MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION DISMISSED: October 6, 1994
                                                              
 
 
                            GSBCA 11214-P-R
 
 
                    INTEGRATED SYSTEMS GROUP, INC.,
 
                                           Protester,
 
                                   v.
 
                      DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY,
 
                                           Respondent,
 
                                  and
 
                       MEMOREX TELEX CORPORATION,
 
                                           Intervenor.
 
        Stephen  L. Mills, Vice  President, Marketing, of Integrated
   Systems Group, Inc., Vienna, VA, appearing for Protester.
 
        Barbara  Harris Vail and  Arthur I. Rettinger,  U.S. Customs
   Service,  Department of the Treasury, Washington, DC, counsel for
   Respondent.
 
        William A.  Roberts III, Lee  Curtis, and Brian A.  Darst of
   Howrey & Simon, Washington, DC, counsel for Intervenor.
 
   DANIELS, Chairman. 
 
                                 ORDER
 
        On July 9, 1991, protester moved for reconsideration of  the
   Board's  decision  in  Integrated   Systems  Group,  Inc.,  GSBCA
   11214-P, 91-3 BCA   24,155, 1991  BPD   140.  Both the respondent
   in this case, the Department of the Treasury, and the intervenor,
   Memorex Telex Corporation, filed oppositions to the motion.
 
        The Board's decision  as to which reconsideration  is sought
   was  issued by  a panel  of Judges  James W. Hendley,  Leonard J.
   Suchanek, and Vincent  A. LaBella.  None of  these individuals is
   now  serving on  the Board.    Judge Hendley  has retired,  Judge
   Suchanek has resigned, and Judge LaBella is deceased.
 
        The Court of Appeals for  the Federal Circuit has instructed
   that  on  reconsideration, a  board of  contract appeals  may not
   change the  panel of judges  to which  the case is  assigned such
   that  the board's  decision is  modified.   ICF  Severn, Inc.  v.
   National  Aeronautics  & Space  Administration,  GSBCA 11552-P-R,
   1994  BPD   153,  at  1  n.1 (July  14,  1994) (citing  Universal
   Restoration, Inc. v. United States, 798 F.2d 1400, 1406 n.9 (Fed.
   Cir. 1986)).   Because none of the members of  the original panel
   is  available   for   consideration  of   the   present   motion,
   reconsideration  is impossible.    The motion  must  be, and  is,
   DISMISSED.
 
        Board  Rule 30(a)(2) permits  a party to  request full Board
   consideration of  a decision  "(1) after the  panel to  which the
   case  is  assigned  has  issued  its decision  on  a  motion  for
   reconsideration or relief from decision and (2) within 10 working
   days after the date on  which that party receives that decision."
   For purposes of this Rule, this  order shall be deemed to be  the
   decision of the panel on the motion for reconsideration.
 
        The Board  notes that  both respondent  and intervenor  have
   filed   motions  for   monetary   sanctions  against   protester.
   Respondent's motion, which  was filed after the case was decided,
   was docketed separately as  GSBCA 11336-C(11214-P).  Intervenor's
   motion, which was made in that party's posthearing brief in GSBCA
   11214-P,  remains as  part of  GSBCA 11214-P.   Unless  any party
   timely requests full Board consideration of the decision in GSBCA
   11214-P, that case shall be  considered closed as of the eleventh
   working day after the date of this  order, which is also the date
   on which  the Board sends the  order to all parties  by facsimile
   transmission.   Both motions  for sanctions  shall be  considered
   under docket number 11336-C(11214-P).
 
                                      _________________________
                                      STEPHEN M. DANIELS
                                      Chairman