I cannot see a possibility for a slap on the wrist. Either he shows he took salbutamol below the allowed dose or he gets his Vuelta stripped and a ban of months to years (although presumably toward the low end of that: the Norwegian skier Johnsrud Sundby recently got a two-month ban for unjustified salbutamol above 1000 ng/ml in his urine in a case where the CAS criticised this salbutamol rule).
Although 2000 ng/ml sounds greatly higher than the presumably already high allowable urine concentration, there’s still a possibility for Froome to show that his urine legitimately had that concentration of salbutamol, which is why this AAF should not be in the public domain. If he can’t, people won’t make much of a distinction between salbutamol, even a mistakenly high dose of salbutamol, and EPO. We’re at that level of inanity, unfortunately.
It’s interesting to consider whether the new media-induced terror of applying for a TUE provoked this AAF, since he’d have been allowed any sane dose of salbutamol with a TUE.
Cycling is being ruined by this combination of overzealous rules, leaks of confidential process, and trial by media. It’s become nigh on impossible to navigate these booby traps while competing at the top. Essentially the rules are constantly changing. Perhaps salvation lies in amateur sport, but if so, what a shame that we cannot have nice things.