Committee chair David Swank issued the retraction and apology to Prof. Tom Jones during a teleconference from NCAA headquarters in Overland Park, Kan.
He said he believed a retraction and admission of such a major mistake was unprecedented for the committee.
Swank's two-page prepared statement concluded with an unmitigated apology to Jones.
"The Committee on Infractions recognizes that a charge of unethical conduct is a very serious allegation and it deeply regrets the public embarrassment and humiliation its finding in this case has caused Prof. Jones and the University of Alabama," Swank said.
The retraction was part of an otherwise confidential settlement between the NCAA and Jones, who had threatened to file a defamation lawsuit. Jones' attorney, Leon Ashford, declined to say if monetary damages were included.
"All I'm able to confirm is that the NCAA has reached a settlement regarding any claims Mr. Jones may have had," said Robin Green, the administrator for the infractions committee.
During its original probe, the infractions committee found Jones guilty of unethical conduct, saying he had failed to disclose several aspects in the case involving former defensive back Antonio Langham's dealings with an agent.
Those and other findings led to Alabama's first-ever NCAA sanctions. They included three years' probation, a one-season postseason ban, the loss of 26 scholarships and forfeiture of 11 games from the 1993 season in which Langham played while ineligible.
But last November, the NCAA Infractions Appeals Committee withdrew the finding against Jones, ruling he was not given proper notice of the charge. In doing so, the appeals committee also lifted one year of probation and restored nine scholarships.
Yesterday's action went a step further because the infractions committee had a chance to examine information Jones never made available because he didn't know charges were pending against him.
Swank said the information that was new to his committee exonerated Jones. Ashford said the infractions committee's new findings set the record straight.
"The problem with the (appeals committee's) result was that it left it in peoples' minds that there was simply a procedural error, and this was not a matter of substance,'' Ashford said during a teleconference in Tuscaloosa.
"It left Dean Jones with the cloud that he was guilty of unethical conduct but got off on a technicality. This corrects the facts and finds the truth."
In its new findings, the infractions committee said "Jones did not knowingly provide incomplete or otherwise false and misleading information to the NCAA eligibility appeals staff and did not intentionally or willfully violate the NCAA Constitution or bylaws."
Culpepper Clark, the school's dean of communications and a school spokesperson during the probe, said Alabama accepted the NCAA's apology. But he said the damage done to the university and Jones could never be completely erased.
"The false charge of unethical conduct undermined the credibility of the university and its officials with consequences that cannot now be reversed," he said.
Clark also questioned some of the original penalties imposed by the infractions committee, although he conceded there was nothing that could be done about them.
He quoted Swank from an August 1995 news conference as saying the charges against Jones weighed heavily in the committee's decision on how harsh the penalties would be.
Yesterday, Swank was less forthcoming on how much the Jones issue was considered when the committee meted out the sanctions.
"It's hard to go back and say his involvement had which affects on which part of the penalties," Swank said.
"I'm not sure I could tell you that. This was more of an individual penalty against him than it was against the university and now we're withdrawing that."