It has been reported that a third military retiree registrant was denied access to a base in California after November 1. The registrant is a former enlisted member of the U.S. Navy and was denied access to Coronado Naval Air Station near San Diego.
“ACSOL has heard from many military retiree registrants throughout the country who were denied access to one or more bases throughout the United States during the past five years,” stated ACSOL Executive Director Janice Bellucci. “The most recent examples of this, however, appear to be limited to bases in California.”
In initial research, ACSOL has discovered a document from U.S. Marine Headquarters, dated May 7, 2021, that states that anyone currently required to register as well as anyone convicted of sexual assault, rape, possession of child pornography, production of child pornography and child molestation will be denied access to military bases. The document includes an appeals process that ends with a determination by the site commander. If access is granted at that site, individuals must apply for access to additional military bases.
According to one person familiar with this issue, the recent denial of military retiree registrants in California may be due to new technology utilized by officials working in pass and identification offices. The technology is the DBIDS system that was formerly limited to companies and non-military personnel.
“ACSOL will continue its research regarding this important issue and report its findings on this website,” stated Bellucci.
Hi
Ms. Janice Bellucci is there a bill in the works asking the DOJ to have people that’s Classified as a tier 3 have a chance to reclassified as a lower tier that’s been on the registry for 20 plus years without any out sex crimes or felonies?
This being Veteran’s Day…it is still sitting very badly with me that…They will Honor me for killing fellow Human Beings, but making ill advised love to one is such than not even my ashes can rest on my arguably well earned ground.
Killing people, sure, you’re honorable enough…but making love, well, that is well out of bounds!
James I
I’m not sure where these comments have anything to do with the above article. I”ve been denied base access since 2013, at multiple installations. I’m 80% VA Disability and my son is currently active duty Air Force and I can’t even visit his home.
I’d be interested to see this Marine Corps memo that ACSOL found. Can that be posted with a link Janice?
HMC(SW/FMF)
The document the denied retiree received along with the waiver should have listed the reason(s) why the retiree was denied. It is literally on that denial document. Then you research it the military law/rule cited.
I am not a retiree, but I had a job interview for a job on a military base a couple of years ago. At the visitor control center, VCC, is where I had to be subjected to a background check and eventually denied access. My case has been dismissed for several years, but I was still on the registry, which is probably why the VCC was closed down for about half an hour as they called the base commander.
Upon doing my research online, I was denied via IMCOM OPORD 15-031. I found some paperwork on line from military instillation Fort Lee, VA citing that same law/rule that was implemented on May 16, 2018 . It was a two-page document, Fort Lee Policy NO: 02-15. The document makes a distinction between non-visitors and visitors. (I can’t find the link online today, but I did picture capture it.)
Non-visitors are common access card ID holders, military retirees, military family members with valid gov’t ID are not classified as “visitors”. These personnel are considered vetted and do not require additional checks.
Visitors will have to check in at the Visitor Control Center, VCC. VCC personnel will deny access if an individual is identified in a listed checklist provided by NCIC (Nat’l Criminal Info Center) a – j.
===
At least on May 15, 2018, retirees were not subject to any additional checks. I don’t know what the policy is or was for CA when I was denied, but it appears that retirees are now considered “visitors”.
Here’s a link I found online about DBIDS: https://marineparents.com/marinecorps/dbids.asp
Apparently, it started at selected bases on as of July 9, 2018. DoD ID holders are automatically enrolled into DBIDS upon their first scan entering the base.
Another DBIDS link: https://www.cnic.navy.mil/om/dbids.html
Ahhh… I see. Retirees are treated like visitors upon their first use of their new DBIDS identification cards. Welp, I guess the military bases are implementing IMCOM OPORD 15-031 to its fullest with the DBIDS system.
Good question now is the registry’s use to ban registrants considered punishment? Remember, Smith v Doe intimated it wouldn’t prevent one from housing, traveling, or work.
PDF page 2 of the Fort Lee policy IMCOM IPORD 15-031
From what I gather, this is their response and “solution” to the recent spate of sexual assaults among service members at military bases nationwide.
Funny how you can kill as many people overseas in active combat duty and not be considered a murderer and be considered relatively free of being an imminent threat to human life back on American soil, but have just a few digital depictions of minors on a computer and you’re shunned, exiled and denied social existence.
They want to create a toxic and hostile environment for everyone forced to register, this was just their next logical step.
Are they using regular state IDs’ or DoD ID because I think that is a HUGE elephant/room question.
On a military base registration tangent…
Since military bases are considered federal land, then does that mean they abide by SORNA or by state registry laws?
If by state registry, then for all CA registristant, presence and residency restrictions are considered unconstitutional.
If by SORNA, then all CA 1203.4 recipients are no longer registered under SORNA.
I am so sorry to all that have served and fought for our United States of America; also known as The land of the free. You who freely served and who are now unable to have access to those military services which you at one time freely offered your life for; and for your families who supported you during your time of service.
Hi, I would like to ask these questions if I may. Back in 2003 I was convicted of Sexual battery and charged with a misdemeanor, not a felony, and given probation for 3 years. Then I was placed on the registry for 10 years after. At the 10-year mark, the state imposed another 5 years on my registry for the sake of being able to comply with Federal law. In 2018 I was taken off both the state and federal registry. During all this time I was never denied access to any military base what so ever. I am a retired veteran and have been retired since Nov 1996. Now that I am about to turn 65 years old and have to change my Deers program with the military, to show that I am now entitled to Medicare and have my status changed from Elected Tricare to Life Time Tricare, and have my Military Id changed to reflect this as well. Just the other day I received a letter from the AF Base Command in my city that I am denied access to the base, based on I was identified on the National Sex Offender Registry, and Under DoDM 5200.08_Volume 3_AFMAN 31-101_Volume 3, Perimeter Access Control Enclosure 2, paragraph 2.12.b. as well I was dis-enrolled in a Tricare use on the base. The letter dated Mar 02 2022. After receiving this letter, I went online and checked both state and federal registry, and found that I was not listed on either Registry. My question would be, how is this possible if I have served my time and punishment and that I am no longer on either Registry? Two, how is it possible that there is no room in the stated law above or provision that would distinguish between a Felony conviction and a Misdemeanor conviction? After all a misdemeanor conviction is far less than a Felony conviction!
To further my question, I would like to also present this into the conversation. I worked for the Airport Authority for over 23 years. 1996 to 2020. At which time I was granted full access to all parts of the Airport un-escorted because of job related. Under the standards of Transportation Security Administration (Homeland Security) any felony is considered to be non-employable and cannot work on the Airport. But, because it was a misdemeanor, I was not only fully employable and was granted full access to all parts of the Airport, both Sterile and no-sterile along with grounds to include runways taxiways ramps, etc. My question would be, why is it possible that the TSA (Homeland Security) is able to grant me this and not hold me to the standards that this Commander is holding me too? Again, how is it possible that there is no room in the stated law granted to this Commander between a Felony conviction and a Misdemeanor conviction when both TSA and Homeland Security both see the difference between the two?
I believe there is injustice here on the part of the Commander of the AF Base. One he isn’t taking into account that I am no longer on both state or federal Registry. Two, I have been off these lists since 2018. Three, why is it that it seems I am being held up my rights after my conviction was served, and I have been a model citizen with no more conviction. People do change, what happened back in 2003 should not be held against a person if they have proved worthy of and non-threat to the general public anymore!! What happened in the past cannot be undone, it can only be a reminder that we all make mistakes and learn from our mistakes, and better ourselves for the future. AS well, why is it that in accordance to the law this Command is acting on, is there not a distinction between a Felony or a Misdemeanor? A retired US Army Veteran looking for answers!!
I am retired Army and was denied access to Ft Riley Kansas