GEELONG, Melbourne, Adelaide and Greater Western Sydney called the Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority drugs authority over doping worries, secret documents reveal.

Documents obtained by the Sunday Mail under Freedom of Information laws reveal also reveal secret AFL sources have been corresponding with the ASADA.

Geelong, GWS and Adelaide all contacted ASADA over concerns about prohibited substances before the 2013 season kicked off.

Melbourne also called ASADA over doping worries four rounds into the season.

But ASADA refuses to say what concerns were raised by the clubs or release details of their correspondence.

After a six month Freedom of Information battle for doping related correspondence between the authority and the AFL, its clubs and players, ASADA released just three partial documents to the Herald Sun, despite initially identifying 2444 relevant documents and putting a $16,619.40 price tag on vetting them.

Two of the partially released documents are copies of the media announcement of the Switkowski Report into the Essendon doping scandal.

The third was a January 18 email from the Adelaide Crows seeking a list of prohibited substances.

The secret sources and the clubs with doping issues are identified in a schedule of just 13 documents ASADA eventually deemed relevant to the Herald Sun request.

Access to two of those documents, an August 12 email between "*" and ASADA and a May 16 email between Essendon and ASADA was denied because they involved a "confidential informant".

ASADA spokesman Rohan Lindeman declined to say how many whistleblowers ASADA has in the ranks of the AFL, or give any indication of the type of doping concerns raised by the clubs.

"ASADA does not discuss the operational details of its anti-doping program," he said.

"This correspondence (with the AFL clubs) is confidential and ASADA cannot comment any further."

Geelong is listed as telephoning ASADA twice on February 8 - three days after the Essendon asked ASADA to investigate its supplements program. GWS called once that day and Melbourne once on April 23. The calls are recorded in six pages of secret documents.

There were also eight emails between Essendon and ASADA between February 27 and July 26, including the two relating to the Switkowski Report announcement and a third relating to the "confidential informant".

The Sunday Mail initially sought all correspondence on prohibited performance enhancing drugs between ASADA and the AFL; AFL clubs; AFL club staff or contractors; and AFL players, from January 1, 2012 to March 13, 2013.

After receiving an estimated $16,619.40 processing charge the Sunday Mail sought to reduce the scope of the request by limiting it to correspondence involving ASADA's Investigations and Intelligence Services branch and its Legal Services and Results Management branch and excluding all non-positive drug tests.

ASADA rejected this request, saying it was too voluminous, with an estimated 600-plus relevant documents.

The doping authority then agreed to process a request which omitted its correspondence with the AFL, with a preliminary search identifying 309 documents within the scope of the request and estimating the processing cost at $567.

However, a month later ASADA said it had identified just 13 relevant documents and, with 10 of those deemed totally exempt from release and the other three partially exempt, the charges were dropped.

ASADA determined the release, or full release, of the documents would, on balance, be contrary to the public interest. Six documents were also deemed exempt because their release could prejudice ASADA's current AFL investigation.

Two of those documents were also exempt because their release would "disclose, or enable a person to ascertain, the existence or identity of a confidential source of information".

Seven documents were also exempted because they had been obtained "in confidence".

Essendon remains under investigation by ASADA.

Geelong, Gold Coast and Brisbane were also investigated by the doping agency this year, while a probe into Melbourne is ongoing.

The AFL announced on Thursday that it had identified 12 clubs that had conducted supplements programs that lacked accountability but would not pursue any further investigations as it was confident that, aside from Essendon, clubs had not used illegal or questionable substances.

###