Robert Scharpnick, CSC Docket No. 2025-2840

Appellant's argumentRobert Scharpnick requests permission to submit a late application for the promotional examination for Police Lieutenant (PM2802G), Elizabeth.

BackgroundThe announcement for the subject examination issued on June 1, 2025 with an application deadline of June 23, 2025. An abbreviated, one-page application was used for this announcement, and no detailed information regarding education, experience, training, etc., was required. Twenty-three applicants were admitted to the examination. The appellant did not submit an application.

Appellant's argumentOn appeal to the Civil Service Commission (Commission), the appellant claimed that on June 4, 2025, he proceeded to fill out his application online for the scheduled test and made payment with his saved credit card method. He stated that upon completion, a note on transaction appeared stating, “You may not receive [an] email confirmation for this transaction.” The appellant further stated that upon completion, he hit submit and was under the impression that the application and transaction were completed. In addition, he stated that upon speaking with other applicants later, he learned that they had received email confirmations and that there was no record of his application being submitted. In support, the appellant submits a copy of an email from the Online Application System (OAS) he received on June 4, 2025 advising him to “[p]lease reset your password.”

BackgroundA review of agency records does not indicate that the appellant started an application for the subject examination prior to the application filing deadline.

CONCLUSION

RuleN.J.A.C. 4A:4-2.1(e) provides, in pertinent part, that applications for promotional examinations shall be submitted no later than 4:00 P.M. on the announced application filing date.

AnalysisUpon review, the Commission declines to permit the appellant to file a late application. The appellant claims to have made payment with his saved credit card method and received a message stating, “You may not receive [an] email confirmation for this transaction.” However, the appellant was unable to provide evidence of his card being charged or a copy of the unusual message he claims to have received. While the appellant was able to provide a copy of an OAS password reset email he received on June 4, 2025, there is no evidence in the record that the appellant in fact went forward and changed his password that day. Moreover, agency records do not indicate he even started an application for the subject examination. In short, the appellant was afforded a three-week window to file an abbreviated, one-page application that did not require the submission of any detailed information regarding education, experience, training, or other background, but there is no evidence in the record of the appellant even starting an application. Twenty-three individuals were able to submit applications. Accordingly, the Commission cannot find a sufficient basis in the record to allow the appellant to file a late application.

ORDER

Therefore, it is ordered that this request be denied.

ClosingThis is the final administrative determination in this matter. Any further review should be pursued in a judicial forum.