demonstrates appellant's long history of alcohol abuse. He began attending AA meetings in 1986, five years before his 1991 hearing before the Board. The 1993 hearing established that appellant had relapsed twice during the time period of his 1991 temporary license. However, the administrative record of the 1996 hearing also demonstrates almost four years of sobriety prior to appellant's application for regular licensure. The record also reflects active involvement in structured treatment programsboth AA and attorney support group meetings. Appellant's mandatory evaluation from a substance abuse treatment facility[5]*847 includes statements from the evaluator that appellant's addiction severity index rating was a "1" which indicated, according to the evaluator, "no problem, no treatment necessary,"[6] and was the lowest score available on the rating scale.
The Board cites this Court's decisionfails to reflect substantial evidence establishing that appellant is presently chemically dependent. We sustain appellant's point of error.
The Board's Redetermination of Moral Character
The Board must make a redetermination of an applicant's moral character and fitness at the expiration of an applicant's probationary license before making a recommendation to the supreme court regarding regular licensure. Tex. Gov't Code Ann. § 82.038(f) (West 1998). The Board made moral character and fitness an explicit condition of appellant's 1993 license in requiring that appellant "not engage in any other conduct that evidences a lack of good moral character and fitness." In the 1996 hearing, the Board found that two specific acts of appellant evidenced a lack of good moral character; namely that appellant failed to adequately repay his student loans and that