NCL REP says "NO!" b2b2b JONES ACT embark Seatle final debark Miami

[Agent999]

Gee...after making wise cracks about me citing articles from the Internet, what do you do? Cite an article from the Internet!!

 

The difference is I've the cited official explanatory bulletin issued by the government agency, CBP, responsible for enforcing this law, as well as provided a link to the wording of the official regulation published in the Code of Federal Regulations, while you're citing some lawyer who may or may not really know what he's talking about.

 

By the way, the lawyer's article you've cited dates from 1999, 12 years ago, while the official CBP publication dates from 2010. Which is more likely to be the most up-to-date interpretation of the law?

So...I have the official and current explanation...you have something 12 years old that's some guy's opinion...

 

By the way, I can cite at least one item in your article that has changed since it was published in 1999...the fine for violations was $200 then...it's now $300. The point is that even if he was right in 1999, he may not be right in 2011.

 

Good catch on the date of the article! Interesting that the article is 12 years old. Exactly how old is the law? Has the law been re-written since the article was published? I think that a complete re-write of the law would invalidate the article since it was published prior to the re-write.

[njhorseman]

This is really a GREAT response .... thanks,

 

we are sitting here reading / checking sources / comparing

.... " interpretations " ...

Earlier it was said that the end point is what NCL will do ....

and then ... we read that in Oct/2011 this 3 legged cruise was

accomplished on NCL ship .

-----

So, try this interpretation and then cuss us off the board ...

We have booked leg 1 first .

We have booked leg 3 a month later --( a separate booking)

We will book leg 2 some time in future

 

OK --- 3 sepaerate cruises. 3 separate bookings.

 

We embark Seattle > debark Vancouver

We have courage drink, + return and embark Vancouver>debark LA

We have 2 courage drinks, + return and embark LA>debark Miami

 

Have 3 cruises contracted with three separate bookings.

Embark and disembark at end of a cruise.

Repeat 2 more times.

 

Your honor, surely --- THIS is legal!?

 

P.S. Our understanding is the fine is now $ 300.00 pp.

 

WHY DOES ___ A NCL REP __NOT___JUMP IN HERE ???

 

again , thank you all, ____ :) Seamo :)

 

I believe your sequence of booking is contributing to the difficulty you're having getting NCL reps to understand it. If you were to start from scratch, and book the the entire b2b2b at once I have the feeling they'll figure out what you're trying to do with a single booking. Right now I think you're confusing the daylights out of them by inserting a segment in between two previously booked segments.

 

Seattle to Vancouver is a legal cruise standing alone.

 

Vancouver to LA is a legal cruise standing alone;

 

BUT...Seattle/Vancouver/LA is not legal on a single ship

 

LA to Miami with a stop at a distant foreign port is a legal cruise standing alone...and it then makes the combination of the first two legal.

 

CBP looks at where you embark and ultimately disembark. Getting off and back on the same ship really doesn't alter anything. (Getting off one ship and on another is a completely different matter, however).

 

Again, my advice is to not be "cute" about it. Start it from scratch and put it together at one time...not book one, then the other, then the other.

[njhorseman]

Good catch on the date of the article! Interesting that the article is 12 years old. Exactly how old is the law? Has the law been re-written since the article was published? I think that a complete re-write of the law would invalidate the article since it was published prior to the re-write.

 

The law itself hasn't been rewritten...it dates from the 1890's, but CBP's current interpretive bulletin dates from April, 2010.

[njhorseman]

No...the wise crack was about your compulsion to tell others how wrong they are...usually over a minor insignificant point.

 

Now...you can cut, paste, link, and quote to your hearts content....however you miss the one single relevant point: IF this is legal, then simply get the OP booked. I said it before and I'll say it again: The ONLY acceptable proof of legality is the booking. You can state your side, and I can state mine, but it is whether or not the OP sails that matters...nothing else.

 

If I still owned my travel agency, the OP would have been booked long ago.

[smeyer418]

Funny...I don't recall stating that you were wrong. Perhaps you could quote the post where I made that claim?

 

 

this is what you wrote

 

"I don't see how your interpretation of the author's definition of a distant foreign port is applicable."

 

all I pointed out was the article was wrong. It still is. The law has not changed. The fine was increased under GW Bush when a lot of service fees and fines were increased.

 

You can cut hairs by saying what I said wasn't applicable didn't mean it was wrong.

 

While I am not a maritime lawyer I play one on TV a lot...and things change. I have no doubt that under the rules this B to B to B is ok but that doesn't mean that there is something I am not aware of nor that the cruise line will allow it anyway....

 

in any case I emailed the second office a few minutes ago and will expect to get a response sometimes.

 

 

BTW I know Seth Pinsky having met with him a few times-and there are times that the PR doesn't necessarily follow the facts. I still want to see them say specifically that the breakaway will be home ported in Manhattan as opposed to NY City- the CG has told that not to bring the QM2 into Manhattan again but that too is subject to change..

Edited November 3, 2011 by smeyer418

[njhorseman]

 

BTW I know Seth Pinsky having met with him a few times-and there are times that the PR doesn't necessarily follow the facts. I still want to see them say specifically that the breakaway will be home ported in Manhattan and opposed to NY City.

 

 

Sid, he specifically said "Thank you to Norwegian Cruise Line for their commitment to New York City, and for making Manhattan Cruise Terminal the homeport for this amazing new state-of-the-art ship"...

[smeyer418]

Sid, he specifically said "Thank you to Norwegian Cruise Line for their commitment to New York City, and for making Manhattan Cruise Terminal the homeport for this amazing new state-of-the-art ship"...

we shall see. they could have answered by now.

[njhorseman]

we shall see. they could have answered by now.

 

LOL...You have a dog in this fight...you want it based in Brooklyn so it's only a $5 taxi ride from your house instead of $30 to Manhattan...

[smeyer418]

LOL...You have a dog in this fight...you want it based in Brooklyn so it's only a $5 taxi ride from your house instead of $30 to Manhattan...

nah my son drives me to either one or a neighbor does. I have no dog in this fight. I just know that the CG doesn't want the ship extending into the river....

[njhorseman]

nah my son drives me to either one or a neighbor does. I have no dog in this fight. I just know that the CG doesn't want the ship extending into the river....

 

Very true. We took the first QM2 Caribbean cruise from NY (Manhattan Cruise Terminal), shortly after the ship was launched, and well before the Brooklyn terminal was completed. She extended way beyond the end of the pier and both the Coast Guard and NY City police had to patrol the river in the vicinity of the pier to ensure some stray boat didn't smack into her.

Edited November 3, 2011 by njhorseman

[time2cruise1]

Very true. We took the first QM2 Caribbean cruise from NY (Manhattan Cruise Terminal), shortly after the ship was launched, and well before the Brooklyn terminal was completed. She extended way beyond the end of the pier and both the Coast Guard and NY City police had to patrol the river in the vicinity of the pier to ensure some stray boat didn't smack into her.

 

Docked next to her on the first Jewel TA. Extended well out from the pier.

 

 

Edited November 3, 2011 by time2cruise1

[LadyShiva]

Very true. We took the first QM2 Caribbean cruise from NY (Manhattan Cruise Terminal), shortly after the ship was launched, and well before the Brooklyn terminal was completed. She extended way beyond the end of the pier and both the Coast Guard and NY City police had to patrol the river in the vicinity of the pier to ensure some stray boat didn't smack into her.

 

*laughing* That's a really funny mental image... it's not as if she's hidden!

[Seamo]

FYI- I emailed the government and asked them:

 

 

I have a question about what is allowed or not allowed under the PVSA which is administered by CBP...can you ask the counsels office who is responsible for this to answer this specific question for a non-US flagged vessel

 

If I get on a cruise in Seattle and stay on for three segments(Seattle to Vancouver Vancouver to LA and LA to Miami-with a stop at a distant foreign port) to Miami-with a stop at a distant foreign port in South America-Is this permitted for a passenger(I know its ok for a crew member).

 

lets see what they say....

 

Have gone over + over all the posts (here+before) and we are now advocating the opposite sides

(positions) -- as if we were 'in court' .

 

We are calling/writing/emailing not only NCL but other lines asking: CAN YOU HELP YOUR CUSTOMERS ??????

---Not that stark, but as suggested here by several helpful posters.

 

If anyone gets an update ...we will be here .. thanks!!!!

 

:) Seamo :)

[Partyatsea]

Jeeeez this is so the perfect thread for NCL to post on. ;)

[sjnyc323]

So what was the outcome here?

 

Sent from my SCH-R910 using Tapatalk

[smeyer418]

latest government response

 

 

Recently you requested personal assistance from our on-line support center. Below is a summary of your request and our response.

 

If this issue is not resolved to your satisfaction, you may reopen it within the next 7 days.

 

Thank you for allowing us to be of service to you.

 

 

Subject PVSA(passenger vessel services act) I have a question about what is allowed or ... Discussion Thread Response (Katelyn)11/16/2011 08:18 AM Dear Sid,

 

Thank you for contacting U.S. Customs and Border Protection Information Center. You will want to speak to the Small Vessel Call Center. They can be reached at 1-800-432-1216.

 

Hope that clarifies,

[smeyer418]

 

latest government response

 

 

Recently you requested personal assistance from our on-line support center. Below is a summary of your request and our response.

 

If this issue is not resolved to your satisfaction, you may reopen it within the next 7 days.

 

Thank you for allowing us to be of service to you.

 

 

Subject PVSA(passenger vessel services act) I have a question about what is allowed or ... Discussion Thread Response (Katelyn)11/16/2011 08:18 AM Dear Sid,

 

Thank you for contacting U.S. Customs and Border Protection Information Center. You will want to speak to the Small Vessel Call Center. They can be reached at 1-800-432-1216.

 

Hope that clarifies,

 

 

latest government response

 

and I called and they said it was ok...they don't understand why NCL is saying "no". I asked them to confirm it in writing...

 

 

"Recently you requested personal assistance from our on-line support center. Below is a summary of your request and our response.

 

If this issue is not resolved to your satisfaction, you may reopen it within the next 7 days.

 

Thank you for allowing us to be of service to you.

 

 

Subject PVSA(passenger vessel services act) I have a question about what is allowed or ... Discussion Thread Response (Katelyn)11/16/2011 08:18 AM Dear Sid,

 

 

 

Dear Sid,

 

Thank you for contacting U.S. Customs and Border Protection Information Center. You will want to speak to the Small Vessel Call Center. They can be reached at 1-800-432-1216.

 

Hope that clarifies,

 

Katelyn

Auto-Response 11/03/2011 03:18 PM

Title: Does CBP fine cruise ships that allow passengers to disembark before the end of the cruise's itinerary?

Link: https://help.cbp.gov/app/answers/detail/a_id/709

 

Title: How to record departure from the United States after the fact

Link: https://help.cbp.gov/app/answers/detail/a_id/752

 

Title: Documents needed to take a cruise

Link: https://help.cbp.gov/app/answers/detail/a_id/1139

 

Title: The Jones Act

Link: https://help.cbp.gov/app/answers/detail/a_id/23

 

Title: Pleasure Boats - Obtaining a cruising license after old one expires

Link: https://help.cbp.gov/app/answers/detail/a_id/608

Customer 11/03/2011 03:18 PM

PVSA(passenger vessel services act)

I have a question about what is allowed or not allowed under the PVSA which is administered by CBP...can you ask the counsels office who is responsible for this to answer this specific question for a non-US flagged vessel

 

If I get on a cruise in Seattle and stay on for three segments(Seattle to Vancouver Vancouver to LA and LA to Miami-with a stop at a distant foreign port) to Miami-with a stop at a distant foreign port in South America-Is this permitted for a passenger(I know its ok for a crew member).

 

Thanks

 

Sid Meyer********(phone number redacted)

 

Question Reference #111103-000604

Topic Level 1: Other/Miscellaneous

Topic Level 2: Other

Date Created: 11/03/2011 03:18 PM

Last Updated: 11/16/2011 08:18 AM

Status: Solved

Cargo Location:

Carrier-Vessel Name:

Flight Number:

Name/Badge:

Incident Date:

AgentsKnowledge:

ReachingAgent:

IssueResolved:

AgentsCourtesy:

Form Type: Email Us

NEXUS Number:

SEVIS Number:

SENTRI Number:

CET Problem Type:

AQI Problem Type:

MET/Trade Problem:

Entry Problem Type:

Entry Number:

Bill of Lading Nbr:

Bill of Lading Type:

Container Number:

Booking Number:

FAST Number:

Problem Type:

Entity Type:

Other Problem:

 

 

Thank you for contacting U.S. Customs and Border Protection Information Center. You will want to speak to the Small Vessel Call Center. They can be reached at 1-800-432-1216.

 

Hope that clarifies,

[billie5]

I make the same suggestion to you that I've made to others...please read the regulations.

Horseman, you give a lot of very good advice, for which all of us should be grateful. However, some times you are out in left field.

 

NOW, I am not saying you are definitely wrong about this b2b2b cruise, although I do think you are. And I must admit to not having had the patience to read this thread beyond the end of page 1. BUT, your quote above is really bad advice.

 

The majority of legal issues are decided by case law, and not by reading the statutes, or the regs. Indeed, just reading statutes is the best route to ending up with a personal conclusion with which the courts have not agreed. Of course, for an individual who is not willing or able to explore the entire history of previous court decisions, there may be no alternative to just reading the statute. But it pays to be humble -- common sense and reading statutes does not always get you to the correct answer.:eek:

 

Bill

[sjnyc323]

Horseman, you give a lot of very good advice, for which all of us should be grateful. However, some times you are out in left field.

 

NOW, I am not saying you are definitely wrong about this b2b2b cruise, although I do think you are. And I must admit to not having had the patience to read this thread beyond the end of page 1. BUT, your quote above is really bad advice.

 

The majority of legal issues are decided by case law, and not by reading the statutes, or the regs. Indeed, just reading statutes is the best route to ending up with a personal conclusion with which the courts have not agreed. Of course, for an individual who is not willing or able to explore the entire history of previous court decisions, there may be no alternative to just reading the statute. But it pays to be humble -- common sense and reading statutes does not always get you to the correct answer.:eek:

 

Bill

 

All I know is two of my friends did these very same cruises on the Pearl in September and booked directly through NCL and had same cabin for all three cruises

 

Sent from my SCH-R910 using Tapatalk

[njhorseman]

Horseman, you give a lot of very good advice, for which all of us should be grateful. However, some times you are out in left field.

 

NOW, I am not saying you are definitely wrong about this b2b2b cruise, although I do think you are. And I must admit to not having had the patience to read this thread beyond the end of page 1. BUT, your quote above is really bad advice.

 

The majority of legal issues are decided by case law, and not by reading the statutes, or the regs. Indeed, just reading statutes is the best route to ending up with a personal conclusion with which the courts have not agreed. Of course, for an individual who is not willing or able to explore the entire history of previous court decisions, there may be no alternative to just reading the statute. But it pays to be humble -- common sense and reading statutes does not always get you to the correct answer.:eek:

 

Bill

 

I normally wouldn't use my time to dignify and respond to the comments of someone who freely admits to not having read the thread beyond page one, particularly since you've criticized me for being unwilling or unable to explore the entire history of previous court decisions (Surely you've heard of the saying "People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones".), but you've always seemed to be a reasonable and intelligent person, so I'll make an exception.

 

(1) The chances of this issue having ever been addressed in a court are slim and none...and I'm voting for none...or at least none that contradict the common sense reading of the law. This is hardly a complicated issue open to a lot of interpretation.

 

(2) I've cited and provided a direct link to a recently issued publication from Customs and Border Protection, the agency responsible for interpreting and enforcing this law. I am not citing the chapter and verse of a 125 year old law...but the fact that this recent interpretation in no way contradicts the 125 year old law would lend support to my comments in (1), above.

 

(3) I am a former travel agency owner, and in that position I needed to understand issues like this one.

 

(4) This itinerary has been allowed by NCL in the past.

 

(5) Poster smeyer418 (who by the way is a lawyer) has been in contact with CBP to ask them, and in the post on this thread immediately preceding yours says:

 

"latest government response

 

and I called and they said it was ok...they don't understand why NCL is saying "no". I asked them to confirm it in writing..."

 

 

Now if you could cite one one sentence of a statute, regulation, court decision or any other concrete evidence supporting your position, I'll be happy to consider the merits of your argument.

[Family Travel Story]

Anyone know the specific cite or langauge of the statute? I would be very intersted to review it. I know there are some laws that make it much easier to travel on a cruise ship. For example, If I want to fly from Miami to Nassau, I need a passport. However, if I want to cruise from Miami to Nassua and back, so long as it is a closed loop cruise (coming and going to the same port) I need only a birth certificate and some form of photo ID.

 

 

This gentleman posted the link to the PVSA rules:

 

+++ ++++ +++ +++ +++

njhorseman

5,000+ Club

 

Join Date: Jul 2007

Posts: 7,673

 

Originally Posted by luv4cruisin View Post

Some one who understands the Jones Act, please help me figure out if this is a violation. Sept 2012 on the Pearl I want to do:

 

The Seattle to Vancouver 7 day

then the Vancouver to LA 5 day Pacific Coastal

then the LA to MIA Panama Canal 14 day.

 

I'm pretty sure I can't do it, but NCL said I could. I just don't trust the "hourly" answers. If you know, please help!

The itinerary looks good to me, because the third leg includes a port call at Cartagena, Colombia, which qualifies as a Distant Foreign Port under the Passenger Vessel Services Act. (The PVSA, not the Jones Act is the law that applies to cruise ships.)

Last edited by njhorseman; June 8th, 2011 at 01:14 AM.

_____________________________________________________________

Old June 8th, 2011, 01:19 AM

njhorseman njhorseman is offline

5,000+ Club

Quote:

Originally Posted by sharke View Post

We actually booked a B2B like this several yrs ago. We arranged the Seattle to Vancouver and Vancouver to LA. No problems when we booked but 2 wks later a NCL agent called and said we couldn't do it because of the Jones Act set way back in I think 1916. Can't remember the details, something about way back when protecting trading rights from country to country etc. So we cancelled both of the cruises since the attraction was following the coast. NCL wasn't too happy but we ended up finding a great deal on a repositioning cruise out of New York on the Dawn, to the Caribbean and ending in Miami. Sure would like that original itinery, though.

The third segment of the OP's cruise, from LA to Miami, makes the whole cruise itinerary legal under the PVSA (the Jones Act isn't for passenger cruise ships) because it calls at Cartagena, Colombia.

____________________________________________________________

Old June 8th, 2011, 01:20 AM

njhorseman njhorseman is offline

5,000+ Club

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Seanote View Post

My best guess is you can't do the first two legs together. You can't travel from Seattle to LA without a stop at a distant foriegn port and Vancouver is not a distant foreign port. The second two legs together are ok, however.

Correct...and all three legs together, which is what the OP is doing is also legal.

________ ______________ ________________ ___________

any updates , links etc ...??

Thank you, :) Seamo :)

[njhorseman]

Anyone know the specific cite or langauge of the statute? I would be very intersted to review it. I know there are some laws that make it much easier to travel on a cruise ship. For example, If I want to fly from Miami to Nassau, I need a passport. However, if I want to cruise from Miami to Nassua and back, so long as it is a closed loop cruise (coming and going to the same port) I need only a birth certificate and some form of photo ID.

 

You can find the language here, but you really have to read the interpretive bulletin from CBP I cited earlier in this thread to understand how it's enforced:

 

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=browse_usc&docid=Cite:+46USC55103

 

The regulations governing the documentation of identity and nationality required for cruise ship passengers are separate and have no connection to the PVSA.

Edited November 17, 2011 by njhorseman

[billie5]

Horseman, I am sorry I was not clearer. I would never expect anyone to read case law on subjects which come up. That is what you pay lawyers for, which means it has to be an important issue. Unfortunately, the only approach is to cite statutes, regs, etc. And point to the experience of others (which can change as fast as interpretations do). And that is exactly what you did.

 

The operative word I should have emphasized is "humble." Although reading the regs may be the only options normal mortals have, one should not assume that because one can "read it," it will be the current law. Courts (and government agencies) can have very peculiar ways of interpreting language. I think your contributions to the discussion have been on point, as they almost always are. However, one should be cautious about conclusions based on "Just read the regs." Reasonable advice, always, but never conclusive -- that was the only point I had hoped to make.

 

Bill (22 years in NJ)

[sjnyc323]

Just strange that NCL booked same three cruises for my friends on the Pearl this last September and now say no to same itinerary

 

Sent from my SCH-R910 using Tapatalk

[sparks1093]

Just strange that NCL booked same three cruises for my friends on the Pearl this last September and now say no to same itinerary

 

Sent from my SCH-R910 using Tapatalk

 

Not strange, someone made a mistake then or someone is making a mistake now. People making mistakes is far from strange;).