________________________________________________
 
            MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION DENIED: June 22, 1994
            ________________________________________________
 
 
                        GSBCA 12270-C-R(12099-P)
 
 
                      ATLANTIC MICROSYSTEMS, INC.,
 
                                        Protester,
 
                                   v.
 
                      DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE,
 
                                        Respondent.
 
        Furqan Ahmad,  Project  Manager  of  Atlantic  Microsystems,
   Inc., Herndon, VA, appearing for Protester.
 
        Clarence D.  Long, III, and  Joseph M. Goldstein,  Office of
   the General Counsel, Department of the Air Force, Washington, DC;
   and Captain  C. Wesley Bridges,  II, Maxwell Air Force  Base, AL,
   counsel for Respondent.
 
   Before Board Judges DANIELS (Chairman), HENDLEY, and VERGILIO.
 
   VERGILIO, Board Judge.
 
        On  June   15,  1994,   Atlantic  Microsystems,  Inc.,   the
   protester, filed a motion requesting  the Board to reconsider its
   decision denying the  protester's request to recover  its alleged
   costs  of  "bid  and  proposal  preparation"  in  the  underlying
   procurement.   Atlantic Microsystems,  Inc. v. Department  of the
   Air Force, GSBCA  12270-C(12099-P), 1994 BPD   98 (May 16, 1994).
   Enroute to  concluding that the  factual record fails  to support
   protester's  recovery in any  amount, the Board  stated that "the
   information submitted by  the protester is not  credible; rather,
   it  appears to  be  fabricated simply  to  support the  requested
   recovery,"  id.  at 3  (Finding  5),  and that  the  "information
   submitted does nothing  to establish the credibility  or accuracy
   of the protester's position and request," id. at 4.
 
        In  the motion for reconsideration, the protester proffers a
   "corrected calculation" of its alleged costs of "bid and proposal
   preparation."  The new calculation (submitted without credible or
   reliable support) results in a  reduced request.  No proper basis
   for reconsideration, Rule 32, has been put forward.
 
                                Decision
 
        The Board DENIES the protester's MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION.
 
                                        ________________________
                                        JOSEPH A. VERGILIO
                                        Board Judge
 
   We concur:
 
 
 
   _________________________            _________________________
   STEPHEN M. DANIELS                   JAMES W. HENDLEY
   Board Judge                          Board Judge