On February 2, 2023, an Administrative Judge determined that an Individual's access authorization should not be restored under 10 C.F.R. Part 710. In March 2022, the Individual disclosed to the local security office (LSO) that he had received alcohol-related treatment through an intensive outpatient program (IOP). The Individual claimed that he had successfully completed the IOP. However, information obtained by LSO revealed that the Individual was discharged from the IOP for not complying with treatment and repeatedly testing positive for traces of alcohol consumption. A DOE - contracted Psychologist (DOE Psychologist) conducted a clinical interview of the Individual and determined that he met the diagnostic criteria for Alcohol Use Disorder (AUD), Severe, under the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders - Fifth Edition, and that he either habitually or binge consumed alcohol to the point of impaired judgment. The DOE Psychologist recommended that the Individual demonstrate rehabilitation by entering in -patient treatment for alcohol misuse, attending aftercare for twelve months, and abstaining from alcohol for the duration of treatment. The Individual did not pursue the treatment recommended by the DOE Psychologist and admitted at the hearing that he had relapsed numerous times since the clinical interview with the DOE Psychologist, including a potential binge drinking episode in the month prior to the hearing. The DOE Psychologist opined that her diagnosis of the Individual was unchanged and that his prognosis for recovery was only fair. In light of the recency of the Individual's problematic alcohol consumption and the unfavorable opinion of the DOE Psychologist, the Administrative Judge determined that the Individual had not resolved the security concerns under Guideline G. Therefore, the Administrative Judge determined that the Individual's access authorization should not be restored. OHA Case No. PSH-23- 0007 (Phillip Harmonick)