Jump to content

Passenger Vessel Act


 Share

Recommended Posts

Best answer.

 

The PVSA only looks at what port the passenger got on the ship and what port the passenger got off the ship.

 

If both ports are the same port, or if one of the ports is a foreign port, the PVSA does not apply.

 

If both ports are different US ports, then the PVSA applies. And any cruise that starts and ends in two different US ports must have a "distant" foreign port stop.

 

A "distant" foreign port is any port NOT in North America, Central America, the Bermuda Islands, or the West Indies (including the Bahama Islands, but not including the Leeward Islands of the Netherlands Antilles, i.e., Aruba, Bonaire, and Curacao).

 

 

Is that why the Panama Canal transits always include Cartagena Colombia? [A South American port.]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

CTN's have been regulated out of existence. A US court ruled that they violate some US law or regulation.

Exactly, which is why I left those off the explanation. I used to include that, but now mentioning it would just muddy the waters.

 

It's a shame cruises to nowhere are gone. I took a couple of them early in my cruise life, and they were a lot of fun. I suppose a Pacific coast cruise now has to serve the purpose, but it isn't the same.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Norwegian has round trip Honolulu to Honolulu cruises. I believe they're the only one allowed to start and end in Hawaii. That's what I was referring to in my earlier post. These cruises do not visit ports other than in Hawaii To quote Dennis Miller, "That's my opinion and I could be wrong!"

 

Yes, but there is no "Hawaiian agreement" that allows the POA to trade strictly in the Hawaiian Islands, it is the fact that the ship is US flag, and has been granted an exemption to the PVSA requirement of being US built, that allows it to trade in the PVSA trade (exclusively US ports). If any other cruise line wanted to build a ship in the US (or get a waiver for building foreign, though the reason NCL got their waiver was that they bought a bankrupt cruise ship hull from the US government) and operate the ship as a US flag vessel, they could trade exclusively in Hawaii as well. It has nothing to do with the state of Hawaii, it is the federal PVSA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Except a "cruise-to-nowhere" that doesn't stop anywhere. Those don't happen often though. Eurodam did one out of NYC before heading to FL for the first time.

 

Cruises to nowhere were granted exemptions under the PVSA a couple of decades ago.

 

CTN's have been regulated out of existence. A US court ruled that they violate some US law or regulation.

 

Actually, it was a CBP interpretation that ended the CTN's, not a court ruling. CBP determined that foreign crew working on foreign ships that do a CTN, are actually working in the US (since the voyage doesn't go anywhere), and therefore they need a B1 work visa, not a C1 crew visa. The B1 work visa is more expensive, required more commitment on the part of the cruise line, requires more background checks, and is subject to rulings as to whether competent US workers are available to do the work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aren't those shore excursion cruises out of Ketchikan to the Misty Fjords cruise to nowhere? We simply board the boat, head for the fjords, don't stop anywhere, then head back.

Aren't they on US boats? If so, then the PVSA has no bearing on them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aren't they on US boats? If so, then the PVSA has no bearing on them.

 

I understand what you are trying to say, but in fact it is the PVSA that requires those boats to be US owned, US built, US registered, and US crewed, and the PVSA is what protects those boats from foreign competition. So, actually, the PVSA does have a bearing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understand what you are trying to say, but in fact it is the PVSA that requires those boats to be US owned, US built, US registered, and US crewed, and the PVSA is what protects those boats from foreign competition. So, actually, the PVSA does have a bearing.

How about if I change the word "them" to "shore excursions"? Better? More precise?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is correct. In fact, this is why the PVSA exists.

 

igraf

 

 

 

I understand what you are trying to say, but in fact it is the PVSA that requires those boats to be US owned, US built, US registered, and US crewed, and the PVSA is what protects those boats from foreign competition. So, actually, the PVSA does have a bearing.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does Europe have something similar to the PVSA?

 

If we take the Cunard from NY, then grab another cruise in Southhampton, do we still need that minimum 24 hours in port before boarding another ship?

 

Even in the US, if you go on a different ship, the PVSA does not apply, it is only for travel on one ship between different ports. The EU has a somewhat similar cabotage law, that prohibits a non-EU flag ship from carrying passengers between ports in one EU country, without calling at another country in between.

 

No, a transatlantic, followed by another cruise, even on the same Cunard ship, would be fine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even in the US, if you go on a different ship, the PVSA does not apply, it is only for travel on one ship between different ports. The EU has a somewhat similar cabotage law, that prohibits a non-EU flag ship from carrying passengers between ports in one EU country, without calling at another country in between.

 

No, a transatlantic, followed by another cruise, even on the same Cunard ship, would be fine.

Don't we have that 24-hour rule after we permanently disembark?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even in the US, if you go on a different ship, the PVSA does not apply, it is only for travel on one ship between different ports. The EU has a somewhat similar cabotage law, that prohibits a non-EU flag ship from carrying passengers between ports in one EU country, without calling at another country in between.

 

No, a transatlantic, followed by another cruise, even on the same Cunard ship, would be fine.

 

So that act is for individual countries, not the EU as a whole? So a ship registered in Panama could legally do an Amsterdam-Cherburg-Rotterdam cruise without a violation?

 

Roy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NCL America also has all American crew and casino is not allowed as she doesn't leave US waters.

It is not the only line that cruises in US, but other are smaller.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't we have that 24-hour rule after we permanently disembark?

 

No. That only applies if you were to make a cruise on one ship, and wanted to get on the same ship for another cruise that when combined as back to back would be illegal.

 

Here are some examples:

 

You take Ship #1 from LA to Vancouver, and then Ship #1 again from Vancouver to Alaska, ending in Seattle: not allowed.

 

You take Ship #1 from LA to Vancouver, then get off, while the ship sails to Seattle, and get back on Ship #1 from Seattle to Alaska and back to Seattle: allowed (essentially the 24 hour rule)

 

You take Ship #1 from LA to Vancouver, then get directly on Ship #2 (same cruise line or different line, makes no difference) for Vancouver to Alaska and ending in Seattle: allowed (each ship only took you from a US port to a foreign port, or from a foreign port to a US port, so each is allowed). Remember, it is all about one ship.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So that act is for individual countries, not the EU as a whole? So a ship registered in Panama could legally do an Amsterdam-Cherburg-Rotterdam cruise without a violation?

 

Roy

 

That is correct. However, a Panamanian flag ship could not do a Amsterdam to Rotterdam cruise, but an Italian, French, UK, Belgian (you get the idea) flag ship could. The UK, with or without Brexit, has laws that are not quite cabotage laws, but that make coastwise operation of a foreign flag ship economically unfeasible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NCL America also has all American crew and casino is not allowed as she doesn't leave US waters.

It is not the only line that cruises in US, but other are smaller.

 

The POA does in fact leave US territorial waters (12 mile limit), but the lack of a casino has nothing to do with that, it is an agreement with the Hawaiian state government that governs the operation of a casino, just like all foreign flag ships cannot operate their casinos while in Hawaiian ports.

 

And, in fact, the POA does not have an "all American" crew, as 25% of the unlicensed crew (everyone other than deck and engine officers) can be either US Resident Aliens (green card) or NRAC (Non-Resident Alien Crew), a special designation for USCG credentialed crew that are neither US citizens nor green card holders, and was established specifically for NCL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

  • Forum Jump
    • Categories
      • Welcome to Cruise Critic
      • New Cruisers
      • Cruise Lines “A – O”
      • Cruise Lines “P – Z”
      • River Cruising
      • ROLL CALLS
      • Digital Photography & Cruise Technology
      • Special Interest Cruising
      • Cruise Discussion Topics
      • UK Cruising
      • Australia & New Zealand Cruisers
      • Canadian Cruisers
      • North American Homeports
      • Ports of Call
      • Cruise Conversations
×
×
  • Create New...