HA 2.05(4)(b)9.9. The convenience or inconvenience to the parties, witnesses and the division; and HA 2.05(4)(b)10.10. Whether the client and the client’s attorney, if any, have had adequate notice and time to prepare for the hearing. HA 2.05(4)(c)(c) Any party requesting that a hearing be rescheduled shall give notice of such request to the opposing party. HA 2.05(5)(a)(a) The identity of a witness may be withheld from the client if disclosure of the identity would threaten the safety of the witness or another. HA 2.05(5)(b)(b) Testimony of a witness may be taken outside the presence of the client when there is substantial likelihood that the witness will suffer significant psychological or emotional trauma if the witness testifies in the presence of the client or when there is substantial likelihood that the witness will not be able to give effective, truthful testimony in the presence of the client at hearing. The administrative law judge shall indicate in the record that such testimony has been taken and the reasons for it and must give the client an opportunity to submit questions to be asked of the witness. HA 2.05(5)(c)(c) The hearing examiner [administrative law judge] shall give the client and the client’s attorney an opportunity on the record to oppose protection of a witness before any such action is taken. HA 2.05(6)(a)(a) The hearing may be closed to the public and shall be conducted in accordance with this chapter. The administrative law judge may conduct the hearing by video conference. The hearing may also be conducted by telephone conference if all parties agree. If all parties do not agree to conduct a hearing by telephone conference, the administrative law judge may conduct the hearing by telephone conference if there is no factual dispute regarding the violations alleged by the department or when the administrative law judge determines that good cause exists to conduct the hearing by telephone conference. All witnesses for and against the offender, including the offender, shall have a chance to speak and respond to questions. HA 2.05(6)(b)(b) The administrative law judge shall weigh the credibility of the witnesses. HA 2.05(6)(c)(c) Evidence to support or rebut the allegation may be offered. Evidence gathered by means not consistent with ch. DOC 328 or in violation of the law may be admitted as evidence at the hearing. HA 2.05(6)(d)(d) The administrative law judge may accept hearsay evidence. HA 2.05(6)(e)(e) The rules of evidence other than ch. 905, Stats., with respect to privileges do not apply except that unduly repetitious or irrelevant questions may be excluded. HA 2.05(6)(f)(f) The department has the burden of proof to establish, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the client violated the rules or conditions of supervision. A violation is proven by a judgment of conviction arising from conduct underlying an allegation. HA 2.05(6)(g)(g) The administrative law judge may take an active role to elicit facts not raised by the client or the client’s attorney, if any, or the department’s representative. HA 2.05(6)(h)(h) Alternatives to revocation and any alibi defense offered by the client or the client’s attorney, if any, shall be considered only if the administrative law judge and the department’s representative have received notice of them at least 5 days before the hearing, unless the administrative law judge allows a shorter notice for cause. HA 2.05(6)(i)(i) The administrative law judge may issue any necessary recommendation to give the department’s representative and the client reasonable opportunity to present a full and fair record. HA 2.05(7)(a)(a) The administrative law judge shall consider only the evidence presented in making the decision. HA 2.05(7)(b)1.1. Decide whether the client committed the conduct underlying the alleged violation; HA 2.05(7)(b)2.2. Decide, if the client committed the conduct, whether the conduct constitutes a violation of the rules or conditions of supervision; HA 2.05(7)(b)3.3. Decide, if the client violated the rules or conditions of supervision, whether revocation should result or whether there are appropriate alternatives to revocation. Violation of a rule or condition is both a necessary and a sufficient ground for revocation of supervision. Revocation may not be the disposition, however, unless the administrative law judge finds on the basis of the original offense and the intervening conduct of the client that: