National Collegiate Athletic Association |
The NCAA News - News and FeaturesThe NCAA News -- April 12, 1999 Governmental affairs report The following is a report of federal activities from February 18 through April 2 affecting the NCAA membership. This report was prepared by the NCAA federal relations office. Copies of all documents, bills and correspondence in this report are available from the federal relations office, One Dupont Circle, N.W., Suite 310, Washington, D.C. 20036; telephone 202/293-3050. Initial-eligibility issues -- Cureton lawsuit On March 8, the District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania issued a ruling that prohibits the continued application of the NCAA's Division I initial-eligibility test-score cutoffs. As a result, the court enjoined the NCAA from denying eligibility based on the standardized test-score component of NCAA Bylaw 14.3 to any Division I student-athlete. Also, the court found that the NCAA is subject to federal civil rights laws because it is a recipient of federal funds through its contribution of administration services to the National Youth Sports Program Fund and the court's belief that member colleges and universities cede their authority over certain federally funded programs to the NCAA. The NCAA responded by requesting a stay of the court injunction. On March 15, Stanley Ikenberry, president of the American Council of Education (ACE), submitted an affidavit to the District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania urging at least a temporary stay of the court injunction in the Cureton v. NCAA case. In the affidavit, ACE explains the organization's support for the adoption of both Proposition 48 in 1983 and Proposition 16 in 1992. The affidavit states: "The rationale of the court's decision has potentially far-reaching implications with respect to the requirements for institutions of higher learning in setting academic standards for athletics participation or admission. The setting of such standards has heretofore been regarded by academic institutions as a matter for their judgment in the exercise of their considered discretion. ACE has grave reservations as to the correctness of the rationale for the court's ruling, which appears to be without precedent with respect to the setting of academic standards." On March 16, the lower court denied the NCAA's request for a stay. The NCAA appealed that decision to the Third Circuit Court of Appeals and a stay was granted March 30, 1999, pending the appeal of the March 8 lower court decision. The Circuit Court's decision to grant a stay re-establishes, at least temporarily, the NCAA initial-eligibility criteria, including the reliance on a minimum standardized test score to determine academic preparedness. Gender-equity issues NCAA provides data to General Accounting Office requested by Speaker Hastert. In early March, the NCAA transmitted data to the General Accounting Office (GAO) to complete a study requested by Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert, R-Illinois. The data tracks the participation of men and women in athletics programs at NCAA member institutions from 1985-86 through 1996-97. Only those members that were members in 1985-86 are included in the study. Hastert had requested the data because he believes the NCAA's current participation numbers do not reveal a decline in men's sports opportunities because the current totals include participation numbers of more than 300 new members. Current NCAA participation numbers show a steady increase for both men and women over this time frame. The data provided to GAO shows the following: Division I -- 278 member institutions -- 1985-86 compared with 1996-97 (contrasted with 310 members as of March 4, 1999). Men -- an average drop of 9.49 percent in average squad sizes; an average drop of 10.51 percent in numbers of sports teams; a drop in total participation numbers of 10.62 percent. Women -- an average increase of 1.75 percent in average squad sizes; an average increase of 31.56 percent in number of sports teams; an increase in total participation numbers of 29.75 percent. Division II -- 153 member institutions -- 1985-86 compared with 1996-97 (contrasted with 267 members as of March 4, 1999). Men -- an average drop of 14.77 percent in average squad sizes; an average drop of 13.10 percent in numbers of sports teams; a drop in total participation numbers of 16.71 percent. Women -- an average drop of 11.01 percent in average squad sizes; an average increase of 21.30 percent in number of sports teams; a drop in total participation numbers of 1.72 percent. Division III -- 294 member institutions -- 1985-86 compared with 1996-97 (contrasted with 387 members as of March 4, 1999). Men -- an average drop of 14.73 percent in average squad sizes; an average increase of 2.29 percent in numbers of sports teams; a drop in total participation numbers of 11.85 percent. Women -- an average drop of 1.75 percent in average squad sizes; an average increase of 37.84 percent in number of sports teams; an increase in total participation numbers of 12.12 percent. All divisions: Men -- actual decrease of 3.57 percent in numbers of sports teams; actual decrease of 12.06 percent in total participation numbers. Women -- actual increase of 17.40 percent in number of sports teams; actual increase of 16.93 percent in total participation numbers. The GAO notified the NCAA that it would release a report on collegiate sports participation utilizing the NCAA numbers in early April. GAO to release report on the effects of Title IX in December 1999. In addition to the GAO report discussed above, another GAO study is in the development stages. Requested by Rep. Patsy Mink, D-Hawaii, the GAO is studying how participation in men's and women's intercollegiate athletics has changed since Title IX's enactment and the extent to which Title IX has had an impact on the change. Data collect for this report will go back to 1972. This report is expected to be completed by the end of the year. Title IX cases U.S. Supreme Court rules in NCAA's favor in Smith v. NCAA case -- sends two questions back to lower court. On February 23, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled unanimously that the NCAA was not subject to Title IX simply because it collects dues from colleges that receive federal funds. The Supreme Court, in its ruling in Smith v. NCAA, disagreed with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit's assessment that the NCAA was a recipient of federal funds through the dues the Association receives from its federally funded membership of colleges and universities. Supreme Court Justice Ginsburg wrote: "At most, the Association's receipt of dues demonstrates that it indirectly benefits from the federal assistance afforded its members. This showing, without more, is insufficient to trigger Title IX coverage." However, the justices did leave open the possibility of future lawsuits, instructing lower courts to consider two other arguments offered by Renee Smith. Smith argued that the NCAA is subject to Title IX because its members grant it authority to govern their sports programs. Smith also asserted that the federal law applies to the NCAA as a result of the Association's relationship with the National Youth Sports Program Foundation, which receives federal funds. Smith played college volleyball for two seasons but was denied a waiver to play two more at the graduate level under an NCAA rule that barred graduate students from competing at a school other than the one from which they earned their undergraduate degree. Federal appeals court dismisses one claim, remands another in Title IX sexual-assault lawsuit against Virginia Tech. On March 5, a federal appeals court dismissed one claim in a gender-equity lawsuit against Virginia Tech and remanded another claim to a lower court. In December 1995, a former Virginia Tech student filed a Title IX lawsuit alleging that she had been raped by two football players and that the university had violated her civil rights by failing to take action against the men. In her Title IX suit, the former Virginia Tech student alleged that the university had given preferential treatment to the two men on the basis of gender and that it had created an atmosphere hostile to women. In 1996, a district court rejected both claims against the university. However, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit reinstated the hostile-atmosphere claim in January 1998. The full appeals court upheld this ruling on March 5, 1999. The "hostile-atmosphere claim" has now been remanded to the federal district court in Roanoke, Virginia, for consideration. The court, before making a decision, will await a U.S. Supreme Court ruling in a case with a similar claim. Athletics Program Expansions/Reductions Judge blocks Cal State campus from cutting wrestlers to comply with Title IX. U.S. District Court Judge Robert E. Coyle ruled that California State University, Bakersfield, could not cap the numbers of wrestlers on a team in order to achieve gender balance within the athletics program. In reaching his decision, Judge Coyle granted an injunction to members of the school's wrestling team who had sued the university. A Cal State Bakersfield attorney said the court's ruling "is inconsistent with six other federal decisions which have considered the same issue." The university had sought to cap the size of the team to keep the percentage of male athletes proportional to the percentage of male students on campus. In 1996, Bakersfield announced it planned to drop wrestling. Soon afterward, members of the wrestling team sued the university to retain the sport. In September 1997, team members sought a restraining order to prevent the university from imposing a cap on the size of the team. Five years ago, the California State University system entered into a consent decree that requires its member institutions to bring the number of female athletes on campus to within 10 percentage points of the total undergraduate female student population by the 1998-99 academic year. In granting the injunction, Coyle ruled that the wrestlers had "demonstrated a likelihood of success on the merits." Coyle wrote, "The court concludes that relying on proportionality to cap the men's athletics teams at CSBU in order to comply with the consent decree constitutes implementation of a quota based on gender in violation of Title IX." Cal State Bakersfield has filed a notice of appeal in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. Miami (Ohio) delays elimination of four sports pending the success of fund-raising plan. On February 6, trustees for Miami University (Ohio) voted unanimously to delay the elimination of its men's soccer, golf, tennis and wrestling programs pending the success of an ambitious fund-raising plan. Trustee Roger Howe's plan calls for an extensive fund-raising effort by the Miami (Ohio) athletics and development offices. The plan requires that $13 million in endowments be raised by April 16, the date of the next trustee meeting. The plan also seeks to add $700,000 annually to athletics by increasing student activity fees $50. University officials indicated that if the $13 million were not achieved by the April meeting, the trustees would have to discontinue the four men's sports. NCAA Responds to the Department of Health and Human Services request for information on NCAA championships. On April 2, the NCAA responded in writing to a request by the Office of Civil Rights at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) for information related to NCAA championships. A complaint has been filed with HHS alleging that the NCAA is in noncompliance with Title IX because more championship opportunities are offered to men than women. Specifically, HHS requested information on the following:
The NCAA answered all questions but emphasized that its response was a voluntary action. The NCAA believes that it is not subject to federal agency review related to Title IX compliance since it is not recipient of federal funds. Currently, the Third Circuit of the U.S. Court of Appeals is examining whether the NCAA is a recipient of federal funds either through the Association's relationship with the National Youth Sports Program Foundation or through the Association's relationship with the membership, most of whom are recipients of federal funds (Cureton v. NCAA). A recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling (Smith v. NCAA) determined that the NCAA is not a recipient of federal funds through its receipt of dues paid by its membership. Equity in Athletics Disclosure Act On April 9, the NCAA will attend a "negotiated rulemaking" session hosted by the U.S. Department of Education to discuss regulations on new amendments to the Student Right-to-Know Act (SRTK) and the Equity in Athletics Disclosure Act (EADA). Negotiated rulemaking is a process mandated by Congress to empower federal agencies to convene meetings with impacted parties to solicit input and build consensus for the development of proposed regulations. Federal regulations are developed to clarify and aid in the implementation of recently adopted federal laws. The April 9 negotiated rulemaking session is one of several convened to discuss amendments to the Higher Education Act (PL 105-244). The NCAA plans to offer recommendations for regulatory guidance on amendments made to the EADA and changes in definitions related to the underlying Act. A subcommittee of the NCAA's Committee on Women's Athletics has been formed to provide suggestions for the NCAA's formal recommendations. Two additional meetings will be held in May. The NCAA supports recommendations to the SRTK made by the National Association of Independent Colleges and Universities concerning the optional reporting of "transfer-out rates" and permitting the use of electronic distribution of the data. However, the NCAA will not be making separate recommendations in this area. The U.S. Department of Education is expected to consider the recommendations as it writes proposed rules to be published in the Federal Register later this summer. The Department of Education recently announced a Web site for negotiated rulemaking for higher education issues. Higher education issues ACE sends letter to presidents asking colleges and universities to join Fair Labor Association to monitor labor practices of apparel manufacturers. On March 15, ACE sent a letter to all ACE member institutions urging the schools to adopt a code of conduct aimed at stopping sweat-shop manufacturing of collegiate apparel. The code, devised by the Fair Labor Association (FLA), requires outside monitors to inspect 30 percent of factories used by an apparel manufacturer in the first year, then 5 percent to 15 percent of the factories in each subsequent year. Each company will be certified annually if it can show that it is protecting workers' rights, providing safe and sanitary working conditions, not using forced or child labor, not requiring employees to work more that 48 hours per week or 12 hours per day, and allowing freedom of association and collective bargaining by workers. The reports on compliance will be released to the public. Along with the letter is a form that colleges and universities can use to join the FLA. Annual FLA dues for college/university affiliates with licensing programs are 1 percent of their previous year's revenues capped at $50,000. Seventeen institutions already have agreed to join the FLA. The FLA and its code were initially created by representatives of the apparel and footwear industries, human rights groups, labor, religious organizations and consumer advocates working under the auspices of the Apparel Industry Partnership (AIP), which included active participation of the White House and the Department of Labor. In recent months, the AIP has worked with representatives from several universities and collegiate licensing organizations to add a college/university voice to the FLA board of directors, to create an advisory council, to establish a college/university affiliation, and to make other modifications in the FLA. These efforts were directed so that interested colleges and universities would participate in the deliberations of the FLA and, eventually, require their licensees to demonstrate compliance with the FLA standards. The Collegiate Licensing Company, a for-profit organization representing collegiate licensing interests, has developed its own code of conduct for manufacturers and is joining forces with the FLA. Student groups at some campuses have demanded that their institutions adopt a code of conduct to ensure that apparel bearing the institution's name or logo is not made under "sweat-shop" conditions. Students are specifically asking that the code include two provisions. One would require manufacturers to reveal the locations of facilities producing the products and the other would require the payment of a "living wage" to employees of the identified factories. A "living wage" would be calculated based on a market-based approach to cost of living in that area. The FLA does not include either of the student-backed provisions. However, seven of the institutions that have joined the FLA also are requiring public disclosure of factory sites in addition to the compliance with the FLA code. Several institutions also require independent inspections and equal pay and treatment for women. Nike agrees to disclose certain manufacturing site locations if competitors will do same. Nike announced in mid-March that in an effort to address fair labor standards in the manufacturing of licensed apparel, it would reveal the locations of certain foreign factories. In a letter to Georgetown University, Nike urges schools to the join the FLA (see above). In the letter, Nike says it will disclose factory locations "provided the institution requires the same level of disclosure" from others. Public disclosure of factory locations is one of the demands of student groups that have protested the use of "sweat-shop labor" in the manufacture of apparel bearing the institution's name or insignia. Senate Budget Committee recommends $40 billion in additional funding for education over next five years. During the last week in February, Sen. Pete Domenici, R-New Mexico, unveiled his budget proposal for fiscal year 2000. The plan includes a $40 billion increase in federal education funding over the next five years, funded by cuts in other federal programs. The budget document serves as a blueprint of federal spending parameters for Senate appropriators. The Senate Appropriations Committee provides the actual spending allocations. The plan drew criticism from some Republicans who claimed that more federal spending on education is not the answer to the nation's educational system. The Budget Act was considered by both the House and Senate on March 25 (H. Con. Res. 68 and S. Con. Res. 20). The differences between the two pieces of legislation are now being reconciled in a conference committee of House and Senate members. Higher education associations join together to support increased need-based aid for college students. The higher education community has joined together to support an initiative to pressure Congress to exceed year 2000 White House-recommended spending levels for several higher education programs. The higher education community's position is that the administration's fiscal year 2000 funding request for college aid to needy students is far below the amount required to make college affordable for those least likely to attend. The NCAA has joined the effort led by David Warren, president of the National Association of Independent Colleges and Universities. Several senators, including Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee Chairman Jim Jeffords, R-Vermont, added an amendment to the Budget Resolution Act (S. Con. Res. 20) endorsing the coalition's priorities for higher education Supreme Court to review student activity fee uses. On March 29, the U.S. Supreme Court announced it would review the Board of Regents, University of Wisconsin v. Southworth, case to determine whether public universities can use a portion of mandatory student activity fees to subsidize student groups with political or ideological agendas. The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals barred the university from setting aside a portion of fees collected from every student to finance groups that pursue political and ideological goals. Gambling issues Oregon holds hearing on legislation to repeal state's sports lottery. On March 10, the Oregon state legislature's Senate Committee on Trade and Economic Development conducted a hearing on S. 455, a bill to repeal the Oregon Sports Action Lottery. The Sports Action Lottery was created in 1989. The lottery allows individuals to place wagers on the outcome of NFL games. Presently, Oregon is one of three states that permit some form of sports betting. Eighty-eight percent of the proceeds ($4.6 million over the past two years -- 1995-97) are directed to athletics departments at seven public institutions in Oregon. This has placed Oregon institutions in a difficult position. The institutions recognize that NCAA rules prohibit student-athletes and athletics administrators from participating in the sports lottery (gambling on NFL games); however, the proceeds from this activity are used to help fund athletics departments. S. 455 proposes that the lost revenues from the sports lottery be replaced by funds from the state's video lottery. The NCAA was asked to testify at the March 10 hearing. The NCAA discussed the invitation with representatives from several Oregon institutions to determine if the NCAA should take a public position on the legislation and whether the higher education community in Oregon would support the legislation. At this time, the schools asked the NCAA not to testify as they continue to examine the issue. Kyl introduces Internet gambling prohibition legislation -- NCAA testifies at hearing. On March 23, Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Arizona, introduced legislation aimed at prohibiting gambling over the Internet (S. 692). In 1997, Kyl introduced a similar bill that passed the Senate in 1998 by a vote of 90-10. However, the earlier bill stalled in the House and died when the 105th Congress ended last October. Kyl, along with a group of supporters including the NCAA, has spent the last couple of months making revisions to his original bill. Kyl believes that the bill will face greater scrutiny as it makes it way through Congress. Kyl conducted a subcommittee hearing on the new legislation on March 23. Bill Saum, NCAA director of gambling and agent activity, delivered testimony on behalf of the NCAA in support of S. 692. The NCAA appeared on a panel with representatives from the NFL and the Major League Baseball Players Association. In addition, the attorneys general from Ohio and Wisconsin testified in support of the legislation. At the hearing, Kyl indicated that several groups who opposed certain provisions in his previous bill have had their concerns addressed. S. 692 contains language that is acceptable to the horse racing lobby and to sports fantasy game operators. S. 692 contains some changes to the civil remedies section aimed at addressing the concerns of Internet service providers. One major change is the elimination of criminal liability for individual gamblers who place bets over the Internet. Only Internet gambling businesses are subject to criminal penalties. This change is more consistent with other federal laws related to gambling. The Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Technology, Terrorism and Government Information plans to mark-up the legislation in April. Satellite royalty fees Currently, there are several bills in the House and Senate that address the extension of the satellite compulsory license for the retransmission of distant network and superstation signals. The NCAA, as member of the Joint Sports Claimants, shares a portion of the compulsory license fees paid for the retransmission of qualifying sports programming. In the summer of 1997, an arbitration panel determined that the compulsory license fee, paid by satellite carriers, should be raised to 27 cents. This significant increase was determined to be the fair market rate. Since then, Congress has been under great pressure to roll back this rate increase. The rate increase has been labeled by opponents as anticonsumer, and satellite carriers have passed the increase on to subscribers in form of higher rates. The current satellite compulsory license expires at the end of 1999. Currently, Congress is struggling to address some larger issues associated with the satellite industry. The most significant is legislation permitting satellite carriers to provide local signals into local markets. It is expected that the House and Senate will eventually work out these issues and consolidate them into one bill later this spring. It appears that the satellite royalty rate will be reduced, however, it is not known how far the rate will be lowered. National Youth Sports Program Statement sent to House and Senate Appropriations Committee seeking $15 Million in funding in fiscal year 2000. On March 2, a statement was delivered to Capitol Hill requesting $15 million in federal funding for the National Youth Sports Program in fiscal year 2000. Sen. Thad Cochran, R-Mississippi, ranking Republican on the Senate Appropriations Committee, has asked that the statement be included in the Senate Subcommittee's hearing record. Rep. Bill Young, R-Florida, chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, has requested that the statement be made part of the House Subcommittee's hearing record. The total of $15 million is the same level provided last year and represents the program's authorization ceiling. The House Subcommittee is expected to mark-up its legislation in early June. The Senate is expected to follow in July. The fiscal year 2000 appropriation will fund the NYSP for the summer of 2000. Young honored at NCAA event in Florida in conjunction with the Final Four. On March 27, Representative Young was honored at the NCAA's YES clinic for his longtime commitment to youth sports opportunities. Young represented the St. Petersburg Congressional District hosting the NCAA 1999 Men's Final Four. Young has consistently favored federal funding for programs such as the NYSP that offer young people from economically disadvantaged backgrounds an opportunity to participate in summer enrichment activities. Drug- and alcohol-abuse issue Court upholds suspension of student-athlete caught violating school's ban on alcohol consumption. On February 5, the Illinois Court of Appeals ruled that high-school officials did not violate the civil rights of a student-athlete suspended from sports participation for violating the school's ban on alcohol consumption. "Students can, need, want and expect to participate in interscholastic athletics, but students are not entitled to participate in them," wrote Judge Clyde Kuehn of the Appellate Court of Illinois. Referring to previous federal and state court rulings on the matter, Kuehn stated that, although the 14th Amendment forbids the state from depriving any person of "life, liberty or property without due process of law, to have a property interest in a benefit, a person must have more than an abstract need or desire for it. He must have a legitimate claim of entitlement to it. "Since Jordan (the student-athlete) possessed no independent right to participate in high-school football, the existence of a protected property interest depends upon whether he can legitimately claim that right to participate in order to earn college financial assistance. This, in turn, depends on whether the hope of earning a college scholarship rises to the level of a protectable property interest. Under the circumstances presented, it does not," wrote Kuehn. Supreme Court allows ban on student drug screening. On March 22, the U.S. Supreme Court let stand a 7th Circuit Court of Appeals ruling that prohibits an Indiana school district from requiring all high-school students who are suspended to submit to a drug test before returning to school. The Supreme Court let stand a the appeals court ruling in the Willis v. Anderson Community School Corporation case. The court held that the school district's drug-testing policy of all suspended students, regardless of the offense, is a violation of the Fourth Amendment prohibition against unreasonable searches. Attorneys for the Anderson school district had asked the Supreme Court to reinstate the school's policy, arguing that it is essential to combating student drug and alcohol use. The 7th Circuit ruling applies in Illinois, Indiana and Wisconsin. In 1995, the Supreme Court upheld a random, drug-testing policy of student-athletes in public schools, stating that such a policy is legal because it is narrowly tailored to protect students who choose to play sports. In a similar case last October, the Supreme Court let stand a drug-testing policy in another Indiana school district that required drug testing for all students participating in extracurricular activities. Athlete-agent issues Drafting committee on uniform state athlete-agent law holds fourth meeting. On February 19-20, the Drafting Committee on the Uniform Athlete Agent Act met for the fourth time in Richmond, Virginia. The purpose of the meeting was to discuss the most recent draft of the "uniform athlete-agent act," proposed state legislation currently being written by the committee. In 1997, the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws agreed to form a drafting committee to work on the development of a uniform state law to regulate athlete agents. The NCAA supports the effort. Presently, there are 27 state laws regulating athlete agents, each differing greatly in scope and content. The February 19-20 meeting was spent revising the current draft. A new version of the draft incorporating changes that were agreed upon at this meeting will be available soon. This final draft version will be reviewed at the annual meeting of the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws in Denver in July. Nearly 250 commissioners will be invited to comment as the conference reviews the entire draft. This will be considered the first reading. Following the July meeting, the draft will be reviewed by the American Bar Association in the spring of 2000. The second reading (and final approval) of the uniform act will occur at the National Conference's annual meeting in July 2000. It is expected that the uniform act will be forwarded to the states in January 2001 for consideration by state legislatures. NBA star negotiates his contract extension without agent. Milwaukee Bucks player Ray Allen recently negotiated his own six-year, $70.9 million contract extension with the team. Allen enlisted the help of two attorneys, an accountant, and a business manager to ensure that "the deal was to his liking." By paying his advisors an hourly rate, Allen saved more than $2.8 million based on the standard 4 percent commission rate charged by agents. Privacy issues -- FERPA On March 12, the NCAA received a response from the U.S. Department of Education related to the Family Educational Records Privacy Act (FERPA). The letter addressed questions posed by the NCAA at a January 13, 1999, meeting. Specifically, the letter addressed a question posed by the NCAA related to the release of information by the NCAA that could be traced back to a specific student-athlete, even though the individual is not mentioned in the news release or public statement. The department determined "that if a reasonable person in the community can identify the subject of the report based on the information provided, then the release will violate FERPA." The department's ruling significantly impacts the release of information concerning any NCAA member institution involved in an infraction case or a disciplinary action. The department indicates in the letter that it recognizes this interpretation places a hardship on the NCAA and would make the Association's current reporting procedures in violation of FERPA. However, the department is confident that the legislative history and case law substantiate their position. In the letter, the department makes the following recommendations to the NCAA to alleviate the strain that its recent interpretation of the law places on the Association. The department recommends the addition of the following language to the Student-Athlete Statement to be signed by the student-athlete as a condition of eligibility: (1) "I allow the NCAA to disclose personally identifiable information from my education records to any third party, including but not limited to the media, for the purpose of reporting or verifying compliance/ accuracy with regard to the NCAA Constitution and Bylaws, to investigate alleged violations of the Constitution and Bylaws, and/or to issue student infraction reports." The department notes that the addition of this statement "would permit the NCAA to release investigative reports and respond to any subsequent questions regarding those reports in compliance with FERPA." The department suggests that the following language also be added to the Student-Athlete Statement: (2) "I allow the NCAA to disclose personally identifiable information from my education records to any third party, including but not limited to the media, for the purpose of reporting or verifying compliance/accuracy with regard to a waiver or denial decision." The department contends that student consent to the statements above "would permit the NCAA to release waiver and denial decisions and respond to any subsequent questions regarding those waiver decisions." The adoption of these changes to the Student-Athlete Statement would require action by the governance committees. |