If these are your best examples, these "cases" you give are not as easy as you want to believe, to decide any punishment or any timeline, given the lack of sufficient or conclusive evidence that any of them ever doped. The reasons anti-doping authorities did not act in the cases of Rupp, and Radcliffe, and Farah, was that there was insufficient basis or grounds to act. Anti-doping authorities cannot act on tabloid journalism, rumors and gossip alone.
Despite your claim, there was no hard evidence against Rupp for doping with testosterone at 16, nor any hard evidence of any escalation of doping, with any banned substance, thereafter.
Same with Radcliffe. There was no hard evidence of any "illegal" blood values. For a number of reasons, the often discussed values -- if it would be appropriate to consider them at all -- would be rejected for being collected too soon or in the wrong conditions, or were well within expectations after weeks of training at altitude.
Same with Farah. Missing one test, or two tests, is not "dodging" and not a sufficient basis to act.
With respect to your handle, and "NOPers" being "dopers", USADA not only acted, but acted rather aggressively, with a "throw spaghetti at the wall" type of lengthy investigation, prosecution, and appeals process, and Tygart explicitly affirmed no "NOPers were dopers" -- which would include Rupp and Farah. After detailed scrutiny, this was corroborated/accepted by an AAA Panel, a CAS Panel, and WADA, after an independent review at the IOC's request.