Dropping the hammer at Utah schools

Once upon a time, the Utah State University Aggies had what Dale Mildenberger called "the toughest drug-testing program in the nation." Not because of what happened the first time an athlete failed a drug test but because of what happened the second.
    "They were gone," recalled Mildenberger, USU's senior associate athletic director and head trainer. "Period. Gone. No chance of reinstatement."
    The Aggies don't have quite as aggressive a program now. Mildenberger describes it as "middle of the road" compared with the one that used to scare off recruits - but at least they have one.
    Having gone more than a decade without an institutional drug-testing program because administrators believed it was not worth the expense, the Aggies only 11 months ago revived drug testing after an embarrassing string of drug arrests - a "catastrophe," coach Brent Guy said - among football players last year.
    "You'd like to say you don't need it," Guy said. "But you're foolish to think that you don't."
    Like most schools around the country (and all of the public ones in Utah), the Aggies do not systematically test athletes for steroids and other performance-enhancing drugs. But they have caught two athletes using illicit drugs, so far, avoiding any more humiliating headlines.
    "When I really sat down and evaluated things, we were making it what I thought was too easy for somebody to get away with it," athletic director Randy Spetman said. "And it doesn't help your program that way."
    The Aggies are one of the six Division I schools in Utah - USU, the University of Utah and Brigham Young University are the only three that compete at the top-tier Division I-A level - about whose drug-testing programs The Salt Lake Tribune sought information as part of an investigation into institutional testing programs across the country.
    But only USU, Utah, Weber State University and Utah Valley State College provided information. Southern Utah University does not have a drug-testing program, it said. And as a private institution not beholden to open-records laws, BYU refused to release any specific information about its drug-testing program.
    In fact, the Cougars allowed associate athletic director Duff Tittle to speak about testing only in general terms.
    "We believe we have one of the best programs in the country, when you factor in everything," Tittle said. "But we also feel it's extremely important that we take the student-athletes through the education process . . . so they can make the correct choices."
    Tittle said education "is one of the most important things in our program" and that half of the program at BYU is dedicated to it, in hopes of deterring athletes from using banned substances. Most schools include an education component in their drug-testing programs.
    But aside from confirming the Cougars perform "random tests throughout the year," Tittle could not comment on the number of tests the Cougars perform, the banned substances for which they test, where the tests are analyzed, how much they pay for the testing, what happens to an athlete who fails a test or whether the school has a specific policy guiding the punishment.
    Tittle did venture that an athlete who fails a drug test at BYU probably would be violating the school's honor code, and that punishment would vary based on the recommendations of school administrators.
    Anti-doping experts caution that such secrecy threatens the credibility of any drug-testing program.
    "It's hard to know the impact without knowing the numbers," said New York internist Gary Wadler, an expert on performance-enhancing drugs in sports.
    At Utah and Utah State, the punishment for failed drug tests is clear.
    The Aggies require an athlete who fails a test for the first time to inform his or her parents or guardian and undergo counseling, though a suspension from practice or competition is left to the "sole discretion" of his or her coach, according to school policy. An athlete who fails a second test is suspended for one year, while an athlete who fails a third test loses his or her scholarship and is banned from the athletic department.
    "The biggest thing you can take away from an athlete is the ability to compete," Spetman, the athletic director, said.
    The Utes also require counseling after a first failed test - two three-hour classes that cost the athlete $50 to attend - but do not require parental notification. If an athlete fails a test for steroids or cocaine, he or she is suspended from practice and competition until given medical clearance to resume.
    An athlete who fails a second drug test at Utah is suspended for a year and required to follow the recommendations of an assessment by the alcohol and drug education center on campus. A third positive test results in the loss of scholarship and banishment from the program.
    "Our policy is pretty much in favor of helping the athletes and not punishing them," head trainer Bill Bean said. "Now, if they ignore the help, then it becomes a punishment."
    Neither the Utes nor the Aggies systematically test for steroids or other performance-enhancing drugs. Both spend between $12,000 and $16,000 per year to test primarily for "street drugs" and stimulants such as marijuana, cocaine and amphetamines, and process their samples at Occupational Health Care International in Sandy. Both allow for such testing based on suspicious characteristics such as sudden weight and strength gains, aggressive behavior, or increased acne.
    Both Bean and Mildenberger believe there are enough coaches, trainers and other athletic personnel who see athletes regularly to detect such clues. "Is there going to be somebody who slips through the cracks?" Bean asked. "Possibly. But where are you going to put your money?"
    The Utes tested 20 football players for anabolic steroids about a month before coach Kyle Whittingham began his first preseason training camp in 2005, documents show, and all passed.
    While the Aggies reported two failed tests for marijuana since resurrecting their program in January, the Utes reported 22 failed tests over the past three academic years - none for steroids. The Utes conducted an average of 416 tests per year over that span, among the most of the schools that reported testing numbers. Of the four-year schools in the state that compete at levels below Division I-A, Utah Valley State College takes the most aggressive approach with its policy, suspending athletes for up to a year on the first failed drug test for any banned substance. But UVSC said it tested only 63 athletes combined in two of the past three years. No tests were conducted in 2005-06 because of a turnover in the medical and athletic training staff.
    Two athletes failed drug tests in that span, head trainer Andrew Nelson said; one completed his suspension and counseling and returned for his senior season, but the other denied the failed test and was "not allowed to return to play." The Wolverines did perform one steroid test on suspicion, Nelson said, but it was negative.
    Southern Utah University does not have a drug-testing program or a policy, it said, while Weber State spends less than $1,000 annually, on average, to randomly test 10 percent of its athletes once per semester. WSU said it had no documents detailing test results, but head trainer Joel Bass said there have been "so, so few" in recent years. The Wildcats' drug-testing policy stipulates counseling for an athlete the first time he or she fails a test, a five-day suspension for a second offense, and an indefinite suspension and loss of scholarship for a third offense.
    "Our whole philosophy is to try to help the kid," Bass said.
    Although UVSC, WSU and SUU are not Division I-A schools, they are still subject to the NCAA's random year-round testing program, as well as its postseason testing program - just like the Utes, Aggies and Cougars.