ACSOL’s Conference Calls

Conference Call Recordings Online
Dial-in number: 1-712-770-8055, Conference Code: 983459

Monthly Meetings | Recordings (01/15 Recording Uploaded)
Emotional Support Group Meetings

Recording of Emergency ACSOL meeting about new SORNA regulations



Third Military Retiree Registrant Denied Access to Base

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.

MCO 5530.13 – May 2021

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...  
  1. Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  2. Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  3. Swear words should be starred out such as f*k and s*t
  4. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  5. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  6. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  7. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  8. We cannot connect participants privately - feel free to leave your contact info here. You may want to create a new / free, readily available email address.
  9. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  10. Please do not post in all Caps.
  11. If you wish to link to a serious and relevant media article, legitimate advocacy group or other pertinent web site / document, please provide the full link. No abbreviated / obfuscated links.
  12. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  13. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  14. Please choose a short user name that does not contain links to other web sites or identify real people
  15. Please do not solicit funds
  16. If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), or any others, the first time you use it please expand it for new people to better understand.
  17. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  18. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
ACSOL, including but not limited to its board members and agents, does not provide legal advice on this website.  In addition, ACSOL warns that those who provide comments on this website may or may not be legal professionals on whose advice one can reasonably rely.  
Notify of
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

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?

You should soon be eligible to go through the process to get off the federal sorna after 25 years if you have a clean record. And at the state level, read code of criminal procedures chapter 62 for the requirements to get off early. And if you have any questions, contact Mary Sue at Texas Voices of Reason and Justice. She can answer your questions and if eligible for early deregistration, put you in touch with 2-3 different attorneys who have been through the process. But you need to pass 25 years first. But you might as well learn now your options.

In your situation I would be more concerned about getting off Texas as you are on for life and the deregistration requirements are very strict with few people getting off because an elected judge has to approve.

If you can not get off of Texas after 25 years on the registry and after you can get off the federal sorna, I would consider moving to another state where you would not be on the registry.

Hey thanks for the information. What’s hurting me also is cause a dirty detective coerced/tricked me into saying i had sexual contact on different occasion with the female that was underage and he knew I didn’t know that, saying he was going to help me by talking to the DA. But If a sorna state won’t require me to register after I satisfied don’t, hell yeah. moving from Texas, I’m gone. But It shouldn’t have be be like that. They needs to honor the plea agreements and everyone that was on probation before lifetime was a requirement shouldn’t be subject to that. Also it should be case by case and unless you’re in prison nothing should be lifetime.

Mr. CEO, there was a case in Texas concerning the plea agreement issue you raise and the regiserants relied upon a Supreme Court decision to support their position.

Of course the courts ruled against the registrants.

Yes its in the SCOTUS as a writ of certiorari. Hopefully its heard how texas did a bait an switch

I got screwed too but in a different state. I was given a plea deal with an almost guaranteed expungement. The state would agree to support a petition for expungement if I met the requirements including no probation violations as long as I petitioned for it and a specified time period elapsed. At that time an expungement in MN was considered to be a full record sealing to restore someone to the status as if the crime had never been committed. Almost the same time I became eligible based on the plea agreement, the state supreme court ruled that essentially an expungement that isn’t specifically authorized by statute can only seal the court record but not the criminal record held at the executive branch. It puts me in a strange position. The court has said I’m supposed to be able to say I’ve never been convicted of this crime but someone checking the executive branch record at the state or the NCIS FBI record would clearly see it. Yet they would not be able to access the underlying court record. So if I travel to say Florida or move to many different states I would have a failure to register if I do not even though the court said I can say I haven’t been convicted.

I’m not done battling this in the court for various reasons I’m not going to discuss here because I think there’s an argument to be had but the timing isn’t right just yet so I wait.

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?


You can if he puts you down as a dependent

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.

  • List “d”: anyone convicted of sexual assault, rape, possession of child pornography, production of child pornography and child molestation
  • List “f”: anyone currently required to register


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:

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:

For each additional U.S. Navy installation to which you need access, the first time you visit you only need to bring your DBIDS credential and statement of purpose for base access when arriving at the Visitor Control Center.

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


They are “visitors” if they let their DoD IDs’ expire before going to get it renewed, as the form you posted says DoD ID holders are considered “vetted” and don’t need to be rechecked/ran through DIBS “again” .

So I must eat a large serving of crow on this statement, they are stopping everyone even with DoD ID’s now.

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.

Yep. It’s idiotic. And obviously no one with a functioning brain believes the Oppression Lists are really for public safety or protecting children. I’m really starting to think the main reason they exist is to try to prop up the pathetic self esteem of a**holes. Well, and money, of course.

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.

Would love your thoughts, please comment.x