Opinion ID: 2621130
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Substantial evidence to support approval

Text: Anderson asserts that there was substantial evidence to find that he overcame the presumption of non-residency. Anderson may be correct on this point. As noted above, Anderson presented evidence that he has always maintained his paper ties to Alaska; did not establish any ties to other states; always listed an Alaska assignment as his first choice for his job preference; consistently expressed a subjective intent to return; and made the statutory minimum return trips to Alaska. The combination of this evidence and reasonable inferences arising from it could support a finding that Anderson overcame the presumption of non-residency. But, as noted above, we are obligated to affirm the decision of an agency where it chooses between two alternatives, both of which are supported by substantial evidence. [20] Accordingly, the existence of substantial evidence to support Anderson's position does not in itself permit us to reverse the department's decision.