Cruises From US Severely Restricted!

[Seacruise]

I was sent this earlier today.

 

Thought it might be of interest to you.

 

Phil

 

Dear CLIA Travel Agency Member:

 

I am writing to you to make you aware that the United States Customs and Border Protection (CBP) has proposed to interpret regulations for cruises to and from U.S. ports for foreign flag vessels. These proposed changes could have a negative impact on your cruise sales by reducing the number of product options for you and your clients. This proposed change appears to be intended to impact only Hawaiian cruise itineraries by making it difficult or impossible for non-U.S. flag cruise lines to offer roundtrip cruises to the Hawaiian Islands from mainland U.S. homeports. However, there is potential negative impact far beyond these specific cruises. As written, this proposed interpretation of regulations could be read more broadly. The proposed interpretation of the Passenger Vessel Services Act

(PVSA) could require all non U.S. flag cruises departing the United States to:

 

* Have at least one foreign port call of 48-hours;

* Provide time at foreign ports that is more than 50 percent of the total amount of time at the U.S. ports of call; and

* The passengers are permitted to go ashore temporarily at the foreign port.

 

As a travel professional, you’re no doubt aware that there are almost no cruise itineraries from U.S. ports that include a 48-hour port call in either U.S. or foreign ports. Consider as well that cruises to Alaska or Hawaii from the West Coast would require 50% as much time in Canadian or Mexican port calls as are made in Hawaii or Alaska.

 

* Current seven-night cruises from a U.S. port such as Seattle

(with a call in a Canadian port such as Victoria or Vancouver) would be required to offer at least one 48-hour foreign port call and 50% as much time in Canadian ports of call as in Alaska, effectively eliminating the traditional one-week Alaska cruises from U.S. ports as we know them today.

* The same negative impact on itineraries and ports of call could take place on Canada and New England cruises from ports such as Boston and New York. Even Caribbean itineraries with calls at ports such as Key West could be negatively affected.

 

In summary, United States Customs and Border Protection’s interpretation could severely disrupt itineraries for vessels departing and returning to U.S. ports. In order to comply, most cruise lines would be forced to reduce the number of calls at U.S. ports and completely eliminate some U.S. ports of call. CLIA and the American Association of Port Authorities filed requests for an extended comment period and asked for clarification. CBP has not granted the request and the deadline for comments is fast approaching. As things now stand, CBP’s interpretation as currently drafted could cause the loss of tens of thousands of jobs in the U.S. economy. CLIA believes this could negatively impact your business by significantly reducing the options and availability of desirable cruise vacations for your clients. You have the right as a U.S. citizen, to provide comments to this proposed rulemaking. Comments are being accepted until December 21, 2007 for CBP’s proposed interpretation, known as Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises, Docket No. USCBP-2007-0098. If you would like to provide comments before the December 21, 2007 deadline, you may do so by following these instructions:

 

1. Submit them online at http://www.regulations.gov. Go to “Search Documents” and select “Customs and Border Protection Bureau” from the pull down menu in Step 2 and click “Submit.”

2. Choose the document “Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises” and select “Add Comments” on the far right column.

3. Include “Docket Number USCBP-2007-0098” and “Customs and Border Protection” in the text of your comments in order for it to be considered.

4. Comments that will provide the most assistance to CBP will reference a specific portion of the proposed interpretation, explain the reason for any recommended change, and include data, information, or authority that support such recommended change.

5. Please note that all comments submitted are available for public view and include whatever personal information you provide.

 

I thank you for your CLIA membership and for participating in the regulatory process that affects our industry.

 

Sincerely,

TerryDaleSignature

Terry Dale President and CEO Cruise Lines International Association ©2007 Cruise Lines International Association. All Rights Reserved.

910 SE 17th Street,

4th Floor,

Fort Lauderdale, FL

33316

[Seacruise]

I hope that many of you that read this will post your comments to the US Gov as stated in the above and not just read it and say oh well. If this ever comes to pass it will mean big problems for cruising as we know it today.

 

I am from Canada and would post but it is for US Citizens only.

 

Phil

[jhannah]

In case you didn't see it, there's a thread on this that's several pages long. "NCL America blames HAL, etc., for losses." (I think I got the title right ... or at least close.)

 

I do hope many will write their members of Congress on this.

[Krazy Kruizers]

Thanks for the information.

 

Very interesting.

[Pete Jackson]

So, what can one do for 48 hours in Ensenada? Imagine the exciting overnight excursions that can be arranged! If people don't go ashore, it will be like sea days without the 'motion of the ocean'.

[mountainmare]

This is just a question--not an opinion.

Could the cruise lines look into making roundtrip Hawaii cruises out of Mexico? Would that be legal?

I haven't been to Ensenada but could they encourage some nice hotels to be built to make it easy to accomodate passengers who fly in a day early?

Wouldn't this be easier than trying to change these laws and help the local economy insread of using this stop as a loophole that is always in danger of closing?

[kakalina]

Thank you for the info. I have gone to the site and submitted my comments. Your directions were excellent.

[Seacruise]

In case you didn't see it, there's a thread on this that's several pages long. "NCL America blames HAL, etc., for losses." (I think I got the title right ... or at least close.)

 

I don't understand this from NCL America.

 

Let's look at things first America Hawaii cruises didn't survive and now HCL America is having problems. First off the per diems are suppose to be higher because of the loss of revenue from casinos. This hasn't been the case for the most part. They have had major problems getting US crew to staff their ships.

 

Now NCL America has 3 soon to be 2 ships with NCL having 10 ships soon to be 11 ships. Now this rule interpretation comes into effect in 2008 and this would throw a wrinkle into all planned cruises for the rest of NCL as well as the industry.

 

We all know that NCL has had problems over the last few years and recently sold a 50% stake to Apollo.

 

I do not think that HAL/Princess/Celebrity doing 14-15 day cruises from LA to Hawaii is the problem as this problem existed almost from day one.

 

I would think that NCL America would be better to close it's doors rather than screw up the schedule for their other 10/11 ships and the rest of the industry.

 

At this point I see the other 50% stake of NCL that they do own very ripe for buy out as this would change cruising as we know it today.

 

I am not sure if any of you that have looked at the Docket for “Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises” but you can read the comments of those that have submitted them. One just has to read them from the major stakeholders in this to see how much damage it will do.

You do not see Vancouver/Victoria or any other BC port objecting to this, why because they win big time if this were to happen.

 

Remember this is not a bill that is trying to come into law. This is how (CBP) has proposed to interpret regulations for cruises to and from U.S. ports for foreign flag vessels. So it does not have to pass anything.

 

Phil

[hammybee]

Gaming

NCL has strong ties to the Asian community. Some Asian cultures value gaming as a recreational activity.

 

Gaming ( including bingo and raffles) is not legal in Hawaii because the people do not want it. And perhaps the people view allowing it on a cruise ship as a slippery slope. Given the history of the Hawaiian Islands, I appreciate their position.

 

From what I have read, over the years, about NCL NA, is that they believed they would eventually prevail and acquire the ability to offer gaming on their ships. This has not happened. So the lack of gaming revenues as well as being less attractive to those market segments who want to participate in gaming, while on vacation, hurts NCL's bottom-line.

 

Chicken or the Egg?

Reliance upon third world employment is the backbone of the cruising industry. The third world crews are willing to work longer and harder hours, under tougher conditions, for less compensation than their U.S. counterparts. Of course this is not unique to cruising. Sustaining our lifestyles is very much dependent upon goods and services being produced by third world labor.

 

NCL N.A. initially overestimated the demand for port intensive Hawaiian cruising and positioned too many ships in the same waters.

 

Passengers are not willing to pay more for their U.S.-flagged cruises to allow NCL to retain a better quality U.S. workforce and so, NCL N.A. has been plagued with labor/service problems from the very begining. Many of their employees initially viewed working on a cruise ship as exciting until reality set in. Serving the general public, especially on a cruise ship, is no piece of cake, especially when there is no time off and the compensation and benefits are relatively poor. Heck, why not enlist in the armed services?

 

Cheap cruises have a tendency to attract passengers for whom their cruise represents a significant part of their current or future income. Such passengers often rationalize not tipping, to the point that NCL N.A. no longer allows anyone to remove the hotel service charge.

 

Challenge the laws

An so it would seem, that as a last ditch effort, NCL NA is using their investor's monies to challenge the rights of other cruise lines to sail R/T from U.S. ports. Perhaps their time and money would be better spent trying to change the laws to allow their cruise ships to be staffed with a predominate non U.S. crew.

[RuthC]

This is just a question--not an opinion.

Could the cruise lines look into making roundtrip Hawaii cruises out of Mexico? Would that be legal?

I haven't been to Ensenada but could they encourage some nice hotels to be built to make it easy to accomodate passengers who fly in a day early?

Wouldn't this be easier than trying to change these laws and help the local economy insread of using this stop as a loophole that is always in danger of closing?

I'm not a lawyer---let's get that out first.

Based on my understanding of the Passenger Services Act there the only thing currently illegal is to start and end in the USA without stopping at a port outside the USA.

So, yes, it would be legal to cruise round-trip to Hawaii out of Mexico. When HAL did one-way Hawaii cruises the passengers (dis)embarked in Ensenada. Passengers were flown in to San Diego, then bussed down to board. Passengers coming from Hawaii disembarked in Ensenada (at night) then bussed to San Diego. (Not my idea of a great way to end a vacation, but I digress :rolleyes:).

Apparently all this is in danger of changing if CBP decides to reinterpret the Passenger Services Act.

[Snook]

There is something we are missing here. The NCL lobby cannot be that strong. There has to be another power house behind the push to get Customs to revisit the interpretation of the Passenger Service Act. I know from personal experience that they don’t tackle something this big unless they are being forced to. It really takes a powerful private interest group to pressure Customs into looking at this. You have to look at the thousands of jobs related to the cruises that would be affected by this change if it takes place versus the positive effect it would have on certain other entities. What these other entities are I certainly don’t know. I guess we should take a look at those that would gain the most from this and we possibly would have the answer.

[sail7seas]

'Ya think that Carnival Corporation and RCI and the biggies have folks spending a great many 'billable hours' working on this?

[PRINSENDAM]

'Ya think that Carnival Corporation and RCI and the biggies have folks spending a great many 'billable hours' working on this?

 

 

 

 

 

I just knew I should have been a 'DAM' lawyer!:rolleyes:

 

BTW.... Merry Xmas! :)

 

Stephen

[sail7seas]

And to you and Ruth, Stephen. :)

 

Miss you around here!