_______________________________________________
 
                        DISMISSED:  June 9, 1994
            _______________________________________________
 
                             GSBCA 12857-P
 
                         ROBERT F. AUDET, INC.,
 
                                           Protester,
 
                                   v.
 
                        DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY,
 
                                           Respondent.
 
        Kenneth  A. Freeborn,  Vice President  of  Robert F.  Audet,
   Inc., East Greenwich, RI, appearing for Protester.
 
        Paul  M.  Fisher,   Naval  Facilities  Engineering  Command,
   Department of the Navy, Alexandria, VA, counsel for Respondent.
 
   BORWICK, Board Judge.
 
        On June  7,  1994,  Robert  F. Audet,  Inc.,  protested  the
   Department of the  Navy's award to a competitor  in a procurement
   for  installation  of high-voltage  capacitors.   On  June  9, we
   convened  a  pre-hearing  conference and  discussed  whether  the
   protest should be  at this Board in  view of two sections  of the
   Brooks Act.  The first section provides:  
 
        [T]he term "automatic  data processing equipment" means
        any equipment . . . used in  the automatic acquisition,
        storage,  manipulation,  management,  control, display,
        switching[,] interchange,  transmission, or  reception,
        of data or information-
 
        (i) by a Federal agency, or
 
        (ii) under a contract with a Federal agency which-
 
             (I) requires the use of such equipment, or 
 
             (II) requires the performance of a service or
             the  furnishing   of  a   product  which   is
             performed or produced  making significant use
             of such equipment.
 
   40 U.S.C.   759(a)(2)(A) (1988).  The second section provides:
 
        Upon  request of an interested party in connection with
        any procurement which  is subject to this  section [the
        Brooks   Act]   (including  procurements   subject   to
        delegation  of  procurement  authority), the  board  of
        contract appeals of the General Services Administration
        . . . shall  review  any  decision  by  a   contracting
        officer alleged to violate a statute or regulation.
 
   40 U.S.C.   759(f)(1) (1988).  
 
        Protester voluntarily  withdrew its protest  and intends  to
   file a protest at the General Accounting Office.  Respondent does
   not object  to the withdrawal.  Pursuant to  Rule 28 and the oral
   agreement of the parties, this protest is DISMISSED.  
 
 
 
                                      __________________________
                                      ANTHONY S. BORWICK
                                      Board Judge