ZMP CTLR DESCRIBED CONFUSING SITUATION REGARDING APPLICATION OF RVSM 'EXCEPTION' RULES; CITING LACK OF TRAINING/PROCS AND MGMNT DECISIONS AS CONTRIBUTORY.

Narrative

THE JET STREAM WAS CAUSING A LOT OF HIGH ALT TURB AND CHOP OF UP TO MODERATE DEG OR GREATER. THUS FREQ CONGESTION AND WORKLOAD WAS HIGH WITH ACFT REQUESTING MANY TURB RPTS AND ALT CHANGES. A FLT WAS HANDED OFF TO US FROM SECTOR 17 (MCW HI) AT FL280 ON A SOUTHERLY HDG; NEGATIVE RVSM REQUESTING AN EXCEPTION CLRNC TO FL300 INTO RVSM AIRSPACE. THE SECTOR TEAM QUESTIONED THE PLT AS TO WHETHER HE WAS AN EXCEPTED RVSM ACFT AND WE GOT CONFUSING AND UNCLR RESPONSES. I ASKED THE PLT IF HE WAS A 'MANUFACTURER ACFT BEING FLOWN FOR DEVELOPMENT/CERTIFICATION' AND HE DID NOT ANSWER IN THE AFFIRMATIVE. I ASKED THE FRONT LINE MGR (FLM) WHETHER OR NOT THIS ACFT WAS AN EXCEPTION AND IF I COULD CLR HIM INTO RVSM AIRSPACE. HE GAVE NO DEFINITE ANSWER INITIALLY UNTIL PRESSED BY MY D-SIDE; TO WHICH THE FLM SAID WE COULD CLB THE ACFT INTO RVSM AIRSPACE; CONSIDERING HIM A 'MANUFACTURER ACFT BEING FLOWN FOR DEVELOPMENT/CERTIFICATION' AS SPECIFIED IN THE 7110.65. HOWEVER; I THEN CHALLENGED THE FLM AS I KNOW OF NO ACFT MANUFACTURERS LOCATED IN ZZZ; AND THE FLM SAID HE WOULD MAKE SOME PHONE CALLS FOR CLARIFICATION. IN RVSM TRAINING WE HAD ALL BEEN INSTRUCTED THAT NON-EXCEPTED ACFT COULD NEVER BE CLRED INTO RVSM AIRSPACE REGARDLESS OF THE CIRCUMSTANCES; SO THE SECTOR TEAM FELT IT NECESSARY TO ENSURE THAT THE ACFT WAS INDEED AN EXCEPTION. ACCORDINGLY WE STOOD BY FOR FURTHER DIRECTION FROM THE FLM. HOWEVER NONE WOULD COME AND EVENTUALLY ACFT X ASKED FOR AND RECEIVED A CLRNC BACK TO ZZZ WITHOUT RECEIVING A CLRNC INTO RVSM AIRSPACE. SUBSEQUENTLY THERE WAS AN 'INVESTIGATION' INTO THE INCIDENT AND IT APPEARS THAT FAA MGMNT IS TRYING TO BLAME ME FOR NOT CLRING ACFT X INTO RVSM AIRSPACE AS AN EXCEPTED ACFT. CONSIDERING I WAS RECEIVING CONTRADICTORY AND INDECISIVE DIRECTION ON THE FLT AT THE TIME FROM THE FLM; I ERRED ON THE SIDE OF SAFETY AND CAUTION AND THE TRAINING I HAD RECEIVED AND DIDN'T CLR THE ACFT INTO RVSM AIRSPACE. AT NO TIME DID THE FLM ORDER ME TO CLB THE ACFT INTO RVSM AIRSPACE AS HE OBVIOUSLY DIDN'T WANT TO BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR THAT DECISION EITHER. THERE NEEDS TO BE ADDITIONAL TRAINING AND PROCS FOR EXCEPTED RVSM ACFT IN THE 'MANUFACTURER ACFT BEING FLOWN FOR DEVELOPMENT/CERTIFICATION' CATEGORY. FURTHER; THERE NEEDS TO BE PRESCRIBED PHRASEOLOGY TO ASCERTAIN WHETHER ACFT MEET THE REQUISITE QUALIFICATIONS FOR ENTRY INTO RVSM AIRSPACE SO THERE IS NO CONFUSION FOR EITHER FLT CREWS OR CTLRS. THIS INCIDENT HIGHLIGHTS THE CLEARLY HOSTILE STANCE FAA MGMNT CURRENTLY SHOWS TOWARDS THE CTLR WORKFORCE. THEY OBVIOUSLY ARE UNWILLING TO ACCEPT ANY REAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR REAL-TIME JUDGEMENT CALLS INVOLVING AIR TFC OR OTHERWISE GIVE CLR DIRECTION; AND ARE LATER WILLING TO DEFLECT BLAME FOR SYS SHORTCOMINGS ONTO CTLRS. I FEEL PERSECUTED FOR MAKING SAFETY MY FIRST PRIORITY AND FOLLOWING THE 7110.65 AND MY TRAINING IN THIS MATTER. THE CURRENT FAA ENVIRONMENT HAS MADE CTLRS DISTR; UNEASY AND MORE PRONE TO ERRORS.