Ovation May 2-24 RCCL Cancelling my second leg

[twangster]

When the Oasis TA cancelled I almost booked both two legs... and Royal said it was okay.

 

The second leg I am booked on was advertised as May 13 - 24.

 

The first leg was advertised as May 2 - 12.  I did a double take.  May 12?  Why May 12?  That meant a gap night in between cruises.

 

I am well aware of the PVSA so I called Crown and Anchor (I never bother booking with the general number) and I asked them about it.  Since it was advertised with a gap of 1 night I was going to use my already booked hotel in Vancouver.  Royal confirmed I was okay to book both since I was getting off and using a hotel in between cruises.

 

Other plans developed so I never booked it, but at point in time (around when Oasis was cancelled) the Hawaii cruise was advertised as ending on May 12 in Vancouver.  

[papaflamingo]

I admit that I'm no lawyer and not all that familiar with the ins and outs of the Jones Act.  But if the OP gets off in Vancouver, then re-boards with a new seapass, on a new cruise, why is this a violation?  The OP would technically be on two separate cruises, ending one in Vancouver and starting a brand new one.  Would this violation be the same if the OP got off Ovation and walked over to another terminal and boarded a HAL ship?  

Really, it's time that the Jones Act be rewritten for the cruise industry.   This stuff is absurd. 

[Clarea]

5 minutes ago, papaflamingo said:

I admit that I'm no lawyer and not all that familiar with the ins and outs of the Jones Act.  But if the OP gets off in Vancouver, then re-boards with a new seapass, on a new cruise, why is this a violation? ...

 

For the purposes of the PVSA, it does not matter what the cruise line defines as a "cruise", or whether the guest has a new SeaPass card.  It only matters if the passenger's transport starts and ends in US ports.

 

I've not read the PVSA so I don't know how many days the passenger has to be off the ship before the PVSA considers it a different cruise.

[twangster]

16 minutes ago, papaflamingo said:

I admit that I'm no lawyer and not all that familiar with the ins and outs of the Jones Act.  But if the OP gets off in Vancouver, then re-boards with a new seapass, on a new cruise, why is this a violation?  The OP would technically be on two separate cruises, ending one in Vancouver and starting a brand new one.  Would this violation be the same if the OP got off Ovation and walked over to another terminal and boarded a HAL ship?  

Really, it's time that the Jones Act be rewritten for the cruise industry.   This stuff is absurd. 

 

Both the PVSA and Jones which are technically both codified into US law acts are designed to protect the US maritime industry.  It's simple to think that they just need to allow cruise lines an exemption or re-write the law, but that has potential ripple effects and few lawmakers could care less about the foreign cruise industry that is raking in billions of dollars in profits and not paying US taxes.

 

February 2019:

 

Congress rallies around the Jones Act

 

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/congress-rallies-around-the-jones-act

 

"Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle are pushing the Trump administration to reject an appeal from Puerto Rico to temporarily waive a controversial measure called the Jones Act, a law intended to protect American shipping and maritime interests."

 

“Administrative waivers of the Jones Act are constrained purposefully to rare cases where such a waiver is ‘necessary in the interest of national defense.' "

 

If the cruise industry wants a voice in Washington they should pay taxes and hire lobbyists like everyone else. 

Edited April 30, 2019 by twangster

[Biker19]

19 minutes ago, twangster said:

Other plans developed so I never booked it, but at point in time (around when Oasis was cancelled) the Hawaii cruise was advertised as ending on May 12 in Vancouver.  

With the last change it is kinda ending on 5/12.

[papaflamingo]

Thx Bob and Twangster for the info. 

[fred30]

3 hours ago, papaflamingo said:

I admit that I'm no lawyer and not all that familiar with the ins and outs of the Jones Act.  But if the OP gets off in Vancouver, then re-boards with a new seapass, on a new cruise, why is this a violation?  The OP would technically be on two separate cruises, ending one in Vancouver and starting a brand new one.  Would this violation be the same if the OP got off Ovation and walked over to another terminal and boarded a HAL ship?  

Really, it's time that the Jones Act be rewritten for the cruise industry.   This stuff is absurd. 

No they should not.   If the cruise industry wants to transport between U.S. ports then they should register their ships in the U.S.  But then they would have to pay more taxes and follow more U.S. laws that protect U.S. citizens.

Edited April 30, 2019 by fred30

[FLACRUISER99]

2 hours ago, fred30 said:

No they should not.   If the cruise industry wants to transport between U.S. ports then they should register their ships in the U.S.  But then they would have to pay more taxes and follow more U.S. laws that protect U.S. citizens.

To register a ship in the USA it must be built in the USA and no US shipyards are able to build large cruise ships.

[Blizzard54]

1 hour ago, FLACRUISER99 said:

To register a ship in the USA it must be built in the USA and no US shipyards are able to build large cruise ships.

The last cruise ship construction in the US was for the Hawaiian market.  Shortly after 9/11 the cruise line filed bankruptcy and construction was halted. 

There was an exception given to NCL America to tow it to Germany for completion. They were also allowed to reflag 2 other ships.  They then had 3 American flagged ships in Hawaii.  They had to operate under US labor laws and they had problems staffing the ships  Service was a problem.  They ended up reflagging 2 of the ships and only have one left operating in Hawaii. 

[FLACRUISER99]

2 minutes ago, Blizzard54 said:

The last cruise ship construction in the US was for the Hawaiian market.  Shortly after 9/11 the cruise line filed bankruptcy and construction was halted. 

There was an exception given to NCL America to tow it to Germany for completion. They were also allowed to reflag 2 other ships.  They then had 3 American flagged ships in Hawaii.  They had to operate under US labor laws and they had problems staffing the ships  Service was a problem.  They ended up reflagging 2 of the ships and only have one left operating in Hawaii. 

Your absolutely correct.

[fred30]

1 hour ago, FLACRUISER99 said:

To register a ship in the USA it must be built in the USA and no US shipyards are able to build large cruise ships.

 

Right and the shipyards lost their business because it was less expensive for the cruise lines to have their ships built in other countries.   Not only did the cruise lines save money on the builds they now get to operate without a lot of the U.S. laws such as employment.

 

 

 

[DougMacP]

Not sure how disembarking in Victoria..and taking the Ferry to Vancouver would change anything...It is still Canada where the cruise terminates.  Nor is this about the Jones Act which refers only to merchandise, but The Passenger Vessel Service Act.  Again...cruise originates in US and terminates in Canada...how is this a violation???  What am I missing?

 

Update:  Okay the May 2nd cruise is Hawaii to Vancouver....and the second cruise is Vancouver to Seattle...B2B cruise on RCI was considered two separate cruises, since there are two bookings...but from customs standpoint we didn't have to clear customs the first cruise as we were considered "in transit".  That's why the disembarking in Victoria would break the "in transit" status ....but still visiting a foreign port is all the act requires.   

 

 

 

The Jones Act, 46 U.S.C § 55102, provides that the transportation of merchandise between U.S. points is reserved for U.S. - built, owned, and documented vessels pursuant to section 55102, a vessel may not provide any protection of the U.S. shipping industry by ensuring that only U.S. built, owned and documented vessels are allowed to transport merchandise between coastwise points within the U.S.

See the Customs Bulletin Weekly, (Vol.51) General Notices: "Notice of Proposed Modification and Revocation" of headquarters ruling letters relating to U.S. Customs and Border Protection's ("CBP") application of The Jones Act to the transportation of certain merchandise and vessel equipment that are transported between coastwise points.

The Passenger Vessel Services Act, (PVSA), 46 U.S.C. § 55103 (b), places the same restrictions on the coastwise movement of people. It is this act that prohibits commercial vessels such as cruise ships from allowing passengers to board at one U.S. port and debark at another U.S. port.

Edited April 30, 2019 by DougMacP

[fred30]

I think it is interpreted that the B2B is counted as one cruise if you get off and on again

at the same port.  That is probably why going to another ports will make it work.

Edited April 30, 2019 by fred30

[Sunny AZ Girl]

8 minutes ago, DougMacP said:

Not sure how disembarking in Victoria..and taking the Ferry to Vancouver would change anything...It is still Canada where the cruise terminates.  Nor is this about the Jones Act which refers only to merchandise, but The Passenger Vessel Service Act.  Again...cruise originates in US and terminates in Canada...how is this a violation??? 

Because the passenger's original itinerary is considered one cruise by the law. The law sees it as the passenger embarking in Honolulu and disembarking in Seattle, both US ports without a DISTANT foreign port of call. Canada is not distant enough.  By leaving the cruise in Victoria on the 11th and reboarding in Vancouver on the 13th there is enough time in between to make it two different cruises in the eye of the law. One cruise is a US port to Canada and the next is Canada to US, so perfectly legal 

 I am not sure how much time there actually has to be between cruises, but that is obviously enough.  It is either 24 or 48 hours. 

Edited April 30, 2019 by Sunny AZ Girl

[Biker19]

13 minutes ago, DougMacP said:

Not sure how disembarking in Victoria..and taking the Ferry to Vancouver would change anything..

Different days and different ports so it doesn't "look" like the passenger is going from one US port to another.

[FLACRUISER99]

20 minutes ago, fred30 said:

 

Right and the shipyards lost their business because it was less expensive for the cruise lines to have their ships built in other countries.   Not only did the cruise lines save money on the builds they now get to operate without a lot of the U.S. laws such as employment.

 

 

 

Yes, and because of that most of us can afford to cruise.

[DougMacP]

13 minutes ago, Sunny AZ Girl said:

Because the passenger's original itinerary is considered one cruise by the law. The law sees it as the passenger embarking in Honolulu and disembarking in Seattle, both US ports without a DISTANT foreign port of call. Canada is not distant enough.  By leaving the cruise in Victoria on the 11th and reboarding in Vancouver on the 13th there is enough time in between to make it two different cruises in the eye of the law. One cruise is a US port to Canada and the next is Canada to US, so perfectly legal 

 I am not sure how much time there actually has to be between cruises, but that is obviously enough.  It is either 24 or 48 hours. 

But Alaska cruise from and to Seattle use Vancouver or Victoria as their foreign stop.   

[Blizzard54]

48 minutes ago, DougMacP said:

Not sure how disembarking in Victoria..and taking the Ferry to Vancouver would change anything...It is still Canada where the cruise terminates.  Nor is this about the Jones Act which refers only to merchandise, but The Passenger Vessel Service Act.  Again...cruise originates in US and terminates in Canada...how is this a violation???  What am I missing?

 

Update:  Okay the May 2nd cruise is Hawaii to Vancouver....and the second cruise is Vancouver to Seattle...B2B cruise on RCI was considered two separate cruises, since there are two bookings...but from customs standpoint we didn't have to clear customs the first cruise as we were considered "in transit".  That's why the disembarking in Victoria would break the "in transit" status ....but still visiting a foreign port is all the act requires.   

 

 

 

The Jones Act, 46 U.S.C § 55102, provides that the transportation of merchandise between U.S. points is reserved for U.S. - built, owned, and documented vessels pursuant to section 55102, a vessel may not provide any protection of the U.S. shipping industry by ensuring that only U.S. built, owned and documented vessels are allowed to transport merchandise between coastwise points within the U.S.

See the Customs Bulletin Weekly, (Vol.51) General Notices: "Notice of Proposed Modification and Revocation" of headquarters ruling letters relating to U.S. Customs and Border Protection's ("CBP") application of The Jones Act to the transportation of certain merchandise and vessel equipment that are transported between coastwise points.

The Passenger Vessel Services Act, (PVSA), 46 U.S.C. § 55103 (b), places the same restrictions on the coastwise movement of people. It is this act that prohibits commercial vessels such as cruise ships from allowing passengers to board at one U.S. port and debark at another U.S. port.

 

Although Royal considers is 2 separate cruises, the US government does not.  It count where you board the ship and where you disembark.  The B2B would be from Hawaii to Seattle.  By disembarking win Victoria that ends the trip.  Starting a new trip in Vancouver would be allowed.  

[awestover89]

28 minutes ago, DougMacP said:

But Alaska cruise from and to Seattle use Vancouver or Victoria as their foreign stop.   

 

Right, because that is a round trip cruise departing from and returning to the same US port. In that case they require a foreign port, but not a distant foreign port. To go from one US port to a different US port, it requires a distant foreign port.

[Hoopster95]

9 hours ago, Host Clarea said:

 

I've not read the PVSA so I don't know how many days the passenger has to be off the ship before the PVSA considers it a different cruise.

 

The very best read I have found in simple layman's terms is here

https://www.cruisecritic.com/articles.cfm?ID=3363

 

How Does the PVSA Apply to Back-to-Back Cruises?

Closed-circuit round trip itineraries done back-to-back will not trigger a violation even when the two itineraries vary. Point-to-point back-to-back trips are another issue, however. If two or more trips, when combined into one trip, transport a passenger between two U.S. ports without stopping at a distant foreign port, then the passenger triggers a violation -- even though the ship's itineraries are within the law because the two trips are separate and distinct. Here's an example:

 

Passenger Z books two cruises that are back-to-back on the same ship. The first is a repositioning from San Diego to Vancouver. The second is a one-way Alaskan cruise from Vancouver to Anchorage. That passenger is essentially being transported from San Diego to Anchorage by way of Vancouver, which is not a distant foreign port since it is in North America. A violation would be triggered. Again, the cruise line is not likely to allow you to knowingly create a violation and would not allow the booking in the first place. If the booking slips through, Passenger Z would likely be denied re-boarding in Vancouver.

 

Passenger Z's remedies are to book the Alaskan portion of the trip on a different ship or by including a third segment that ends at a foreign port as the final destination. Simply booking the return from Anchorage to Vancouver works because now Z's trip began in San Diego and ended in Vancouver, even though that port was on the itinerary twice."

[Tee & Chilli]

Hope the OP posts an update and it worked out well.

[volk904]

You are this close to sailing I think I would just try to get some kind of cruise credit from Royal and take the Ferry.  Not the best deal but why give up a weeks vacation?

 

[mr walker]

9 hours ago, DougMacP said:

But Alaska cruise from and to Seattle use Vancouver or Victoria as their foreign stop.   

 

Not true - a Canadian port if not 'foreign' under the act's definition. When we cruised on Rhapsody, from start of Alaskan cruise season, cruises were roundtrip Seattle, and the last one started in Seattle & ended in Vancouver. The next cruise was Vancouver to Honolulu. No-one could board in Seattle and do B2B to Honolulu - contravenes the act. We, along with 28 others, did B2B2B, ending in Sydney.

[er345]

The OP did post on their roll call that Royal stepped up and made arrangements for them to get from Victoria to Vancouver.  I am happy that this seems to have worked out as best as it can be for them, despite the huge inconvenience.  Hopefully we will find out how it turns out. 

[Blizzard54]

15 hours ago, mr walker said:

 

Not true - a Canadian port if not 'foreign' under the act's definition. When we cruised on Rhapsody, from start of Alaskan cruise season, cruises were roundtrip Seattle, and the last one started in Seattle & ended in Vancouver. The next cruise was Vancouver to Honolulu. No-one could board in Seattle and do B2B to Honolulu - contravenes the act. We, along with 28 others, did B2B2B, ending in Sydney.

Actually, it is considered a foreign port but the PVSA requires a distant foreign port.  For the closed loop, R/T Seattle to Alaska a foreign port is required and Victoria is used most often.  You are correct about needed to continue to Sydney you your scenario.