Opinion ID: 526031
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Assistant Chief Supply Division

Text: Fontane-Rexach v. PREPA 46 The third and the most difficult case is that of the Assistant Chief of the Supply Division of the Puerto Rican Electric Power Authority (PREPA). The job is three levels below the Executive Director of PREPA. 47 The job involves planning, directing, coordinating and supervising PREPA's purchasing activities. The job description in the record says that the tasks performed by the Assistant Chief of the Supply Division include: 48 1. Formulates and recommends the implementation of norms and procedures to improve the internal operations of the purchasing area of the Division. 49 2. Is responsible for the publication, review, evaluation, approval and adjudication of bids. 50 3. Negotiates contracting of services. 51 4. Evaluates the quality of the products, materials and equipment which ... [PREPA] acquires. 52 5. Determines the conditions and value of excess and surplus supplies to be sold by ... [PREPA]. 53 6. Is responsible for the sale of obsolete material. 54 7. Coordinates with the different suppliers of materials and equipments the services related to purchases which these render to ... [PREPA]. 55 8. Coordinates the rendering of the services mentioned with officers of ... [PREPA] and governmental agencies, as required. 56 9. Recommends and administrates the annual operational budget of the purchasing area. 57 A panel of this court found that the record indicated this position was highly technical in terms of its duties, and not very high level in respect to organizational rank. It concluded that the defendants had not established a qualified immunity defense. We agree with the panel in its decision, though we shall make these observations. 58 First, we believe it important, as did the panel, that the record does not show that Puerto Rico's own civil service system classified the job as a trust position in the sense in which that classification is relevant to our inquiry, namely, in permitting (as a matter of Commonwealth law) dismissal of an office holder for political reasons. We recognize that Puerto Rico's Personnel law requires governmental agencies that operate as private enterprises, such as PREPA, to adopt personnel regulations embodying the same merit principle that governs the Public Service Personnel Law. P.R.Laws Ann. tit. 3, Sec. 1338. We also recognize that PREPA has adopted such regulations, using the same criteria as the personnel law in distinguishing career from trust employees. PREPA defines Trust or Confidence Employees as those 59 classified in the occupational groups M-VI to M-VIII, Executive Officers and Officers of the Authority and those whose functions are involved in the intervening or collaborating with the hiring authority in the formulation or application of the corporation's public policy, or perform in positions that involve a high degree of personal trust. 60 Electric Power Authority, Personnel Division, Personnel Regulation, Sec. II (Feb. 24, 1982). 61 The record does not make clear, however, whether an Assistant Head of the Supplies Division is an Executive Officer (or otherwise comes within this definition). Nor does it explain the potential relevance (or non-relevance), of Article 15(b) of PREPA's bylaws, which states that PREPA's officers ... may be removed by the Executive Director, but only for cause. (Emphasis added.) This by-law, even if literally applicable only to officers, a position higher in rank than Assistant Chief of the Supply Division, would seem to underscore the intended technical nature of the agency. For these reasons we believe the panel correctly refused to give deference to Puerto Rico's own classification system. Jimenez-Fuentes, 807 F.2d at 246. 62 Second, without any such deference, it is difficult to see where, in the job description, one could find, even potentially, any matters of partisan political interest. The panel opinion elaborates the reasons for this conclusion. 63 Third, as the panel opinion states, the defendants ... remain free ... to provide at trial additional evidence to show that ... political affiliation is a suitable criterion for this post. We add that they may submit evidence designed to show that the position potentially encompassed matters of partisan political interest and that, therefore, they enjoy qualified immunity from liability for damages. We reinstate the panel's holding that, on the present state of the record, the district court correctly denied the defendant's motion for summary judgment on these questions. 64 The determinations of the district court in respect to qualified immunity in Gonzalez-Gonzalez v. Zayas and Figueroa-Rodriguez v. Lopez-Rivera are 65 Reversed. 66 Part III of the panel opinion in Figueroa-Rodriguez v. Lopez-Rivera (vacating sanctions imposed by the district court) is 67 Reinstated. 68 The district court's denial of summary judgment in Fontane-Rexach v. PREPA, is 69 Affirmed. 70 The opinion of the panel in Fontane-Rexach v. PREPA, is 71 Reinstated. 72