HomeMy WebLinkAbout83-627 DoneganPatricia A. Donegan
Solid Waste Specialist
Bureau of Solid Waste Management
Department of Environmental Resources
White Memorial Building
Knox, Pennsylvania 16232
Mailing Address
STATE ETHICS COMMISSION
P.O. BOX 1 179
HARRISBURG, PA 17108
TELEPHONE: (717) 783 -1610
December 16, 1983
ADVICE OF COUNSEL
RE: Professional Engineering Trainee Exam, Recommendation
Dear Ms. Donegan:
83 - 627
This responds to your letter of November 15, 1983, in which you requested
Advice from the State Ethics Commission.
Issue: You ask whether you may secure the recommendation of certain
professional engineers to be eligible to take an examination in the near
future.
Facts: You indicate you are currently employed as a Solid Waste Specialist
with the Department of Environmental Resources in the Meadville Regional
Office. You also indicate that you would like to take the Engineer -
in- Training examination in the near future. A pre- requisite for the
examination is that you must be recommended to take the examination by five
professional engineers who are familiar with your previous work in the
engineering field. Several of the engineers for whom and with whom you have
worked and who are thus in a position to provide the necessary recommendations
currently have solid waste or hazardous waste projects or clients in the area
which you inspect at this time -- Elk and Jefferson Counties.
You would like to secure the recommendations of these five professional
engineers in order to be able to apply for and to take the examination in
question but you wish to secure our determination of whether this constitutes
a conflict of interest before doing so.
State Ethics Commission • 308 Finance Building • Harrisburg, Pennsylvania
Patricia A. Donegan
December 16, 1983
Page 2
Discussion: We will assume that in your position of a Solid Waste Specialist
with the Department of Environmental Resources (DER) you are a "public
employee" as that term is defined in the State Ethics Act. It is clear that
under the State Ethics Act you may not use your public employment to secure
compensation other than as provided by law. See Section 3(a) of the Ethics
Act, 65 P.S,4O3(a). However, in the circumstances that you outlined, there
does not appear to be any attempt by you to use your current position to
secure any financial gain and, therefore, there is no violation of Section
3(a) of the Ethics Act if you were to proceed to secure the recommendations
and to take, and hopefully pass, the examination for Engineer -in- Training.
The only other provision of the Ethics Act which may be impacted by your
question is Section 3(b) of the Ethics Act as outlined below:
(b) No person shall offer or give to a public official or
public employee or candidate for public office or a member
of his immediate family or a business with which he is
associated, and no public official or public employee or
candidate for public office shall solicit or accept,
anything of value, including a gift, loan, political
contribution, reward, or promise of future employment
based on any understanding that the vote, official action,
or judgment of the public official or public employee or
candidate for public office would be influenced thereby.
65 P.S. 403(b).
As you can see as a "public employee ", you may not accept anything of
value on the understanding that your official judgment would be influenced
thereby. Consequently, you could not solicit or secure or accept any
recommendation from any of the engineers in question who might have projects
within your area of inspection authority on the understanding that if the
recommendation is given, certain official judgment which you might be called
upon to exercise vis -a -vis those engineers or the clients of those engineers
would be influenced. Of course, we do not assume that this occuring or will
occur and merely point to this section of the Ethics Act in order to insure
that you are aware of this requirement.
If, however, even given the fact that the Ethics Act would not preclude
your seeking and securing the recommendations of these engineers, except where
Section 3(b) of the Ethics Act might be implicated, you might consider
securing these recommendations and, if necessary, abstaining from exercising
your official judgment -a -vis the five professional engineers from whom you
had sought recommendations rather than to absolutely refraining from securing
these recommendations. This is especially true where, as here, the securing
Patricia A. Donegan
December 16, 1983
Page 3
of recommendations for persons who are familiar with your work is a
pre- requisite for the examination in question. We do not, however, indicate
that it is required by the State Ethics Act that you abstain from reviewing
the work or projects of the five engineers from whom you secure
recommendations but merely point out that, if you feel required to do so, such
abstention would be appropriate in lieu of avoiding requesting recommendations
themselves.
Conclusion: The Ethics Act would not preclude you from seeking or securing
the recommendations that you need to take the Engineer -in- Training examination
nor would the Ethics Act place any restrictions on your conduct vis -a -vis
those engineers from whom you have secured recommendations other than the
requirement that your seeking, securing and acceptance of these
recommendations does not violate Section 3(b) of the Ethics Act as outlined
above.
Pursuant to Section 7(9)(ii), this Advice is a complete defense in any
enforcement proceeding initiated by the Commission, and evidence of good faith
conduct in any other civil or criminal proceeding, providing the requestor has
disclosed truthfully all the material facts and committed the acts complained
of in reliance on the Advice given.
This letter is a public record and will be made available as such.
Finally, if you disagree with this Advice or if you have any reason to
challenge same, you may request that the full Commission review this Advice. A
personal appearance before the Commission will be scheduled and a formal
Opinion from the Commission will be issued. Any such appeal must be made, in
writing, to the Commission within 15 days of service of this Advice pursuant
to 51 Pa. Code 2.12.
SSC /rdp
Sincerely,
S. ndra S. Chris ian dn
General Counsel'