Facts
The Spanish Agency for the Protection of Health in Sport (Agencia Española de Protección de la Salud en el Deporte, AEPSAD) charges respondent E08 for a violation of the Anti-Doping rules. The respondent did not deliver the whereabouts information.

History
The respondent failed three times to to provide her location for doping controls: March 20, 2014, belonging to the first quarter; On July 25, 2014, the second failure belonging to the second quarter and November 11, 2014, belonging to third trimester. The respondent confirmed the charges by e-mail. The respondent has no sport license in this season, but during the controls he had a license.

Decision
- The sanction is a period of ineligibility of one year.
- The sanction starts on the date of the notification.

Facts
The Spanish Agency for the Protection of Health in Sport (Agencia Española de Protección de la Salud en el Deporte, AEPSAD) charges respondent E07 for a violation of the Anti-Doping rules. The respondent did not deliver the whereabouts information.

History
The respondent failed three times to provide her location for doping controls. The respondent did not provide any reason for not delivering the required information.

Decision
- The sanction is a period of ineligibility of one year.
- The sanction start on the date of the notification.

Related cases:

• AEPSAD 2015 AEPSAD vs respondent E02
  April 10, 2015
• AEPSAD 2015 AEPSAD vs respondent E03
  March 30, 2015
• AEPSAD 2015 AEPSAD vs respondent E04
  March 30,
• AEPSAD 2015 AEPSAD vs respondent E05
  March 30, 2015
• TAD 2014_063 Respondent E08 vs AEPSAD
  June 6, 2014
• TAD 2014_074 Respondent E11 vs AEPSAD
  June 6, 2015
• TAD 2015_077 Respondent E02 vs AEPSAD
  June 26, 2015
• TAD 2015_083 Respondent E03 vs AEPSAD
  July 13, 2015
• TAD 2015_086 Respondent E06 vs AEPSAD
  July 30, 2015
• AEPSAD 2015 AEPSAD vs respondent E41
  January 21, 2016

In March 2014 the Spanish police arrested 13 people in the police action operation Jimbo. Several Athletes were arrested whom operated in Lucena, Cantabria, Silla (Valencia), Marbella (Malaga), Almonte (Huelva) and Sevilla. After house searches the police confiscated blood bags, syringes, growth hormone, EPO and other doping substances.

The Spanish Agency for the Protection of Health in Sport (Agencia Española de Protección de la Salud en el Deporte, AEPSAD) charges respondent E06 for a violation of the Anti-Doping rules. The charges where based on the possession of prohibited substances metandienone, oxandrolone, testosterone erythropoietin (EPO), Growth hormone (GH) and insulin. All these substances are prohibited according the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) 2014 prohibited list, they are regarded as non-specified substances.

History
The prohibited substances where found during a house search of the police in 2014. Also unused syringes where found.
The panel considers in this case aggravating circumstances.

Decision
- The sanction is a period of ineligibility of four years.
- The period of ineligibility will be reduced with the period already spent in voluntary suspension.
- The decision will be published on the website of of the AEPSAD.

Related cases:

• AEPSAD 2015 AEPSAD vs respondent E02
  April 10, 2015
• AEPSAD 2015 AEPSAD vs respondent E03
  March 30, 2015
• AEPSAD 2015 AEPSAD vs respondent E04
  March 30,
• AEPSAD 2015 AEPSAD vs respondent E06
  May 20, 2015
• TAD 2014_063 Respondent E08 vs AEPSAD
  June 6, 2014
• TAD 2014_074 Respondent E11 vs AEPSAD
  June 6, 2015
• TAD 2015_077 Respondent E02 vs AEPSAD
  June 26, 2015
• TAD 2015_083 Respondent E03 vs AEPSAD
  July 13, 2015
• TAD 2015_086 Respondent E06 vs AEPSAD
  July 30, 2015
• AEPSAD 2015 AEPSAD vs respondent E41
  January 21, 2016

In March 2014 the Spanish police arrested 13 people in the police action operation Jimbo. Several Athletes were arrested whom operated in Lucena, Cantabria, Silla (Valencia), Marbella (Malaga), Almonte (Huelva) and Sevilla. After house searches the police confiscated blood bags, syringes, growth hormone, EPO and other doping substances.

The Spanish Agency for the Protection of Health in Sport (Agencia Española de Protección de la Salud en el Deporte, AEPSAD) charges respondent E05 for a violation of the Anti-Doping rules. The respondent was charged for the possession of the prohibited substances nandrolon and testosterone and for the use of forbidden methods with aggravating circumstances.

Decision
- The sanction is a period of ineligibility of four years.
- The period of ineligibility will be reduced by the period already fulfilled in voluntary suspension.
- The sanction will be published on the website of AEPSAD.

Related cases:

• AEPSAD 2015 AEPSAD vs respondent E02
  April 10, 2015
• AEPSAD 2015 AEPSAD vs respondent E03
  March 30, 2015
• AEPSAD 2015 AEPSAD vs respondent E05
  March 30, 2015
• AEPSAD 2015 AEPSAD vs respondent E06
  May 20, 2015
• TAD 2014_063 Respondent E08 vs AEPSAD
  June 6, 2014
• TAD 2014_074 Respondent E11 vs AEPSAD
  June 6, 2015
• TAD 2015_077 Respondent E02 vs AEPSAD
  June 26, 2015
• TAD 2015_083 Respondent E03 vs AEPSAD
  July 13, 2015
• TAD 2015_086 Respondent E06 vs AEPSAD
  July 30, 2015
• AEPSAD 2015 AEPSAD vs respondent E41
  January 21, 2016

In March 2014 the Spanish police arrested 13 people in the police action operation Jimbo. Several Athletes were arrested whom operated in Lucena, Cantabria, Silla (Valencia), Marbella (Malaga), Almonte (Huelva) and Sevilla. After house searches the police confiscated blood bags, syringes, growth hormone, EPO and other doping substances.

The Spanish Agency for the Protection of Health in Sport (Agencia Española de Protección de la Salud en el Deporte, AEPSAD) has reported anti-doping rule violations against the respondent E04 for the possession, probably use, trafficking of epoetin Beta and recombinant Erythropoietin (rEPO) and use of forbidden methods.

In his defence the respondent argued that the substances where for his wife who suffered from anemia. But the police had evidence that packages where sent to other athletes.
The panel considers aggravating circumstances in this case.

Decision
- The sanction is a period of ineligibility of two years.

Facts
The United Kingdom Anti-Doping (UKAD) had charged Andrew Hastings, the athlete, for a violation of the Anti-Doping Rules. On May 30, 2015, the athlete provided an in-competition sample for doping test purposes, during a cycling event in Belgium. The sample of the athlete showed the presence of metenolone, a metabolite of metenolone and a metabolite of stanozolol. Metenolone and stanozolol are prohibited substances according the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) 2015 prohibited list. They are regarded as a non-specified substances.

History
The athlete accepted the charge and did not want to have a hearing and handle it by written representation. It is regarded as a prompt admission, in terms of time and context.
In his written statement the athlete claims that there had been a contamination with a syringe he used to administer vitamine B12. He had taken a used syringe from a person he did not know because he did not have one at the training camp he attended.
One expert states that metenolone and stanozolol are derivatives of a naturally occurring hormones. Stanazolol is likely to be modified in order to amplify its anabolic effects. Stanozolol is not currently licensed as a medicine.
Another expert concludes that residues in a syringe does not adequately account for the presence of metenolone, its metabolite or a metabolite of stanozolol.
The athlete holds on to his statement that he had used a contaminated syringe although there is no proof of that fact.
The athlete failed to establish how the prohibited substances had entered his body, meaning a reduction of the standard sanction is not possible.

Decision
- The sanction is a period of ineligibility of four years, commencing from May 30, 2015, till May 29, 2019.

Related cases:

• AEPSAD 2015 AEPSAD vs respondent E02
  April 10, 2015
• AEPSAD 2015 AEPSAD vs respondent E04
  March 30,
• AEPSAD 2015 AEPSAD vs respondent E05
  March 30, 2015
• AEPSAD 2015 AEPSAD vs respondent E06
  May 20, 2015
• TAD 2014_063 Respondent E08 vs AEPSAD
  June 6, 2014
• TAD 2014_074 Respondent E11 vs AEPSAD
  June 6, 2015
• TAD 2015_077 Respondent E02 vs AEPSAD
  June 26, 2015
• TAD 2015_083 Respondent E03 vs AEPSAD
  July 13, 2015
• TAD 2015_086 Respondent E06 vs AEPSAD
  July 30, 2015
• AEPSAD 2015 AEPSAD vs respondent E41
  January 21, 2016

In March 2014 the Spanish police arrested 13 people in the police action operation Jimbo. Several Athletes were arrested whom operated in Lucena, Cantabria, Silla (Valencia), Marbella (Malaga), Almonte (Huelva) and Sevilla. After house searches the police confiscated blood bags, syringes, growth hormone, EPO and other doping substances.

Hereafter the Spanish Agency for the Protection of Health in Sport (Agencia Española de Protección de la Salud en el Deporte, AEPSAD) had reported a anti-doping rule violation against respondent E03 for possession and methods with aggravating circumstances:
- Anabolic agents;
- Peptide hormones, growth factors and related substances;
- Manipulation Of Blood And Blood Components.

Decision
- The sanction is a period of ineligibility of four years.
- A fine of 3.001,-. euro is imposed.
- The period of ineligibility start from the date of notification but will be reduced with the period already spent in voluntary suspension.

Related cases:

• AEPSAD 2015 AEPSAD vs respondent E03
  March 30, 2015
• AEPSAD 2015 AEPSAD vs respondent E04
  March 30,
• AEPSAD 2015 AEPSAD vs respondent E05
  March 30, 2015
• AEPSAD 2015 AEPSAD vs respondent E06
  May 20, 2015
• TAD 2014_063 Respondent E08 vs AEPSAD
  June 6, 2014
• TAD 2014_074 Respondent E11 vs AEPSAD
  June 6, 2015
• TAD 2015_077 Respondent E02 vs AEPSAD
  June 26, 2015
• TAD 2015_083 Respondent E03 vs AEPSAD
  July 13, 2015
• TAD 2015_086 Respondent E06 vs AEPSAD
  July 30, 2015
• AEPSAD 2015 AEPSAD vs respondent E41
  January 21, 2016

In March 2014 the Spanish police arrested 13 people in the police action operation Jimbo. Several Athletes were arrested whom operated in Lucena, Cantabria, Silla (Valencia), Marbella (Malaga), Almonte (Huelva) and Sevilla. After house searches the police confiscated blood bags, syringes, growth hormone, EPO and other doping substances.

Hereafter the Spanish Agency for the Protection of Health in Sport (Agencia Española de Protección de la Salud en el Deporte, AEPSAD) charges respondent E02 for a violation of the Anti-Doping rules. The charges are based on the police investigation, operation Jimbo, for the possession and trafficking with aggravating circumstances for:
- Anabolic agents;
- Peptide hormones, growth factors and related substances;
- glucocorticosteroids.

Decision
- The sanction is a period of ineligibility of four years.
- The period of ineligibility will be reduced by the time already spent in voluntary suspension.

Facts
The Spanish Agency for the Protection of Health in Sport (Agencia Española de Protección de la Salud en el Deporte, AEPSAD) charges respondent E01 for a violation of the Anti-Doping rules. During an in-competition doping control on November 30, 2014, a sample was taken for doping test purposes. Analysis of the sample showed the presence of 19-norandrosterone, 19-noretiocholanolone and metenolone. These substances are prohibited according the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) 2014 prohibited list and are regarded as non-specified substances.

History
The panel considers the adverse analytical finding of several non-specified prohibited substances as aggravating circumstances.

Decision
- The sanction is a period of ineligibility of three years.
- The period of ineligibility will be reduced with the period already spent in voluntary suspension.

Facts
The Anti-doping Authority Netherlands (Dopingautoriteit, DA) had reported an anti doping rule violation against the athlete, respondent 2014109. During a boxing event the athlete was selected to provide a sample for drug testing.

History
After her match the respondent could not produce enough urine for a valid sample, after 1,5 hour her trainer told her to go home. She had urgent family matters and her child was waiting for her. They were informed about the consequences by the Doping Control Officer (DCO) and did not sign the doping control form.

Afterwards the Royal Dutch Boxing Federation (Nederlandse Boksbond, NBB) failed to open proceedings, for which reason the DA felt obligated to report this case.
In case of potential anti-doping violation, the DA had to send promptly a notication to the athlete that further investigation will follow. However the DA failed to send this notification.
Despite the sample was not valid, it was analysed anyway and turned out to be negative.
The ISR Disciplinary Committee declares this case as inadmissible.

Decision
- This case is dismissed.
- The DA has to bear the administrative costs for the procedure.