1. Presence of a prohibited substance or its metabolites or markers in an athlete’s sample |
It is each athlete’s personal duty to ensure that no prohibited substance enters his or her body and that no prohibited method is used. Accordingly, it is not necessary that intent, fault, negligence or knowing use on the athlete’s part be demonstrated in order to establish an anti-doping rule violation for use of a prohibited substance or a prohibited method.
Sufficient proof of an anti-doping rule violation is established by any of the following:
presence of a prohibited substance or its metabolites or markers in the athlete’s A sample if the athlete waives analysis of the B sample;
if the sthlete’s B sample is analyzed and the analysis of the athlete’s B sample confirms the presence of the prohibited substance or its metabolites or markers found in the athlete’s A sample;
if the athlete’s B sample is split into two bottles and the analysis of the second bottle confirms the presence of the prohibited substance or its metabolites or markers found in the first bottle.
Excepting those substances for which a quantitative threshold is specifically identified in the Prohibited List, the presence of any quantity of a prohibited substance or its metabolites or markers in an athlete’s sample shall constitute an anti-doping rule violation.
2. Use or Attempted Use by an Athlete of a Prohibited Substance or a Prohibited Method |
3. Evading, Refusing or Failing to Submit to Sample Collection |
4.Whereabouts Failures |
5. Tampering or Attempted Tampering with any part of Doping Control |
6. Possession of a Prohibited Substance or a Prohibited Method |
8. Administration or Attempted Administration to any Athlete In-Competition or Out-of-Competition of any Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method. |
9. Complicity |
10. Prohibited Association |