Jones Act?

[chengkp75]

This could be a bit confusing to some. Foreign flagged ships go from Miami to San Diego and back all the time legally because they stop at a "distant foreign" port. I realize those ports are not in "North America" but the ship does transport people between two US cities legally legally by stopping in a distant foreign port.

 

This is correct. A "closed loop" or round trip cruise that returns to its port of origin in the US, must call at a "foreign" port. One way cruises, that start and end in different US ports, must call at a "distant foreign" port. Distant foreign ports are defined as any port not in North or Central America, Bermuda, or the Caribbean Islands, with the exception of the ABC islands (Aruba, Bonaire, and Curacao) which are considered part of South America.

 

Regardless of how the cruise is advertised, the actual itinerary of the individual passenger is what CBP considers, so late embarkation, early disembarkation, and back to back cruises can make legal cruises illegal for the individual.

[GeezerCouple]

This is correct. A "closed loop" or round trip cruise that returns to its port of origin in the US, must call at a "foreign" port. One way cruises, that start and end in different US ports, must call at a "distant foreign" port. Distant foreign ports are defined as any port not in North or Central America, Bermuda, or the Caribbean Islands, with the exception of the ABC islands (Aruba, Bonaire, and Curacao) which are considered part of South America.

 

Regardless of how the cruise is advertised, the actual itinerary of the individual passenger is what CBP considers, so late embarkation, early disembarkation, and back to back cruises can make legal cruises illegal for the individual.

 

Thanks - I've wondered about this.

 

So what happens if one's flight is delayed due to, say, a major blizzard that closed airports for a couple of days (only phrasing it this way to avoid "should'a flown in early", which we always do), and then one wants to fly to the first or subsequent port?

 

Is there a penalty (other than all of the travel expenses!)?

 

On our recent holiday cruise (not NCL this year), a couple we met had a daughter who couldn't miss exams, so she flew to the first port, which was after 2 sea days.

I doubt that the fact that this was a "choice" (vs. weather forced) makes any difference to assorted authorities.

But sure enough, she was on the ship later.

 

We've assumed that we *could* "catch up" if necessary, although we always fly in at least one full day early.

 

[As for the Hawaii POA query to NCL we mentioned above, we were further told that "if we 'just' missed the ship", we would NOT be allowed back on later, and our bags would be packed for us and delivered to HNL when the ship made it's normal return at the end of the cruise. Sounded rather punitive... All of this was in writing.]

[bruadhin]

Thanks - I've wondered about this.

 

So what happens if one's flight is delayed due to, say, a major blizzard that closed airports for a couple of days (only phrasing it this way to avoid "should'a flown in early", which we always do), and then one wants to fly to the first or subsequent port?

 

Is there a penalty (other than all of the travel expenses!)?

 

On our recent holiday cruise (not NCL this year), a couple we met had a daughter who couldn't miss exams, so she flew to the first port, which was after 2 sea days.

I doubt that the fact that this was a "choice" (vs. weather forced) makes any difference to assorted authorities.

But sure enough, she was on the ship later.

 

We've assumed that we *could* "catch up" if necessary, although we always fly in at least one full day early.

 

[As for the Hawaii POA query to NCL we mentioned above, we were further told that "if we 'just' missed the ship", we would NOT be allowed back on later, and our bags would be packed for us and delivered to HNL when the ship made it's normal return at the end of the cruise. Sounded rather punitive... All of this was in writing.]

 

It is perfectly legal to bring people from a foreign country to the US, nothing wrong with that. The issue might be if you miss the original embarkation and then board in a US port, such as Cape Canaveral or Key West. Although as Chengkp mentioned, there are exemptions for certain circumstances. I'm sure health and safety or death would be one, no idea about travel interruptions on reaching embarkation.

 

Chengkp mentioned he didn't see anything restricting NCL America, but perhaps their lawyers felt there was something. Or they simply don't want to abuse it and attract the wrath of regulators or Congress by embarking and disembarking at various ports during the cruise. Also, they may feel it is a financial issue for them, as you won't be onboard for spending the rest of the cruise. And finally, perhaps they are just afraid it will set a precedent that people will try to follow on their non-US flagged cruises.

 

Something to remember, the government WILL get the fine from the cruise line, even if that means impounding a ship to collect, freezing bank accounts, etc. Whether or not the cruise line is able to successfully collect from a passenger is another story.

 

One slight clarification about what Chengkp said. The cruise line cannot force the family to pay the fine in case of a death until an exemption is received. They can go after the estate and tie it up until the fine is paid or dismissed due to exemption. Anyone who can afford a cruise is likely to have assets the family wants.

[richg35]

It would seem that Jones PVSA and a host of other garbledegook rules and

regs need to be dumped tea party style. As I understand it there is only

1 ship flagged in USA service the POA - as for Canada I don't know.

So if we (USA) don't have any ships for passenger carriage the big deal is

about these archaic ancient times transportation road blocks favoring

USA flag ships which there is only one ! One ship in Hawaiian waters of USA

registry is going to dictate the rest of the USA cruising maritime business !

Give - me - a - break !

Comments specifically about CRUISE Ships and not Cargo Ships !

Where are the USA ships that need protection ?

This would be different if we had ships and USA employee workers !

And at this point what incentives are being shown to built such ships

and employ USA workers and is there any profit in it ?

The US United States is the only feasible realistic ghost of an opportunity

to pursue this further ! And she no doubt will be scrapped like the politicians

and archaic rules should be in not updating the Acts and Rules !

One should be able to get on and off cruise ships like inter-country travel in

Europe paying the tariff (fare) that the cruise ship line determines to make

a business profit out of this.

There are Acts Rules & Regulations and then there are DAMN Acts Rules & Regs !

 

What on earth are you even talking about?

[bruadhin]

What on earth are you even talking about?

 

I doubt even he knows. As Chengkp mentioned, there are many more PVSA vessels than we realize. The four biggest cities in Tennessee are all located on navigable rivers and there are riverboats in each city that offer short cruises along the river. That would mean each boat had to be built in the US and each job is subject to US regulations. Also, there are riverboats that travel the Mississippi and Ohio rivers as river cruises. And let me tell you, those trips are not cheap by any stretch. But again, all US mariners and US jobs that presumably pay significantly higher than all the non-US cruise lines.

[chengkp75]

Thanks - I've wondered about this.

 

So what happens if one's flight is delayed due to, say, a major blizzard that closed airports for a couple of days (only phrasing it this way to avoid "should'a flown in early", which we always do), and then one wants to fly to the first or subsequent port?

 

Is there a penalty (other than all of the travel expenses!)?

 

On our recent holiday cruise (not NCL this year), a couple we met had a daughter who couldn't miss exams, so she flew to the first port, which was after 2 sea days.

I doubt that the fact that this was a "choice" (vs. weather forced) makes any difference to assorted authorities.

But sure enough, she was on the ship later.

 

We've assumed that we *could* "catch up" if necessary, although we always fly in at least one full day early.

 

[As for the Hawaii POA query to NCL we mentioned above, we were further told that "if we 'just' missed the ship", we would NOT be allowed back on later, and our bags would be packed for us and delivered to HNL when the ship made it's normal return at the end of the cruise. Sounded rather punitive... All of this was in writing.]

 

Joining at a later US port would be a violation of the PVSA. Joining in a foreign port would not, but it is a practice that the cruise lines are actively discouraging over the last couple of years, due to changes in how CBP screens pax. For closed loop cruises, the pax manifest submitted to CBP is used to screen the pax all during the cruise. This allows CBP to do the very cursory disembarkation "interview" which is mainly that everyone on the screened manifest has presented an ID with matching name, and that the face in front of the CBP agent matches the face on the ID.

 

Whenever someone joins late (downstream boarding) or leaves early (upstream disembarking), a new pax manifest must be submitted to CBP, and they treat this new manifest as a voyage beginning in a foreign country, not a closed loop. While this does not negate the ability to travel on the BC/DL ID method, it does require CBP to perform a different type of disembarkation interview, since this new manifest could have been submitted as recently as the day before. This more lengthy interview can cause delays in disembarking and missed flights, complaints about which the cruise lines don't want. They also don't want the added cost of additional CBP agents at disembarkation or the cost of submitting new manifests.

 

So, most cruise lines, over the last couple of years, have disallowed upstream/downstream passengers, for voluntary reasons, but exceptions are normally made if the cruise line arranged the air transportation, or a significant number of pax are delayed. Each cruise line, in each area of US homeports, will handle these cases differently (as each area office of CBP can handle things differently), so you need to get permission in advance.

[newcruisers2]

Can you tell me if you are on the May 5-15? Have you received any type of confirmation from NCL? On previous cruises we have been able to disembark in Victoria and always received a letter.

 

QUOTE=RobTheGob;49318234]We're on the Pearl in May and have been (according to our TA) approved for disembarkation in Victoria. The NCL approval was done in Nov, even before we made the deposit.

[Philob]

Chengkp mentioned he didn't see anything restricting NCL America, but perhaps their lawyers felt there was something. Or they simply don't want to abuse it and attract the wrath of regulators or Congress by embarking and disembarking at various ports during the cruise. Also, they may feel it is a financial issue for them, as you won't be onboard for spending the rest of the cruise. And finally, perhaps they are just afraid it will set a precedent that people will try to follow on their non-US flagged cruises.

 

I'll just add my two bits to this and sit back and finish my popcorn :D

 

Perhaps it's Hawaiian law that's preventing transport between islands. A few years ago a ferry service between islands was torpedo'd after a short operation period for "environmental" reasons. IMO a lot of anti-ferry lobbying was supported by the airlines;) Also some of the groups are still calling for halting POA sailings because of disruption to migrating (fill in the blank):cool:

[RobTheGob]

Can you tell me if you are on the May 5-15? Have you received any type of confirmation from NCL? On previous cruises we have been able to disembark in Victoria and always received a letter.

 

Yes - we're on the Pearl from May 5-15 (14th, in our case!). I have not received anything from NCL - but our TA (in Vancouver) confirmed again last week that the Victoria disembarkation is still showing on the system.

[chengkp75]

I'll just add my two bits to this and sit back and finish my popcorn :D

 

Perhaps it's Hawaiian law that's preventing transport between islands. A few years ago a ferry service between islands was torpedo'd after a short operation period for "environmental" reasons. IMO a lot of anti-ferry lobbying was supported by the airlines;) Also some of the groups are still calling for halting POA sailings because of disruption to migrating (fill in the blank):cool:

 

As far as I know, there is no state law against this. It is no secret that the airlines and the existing inter-island barge operators were the power behind the environmental groups protesting the Superferry. The reasons given were specious, since the barge operators already provided the same service (transporting trucks and containers) that the environmentalists were against for the Superferry. Cargo was going to be the mainspring of the Superferry's profit, passenger service was seen as gravy.

 

The POA still has to contend with deck lighting restrictions during certain months in Kauai to protect the Pacific Shearwake (sea bird). And the deck officers have to wear night vision goggles when on watch at night and the ship is transiting the whale sanctuary. The Superferry was required to perform special maneuvers during sea trials to show that it could maneuver adequately at full speed to avoid whale strikes. Interesting fact, until I left NCL in 2008, the last whale strike by a vessel in Hawaiian waters was by the Pacific Cetacean Institute's research vessel, studying whales.

[newcruisers2]

Our travel companions just finished talking to three different people at NCL....all saying the same thing. No one is getting off in Victoria. Something does not seem right here :confused: Would you be willing to share who your TA is or would you be willing to double check again to see if they are still allowing it? NCL did tell our friends that if we had a reservation number of someone getting off in Victoria they could check but I understand about confidential information and would not expect you to give that out :) Thanks

 

Yes - we're on the Pearl from May 5-15 (14th, in our case!). I have not received anything from NCL - but our TA (in Vancouver) confirmed again last week that the Victoria disembarkation is still showing on the system.

[RobTheGob]

Our travel companions just finished talking to three different people at NCL....all saying the same thing. No one is getting off in Victoria. Something does not seem right here :confused: Would you be willing to share who your TA is or would you be willing to double check again to see if they are still allowing it? NCL did tell our friends that if we had a reservation number of someone getting off in Victoria they could check but I understand about confidential information and would not expect you to give that out :) Thanks

 

My TA just called NCL and verified that our file indicates we are marked for a Victoria disembarkation.

 

She also asked NCL if there was a limit to the number of people that could get off here - and was told "no"! So - her only thoughts were that your TA didn't want to request the early disembarkation.

 

I looked up my notes - we were approved for Vic disembarkation on Nov. 25th.

[Pszaffveauhraunne]

[ .. ] Concordia, Triumph, Splendor, Grandeur, Star Princess, not to mention the number of unmentionable cargo ships that have struck bridges and shopping malls in the US while flying flags of convenience.

 

Shopping malls? That's got to be a good story!

[barnacle_boy]

Even after 15 years of US flag operations, many in corporate NCL still do not understand the differences.

 

The new executives from Prestige were toying with the idea of sending her to Alaska on "very unique itineraries" before someone helpfully explained that the ship is only permitted to sail in Hawaii under the initial authorizing legislation. Just another day with people who don't have a clue running the show :rolleyes:

[tallyho8]

Shopping malls? That's got to be a good story!

 

Yes, here in New Orleans. http://www.nytimes.com/1996/12/15/us/freighter-hits-riverfront-mall-in-new-orleans.html

[Cuizer2]

Shopping malls? That's got to be a good story!

 

I think that reference is to a cargo ship on the Mississippi River.

 

Here is a video ...

 

[chengkp75]

Now that I stop and think about it, I don't believe there would be any prohibition to disembarking at Victoria. The ship calls at foreign (to Canada) ports in Alaska between Vancouver and Victoria, and I don't believe the Canadian Coastal Act has any requirement for a "distant" foreign port like the PVSA.

[Davechipp74]

I got caught up in something like this I think it was called the passenger service act (or something like that) I disembarked myself in FLA. from a cruise that embarked in NYC. What happen was while at port in FLA I met a woman who would later become my wife, I went back on-board packed all my stuff and left. Didn't think anything about it. 3 years later my wife and I are going through customs at SEA-TAC and customs started going crazy, took us to a side room read me the riot act for a half hour, and then I had to pay a fine, I think it was about $300. Put a "special" stamp in my passport too.

:cool:

[punkincc]

I got caught up in something like this I think it was called the passenger service act (or something like that) I disembarked myself in FLA. from a cruise that embarked in NYC. What happen was while at port in FLA I met a woman who would later become my wife, I went back on-board packed all my stuff and left. Didn't think anything about it. 3 years later my wife and I are going through customs at SEA-TAC and customs started going crazy, took us to a side room read me the riot act for a half hour, and then I had to pay a fine, I think it was about $300. Put a "special" stamp in my passport too.

:cool:

 

Well, but at least you got a wife and an apparently successful marriage out of the deal, so it was well worth it, right? Who knows where you'd be now if you'd have let some silly rule dissuade you from disembarking had you known about it at the time.;)

[GeezerCouple]

I got caught up in something like this I think it was called the passenger service act (or something like that) I disembarked myself in FLA. from a cruise that embarked in NYC. What happen was while at port in FLA I met a woman who would later become my wife, I went back on-board packed all my stuff and left. Didn't think anything about it. 3 years later my wife and I are going through customs at SEA-TAC and customs started going crazy, took us to a side room read me the riot act for a half hour, and then I had to pay a fine, I think it was about $300. Put a "special" stamp in my passport too.

:cool:

 

That's a wonderful story :)

 

Did you both know it was sort of love at first sight?

[hawkeyetlse]

Now that I stop and think about it, I don't believe there would be any prohibition to disembarking at Victoria. The ship calls at foreign (to Canada) ports in Alaska between Vancouver and Victoria, and I don't believe the Canadian Coastal Act has any requirement for a "distant" foreign port like the PVSA.

You must be right about Victoria, but I can't see how to interpret the text quoted by triptolemus above in a way that allows this:

(d) the carriage of passengers by ship from any place in Canada other than from a place to which paragraph (b) or © applies

(i) to the same place, without any call at any port outside Canada, other than one or more technical or emergency calls, or

(ii) to any other place in Canada, other than as an in-transit call, either directly or by way of a place outside Canada,

As you said, they don't care if the foreign port is nearby or distant: no itinerary between two Canadian ports should be allowed, according to this clause.

[surfer54]

We had a B2B pacific coastal on the Pearl, then continuing on the pearl from Van to Alaska. We are from CA and USA.

Booked a year in advance.

Was told by NCL 2 weeks prior to sailing we would have to take the pearl to Van, then be bused to Seattle, overnight in a hotel and get on the sister ship (?). for Seattle to Alaska and then to Van. Transportation and hotel would be paid by NCL.

Why because of the Jones act. NCL computer should have caught this booking error but did not until cruise review 2 weeks prior to sailing.

Overall, NCL was very helpful and refunded the Pacific Coastal. We flew to Van for a short vacation and got on the Pearl to AK.

[bme]

I got caught up in something like this I think it was called the passenger service act (or something like that) I disembarked myself in FLA. from a cruise that embarked in NYC. What happen was while at port in FLA I met a woman who would later become my wife, I went back on-board packed all my stuff and left. Didn't think anything about it. 3 years later my wife and I are going through customs at SEA-TAC and customs started going crazy, took us to a side room read me the riot act for a half hour, and then I had to pay a fine, I think it was about $300. Put a "special" stamp in my passport too.

:cool:

 

Were you cruising with anyone? I'd be very curious to know what their experience was when you went "missing" from the trip! I'm assuming they understood you left -- but what was the reaction from the ship's crew?

 

Anyone else experience this type of event?

[chengkp75]

I got caught up in something like this I think it was called the passenger service act (or something like that) I disembarked myself in FLA. from a cruise that embarked in NYC. What happen was while at port in FLA I met a woman who would later become my wife, I went back on-board packed all my stuff and left. Didn't think anything about it. 3 years later my wife and I are going through customs at SEA-TAC and customs started going crazy, took us to a side room read me the riot act for a half hour, and then I had to pay a fine, I think it was about $300. Put a "special" stamp in my passport too.

:cool:

 

Were you cruising with anyone? I'd be very curious to know what their experience was when you went "missing" from the trip! I'm assuming they understood you left -- but what was the reaction from the ship's crew?

 

Anyone else experience this type of event?

 

Hmmm. Something not right about this story. CBP could care less who the passenger was, the fine is against the cruise line, so no idea why or if CBP would impose the fine 3 years later. It is only the ticket contract between the passenger and the cruise line that allows the cruise line to pass the fine to the passenger. If you look at the CBP page concerning the PVSA, their FAQ's state that they are not interested in who the passenger was. There would not have been any "special stamp" in the passport for a violation of the PVSA, since the PVSA only deals with domestic travel.

 

Also, a bit surprised that security didn't say anything when the passenger went ashore with all their luggage.

 

What I believe happened, and this had nothing to do with the PVSA, is that the poster left the ship without clearing CBP, and hence there was no record of his re-entering the US. I suspect he never left the US between this cruise and their encounter at Sea-Tac, and the fine was for failing to properly enter the country.

[AHS123]

Something not right about this story. CBP could care less who the passenger was, the fine is against the cruise line, so no idea why or if CBP would impose the fine 3 years later.

 

I must agree, the CBP couldn't care less.