The NCAA Division II Committee on Infractions has placed Brigham Young University, Hawaii, on three years of probation for failing to monitor student-athlete eligibility.

Other penalties for the violations include a mandatory compliance review and completion of annual compliance reports.

The committee found that from 2005-06 through 2007-08, the university failed to monitor its athletics program in four specific areas pertaining to student-athlete eligibility.

First, NCAA rules state that a transfer student-athlete must complete either six semester or six quarter hours of transferable academic credit from the preceding academic term to be eligible for competition. 

The committee found that the university did not apply this rule when certifying eight transfer student-athletes. Two of these student-athletes participated in softball and two participated in women’s basketball. The remaining transfer student-athletes competed in men’s basketball, women’s soccer, men’s soccer and men’s tennis.

The university did not complete the evaluation of these eight student-athletes’ official transcripts to ensure all eligibility requirements had been met until the enforcement staff requested the action during the investigation. This was well after the transfer student-athletes had enrolled and competed.

Second, according to NCAA rules, a student-athlete must designate a program of studies by the beginning of the third year of enrollment. During the course of the investigation, the enforcement staff identified four situations in which the degree-designation rules were not followed and school officials were not tracking compliance of the rule.

Third, the university failed to monitor the completion of the NCAA General Amateurism and Eligibility Forms for International and Select Students in tennis. The university had delegated this monitoring responsibility to the head tennis coach, even though this duty is a compliance function. Besides the obvious conflict of interest that may arise when a coach is asked to determine if certain information might cause an eligibility issue for a prospect the coach is recruiting, the committee found that final eligibility decisions cannot be left solely to individuals not charged with that responsibility in an official capacity.

Finally, the university allowed three student-athletes to practice, compete and receive travel expenses before receiving final amateurism certification from the NCAA Eligibility Center. A women’s basketball student-athlete participated in 33 practices beyond the permissible 45-day grace period and competed in five contests before receiving her final amateurism certification. A men’s golf student-athlete participated in five practices beyond the 45-day grace period and competed in eight dates of competition before receiving his final amateurism certification. A men’s soccer student-athlete participated in 58 practices beyond the 45-day grace period and competed in 16 dates of competition before receiving his final amateurism certification.

The penalties in this case are as follows:

• Public reprimand and censure.
• Three years of probation (August 26, 2009, to August 25, 2012).
• As a part of its annual compliance reports, the university shall identify specific individuals responsible for compliance oversight in the admissions, registrar, housing, academic services and financial aid departments.
• The university shall request a Blueprint Compliance Review as soon as one can be scheduled with the NCAA Academic and Membership Affairs staff.

The members of the NCAA Division II Committee on Infractions who reviewed this case are Wendy Taylor May, chair, senior associate athletics director, University of California, San Diego; Bruce Kirsh, athletics director and vice president, Franklin Pierce University; Jean Paul Bradshaw II, attorney, Lathrop & Gage LLC; Bridget Lyons, senior associate director of athletics, Barry University; and Julie Rochester, faculty athletics representative and associate professor, Northern Michigan University.