njhorseman

But perhaps they are only now enforcing them. Not only NCLH ships, but also Cunard and Viking Ocean ships have been recently denied port entry because of the biofouling laws. Could be a communication disconnect between the government and the cruise lines that explains why multiple cruise lines are having these issues only now.

Someone on an NCL cruise recently complained that going to Starlink resulted in even worse internet service than the ship previously had, with more frequent total unavailability of service as opposed to just abysmally slow service. I suspect Starlink needs to launch many more satellites in order to provide adequate coverage.

Other cruise lines have had the same issue, not just NCLH lines. Both Cunard and Viking Ocean have had ships denied entry because of the biofouling problems. The issue may be just as much one of government failure to notify cruise lines of how and when enforcement would begin as as it is the cruise lines' failure to prepare for the consequences of the laws.

Credit cards and US dollars are fine. There's a thread on this board from a couple of days ago discussing this very question:

Yes, the resolution does say "persons", not passengers, but only a small number of crew are needed ashore to assist in the tendering process, so at most what does 1,000 become, 975? It's not going to make a big difference and as long as those crew are going no further than the tender pier they may just turn a blind eye to it.

@Turtles06 was on the Gem, which was the ship going southbound. The Jewel was going northbound.

The referendum prohibits more than 1,000 cruise ship passengers from disembarking in Bar Harbor on any day. There's at least one lawsuit already filed challenging the legality of the referendum. In theory a ship carrying more than 1,000 passengers could still call on Bar Harbor, as long as no more than 1,000 passengers in total from all ships in port that day go ashore, but from a practical perspective I doubt any ships carrying over 1,00 passengers would still call on the port. The referendum doesn't affect any port calls that were contracted for prior to March 2022. There's a lengthy thread on this board discussing the situation:

I interpreted your second sentence "I think the full transit uses both new and old locks" to mean that you thought any individual ship uses both sets of locks on a full transit, which would be wrong. I interpreted it that way because of your first sentence stating that a partial transit uses the old locks, which was wrong. If your second sentence meant that a full transit could use both sets of locks then technically you would be correct, subject to your understanding that a NeoPanamax ship can only use the new locks, while a Panamax ship can use either, although their use of the new locks is extremely rare . As to a little respect, you didn't give me the respect of answering my question about which Celebrity ship you were on. I assume that means I was correct about your being on one of the Millennium-class ships.

I don't want to beat you up on this subject, but your first post was wrong when you said a partial transit uses the old locks. A NeoPanamax ship can't use the old locks whether it's doing a partial transit or a full transit. I also explained in the last paragraph of my first reply to you that a Panamax ship would only use the new locks under unusual circumstances.

Of course they did. The NCL Jewel is a Panamax ship so it normally uses the original locks.

Which ship? Summit, Infinity, Constellation and Millennium are all Panamax ships, so they can and will use the original locks.

No, that's incorrect on both counts. NeoPanamax ships use the new locks for their entire transit, whether partial or full. On a partial transit they use Agua Clara locks and on a full transit the Agua Clara and Cocoli locks. Panamax ships use the original locks, Gatun, Pedro Miguel and Miraflores, for their entire transit, whether partial or full. Once in a great while...presumably only if there's an operational problem with the original locks...a Panamax ship may use the new locks, but that is an unusual exception to normal procedure. A NeoPanamax ship has no choice but to use the new locks.

Not only is a full transit preferable but you should also try to sail on what is called a Panamax ship...a ship that can use the original locks. A transit through the new locks is not nearly as interesting.

My guess is that some genius in NCL's corporate office thought Nassau is on AST and listed the arrival and departure times one hour later than they actually were.

Why is your travel agent questioning this when WHTI regulations permit and Royal Caribbean clearly allows a US citizen to take the cruise using a birth certificate and photo Id such as a driver's license? @sparks1093has already cited the relevant passage from Royal Caribbean's website: https://www.royalcaribbean.com/faq/questions/what-travel-documents-i-need-for-boarding-day "For sailings departing from U.S. homeports, an official US state-issued Birth Certificate is also accepted. Guests age 16 and older that present an official US state-issued Birth Certificate will also need to provide a valid Driver’s License or picture ID issued by the government."

Nassau is on EST.

Yes, it should be a less expensive for taxi/car service/Uber from LGA, but if airfare is much cheaper to JFK or EWR the total cost of air and ground transportation can be cheaper than using LGA. I'd check out airfare first and if it's close by all means use LGA.

Carnival press releases I've seen say the ship will sail year round from Manhattan, which makes sense because that's the cruise terminal Carnival uses. Cape Liberty is 99.999% Royal Caribbean group ships with just an odd exception once in a blue moon if there's no docking space available elsewhere.

There is no window to renew other than in the online passport renewal process. You can renew by mail at any time .

Preferably it should be good advice, not unnecessary handwringing about nonexistent scenarios. The OP's question is this: " Are there any issues with having a passport expire 3 months after travel? ", and the answer for the OP's cruise is a resounding "No".

Some countries require the passport to be valid for at least six months, but by no means all. In the OP's case they're doing a closed loop Caribbean cruise which doesn't even require a passport, so the six month rule isn't applicable anywhere they're cruising.

It matters little whether you fly into EWR, LGA or JFK. Pick your flight based on price and schedule. Taxi, Uber/Lyft rideshare or car service such as Carmel Limo or Dial 7 will be the easiest way to go. There are some mass transit options but i generally don't recommend them for those with luggage.

@mking8288...Henry...thanks for taking the time to do your report. It's always good to see a firsthand account of what's going on from a reliable person .

Why would it ever be important on this itinerary? They're not travelling to Europe or South America or Africa or Asia. It's a closed loop Caribbean cruise. Even if they had to fly home in an emergency all that is needed is a valid passport, even if it expires only a day after they return.

The point is there's no need to rush. The OP can renew when they return. If they said they had another trip planned for shortly thereafter the answer might be different. Why create nonexistent "what if" scenarios? They're still going to have almost three months remaining on the passport after they return from this cruise. Why should the OP lose months of validity on the current passport by renewing before they have to?