Passenger Vessel Services Act / Jones Act & Route Deviations

[darrylzuk]

I've been looking at a 2 week Christmas and New Year's cruise on Caribbean Princess as a family trip for the holidays. We sailed on her maiden voyage in 2004 and thought it would be fun to sail on her again, plus the itinerary is great!

 

When we first called Princess, we had told them my brother and father both work in the movie industry and would likely miss the embarkation in Fort Lauderdale but could meet the ship in St. Thomas 3 days later and board there. They claimed this was possible and that we would need to complete "Route Deviation Forms" for them.

 

Yesterday we received a voicemail saying it was not possible because of the Jones Act. I listened the voicemail a couple of times and can't figure out how Fort Lauderdale is any different than St. Thomas, as they are both US. I found the below on Carnival's website:

 

Quote

THE JONES ACT / PASSENGER SERVICES ACT / CABOTAGE LAW

The Jones Act (also known as the Passenger Services Act) prohibits ships of Non-U.S registry from embarking and debarking guests at two different U.S ports. Such travel would constitute point-to-point transportation between two U.S ports, which is prohibited on foreign flagged ships. The exception to this rule is if the itinerary includes a ‘distant foreign port’ - in this case, a ship can embark and debark guests at two different U.S. ports. The following ports qualify as ‘distant foreign ports’:

• Countries in South America
• Aruba
• Bonaire
• Curacao

The following ports do not qualify as ‘distant foreign ports’:

• Canada
• Mexico
• Central America
• Bermuda
• Most Caribbean Islands

Note: Puerto Rico and the U.S Virgin Islands (St. Thomas; St. Croix; St. John) are not in the category of U.S ports under this act. For example: If an itinerary sails from Puerto Rico to Miami, this cruise is not in violation of the Jones Act because Puerto Rico is not considered a U.S port under this act.

 

 

The ship calls to both Aruba and Curacao during the cruise, which per the above are "distant foreign ports" so I don't see the issue. The Princess rep said if the ship were to stop in Cartagena or Panama City it would be possible to have them join later. But I'm failing to see the difference.

 

Has anyone else dealt with this issue before? I've attached a copy of the itinerary and the voicemail from Princess. My understanding of the law makes me feel like the Princess Representative misspoke and that my brother and father should be able to join in St. Thomas. 

 

Thanks!

VM from Princess.amr

[thinfool]

You are correct.  You or your travel agent (and this may be a time when a good travel agent will be more effective than a consumer) need to keep talking and trying to get somewhere with Princess.

Edited October 19, 2018 by thinfool

[Heidi13]

The PVSA prevents foreign flag passenger vessels carrying US citizens between US ports, with the following exceptions:

 - R/T cruises are permitted provided you visit any NON-American port

 - Embarking at 1 port and disembarking at another is only permitted, provided the vessel calls at a distant Non-American port. The ABC Islands (Aruba, Bonaire & Curacao) meet the definition of distant foreign port.

 

Therefore, boarding in STVI and disembarking in FL should meet the requirements. I note that all trans-Canal cruises we have completed with Princess call at an ABC island + Cartagena. This is not a requirement, but could be insurance, should 1 port be cancelled. However, your cruise visits 2 ABC islands, so it is unlikely they wil miss both.

 

I would call Princess and ask to discuss with Cust Service Manager

[njhorseman]

Not only do the port calls at Aruba and Curacao satisfy the PVSA distant foreign port requirement but embarking in St. Thomas, which has a PVSA exemption also makes the cruise legal. So, on two counts Princess is wrong. Either the Aruba and Curacao port calls or the St. Thomas embarkation alone would satisfy the requirements.

 

You need to run this up the ladder at Princess to a higher level .

[darrylzuk]

Thanks all for your responses and advice. I pressed Princess about this over their twitter account and also on the phone, can the are holding fast to the claim, saying:

 

Quote

Regretfully, we do not allow guests to embark mid-cruise on tround-trip Caribbean cruises that do not reuire a passport, as doing so could jeopardize the closed-loop status of the voyage and result in additional immigation processing requirements for all guests. 

 

Not sure where to go from here, other than a different line that has a similar itinerarty that embarks later. 

 

[Essiesmom]

They are not telling you it is illegal.  they are telling you that there are hoops that they have to jump through and that cost them money due to the fact that your friends embarking downline makes the entire cruise no longer closed loop.  Cruise lines used to allow this all the time, but they have decided the extra paperwork, time, and aggravation to the other passengers on debarkation due to more thorough CBP checks.  It is their choice not to allow it, and they are not the only cruise line doing this (or not doing this any more).  EM

[njhorseman]

2 hours ago, Essiesmom said:

They are not telling you it is illegal.  they are telling you that there are hoops that they have to jump through and that cost them money due to the fact that your friends embarking downline makes the entire cruise no longer closed loop.  Cruise lines used to allow this all the time, but they have decided the extra paperwork, time, and aggravation to the other passengers on debarkation due to more thorough CBP checks.  It is their choice not to allow it, and they are not the only cruise line doing this (or not doing this any more).  EM

You've hit the nail on the head. This isn't a legal issue, it's a pain-in-the-neck administrative issue that the cruise line doesn't wish to undertake. This is a pretty commonly taken position by cruise lines at present.

Edited October 22, 2018 by njhorseman

[Hlitner]

I think we have a better understanding of why Princess is saying no.  It is not about the PVSA which would not be an issue on this itinerary.  But it does create a huge problem with the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative (WHTI) which contains the language that allows what many call "Closed Loop Cruises."  Caribbean cruises that begin and end at the same port generally fall under the WHTI and, as a result, their passengers are exempt from needing a valid Passport.  But that rule assumes that everyone embarks and disembarks from the same port.  Allowing passengers to embark at a different port, even if its part of the USA, would not satisfy that requirement.   Princess would have to be very wary of not complying with the WHTI rules which would then mean that every passenger on that cruise would have to have a valid Passport.

 

Hank

[chengkp75]

It's not that the passport/document requirement would change, but that the way CBP handles the manifest changes, and CBP could require a more formal disembarkation interview, which can cause delays.