# Appeals Board Denies 22 out of 24 Clearances in 2018

**URL:** <https://discuss.clearancejobsblog.com/t/appeals-board-denies-22-out-of-24-clearances-in-2018/2937>\
**Category:** SECURITY CLEARANCE NEWS\
**Created:** [February 20, 2018, 10:52pm UTC](https://discuss.clearancejobsblog.com/t/appeals-board-denies-22-out-of-24-clearances-in-2018/2937 "2018-02-20T22:52:10Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 5\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Marko](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discuss.clearancejobsblog.com/marko/32/103_2.png) [@Marko](https://discuss.clearancejobsblog.com/u/Marko)\
**Post date:** [February 20, 2018, 10:52pm UTC](https://discuss.clearancejobsblog.com/t/appeals-board-denies-22-out-of-24-clearances-in-2018/2937/1 "2018-02-20T22:52:10Z")

</div>

Originally published at: [https://www.clearancejobsblog.com/appeals-board-denies-22-out-of-24-clearances-in-2018/](https://www.clearancejobsblog.com/appeals-board-denies-22-out-of-24-clearances-in-2018/)  
   
The Defense Office of Hearing and Appeals has started 2018 off with a bang in hearing twenty-four appeal cases, of which twenty-two clearance denial decisions were upheld, one denial decision reversed to clearance granted, and one case remanded back to the original adjudicator for a procedural review. As has historically been the case, financial issues…

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![sbusquirrel](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discuss.clearancejobsblog.com/sbusquirrel/32/34_2.png) [@sbusquirrel](https://discuss.clearancejobsblog.com/u/sbusquirrel)\
**Post date:** [February 20, 2018, 11:30pm UTC](https://discuss.clearancejobsblog.com/t/appeals-board-denies-22-out-of-24-clearances-in-2018/2937/2 "2018-02-20T23:30:55Z")

</div>

Pardon me for asking again, but when we are talking about DOHA “appeals,” are we talking about the second round? That is, the first round is the response to the SOR; if that is not in the applicant’s favor, they can pursue an appeal, correct?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Marko](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discuss.clearancejobsblog.com/marko/32/103_2.png) [@Marko](https://discuss.clearancejobsblog.com/u/Marko)\
**Post date:** [February 20, 2018, 11:31pm UTC](https://discuss.clearancejobsblog.com/t/appeals-board-denies-22-out-of-24-clearances-in-2018/2937/3 "2018-02-20T23:31:52Z")

</div>

Correct, DOHA hears an appeal to the initial denial.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![AWoodhull](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discuss.clearancejobsblog.com/awoodhull/32/867_2.png) [@AWoodhull](https://discuss.clearancejobsblog.com/u/AWoodhull)\
**Post date:** [February 21, 2018, 12:40pm UTC](https://discuss.clearancejobsblog.com/t/appeals-board-denies-22-out-of-24-clearances-in-2018/2937/4 "2018-02-21T12:40:46Z")

</div>

DOHA only hears cases concerning contractors not government employees?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![sbusquirrel](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discuss.clearancejobsblog.com/sbusquirrel/32/34_2.png) [@sbusquirrel](https://discuss.clearancejobsblog.com/u/sbusquirrel)\
**Post date:** [February 21, 2018, 11:19pm UTC](https://discuss.clearancejobsblog.com/t/appeals-board-denies-22-out-of-24-clearances-in-2018/2937/5 "2018-02-21T23:19:57Z")

</div>

> [@AWoodhull](#):
>
> DOHA only hears cases concerning contractors not government employees?

I know the records of appeals posted on their website are only for contractors.