Despite an attempt by the NFL Players Association to soften sanctions against players who test positive for banned substances, the four-game penalty that has become the standard for first-time offenders will remain in place for the coming season, league and union officials confirmed Tuesday.

Several players and their representatives have contended that the NFL policy regarding banned substances and dietary supplements, when viewed in comparison to the guidelines used for substance abuse violations, is too harsh.

A first-time violation of the substance abuse policy typically subjects a player to random testing, counseling and evaluation. Under the "tiered" program, in which sanctions are essentially increased with each violation, a player is not subject to suspension unless there is a second positive test.

Testing positive for a banned substance, however, results in a four-game suspension, and there are no incremental steps preceding that sanction.

"Basically, you can have a guy test positive for some kind of 'street' drug, and he misses no games," player agent Harold Lewis said. "And another guy takes a supplement and, in some cases, accidentally ingests a banned substance by mistake. And he's going to sit for four games because the (policies) are different."

One of Lewis' clients, Kansas City Chiefs linebacker Lew Bush, was suspended for four games last season after testing positive for a derivative of ephedra, which is a banned substance.

Gene Upshaw, executive director of the NFLPA, cited this inequity in his annual Super Bowl-week news conference in January, and said the rules regarding banned substances should be changed. "They're at four weeks and we are at zero weeks (suspension) ... and somewhere in there is a deal," Upshaw said at the time.

A deal, which would require a negotiated change in the Collective Bargaining Agreement, won't happen in time for the 2003 season.

The union, sources said, favors a change in which players would not be suspended unless there was a second positive test for banned substances. Part of the problem is that, despite warnings from the NFLPA to its constituents, players continue to ingest (unknowingly in many cases) banned substances.

Virtually every player suspended in 2002 for banned substances argued that they were taken inadvertently. Because the supplements industry is so loosely regulated, there have been inconsistencies with labeling and with full disclosure of contents.

The agents for some players who have served suspensions continue to consider possible lawsuits against the manufacturers of supplements.

Len Pasquarelli is a senior NFL writer for ESPN.com.