formance, or anti-doping and medication control 
rule violation or the violation of a period of sus-
pension or eligibility. 
(L) Threatening or seeking to intimidate a 
person with the intent of discouraging the per-
son from the good faith reporting to the Au-
thority, an agent of the Authority or the Com-
mission, or the anti-doping and medication con-
trol enforcement agency under section 5(e), of 
information that relates to— 
(i) an alleged safety, performance, or 
anti-doping and medication control rule 
violation; or 
(ii) alleged noncompliance with a safe-
ty, performance, or anti-doping and medi-
cation control rule. 
(b) TESTING LABORATORIES.— 
(1) ACCREDITATION
AND
STANDARDS.—Not 
later than 120 days before the program effective 
date, the Authority shall, in consultation with the 
anti-doping and medication control enforcement 
agency, establish, by rule in accordance with section 
4—
(A) standards of accreditation for labora-
tories involved in testing samples from covered 
horses; 
(B) the process for achieving and main-
taining accreditation; and 
(C) the standards and protocols for testing 
such samples. 
(2) ADMINISTRATION.—The accreditation of 
laboratories and the conduct of audits of accredited 
laboratories to ensure compliance with Authority 
rules shall be administered by the anti-doping and 
medication control enforcement agency. The anti- 
doping and medication control enforcement agency 
shall have the authority to require specific test sam-
ples to be directed to and tested by laboratories hav-
ing special expertise in the required tests. 
(3) EXTENSION OF PROVISIONAL OR INTERIM 
ACCREDITATION.—The Authority may, by rule in ac-
cordance with section 4, extend provisional or in-
terim accreditation to a laboratory accredited by the 
Racing Medication and Testing Consortium, Inc., on 
a date before the program effective date. 
(4) SELECTION OF LABORATORIES.— 
(A) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in 
paragraph (2), a State racing commission may
select a laboratory accredited in accordance 
with the standards established under paragraph 
(1) to test samples taken in the applicable 
State. 
(B) SELECTION BY THE AUTHORITY.—If a 
State racing commission does not select an ac-
credited laboratory under subparagraph (A), 
the Authority shall select such a laboratory to 
test samples taken in the State concerned. 
(c) RESULTS
MANAGEMENT
AND
DISCIPLINARY 
PROCESS.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 120 days be-
fore the program effective date, the Authority shall 
establish in accordance with section 4— 
(A) rules for safety, performance, and anti- 
doping and medication control results manage-
ment; and 
(B) the disciplinary process for safety, per-
formance, and anti-doping and medication con-
trol rule violations. 
(2) ELEMENTS.—The rules and process estab-
lished under paragraph (1) shall include the fol-
lowing:
(A) Provisions for notification of safety, 
performance, and anti-doping and medication 
control rule violations. 
(B) Hearing procedures. 
(C) Standards for burden of proof. 
(D) Presumptions. 
(E) Evidentiary rules. 
(F) Appeals. 
(G) Guidelines for confidentiality and pub-
lic reporting of decisions. 
(3) DUE
PROCESS.—The rules established 
under paragraph (1) shall provide for adequate due 
process, including impartial hearing officers or tribu-
nals commensurate with the seriousness of the al-
leged safety, performance, or anti-doping and medi-
cation control rule violation and the possible civil 
sanctions for such violation. 
(d) CIVIL SANCTIONS.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—The Authority shall estab-
lish uniform rules, in accordance with section 4, im-
posing civil sanctions against covered persons or cov-
ered horses for safety, performance, and anti-doping 
and medication control rule violations. 
(2) REQUIREMENTS.—The rules established 
under paragraph (1) shall—
(A) take into account the unique aspects of 
horseracing; 
(B) be designed to ensure fair and trans-
parent horseraces; and 
(C) deter safety, performance, and anti- 
doping and medication control rule violations. 
(3) SEVERITY.—The civil sanctions under para-
graph (1) may include— 
(A) 
lifetime 
bans 
from 
horseracing, 
disgorgement of purses, monetary fines and 
penalties, and changes to the order of finish in 
covered races; and 
(B) with respect to anti-doping and medi-
cation control rule violators, an opportunity to 
reduce the applicable civil sanctions that is 
comparable to the opportunity provided by the 
Protocol for Olympic Movement Testing of the 
United States Anti-Doping Agency. 
(e) MODIFICATIONS.—The Authority may propose a 
modification to any rule established under this section as 
the Authority considers appropriate, and the proposed 
modification shall be submitted to and considered by the 
Commission in accordance with section 4.
SEC. 9. REVIEW OF FINAL DECISIONS OF THE AUTHORITY. 
(a) NOTICE OF CIVIL SANCTIONS.— If the Authority 
imposes a final civil sanction for a violation committed by 
a covered person pursuant to the rules or standards of 
the Authority, the Authority shall promptly submit to the 
Commission notice of the civil sanction in such form as 
the Commission may require. 
(b) REVIEW BY ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—With respect to a final civil 
sanction imposed by the Authority, on application by 
the Commission or a person aggrieved by the civil 
sanction filed not later than 30 days after the date 
on which notice under subsection (a) is submitted, 
the civil sanction shall be subject to de novo review 
by an administrative law judge. 
(2) NATURE OF REVIEW.— 
(A) IN
GENERAL.—In matters reviewed 
under this subsection, the administrative law 
judge shall determine whether— 
(i) a person has engaged in such acts 
or practices, or has omitted such acts or 
practices, as the Authority has found the 
person to have engaged in or omitted; 
(ii) such acts, practices, or omissions 
are in violation of this Act or the anti- 
doping and medication control or racetrack
(iii) may make any finding or conclu-
sion that, in the judgment of the adminis-
trative law judge, is proper and based on 
the record. 
(B) FINAL
DECISION.—A decision under 
this paragraph shall constitute the decision of 
the Commission without further proceedings 
unless a notice or an application for review is 
timely filed under subsection (c). 
(c) REVIEW BY COMMISSION.— 
(1) NOTICE OF REVIEW BY COMMISSION.—The 
Commission may, on its own motion, review any de-
cision of an administrative law judge issued under 
subsection (b)(3) by providing written notice to the 
Authority and any interested party not later than 30 
days after the date on which the administrative law 
judge issues the decision. 
(2) APPLICATION FOR REVIEW.— 
(A) IN GENERAL.—The Authority or a per-
son aggrieved by a decision issued under sub-
section (b)(3) may petition the Commission for 
review of such decision by filing an application 
for review not later than 30 days after the date 
on which the administrative law judge issues 
the decision.
(B) EFFECT OF DENIAL OF APPLICATION 
FOR
REVIEW.—If an application for review 
under subparagraph (A) is denied, the decision 
of the administrative law judge shall constitute 
the decision of the Commission without further 
proceedings. 
(C) DISCRETION OF COMMISSION.— 
(i) IN GENERAL.—A decision with re-
spect to whether to grant an application 
for review under subparagraph (A) is sub-
ject to the discretion of the Commission. 
(ii) MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED.— 
In determining whether to grant such an 
application for review, the Commission 
shall consider whether the application 
makes a reasonable showing that— 
(I) a prejudicial error was com-
mitted in the conduct of the pro-
ceeding; or 
(II) the decision involved— 
(aa) an erroneous applica-
tion of the anti-doping and medi-
cation control or racetrack safety 
rules approved by the Commis-
sion; or
(bb) an exercise of discretion 
or a decision of law or policy that 
warrants review by the Commis-
sion. 
(3) NATURE OF REVIEW.— 
(A) IN
GENERAL.—In matters reviewed 
under this subsection, the Commission may— 
(i) affirm, reverse, modify, set aside, 
or remand for further proceedings, in 
whole or in part, the decision of the admin-
istrative law judge; and 
(ii) make any finding or conclusion 
that, in the judgement of the Commission, 
is proper and based on the record. 
(B) DE NOVO REVIEW.—The Commission 
shall review de novo the factual findings and 
conclusions of law made by the administrative 
law judge. 
(C) CONSIDERATION OF ADDITIONAL EVI-
DENCE.— 
(i) MOTION
BY
COMMISSION.—The 
Commission may, on its own motion, allow 
the consideration of additional evidence. 
(ii) MOTION BY A PARTY.—
(I) IN GENERAL.—A party may 
file a motion to consider additional 
evidence at any time before the 
issuance of a decision by the Commis-
sion, which shall show, with particu-
larity, that— 
(aa) such additional evidence 
is material; and 
(bb) there were reasonable 
grounds for failure to submit the 
evidence previously. 
(II) PROCEDURE.—The Commis-
sion may— 
(aa) accept or hear addi-
tional evidence; or 
(bb) remand the proceeding 
to the administrative law judge 
for the consideration of addi-
tional evidence. 
(d) STAY OF PROCEEDINGS.—Review by an adminis-
trative law judge or the Commission under this section 
shall not operate as a stay of a final civil sanction of the 
Authority unless the administrative law judge or Commis-
sion orders such a stay.