On September 22, 2022, an Administrative Jude determined that the Individual's access authorization should be restored under 10 C.F.R. Part 710. The Individual is employed by a DOE contractor in a position that requires him to hold a security clearance to carry out specific work tasks. the Local Security Office (LSO) received potentially derogatory information regarding the Individual's alcohol consumption. The LSO alleged that the Individual was charged with DUI in 2006 when he consumed six alcoholic beverages and his breath alcohol concentration (BAC) registered at .159. The Individual was charged with DUI in 2004 after consuming four to six alcoholic beverages and his BAC registered at .166. the LSO also alleged that on February 11, 2022, the DOE Psychiatrist evaluated the Individual and indicated in his March 2022 report that pursuant to the DSM-V, the Individual met the diagnostic criteria for AUD, Moderate, without adequate evidence of rehabilitation or reformation.

At the hearing, the Individual, his former supervisor, his wife, his counselor, and the DOE -contracted Psychologist (DOE Psychologist) testified. The evidence in the record established that the Individual self-reported the fact that he voluntarily began seeking treatment from an intensive outpatient treatment program (IOP) on December 14, 2021. The Individual felt that his alcohol consumption had become problematic, and he completed the 90-day IOP. Although it was established that it is generally recommended that IOP participants join a self -help group like Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) upon their completion of the program, the Individual failed to do so. A letter from the medical director of the IOP indicated that he did not believe AA participation was necessary for the Individual. The record also established that the Individual continued to receive aftercare. The Individual, his wife, and his counselor all testified that the Individual has developed appropriate coping mechanisms to deal with the stress that would cause him to drink. The Individual had also been honest with his friends and family regarding his abstinence and enjoys support from his wife, extended family, and other aftercare participants. Further, the evidence in the record indicates that the Individual has been abstinent since December 14, 2021. The DOE Psychologist indicated in his testimony that he would have felt more secure about the Individual's rehabilitation had the Individual submitted an updated negative Phosphatidylethanol (PEth) test. The record did contain evidence of four negative urine tests . On balance, the Administrative Judge did not believe the PEth test is necessary to show that the Individual has mitigated the stated Guideline G concerns. Based on the evidence, the Administrative Judge concluded that the Individual had mitigated Guideline G concerns pursuant to the mitigating factor at ¶ 23(b) of the Adjudicative Guidelines. (OHA Case No. PSH-22-0110, Rahimzadeh)