The committee changed its policies and procedures (see Attachment). The proposed changes will enhance consistency, accuracy and clarity. Specifically, the changes clarify the limited role that major enforcement, and the gambling, agent and amateurism staffs play in the reinstatement process. The changes also outline what information is exchanged with the gambling, agents and amateurism staff, and the major enforcement staff.

The committee determined that violations of Bylaw 12.1.1.1.6 (Preferential Treatment, Benefits or Services) should be treated similarly to cases that involve extra-benefit violations of Bylaw 16.12.2.1 where student-athletes act independently of the institution or receive benefits from a representative of the institution’s athletics interest. With this in mind, the committee established the following guideline for cases in which student-athletes receive benefits from a representative of the institution’s athletics interests, the institution or benefits based on their athletics ability or reputation: 10 percent withholding and repayment of the benefit for values of $50 to $300, 20 percent withholding and repayment of the benefit for values of $301 to $500, a minimum 30 percent withholding and repayment of the benefit for values greater than $500. The committee established different reinstatement guidelines for prospective student-athletes involved in the same violations. The different guidelines were warranted since prospective student-athletes have not received the same level of education regarding such violations. The committee approved the following reinstatement guidelines for prospective student-athletes: 10 percent withholding and repayment of the benefit for values of $50 to $500, 20 percent withholding and repayment of the benefit for values of $501 to $700, 30 percent withholding and repayment of the benefit for values greater than $700. The guidelines were established as a minimum reinstatement condition for cases involving preferential treatment, benefits or services. The committee directed staff to consider any mitigating circumstances, which may increase or decrease a student-athlete’s or prospective student-athlete’s culpability.

The committee established guidelines to assist the membership in determining the value of an extra benefit. In addition, the committee directed staff to assist the member institutions in determining methods that are reasonable so institutions may accurately determine the value of an impermissible benefit. For example, if a student-athlete received a free or reduced service, the institution should use the average market cost that a customer would be charged for the service in the locale where the violation occurred.

The Committee on Student-Athlete Reinstatement (SAR) in conjunction with the Administrative Review Subcommittee (ARS) established that the ARS will process cases in which a student-athletes’ 10-semester/15-quarter time period of eligibility commences as result of erroneous advice from appropriate institutional authorities. All other cases will be processed by the committee as an extension of the five-year/10-semester period of eligibility. In the past, institutions could submit the same request to both groups (e.g., a waiver of Bylaw 14.2.1 went to ARS while an extension under Bylaw 30.6.1 went to SAR). This resulted in inconsistent decisions. The new approach will improve consistency.

The committee reaffirmed its directive from the December 1999 meeting regarding cases involving academic fraud. The committee directed staff not to reinstate student-athletes involved in academic fraud. In a similar matter, the committee directed staff in cases involving 10.1 (Unethical Conduct) and false or misleading information to impose a minimal reinstatement condition of 20 to 40 percent. Further, the committee directed staff to impose hasher reinstatement conditions in cases where an individual provides false or misleading information to an enforcement services representative, since the information is directly related to the student-athlete’s or prospective student-athlete’s culpability.