Scroll for more

Rules and Regulation

EXAMPLES OF THE APPLICATION OF DC 10

EXAMPLE 1
Facts: An Adverse Analytical Finding results from the presence of an anabolic steroid in an In-Competition test (DC 2.1); the Athlete promptly admits the anti-doping rule violation; the Athlete establishes No Significant Fault or Negligence; and the Athlete provides Substantial Assistance.
Application of Consequences:
1. The starting point would be DC 10.2. Because the Athlete is deemed to have No Significant Fault that would be sufficient corroborating evidence (DC 10.2.1.1 and 10.2.3) that the anti-doping rule violation was not intentional, the period of Ineligibility would thus be two years, not four years (DC 10.2.2).
2. In a second step, the panel would analyze whether the Fault-related reductions (DC 10.4 and 10.5) apply. Based on No Significant Fault or Negligence (DC 10.5.2) since the anabolic steroid is not a Specified Substance, the applicable range of sanctions would be reduced to a range of two years to one year (minimum one-half of the two year sanction). The panel would then determine the applicable period of Ineligibility within this range based on the Athlete’s degree of Fault. (Assume for purposes of illustration in this example that the panel would otherwise impose a period of Ineligibility of 16 months.)
3. In a third step, the panel would assess the possibility for suspension or reduction under DC 10.6 (reductions not related to Fault). In this case, only DC 10.6.1 (Substantial Assistance) applies. (DC 10.6.3, Prompt Admission, is not applicable because the period of Ineligibility is already below the two-year minimum set forth in DC 10.6.3.) Based on Substantial Assistance, the period of Ineligibility could be suspended by three-quarters of 16 months.* The minimum period of Ineligibility would thus be four months. (Assume for purposes of illustration in this example that the panel suspends ten months and the period of Ineligibility would thus be six months.)
4. Under DC 10.11, the period of Ineligibility, in principle, starts on the date of the final hearing decision. However, because the Athlete promptly admitted the anti-doping rule violation, the period of Ineligibility could start as early as the date of Sample collection, but in any event the Athlete would have to serve at least one-half of the Ineligibility period (i.e., three months) after the date of the hearing decision (DC 10.11.2).
5. Since the Adverse Analytical Finding was committed in a Competition, the panel would have to automatically Disqualify the result obtained in that Competition (DC 9).
6. According to DC 10.8, all results obtained by the Athlete subsequent to the date of the Sample collection until the start of the period of Ineligibility would also be Disqualified unless fairness requires otherwise.
7. The information referred to in DC 14.3.2 must be Publicly Disclosed, unless the Athlete is a Minor, since this is a mandatory part of each sanction (DC 10.13).
8. The Athlete is not allowed to participate in any capacity in a Competition or other sport-related activity under the authority of any Signatory or its affiliates during the Athlete’s period of Ineligibility (DC 10.12.1). However, the Athlete may return to train with a Team or to use thefacilities of a club or other member organization of a Signatory or its affiliates during the shorter of: (a) the last two months of the Athlete’s period of Ineligibility, or (b) the last one-quarter of the period of Ineligibility imposed (DC 10.12.2). Thus, the Athlete would be allowed to return to training one and one-half months before the end of the period of Ineligibility.

EXAMPLE 2
Facts: An Adverse Analytical Finding results from the presence of a stimulant which is a Specified Substance in an In-Competition Test (DC 2.1); the Anti-Doping Organization is able to establish that the Athlete committed the anti-doping rule violation intentionally; the Athlete is not able to establish that the Prohibited Substance was used Out-of-Competition in a context unrelated to sport performance; the Athlete does not promptly admit the anti-doping rule violation as alleged; the Athlete does provide Substantial Assistance.
Application of Consequences:
1. The starting point would be DC 10.2. Because the Anti-Doping Organization can establish that the anti-doping rule violation was committed intentionally and the Athlete is unable to establish that the substance was permitted Out-of-Competition and the Use was unrelated to the Athlete’s sport performance (DC 10.2.3), the period of Ineligibility would be four years (DC 10.2.1.2).
2. Because the violation was intentional, there is no room for a reduction based on Fault (no application of DC 10.4 and 10.5). Based on Substantial Assistance, the sanction could be suspended by up to three-quarters of the four years.* The minimum period of Ineligibility would thus be one year.
3. Under DC 10.11, the period of Ineligibility would start on the date of the final hearing decision.
4. Since the Adverse Analytical Finding was committed in a Competition, the panel would automatically Disqualify the result obtained in the Competition.
5. According to DC 10.8, all results obtained by the Athlete subsequent to the date of Sample collection until the start of the period of Ineligibility would also be Disqualified unless fairness requires otherwise.
6. The information referred to in DC 14.3.2 must be Publicly Disclosed, unless the Athlete is a Minor, since this is a mandatory part of each sanction (DC 10.13).
7. The Athlete is not allowed to participate in any capacity in a Competition or other sport-related activity under the authority of any Signatory or its affiliates during the Athlete’s period of Ineligibility (DC 10.12.1). However, the Athlete may return to train with a Team or to use the facilities of a club or other member organization of a Signatory or its affiliates during the shorter of: (a) the last two months of the Athlete’s period of Ineligibility, or (b) the last one-quarter of the period of Ineligibility imposed (DC 10.12.2). Thus, the Athlete would be allowed to return to training two months before the end of the period of Ineligibility.

EXAMPLE 3
Facts: An Adverse Analytical Finding results from the presence of an anabolic steroid in an Out-of-Competition Test (DC 2.1); the Athlete establishes that he had No Significant Fault or Negligence; the Athlete also establishes that the Adverse Analytical Finding was caused by a Contaminated Product.

Application of Consequences:
1. The starting point would be DC 10.2. Because the Athlete can establish through corroborating evidence that he did not commit the anti-doping rule violation intentionally—he had No Significant Fault in using a Contaminated Product (DC 10.2.1.1 and 10.2.3), the period of Ineligibility would be two years (DC 10.2.2).
2. In a second step, the panel would analyze the Fault-related possibilities for reductions (DC 10.4 and 10.5). Since the Athlete can establish that the anti-doping rule violation was caused by a Contaminated Product and that he acted with No Significant Fault or Negligence based on DC 10.5.1.2, the applicable range for the period of Ineligibility would be reduced to a range of two years to a reprimand. The panel would determine the period of Ineligibility within this range, based on the Athlete’s degree of Fault. (Assume for purposes of illustration in this example that the panel would otherwise impose a period of Ineligibility of four months.)
3. According to DC 10.8, all results obtained by the Athlete subsequent to the date of Sample collection until the start of the period of Ineligibility would be Disqualified unless fairness requires otherwise.
4. The information referred to in DC 14.3.2 must be Publicly Disclosed, unless the Athlete is a Minor, since this is a mandatory part of each sanction (DC 10.13).
5. The Athlete is not allowed to participate in any capacity in a Competition or other sport-related activity under the authority of any Signatory or its affiliates during the Athlete’s period of Ineligibility (DC 10.12.1). However, the Athlete may return to train with a Team or to use the facilities of a club or other member organization of a Signatory or its affiliates during the shorter of: (a) the last two months of the Athlete’s period of Ineligibility, or (b) the last one-quarter of the period of Ineligibility imposed (DC 10.12.2). Thus, the Athlete would be allowed to return to training one month before the end of the period of Ineligibility.

EXAMPLE 4
Facts: An Athlete who has never had an Adverse Analytical Finding or been confronted with an anti-doping rule violation spontaneously admits that he used an anabolic steroid to enhance his performance. The Athlete also provides Substantial Assistance.
Application of Consequences:
1. Since the violation was intentional, DC 10.2.1 would be applicable and the basic period of Ineligibility imposed would be four years.
2. There is no room for Fault-related reductions of the period of Ineligibility (no application of DC 10.4 and 10.5).
3. Based on the Athlete’s spontaneous admission (DC 10.6.2) alone, the period of Ineligibility could be reduced by up to one-half of the four years. Based on the Athlete’s Substantial Assistance (DC 10.6.1) alone, the period of Ineligibility could be suspended up to three-quarters of the four years.* Under DC 10.6.4, in considering the spontaneous admission and Substantial Assistance together, the most the sanction could be reduced or suspended would be up to three-quarters of the four years. The minimum period of Ineligibility would be one year.
4. The period of Ineligibility, in principle, starts on the day of the final hearing decision (DC 10.11). If the spontaneous admission is factored into the reduction of the period of Ineligibility, an early start of the period of Ineligibility under DC 10.11.2 would not be permitted. The provision seeks to prevent an Athlete from benefitting twice from the same set of circumstances. However, if the period of Ineligibility was suspended solely on the basis of Substantial Assistance, DC 10.11.2 may still be applied, and the period of Ineligibility started as early as the Athlete’s last use of the anabolic steroid.

5. According to DC 10.8, all results obtained by the Athlete subsequent to the date of the anti-doping rule violation until the start of the period of Ineligibility would be Disqualified unless fairness requires otherwise.
6. The information referred to in DC 14.3.2 must be Publicly Disclosed, unless the Athlete is a Minor, since this is a mandatory part of each sanction (DC 10.13).
7. The Athlete is not allowed to participate in any capacity in a Competition or other sport-related activity under the authority of any Signatory or its affiliates during the Athlete’s period of Ineligibility (DC 10.12.1). However, the Athlete may return to train with a Team or to use the facilities of a club or other member organization of a Signatory or its affiliates during the shorter of: (a) the last two months of the Athlete’s period of Ineligibility, or (b) the last one-quarter of the period of Ineligibility imposed (DC 10.12.2). Thus, the Athlete would be allowed to return to training two months before the end of the period of Ineligibility.

EXAMPLE 5
Facts:
An Athlete Support Personnel helps to circumvent a period of Ineligibility imposed on an Athlete by entering him into a Competition under a false name. The Athlete Support Personnel comes forward with this anti-doping rule violation (DC 2.9) spontaneously before being notified of an anti-doping rule violation by an Anti-Doping Organization.
Application of Consequences:
1. According to DC 10.3.4, the period of Ineligibility would be from two up to four years, depending on the seriousness of the violation. (Assume for purposes of illustration in this example that the panel would otherwise impose a period of Ineligibility of three years.)
2. There is no room for Fault-related reductions since intent is an element of the anti-doping rule violation in DC 2.9 (see comment to DC 10.5.2).
3. According to DC 10.6.2, provided that the admission is the only reliable evidence, the period of Ineligibility may be reduced down to one-half. (Assume for purposes of illustration in this example that the panel would impose a period of Ineligibility of 18 months.)
4. The information referred to in DC 14.3.2 must be Publicly Disclosed unless the Athlete Support Personnel is a Minor, since this is a mandatory part of each sanction (DC 10.13).

EXAMPLE 6
Facts: An Athlete was sanctioned for a first anti-doping rule violation with a period of Ineligibility of 14 months, of which four months were suspended because of Substantial Assistance. Now, the Athlete commits a second anti-doping rule violation resulting from the presence of a stimulant which is not a Specified Substance in an In-Competition Test (DC 2.1); the Athlete establishes No Significant Fault or Negligence; and the Athlete provided Substantial Assistance. If this were a first violation, the panel would sanction the Athlete with a period of Ineligibility of 16 months and suspend six months for Substantial Assistance.

Application of Consequences:
1. DC 10.7 is applicable to the second anti-doping rule violation because DC 10.7.4.1 and DC 10.7.5 apply.
2. Under DC 10.7.1, the period of Ineligibility would be the greater of:
(a) six months;
(b) one-half of the period of Ineligibility imposed for the first anti-doping rule violation without taking into account any reduction under DC 10.6 (in this example, that would equal one-half of 14 months, which is seven months); or
(c) two times the period of Ineligibility otherwise applicable to the second anti-doping rule violation treated as if it were a first violation, without taking into account any reduction under DC 10.6 (in this example, that would equal two times 16 months, which is 32 months).
Thus, the period of Ineligibility for the second violation would be the greater of (a), (b) and (c), which is a period of Ineligibility of 32 months.
3. In a next step, the panel would assess the possibility for suspension or reduction under DC 10.6 (non-Fault-related reductions). In the case of the second violation, only DC 10.6.1 (Substantial Assistance) applies. Based on Substantial Assistance, the period of Ineligibility could be suspended by three-quarters of 32 months.*(Upon the approval of WADA in exceptional circumstances, the maximum suspension of the period of Ineligibility for Substantial Assistance may be greater than three-quarters, and reporting and publication may be delayed.) The minimum period of Ineligibility would thus be eight months. (Assume for purposes of illustration in this example that the panel suspends eight months of the period of Ineligibility for Substantial Assistance, thus reducing the period of Ineligibility imposed to two years.)
4. Since the Adverse Analytical Finding was committed in a Competition, the panel would automatically Disqualify the result obtained in the Competition.
5. According to DC 10.8, all results obtained by the Athlete subsequent to the date of Sample collection until the start of the period of Ineligibility would also be Disqualified unless fairness requires otherwise.
6. The information referred to in DC 14.3.2 must be Publicly Disclosed, unless the Athlete is a Minor, since this is a mandatory part of each sanction (DC 10.13).
7. The Athlete is not allowed to participate in any capacity in a Competition or other sport-related activity under the authority of any Signatory or its affiliates during the Athlete’s period of Ineligibility (DC 10.12.1). However, the Athlete may return to train with a Team or to use the facilities of a club or other member organization of a Signatory or its affiliates during the shorter of: (a) the last two months of the Athlete’s period of Ineligibility, or (b) the last one-quarter of the period of Ineligibility imposed (DC 10.12.2). Thus, the Athlete would be allowed to return to training two months before the end of the period of Ineligibility