Richard P. Kattula appeals from the district court's order dismissing his suit in which he challenged the revocation of his security clearance. The district court was correct in finding that federal courts lack subject matter jurisdiction to review the merits of a security clearance decision. However, Kattula raises two other claims which were not addressed by the district court and over which federal courts do have jurisdiction.

First, Kattula claims that the Air Force denied him due process in revoking his security clearance. However, this Court has recently held that there is no property interest in a security clearance, and, therefore, no right to due process in decisions affecting a security clearance. Jamil v. Secretary, Dep't of Defense, 910 F.2d 1203, 1209 (4th Cir. 1990). Second, Kattula argues that the Air Force failed to follow its own regulations in reaching its decision. These regulations provide for notice of intent to revoke (stating the reasons therefor), an opportunity to submit rebuttal evidence, notice of the agency's final decision, and the right to appeal to the Administrative Assistant to the Secretary of the Air Force. Our review of the record discloses that the defendant carefully followed its regulations at each stage of the security clearance revocation. Therefore, we affirm the district court's order dismissing this suit. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the Court and argument would not aid the decisional process.