The Division I Academics/Eligibility/Compliance Cabinet tackled a light legislative agenda at its June 11-13 meeting in San Diego as Division I prepares for a new single annual legislative cycles that begins July 15 with a deadline for proposals.

One proposal the AEC Cabinet will submit by then -- and the only legislative issue that generated much debate from the full cabinet at the San Diego meeting -- concerns allowing prospective student-athletes to fulfill a recently enhanced core-curriculum requirement the summer before initial college enrollment.

Specifically, the cabinet is asking the Division I Management Council to sponsor legislation that allows prospects to earn up to one approved core-course unit in the summer immediately after high-school graduation, provided the course appears on the high-school transcript from which the course was taken.

Proponents of the measure believe it provides greater flexibility for prospects to meet tougher core-course requirements set to become effective with the entering class of 2008. Those student-athletes will have to have completed 16 core courses as opposed to the current 14 required. The Division I Board of Directors unanimously approved the increase during its April meeting.

But some cabinet members were concerned that such flexibility for prospects could muddy the qualifier waters. In other words, institutional personnel would have to wait until late in the certification process in some cases to determine qualifier status on prospects opting to take their final core course in the summer period. That might be a hardship on coaches making last-minute scholarship determinations.

The only other timely legislative actions the cabinet took were of a housekeeping nature. One was recommending that the Management Council sponsor emergency legislation at its July meeting to increase from two to three the number of women's basketball coaches allowed to recruit off campus during the April contact period after the Women's Final Four. The measure, which is not considered to be controversial, became necessary with recent modifications to the women's basketball recruiting calendar.

Cabinet members also urged the Management Council not to support Proposal No. 2002-5, which permits two-year college transfers who enter during the academic year to compete during the nontraditional segment if they haven't competed in the championship segment at the two-year college that same year. The cabinet tabled that proposal in February 2002 and would prefer that the Council support the less-restrictive Proposal No. 2003-39, which would allow the two-year transfer to compete in the championship segment under the same provisions as Proposal No. 2002-5. Cabinet members believe Proposal No. 2003-39 is the better option because it permits two-year college transfers to compete in both the championship and nonchampionship segments, which affords them the same competitive advantages as their four-year transfer counterparts.

In other items of interest, the AEC Cabinet:

Approved a revision to the initial-eligibility waiver procedures in cases in which the NCAA enforcement services staff is involved. The change provides for a conference call that would include three institutional representatives, as well as legal representation. Student-athletes also would be allowed to participate under certain conditions. Current initial-eligibility waiver procedures do not provide for any participation by member institutions, student-athletes or other interested parties (such as private counsel). Cabinet members believe that the changes provide structure for the involvement and conduct of outside participants on the conference calls and subsequent deliberation procedures.

Approved a revision to policies that permit NCAA staff to approve, through the intercept waiver process, the eligibility of prospects who do not meet the initial-eligibility requirements in effect at the time of their enrollment, but who do satisfy the requirements at the time of high-school graduation. Student-athletes who would have satisfied the initial-eligibility requirements at the time of graduation but who did not immediately enroll in a collegiate institution may not have satisfied initial-eligibility requirements at the time of initial full-time collegiate enrollment. The recommended policy allows such student-athletes to be declared eligible through a streamlined process. The cabinet also believes that by allowing staff to process these types of cases, the administrative burden on the institution is reduced and the student-athlete's eligibility is determined in a more timely manner.

Agreed that though recently adopted legislation will eliminate references to partial qualifiers (Bylaw 14.3.2), all initial-eligibility waiver subcommittees shall continue to have the authority to grant student-athletes the ability to practice and/or receive institutional athletics financial aid.