UEFA Anti-Doping Regulations

2.1Presence of a Prohibited Substance or its Metabolites or Markers in a Player’s Sample

2.1.1It is the Players’ personal duty to ensure that no Prohibited Substance enters their bodies. Players are responsible for any Prohibited Substance or its Metabolites or Markers found to be present in their

2.1.2Sufficient proof of an anti-doping rule violation under Article 2.1 is established by any of the following: presence of a Prohibited Substance or its Metabolites or Markers in the Player’s A Sample where the Player waives analysis of the B Sample and the B Sample is not analysed; or, where the Player’s B Sample is analysed and the analysis of the Player’s B Sample confirms the presence of the Prohibited Substance or its Metabolites or Markers found in the Player’s A Sample; or where the Player’s A or B Sample is split into two (2) parts and the analysis of the confirmation part of the split Sample confirms the presence of the Prohibited Substance or its Metabolites or Markers found in the first part of the split Sample or the Player waives analysis of the confirmation part of the split Sample.

2.1.3Excepting those substances for which a Decision Limit is specifically identified in the Prohibited List or a Technical Document, the presence of any reported quantity of a Prohibited Substance or its Metabolites or Markers in a Player’s Sample shall constitute an anti-doping rule violation.

2.1.4As an exception to the general rule of Article 2.1, the Prohibited List, International Standards or Technical Documents may establish special criteria for reporting or the evaluation of certain Prohibited Substances.

2.2Use or Attempted Use by a Player of a Prohibited Substance or a Prohibited Method

2.2.1It is the Players’ personal duty to ensure that no Prohibited Substance enters their bodies and that no Prohibited Method is Used. Accordingly, it is not necessary that intent, Fault, Negligence or knowing Use on the Player’s part be demonstrated in order to establish an anti-doping rule violation for Use of a Prohibited Substance or a Prohibited Method.

2.2.2The success or failure of the Use or Attempted Use of a Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method is not material. It is sufficient that the Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method was Used or Attempted to be Used for an anti-doping rule violation to be committed.

2.3Evading, refusing or failing to submit to Sample collection by a Player Evading Sample collection; or refusing or failing to submit to Sample collection without compelling justification after notification by a duly authorised Person.

2.4[Intentionally omitted]

2.5Tampering or Attempted Tampering with any part of Doping Control by a Player or other Person.

2.6Possession of a Prohibited Substance or a Prohibited Method by a Player or Player Support Personnel

2.6.1Possession by a Player In-Competition of any Prohibited Substance or any Prohibited Method, or Possession by an Player Out-of- Competition of any Prohibited Substance or any Prohibited Method which is prohibited Out-of-Competition unless the Player establishes that the Possession is consistent with a Therapeutic Use Exemption (“TUE”) granted in accordance with Article 4.4 or other acceptable justification.

2.6.2Possession by a Player Support Personnel, In-Competition of any Prohibited Substance or any Prohibited Method, or Possession by a Player Support Personnel Out-of-Competition of any Prohibited Substance or any Prohibited Method which is prohibited Out-of- Competition in connection with a Player, Match or training, unless the Player Support Personnel establishes that the Possession is consistent with a TUE granted to a Player in accordance with Article 4.4 or other acceptable justification.

2.7Trafficking or Attempted Trafficking in any Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method by a Player or other Person.

2.8Administration or Attempted Administration by a Player or other Person to any Player In-Competition of any Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method, or Administration or Attempted Administration to any Player Out-of-Competition of any Prohibited Substance or any Prohibited Method that is prohibited Outof-Competition.

2.9Complicity or Attempted complicity by a Player or other Person Assisting, encouraging, aiding, abetting, conspiring, covering up or any other type of intentional complicity or Attempted complicity involving an anti-doping rule violation, Attempted anti-doping rule violation or violation of Article 10.14.1 by another Person.

2.10Prohibited association by a Player or other Person

2.10.1Association by a Player or other Person subject to the authority of UEFA or an Anti-Doping Organisation in a professional or sportrelated capacity with any Player Support Personnel who:

2.10.1.1If subject to the authority of UEFA or an Anti-Doping Organisation, is serving a period of Ineligibility; or

2.10.1.2If not subject to the authority of UEFA or an Anti-Doping Organisation and where Ineligibility has not been addressed in a Results Management process pursuant to the Code, has been convicted or found in a criminal, disciplinary or professional proceeding to have engaged in conduct which would have constituted a violation of anti-doping rules if Code-compliant rules had been applicable to such Person. The disqualifying status of such Person shall be in force for the longer of six (6) years from the criminal, professional or disciplinary decision or the duration of the criminal, disciplinary or professional sanction imposed; or

2.10.1.3Is serving as a front or intermediary for an individual described in Article 2.10.1.1 or 2.10.1.2.

2.10.2To establish a violation of Article 2.10, UEFA must establish that the Player or other Person knew of the Player Support Personnel’s disqualifying status. The burden shall be on the Player or other Person to establish that any association with a Player Support Personnel described in Article 2.10.1.1 or 2.10.1.2 is not in a professional or sport-related capacity and/or that such association could not have been reasonably avoided.

2.11Acts by a Player or other Person to discourage or retaliate against reporting to authorities Where such conduct does not otherwise constitute a violation of Article 2.5:

2.11.1Any act which threatens or seeks to intimidate another Person with the intent of discouraging the Person from the good-faith reporting of information that relates to an alleged anti-doping rule violation or alleged non-compliance with the Code to WADA, an Anti-Doping Organisation, law enforcement, regulatory or professional disciplinary body, hearing body or Person conducting an investigation for WADA, UEFA or an Anti-Doping Organisation.

2.11.2Retaliation against a Person who, in good faith, has provided evidence or information that relates to an alleged anti-doping rule violation or alleged non-compliance with the Code to WADA, an Anti-Doping Organisation, law enforcement, regulatory or professional disciplinary body, hearing body or Person conducting an investigation for WADA or an Anti-Doping Organisation. For purposes of Article 2.11, retaliation, threatening and intimidation include an act taken against such Person either because the act lacks a good faith basis or is a disproportionate response.

3.1Burdens and standards of proof UEFA shall have the burden of establishing that an anti-doping rule violation has occurred. The standard of proof shall be whether UEFA has established an anti-doping rule violation to the comfortable satisfaction of the hearing panel bearing in mind the seriousness of the allegation which is made. This standard of proof in all cases is greater than a mere balance of probability but less than proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Where these regulations place the burden of proof upon the Player or other Person alleged to have committed an anti-doping rule violation to rebut a presumption or establish specified facts or circumstances, except as provided in Articles 3.2.2 and 3.2.3, the standard of proof shall be by a balance of probability.

3.2Methods of establishing facts and presumptions Facts related to anti-doping rule violations and other related violations may be established by any reliable means, including admissions. The following rules of proof shall be applicable in doping cases:

3.2.1Analytical methods or Decision Limits approved by WADA after consultation within the relevant scientific community or which have been the subject of peer review are presumed to be scientifically

3.2.2WADA-accredited laboratories, and other laboratories approved by WADA, are presumed to have conducted Sample analysis and custodial procedures in accordance with the International Standard for Laboratories. The Player or other Person may rebut this presumption by establishing that a departure from the International Standard for Laboratories occurred which could reasonably have caused the Adverse Analytical Finding.

3.2.3UEFA departures from any other International Standard or other anti-doping rule or policy set forth in the Code or these regulations shall not invalidate analytical results or other evidence of an anti-doping rule violation, and shall not constitute a defence to an anti-doping rule violation; provided, however, if the Player or other Person establishes that a departure from one of the specific International Standard provisions listed below could reasonably have caused an anti-doping rule violation based on an Adverse Analytical Finding or Whereabouts Failure, then UEFA shall have the burden to establish that such departure did not cause the Adverse Analytical Finding or the Whereabouts Failure:

3.2.4The facts established by a decision of a court or professional disciplinary tribunal of competent jurisdiction which is not the subject of a pending appeal shall be irrebuttable evidence against the Player or other Person to whom the decision pertained of those facts unless the Player or other Person establishes that the decision violated principles of natural justice.

3.2.5The hearing panel in a hearing on an anti-doping rule violation may draw an inference adverse to the Player or other Person who is asserted to have committed an anti-doping rule violation based on the Player’s or other Person’s refusal, after a request made in a reasonable time in advance of the hearing, to appear at the hearing (either in person or telephonically as directed by the hearing panel) and to answer questions from the hearing panel or UEFA.

4.1Prohibited List The Prohibited Substances and Prohibited Methods comprise everything on the Prohibited List published by WADA. Unless provided otherwise in the Prohibited List or a revision thereto, the Prohibited List and any revision thereto shall go into effect under these regulations three (3) months after publication by WADA, without requiring any further action being required by UEFA. All Players and other Persons shall be bound by the Prohibited List, and any revision thereto, from the date they go into effect without requiring any further action being required by UEFA. It is the responsibility of all Players and other Persons to familiarise themselves with the most up-to-date version of the Prohibited List and all revisions. The Prohibited List in force is available on WADA’s website at www.wada-ama.org.,

4.2Prohibited Substances and Prohibited Methods identified on the Prohibited List

4.2.1Prohibited Substances and Prohibited Methods The Prohibited List shall identify those Prohibited Substances and Prohibited Methods which are prohibited as doping at all times (both In-Competition and Out-of-Competition) because of their potential to enhance performance in future Matches or their masking potential, and those substances and methods which are prohibited In-Competition only. Prohibited Substances and Prohibited Methods may be included in the Prohibited List by general category (e.g. anabolic agents) or by specific reference to a particular substance or method.

4.2.2Specified Substances or Specified Methods For purposes of the application of Article 10, all Prohibited Substances shall be Specified Substances except as identified on the Prohibited

4.2.3Substances of Abuse For purposes of applying Article 10, Substances of Abuse shall include those Prohibited Substances which are specifically identified as Substances of Abuse on the Prohibited List because they are frequently abused in society outside of the context of sport.

4.3WADA’s determination of the Prohibited List WADA’s determination of the Prohibited Substances and Prohibited Methods that will be included on the Prohibited List, the classification of substances into categories on the Prohibited List, the classification of a substance as prohibited at all times or In-Competition only, the classification of a substance or method as a Specified Substance, Specified Method or Substance of Abuse is final and shall not be subject to any challenge by a Player or other Person including, but not limited to, any challenge based on an argument that the substance or method was not a masking agent or did not have the potential to enhance performance, represent a health risk or violate the spirit of sport.

4.4Therapeutic Use Exemptions (“TUEs”)

4.4.1The presence of a Prohibited Substance or its Metabolites or Markers, and/or the Use or Attempted Use, Possession or Administration or Attempted Administration of a Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method, shall not be considered an anti-doping rule violation if it is consistent with the provisions of a TUE granted in accordance with the International Standard for Therapeutic Use Exemptions.

4.4.2TUE Applications Players shall apply to UEFA for a TUE or TUE recognition in accordance with these regulations.

4.4.3TUE Recognition

4.4.3.1Where the Player already has a TUE granted by their National Anti-Doping Organisation pursuant to Article 4.4 of the Code for the Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method in question, and if that TUE meets the criteria set out in the International Standard for Therapeutic Use Exemptions, UEFA must recognise it for its Match. Should UEFA consider that a TUE granted by a Player’s National Anti-Doping Organisation does not fulfil the criteria set out in the International Standard for Therapeutic Use Exemptions and refuses to recognise it, UEFA promptly notifies the Player and his National Anti-doping Organisation accordingly with reasons. The Player and the National Anti-Doping Organisation shall have 21 days from such notification to refer the matter to WADA for review. If the matter is referred to WADA for review, the TUE granted by the National Anti-Doping Organisation is not valid for UEFA Match. If the matter is not referred to WADA for review within the twenty-one (21) day deadline, the Player’s National Anti- Doping Organisation must determine whether the original TUE granted by that National Anti-Doping Organisation should nevertheless remain valid for national-level Matches and Out-of-Competition Testing (provided that the Player does not participate in UEFA Matches). Pending the National Anti-Doping Organisation’s decision, the TUE remains valid for national-level Matches and Out-of- Competition Testing but is not valid for UEFA Matches and Out-of-Competition).

4.4.3.2UEFA may grant automatic recognition to the TUE granted by Anti-Doping Organisations.

4.4.4TUE application process and TUE Committee

4.4.4.1If the Player does not already have a TUE granted by their National Anti-Doping Organisation for the substance or method in question, the Player must apply directly to UEFA.

4.4.4.2An application to UEFA for grant or recognition of a TUE must be made as soon as possible, save where Articles 4.1 or 4.3 of the International Standard for Therapeutic Use Exemptions apply. The application shall be made in accordance with Article 6 of the International Standard for Therapeutic Use Exemptions as posted on wada-ama.org.

4.4.4.3The UEFA administration shall establish a UEFA TUE Committee to consider applications for the grant or recognition of TUEs in accordance with the International Standard for Therapeutic Use Exemption.

4.4.4.4The UEFA TUE Committee considers whether TUE applications for the grant or recognition meet the conditions set out in the International Standard for Therapeutic Use Exemptions. The TUE Committee shall promptly evaluate and decide upon the application in accordance with the relevant provisions of the International Standard for Therapeutic Use Exemptions and usually (i.e., unless exceptional circumstances apply) within no more than twenty-one (21) days of receipt of a complete

4.4.4.5The UEFA TUE Committee’s decision shall be the final decision of UEFA and may be appealed in accordance with Article 4.4.7. The UEFA TUE Committee’s decision shall be notified in writing to the Player., WADA, FIFA and the National Anti-Doping Organisation of the Player’s national association and/or club based on the territory of a UEFA member association. It shall also promptly be reported into ADAMS.

4.4.4.6If UEFA denies the Player’s application, it must notify the Player promptly, with reasons. If UEFA grants the Player’s application, it must notify not only the Player but also their National Anti-Doping Organisation and FIFA. If the National Anti-Doping Organisation considers that the TUE granted by UEFA does not meet the criteria set out in the International Standard for Therapeutic Use Exemptions, it has twenty-one (21) days from such notification to refer the matter to WADA for review in accordance with Article 4.4.7. If the National Anti-Doping Organisation refers the matter to WADA for review, the TUE granted by UEFA remains valid for UEFA Matches and Out-of-Competition Testing (but is not valid for national-level Matches) pending WADA’s decision. If the National Anti-Doping Organisation does not refer the matter to WADA for review, the TUE granted by UEFA becomes valid for national-level Matches as well when the twenty-one (21) day review deadline expires.

4.4.5[Intentionally omitted]

4.4.6Expiration, withdrawal or reversal of a TUE

4.4.6.1A TUE granted pursuant to these regulations: (a) shall expire automatically at the end of any term for which it was granted, without the need for any further notice or other formality; (b) will be withdrawn if the Player does not promptly comply with any requirements or conditions imposed by the UEFA TUE Committee upon grant of the TUE; (c) may be withdrawn by the UEFA TUE Committee if it is subsequently determined that the criteria for grant of a TUE are not in fact met; or (d) may be reversed on review by WADA or on appeal.

4.4.6.2In such event, the Player shall not be subject to any Consequences based on their Use or Possession or Administration of the Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method in question in accordance with the TUE prior to the effective date of expiry, withdrawal, or reversal of the TUE. The review pursuant to Article 5.1.1.1 of the International Standard for Results Management of an Adverse Analytical Finding, reported shortly after the TUE expiry, withdrawal or reversal, shall include consideration of whether such finding is consistent with Use of the Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method prior to that date, in which event no anti-doping rule violation shall be asserted.

4.4.7Reviews and appeals of TUE decisions

4.4.7.1WADA may review UEFA’s decision not to recognise a TUE granted by the National Anti-Doping Organisation that is referred to WADA by the Player or the Player’s National Anti-Doping Organisation. WADA may review any other TUE decisions at any time, whether upon request by those affected or on its own initiative. If the TUE decision being reviewed meets the criteria set out in the International Standard for Therapeutic Use Exemptions, WADA will not interfere with it. If the TUE decision does not meet those criteria, WADA will reverse it.

4.4.7.2Any TUE decision by UEFA that is not reviewed by WADA, or that is reviewed by WADA but is not reversed upon review, may be appealed by the Player and/or the Player’s National Anti-Doping Organisation, exclusively to CAS.

4.4.7.3A decision by WADA to reverse a TUE decision may be appealed by the Player, the National Anti-Doping Organisation and/or UEFA, exclusively to CAS. 4.4.7.4. A failure to render a decision within a reasonable time on a properly submitted application for grant/recognition of a TUE or for review of a TUE decision shall be considered a denial of the application thus triggering the applicable rights of review/appeal.

5.1Purpose of Testing and investigations

5.1.1Testing and investigations may be undertaken for any anti-doping purpose.

5.1.2Testing shall be undertaken to obtain analytical evidence as to whether the Player has violated Article 2.1 (Presence of a Prohibited Substance or its Metabolites or Markers in a Player’s Sample) or Article 2.2 (Use or Attempted Use by a Player of a Prohibited Substance or a Prohibited Method).

5.2Authority to Test

5.2.1Subject to the limitations for Competition Testing set out in Article 5.3, UEFA shall have In-Competition and Out-of-Competition Testing authority over all Players specified under paragraph D.2 of the Introduction of these regulations.

5.2.2UEFA may require any Player over whom it has Testing authority (including any Player serving a period of Ineligibility) to provide a Sample at any time and at any place.

5.2.3WADA shall have In-Competition and Out-of-Competition Testing authority as set out in these regulations.

5.2.4If UEFA delegates or contracts any part of Testing to a National Anti- Doping Organisation, that National Anti-Doping Organisation may collect additional Samples and direct the laboratory to perform additional types of analysis at the National Anti-Doping Organisation’s expense. If additional Samples are collected or additional types of analysis are conducted on the Samples that the National Anti-Doping Organisation collected for UEFA, the Results Management and hearing authority for such additional Samples or additional analyses remain with UEFA, unless agreed otherwise.

5.3Competition Testing

5.3.1Except as otherwise provided below, only UEFA shall have authority to conduct Testing at Competition Venues during a Competition

5.3.2If an Anti-Doping Organisation, which would otherwise have Testing authority but is not responsible for initiating and directing Testing at a Competition, desires to conduct Testing of Players at the Competition Venues during the Competition Period, the Anti-Doping Organisation shall first confer with UEFA to obtain permission to conduct and coordinate such Testing. If the Anti-Doping Organisation is not satisfied with the response from UEFA, the Anti- Doping Organisation may, in accordance with the procedures described in the International Standard for Testing and Investigations, ask WADA for permission to conduct Testing and to determine how to coordinate such Testing. WADA shall not grant approval for such Testing before consulting with and informing UEFA. Unless otherwise provided in the authorisation to conduct Testing, such tests shall be considered Out-of-Competition tests. Results Management for any such test shall be UEFA’s responsibility, unless agreed otherwise.

5.4Testing requirements

5.4.1UEFA shall conduct test distribution planning and Testing as required by the International Standard for Testing and Investigations.

5.4.2Where reasonably feasible, Testing shall be coordinated through ADAMS in order to maximise the effectiveness of the combined Testing effort and to avoid unnecessary repetitive Testing.

5.5Player and Team whereabouts information

5.5.1UEFA has established Testing Pools of those Players and Teams who are required to provide whereabouts information and who shall be subject to administrative and/or disciplinary measures as described in Annex C and in line with the International Standard for Testing and Investigations.

5.5.2[Intentionally omitted]

5.5.3[Intentionally omitted]

5.5.4[Intentionally omitted]

5.5.5[Intentionally omitted]

5.5.6[Intentionally omitted]

5.5.7Whereabouts information provided by a Player while in the Testing Pool will be accessible through reliable means to other Anti-Doping Organisations having authority to test that Player as provided in Article 5.2. Whereabouts information shall be maintained in strict confidence at all times; it shall be used exclusively for purposes of planning, coordinating or conducting Doping Control, providing information relevant to the Athlete Biological Passport or other analytical results, to support an investigation into a potential anti-doping rule violation, or to support proceedings alleging an anti-doping rule violation; and shall be destroyed after it is no longer relevant for these purposes in accordance with the International Standard for the Protection of Privacy and Personal Information.

5.6[Intentionally omitted]

5.7[Intentionally omitted]

6.1Use of accredited, approved Laboratories and other Laboratories

6.1.1For purposes of directly establishing an Adverse Analytical Finding under Article 2.1, Samples shall be analysed only in WADA-accredited laboratories or laboratories approved by WADA. The choice of the WADA-accredited or WADA-approved laboratory used for the Sample analysis shall be determined exclusively by UEFA.

6.1.2As provided in Article 3.2, facts related to anti-doping rule violations may be established by any reliable means. This would include, for example, reliable laboratory or other forensic testing conducted outside of WADA-accredited or approved laboratories.

6.2Purpose of analysis of Samples and data Samples and related analytical data or Doping Control information shall be analysed to detect Prohibited Substances and Prohibited Methods identified on the Prohibited List and other substances as may be directed by WADA pursuant to the monitoring program described in Article 4.5 of the Code, or to assist UEFA in profiling relevant parameters in a Player’s urine, blood or other matrix, including for DNA or genomic profiling, or for any other legitimate anti-doping purpose.

6.3Research on Samples and data Samples, related analytical data and Doping Control information may be used for anti-doping research purposes, although no Sample may be used for research without the Player’s written consent. Samples and related analytical data or Doping Control information used for research purposes shall first be processed in such a manner as to prevent Samples and related analytical data or Doping Control information being traced back to a particular Player. Any research involving Samples and related analytical data or Doping Control information shall adhere to the principles set out in Article 19 of the Code.

6.4Standards for Sample analysis and reporting UEFA shall ask laboratories to analyse Samples in conformity with the International Standard for Laboratories and Article 4.7 of the International Standard for Testing and Investigations. Laboratories at their own initiative and expense may analyse Samples for Prohibited Substances or Prohibited Methods not included on the standard Sample analysis menu, or as requested by UEFA. Results from any such analysis shall be reported to UEFA and have the same validity and Consequences as any other analytical result.

6.5Further analysis of a Sample prior to or during Results Management There shall be no limitation on the authority of a laboratory to conduct repeat or additional analysis on a Sample prior to the time UEFA notifies a Player that the Sample is the basis for an Article 2.1 anti-doping rule violation charge. If after such notification UEFA wishes to conduct additional analysis on that Sample, it may do so with the consent of the Player or approval from a hearing body.

6.6Further analysis of a Sample after it has been reported as negative or has otherwise not resulted in an anti-doping rule violation charge After a laboratory has reported a Sample as negative, or the Sample has not otherwise resulted in an anti-doping rule violation charge, it may be stored and subjected to further analyses for the purpose of Article 6.2 at any time exclusively at the direction of UEFA. Any other Anti-Doping Organisation with authority to test the Player that wishes to conduct further analysis on a stored Sample may do so with the permission of UEFA, and UEFA shall be responsible for any follow-up Results Management, unless agreed otherwise. Further analysis of Samples shall conform with the requirements of the International Standard for Laboratories.

6.7Split of A or B Sample When an Anti-Doping Organisation with Results Management authority, and/or a WADA-accredited laboratory (with approval from UEFA) wishes to split an A or B Sample for the purpose of using the first part of the split Sample for an A Sample analysis and the second part of the split Sample for confirmation, then the procedures set forth in the International Standard for Laboratories shall be followed.

6.8[Intentionally omitted]

7.1Responsibility for conducting Results Management

7.1.1Results Management shall be the responsibility of UEFA or, if no Sample collection is involved, of the Anti-Doping Organisation which first provides notice to a Player or other Person of a potential anti-doping rule violation and then diligently pursues that anti-doping rule violation.

7.1.2[Intentionally omitted]

7.1.3[Intentionally omitted]

7.1.4Results Management in relation to a potential Whereabouts Failure (a Filing Failure or a Missed Test) when in a Testing Pool other than a Registered Testing Pool shall be the responsibility of UEFA, FIFA and/or the National Anti-Doping Organisation with whom the Player in question files whereabouts information, in accordance with Annex C of these regulations. If UEFA determines a Filing Failure or a Missed Test has occurred it shares that information with FIFA and/or the National Anti-Doping Organisation through any reliable means, where it may be made available to other relevant Anti-Doping Organisations.

7.1.5[Intentionally omitted]

7.1.6[Intentionally omitted]

7.2Initial review and notification regarding potential anti-doping rule violations and related violations The UEFA administration shall carry out the initial review and notification with respect to any potential anti-doping rule violation and related violations in accordance with these regulations and Articles 5.1 to 5.3 and Annexes A and C of the International Standard for Results Management

7.3Identification of prior anti-doping rule violations Before giving a Player or other Person notice of a potential anti-doping rule violation as provided above, UEFA shall refer to ADAMS and contact WADA and relevant Anti-Doping Organisations to determine whether any prior anti-doping rule violation exists.

7.4Provisional Suspensions

7.4.1Mandatory Provisional Suspension after an Adverse Analytical Finding or Adverse Passport Finding If UEFA receives an Adverse Analytical Finding or an Adverse Passport Finding (upon completion of the Adverse Passport Finding review

7.4.2Optional Provisional Suspension based on an Adverse Analytical Finding for Specified Substances, Specified Methods, Contaminated Products, or other anti-doping rule violations UEFA may impose a Provisional Suspension for anti-doping rule violations not covered by Article 7.4.1 prior to the analysis of the Player’s B Sample or final hearing as described in Article 8. An optional Provisional Suspension may be lifted at the discretion of UEFA at any time prior to UEFA’s hearing panel’s decision under Article 8, unless provided otherwise in the International Standard for Results Management.

7.4.3Opportunity for hearing or appeal Notwithstanding Articles 7.4.1 and 7.4.2, a Provisional Suspension may not be imposed unless the Player or other Person is given: (a) an opportunity for a Provisional hearing, either before or on a timely basis after the imposition of the Provisional Suspension; or (b) an opportunity for an expedited hearing in accordance with Article 8 on a timely basis after the imposition of the Provisional Suspension. The imposition of a Provisional Suspension, or the decision not to impose a Provisional Suspension, may be appealed in an expedited process in accordance with Article 13.2.

7.4.4Voluntary Acceptance of Provisional Suspension Players or other Persons on their own initiative may voluntarily accept in writing a Provisional Suspension if done within ten (10) days from the notice of an anti-doping rule violation. Upon such voluntary acceptance, the Provisional Suspension shall have the full effect and be treated in the same manner as if the Provisional Suspension had been imposed under Article 7.4.1 or 7.4.2; however, at any time after voluntarily accepting a Provisional Suspension, the Player or other Person may withdraw such acceptance, in which event the Player or other Person shall not receive any credit for time previously served during the Provisional Suspension.

7.4.5If a Provisional Suspension is imposed based on an A Sample Adverse Analytical Finding and a subsequent B Sample analysis (if requested by the Player or UEFA) does not confirm the A Sample analysis, then the Player shall not be subject to any further Provisional Suspension on account of a violation of Article 2.1. In circumstances where the Player has been removed from a Competition based on a violation of Article 2.1 and the subsequent B Sample analysis does not confirm the A Sample finding, then, if it is still possible for the Player to be reinserted, without otherwise affecting the Competition, the Player may continue to take part in the Competition.

7.5Results Management decisions Results Management decisions by UEFA shall determine without limitation the following issues: (i) whether an anti-doping rule violation was committed or a Provisional Suspension should be imposed, the factual basis for such determination, and the specific articles that have been violated, and (ii) all Consequences flowing from the anti-doping rule violation(s), including any period of Ineligibility (and the date it begins to run) and any Financial Consequences.

7.6Notification of Results Management decisions

7.6.1UEFA shall notify the Players, other Persons, the relevant national association and/or club based on the territory of a UEFA member association, the National Anti-Doping Organisation of their national association and/or club based on the territory of a UEFA member association, WADA and FIFA, of its Results Management decisions.

7.7Retirement from football If a Player or other Person retires while the UEFA’s Results Management process is under way, UEFA retains authority to complete its Results Management process. If a Player or other Person retires before any Results Management process has begun, and UEFA would have had Results Management authority over the Player or other Person at the time the Player or other Person committed an anti-doping rule violation, UEFA has authority to conduct Results Management.

8.1Fair hearings

8.1.1[Intentionally omitted]

8.1.2Hearing process

8.1.2.1When UEFA sends a notice to a Player or other Person notifying them of a potential anti-doping rule violation, and the Player or other Person does not waive a hearing in accordance with Article 8.3.1 or Article 8.3.2, then the case shall be referred to the UEFA hearing panel for hearing and adjudication, which shall be conducted in accordance with the UEFA Disciplinary Regulations.

8.1.2.2When hearing a case, one (1) panel member shall be a qualified lawyer.

8.1.2.3Upon appointment, UEFA’s hearing panel member(s) must sign a declaration that there are no facts or circumstances known to them which might call into question their impartiality in the eyes of any of the parties, other than those circumstances disclosed in the declaration.

8.1.2.4[Intentionally omitted]

8.1.2.5[Intentionally omitted]

8.2Notice of decisions

8.2.1At the end of the hearing, or promptly thereafter, the UEFA’s hearing panel shall issue a written decision that conforms with Article 9 of the International Standard for Results Management and which includes the full reasons for the decision, the period of Ineligibility imposed, the Disqualification of awards and, if applicable, a justification for why the greatest potential Consequences were not imposed.

8.2.2UEFA shall notify that decision to the Player or other Person and to the Anti-Doping Organisations with a right to appeal under Article 13.2.3, and shall promptly report it into ADAMS. The decision may be appealed as provided in Article 13.

8.2.3UEFA shall notify FIFA of that decision.

8.3Waiver of hearing

8.3.1A Player or other Person against whom an anti-doping rule violation is asserted may waive a hearing expressly and agree with the Consequences proposed by UEFA.

8.3.2If the Player or other Person against whom an anti-doping rule violation is asserted fails to dispute that assertion within the deadline otherwise specified in the notice sent by the UEFA asserting the violation, then they shall be deemed to have waived a hearing, to have admitted the violation, and to have accepted the proposed Consequences.

8.3.3In cases where Article 8.3.1 or 8.3.2 applies, a hearing before UEFA’s hearing panel shall not be required. Instead UEFA shall promptly issue a written decision that conforms with Article 9 of the International Standard for Results Management and which includes the full reasons of the decision, the period of Ineligibility imposed, the Disqualification of awards and, if applicable, a justification for why the greatest potential Consequences were not imposed.

8.3.4UEFA shall notify that decision to the Player or other Person and to Anti-Doping Organisations with a right to appeal under Article 13.2.3, and shall promptly report it into ADAMS.

8.3.5UEFA shall notify FIFA of that decision.

8.4[Intentionally omitted]

10.1An anti-doping rule violation occurring during or in connection with a Competition or a Match may, upon the decision of UEFA hearing panel, lead to Disqualification of all the Player's individual awards obtained in that Competition with all Consequences, including forfeiture of all medals and prize money.

10.2Ineligibility for presence, Use or Attempted Use, or Possession of a Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method The period of Ineligibility for a violation of Article 2.1, 2.2 or 2.6 shall be as follows, subject to potential reduction or suspension pursuant to Article 10.5,

10.2.1The period of Ineligibility, subject to Article 10.2.4, shall be four (4) years where:

10.2.1.1The anti-doping rule violation does not involve a Specified Substance, unless the Player or other Person can establish that the anti-doping rule violation was not intentional.

10.2.1.2The anti-doping rule violation involves a Specified Substance and UEFA can establish that the anti-doping rule violation was intentional.

10.2.2If Article 10.2.1 does not apply, subject to Article 10.2.4.1, the period of Ineligibility shall be two (2) years.

10.2.3As used in Article 10.2, the term “intentional” is meant to identify those Players or other Persons who engage in conduct which they knew constituted an anti-doping rule violation or knew that there was a significant risk that the conduct might constitute or result in an anti-doping rule violation and manifestly disregarded that risk. An anti-doping rule violation resulting from an Adverse Analytical Finding for a substance which is only prohibited In-Competition shall be rebuttably presumed to be not “intentional” if the substance is a Specified Substance and the Player can establish that the Prohibited Substance was Used Out-of-Competition. An anti-doping rule violation resulting from an Adverse Analytical Finding for a substance which is only prohibited In-Competition shall not be considered “intentional” if the substance is not a Specified Substance and the Player can establish that the Prohibited Substance was Used Out-of- Competition in a context unrelated to sport performance.

10.2.4Notwithstanding any other provision in Article 10.2, where the anti-doping rule violation involves a Substance of Abuse:

10.2.4.1If the Player can establish that any ingestion or Use occurred Out-of-Competition and was unrelated to sport performance, then the period of Ineligibility shall be three (3) months Ineligibility. In addition, the period of Ineligibility calculated under this Article 10.2.4.1 may be reduced to one (1) month if the Player or other Person satisfactorily completes a Substance of Abuse treatment programme approved by UEFA. The period of Ineligibility established in this Article 10.2.4.1 is not subject to any reduction based on any provision in Article 10.6.

10.2.4.2If the ingestion, Use or Possession occurred In-Competition, and the Player can establish that the context of the ingestion, Use or Possession was unrelated to sport performance, then the ingestion, Use or Possession shall not be considered intentional for purposes of Article 10.2.1 and shall not provide a basis for a finding of Aggravating Circumstances under Article 10.4.

10.3Ineligibility for other Anti-Doping Rule Violations The period of Ineligibility for anti-doping rule violations other than as provided in Article 10.2 shall be as follows, unless Article 10.6 or 10.7 are applicable:

10.3.1For violations of Article 2.3 or 2.5, the period of Ineligibility shall be four (4) years except: (i) in the case of failing to submit to Sample collection, if the Player can establish that the commission of the anti-doping rule violation was not intentional, the period of Ineligibility shall be two (2) years; (ii) in all other cases, if the Player or other Person can establish exceptional circumstances that justify a reduction of the period of Ineligibility, the period of Ineligibility shall be in a range from two (2) years to four (4) years depending on the Player or other Person’s degree of Fault; or (iii) in a case involving a Protected Person, the period of Ineligibility shall be in a range between a maximum of two (2) years and, at a minimum, a reprimand and no period of Ineligibility, depending on the Protected Person’s degree of Fault.

10.3.2[intentionally omitted

10.3.3For violations of Article 2.7 or 2.8, the period of Ineligibility shall be a minimum of four (4) years up to lifetime Ineligibility, depending on the seriousness of the violation. An Article 2.7 or Article 2.8 violation involving a Protected Person shall be considered a particularly serious violation and, if committed by Player Support Personnel for violations other than for Specified Substances, shall result in lifetime Ineligibility for Player Support Personnel. In addition, significant violations of Article 2.7 or 2.8 which may also violate non-sporting laws and regulations, shall be reported to the competent administrative, professional or judicial authorities.

10.3.4For violations of Article 2.9, the period of Ineligibility imposed shall be a minimum of two (2) years, up to lifetime Ineligibility, depending on the seriousness of the violation.

10.3.5For violations of Article 2.10, the period of Ineligibility shall be two (2) years, subject to reduction down to a minimum of one (1) year, depending on the Player or other Person’s degree of Fault and other circumstances of the case.

10.3.6For violations of Article 2.11, the period of Ineligibility shall be a minimum of two (2) years, up to lifetime Ineligibility, depending on the seriousness of the violation by the Player or other Person.

10.4Aggravating Circumstances which may Increase the period of Ineligibility If UEFA establishes in an individual case involving an anti-doping rule violation other than violations under Article 2.7 (Trafficking or Attempted Trafficking), 2.8 (Administration or Attempted Administration), 2.9 (Complicity) or 2.11 (Acts by a Player or other Person to discourage or retaliate against reporting) that Aggravating Circumstances are present which justify the imposition of a period of Ineligibility greater than the standard sanction, then the period of Ineligibility otherwise applicable shall be increased by an additional period of Ineligibility of up to two (2) years depending on the seriousness of the violation and the nature of the Aggravating Circumstances, unless the Player or other Person can establish that they did not knowingly commit the anti-doping rule violation.

10.5Elimination of the period of Ineligibility where there is No Fault or Negligence If a Player or other Person establishes in an individual case that he or she bears No Fault or Negligence, then the otherwise applicable period of Ineligibility shall be eliminated.

10.6Reduction of the Period of Ineligibility based on No Significant Fault or Negligence

10.6.1Reduction of Sanctions in particular circumstances for violations of Article 2.1, 2.2 or 2.6. All reductions under Article 10.6.1 are mutually exclusive and not cumulative.

10.6.1.1Specified Substances or Specified Methods Where the anti-doping rule violation involves a Specified Substance (other than a Substance of Abuse) or Specified Method, and the Player or other Person can establish No Significant Fault or Negligence, then the sanction shall be, at a minimum, a reprimand and no period of Ineligibility, and at a maximum, two (2) years of Ineligibility, depending on the Player’s or other Person’s degree of Fault.

10.6.1.2Contaminated Products In cases where the Player or other Person can establish both No Significant Fault or Negligence and that the detected Prohibited Substance (other than a Substance of Abuse) came from a Contaminated Product, then the sanction shall be, at a minimum, a reprimand and no period of Ineligibility, and at a maximum, two (2) years Ineligibility, depending on the Player or other Person’s degree of Fault.

10.6.1.3Protected Persons Where the anti-doping rule violation not involving a Substance of Abuse is committed by a Protected Person and the Protected Person can establish No Significant Fault or Negligence, then the sanction shall be, at a minimum, a reprimand and no period of Ineligibility, and at a maximum, two (2) years Ineligibility, depending on the Protected Person’s degree of Fault.

10.6.2Application of No Significant Fault or Negligence beyond the Application of Article 10.6.1 If an Player or other Person establishes in an individual case where Article 10.6.1 is not applicable that he or she bears No Significant Fault or Negligence, then, subject to further reduction or elimination as provided in Article 10.7, the otherwise applicable period of Ineligibility may be reduced based on the Player or other Person’s degree of Fault, but the reduced period of Ineligibility may not be less than one-half of the period of Ineligibility otherwise applicable. If the otherwise applicable period of Ineligibility is a lifetime, the reduced period under this Article may be no less than eight (8) years.

10.7Elimination, reduction, or suspension of period of Ineligibility or other Consequences for reasons other than Fault

10.7.1Substantial Assistance in discovering or establishing anti-doping rule violations.

10.7.1.1UEFA may, prior to an appellate decision under Article 13 or the expiration of the time to appeal, suspend a part of the Consequences (other than Disqualification and mandatory Public Disclosure) imposed in an individual case where the Player or other Person has provided Substantial Assistance to an Anti-Doping Organisation, criminal authority or professional disciplinary body:

10.7.1.2may not be appealed.

10.7.1.3If UEFA suspends any part of an otherwise applicable sanction because of Substantial Assistance, then notice providing justification for the decision shall be provided to the other Anti-Doping Organisations with a right to appeal under Article 13.2.3 as provided in Article 14.2. In unique circumstances where WADA determines that it would be in the best interest of anti-doping, WADA may authorise UEFA to enter into appropriate confidentiality agreements limiting or delaying the disclosure of the Substantial Assistance agreement or the nature of Substantial Assistance being provided.

10.7.2Admission of an anti-doping rule violation in the absence of other evidence Where a Player or other Person voluntarily admits the commission of an anti-doping rule violation before having received notice of a Sample collection which could establish an anti-doping rule violation (or, in the case of an anti-doping rule violation other than Article 2.1, before receiving first notice of the admitted violation pursuant to Article 7) and that admission is the only reliable evidence of the violation at the time of admission, then the period of Ineligibility may be reduced, but not below one-half of the period of Ineligibility otherwise applicable.

10.7.3Application of multiple grounds for reduction of a sanction Where a Player or other Person establishes entitlement to reduction in sanction under more than one provision of Article 10.5, 10.6 or 10.7, before applying any reduction or suspension under Article 10.7, the otherwise applicable period of Ineligibility shall be determined in accordance with Articles 10.2, 10.3, 10.5, and 10.6. If the Player or other Person establishes entitlement to a reduction or suspension of the period of Ineligibility under Article 10.7, then the period of Ineligibility may be reduced or suspended, but not below one-fourth of the otherwise applicable period of Ineligibility.

10.8Results Management Agreements

10.8.1One (1) Year reduction for certain anti-doping rule violations based on early admission and acceptance of sanction Where a Player or other Person, after being notified by UEFA of a potential anti-doping rule violation that carries an asserted period of Ineligibility of four (4) or more years (including any period of Ineligibility asserted under Article 10.4), admits the violation and accepts the asserted period of Ineligibility no later than twenty (20) days after receiving notice of an anti-doping rule violation charge, the Player or other Person may receive a one (1) year reduction in the period of Ineligibility asserted by UEFA. Where the Player or other Person receives the one (1) year reduction in the asserted period of Ineligibility under this Article 10.8.1, no further reduction in the asserted period of Ineligibility shall be allowed under any other Article.

10.8.2Case resolution agreement Where the Player or other Person admits an anti-doping rule violation after being confronted with the anti-doping rule violation by UEFA and agrees to Consequences acceptable to UEFA and WADA, at their sole discretion, then:

10.9Multiple Violations

10.9.1Second or third anti-doping rule violation

10.9.1.1For a Player or other Person’s second anti-doping rule violation, the period of Ineligibility shall be the greater of:

10.9.1.2may then be further reduced by the application of Article 10.7.

10.9.1.3The period of Ineligibility established in Articles 10.9.1.1 and

10.9.2An anti-doping rule violation for which a Player or other Person has established No Fault or Negligence shall not be considered a violation for purposes of Article 10.9. In addition, an anti-doping rule violation sanctioned under Article 10.2.4.1 shall not be considered a violation for purposes of Article 10.9.

10.9.3Additional rules for certain potential multiple violations

10.9.3.1For purposes of imposing sanctions under Article 10.9, except as provided in Articles 10.9.3.2 and 10.9.3.3, an anti-doping rule violation will only be considered a second violation if UEFA can establish that the Player or other Person committed the additional anti-doping rule violation after the Player or other Person received notice pursuant to Article 7, or after UEFA made reasonable efforts to give notice of the first anti-doping rule violation. If UEFA cannot establish this, the violations shall be considered together as one single first violation, and the sanction imposed shall be based on the violation that carries the more severe sanction, including the application of Aggravating Circumstances.

10.9.3.2If UEFA establishes that a Player or other Person committed an additional anti-doping rule violation prior to notification, and that the additional violation occurred twelve (12) months or more before or after the first-noticed violation, then the period of Ineligibility for the additional violation shall be calculated as if the additional violation were a stand-alone first violation and this period of Ineligibility is served consecutively, rather than concurrently, with the period of Ineligibility imposed for the earlier-noticed

10.9.3.3If UEFA establishes that a Player or other Person committed a violation of Article 2.5 in connection with the Doping Control process for an underlying asserted anti-doping rule violation, the violation of Article 2.5 shall be treated as a stand-alone first violation and the period of Ineligibility for such violation shall be served consecutively, rather than concurrently, with the period of Ineligibility, if any, imposed for the underlying anti-doping rule violation. Where this Article 10.9.3.3 is applied, the violations taken together shall constitute a single violation for purposes of Article 10.9.1.

10.9.3.4If UEFA establishes that a Player or other Person has committed a second or third anti-doping rule violation during a period of Ineligibility, the periods of Ineligibility for the multiple violations shall run consecutively, rather than concurrently.

10.9.4Multiple Anti-Doping Rule Violations during Ten (10) Year Period For purposes of Article 10.9, each anti-doping rule violation must take place within the same ten (10) year period in order to be considered multiple violations.

10.10[Intentionally omitted]

10.11[Intentionally omitted]

10.12[Intentionally omitted]

10.13Commencement of Ineligibility period Where a Player is already serving a period of Ineligibility for an anti-doping rule violation, any new period of Ineligibility shall commence on the first day after the current period of Ineligibility has been served. Otherwise, except as provided below, the period of Ineligibility shall start on the date of the final hearing decision providing for Ineligibility or, if the hearing is waived or there is no hearing, on the date Ineligibility is accepted or otherwise imposed.

10.13.1Delays not attributable to the Player or other Person Where there have been substantial delays in the hearing process or other aspects of Doping Control, and the Player or other Person can establish that such delays are not attributable to the Player or other Person, the competent UEFA disciplinary body may start the period of Ineligibility at an earlier date commencing as early as the date of Sample collection or the date on which another anti-doping rule violation last occurred. All individual awards achieved during the period of Ineligibility, including retroactive Ineligibility, shall be forfeited.

10.13.2Credit for Provisional Suspension or Period of Ineligibility served

10.13.2.1If a Provisional Suspension is respected by the Player or other Person, then the Player or other Person shall receive a credit for such period of Provisional Suspension against any period of Ineligibility which may ultimately be imposed. If the Player or other Person does not respect a Provisional Suspension, then the Player or other Person shall receive no credit for any period of Provisional Suspension served. If a period of Ineligibility is served pursuant to a decision that is subsequently appealed, then the Player or other Person shall receive a credit for such period of Ineligibility served against any period of Ineligibility which may ultimately be imposed on appeal.

10.13.2.2If a Player or other Person voluntarily accepts a Provisional Suspension in writing from UEFA and thereafter respects the Provisional Suspension, the Player or other Person shall receive a credit for such period of voluntary Provisional Suspension against any period of Ineligibility which may ultimately be imposed. A copy of the Player or other Person’s voluntary acceptance of a Provisional Suspension shall be provided promptly to each party entitled to receive notice of an asserted anti-doping rule violation under Article 14.1.

10.13.2.3No credit against a period of Ineligibility shall be given for any time period before the effective date of the Provisional Suspension or voluntary Provisional Suspension regardless of whether the Player elected not to compete or was suspended by a Team.

10.13.2.4Where a period of Ineligibility is imposed upon a Team, unless fairness requires otherwise, the period of Ineligibility shall start on the date of the final hearing decision providing for Ineligibility or, if the hearing is waived, on the date Ineligibility is accepted or otherwise imposed. Any period of Team Provisional Suspension (whether imposed or voluntarily accepted) shall be credited against the total period of Ineligibility to be served.

10.14Status during Ineligibility or Provisional Suspension

10.14.1shall receive no credit for any period of Provisional Suspension served and the individual awards of such participation shall be forfeited. Where a Player Support Personnel or other Person assists a Person in violating the prohibition against participation during Ineligibility or a Provisional Suspension, UEFA shall impose sanctions for a violation of Article 2.9 for such assistance.

10.14.2Return to training As an exception to Article 10.14.1, a Player may return to train with a Team or to use the facilities of a club or other member organisation of a national association during the shorter of: (1) the last two months of the Player’s period of Ineligibility, or (2) the last onequarter of the period of Ineligibility imposed.

10.14.3Violation of the prohibition participation during Ineligibility or Provisional Suspension Where a Player or other Person who has been declared Ineligible violates the prohibition against participation during Ineligibility described in Article 10.14.1, the results of such participation shall be Disqualified and a new period of Ineligibility equal in length to the original period of Ineligibility shall be added to the end of the original period of Ineligibility. The new period of Ineligibility, including a reprimand and no period of Ineligibility, may be adjusted based on the Player or other Person’s degree of Fault and other circumstances of the case. The determination of whether a Player or other Person has violated the prohibition against participation, and whether an adjustment is appropriate, shall be made by UEFA. This decision may be appealed under Article 13. A Player or other Person who violates the prohibition against participation during a Provisional Suspension described in Article

10.14.4Withholding of financial support during Ineligibility In addition, for any anti-doping rule violation not involving a reduced sanction as described in Article 10.5 or 10.6, some or all sport-related financial support or other sport-related benefits received by such Person will be withheld by UEFA.

10.15Automatic Publication of sanction A mandatory part of each sanction shall include automatic publication, as provided in Article 14.3.

11.1Team Testing Where more than one (1) Player from the same Team has been notified of a possible anti-doping rule violation under Article 7, the UEFA administration shall conduct appropriate Target Testing of the Team during the Competition Period.

11.2Team Consequences If more than two (2) Players from the same Team are found to have committed an anti-doping rule violation during an Competition Period, UEFA shall impose the appropriate sanction(s) in accordance with the UEFA Disciplinary Regulations and these regulations on the member association or club to which the Players belong, in addition to the Consequences imposed on the individual Players found to have committed the anti-doping rule violation. If a Team moves from one Competition to another during the same season, these Competitions are considered as one Competition Period for the purpose of this Article.

13.1Decisions subject to appeal Decisions made under these regulations may be appealed as set forth below in Articles 13.2 through 13.6 or as otherwise provided in these regulations. Such decisions shall remain in effect while under appeal unless the appellate body orders otherwise.

13.1.1Scope of review not limited The scope of review on appeal includes all issues relevant to the matter and is expressly not limited to the issues or scope of review before the initial decision maker. Any party to the appeal may submit evidence, legal arguments and claims that were not raised in the first instance hearing so long as they arise from the same cause of action or same general facts or circumstances raised or addressed in the first instance hearing.

13.1.2CAS shall not defer to the findings being appealed In making its decision, CAS shall not give deference to the discretion exercised by the body whose decision is being appealed.

13.1.3WADA not required to exhaust internal remedies Where WADA has a right to appeal under Article 13 and no other party has appealed a final decision within UEFA’s process, WADA may appeal such decision directly to CAS without having to exhaust other remedies in UEFA’s process.

13.2Appeals from decisions regarding anti-doping rule violations, Consequences, Provisional Suspensions, implementation of decisions and authority A decision that an anti-doping rule violation was committed, a decision imposing Consequences or not imposing Consequences for an anti-doping rule violation, or a decision that no anti-doping rule violation was committed; a decision that an anti-doping rule violation proceeding cannot go forward for procedural reasons (including, for example, prescription); a decision by UEFA not to bring forward an Adverse Analytical Finding or an Atypical Finding as an anti-doping rule violation, or a decision not to go forward with an anti-doping rule violation after an investigation in accordance with the International Standard for Results Management; a decision to impose, or lift, a Provisional Suspension as a result of a Provisional Hearing; UEFA’s failure to comply with Article 7.4; a decision that UEFA lacks authority to rule on an alleged anti-doping rule violation or its Consequences; a decision to suspend, or not suspend, Consequences or to reinstate, or not reinstate, Consequences under Article 10.7.1; a decision under Article 10.14.3; a decision by UEFA not to implement another Anti-Doping Organisation’s decision under Article 15; and a decision under point F of the final part of these regulations in connection with Article 27.3 of the Code. may be appealed exclusively as provided in this Article 13.2.

13.2.1Appeals In cases arising from participation in a Competition or in cases involving Players, the decision may be appealed exclusively to CAS.

13.2.2[Intentionally omitted]

13.2.3Persons entitled to appeal

13.2.3.1Appeals In cases under Article 13.2.1, the following parties shall have the right to appeal to CAS:

13.2.3.2[Intentionally omitted]

13.2.3.3Duty to notify All parties to any CAS appeal must ensure that WADA and all other parties with a right to appeal have been given timely notice of the appeal.

13.2.3.4Appeal from imposition of Provisional Suspension Notwithstanding any other provision herein, the only Person who may appeal from the imposition of a Provisional Suspension is the Player or other Person upon whom the Provisional Suspension is imposed.

13.2.3.5[intentionally omitted]

13.2.4Cross appeals and other subsequent appeals allowed Cross appeals and other subsequent appeals by any respondent named in cases brought to CAS under these regulations are specifically permitted. Any party with a right to appeal under this Article 13 must file a cross appeal or subsequent appeal at the latest with the party’s answer.

13.3Failure to render a timely decision by UEFA Where, in a particular case, UEFA fails to render a decision with respect to whether an anti-doping rule violation was committed within a reasonable deadline set by WADA, WADA may elect to appeal directly to CAS as if UEFA had rendered a decision finding no anti-doping rule violation.

13.4Appeals relating to TUEs TUE decisions may be appealed exclusively as provided in Article 4.4.

13.5Notice of appeal decisions and information to FIFA

13.5.1UEFA shall promptly provide the appeal decision to the Player or other Person and to the other Anti-Doping Organisations that would have been entitled to appeal under Article 13.2.3 as provided under Article 14.2 and in compliance with the UEFA Disciplinary Regulations and these regulations.

13.5.2UEFA informs FIFA of the appeal decision.

13.6Time for filing appeals

13.6.1Appeals to CAS The time to file an appeal to CAS shall be twenty-one (21) days from the date of receipt of the motivated decision in an official UEFA language by the appealing party. The above notwithstanding, the following shall apply in connection with appeals filed by a party entitled to appeal, but which was not a party to the proceedings that led to the decision being appealed:

13.6.2[Intentionally omitted]

14.1Information concerning Adverse Analytical Findings, Atypical Findings and other asserted anti-doping rule violations

14.1.1Notice of Anti-Doping Rule Violations to Players and other Persons Notice to Players or other Persons of anti-doping rule violations asserted against them shall occur as provided under Articles 7 and 14. If at any point during Results Management up until the anti-doping rule violation charge, UEFA decides not to move forward with a matter, it must notify the Player or other Person, (provided that the Player or other Person had been already informed of the ongoing Results Management). UEFA confidentially notifies the Players or other Persons in writing (by email or letter) via the member association’s and/or club’s general secretary or other qualified representative.

14.1.2Notice of anti-doping rule violations to National Anti-Doping Organisations, FIFA and WADA Notice of the assertion of an anti-doping rule violation to the National Anti-Doping Organisation of the Player’s or other Person’s national association and/or club based on the territory of a UEFA member association, FIFA and WADA shall occur as provided under Articles 7 and 14, simultaneously with the notice to the Player or other Person. If at any point during Results Management up until the anti-doping rule violation charge, UEFA decides not to move forward with a matter, it must give notice (with reasons) to the Anti-Doping Organisations with a right of appeal under Article 13.2.3. FIFA is also informed of such decision.

14.1.3Content of an anti-doping rule violation notice Notification of an anti-doping rule violation shall include: the Player’s or other Person’s name, national association and/or club, the Competition concerned, whether the test was In-Competition or Outof-Competition, the date of Sample collection, the analytical result reported by the laboratory, and other information as required by the International Standard for Testing and Investigations and International Standard for Results Management. Notification of anti-doping rule violations other than under Article 2.1 shall also include the rule asserted to have been violated and the basis of the asserted violation.

14.1.4Status reports Except with respect to investigations which have not resulted in a notice of an anti-doping rule violation pursuant to Article 14.1.1, the National Anti-Doping Organisation of the Player’s or other Person’s national association and/or club based on the territory of a UEFA member association, FIFA and WADA shall be regularly updated on the status and findings of any review or proceedings conducted pursuant to Article 7, 8 or 13 and shall be provided with a prompt written reasoned explanation or decision explaining the resolution of the matter.

14.1.5Confidentiality Recipient organisations shall not disclose this information beyond those Persons with a need to know (which would include the appropriate personnel at the applicable National Anti-Doping Organisation of the Player’s or other Person’s national association and/or club based on the territory of a UEFA member association) until UEFA has made Public Disclosure as permitted by Article 14.3.

14.2Notice of anti-doping rule violation or violations of Ineligibility or Provisional Suspension decisions and request for files

14.2.1Anti-doping rule violation decisions or decisions related to violations of Ineligibility or Provisional Suspension rendered pursuant to Article 8.2, 10.5, 10.6, 10.7 or 13.5 shall include the full reasons for the decision, including, if applicable, a justification for why the maximum potential sanction was not imposed. Where the decision is not in English or French, UEFA shall provide an English or French summary of the decision and the supporting reasons.

14.2.2An Anti-Doping Organisation having a right to appeal a decision received pursuant to Article 14.2.1 may, within fifteen (15) days of receipt, request a copy of the full case file pertaining to the decision.

14.3Public disclosure

14.3.1[Intentionally omitted]

14.3.2No later than twenty (20) days after it has been determined in an appellate decision under Article 13.2.1, or such appeal has been waived, or a hearing in accordance with Article 8 has been waived, or the original decision has not otherwise been challenged in a timely manner, or the matter has been resolved under Article 10.8, or a new period of Ineligibility, or reprimand, has been imposed under Article 10.14.3, UEFA must Publicly Disclose the anti-doping rule violated, the name of the Player or other Person committing the violation, the Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method involved (if any) and the Consequences imposed.

14.3.3[Intentionally omitted]

14.3.4In any case where it is determined, after a hearing or appeal, that the Player or other Person did not commit an anti-doping rule violation, the decision itself and the underlying facts may be Publicly Disclosed only with the consent of the Player or other Person who is the subject of the decision. UEFA shall use reasonable efforts to obtain such consent, and if consent is obtained, shall Publicly Disclose the decision in its entirety or in such redacted form as the Player or other Person may approve.

14.3.5Publication shall be accomplished at a minimum by placing the required information on UEFA’s website and leaving the information up for the longer of one (1) month or the duration of any period of Ineligibility.

14.3.6Neither UEFA, nor an Anti-Doping Organisation or WADA-accredited laboratory, or official of either, may publicly comment on the specific facts of any pending case (as opposed to general description of process and science) except in response to public comments attributed to, or based on information provided by, the Player, other Person or their entourage or their representatives.

14.3.7The mandatory Public Disclosure required in Article 14.3.2 shall not be required where the Player or other Person who has been found to have committed an anti-doping rule violation is a Minor or Protected Person.

14.4[Intentionally omitted]

14.5Doping Control information database To ensure the effective use of resources and sharing of applicable Doping Control information among Anti-Doping Organisations, UEFA may report to WADA through ADAMS or any other reliable means, including, in particular:

14.5.1To facilitate coordinated test distribution planning, to avoid unnecessary duplication in Testing by various Anti-Doping Organisations, and to ensure that Athlete Biological Passport profiles are updated, UEFA shall report all In-Competition and Out-of- Competition tests to WADA by entering the Doping Control forms into ADAMS in accordance with the requirements and timelines contained in the International Standard for Testing and Investigations.

14.5.2To facilitate WADA’s oversight and appeal rights for TUEs, UEFA shall report all TUE applications, decisions and supporting documentation using ADAMS or any other reliable means in accordance with the requirements and timelines contained in the International Standard for Therapeutic Use Exemptions.

14.5.3To facilitate WADA’s oversight and appeal rights for Results Management, UEFA shall report the following information into ADAMS in accordance with the requirements and timelines outlined in the International Standard for Results Management:

14.5.4The information described in this Article will be made accessible, where appropriate and in accordance with the applicable rules, to the Player, the National Anti-Doping Organisation of the Player’s national association and/or club, and any other Anti-Doping Organisations with Testing authority over the Player.

14.6Data privacy

14.6.1UEFA may collect, store, process or disclose personal information relating to Players and other Persons where necessary and appropriate to conduct its Anti-Doping Activities under these regulations, the International Standards (including specifically the International Standard for the Protection of Privacy and Personal Information), and in compliance with applicable law. Any Player or other Person who submits information including personal information in accordance with these regulations shall be deemed to have agreed, pursuant to applicable data protection laws, that such information may be collected, processed, disclosed and used for the purposes of the implementation of these regulations.

14.6.2[Intentionally omitted]

15.1Decisions by Anti-Doping Organisations Subject to the right to appeal provided in Article 13, UFEA recognises and respects Testing, hearing results and other final adjudications of any Anti- Doping Organisation which are consistent with the Code and are within the Anti-Doping Organisation’s authority.

15.2Decisions by other bodies UEFA recognises measures taken by other bodies which have not accepted the Code if the rules of those bodies are consistent with the Code.

15.3[Intentionally omitted]

20.1UEFA provides the necessary staff, and establishes the necessary committees and disciplinary bodies to implement the present regulations.

20.2The UEFA administration is responsible for administrative tasks relating to the present regulations and handles: (i) the TUE process described in Article 4; (ii) Doping Controls as described in Annex B; (iii) whereabouts information as described in Annex C; (iv) UEFA’s anti-doping Education programme as described in Article 17; and (v) the Results Management of potential anti-doping rule violations.

20.3[Intentionally omitted]

21.1Being knowledgeable of and complying with these regulations and assisting UEFA in implementing its anti-doping programme described herein.

21.2Being available for Sample collections at all times and at any place, even if serving a period of Ineligibility or a Provisional Suspension.

21.3Taking responsibility, in the context of anti-doping, for what they ingest and Use.

21.4Informing medical personnel of their obligation not to Use Prohibited Substances and Prohibited Methods and taking responsibility for ensuring that any medical treatment received does not violate these regulations.

21.5Informing UEFA and their National Anti-Doping Organisation of any decision by a non-Signatory that they committed an anti-doping rule violation within the previous ten (10) years.

21.6Cooperating with UEFA and Anti-Doping Organisations investigating anti-doping rule violations.

21.7Disclosing the identity of their Player Support Personnel upon request by UEFA or any other Anti-Doping Organisation with authority over the Player.

21.8Complying with any instructions given by the Doping Control Officer, Chaperone or other Person involved in Doping Control. Failure to do so, that does not otherwise constitute Tampering, may result in a charge of misconduct under the UEFA Disciplinary Regulations.

21.9Remaining available in the stadium for 30 minutes after the end of the Match to undergo Sample collection if the Player is on a UEFA Match Sheet.

21.10If designated to undergo a Doping Control:

22.1Being knowledgeable of and complying with these regulations and assisting UEFA in implementing its anti-doping programme described herein.

22.2Cooperating with the Player Testing programme.

22.3Using their influence on Player values and behaviour to foster anti-doping attitudes.

22.4Informing UEFA and their National Anti-Doping Organisation of any decision by a non-Signatory that they committed an anti-doping rule violation within the previous ten (10) years.

22.5Cooperating with Anti-Doping Organisations investigating anti-doping rule violations.

22.6Not to Use or Possess any Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method without valid justification.

22.7Complying with any instructions given by the Doping Control Officer, Chaperone or other Person involved in Doping Control. Failure to do so, that does not otherwise constitute Tampering, may result in a charge of misconduct under the UEFA Disciplinary Regulations.

23.1Providing whereabouts information at UEFA’s request and ensuring it is up-to-date at all times. Full details of whereabouts information requirements are given in Annex C.

23.2Assisting UEFA in implementing its anti-doping programme described in these regulations.

23.3Ensuring that any correspondence received about anti-doping matters is forwarded to the individual addressee concerned. All communication with individuals is sent to their national associations or clubs based on the territory of a UEFA member association, which inform the individuals personally. Communications are sent by mail or email in one of UEFA’s official languages: English, French or German.

23.4Reporting any information to UEFA suggesting or relating to an anti-doping rule violation under these regulations and cooperating with UEFA investigations.

23.5If in the UEFA Testing Pool, providing up-to-date whereabouts information and an up-to-date list of Players if requested to do so. Full details of whereabouts information requirements are given in Annex C.

23.6Obtaining whereabouts information concerning Teams and Players on UEFA’s behalf.