On April 3, 2018, an OHA Administrative Judge issued a decision in which she determined that an individual's DOE access authorization should not be restored. To support the Guideline G security concern, the LSO stated that it relied upon a September 2016 written evaluation by the DOE psychiatrist, in which he diagnosed the individual with Alcohol Dependence under the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, Text Revision (DSM-IV-TR) and with Alcohol Use Disorder, Severe, under the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5). In addition, the LSO cited that: (1) the individual was charged with DUI in February 2016; (2) the judge ordered the individual  to undergo alcohol testing and participation in an alcohol program as part of his sentence; (3) the individual typically consumed one or two drinks of beer or wine at home or in a social setting and that it takes three to five drinks for him to become intoxicated; and (4) stressors due to the individual’s marital situation had changed his drinking behavior in 2016 prior to his separating from his wife. After carefully considering the totality of the record, the Administrative Judge found that the individual’s clearance should not be restored.   Although the individual is attending counseling and AA and has ceased alcohol consumption, his AA attendance and abstinence is in the early stages, beginning only four months prior to the hearing. While the individual has made progress in his rehabilitation efforts to date, I do not believe he has demonstrated a clear and established pattern of abstinence with only four months of sobriety, as of the time of the hearing.  Further, while the individual did attend an outpatient treatment program, the record reflects that his discharge from that program was based partially on his declared abstinence, which he admitted to the DOE psychiatrist and at the hearing was untrue.  In addition, the individual has a previous history of treatment. Finally, the Administrative Judge concurred with the DOE psychologist who opined that the individual would not be considered a low risk for relapse until he achieved at least twelve months of sobriety. Consequently, based on all of the above, the Administrative Judge found that the individual's access authorization should not be restored. OHA Case No. PSH-17-0091 (Janet R. H. Fishman).