University President Mary Sue Coleman said in an interview yesterday that she's not concerned with the Athletic Department’s practice of paying for faculty members on a student-athlete oversight committee to attend bowl games because the Office of the Provost, not the committee, has the final authority in athlete eligibility cases.

The Committee on Academic Performance, known as the APC, which is part of the University’s Advisory Board on Intercollegiate Athletics that advises Athletic Director Bill Martin on issues concerning Michigan athletics, reviews eligibility cases for student-athletes who fall below the University’s required 2.0 grade point average.

An internal University audit from July 2007 said there “may appear to be a conflict of interest” with the Athletic Department’s practice of offering to pay the bowl game expenses for APC members, which include airfare, hotel accommodations, tickets and meals.

Seven APC members attended the 2007 Rose Bowl game as “guests of the Athletic Department,” the audit said.

According to University bylaws, the APC, made up of all the faculty members and one University administrator on the athletics advisory board, has the authority “to determine (student-athletes’) eligibility for competition in intercollegiate athletics.” But the bylaws give University Provost Teresa Sullivan the final authority on all eligibility cases.

Coleman said the Provost’s authority on athletic eligibility cases along with the University’s disclosure of the practice of paying for APC members to travel to bowl games greatly decreases the potential for any conflict of interest.

“When I look at it, we disclose the potential — you know, everybody knows about it,” she said. “I believe absolutely in the integrity of the faculty in making these decisions.”

Coleman added that administrators within the Office of the Provost do not get their bowl game trips funded by money the Athletic Department receives for making a bowl game.

The bowl game trips for APC members are valuable, she said later, because it gives those individuals the opportunity to meet with faculty from other colleges and universities who serve on similar intercollegiate athletics advisory groups.

Though the Office of the Provost has final authority on athlete eligibility cases, the minutes for the Advisory Board on Intercollegiate Athletics between January 2006 and January 2008 do not specifically mention the Office of the Provost overturning or changing any decisions made by the APC.

Pharmacology Prof. Charles Smith, who chaired the Senate Advisory Committee on University Affairs from May 2006 to April 2008 and served on the APC, said in an e-mail interview that he “cannot recall the Provost or her representative, Phil Hanlon, ever rejecting a decision of the (APC).”

The University faculty’s main governing body will vote on a resolution at its Dec. 8 meeting urging Coleman to stop the Athletic Department’s bowl game expenses practice.