At the October, 2003, UCI World Championship held in Canada, Respondent provided a blood sample, it showed a hematorcrit level above the 47% UCI safety threshold for female riders, she was not permitted to participate in the race. Early on the morning of April 21,2004, prior to the start of the "La Flèche Wallonne" race in Belgium, Respondent provided a blood sample. She was shortly thereafter informed that her hematocrit level was 49.5, in excess of the safety threshold Thereupon she was requested for a urine sample, which she did. Respondent elected to have a "B" sample of her blood analyzed. Unlike the "A" sample, the "B" blood sample did not result in an elevated hematocrit level. The urine sample tested negative for all prohibited substances. Respondent proceeded with the race afterwards she failed to appear for the post-race drug testing.
Final Conclusion:
We conclude that Respondent
(a) has committed a doping offence, her first offence, for failure to appear for the post-competition drug testing,
(b) that the stipulated manner of notification by the UCI of Respondent's selection for drug testing was incompliance with applicable UCI Regulations,
(c) that Respondent was able through testimony and other evidence provided to the panel at the June 11 2004 evidentiary hearing, to disprove the presumption of refusal to take the test, (d) that the rather unique circumstances of Respondent's case, as described. do not justify a suspension but, rather, a warning, as authorized by UCI Regulations, Article 132.
A fine is settled.
The administrative fees and expenses of the American Arbitration Association and the compensation and expenses of the arbitrators shall by borne entirely by USADA.
