__________________________________________ DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE: August 17, 1993 __________________________________________ GSBCA 12513-P LITTON SYSTEMS, INC., Protester, and DENRO, INC., Intervenor, v. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, and DEFENSE INFORMATION SYSTEMS AGENCY, Respondents, and WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC CORPORATION, Intervenor. David V. Anthony, Michael W. Clancy, Richard P. Rector, and Mark A. Riordan of Pettit & Martin, Washington, DC; Samuel M. Thomasson of Litton Industries, Inc., Beverly Hills, CA; and L. Russell Gobbel of Litton Amecom, College Park, MD, counsel for Protester. Donald N. Sperling, David C. Driscoll, and Jeffrey M. Schwaber of Stein, Sperling, Bennett, DeJong, Driscoll, Greenfeig & Metro, Rockville, MD, counsel for Intervenor Denro, Inc. John R. McCaw, Jr., Anthony L. Washington, and Richard J. McCarthy, Office of the Chief Counsel, Federal Aviation Administration, Department of Transportation, Washington, DC, counsel for Respondent Department of Transportation. H. Jack Shearer and Douglas G. White, Defense Information Systems Agency, Defense Commercial Communications Office, Scott Air Force Base, IL, counsel for Respondent Defense Information Systems Agency. Rand L. Allen, Phillip J. Davis, Paul F. Khoury, and David R. Vogel, of Wiley, Rein & Fielding, Washington, DC, counsel for Intervenor Westinghouse Electric Corporation. VERGILIO, Board Judge. ORDER On July 30, 1993, Litton Systems, Inc. filed with the Board a post-award protest involving a procurement by the respondents, the Department of Transportation and the Defense Information Systems Agency. Westinghouse Electric Corporation, the awardee, and Denro, Inc., an unsuccessful offeror, are intervenors of right. The protester alleges that the Government improperly evaluated proposals and conducted discussions, and awarded the contract to an offeror whose proposal is not acceptable and is not most advantageous to the Government. On August 12, the protester filed a motion requesting that the protest be dismissed with prejudice. Intervenor Denro does not object to the dismissal. Accordingly, the protest is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. Rule 28(a). The previously entered suspension of procurement authority lapses by its terms. Order (Aug. 9, 1993); 40 U.S.C. 759(f)(3) (1988). ________________________ JOSEPH A. VERGILIO Board Judge