That is a legitimate question and the history behind it explains a lot about where things stand today.
Atlanta camp had a reputation for years as one of the more loosely run federal camps in the country. Inmates who did time there described a culture where furloughs were granted freely and the boundaries between inside and outside were, to put it generously, porous. Nightly departures, inmates timing their return to beat count, contraband coming back in with them, it became what insiders described as the wild west of federal minimum security. The Bureau of Prisons eventually took notice, and the Atlanta Journal-Constitution published a scathing article that investigated the situation in detail and made it impossible to ignore.
The crackdown that followed is almost certainly why furlough access at the Atlanta camp has been significantly curtailed. When a facility develops that kind of documented history of abuse, the institutional response is to tighten everything across the board, and furloughs are one of the first privileges to go. Rebuilding trust with BOP leadership after that kind of exposure takes time, and there is no guaranteed timeline for when or whether the program returns in any meaningful form.
What your inmate can do is continue petitioning the warden through proper channels and keep that request on record. More importantly, completing every recommended program the facility offers is the most concrete thing that moves someone closer to any kind of expanded privilege or early transition. Programming completion does not guarantee a furlough, but it builds the institutional record that makes any favorable discretionary decision more likely.