_________________________________________________________
 
       PERMISSIVE INTERVENTION OF TRESP ASSOCIATES, INC. GRANTED
                            October 18, 1994
       _________________________________________________________
 
 
                             GSBCA 12999-P
 
                     COLUMBIA SERVICES GROUP, INC.,
 
                                        Protester,
                                  and
 
                        TRESP ASSOCIATES, INC.,
 
                                        Permissive Intervenor,
 
                                   v.
 
                         DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY,
 
                                        Respondent.
 
        David  R. Smith, General Counsel of Columbia Services Group,
   Inc.,  Arlington, VA;  and John  R. Tolle  of Barton,  Mountain &
   Tolle, McLean, VA, counsel for Protester.
 
        Mary Beth Bosco,  Timothy B. Mills,  Glenn T. Reynolds,  and
   Christy L. Gherlein, of Patton Boggs, Washington, DC, counsel for
   Permissive Intervenor.
 
        Mary D. Copeland, Wendy  E. Ojeda, Nicole Porter, Office  of
   Chief Counsel, Department  of Energy, Oak Ridge,  TN, counsel for
   Respondent.
 
   VERGILIO, Board Judge.
 
                                 ORDER
 
        TRESP Associates, Inc. has filed a notice of intervention as
   of right, and alternatively,  as a permissive intervenor, in  the
   protest of  Columbia Services  Group, Inc.   The  respondent, the
   Department  of  Energy,  opposes the  requested  intervention  of
   right.
 
        TRESP states in its notice of intervention that on September
   21, 1994,  it filed  with the General  Accounting Office  (GAO) a
   protest  concerning the underlying procurement.  It contends that
   on October 4  it received notice  of the  Columbia protest.   Its
   notice  of intervention  was  filed  on  October  11--the  fourth
   working  day after  receipt of  the  notice.   Rule 2(c).   TRESP
   supports  each   basis  of   protest  raised   by  Columbia;   it
   additionally seeks to pursue its own (distinct) issues of protest
   which it raised at GAO.
 
 
        Regarding  this  Board's  protest jurisdiction,  the  Brooks
   Automatic  Data Processing  Act, as  amended,  specifies that  an
   "interested party who  has filed a protest under  subsection V of
   chapter 35  of title  31, United States  Code[; that is,  filed a
   protest with the General Accounting Office, Comptroller General],
   with  respect to  a procurement  or proposed procurement  may not
   file  a protest  with  respect to  that  procurement or  proposed
   procurement  under  this  subsection."    40  U.S.C.    759(f)(1)
   (1988).
 
        Having  elected to  file a  protest  at the  GAO, under  the
   statute, the election precludes TRESP  from filing a protest with
   this Board.   To permit TRESP to intervene  of right, with all of
   the rights of a party, Rule 5(b)(4),  and to raise and pursue its
   own issues of protest  would circumvent the dictates of  statute.
   Such  an intervention  would place  TRESP  in the  position of  a
   protester.  Rules 5(b)(3) and (4).
 
        Consistent with  statute, the  Rules of  the Board  preclude
   TRESP  from participating  in this  protest as  an  intervenor of
   right.  By  definition such an intervenor is  an interested party
   which has not filed  a protest with the GAO.   Rule 1(b)(8).  The
   actions of GAO in dismissing (or not) the protest there, does not
   affect  the authority  of  this  Board  which  is  enunciated  in
   statute.
 
        Given  the determination that  TRESP's intervention of right
   must be denied, the Board need not  address other questions.  For
   example, should  TRESP be permitted  to pursue its own  issues of
   protest at  this Board, is  TRESP entitled to discovery  it would
   not have received at the GAO, and should the Board apply  de novo
   review or the analysis employed by the GAO.
 
        TRESP  has  timely  filed  a  motion  to  participate  as  a
   permissive intervenor.  Rule 5(a)(4)(iii).
 
        Accordingly, the  Board DENIES  TRESP's participation  as an
   intervenor of  right, and GRANTS  its motion to participate  as a
   permissive intervenor.
 
         ________________________
                                              JOSEPH A. VERGILIO
                                              Board Judge