RELATED TO
MANAGEMENT COUNCIL
SUPPLEMENT NO. 16

DIVISION III STUDENT-ATHLETE REINSTATEMENT COMMITTEE

Summary of Recommendations

ACTION ITEMS – MANAGEMENT COUNCIL ONLY

1. ISSUE:		NCAA Bylaw 12.2.4.2.2 (Exception–Professional Basketball Draft–Two-Year College Prospective Student-Athlete).
Committee Recommendation:
	Adopt noncontroversial legislation for a draft exception for two-year college enrolled student-athletes who enter a professional basketball league’s draft one time during his or her collegiate career and who subsequently enroll at a Division III institution.
Management Council Action:
	Previously adopted the legislation (NC-4) in July 2003.
2. ISSUE:		International Basketball Draft Exception.
Committee Action:
	The committee asked staff to draft legislation for discussion at its December 2003 meeting allowing a student-athlete in his or her final year of eligibility to not lose his/her eligibility if drafted during the basketball season by an international organization provided the student-athlete has not engaged in impermissible activities with an agent, received no benefits from the organization and not undertaken any activities with the team until exhausting his/her collegiate eligibility.
Management Council Action:
	Approved the recommendation to draft legislation for review by the committee at its December meeting.

ITEMS OF INFORMATION

1. ISSUE:		Student-Athlete Reinstatement Philosophy.
Committee Action:
	The committee conducted a workshop with the student-athlete reinstatement staff to thoroughly explore a more flexible approach to cases as encouraged by President Brand and the Executive Committee in the June 2 memorandum sent to committee chairs. The memorandum seemed to suggest three themes: · Flexible judgment. · Responsiveness. · Simplification.
Management Council Action:
	Accepted the information.
2. ISSUE:		National Baseball Congress.
Committee Action:
	The staff and committee reviewed cases involving student-athletes competing on summer league teams that promote/market themselves as semiprofessional. Under the previous definition of a professional team, competing on teams that promote/market themselves as semiprofessional was a violation. Thus, if the violation occurred prior to the effective date of the new definition of a professional team and the only basis for a violation is due to the team or league marketing itself as semiprofessional, this would not trigger the new definition. Relief should be provided, and the student-athletes should be reinstated without conditions. A case-by-case review should ensure that institutions address possible violations of agent legislation as well as the acceptance of prize money by teams. If agent or prize money violations are present, a penalty may be imposed.
Management Council Action:
	Accepted the information.
3. ISSUE:		Institutional Errors Resulting in Student-Athlete Ineligibility.
Committee Action:
	The committee discussed the importance of institutional sanctions when an institutional error results in a student-athlete’s ineligibility. The committee expressed an interest in hearing from the secondary enforcement staff at its December 2003 meetings regarding this issue and requesting the secondary enforcement committee explore implementing a fine system at the Division III level.
Management Council Action:
	Accepted the information, noting its support.
4. ISSUE:		Staggering Reinstatement Without Penalties.
Committee Action:
	The committee endorsed the concept of staggering reinstatement without penalties and directed the reinstatement staff to consider on a case-by-case basis requests from Division III institutions. The committee reviewed and accepted the guidelines available in Division I.
Management Council Action:
	Accepted the information.
5. ISSUE:		Transfer Directive as Applied to Nontransfer Situations.
Committee Action:
	The committee determined that the analysis should be the same for transfers and nontransfers when reviewing circumstances involving student-athletes who compete and are subsequently discovered to be ineligible, but the institution is waiting on specific information from an outside source and/or the student-athlete was misadvised by a person within and/or outside the athletics department. The December 2002 directive addressed withholding conditions for transfer student-athletes involved in impermissible competition during a transfer year in residence. The committee affirmed that the same directive be applied to nontransfer student-athletes involved in impermissible competition. [Please note that the applicability of the December 2002 directive should be considered in light of the recently adopted flexible approach for particular violations at the June 2003 meetings.]
Management Council Action:
	Accepted the information.
6. ISSUE:		Cross Divisional Issues.
Committee Action:
	(1) Violations. The committee determined that for violations of NCAA rules occurring once a student-athlete is enrolled at an institution should be processed through the division where the violation occurred, including any appeal. Thus if a student-athlete competes in violation of NCAA legislation while attending a Division II institution and then transfers to a Division III institution, the violation will be processed in accordance with the guidelines issued by Division II and any appeal would be heard by the Division II committee. The committee noted that the Division III institution would be permitted to be part of the reinstatement process and the appeal process. (2) Season-of-Competition Waiver while Eligible. The committee determined that the season-of-competition waiver, while eligible, should be processed by the division in which the competition occurred. Thus, if a student-athlete competed in limited competition while attending a Division II institution and subsequently transferred to a Division III institution, the season of competition waiver would be processed under the criteria established by Division II and any appeal would be handled by the Division II committee.
Management Council Action:
	Accepted the information.
7. ISSUE:		Provision of False and Misleading Information.
Committee Action:
	In its discussion of cases involving ethical conduct, the committee noted that culpability and responsibility are inherently present. In that regard, the committee noted that, although the guidelines established for ethical conduct are 20 to 50 percent due to the seriousness of the student-athlete’s action, the staff may impose a withholding condition greater then 50 percent if it deems appropriate.
Management Council Action:
	Accepted the information.
8. ISSUE:		Extensions of 10-Semester/15-Quarter Period of Eligibility (Season-of-Competition Waiver for student-athletes called to active duty).
Committee Action:
	The Division III Management Council approved a provision to grant relief for a student-athlete who started but failed to complete the 2002-03 season due to being called to active duty in the armed services. In light of this, the committee determined that in situations where student-athletes meet the criteria for a waiver, for the purposes of an extension, the year should be considered a denied participation opportunity.
Management Council Action:
	Accepted the information.

9. ISSUE:		Weighing Championships Contests When Fulfilling a Withholding Conduction.
Committee Action:
	The committee advised staff that all contests eligible to fulfill a withholding condition shall remain weighted equally and that no special consideration shall be given to championship-designated contests when fulfilling a withholding condition.
Management Council Action:
	Accepted the information.