___________________________________________________
 
             DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE:  January 28, 1993
          ___________________________________________________
 
                    GSBCA 12204-P, 12206-P, 12208-P
 
 
                          EG&G FLORIDA, INC.,
 
                                  and 
 
                              BAMSI, INC.,
 
 
                                         
                                  and
 
                     WESTINGHOUSE KSC COMPANY, INC.,
 
                                            
   Protesters/Intervenors,
 
                                   v.
 
             NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION,
 
                                              Respondent,    
 
                                  and
 
                   LOCKHEED SPACE OPERATIONS COMPANY,
 
                                              Intervenor.
 
        Rand L. Allen,  Paul F. Khoury,  Mitchell R. Kreindler,  and
   John F. Guyot of Wiley,  Rein & Fielding, Washington, DC, counsel
   for Protester/Intervenor EG&G Florida, Inc.
 
        Stephen M. Ryan, Sue Ellen Russell, William M. Hathaway, and
   Margit H. Nahra of Brand  & Lowell, P.C., Washington, DC, counsel
   for Protester/Intervenor Bamsi, Inc.
 
        Richard  O.  Duvall,  Timothy   J.  Bloomfield,  Richard  L.
   Moorhouse, William J.  Dempster, Michael H. Ditton,  and Giannina
   Lynn of  Dunnells, Duvall &  Porter, Washington, DC,  counsel for
   Protester/Intervenor Westinghouse KSC Company, Inc.
 
 
 
        David  P. Forbes,  Sumara M.  Thompson-King,  and Robert  M.
   Stephens,  Office  of  the General  Counsel,  NASA  Headquarters,
   Washington,  DC,  and  Dudley  R. Cannon,  Jr.,  and  Douglas  G.
   Hendriksen,  National   Aeronautics  and   Space  Administration,
   Kennedy Space Center, FL, counsel for Respondent.
 
        Stuart  B. Nibley, Daniel  Marino, Michael B.  Hubbard, Mary
   Beth  Sullivan,  James M.  Mesnard, and  Allen Todd  of Seyfarth,
   Shaw,  Fairweather  &  Geraldson,  Washington,  DC,  counsel  for
   Intervenor Lockheed Space Operations Company.
 
   HENDLEY, Board Judge.
 
                                 ORDER
    
        On December 2,  1992, the Board docketed a  protest filed by
   EG&G  Florida, Inc., contending that the respondent, the National
   Aeronautics  and Space  Administration,  had improperly  selected
   Lockheed Space Operations Company, an intervenor in each protest,
   for  award of a contract  for automatic data processing services.
   That protest  was followed  by protests filed  by Bamsi,  Inc. on
   December 3  and  Westinghouse KSC  Company, Inc.  on December  4.
   Each protester intervened  in the other  protests.  The  protests
   were consolidated for further proceedings before this Board.  The
   respondent's delegation of procurement authority was suspended on
   December 10. 
 
        In our order  on proceedings of December  4, we set forth  a
   schedule for resolving the protests.  However, shortly before the
   originally scheduled hearing date, the parties sought a postpone-
   ment of the hearing and informed the Board that they were  in the
   process of settling the cases.  We rescheduled the hearing, and a
   settlement ensued. 
 
        On January 26, 1993, the parties  filed a "joint stipulation
   of  dismissal without prejudice" in each  protest.  The requested
   dismissals are to  "become a dismissal with prejudice  10 working
   days  after debriefings following the announcement of a selection
   of an awardee  based on the evaluation  of best and final  offers
   ("BAFOS")  submitted in  accordance with  the  revised BOC  [Base
   Operations Contract] request for Proposals ("RFP")." 
 
        Under the terms of the motion to dismiss, which we expressly
   decline to make a part of our  order, we note that the respondent
   is  obliged  to  engage  in  another round  of  BAFOs,  that  the
   protesters,  for  the  purposes  of  the  agreement,  are  deemed
   prevailing parties  in these  protests, and  that the  respondent
   agrees that the protesters' "attorneys'  fees and partial bid and
   proposal  costs in  a sum  not to  exceed $1.2  million for  each
   protester may be recoverable under these protests." 
 
        As  we informed  the parties  in a  telephone conference  on
   January 27, we  neither approve nor disapprove  such settlements.
   The parties acknowledged our position and stated that all claimed
   costs would be presented in a future motion.  The settlement will
   stand or fall on  its own terms as the agreement  of the parties.
   Federal  Data Corp. v. SMS Data Products Group Inc., 819 F.2d 277
   (Fed. Cir. 1987).
 
                                Decision
 
        The  parties' stipulation to dismiss the protests is granted
   to  the extent  that  the protests  are hereby  DISMISSED WITHOUT
   PREJUDICE to their  reinstatement at this Board.   Rule 28(a)(1).
   The settlement between the protesters and the respondent operates
   as  their separate  agreement and  is not  currently a  matter of
   dispute.   These dismissals become dismissals with prejudice upon
   the occurrence of  the events specified in the  stipulation.  The
   suspension  of   the  respondent's   delegation  of   procurement
   authority lapses by its own terms.
    
 
 
 
                                      ______________________________
                                      JAMES W. HENDLEY
                                      Board Judge