Told will be contacted by different BI?

Is this a common issue?

After a whole lot of nothing and waiting, finally some movement and contacted by BI.

But, when asked about my current location and the location of where will I work, I was told that I will be contacted by different BI. GOD knows how long it will be after all those waiting only to wait more.

My current location is in a different state from where my employer is.

We went over these with the FSO before submission with this particular address issue of my physical location and where would I work, TWICE. TWICE. Literally followed everything only to have this unnecessary and easily avoidable problem that could cost months of being jobless.

Unfortunately, when OPM (NBIB) schedules these things they don’t look anywhere other than the listed work address. I’ve seen cases where this is so blatantly obvious it makes me wonder if the scheduler is even literate.

I’m a lowly 3rd party investigator in middle America but, for what its worth, I apologize on behalf of the whole system.

Good luck!

1 Like

I have had packages kicked back asking for local references so one investigator can visit all. Sometimes it just can’t be helped if it is a vet returning from overseas. Or if you lived as an Ex-pat. It is frustrating, but they may move the priority up since it was likely already initiated.

Yes, this is extremely common. Not sure why it keeps happening.

This happens because you list your employer and job location in the other state. The ESI is scheduled to the work place because the ESI is supposed to be conducted at your workplace. This is your FSO’s fault.

goku, don’t apologize. The system is very automated because there are a lot of cases. The federal agencies and contract security personnel are supposed to know how to fill how the questionnaire. Unfortunately, sometimes you have great security managers/FSOs and sometimes you have the poor person that does the job as an additional duty.

If you didn’t input your actual physical work location or didn’t differentiate that from the employer’s HQ, this happens.

If you did and don’t actually work there yet then nothing went wrong, the subject interview is always scheduled to the workplace.

@backgdinvestigator They specifically tell applicants to do that, with big warning words, because apparently if you don’t, PSMO-I will reject the eQIP and say that you must list the sponsoring company as your current employer. The FSOs are doing exactly what they are told to do apparently.

I was in a similar situation (though it was no one’s fault, but my own). I moved, and three days later I was contacted by a BI in my previous location for my face-to-face interview. I informed him that I was no longer in that area, and he said he would contact an investigator in my new area. I received a call from my new investigator a week later, and then we scheduled my interview for the week after that.

The turn around on this is gonna depend on where you are and that investigator’s workload. I moved from a decently large city to a larger one a few hours away.

You can list the employer - (which still confuses things when there is no employment record for you during the investigation) but your job location under that employer should still be your physical location.

For the pundits that say, well, just schedule to the residence: You would be amazed how many people list their “home of record” and not their physical residence as required by the questionnaire.

1 Like

Yes . . . It’s common . . .