______________________________________________ PROTEST COSTS GRANTED: February 15, 1996 _______________________________________________ GSBCA 12418-C(12343-P) INTEGRATED SYSTEMS GROUP, INC., Applicant, v. DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY, Respondent. Shelton H. Skolnick of Skolnick & Leishman, Derwood, MD, counsel for Applicant. Maj. William R. Medsger, Office of Command Counsel, U.S. Army Materiel Command, Alexandria, VA, counsel for Respondent. Before Board Judges PARKER, NEILL, and DEGRAFF. PARKER, Board Judge. Integrated Systems Group, Inc. (ISG) moves for award of the costs of filing and pursuing a protest against the Department of the Army. The protest was dismissed at the request of the parties after the Army agreed to amend the solicitation and re- solicit offers. Integrated Systems Group, Inc. v. Department of the Army, GSBCA 12343, 1993 BPD 133 (Apr. 30, 1993). ISG claims a total of $645.00, all of which represents attorneys' fees. The Army does not object to ISG's request. Discussion The applicable provision of the Brooks Act permits the Board to grant an "appropriate interested party" its costs of filing and pursuing a protest, including reasonable attorneys' fees, when the Board determines that an agency has violated a statute, regulation, or the conditions of a delegation of procurement authority. 40 U.S.C. 759(f)(5)(C) (1988). An appropriate interested party has been defined as a "prevailing party" or "one that has succeeded on any significant issue in the litigation that achieves some of the benefit it sought in bringing suit." Bedford Computer Corp., GSBCA 9837-C(9742-P), 89-2 BCA 21,827, at 109,811, 1989 BPD 121, at 3. The statute implies that the costs and fees sought to be reimbursable must be reasonable. United States v. Compusearch Software Systems, 936 F.2d 564, 566 (Fed. Cir. 1991). Here, the Army does not dispute that the corrective action which it agreed to take was the result of a violation of statute or regulation, or that ISG is a prevailing party. Accordingly, we hold that ISG is an appropriate interested party entitled to recover its protest costs. We have examined the documentation submitted by ISG in support of its application and we find the claimed amount to be both well-documented and reasonable. Decision ISG's motion is GRANTED. ISG is awarded the sum of $645.00, to be paid without interest from the permanent indefinite judgment fund, 31 U.S.C. 1304 (1994). ________________________ ROBERT W. PARKER Board Judge We concur: _______________________ EDWIN B. NEILL Board Judge ________________________ MARTHA H. DEGRAFF Board Judge