WADA - WADA Technical Document – ISL TD2027PERF

WADA Technical Document – ISL TD2027PERF Document number: ISL TD2027PERF Version number: 1.0

Written by: Reviewed by:

WADA Science / TD PERF Drafting Team WADA Laboratory Expert Advisory Group Approved by: WADA Executive Committee Date: 02 December 2025 Effective date: 01 January 2027

Page 1/29 ISL TD2027PERF – Version 1.0 – 01 January 2027 Laboratory Performance Evaluation 1.0 Introduction This Technical Document (TD), which constitutes an integral part of the International Stan dard for Laboratories 1 (ISL [1]), outlines the WADA requirements for the evaluation of Laboratory performance within the framework of the WADA External Quality Assessment Scheme (EQAS) and during routine Analytical Testing. The Laboratory Expert Advisory Group (Lab EAG) 2 evaluates Laboratory performance and oversees the accreditation of Laboratories and the approval of ABP Laboratories. 2.0 Laboratory EQAS Program The WADA system of Laboratory EQAS and routine Analytical Testing performance evaluation (see Points Scale Table in Article 3.8 below) has been developed with the objective of setting a transparent and balanced procedure for evaluation of Laboratory operations. It is based on the principle of proportionality and is focused on improving and harmonizing Laboratory Analytical Testing capabilities. It is ultimately aimed at supporting Laboratory quality management and maintaining the confidence in and strengthening the anti-doping Laboratory system. Satisfactory EQAS performance in single-blind and doubleblind EQAS rounds, as well as over a consecutive twelve (12)-month period 3 is necessary for maintaining WADA accreditation. [Comment 1 to Article 2.0: An EQAS Round is a distribution of EQAS sample(s) to the Laboratories for Analytical Testing as defined by WADA.] Laboratory performance in the educational EQAS is not evaluated according to the Points Scale Table; however, unsatisfactory performance in an educational EQAS shall trigger and investigation and/or the

defined by WADA.] Laboratory performance in the educational EQAS is not evaluated according to the Points Scale Table; however, unsatisfactory performance in an educational EQAS shall trigger and investigation and/or the implementation of corrective actions by the Laboratory , as applicable. Where the unsatisfactory educational EQAS performance relates to a new or WADA-specific Analytical Testing Procedure (ATP), this may prevent the Laboratory from seeking an extension of the Laboratory’s Scope of ISO/IEC 17025 Accreditation [3] for the affected ATP and thereby preclude its application in routine Analytical Testing

1 To facilitate the comprehension and interpretation of ISL provisions , including ISL TDs and ISL Technical Letters (TLs), when requirements apply to both Laboratories and ABP Laboratories, both shall be referred to as “Laboratory( -ies)”. If, instead, provisions apply exclusively to either Laboratories or ABP Laboratories, the specific definition is used as applicable. When the term “laboratory” is used, it implies laboratories that are neither WADA-accredited nor -ABP-approved. 2 Laboratory Expert Advisory Group, Terms of Reference; https://www.wada -ama.org/en/resources/governance/laboratory-expertadvisory-group-terms-reference. 3 The twelve (12)-month period, used to assess the total number of points accumulated by a Laboratory according to the Points Scale Table (Article 3.8), is defined as the most recent consecutive twelve (12 )-month interval starting from the date that the Laboratory is informed by WADA, in writing, of the final number of points assigned in respect to a Laboratory nonconformity. Any assigned points will expire after a twelve (12 )-month period; however, the total number of points accumulated within any consecutive twelve (12 )-month period shall not reach the maximum allowed number of points established in the Points Scale Table.WADA Technical Document – ISL TD2027PERF Document number: ISL TD2027PERF Version number: 1.0

Written by: Reviewed by:

WADA Science / TD PERF Drafting Team

period shall not reach the maximum allowed number of points established in the Points Scale Table.WADA Technical Document – ISL TD2027PERF Document number: ISL TD2027PERF Version number: 1.0

Written by: Reviewed by:

WADA Science / TD PERF Drafting Team WADA Laboratory Expert Advisory Group Approved by: WADA Executive Committee Date: 02 December 2025 Effective date: 01 January 2027

Page 2/29 ISL TD2027PERF – Version 1.0 – 01 January 2027 (see the ISL Article 4.1.4.2.4 [1] and ISL TD ATP [2]). In such circumstances, the Laboratory may only apply the newly WADA-approved ATP for routine Sample analysis when it properly corrects the deficiencies identified in the educational EQAS (as determined by WADA ) and the Test M ethod is included in the Laboratory’s Scope of ISO/IEC 17025 Accreditation [3]. [Comment 2 to Article 2.0: Some ATPs are not eligible for a Flexible Scope of ISO/IEC 17025 Accreditation and require an extension of the Scope of ISO/IEC 17025 Accreditation before the Laboratory can apply the procedure to the analysis of Samples. WADA-specific ATPs, and the process to be followed for their implementation, are described in the ISL TD ATP [2]] 2.1. EQAS Samples Analyzed with Qualitative Procedures (Non-Threshold Substances) When a Non -Threshold Substance has been reported, the Laboratory result will be evaluated based on the expected test result for the EQAS sample, e.g., Adverse Analytical Finding (AAF), Atypical Finding (ATF), or Negative Finding. a) Non-Threshold Substances (NTS) without Minimum Reporting Levels (MRLs) [4]

1. EQAS samples containing an NTS at a concentration greater than or equal to (≥) the

Minimum Required Performance Level (MRPL) 4

Atypical Finding (ATF), or Negative Finding. a) Non-Threshold Substances (NTS) without Minimum Reporting Levels (MRLs) [4]

1. EQAS samples containing an NTS at a concentration greater than or equal to (≥) the

Minimum Required Performance Level (MRPL) 4 The Laboratory shall report the EQAS sample results as an AAF. EQAS results shall be evaluated as per the Points Scale Table. ii. EQAS samples containing an NTS at a concentration below (<) the MRPL EQAS results shall not be evaluated using the Points Scale Table. However, the Laboratory should report the presence of a NTS without an MRL at an estimated concentration below (<) the MRPL if an Analyte of the NTS is identified in the Sample in accordance with the ISL TD IDCR [5] and/or other applicable ISL TD or ISL TL. WADA may require the Laboratory to conduct an internal investigation and report to WADA if such Samples are not reported as an AAF. b) Non-Threshold Substance with an MRL [6]:

1. EQAS samples at a concentration greater than (>) 150% of the MRL The Laboratory shall report the EQAS sample results as an AAF. EQAS results shall be evaluated as per the Points Scale Table. ii. EQAS samples at concentrations less than or equal to (≤) 150% of the MRL

4 For an EQAS sample to be considered suitable for Laboratory performance evaluation (i.e., evaluation of Laboratory capacity to detect and report the presence of a Prohibited Substance, a Prohibited Method or a confounding factor in the sample) , criteria have been established to ensure that the concentration of the target Analyte(s) in the EQAS sample, as determined by the EQAS Sample Provider, meet the applicable substance detection (MRPL) and/or reporting [MRL, Decision Limit (DL)] criteria.WADA Technical Document – ISL TD2027PERF Document number: ISL TD2027PERF Version number: 1.0

Written by: Reviewed by:

meet the applicable substance detection (MRPL) and/or reporting [MRL, Decision Limit (DL)] criteria.WADA Technical Document – ISL TD2027PERF Document number: ISL TD2027PERF Version number: 1.0

Written by: Reviewed by:

WADA Science / TD PERF Drafting Team WADA Laboratory Expert Advisory Group Approved by: WADA Executive Committee Date: 02 December 2025 Effective date: 01 January 2027

Page 3/29 ISL TD2027PERF – Version 1.0 – 01 January 2027 The Laboratory should report the EQAS sample results as a Negative Finding, except for those Prohibited Substances for which the result shall be reported as ATF or in those specific circumstances where the result shall be reported as AAF (see ISL TD MRL [6]). EQAS results shall be evaluated using the Points Scale Table if it is determined that the Laboratory did not follow the applicable reporting requirements. 2.2. EQAS Samples Analyzed with Quantitative Procedures 5 a) The quantitative determinations in EQAS samples of Threshold Substances at levels greater than (>) 50% of the Threshold, the Markers of the of the Steroidal and Endocrine Modules of the Athlete Biological Passport (ABP), the urinary SG, and the carbon isotopic ratios of Target Compounds (TCs) and Endogenous Reference Compounds (ERCs) by GC/C/IRMS will be statistically evaluated ( e.g., z-score 6, degree of equivalence analysis) to determine the compatibility of the reported result with the assigned value (reference, nominal or consensus value, as applicable). In addition, the Bias (B) and Measurement Uncertainty (MU) of the determination will also be statistically evaluated for compliance with the criteria indicated in the effective version of the ISL TD DL [7] or other relevant ISL TD, ISL TL or Laboratory Guidelines (LGs). b) A Laboratory shall achieve a satisfactory statistical evaluation of their reported quantitative results. Nonconforming results shall be evaluated as per the Points Scale Table.

ISL TD DL [7] or other relevant ISL TD, ISL TL or Laboratory Guidelines (LGs). b) A Laboratory shall achieve a satisfactory statistical evaluation of their reported quantitative results. Nonconforming results shall be evaluated as per the Points Scale Table. [Comment to Article 2.2 b): For Laboratory harmonization, the main criterion applied for the evaluation of EQAS quantitative results is the compatibility of the reported Laboratory result with the assigned value for proficiency assessment. Therefore, the incorrect reporting, for example, of an EQAS sample containing a Threshold Substance as a Negative Finding or as an AAF, as applicable, is not considered as a False Negative Finding or False AAF, respectively, if the absolute z-score for the Laboratory's quantitative result is < 3.0 6.]

1. Unsatisfactory Quantitative Result (absolute z-score ≥ 3.0) − WADA shall request the Laboratory to provide a Corrective Action Report ( CAR) for unsatisfactory quantitative result occurrences in accordance with the Points Scale Table.

The CAR shall be submitted within thirty (30) days of receiving a written notification about the unsatisfactory result (s) from WADA (unless the nonconformity led to the

5 Applicable to the measurement of concentrations of Threshold Substances and the Markers of the Steroidal and Endocrine Modules of the ABP, as well as urinary Specific Gravity (SG) and Gas Chromatography / Combustion / Isotope Ratio Mass Spectrometry (GC/C/IRMS) determinations. 6 The z–score is calculated for the quantitative results reported by each Laboratory according to Eq. 1, and is expressed truncated to one (1) decimal place: (Eq.1) 𝒛𝒛 = 𝒙𝒙𝒊𝒊−𝒙𝒙𝒑𝒑𝒑𝒑

Where: xi is the mean value of the Laboratory’s measurements; xpt is the assigned value for proficiency assessment (reference, nominal

𝒙𝒙𝒊𝒊−𝒙𝒙𝒑𝒑𝒑𝒑

Where: xi is the mean value of the Laboratory’s measurements; xpt is the assigned value for proficiency assessment (reference, nominal or consensus value, as applicable); σ pt is the standard deviation for proficiency assessment (i.e.., the maximum allowed combined standard uncertainty - uc_Max - or the robust Reproducibility - sR - of results from all participant Laboratories). The uc_Max is adopted as σpt unless a uc_Max has not yet been established by WADA, in which case the sR will be used as σpt.WADA Technical Document – ISL TD2027PERF Document number: ISL TD2027PERF Version number: 1.0

Written by: Reviewed by:

WADA Science / TD PERF Drafting Team WADA Laboratory Expert Advisory Group Approved by: WADA Executive Committee Date: 02 December 2025 Effective date: 01 January 2027

Page 4/29 ISL TD2027PERF – Version 1.0 – 01 January 2027 reporting of a False AAF or a False Negative Finding , in which case the CAR shall be provided in accordance with Articles 3.2 and 3.3 below, respectively). − Failure to submit a satisfactory CAR (as per Article 3.5) or the nonapproved late submission of the CAR without prior approval by WADA shall result in the imposition of further points in accordance with the Points Scale Table. ii. Questionable Quantitative Result (absolute z-score > 2.0 and < 3.0) WADA shall request the Laboratory to perform an internal investigation to determine the root cause(s) of the questionable result and implement appropriate corrective measures to resolve them. It is not necessary to provide a CAR to WADA. 3.0 Evaluation of Laboratory EQAS and Routine Analytical Testing Performance 3.1. Application of Analytical Testing Procedures (ATPs)

root cause(s) of the questionable result and implement appropriate corrective measures to resolve them. It is not necessary to provide a CAR to WADA. 3.0 Evaluation of Laboratory EQAS and Routine Analytical Testing Performance 3.1. Application of Analytical Testing Procedures (ATPs) a) Any Sample test result reported during routine Analytical Testing or in an EQAS shall be based on the application of validated ATPs, in accordance with the ISL TD VAL [8]. b) The inclusion of an ATP within the Laboratory ’s Scope of ISO/IEC 17025 Accreditation establishes the presumption that the ATP has been validated as Fit-for-Purpose [1], [3]. 3.2. False AAF The reporting of a False AAF is not acceptable for any blind or doubleblind EQAS sample or during routine Analytical Testing conducted by a Laboratory. a) False Adverse Analytical Finding during routine Analytical Testing

1. The Laboratory shall inform the Testing Authority (TA) (or Results Management Authority

(RMA), if different) and WADA immediately if the Laboratory discovers that it reported a False AAF during routine Analytical Testing. ii. WADA shall inform the Laboratory immediately if a routine Analytical Testing False AAF is identified by WADA, based on information received from a TA , a n RMA, through WADA’s Results Management activities or through any other means. b) False Adverse Analytical Finding in EQAS

1. If a False AAF is reported during the (blindor doubleblind) EQAS, WADA shall immediately start an investigation to establish if the incorrect result was caused by the EQAS Sample Provider (blind and double-blind EQAS) or the TA / Delegated Third Party

(DTP) / Major Event Organization (MEO) that delivered the Sample to the Laboratory (only for double-blind EQAS).WADA Technical Document – ISL TD2027PERF Document number: ISL TD2027PERF Version number: 1.0

Written by: Reviewed by:

WADA Science / TD PERF Drafting Team

for double-blind EQAS).WADA Technical Document – ISL TD2027PERF Document number: ISL TD2027PERF Version number: 1.0

Written by: Reviewed by:

WADA Science / TD PERF Drafting Team WADA Laboratory Expert Advisory Group Approved by: WADA Executive Committee Date: 02 December 2025 Effective date: 01 January 2027

Page 5/29 ISL TD2027PERF – Version 1.0 – 01 January 2027 ii. If the WADA investigation indicates that the False AAF result was caused by an error made by the EQAS Sample Provider or the TA / DTP / MEO, WADA shall inform the Laboratory, and no further action shall be required from the Laboratory. iii. If it is established that the False AAF was caused by an error made by the Laboratory during the Analytical Testing of the EQAS sample(s), WADA shall inform the Laboratory as soon as possible. c) Cessation of Affected Analytical Testing Activities

1. When a False AAF is reported, the Laboratory shall cease all affected ATP(s) and/or Laboratory process(es) ( e.g., ITP(s) and/or CP(s) as applicable, Sample aliquoting, reporting of results) as soon as it becomes aware that a False AAF has been reported, to prevent further nonconformities and to prioritize the conduct of a Root Cause Analysis

(RCA) and the planning of corrective actions. ii. The Laboratory shall inform its customers of the cessation of the affected ATP (s) and/or Laboratory process(es) if it affects the results reporting timelines. d) WADA Laboratory Assessment The reporting of any False AAF result, irrespective of whether it relates to routine Analytical Testing or the EQAS, or whether it results in the imposition of an Analytical Testing Restriction (ATR) or the Suspension of the Laboratory’s WADA accreditation, may trigger a WADA Laboratory Assessment and the requirement that additional EQAS samples be analyzed by

Testing or the EQAS, or whether it results in the imposition of an Analytical Testing Restriction (ATR) or the Suspension of the Laboratory’s WADA accreditation, may trigger a WADA Laboratory Assessment and the requirement that additional EQAS samples be analyzed by the Laboratory. All costs associated with the preparation, characterization and shipment of the EQAS samples, as well as the conduct of the Laboratory Assessment, shall be at the Laboratory’s expense. 3.2.1 False Adverse Analytical Finding Reported during R outine Analytical Testing with Consequences 7 for the Athlete. a) If the reporting of the False AAF has resulted in Consequences imposed against an Athlete, the Laboratory shall initially receive twenty (20) points in accordance with the Points Scale Table, irrespective of the nature of the error (technical/methodological or clerical/administrative) that led to the reporting of the False AAF. b) Voluntary Self-reporting If the Laboratory first informs WADA of their investigation and discovery of a False AAF, then the Laboratory shall have five (5) points deducted from the twenty (2 0) points initially assigned.

7 Defined in the Code [9] as resulting in one or more of the following consequences for the Athlete: Disqualification, Ineligibility, Provisional Suspension, Financial Consequences and/or Public Disclosure.WADA Technical Document – ISL TD2027PERF Document number: ISL TD2027PERF Version number: 1.0

Written by: Reviewed by:

WADA Science / TD PERF Drafting Team WADA Laboratory Expert Advisory Group Approved by: WADA Executive Committee Date: 02 December 2025 Effective date: 01 January 2027

Page 6/29 ISL TD2027PERF – Version 1.0 – 01 January 2027 c) Root Cause Analysis and Plan of Corrective Action(s) The Laboratory shall provide WADA with a Root Cause Analysis (RCA) and a plan of

Page 6/29 ISL TD2027PERF – Version 1.0 – 01 January 2027 c) Root Cause Analysis and Plan of Corrective Action(s) The Laboratory shall provide WADA with a Root Cause Analysis (RCA) and a plan of corrective action(s) for rectification of the nonconformity within five (5) days of informing WADA or being informed by WADA of the False AAF, as applicable. For Major Events, this period shall be substantially shorter (within twenty -four (24) hours of notification of the False AAF; see also ISL Article 7.7 [1]). In exceptional cases, the timeline may be extended by WADA. d) Lab EAG Review The Lab EAG shall review the Laboratory’s RCA and plan of corrective actions within five (5) days, or within a timeline otherwise defined by WADA, and determine:

1. RCA: Whether the Laboratory’s RCA investigation has correctly identified the root cause(s) of the nonconformity. ii. Plan of Corrective and Preventive Actions Plan: whether the Laboratory’s plan for corrective and preventive actions is adequate to rectify and minimize the risk of recurrence of the nonconformity (see also Article 3.5). e) Submission of Corrective Action Report Following the Lab EAG’s approval of the Laboratory’s RCA and corrective actions plan, the Laboratory shall provide WADA with a CAR including evidence of implementation of the corrective and preventive actions within five (5) days, or within a timeline otherwise determined by WADA (for example, within forty-eight (48) hours during Major Events; see also ISL Article 7.7 [1]). f) Satisfactory and Timely Corrective Action Report: Resumption of Analytical Testing
2. If the nonconformity is satisfactorily resolved within the timelines established in this Article 3.2.1, as determined by the Lab EAG, the Laboratory shall have five (5) points deducted, in accordance with the Points Scale Table.

1. If the nonconformity is satisfactorily resolved within the timelines established in this Article 3.2.1, as determined by the Lab EAG, the Laboratory shall have five (5) points deducted, in accordance with the Points Scale Table. ii. The Laboratory shall be informed by WADA, in writing, of the final number of points assigned in connection with the reporting of the False AAF 8. iii. Nevertheless, WADA reserves the right to send extra EQAS samples or perform an On-site Assessment of the Laboratory , at WADA ’s discretion and at the Laboratory’s expense.

8 WADA shall inform a Laboratory in writing about the assignment of points , as decided by the Lab EAG and in accordance with the Points Scale Table (Article 3.8). If the final decision regarding the number of points to be imposed is conditional on the evaluation of implemented corrective actions or other follow-up measures (e.g., analysis of further EQAS samples) that have been requested by the Lab EAG, WADA will only inform the Laboratory about the final number of points imposed at the end of the evaluation process.WADA Technical Document – ISL TD2027PERF Document number: ISL TD2027PERF Version number: 1.0

Written by: Reviewed by:

WADA Science / TD PERF Drafting Team WADA Laboratory Expert Advisory Group Approved by: WADA Executive Committee Date: 02 December 2025 Effective date: 01 January 2027

Page 7/29 ISL TD2027PERF – Version 1.0 – 01 January 2027 iv. The Laboratory may resume Analytical Testing following written notification by WADA, provided that the total number of accumulated points by the Laboratory for a twelve (12)-month 3 period has not reached thirty (30) points. g) Unsatisfactory Corrective Action Report: Suspension or Analytical Testing Restriction If the nonconformity is not satisfactorily resolved within the timelines in accordance

a twelve (12)-month 3 period has not reached thirty (30) points. g) Unsatisfactory Corrective Action Report: Suspension or Analytical Testing Restriction If the nonconformity is not satisfactorily resolved within the timelines in accordance with this Article 3 .2.1, as determined by the Lab EAG , then the Laboratory shall be assigned an additional ten (10) points and the Lab EAG shall recommend the ATR or Suspension of the Laboratory, as applicable (see ISL Article 7.1.1.2 [1]) 9. h) Additional Analyses

1. WADA may request t he Laboratory to analyze additional EQAS samples (at the Laboratory’s expense) and/or perform a retrospective review of the relevant analytical results. In addition, WADA may request the Laboratory to re-analyze any relevant Samples stored in the Laboratory that were previously reported as AAF based on the application of the ATP(s) for which the noncompliance occurred during the preceding twelve (12)-months (or during a period otherwise determined by WADA) 3, 10, 11. ii. Depending on the root cause(s) of the error that led to the reporting of the False AAF, this re -analysis may be limited to one Analyte, a class of Prohibited Substances or Prohibited Methods, or may include any Prohibited Substance or Prohibited Method. iii. The Laboratory shall report the results of the re-analysis to WADA. iv. The Laboratory shall inform all its customers whose Analytical Testing results may have been affected.

9 During the period of ATR or Suspension, the Laboratory shall follow the instructions provided in ISL Article s 7.2.1 and 7.2.2 [1], respectively, regarding Samples in the Laboratory’s possession. WADA shall conduct an Assessment (preferably on-site) of the Laboratory, including the analysis of additional EQAS samples. The ATR or Suspension of the Laboratory shall be lifted only once the

respectively, regarding Samples in the Laboratory’s possession. WADA shall conduct an Assessment (preferably on-site) of the Laboratory, including the analysis of additional EQAS samples. The ATR or Suspension of the Laboratory shall be lifted only once the required conditions have been satisfactorily met, and the Laboratory provides sufficient evidence, as determined by WADA, that appropriate steps have been taken to remedy the issue(s) that resulted in the ATR or Suspension. 10 The retrospective review of the analytical results and re -analysis of previous relevant Samples reported as AAF shall be performed with the objective of determining whether any other related [i.e., produced by the same root cause(s)] False AAF(s) have been reported by the Laboratory. The discovery of additional False AAF (s) shall lead to the implementation of corrective measures and shall be communicated to the responsible TA (or RMA, if different) and to WADA . However, the additional False AAF(s) will not lead to the accumulation of additional points if produced by the same root cause(s), as determined by WADA. 11 The Laboratory may not re -analyze Sample(s) previously reported as AAF s if the responsible Anti-Doping Organization (ADO) has charged the Athlete with a Code Article 2.1 [9] anti-doping rule violation resulting from the analysis of the Sample, without the consent of the Athlete or approval from a hearing body. However, in connection with its monitoring of a Laboratory , WADA may direct the Further Analysis of a Sample, which has resulted in a Code Article 2.1 anti-doping rule violation charge, without the consent of the Athlete or approval from a hearing body , provided that the resulting analytical result is not used against the Athlete [for example, reanalyzing Sample(s) which the Laboratory has reported as AAF when other Sample (s) analyzed by the Laboratory using the same ATP has been discovered to be a False AAF(s)].WADA Technical Document – ISL TD2027PERF Document number: ISL TD2027PERF Version number: 1.0

Written by: Reviewed by:

ATP has been discovered to be a False AAF(s)].WADA Technical Document – ISL TD2027PERF Document number: ISL TD2027PERF Version number: 1.0

Written by: Reviewed by:

WADA Science / TD PERF Drafting Team WADA Laboratory Expert Advisory Group Approved by: WADA Executive Committee Date: 02 December 2025 Effective date: 01 January 2027

Page 8/29 ISL TD2027PERF – Version 1.0 – 01 January 2027 3.2.2 False Adverse Analytical Finding reported during routine Analytical Testing with No Consequences for an Athlete or False Adverse Analytical Finding reported for an EQAS Sample a) Root Cause Analysis and Plan of Corrective Action(s) The Laboratory shall provide WADA with an RCA and a plan of corrective action(s) for rectification of the nonconformity within five ( 5) days of informing WADA or being informed by WADA of the False AAF, as applicable. b) Lab EAG Review The Lab EAG shall review the Laboratory’s RCA and plan of corrective actions within five (5) days, or within a timeline otherwise determined by WADA and determine:

1. RCA: Whether the Laboratory’s RCA investigation has correctly identified the root cause(s) of the nonconformity as either a technical/methodological error or a clerical/administrative error. ii. Plan of Corrective and Preventive Action(s): whether the Laboratory’s plan for corrective action(s) is adequate to rectify and minimize the risk of recurrence of the nonconformity (see also Article 3.5). c) Classification of Error The Lab EAG , taking into consideration the RCA investigation performed by the Laboratory, shall determine whether the error shall be classified as technical/methodological or clerical/administrative.
2. Technical/Methodological Error The Laboratory shall be initially assigned twenty (20) points in accordance with the

Points Scale Table.

Laboratory, shall determine whether the error shall be classified as technical/methodological or clerical/administrative.

1. Technical/Methodological Error The Laboratory shall be initially assigned twenty (20) points in accordance with the

Points Scale Table. ii. Clerical/Administrative Error 12 The Laboratory shall be initially assigned fifteen (15) points in accordance with the Points Scale Table.

12 For the purpose of Laboratory performance evaluation, clerical/administrative errors are defined as those incidental, non -systematic errors of no technical or methodological origin (e.g., a typographical error when manually recording an analytical result). The Laboratory shall bear no responsibility for clerical/administrative errors reflected in the Laboratory documentation, which were made, for example, by the Sample Collection Authority (SCA) or the TA.WADA Technical Document – ISL TD2027PERF Document number: ISL TD2027PERF Version number: 1.0

Written by: Reviewed by:

WADA Science / TD PERF Drafting Team WADA Laboratory Expert Advisory Group Approved by: WADA Executive Committee Date: 02 December 2025 Effective date: 01 January 2027

Page 9/29 ISL TD2027PERF – Version 1.0 – 01 January 2027 d) Voluntary Self-reporting If the Laboratory first informs WADA of their investigation and discovery of a False AAF, then the Laboratory shall have five (5) points deducted from the number of points initially assigned. e) Submission of Corrective Action Report Following approval of the Laboratory ’s RCA and corrective actions plan by the Lab EAG, the Laboratory shall provide WADA with a CAR including evidence of implemented corrective and preventive actions within five (5) days, or within a timeline otherwise determined by WADA. f) Additional Analyses

1. The Laboratory may be required by WADA to analyze additional EQAS samples

(at the Laboratory’s expense) and/or perform a retrospective review of the relevant

implemented corrective and preventive actions within five (5) days, or within a timeline otherwise determined by WADA