______________________________________
 
                  NOTICE OF ISSUANCE OF OPINION UNDER
                   PROTECTIVE ORDER:  August 31, 1992
                 ______________________________________
 
 
                       GSBCA 11736-P-R, 11745-P-R
 
 
                              DENRO, INC.,
 
                                  and        
 
                WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC CORPORATION, INC.
 
                                             Protesters,
 
                                   v.
 
                     DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION,
 
                                  and
 
                         DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE,
 
                                             Respondents.
 
                                  and
 
                          LITTON SYSTEMS, INC.
 
                                            Intervenor.
 
        William  H. Butterfield,  Charlotte  F. Rothenberg  and Lori
   Beth  Feld,  McGuire,  Woods, Battle  &  Boothe,  Washington, DC,
   counsel for Protester.
 
        Rand  L. Allen,  Philip J.  Davis, Paul  F. Khoury  and Eric
   DeSilva,  Wiley, Rein  & Fielding,  Washington,  DC, counsel  for
   Protester.
 
        Richard   J.  McCarthy,  John  R.  McCaw,  Jr.,  Anthony  L.
   Washington  and Gregory  C.  Carter, Esq.,  Office  of the  Chief
   Counsel, Federal Aviation Administration, Washington, DC, counsel
   for Respondent Department of Transportation.
 
        Roger  B. Sabin, and  Captain Richard B.  Wingate, Office of
   General Counsel, Defense  Information Systems Agency,  Arlington,
   VA  and Clifton  M.  Hasegawa, Virginia  Farrier  and Douglas  G.
   White,   Defense   Commercial  Communications   Office,   Defense
   Information Systems Agency, Scott Air Force Base, IL, counsel for
   Respondent Department of Defense.
 
 
        David  V. Anthony, Michael W.  Clancy and Richard P. Rector,
   Pettit & Martin, Washington, DC, counsel for Intervenor.
 
   Board Judge HYATT.
 
 
                                 Notice
 
        On  August  31,  1992,  the  Board  issued  its  opinion  on
   Respondent's  motion  for  clarification in  this  protest.   The
   motion was granted.
 
        Because the Board's decision contains information considered
   by the  parties to be  procurement sensitive or  proprietary, the
   Board initially issued its decision  subject in its entirety to a
   protective order.   The parties were advised to  inform the Board
   of any redactions they consider appropriate by close  of business
   Friday, September 4, 1992.   The Board  will decide at that  time
   what portions of the opinion will be made public.
 
                                 ______________________________
                                 CATHERINE B. HYATT
                                 Board Judge