Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout82-585 PeiferRobert Dissinger, R. Ph. RD #1, Box 197 Bainbridge, PA 17502 RE: Pharmacits; DPW; Outside Employment Dear Messers Dissinger & Peifer: MaAng Address: STATE ETHICS COMMISSION P.O. BOX 1 179 HARRISBURG, PA 17108 TELEPHONE: 1717) 783 -1610 November 19, 1982 ADVICE OF COUNSEL William M. Peifer, R. Ph. 518 Benyou Lane New Cumberland, PA 17070 State Ethics Commission • 308 Finance Building • Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 82 -585 This responds to your letter of August 3, 1982, in which you requested advice from the State Ethics Commission. Issue: You inquire about whether the Ethics Act poses any restrictions on pharmacists who are employed by the Bureau of Medical Assistance Operations and who are also employed on a part -time basis in the private sector. Facts: Both of you are employed with the Department of Public Welfare (DPW), Office of Medical Assistance, Bureau of Medical Assistance Operations, as full -time Pharmacists. Your specific duties and responsibilities include the maintenance of the MAMIS Drug Reference File. The MAMIS (Medical Assistance Mangement Information System) Drug Reference File contains a list of drugs that the Medicaid Program uses to reimburse pharmacies. The file contains the drug name, the estimated acqusition cost or the average wholesale price, and the maximum allowable cost that Medicaid will reimburse. You are each employed as pharmacists on a part -time basis at pharmacies in the private sector. The pricing structure of these pharmacies is set by the pharmacy owner, not by you, and you have no control over this structure. When durgs are dispensed under DPW's Pharmaceutical Services Program, DPW is billed under the pricing structure so established by the Pharmacy at the usual and customary charge. Mr. Dissinger is employed by a pharmacy that does not have a contract with the to furnish pharmaceutical services to recipients of public welfare, and he has neither personal nor financial interest in the pharmacy beyond his salary. Robert Dissenger, R. Ph. William M. Peifer, R. Ph. November 19, 1982 Page 2 Mr. Peifer is employed by both an independent pharmacy and a chain durg store. While the independent pharmacy is not enrolled in DPW Medicaid Program, the chain drug store does dispense prescriptions for recipients of public welfare. Mr. Peifer also owns 100 shares of stock which we assume is less than 5% of the equity at fair market value in the chain drug store (People's Drug Stores) and receives a dividend of less than $100 per year from the stock. While you are both responsible for updating the Drug Reference File with regard to additions to, changes in, and deletions of drug products, as well as complete pricing information, entries must be approved by the supervisor of the Reference File Section and reviewed by the Chief of the Division of MAMIS operations. The information is also subject to various other reviews, and any suspected improprieties would be reported to the Directcr of the Bureau of Medical Assistance Operations. Discussion: There is no conflict, per se, in the situation herein. The fact that you both work for independent pharmacies not enrolled in the MAMIS Program virtually precludes the possibility of any abuse of the MAMIS ber+efits through those particular pharmacies. There is no apparent benefit to you in terms of personal financial gain or continued employment resulting from your public employment. Mr. Peifer's ownership of stock in the chain drug store enrolled in the Medicaid Program may prove a problem under Section 403(c) if such ownership should some day exceed 5% of the equity at fair market value of the business. While we are not aware of the precise fair market value of the People's Drug Store it can safely be assumed that the 100 shares producing less than $100 per year in dividends does not approach 5% of the equity at fair market value of the business. At the same time, it must be pointed out with regard to both of you, that Section 403(a) of the Ethics Act prohibits either of you from using confidential information gained in your public employment to obtain financial gain, including other employment, for yourselves, members of your immediate families, or any businesses with which you may be associated. Although there is no indication that either of your part -time jobs were secured through the use of any such confidential information, this statement is included to indicate the presence of this requirement in the Ethics Act and the prohibition against the use of such confidential information in general. Robert Dissenger, R. Ph. William M. Peifer, R. Ph. November.19, 1982 Page 3 Conclusion: The Ethics Act does not preclude from pursuing part -time employment in the private sector in pharmacies enrolled in the MAMIS Program or not, as long as neither of them uses confidential information derrived through their employment with the Department of Public Welfare to procure, in general, financial gain for yourself, your families, or businesses with which you may be associated other than that lawfully provided. 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. KW /rdp This letter is a public record and will be made available as such. Finally, if you disagree with this Advice or if you have challenge same, you may request that the full Commission revi personal appearance before the Commission will be scheduled a Opinion from the Commission will be issued. Any such appeal writing, to the Commission within 15 days of service of this to 51 Pa. Code 2.12. cc: Robert Kelly Sincerely, ndra S. Chri General Counse any reason to ew this Advice. A nd a formal must be made, in Advice pursuant ianson