USADA Case against Lance Armstrong | USADA Adjudication Process Part II | The Review Board Track

by Renée Kolar

After receipt of a B Sample report confirming an Adverse Analytical Finding (or upon the waiver of analysis of the B Sample), or when USADA determines that a potential violation of other applicable anti-doping rules has occurred, the adjudication or “results management” process is triggered. United States Anti-Doping Agency, Protocol for Olympic and Paralympic Movement Testing § 11 (2009) [hereinafter USADA Protocol]. USADA has implemented a two step process of review by which the Review Board first determines whether or not there is sufficient evidence of doping to proceed with the adjudication process before moving on to the arbitration hearing. Id.

The Review Board is made up of experts independent of USADA with medical, technical and legal knowledge of anti-doping matters who are appointed for two-year terms by the USADA Board of Directors. USADA Protocol at § 11. The CEO of USADA appoints the Review Board Members to sit on the panel in any given case. Id. at § 11(a)-(b).

The Review Board is provided with the laboratory documentation and any additional information that USADA deems appropriate, with the Athlete’s or other Person’s name redacted out of the documents. Id. at § 11(c)(ii). Copies of this information will be sent to the Athlete or other Person, upon which the he or she may file a response with the Board. Id. at § 11(c)(ii). The Athlete or other Person may submit to the Review Board, any written materials for the Review Board’s consideration and will be given the name, telephone number, email address and website URL of the USOC Athlete Ombudsman. Id. at § 11(c)(iii)-(iv). The Review Board can ask for any additional information from either party. Id. at § 11(c)(v).

The Review Board will only consider written submittals in making their recommendation. Id. at § 11(c)(vi). No evidence concerning the proceeding before the Review Board, including but not limited to the composition of the Review Board, what evidence may or may have not been considered by it, its deliberative process or its recommendations shall be admissible in any further hearing or proceeding. USADA Protocol at § 11(c)(vi).

The Board decides by majority vote whether there is sufficient evidence of doping to proceed with the adjudication process and makes a signed, written recommendation to USADA with a copy to the Athlete or other Person, United States Olympic Committee (USOC), the applicable National Governing Body (NGB), International Federation (IF) and World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA). Id. at § 11(c)(vii)-(viii). Upon receipt of this recommendation, the USADA decides whether or not to adjudicate the alleged violations and sends notice to the Athlete or other Person of its decision. Id. at § 11(d).

The Athlete or other Person may waive the Review Board process at any time and if USADA concurs in the waiver, USADA shall notify the USOC, the relevant NGB, IF, and WADA within ten working days of whether USADA has decided to charge the Athlete or other Person with an anti-doping rule violation or not. Id. at § 11(c)(ix).

Within ten days of receipt of notice of USADA’s decision to adjudicate the alleged violations, the Athlete or other Person must notify USADA of whether he or she will accept or contest the proposed sanctions. Id. at § 11(e). The Athlete or other Person is entitled to a five day extension if requested within the ten day period. USADA Protocol at §11(e). If the sanction is not contested in writing by the deadline, then the sanction is communicated by USADA to the Athlete or other Person, USOC, the applicable NGB, IF and WADA and thereafter imposed by the NGB. Id. Such sanction cannot be reopened or be subject to appeal unless the Athlete can demonstrate by a preponderance of the evidence in a subsequent appeal to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) that he or she did not receive either actual or constructive notice of the opportunity to contest the sanction. Id.

The Athlete or other Person may chose to accept the sanction, thereby avoiding the hearing or, he or she may contest the sanction and proceed on to the arbitration hearing. Id.

Related Posts:

• Armstrong v. Tygart | USADA Files Motion to Dismiss Lance Armstrong’s Suit , Disputing, July 21, 2012
• USADA Case against Lance Armstrong | USADA Adjudication Process Part I | USADA ‘Results Management,’ Disputing, July 19, 2012
• Armstrong v. Tygart | Texas Federal Court Will Hear Lance Armstrong Case on August 10, Disputing, July 18, 2012
• Armstrong v. Tygart | Lance Armstrong’s Suit and Restraining Order against USADA, Disputing, July 17, 2012
• USADA Case against Lance Armstrong | What is the USADA? Disputing, July 16, 2012
• USADA Case against Lance Armstrong | USADA Allegations, Disputing, July 13, 2012
• Lance Armstrong | The Doping Controversy Continues, Disputing, July 12, 2012

Renée Kolar is a summer intern at Karl Bayer, Dispute Resolution Expert . Renée is a J.D. candidate at The University of Texas School of Law and holds an undergraduate degree in Applied Foreign Languages from l’Université Stendhal in Grenoble, France.