this procurement.  The Navy  shall grant the relief
        requested in Berry's protest complaint, i.e., to cancel
        the   existing   purchase  order   and   resolicit  its
        requirements on a competitive basis.
 
        The Board dismissed the protest with prejudice on August 26,
   1992, and protester timely moved to recover $362.50 in attorney's
   fees,  pursuant to  Rule 35.    On October  14, 1992,  respondent
   stated  that  protester's  request  "appears  to be  a  fair  and
   reasonable representation of the costs of filing and pursuing the
   protest."  
 
 
        Protester  clearly is a prevailing party entitled to recover
   its protest  costs.   40  U.S.C.    759(f)(5)(C) (1988).    After
   reviewing  protester's  supporting documentation,  we  agree that
   protester seeks only a  reasonable amount of allowable costs  and
   therefore  may  recover  the  full  $362.50.    Sterling  Federal
   Systems, Inc.  v. National Aeronautic  and Space  Administration,
   GSBCA  10000-C(9835-P), 1992  BPD   141  (May  22, 1992),  appeal
   docketed, No. 92-1552 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 28, 1992).  
 
                                Decision
 
        The  Board GRANTS protester's  motion to recover  $362.50 in
   attorney's fees incurred in litigating this protest.
 
 
 
                                      ___________________________
                                      ROBERT W. PARKER
                                      Board Judge
 
 
   We concur:
 
   ___________________________        ___________________________
   DONALD W. DEVINE                   STEPHEN M. DANIELS
   Board Judge                        Board Judge