PVSA Violation...or not?

[Flamingo15]

Due to a scheduling conflict and family commitment, I cannot board an upcoming cruise at the origination port - Port Canaveral.  I've sent the request to the cruise line to allow me to board in St. Thomas USVI and continue on the cruise with the other 6 members of this cruise party.  St. Thomas is a US port, and I know the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PSVA) does not allow for embarking in one US port and then terminating in another US port, some extenuating circumstances and exceptions may be granted. The PSVA however clearly states that it does not apply to the Virgin Islands (per 46 USC 55101(b)(3) ).  Perhaps this only means a closed-loop itinerary within the Virgin Islands...idk. Additionally, another caveat of the PSVA with regard to embarking/disembarking in different US ports is that a stop must be made in a foreign country.  In my case, after St. Thomas we would be visiting St. Maarten.  It would seem to me my case would not necessarily violate the PVSA, but curious if others have experience with this particular scenario or are well versed with strict application of the law.  Meanwhile, I'll wait to hear back from the cruise line if my exception will be granted.

[Corby114]

St Maarten is not considered a distant foreign port like the ABC islands, Aruba, Bonaire, and Curaçao so I think it will be a violation of the Passenger Vessel Service Act. The cruiseline may allow you to join the voyage in St Thomas but you may be responsible for any fine that the cruiseline incurs. Please let us know how you make out.

[Flamingo15]

Thank you - I was afraid St. Maarten didn't really qualify.  I will definitely let folks know how things go.

[retafcruiser]

Just now, Flamingo15 said:

Thank you - I was afraid St. Maarten didn't really qualify.  I will definitely let folks know how things go.

Please do. I would think you will be allowed. If the USVI are exempted, it would be like you are embarking in a foreign country travelling to the US. If that is the interpretation then nothing about the PVSA applies. 

[Flatbush Flyer]

17 minutes ago, Flamingo15 said:

 I know the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PSVA) does not allow for embarking in one US port and then terminating in another US port....

Huh?

[njhorseman]

26 minutes ago, Corby114 said:

St Maarten is not considered a distant foreign port like the ABC islands, Aruba, Bonaire, and Curaçao so I think it will be a violation of the Passenger Vessel Service Act. The cruiseline may allow you to join the voyage in St Thomas but you may be responsible for any fine that the cruiseline incurs. Please let us know how you make out.

The OP doesn't need the ship to call at a distant foreign port because of the USVI exception to the PVSA. Any foreign port call will suffice so the stop in St. Maarten will make the cruise compliant.

 

The larger issue is that many cruise lines are reluctant to allow downstream embarkation even if the law permits it because of the additional paperwork and expense it generates. So while the OP's proposed itinerary is legal, the cruise line may not allow it.

[njhorseman]

32 minutes ago, Flamingo15 said:

Thank you - I was afraid St. Maarten didn't really qualify.  I will definitely let folks know how things go.

No...St. Maarten does qualify because of the USVI exception to the PVSA regulations.  You can board in St. Thomas without stopping at a distant foreign port. Any foreign port, including St. Maarten,  will be satisfactory. 

 

The problem is that cruise lines often won't permit the type of downstream boarding you're requesting even if it complies with the law.

Edited April 25, 2019 by njhorseman

[Flamingo15]

Here's hoping they have a little mercy and grant my request...we have 3 cabins total and I bought the $400 drink package months ago! 

[njhorseman]

6 minutes ago, Flamingo15 said:

Here's hoping they have a little mercy and grant my request...we have 3 cabins total and I bought the $400 drink package months ago! 

Be prepared to have to push this request up a couple of levels on the organizational ladder. The first level customer service agents and usually their immediate supervisors generally have absolutely no idea of what the law actually says not to mention the exceptions, such as that for the USVI, contained in the regulation. Commonly they say "no" and "no" because they don't know and it will then require review and approval from a higher level.

 

Good luck.

[Flamingo15]

OK gotcha, I'll be on it!

 

[Hlitner]

Just thinking out loud but wondering if the OP's scenario would be prohibited because they would be on a so-called "closed loop" cruise as defined by the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative (WHTI).  This is the law/regulations that permits many US cruisers to take a cruise without the need to have a valid Passport.  But if they allow a passenger to disembark at any port other then the embarkation port, wouldn't that negate the closed-loop clause?    

 

Hank

[njhorseman]

1 hour ago, Hlitner said:

Just thinking out loud but wondering if the OP's scenario would be prohibited because they would be on a so-called "closed loop" cruise as defined by the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative (WHTI).  This is the law/regulations that permits many US cruisers to take a cruise without the need to have a valid Passport.  But if they allow a passenger to disembark at any port other then the embarkation port, wouldn't that negate the closed-loop clause?    

 

Hank

The WHTI and PVSA are separate issues. The fact that the itinerary exception being requested is not closed loop interacts with the WHTI only to the extent that the passenger would not be able to cruise on this itinerary with a birth certificate and ID, which is only permitted if you're on a closed loop itinerary. The passenger would need  a passport card or book for the itinerary exception requested. The requested itinerary is perfectly legal under the PVSA....you just need more than the BC/ID allowed on  a closed loop. The other passengers taking the closed loop version of the cruise are still permitted to use the BC/ID combination.

 

Cruise lines used to approve these exceptions fairly routinely, but now are reluctant to do so because of the paperwork and additional expense it generates. It also forces CBP to do a bit more review of the passenger manifest when clearing the ship so they don't like it either. It can slow the clearance process.

Edited April 25, 2019 by njhorseman

[Flamingo15]

These discussions are helpful, at least for my own edification. I know ultimately I'll get my answer early next week. I do have a passport and also have a Known Traveler Number, so my 10-card is on file etc. Late embarkation, or denial of, is called out in the cruise ticket contract so it's totally within Royal's right to deny the request. Still, I like to be as knowledgeable as possible so I can ask the right questions of the right people and hopefully affect a positive outcome.

[Hlitner]

1 hour ago, njhorseman said:

The WHTI and PVSA are separate issues. The fact that the itinerary exception being requested is not closed loop interacts with the WHTI only to the extent that the passenger would not be able to cruise on this itinerary with a birth certificate and ID, which is only permitted if you're on a closed loop itinerary. The passenger would need  a passport card or book for the itinerary exception requested. The requested itinerary is perfectly legal under the PVSA....you just need more than the BC/ID allowed on  a closed loop. The other passengers taking the closed loop version of the cruise are still permitted to use the BC/ID combination.

 

Cruise lines used to approve these exceptions fairly routinely, but now are reluctant to do so because of the paperwork and additional expense it generates. It also forces CBP to do a bit more review of the passenger manifest when clearing the ship so they don't like it either. It can slow the clearance process.

My thought went one further step by wondering if a ship allows one passenger to disembark early (on a closed loop cruise) then it no longer is a completely closed loop.  In a legal sense the one disembarkation breaks the loop.  Otherwise, a line such as MSC who generally prefers to allow passengers to embark/disembark at most ports would be able to run Caribbean cruises in a similar way that they do their European cruises...with passengers embarking/disembarking at multiple ports along a given route. I did not comment on the PVSA aspect because I am not certain as to whether an early disembarkation would fall under any USVI waiver to the PVSA.    We see two possible issues, those being the PVSA AND the WHTI.  I suspect that most cruise lines find it easier to just say no rather than pay their law firms a big fee for a ruling that may or may not be acceptable to the US Authorities.

 

Just another thought about the PVSA.  If the USVI actually had a waiver of those rules there would likely be one way cruises between the USVI and the mainland USA.   I can imagine lots of interesting 7 day itineraries on a cruise between a Florida port and St Thomas...where passengers could do a one way 7 day cruise or opt for a back to back 14 day cruise back to their starting port.  The reality is that all these government rules really limit the ability of cruise lines to do some new and interesting itineraries.

 

Hank

[Flamingo15]

Thanks Hank for your thoughts, I was actually unaware of the WHTI, so I always appreciate  more general knowledge.

 

I believe as you implied, the cruise industry likely assumes the most stringent interpretation thereby allowing themselves some latitude to back down from that position on a case by case basis.  They did indicate if my request is approved I would have to pay a $65 fee for filing the forms.

 

I would never recommend  someone take this approach and book a cruise on the notion they'll just join in-progress, and/or just expect the cruise line to give the OK. I find myself in this pickle after having orchestrated the schedules for parties in 3 cabins that we've booked for this cruise - only to find an event I previously committed to late last year was now scheduled in this timeframe. Everyone else is ok to travel as intended. It's certainly a last ditch effort on my part to try and salvage some of the cruise.  But it's on me, I have to deal with it.

[njhorseman]

1 hour ago, Hlitner said:

My thought went one further step by wondering if a ship allows one passenger to disembark early (on a closed loop cruise) then it no longer is a completely closed loop.  In a legal sense the one disembarkation breaks the loop.  Otherwise, a line such as MSC who generally prefers to allow passengers to embark/disembark at most ports would be able to run Caribbean cruises in a similar way that they do their European cruises...with passengers embarking/disembarking at multiple ports along a given route. I did not comment on the PVSA aspect because I am not certain as to whether an early disembarkation would fall under any USVI waiver to the PVSA.    We see two possible issues, those being the PVSA AND the WHTI.  I suspect that most cruise lines find it easier to just say no rather than pay their law firms a big fee for a ruling that may or may not be acceptable to the US Authorities.

 

Just another thought about the PVSA.  If the USVI actually had a waiver of those rules there would likely be one way cruises between the USVI and the mainland USA.   I can imagine lots of interesting 7 day itineraries on a cruise between a Florida port and St Thomas...where passengers could do a one way 7 day cruise or opt for a back to back 14 day cruise back to their starting port.  The reality is that all these government rules really limit the ability of cruise lines to do some new and interesting itineraries.

 

Hank

There is absolutely no question about the legality of the OP's request and in fact cruise lines do grant permission for such deviations although not as routinely as they did in the past. No need for legal fees to be paid to anyone...it's all in black and white in the law and regulation. No need for guessing and speculation.

 

If you read the PVSA regulation, which can be found here https://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/documents/pvsa_icp_3.pdf you'll see on page 11 that the PVSA does not apply to the USVI as well as three other territories, so there is no question or speculation about its applicability.

 

Further along, on page 14 you'll also find an exception written in for Puerto Rico. Cruise lines routinely run open jaw repositioning sailings between the Continental US and Puerto Rico without calling on a distant foreign port, which are made legal by the noted exception. I've been on more than one of those cruises. They don't run them between the mainland and the USVI because they don't home port ships in the USVI, while they do home port in PR so they are run between PR and the states.

 

In my previous post I did mention the issue caused by allowing passenger(s) to be non closed loop while the underlying cruise is closed loop. There is paperwork to be filed with CBP,  and minor costs associated with it...hence the $65 fee the OP mentions. As I said CBP can spend additional time clearing the ship when these situations arise, and neither CBP nor the cruise lines like that, but it does not invalidate the legality of  using BC/ID if you're a passenger on the full closed loop cruise. It merely requires those passengers not on the closed loop to have other WHTI documentation such as a passport or passport card.

[chengkp75]

2 hours ago, Hlitner said:

My thought went one further step by wondering if a ship allows one passenger to disembark early (on a closed loop cruise) then it no longer is a completely closed loop.  In a legal sense the one disembarkation breaks the loop.  Otherwise, a line such as MSC who generally prefers to allow passengers to embark/disembark at most ports would be able to run Caribbean cruises in a similar way that they do their European cruises...with passengers embarking/disembarking at multiple ports along a given route. I did not comment on the PVSA aspect because I am not certain as to whether an early disembarkation would fall under any USVI waiver to the PVSA.    We see two possible issues, those being the PVSA AND the WHTI.  I suspect that most cruise lines find it easier to just say no rather than pay their law firms a big fee for a ruling that may or may not be acceptable to the US Authorities.

 

Just another thought about the PVSA.  If the USVI actually had a waiver of those rules there would likely be one way cruises between the USVI and the mainland USA.   I can imagine lots of interesting 7 day itineraries on a cruise between a Florida port and St Thomas...where passengers could do a one way 7 day cruise or opt for a back to back 14 day cruise back to their starting port.  The reality is that all these government rules really limit the ability of cruise lines to do some new and interesting itineraries.

 

Hank

As NJhorseman says, by having a group of passengers who make the cruise (actually the manifest) be non-closed loop does not affect the WHTI allowances that the majority of passengers boarded with.  What it does, as he states, is that the new manifest sent to CBP after the late arriving passengers are added, is treated as a completely new manifest, but without the full cruise time to vet the passengers, so it can cause CBP to hold more lengthy disembarkation interviews, more like what is done when arriving from overseas on an airline.

 

The exemption for the USVI is just like the one for Puerto Rico, and is valid until there is a US flag passenger service between the islands and the mainland (notice passenger service, not cruise service).  And, just like Puerto Rico, after about 2 years of one way cruises to the mainland, Carnival, the only line that used the exemption, cancelled the service for lack of interest in the cruises.

[Ashland]

In regards to all the above then...how does the ship handle the situation when a cruiser (no fault of their own) misses embarkation and the cruiseline has to get them on board at the next port?

[Flamingo15]

Fr

[chengkp75]

14 minutes ago, Ashland said:

In regards to all the above then...how does the ship handle the situation when a cruiser (no fault of their own) misses embarkation and the cruiseline has to get them on board at the next port?

If the cruise line is on the hook to get the passenger to the next port (cruise line airfare), then the line will eat the fine and the cost of downstream boarding documentation.  If the passenger misses through no fault of their own, and the cruise line is not responsible to transport the passenger to the next port, then the passenger is typically out of luck if the next port is a US port, and who eats the cost of downstream boarding is decided case by case, or by company policy.

[Ashland]

1 hour ago, chengkp75 said:

If the cruise line is on the hook to get the passenger to the next port (cruise line airfare), then the line will eat the fine and the cost of downstream boarding documentation.  If the passenger misses through no fault of their own, and the cruise line is not responsible to transport the passenger to the next port, then the passenger is typically out of luck if the next port is a US port, and who eats the cost of downstream boarding is decided case by case, or by company policy.

Thanks...interesting.

[Flamingo15]

While it's a little nerve-racking to find out what's going to happen, I have to say I've enjoyed all the discussion here and have found it interesting and useful.  I appreciate everyone's input.

[brillohead]

And I have to commend you, @Flamingo15, for the fact that you're taking responsibility for all of this.  

Personal responsibility is an attribute that is becoming less and less common as time goes on, and it is refreshing that you acknowledged that the scheduling problem was of your own making, and you're being proactive in finding a work-around rather than just whining and bad-mouthing the cruise company for not letting you do what you want to do. (A search will find several threads here where someone does just that, blaming the cruise line for a rule that the cruise line didn't create, but rather it's actually a law of the US Government.)

I hope that the cruise line will see things appropriately, and you're able to enjoy the cruise with your fellow travelers.

[Flamingo15]

My formal request for exception was submitted today as instructed by the cruise line - waiting begins...

Edited April 28, 2019 by Flamingo15
repeat

[ontheweb]

1 hour ago, Flamingo15 said:

My formal request for exception was submitted today as instructed by the cruise line - waiting begins...

Good luck. And I'm sure you will come back to let everyone know what they said. Remember to get it in writing if it is positive, and escalate it to a higher level of decision making if it is negative.