Facts
The French Federation of Ice Sports (Fédération Française des Sports de Glace, FFSG) charges respondent M61 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a match on October 29, 2005, a sample was taken for doping test purposes. The analysis of the sample showed the presence of ephedrine. Ephedrine is a prohibited substance according the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list.

History
The disciplinary committee had sanctioned the respondent with a period of ineligibility of six months from which four months conditionally.
Respondent had used medication without mentioning it on the doping control form. Also he didn't explain the reason for his positive test. Because of the fact that the appeal of the respondent wasn't handled within the time limit the sanctions are restricted only to the French federation of ice hockey.

Decision
1. The sanction is a period of ineligibility of six months, from which three months conditionally, in which respondent can't take part in competition or manifestations organized or authorized by the French Ice Hockey Federation (FFHG).
2. The decision will start on the date of notification.
3. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.

Facts
The French Federation for Judo, Jujitsu, Kendo and Associated Disciplines (Fédération Française de Judo, Jujitsu, Kendo et Disciplines Associées FFJDA) charges respondent M60 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a judo tournament on May 14, 2005, a sample was taken for doping test purposes. Analysis of the sample showed the presence of furosemide, 19-norandrosterone, 19-noretiocholanolone and testerone. These are prohibited substances according the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list.

History
The respondent didn't object against the findings. Also he didn't sent in written statements and didn't attend the hearing.

Decision
1. The sanction is a period of ineligibility of three years in which the respondent can't take part in competition or manifestations organized or authorized by the FFJDA.
2. The decision starts on the date of notification.
2. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.

Facts
The International Rugby Board (IRB) alleges Andrey Garbuzov and Yaroslav Rechnev (the players) for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. Urine samples provided in the course of a doping control test taken on the 18th of June 2006, during the IRB Nations Cup Tournament played at Lisbon, were found to have contained a prohibited substance namely 11-nor-delta 9-tetrahydrocannabinol-9-carboxylic acid (Cannabinoids) at concentrations of higher than 15 ng/ml.

History
Both players declare in writing that they were sitting in a bar when a cigarette with marijuana was offered. Both players confirmed by telephone that they did not wish to participate in the hearings. Both players used cannabis in a social setting and that there was no intention on their part to enhance sport performance.

Decision
Allowing for the mitigating factors that have been advanced on behalf of the players in each case the periods of ineligibility will be reduced to four months.

AUSTRALIAN SPORTS ANTI-DOPING AUTHORITY 2005-06 ANNUAL REPORT
© Commonwealth of Australia
ISSN 1833-8976

Table of Contents iv
Figures vi
Acronyms vii
About this report ix
Overview 1
Chair’s message 2
Organisational overview 4
ASDA Snapshot 2005–06 4
Outcome and output structure 5
ASADA Snapshot: 2005–06 6
2005–06 ASADA highlights 9
2006–07 ASADA outlook 9
ASDA’s Organisational Structure 10
ASADA’s Organisational Structure 11
Australia’s Anti-Doping Framework 12
Performance review 13
Performance reports 14
Resources for Outcome 14
Outcome 1 14
Output 1.1 Drug testing program 15
Detection 15
Enforcement 22
Compliance 22
Deterrence 23
Key Projects 23
Output 1.2 Education, communication and advocacy services 26
Education and communication 27
Advocacy 33
Management Accountability 41
Corporate Governance 42
Senior management committees 43
Risk management 46
External scrutiny 49
Management of Human Resources 51
Financials 57
Discretionary grants 58
Asset management 58
Purchasing 59
Consultants 59
Competitive tendering and contracting 60
Compliance requirements 61
Australian Sports Drug Agency 63
Corporate Governance 64
Financial management 66
Contracting and purchasing 67
People 68
Australian Sports Drug Medical Advisory Committee 73
Financial Statements 77
Appendices 157
Appendix A: Doping Control statistics 1989 to 30 June 2006 158
Appendix B: Register of Notifiable Events (RNE) 2005–06 159
Appendix C: List of International Incidences (LII) 2005–06 162
Appendix D: Register of Findings (RoF) 2005–06 163
Appendix E: International anti-doping arrangements and Doping Control agreements 164
Appendix F: The functions, powers and delegations of ASADA in accordance with
the ASADA Act 2006 166
Appendix G: Powers of the Minister under the ASADA Act 168
Appendix H: The objects, functions and powers of ASDA as specified in the ASDA Act 169
Appendix I: Powers of the Minister under the ASDA Act 171
Appendix J: ASADA Staffing Statistics as at 30 June 2006 172
Appendix K: ASDA Staffing Statistics as at 13 March 2006 174
Appendix L: Freedom of Information 176
Appendix M: 2001-05 ASDA Strategy Plan 177
Appendix N: ASDMAC Functions (excerpt from ASADA Regulations) 178
Appendix O: ASDMAC Approvals by Sport July 1 2005 to 30 June 2006 179
Glossary 183
Compliance Index 185
Index 188
Figures
Figure 1: ASDA’s outcome and output structure 5
Figure 2: Changes to the outcome and output structure 2006–07 8
Figure 3: ASADA’s outcome and output structure 2006–07 8
Figure 4: ASDA’S organisational structure 10
Figure 5: ASADA’S organisational structure 11
Figure 6: Australia’s anti-doping framework 12
Figure 7: Resources for outcome 14
Figure 8: Output 1.1 performance measures 15
Figure 9: ASADA’s Doping Control statistics for 2005–06 17
Figure 10: Register of Notifiable Events and Register of Findings trends 1998 to 2006 21
Figure 11: Output 1.2 performance measures 26
Figure 12: Distribution of education and communication products and services 30
Figure 13: ASADA Member details as at 30 June 2006 44
Figure 14: Expenditure on new and existing contracts 60
Figure 15: Service provider contracts over $100,000 60
Figure 16: Media advertising agencies 61
Figure 17: ASDA Board details as at 13 March 2006 64
Figure 18: ASDA Audit Commitee details as at 13 March 2006 66
Figure 19: ASDMAC budget 2005–06 76

Respondent subject to out-of-competition ("OOC") testing in 2004. As a result of several events, a Missed Test-Unavailable was declared. Because of a missed test in an eighteen month period Claimant charges Respondent with an anti-doping rule violation. Respondent failed his tests because had largely given up trying to race competitively.

Discussion and findings: Therefore, this panel imposes a two-year period of ineligibility commencing on the day of the hearing, August 22, 2006. WADA Code, Art. 10.8. This panel also disqualifies any and all of Mr. Mortenson's competitive results achieved on and subsequent to October 22, 2005, the day of his last violation. WADA Code, Art. 10.7.

The administrative fees and expenses of the American Arbitration Association and the compensation and expenses of the arbitrators shall by borne entirely by USOC.

The 2007 Prohibited List International Standard : The World Anti-Doping Code / World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA). - Montreal : WADA, 2006.

- The official text of the Prohibited List shall be maintained by WADA and shall be published in English and French. In the event of any conflict between the English and French versions, the English version shall prevail.
- This List shall come into effect on 1 January 2007

Facts
The French Federation of Volley-ball (Fédération Française de Volley-ball, FFVB) charges respondent M57 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a Volleyball match on December 10, 2005, a sample was taken for doping test purposes. The sample showed the presence of a metabolite of cannabis. Cannabis is a prohibited substance according the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list.

History
The respondent had received a warning by the disciplinary committee of the FFVB. Considering that respondent does not dispute the results of the analyses he appeared before the disciplinary body federal, he was surprised by the results of the analyses, claiming never to have smoked cannabis; he explains the presence of this substance in urine from passive smoking during a party at the eve before the doping control.

Decision
1. The sanction is a period of ineligibility of three months, from which two conditionally, in which the respondent can't take part in competition or manifestations organized or authorized by the FFVB.
2. The decision starts on the date of the notification.
3. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.

Facts
The French Roller Skating Federation (Fédération Française de Roller Skating, FFRS) charges respondent M59 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a contest on January 7, 2006, a sample was taken for doping test purposes. The analysis of the sample showed the presence of a metabolite of cannabis. Cannabis is a prohibited substance according the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list.

History
The respondent didn't object against the findings, also he didn't sent written statements and didn't attend the hearing.

Decision
1. The sanction is a period of ineligibility of three months, from which one month conditionally, in which respondent can't take part in competition or manifestations organized by the FFRS.
2. The present decision will start on the day of notification.
3. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.

Facts
The French Wrestling Federation (Fédération Française de Lutte, FFL) charges respondent M58 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. After a match on November 19, 2005, respondent failed to attend the requested doping control.

History
Respondent had a knee injury during the match and went to the hospital without attending the doping control. At the hearing he explained that he was not able to master his deception after his injury, for which he couldn't combat for several weeks.

Decision
1. The sanction is a period of ineligibility lasting eighteen months, with nine months conditionally, in which respondent can't take part in competition or manifestations organized or authorize by the FFL.
2. The decision starts on the date of notification.
3. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.

Facts
The French Federation of Volley-ball (Fédération Française de Volley-ball, FFVB) charges respondent M57 for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. During a Volleyball match on December 10, 2005, a sample was taken for doping test purposes. The sample showed the presence of a metabolite of cannabis. Cannabis is a prohibited substance according the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) prohibited list.

History
The respondent had received a warning by the disciplinary committee of the FFVB. Considering that respondent does not dispute the results of the analyses he appeared before the disciplinary body federal, he was surprised by the results of the analyses, claiming never to have smoked cannabis; he explains the presence of this substance in urine from passive smoking during a party at the eve before the doping control.

Decision
1. The sanction is a period of ineligibility of three months, from which two conditionally, in which the respondent can't take part in competition or manifestations organized or authorized by the FFVB.
2. The decision starts on the date of the notification.
3. The decision will be published and sent to the parties involved.