CAS 2010/A/2041 Yuliya Chepalova v. Fédération Internationale de Ski (FIS)
CAS 2010/A/2041 Y. v. Fédération Internationale de Ski (FIS)
- Cross country skiing
- Doping (rEPO)
- Validity of the method to find the presence of rEPO in a urine sample
- Validity of the adverse analytical finding
- Extent of the right to attend the B sample “opening and analysis”
- Sanction
1. Considering that the IEF-DB Method which is a “direct detection method” codified by TD2007EPO and TD2009EPO (Technical Document issued by WADA) has been applied for years to detect the presence of rEPO in the sample provided by the athlete and has also been repeatedly validated by the CAS jurisprudence, the application of the new identification criteria under TD2009EPO to address, as “Other Epoetins”, the new types of EPOs does not require a new validation. The application of the SDS-PAGE Method cannot be considered to be a mandatory supplement to the IEF-DB Method under TD2009EPO in every case. If a doubt exists as to the origin of the EPO found in a sample not showing a typical endogenous profile, the SDS-PAGE Method can be applied (as additional evidence) to discriminate between forms of EPO on the basis of a different, compared to the IEF-DB Method, principle: not the acidity of the molecules, but their mass.
2. As long as (i) the results shown by the IEF-DB Method, indicating that the identification criteria for “Other Epoetins” are clearly met, are reliable and are sufficient to support the Adverse Analytical Finding, (ii) the results of the SDS-PAGE Method cannot be deemed to exclude the positive finding based on the IEF-DB Method and (iii) there is no evidence invalidating the Adverse Analytical Finding for any procedural reasons, then the detection of rEPO in the athlete's urine is established and the athlete is to be found in violation of the anti-doping rule constituted by Article 2.1 of the FIS ADR.
3. The opportunity for the athlete and/or his/her representative to attend the B sample “opening and analysis” is indeed a basic right in doping-control proceedings, since it reflects the need that an athlete is heard before an adverse analytical finding is finally reported and provides the possibility for the athlete to verify that the procedures intended to confirm the initial adverse analytical finding are properly conducted. However this right does not necessarily extend to the right to attend the performance of those analyses which are not required to confirm the initial adverse analytical finding like the attendance of the performance of the analysis performed on the “extended gel”.
4. An athlete who has violated an anti-doping rule (presence of a prohibited substance in his/her urine sample – Article 2.1 of the FIS ADR) is to be sanctioned with two years’ ineligibility pursuant to Article 10.2 of the FIS ADR.
In August 2009 the International Ski Federation (FIS) reported an anti-doping rule violation against the Russian skier Yuliya Chepalova after her A and B samples tested positive for the prohibited substance Recombinan Erythropoietin (RhEPO).
Consequently the FIS Doping Panel decided on 22 December 2009 to impose a 2 year period of ineligibility on the Athlete. Hereafter in January 2010 the Athlete appealed the FIS Decision with the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS).
The Panel assessed and addressed the evidence and the many issues raised by the Athlete and determines that:
- The results shown by the IEF-DB Method, indicating that the identification criteria for “Other Epoetins” are clearly met, are reliable and are sufficient to support the Adverse Analytical Finding.
- The results of the SDS-PAGE Method cannot be deemed to exclude the positive finding based on the IEF-DB Method.
- The Adverse Analytical Finding is not invalid for any procedural reasons.
- Given the detection of RhEPO in her urine, the Athlete. is to be found in violation of the anti-doping rule constituted by Article 2.1 of the FIS ADR.
Therefore the Court of Arbitration for Sport decides on 1 October 2010 that:
1.) The appeal filed by the Athlete against the decision issued on 22 December 2009 by the Doping Panel of the Fédération Internationale de Ski is dismissed.
(…)
4.) All other prayers for relief are dismissed.
