The Jones Act/ Passenger Service Act - Back to Back Sailings

[flyboy88]

I'm not sure if anyone has experience with the Jones Act on back to back cruises before.

 

I was booked on a 1-day repo cruise from Seattle to Vancouver, and the following 6-day sailing from Vancouver to LA. Yesterday I received a call from Princess explaining that I am not permitted to do this both back to back due to the Jones Act/Passenger Act. I was confused as they allowed me to book this, and I have done the 1-day repo cruises previously where I met people continuing on the next sailing ( also returning to the US). The Princess Agent who called did acknowledge that there were cases when people were able to do the back to back (even though they shouldn't have) however that was due to their system not flagging their bookings in advance.

 

I did some further digging by using the internet and made some phone calls, I found out that this Act is outdated and open to some interpretation when it comes to the back to back cruises. I called Holland America that operates the same type of back to back cruises and surprisingly they had no issues with booking them as they are "two different bookings, and you are clearing customs". I even called my PVP (who booked the two cruises for me) and she is now confused as her support desk is stating the same as Holland America and doesn't believe the Jones Act applies to these two cruises.

 

Based on the confusion and conflicting information, I decided to send the following email to US Customs and Border Protection to seek more clarification and outline my situation. you can read that below.

 

Has anyone else had any experience with the Jones Act, or have you previously been able to complete this type of back to back?

 

Email to CBP:

 

"My Inquiry is in regards to 'The Jones Act/ Passenger Service Act'.

 

"The Passenger Services Act prohibits ships of non-U.S. registry from embarking and disembarking passengers at two different U.S. ports."

 

Situation: I was booked on two separate cruises that are back to back. I have already spoken to Canadian Customs and Border Patrol in regards to this inquiry and they approved it. However, I want to see how the US CBP stands on this situation in writing so that I can forward to Princess Cruises as they are providing conflicting information.

 

Here is the itinerary;

 

CRUISE #1 - September 30, 2017 - Ruby Princess - Departs Seattle, Arrives in Vancouver, Canada at 07:00 on October 1, 2017.

 

* As this is only a one day cruise, I would be disembarking the Ruby Princess in Vancouver and clearing Canadian Customs and entering Canada. A couple hours later I would be pre-clearing US Customs in Vancouver prior to re-boarding the Ruby Princess for the next cruise (booked as a separate cruise).

 

CRUISE #2 - October 1, 2017 - Ruby Princess- Departs Vancouver, Canada at 16:30 and arrrives in Los Angles, CA on October 7, 2017.

 

 

Question: I know that the Jone's Act/ Passenger Service Act prevents a non-US registered ship from transporting passengers between two US ports... however in this situation it is TWO separate cruises and I would be entering Canada and Pre-Clearing US customs prior to reboarding the ship, I am not remaining on a ship that is going from US port to US port without entering Canada first.

 

Please inform me if this type of back to back itinerary would be acceptable, or if it would be unacceptable as per the Jones Act (even though it is not one cruise, it is two different bookings)?

 

As previously mentioned, when I spoke to Canadian Customs about the above situation/ inquiry they said there were no issues with the plan as I would be clearing Canadian Customs and entering Canada before returning to the United States."

[lstone19]

First, some clarifications. The Jones Act deals with cargo; The PVSA (Passenger Vessel Services Act) deals with passengers. So only the PVSA is applicable. Also, since you brought up Customs, Customs deals with the admissibility of goods; Immigration deals with the admissibility of people. Many people say "Customs" when they either mean just Immigration or both functions (at airports, Immigration and Customs are usually separate inspections (Immigration, then claim checks bags, then Customs) while at highway border crossings, one inspector usually does both functions (at least at the initial inspection - all bets are off if you're sent to secondary).

 

Also, since the PVSA is a U.S. law, Canada does not really know nor care about how it is applied.

 

As I have always understood it, it matters not how the cruise line markets the cruises but simply where you embark and where you disembark. Embark at one U.S. port and disembark at another U.S. port (and not having visited a "distant foreign port" which by definition is one on another continent or one of the ABC islands), it's not legal. And it is that simple. In your case, you want to embark on Ruby Princess in Seattle and disembark in Los Angeles. Two different U.S. ports so not legal. That Princess markets it as two different cruises is irrelevant.

 

I'm surprised by your claim that Holland America thinks this is legal. I'll be interested to hear what response you get from CBP if they reply.

[Coral]

You will not be allowed to do this cruise. It is not a Canadian Law but a US Law.

 

You can not start in Seattle and end in LA on the same ship. You can if they are different ships.

 

We have done several B2B2B but always go by the law.

 

Just find 2 ships doing the same itinerary and switch ships. If you had booked it with HAL, they would eventually call you. Some of the reps are not well versed on the law. It would have eventually been caught.

[thinfool]

There are several threads here on CC with exactly the same tale. While frustrating, your efforts will not find success.

[skynight]

Agree with what others have posted. You can not board in Seattle and disembark in L.A. unless you change ships. This has nothing to do with Canada Law, it is all U.S. law. Here is some good reading, see page 13.

https://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/documents/ICP%20Pax%20Vessel%20Services%20Act%20Apr%202010.pdf

[BillB48]

At the root of the problem is the same ship will be transporting you between 2 US cities, in your case Seattle and LA without the required call at a distant foreign port. It does not matter how the cruise was booked or sold, you will need drop one of the cruises:(. Bummer, but CBP watches those cruises like a hawk.

[willyshaw]

Just curious why is this a law anyway. What does it prevent

[AF-1]

So it seems this act this applies for non US citizens only, and has nothing to do with the actual ship; is that correct?

[Coral]

So it seems this act this applies for non US citizens only, and has nothing to do with the actual ship; is that correct?

 

It applies to everyone.

[lstone19]

Just curious why is this a law anyway. What does it prevent

 

 

 

It, in theory, protects US shipping interests by not allowing foreign ships to provide transportation within the US.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[peety3]

You could do it if you switched ships, or got off the ship for at least 24 hours, but cannot do it as originally booked. It does not matter what your citizenship is. The only two factors are that you're trying to travel between US cities and the ship is not registered in the US.

 

Essentially, you cannot ride a ship as transport from one US city to another US city. (I don't consider going from one US city to a distant foreign port to another US city as transport; that's tourism.)

[RDC1]

It, in theory, protects US shipping interests by not allowing foreign ships to provide transportation within the US.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

In actual practice, not just theory, it provides protection to US maritime related jobs, since it applies to a wide range of ships such as ferries, and a number of others, not juse large cruise ships.

[skynight]

Just curious why is this a law anyway. What does it prevent

Read through the attachment in posting #5. The law is very old and is meant to protect Maritime trade between U.S. ports. Only U.S. flagged vessels with U.S. crews can operate between U.S. ports.

[ar1950]

Just curious why is this a law anyway. What does it prevent

 

You can also read about it here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passenger_Vessel_Services_Act_of_1886

[jagoffee]

In actual practice, not just theory, it provides protection to US maritime related jobs, since it applies to a wide range of ships such as ferries, and a number of others, not juse large cruise ships.

Doesn't it also apply to Foreign owned airlines as well? Or is that a different law?

[skynight]

Doesn't it also apply to Foreign owned airlines as well? Or is that a different law?

Similar, but different laws.

[Colo Cruiser]

Have to be off the ship 24 hours or change ships.

[beg3yrs]

So it seems this act this applies for non US citizens only, and has nothing to do with the actual ship; is that correct?

 

Others have answered the first part of your question: It applies to everyone.

 

The second part though hasn't been answered: It actually has everything to do with the actual ship. The law applies only to non-US flagged vessels. Princess ships are flagged in the Bahamas. If the ships were US flagged, you could take the cruise as you wanted.

[rtownsend]

This is such an outdated law and the reason why ships stop at Victoria and Ensenada.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

[casavaha]

Take HAL for the one day cruise and Princess for the 6 day. You are going to have to take two different

cruise lines.

[ar1950]

.............................

 

The second part though hasn't been answered: It actually has everything to do with the actual ship. The law applies only to non-US flagged vessels. Princess ships are flagged in the Bahamas. If the ships were US flagged, you could take the cruise as you wanted.

 

Actually Princess ships are registered (and flagged) in Bermuda. Except the Majestic, Golden, Sapphire and Diamond which are registered in the UK.

[Colo Cruiser]

Actually Princess ships are registered (and flagged) in Bermuda. Except the Majestic which is registered in the UK.

 

 

I believe the Diamond/Sapphire are now registered in London.

[neverbeenhere]

I'm confused by all this talk of the Jones Act. I thought I knew what the Jones Act was.

[RDC1]

This is such an outdated law and the reason why ships stop at Victoria and Ensenada.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

 

 

Not out dated at all. Still protects a lot of jobs in the US. (Ferries, tour boats, etc. basically any commercial passenger carrying boats in the US). If it wasn't for the law they could be run by non- US companies, using non-US built ships, with non-US crews.

[Cruise Raider]

Not out dated at all. Still protects a lot of jobs in the US. (Ferries, tour boats, etc. basically any commercial passenger carrying boats in the US). If it wasn't for the law they could be run by non- US companies, using non-US built ships, with non-US crews.

 

Precisely!!! Passengers that might want to be free to break this law don't look at the unintended consequences. There is a US Senator or two looking into this but nothing has been done as US interests still need protection.

Not the same law but also the same principal as being able to fly Air Canada from LA to Las Vegas applies.

I understand there may be exceptions to this law but the cruiselines cannot knowingly book you while breaking this law ... there will be a fine imposed on them for doing so.

 

We were able to circumvent this law quite legally and it was an excellent trip....I highly recommend it to anyone interested in touring Vancouver for a day or two. We sailed on an 11 night cruise from Seattle to Vancouver, stayed overnight at the Pan Pacific there at Canada Place and the next morning, caught the Island Princess to sail back to San Francisco. This overnight made it fully legal.

We recently sailed on the Solstice from Vancouver to Seattle. For those that embarked in Honolulu and then continued their cruise from Vancouver had to disembark on the last day in Victoria. I believe you pay an additional fare to do it this way as the Canadian immigration and customs officials have to be in place for these disembarking passengers. Cannot be absolutely sure of this, though.