__________________________________________
 
                DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE:  June 7, 1994
              ___________________________________________
 
 
                             GSBCA 12840-P
 
 
                  APPLIED TECHNOLOGY ASSOCIATES, INC.,
 
                                           Protester,
 
                                  and
 
                      RESOURCE CONSULTANTS, INC.,
 
                                           Intervenor,
 
                                   v.
 
                         DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE,
 
                                           Respondent,
 
                                  and
 
                         LABAT-ANDERSON, INC.,
 
                                           Intervenor.
 
        Pamela J. Mazza, Andrew P.  Hallowell, and Antonio R. Franco
   of  Piliero, Mazza  &  Pargament,  Washington,  DC,  counsel  for
   Protester.
 
        Jacob B. Pompan,  Gerald H. Werfel, and David  B. Stinson of
   Pompan,  Ruffner & Werfel, Alexandria, VA, counsel for Intervenor
   Resource Consultants, Inc.
 
        Michael   J.  Coster,   Office  of   the  General   Counsel,
   Immigration  and Naturalization  Service, Department  of Justice,
   Washington, DC, counsel for Respondent.
 
        David T.  Ralston,  Jr., and  Judson  A. Gould  of  Leonard,
   Ralston,  Stanton & Danks, Washington, DC, counsel for Intervenor
   Labat-Anderson, Inc.
 
   HENDLEY, Board Judge.
 
                                 ORDER
 
        On  May 20,  1994, the  Board  docketed a  protest filed  by
   Applied Technology Associates, Inc. (ATA), against the award made
   to  Labat-Anderson  Inc.  under  solicitation  number   HQ-93-22.
   Labat-Anderson  Inc.  and   Resource  Consultants,  Inc.,  timely
   intervened.   We issued our standard protective  order.  Inasmuch
   as the respondent did not contest the suspension requested by the
   protester, the applicable delegation of procurement authority was
   suspended pending resolution of the protest.
 
        On May 26,  1994, we held a prehearing  telephone conference
   with  the parties  for the  purpose  of establishing  a plan  for
   further proceedings in the protest.  
 
        On  June 3,  1994, the Board  received the  respondent's and
   protester's joint motion  to dismiss the protest  with prejudice.
   The  parties  have stated  that  the  protested award  to  Labat-
   Anderson  Inc.  has been  terminated for  the convenience  of the
   Government.
 
        Accordingly, the request to dismiss is granted.  The protest
   is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.   Rule 28(a).  The suspension of the
   respondent's delegation  of procurement authority  lapses by  its
   own terms.
 
                                 _______________________________
                                 JAMES W. HENDLEY
                                 Board Judge