__________________________________
        
                   GRANTED IN PART:  January 17, 1995
                   __________________________________
 
 
                         GSBCA 13094-C(13003-P)
 
                         HSQ TECHNOLOGY, INC.,
 
                                           Protester,
 
                                   v.
 
                        DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY,
 
                                           Respondent.
 
        Donald  O. Pratt  and  Paul  H.  Sanderford  of  Canterbury,
   Stuber, Pratt, Elder & Gooch, Dallas, TX, counsel for Protester.
 
        Craig R. Schmauder and Scott M. McCaleb, Office of the Chief
   Counsel, U.S. Army  Corps of Engineers,  Department of the  Army,
   Washington,  DC; Larry  E.  Beall, Office  of Counsel,  U.S. Army
   Corps of Engineers,  Department of the Army, Mobile,  AL, counsel
   for Respondent.
 
   Before Board Judges PARKER, DEVINE, and DeGRAFF.
 
   DeGRAFF, Board Judge.
 
        Pursuant  to  Rule 35,  HSQ Technology,  Inc. (HSQ)  filed a
   timely application for the award of the attorney fees, costs, and
   consultant's  fees that  it  incurred  in  connection  with  this
   protest.  The application for  attorney fees and costs is granted
   in the amount  of $26,500.  The Board and the parties agreed that
   the application  for  consultant's fees  will be  addressed in  a
   later decision.
 
        On October  5, 1994, HSQ  filed this protest  concerning the
   award made by the United  States Army Corps of Engineers pursuant
   to  solicitation  DACA01-94-R-0127  for  the  installation  of  a
   utility control system at the Irwin Army Community Hospital, Fort
   Riley,  Kansas.    On  November  3, 1994,  the  parties  filed  a
   Stipulation and  Agreement  settling the  protest and  requesting
   that the protest be dismissed.   The parties' stipulation  states
   that there were improprieties in the evaluation process, that the
   Army  agreed  to take  corrective  action,  and  that HSQ  was  a
   prevailing interested party.  The  Board dismissed the protest on
   November 3, 1994.  
 
 
        On December 1, 1994, HSQ  filed an application for the award
   of $23,218  for  attorney  fees and  $4,649  for  costs  (travel,
   deposition  transcripts,  telephone,  telefax,  photocopies,  and
   computerized research) that it incurred in pursuing this protest.
   On December  21, 1994, the  parties stipulated that $26,500  is a
   reasonable amount  of attorney  fees and  costs.   HSQ  submitted
   appropriate  documentation justifying  the time  expended by  its
   attorneys and the costs incurred.  
 
                                Decision
 
        Pursuant  to 40 U.S.C.   759(f)(5)(C) (1988), HSQ is awarded
   $26,500  for the  attorney fees  and  costs that  it incurred  in
   pursuing  this  protest.   This  award  is  to be  paid,  without
   interest,  from the permanent indefinite judgment fund, 31 U.S.C.
     1304 (1988).   The  application for  consultant's fees  will be
   addressed in a later decision.  
 
 
 
                                 ______________________________
                                 MARTHA H. DeGRAFF
                                 Board Judge
 
   We concur:
   ____________________________  _______________________________
   ROBERT W. PARKER              DONALD W. DEVINE
   Board Judge                   Board Judge