DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE: October 21, 1992
                                                  
 
 
                             GSBCA 12088-P
 
 
                    INTEGRATED SYSTEMS GROUP, INC.,
 
                                           Protester,
 
                                   v.
 
                        DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY,
 
                                           Respondent.
 
        Shelton H. Skolnick, Derwood, MD, counsel for Protester. 
 
        Theresa M.  Young, Marine  Corps Base,  Camp Pendleton,  CA,
   counsel for Respondent.
 
   DANIELS, Board Judge. 
 
                                 ORDER
 
        On October 8, 1992, Integrated Systems Group, Inc. protested
   that two notices published in  the Commerce Business Daily by the
   Department of the Navy's Marine Corps Recruit Depot in San Diego,
   California,  were in  violation  of a  provision  of the  Federal
   Information  Resources  Management  Regulation.   The  regulation
   mandates  that notices  of intent  to  place an  order against  a
   General  Services  Administration   nonmandatory  automatic  data
   processing  equipment  schedule  contract  include,  among  other
   things, an identification of the specific contract intended to be
   used and a  description of the resources  to be ordered.   41 CFR
   201-39.501-3(c)  (1991).  The  protested notices plainly  did not
   include this information.
 
        On  October  19,  following  a  telephonic  conference,  the
   parties  filed  a Joint  Stipulation and  Motion to  Dismiss with
   Prejudice.  Under  the terms of this document,  the agency agrees
   to terminate  for the  convenience of the  Government all  orders
   which  are  pertinent to  the notices and  which have not already
   been  accepted.   The agency  further  agrees that  if  it has  a
   continuing need  for  the supplies  for  which orders  have  been
   cancelled,  it will fulfill  its requirements in  accordance with
   all  applicable statutes and regulations, including the one cited
   here.  The agreement further provides that the parties shall bear
   their own protest costs.
 
 
        In  accordance with  the parties'  desires,  the protest  is
   DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.  Rule 28(a).
 
                                      _________________________
                                      STEPHEN M. DANIELS
                                      Board Judge