Am I Violating the Jones Act?

[chengkp75]

1 hour ago, Bo1953 said:

Yes, that is what I Am made to understand from The CBP.

 

It may sound absurd, yet if that is how the U.S. Government interprets and applies the law, then that is how it is.. good, bad or in-different.

 

We can discuss how crazy it is until we are blue or pale in the face, yet the application is the application and it will take an act of congress to change it.

 

bon voyage

If this were the case, then every single one way cruise to Alaska, which all board in Vancouver, would have every single passenger in violation.

[npcl]

1 hour ago, Bo1953 said:

Yes, that is what I Am made to understand from The CBP.

 

It may sound absurd, yet if that is how the U.S. Government interprets and applies the law, then that is how it is.. good, bad or in-different.

 

We can discuss how crazy it is until we are blue or pale in the face, yet the application is the application and it will take an act of congress to change it.

 

bon voyage

It is similar is that each US embassy is considered to be US territory.

 

However, the fact that CBP has a facility there and that US law applies once you pass through US immigration, does not impact PVSA at all.  If it did, then as others have mentioned then Vancouver to and US city in Alaska, Hawaii and California would also be a violation. Since clearly those are not a violation and occur frequently the fact that one clears customs in Vancouver does not make Vancouver a US city under the terms of the PVSA.

[npcl]

2 hours ago, Bo1953 said:

Been following this discussion with some chuckles about 'where' the port is....

 

Just to educate you on the reason this 'is and can' be an issue for the OP and other passengers in a similar situation is, there is a section of the port which is considered to be U.S. territory and as such, one must 'technically' enter the U.S. to get into the port, it is call U.S. Customs.

 

Same thing for airports around the world where most of us go through U.S. Customs before boarding flights back to the U.S. in many airports. These areas are considered the U.S. no matter how small or large the passage area is and everyone is subject to U.S. laws accordingly when transiting through these areas.... with the possible exception of Diplomats.

 

As such, ALL U.S. bound/departing cruises must conform to various U.S. Maritime Law's in this regard AND X is complying with the laws accordingly, or they can be fined for deliberately violating these laws.

 

From the Port of Vancouver website " All passengers embarking in Vancouver will go through screening and U.S. Customs and Border Protection as you are considered to be entering U.S. jurisdiction upon boarding the cruise ship. Please visit the U.S. Customs and Border Protection website for more information and required travel documents"

 

The only fault I see here is X's timely notification to the OP of this issue. This has happened before and discussed before but not in the recent past, that I can find.

 

Only Congress can make changes to the law(s), start there first and not to X. X will not take a bullet for a passenger who wants to do it otherwise, as I Am sure they and other cruise lines have, in error.

 

I trust a good work around will be found for the OP...

 

bon voyage

I suspect the problem is much simpler.  I suspect that Celebrity has a routine in their computer systems that checks B2B cruises for violation of PVSA.  So when the reservation goes through the system the first B2B gets checked, no problem, the second B2B raises a red flag.  At that point normal customer service, which is pretty much limited to what their computer says reacts eactly how they did, in line with flag.  At this point one needs to get the issue in front of a knowledgeable person with the knowledge to override he computer.  Normally one can do that by going through resolutions department.  In this case the OP has booked through a TA and we have limited info on exactly how far the TA has pursued this up the chain.  From what the OP has said it appears that the 3 way call was with customer service and that the TA is perfectly happy to execute the work around that Celebrity has suggested.  Pretty much a dead end if the TA is not willing to purse it further.

 

If it was me, I would:

1. Fire the TA

2. Call corporate headquarters and ask for the legal/Compliance department.  I would explain to them that it appears that Celebrity might have a flaw in their process/systems and explain exactly what the issue is, how it is impacting me and that the flaw might be impacting others.  I would also ask if there is someone I can talk to that would be knowledgeable in this area and could either get this resolved or explain why the 3 cruise combination would be considered to be a violation.

 

I once had an argument with a future cruise sales person on board ship because in their presentation they kept saying that the reason why Alaska cruises from Seattle all stopped in Vancouver was to avoid having to charge US taxes on board (just as in the EU).  He refused to believe that he his interpretation could be wrong and that the real reason was the need to comply with PVSA.  Just because someone works in a responsible position in a cruise line does not mean that they really understand the laws.

Edited August 7, 2019 by npcl

[mayleeman]

deleted

Edited August 7, 2019 by mayleeman
I was wrong!

[cruisestitch]

 

My memory of being a back to back passenger in Vancouver was that we all exited the ship, passed through Canadian customs and immigration, thus entering Canada. Then we all passed through American customs and immigration’s there in the terminal before we re-entered the ship. Is that not still the case? Because in that case the passenger certainly is in Canada even for only a few minutes.

[Bo1953]

Update - Update - Update...

 

After reading a U.S. Publication of the Act (PVSA) the fact that none of X's and frankly no other cruise line that I Am aware of, are NOT U.S. flagged the restrictions apply.

 

"That statute provided that “no foreign vessel shall transport passengers between ports or places in the United States, either directly or by way of a foreign port, under a penalty..." if anyone cares, it is codified at 46 U.S.C. § 55103.

 

Thus the work around for the OP.

 

As such, my premise about CBP Jurisdiction at the Port of Vancouver is not and was not valid at all, to wit.

 

There is an U.S. 'ownership' component as well, that can in some circumstances be used to have PVSA not apply.

 

bon voyage

Edited August 7, 2019 by Bo1953

[Turtles06]

1 hour ago, Bo1953 said:

Update - Update - Update...

 

After reading a U.S. Publication of the Act (PVSA) the fact that none of X's and frankly no other cruise line that I Am aware of, are NOT U.S. flagged the restrictions apply.

 

"That statute provided that “no foreign vessel shall transport passengers between ports or places in the United States, either directly or by way of a foreign port, under a penalty..." if anyone cares, it is codified at 46 U.S.C. § 55103.

 

Thus the work around for the OP.

 

As such, my premise about CBP Jurisdiction at the Port of Vancouver is not and was not valid at all, to wit.

 

There is an U.S. 'ownership' component as well, that can in some circumstances be used to have PVSA not apply.

 

bon voyage

 

Bo, with all due respect, there was never any doubt that X is a foreign-flagged carrier and that the PVSA would apply to any attempt by X to transport pax between two different U.S. ports without stopping at a distant foreign port (as defined by the Act).   The CBP stuff you injected earlier in this thread was incorrect and irrelevant, as several posters have commented.  I am not sure I can even understand your most recent post, but I think you are saying you now understand that the OP's B2B2B cruise isn't and never was violating the PVSA.  At least I hope you are.

[ghstudio]

I believe the real problem here (given the level of understanding within Celebrity HQ) is to make the third cruise an independent cruise.......book the first two together as a B2B  Vancouver to Vancouver and then book the third cruise separately Vancouver to Los Angeles.  Yes, that would give up the B2B $50/$100 offered for the second B2B, but maybe that's the cost of clearing this up.  If necessary, disembark with luggage, go through canadian customs/immigration and check back in.  

 

Perhaps you might forget to pack some of the clothes (hint)....

 

Since it's after final payment, then you need help from celebrity HQ to reticket.  

[bEwAbG]

3 minutes ago, ghstudio said:

I believe the real problem here (given the level of understanding within Celebrity HQ) is to make the third cruise an independent cruise.......book the first two together as a B2B  Vancouver to Vancouver and then book the third cruise separately Vancouver to Los Angeles.  Yes, that would give up the B2B $50/$100 offered for the second B2B, but maybe that's the cost of clearing this up.  If necessary, disembark with luggage, go through canadian customs/immigration and check back in.  

 

Perhaps you might forget to pack some of the clothes (hint)....

 

Since it's after final payment, then you need help from celebrity HQ to reticket.  

 

I don't think that would resolve anything, really.  As has already been noted several times, the government does not care how it's booked in a ticketing system.  They're looking at passenger manifests to see where passenger A began the trip and where they end it.

[chengkp75]

1 hour ago, Bo1953 said:

Update - Update - Update...

 

After reading a U.S. Publication of the Act (PVSA) the fact that none of X's and frankly no other cruise line that I Am aware of, are NOT U.S. flagged the restrictions apply.

 

"That statute provided that “no foreign vessel shall transport passengers between ports or places in the United States, either directly or by way of a foreign port, under a penalty..." if anyone cares, it is codified at 46 U.S.C. § 55103.

 

Thus the work around for the OP.

 

As such, my premise about CBP Jurisdiction at the Port of Vancouver is not and was not valid at all, to wit.

 

There is an U.S. 'ownership' component as well, that can in some circumstances be used to have PVSA not apply.

 

bon voyage

To be exact, the act says "transportation from a US port of embarkation to another US port where the passenger PERMANENTLY disembarks. If you rejoin a ship the same day you disembark, you are not "permanently" disembarking. This clause was added to allow multiple US port calls in one voyage.

 

And the ship must be BUILT in the US as well as being US owned and US flagged, in order to be PVSA compliant.

[ghstudio]

OP.....have you considered call MARAD who is (apparently) responsible for applying the law and granting exemptions.

 

https://www.maritime.dot.gov/

 

You might just find someone in the Dept of Transportation who would be more  helpful than those you've talked to in Celebrity.

 

I know it's a long shot....but you really have nothing to lose by calling.

[Turtles06]

8 minutes ago, bEwAbG said:

 

I don't think that would resolve anything, really.  As has already been noted several times, the government does not care how it's booked in a ticketing system.  They're looking at passenger manifests to see where passenger A began the trip and where they end it.

 

Indeed.

 

In fact, a while back, when we booked a cruise with HAL going one-way from Boston to Quebec City, we not only received a booking confirmation from HAL, but immediately after it a separate email that basically said: don't even think about booking the same ship from Quebec City (it was embarking the day we arrived and leaving the next day) and going to NY.  It did not matter whether someone had tried to book those cruises as one long cruise or as two separate cruises, the result would have been the same: HAL would have transported that person from Boston to NY, without visiting a distant foreign port, and that would have violated the PVSA.  (I thought about this when I read the OP's first post, and remembered how "on the ball" HAL had seemed.  Apart from everything else the OP is going through, X's late "discovery" of the supposed PVSA violation is inexcusable)

[chengkp75]

1 minute ago, ghstudio said:

OP.....have you considered call MARAD who is (apparently) responsible for applying the law and granting exemptions.

 

https://www.maritime.dot.gov/

 

You might just find someone in the Dept of Transportation who would be more  helpful than those you've talked to in Celebrity.

 

I know it's a long shot....but you really have nothing to lose by calling.

No, MARAD only determines whether a ship is PVSA compliant, CBP determines whether a violation has happened, and fines the cruise line, not the passengers. The cruise ticket contract is what allows the cruise line to pass the fine to the passenger, so CBP doesn't care about a passenger's problems.

[ghstudio]

1 minute ago, chengkp75 said:

No, MARAD only determines whether a ship is PVSA compliant, CBP determines whether a violation has happened, and fines the cruise line, not the passengers. The cruise ticket contract is what allows the cruise line to pass the fine to the passenger, so CBP doesn't care about a passenger's problems.

OK....call CBP and ask the question.....I would call the one in Vancouver.  They will likely refer you somewhere else....but it's a start down another path.  You might actually reach someone who understands what you are doing.

 

I hope everyone realizes that we are talking about a $200 fine which Celebrity would just pass on.

[Turtles06]

46 minutes ago, ghstudio said:

I hope everyone realizes that we are talking about a $200 fine which Celebrity would just pass on.

 

Unless it’s recently been decreased, it’s $762 according to this article right here on CC.

 

https://www.cruisecritic.com/articles.cfm?ID=3363#what-is-the-passenger-vessel-services-act-pvsa

[AmazedByCruising]

44 minutes ago, ghstudio said:

OK....call CBP and ask the question.....I would call the one in Vancouver.  They will likely refer you somewhere else....but it's a start down another path.  You might actually reach someone who understands what you are doing.

 

I hope everyone realizes that we are talking about a $200 fine which Celebrity would just pass on.

 

Except it is now more than $200, if it's a mistake. If Celebrity purposely allows an illegal transportation it's a lot more than that. Then again, there are not violations here. 

[bEwAbG]

46 minutes ago, ghstudio said:

OK....call CBP and ask the question.....I would call the one in Vancouver.  They will likely refer you somewhere else....but it's a start down another path.  You might actually reach someone who understands what you are doing.

 

I hope everyone realizes that we are talking about a $200 fine which Celebrity would just pass on.

 

The fine is more than that now, and it's levied per person.  AFAIK, cruise lines will not let you intentionally break the law, even if you offer to pay the associated fines.  These are marks against their records with CBP so they have an incentive to police it.

 

As far as calling CBP, that would do no good, either.  This just needs to be escalated within Celebrity until someone with common sense makes a ruling on it.  

[Turtles06]

 I just came across this interesting article right here on CC that explains the PVSA. It has a very interesting section about B2B cruises and the PVSA.  Take a look at the last paragraph in that section.  It gives an example three cruises taken B2B2B that would not violate the PVSA:  San Diego to Vancouver, Vancouver to Anchorage, and Anchorage to Vancouver.  

 

This is no different from what the OP is doing.  Maybe his TA should send X this article. 🤣

 

https://www.cruisecritic.com/articles.cfm?ID=3363#what-is-the-passenger-vessel-services-act-pvsa

 

Seriously, it's terrible that the OP is having to deal with this.

Edited August 7, 2019 by Turtles06

[ghstudio]

Just now, Turtles06 said:

 I just came across this interesting article right here on CC that explains the PVSA. It has a very interesting section about B2B cruises and the PVSA.  Take a look at the last paragraph in that section.  It gives as an example of three cruises taken B2B2B that would not violate the PVSA:  San Diego to Vancouver, Vancouver to Anchorage, and Anchorage to Vancouver.  

 

This is no different from what the OP is doing.  Maybe his TA should send X this article. 🤣

 

https://www.cruisecritic.com/articles.cfm?ID=3363#what-is-the-passenger-vessel-services-act-pvsa

I wouldn't call to solve the issue....I'd call to find out who is interpreting the law correctly.  None of us are experts and it sounds like the folks the OP is talking to aren't experts either.

[varoo]

25 minutes ago, Turtles06 said:

 I just came across this interesting article right here on CC that explains the PVSA. It has a very interesting section about B2B cruises and the PVSA.  Take a look at the last paragraph in that section.  It gives as an example of three cruises taken B2B2B that would not violate the PVSA:  San Diego to Vancouver, Vancouver to Anchorage, and Anchorage to Vancouver.  

 

This is no different from what the OP is doing.  Maybe his TA should send X this article. 🤣

https://www.cruisecritic.com/articles.cfm?ID=3363#what-is-the-passenger-vessel-services-act-pvsa

 

No need, as passengers have been doing similar itineraries on X for years with no problem.

 

For us it was San Diego to Vancouver, Vancouver to Seward, and Seward to Vancouver.

 

Edited August 7, 2019 by varoo

[bEwAbG]

10 minutes ago, ghstudio said:

I wouldn't call to solve the issue....I'd call to find out who is interpreting the law correctly.  None of us are experts and it sounds like the folks the OP is talking to aren't experts either.

 

It is the cruise line making the decision.  Calling CBP is going to add zero value to the transaction.  

[ghstudio]

duplicate....ignore

Edited August 7, 2019 by ghstudio

[ghstudio]

Just now, ghstudio said:

It is possible that Celebrity is correct...or maybe we armchair lawyers, are correct.  Wouldn't it be useful to talk to the folks who "enforce" the law to get their opinion.  Who knows what special rules/interpretations/practices the CBP has in place....

 

It was just a suggestion.... I was just trying to think outside the box. if the OP doesn't think it's worthwhile, he can obviously just ignore it. 

 

[AmazedByCruising]

TAs and lines themselves are dealing with the PVSA on a daily basis. How is this a regular subject?

 

Someone should register isthiscruiseok.com (which is available, btw). A really simple site asking a few questions until it reaches a decision.  

---

These questions are about your whole cruise.

 

Where do you embark?

Where do you disembark?

 

 

Mmm. Maybe you are visiting Aruba, Bonaire or Curacao?

OK. Maybe you are going really far, like Europe?

OK, is there a pause somewhere for a day or more?

Are you getting on another ship somewhere?

 

We found you're OK, time to convince the line or your TA.

 

One last question, did they say it was the "Jones Act" instead of the PVSA?

 

Thank you. Here's the explanation that you can send to your TA and your cruise line. Please do click on one of the ads.

 

Blabla not Jones blabla Far Port as defined in article blabla while starting in blabla the PVSA is only blabla. While Vancouver blabla. Conclusion: this cruise does not violate the PVSA. You may want to check it at isthiscruiseok.com, which has been officially tested and allowed for giving a conclusive answer by CBP. (for which we paid a lot so really please do click on one of the ads)

 

 

Edited August 7, 2019 by AmazedByCruising

[chengkp75]

2 hours ago, ghstudio said:

OK....call CBP and ask the question.....I would call the one in Vancouver.  They will likely refer you somewhere else....but it's a start down another path.  You might actually reach someone who understands what you are doing.

 

I hope everyone realizes that we are talking about a $200 fine which Celebrity would just pass on.

Again, CBP doesn't give a hoot or holler about what plans a passenger is making with the cruise lines.  They will not deal with a passenger, even if a passenger has had a fine levied by the cruise line for a deceased passenger being disembarked at a different US port, unless the cruise line sends the passenger the case number and pertinent documentation of the fine levied against the cruise line by CBP (by the way, this happens frequently, and the family always gets a refund of the fine).