ABCD
   AB876
                _______________________________________
 
                DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE: July 14, 1992
                _______________________________________
 
                             GSBCA 11902-P
 
                          AMDAHL CORPORATION,
 
                                        Protester, 
 
                                   v.
 
                         DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE,
 
                                        Respondent.
 
        Richard  J. Webber  and Michele  A. Masiowski  of  Arent Fox
   Kintner Plotkin & Kahn, Washington, DC, counsel for Protester.
 
        James J. Roby  and Rafael A.  Madan, Department of  Justice,
   Washington, DC, counsel for Respondent.
 
   VERGILIO, Board Judge.
 
                                 ORDER
 
        On June  26, 1992, AMDAHL  Corporation filed with  the Board
   this  post-award protest involving the respondent, the Department
   of Justice.   Protester contends that  the awardee's second  best
   and final  offer (BAFO)  failed to  conform to  the terms  of the
   solicitation, such that  the agency improperly made  the award to
   an unacceptable offeror.   Further, protester maintains  that the
   communications between the  agency and awardee after  the receipt
   of second BAFOs  constituted discussions, or something  more than
   clarifications,  such  that  the agency  erred  in  not reopening
   discussions and seeking a new round of BAFOs.
 
        By amended motion filed on July 13, protester requests  that
   the protest  be dismissed  with prejudice.   The agency  does not
   object.   Accordingly, the  Board DISMISSES  WITH PREJUDICE  this
   protest.  Rule  28(a).  The previously entered  suspension of the
   agency's procurement authority lapses by its terms.   Order (July
   2, 1992).
 
 
                                        ________________________
                                        JOSEPH A. VERGILIO
                                        Board Judge