Did Crown Princess violate federal law today?

[LMaxwell]

2 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

Ah, that Admiral.  Then I can see why he would be "caught flatfooted" by an accusation from the Port Director.  Perhaps because it isn't correct.

 

You are stating that the Port Director was making a false accusation? And the County Commissioner that had the CEO of Broward Health on the phone making counterclaims against the Admiral were making false accusations? 

 

 

[LMaxwell]

1 hour ago, ALWAYS CRUZIN said:

I listened to just about all of it and did not hear Admiral Burke speak. Can you give me the time stamp to be able to find it. The 7thy Coast Guard District Commander gave the port order not to let the ships into US watters.

Also now the sheriff's office has authority.

Admiral Burke is the representative for Carnival; I believe he was speaking from 12:30PM onwards

[bluesea321]

3 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

Ah, that Admiral.  Then I can see why he would be "caught flatfooted" by an accusation from the Port Director.  Perhaps because it isn't correct.

 

1 hour ago, LMaxwell said:

You are stating that the Port Director was making a false accusation? And the County Commissioner that had the CEO of Broward Health on the phone making counterclaims against the Admiral were making false accusations? 

 

Chengkp75 did not view the Broward County Commissioners meeting before commenting above.  As I mentioned earlier, either the CEO of Broward Health or Admiral Burke was mistaken.  No way for us to know but from the meeting the Commissioner and the CEO seemed very sure of themselves, Burke did not, he waffled.

[Ombud]

5 hours ago, Wendy&Grumpy said:

 

Had you clicked on the article rather than simply reading the headline and assuming, you'd have found that the four dead are on Zaandam, and the article makes NO mention of illnesses onboard Coral Princess.

Yeah. I should have referenced the Washington Post. See 2nd, 9th-11th paragraphs 

[Wendy&Grumpy]

4 minutes ago, Ombud said:

Yeah. I should have referenced the Washington Post. See 2nd, 9th-11th paragraphs 

 

The article you linked was from The Independent, not the Washington Post.

[chengkp75]

1 hour ago, LMaxwell said:

 

You are stating that the Port Director was making a false accusation? And the County Commissioner that had the CEO of Broward Health on the phone making counterclaims against the Admiral were making false accusations? 

 

 

My answer was lost in the cloud, so I'll repeat.  I'm not accusing anyone, but I would prefer to hear from the USCG itself, rather than someone who was "speaking for them".  And, unless this is an emergency requirement brought out by this epidemic, I know of no requirement that a ship needs to notify the local board of health for any reason.  The ship notifies the USCG, and they notify the USPH/CDC and CBP if there is a health issue onboard, and they have their own notification trees, but I don't know what they are, so while the Broward Board of Health may not have been notified, I'd like to see the requirement that they need to be notified directly by the ship.  There may be one, but I've never heard of it, and neither has the Captain I ate dinner with this evening.

[Ombud]

12 minutes ago, Wendy&Grumpy said:

 

The article you linked was from The Independent, not the Washington Post.

Yes, you were right and I was wrong

[LMaxwell]

20 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

 I know of no requirement that a ship needs to notify the local board of health for any reason.  The ship notifies the USCG, and they notify the USPH/CDC and CBP if there is a health issue onboard, and they have their own notification trees, but I don't know what they are, so while the Broward Board of Health may not have been notified, I'd like to see the requirement that they need to be notified directly by the ship.  There may be one, but I've never heard of it, and neither has the Captain I ate dinner with this evening.

Broward Health is a hospital system, not the Board of Health, nor has anyone contended that the Board of Health was to be notified as standard operating procedure, or special provision.  The Port Director specifically stated he was not notified and upon checking with Coast Guard and CDC neither of those entities were notified.  

[bluesea321]

29 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

My answer was lost in the cloud, so I'll repeat.  I'm not accusing anyone, but I would prefer to hear from the USCG itself, rather than someone who was "speaking for them".  And, unless this is an emergency requirement brought out by this epidemic, I know of no requirement that a ship needs to notify the local board of health for any reason.  The ship notifies the USCG, and they notify the USPH/CDC and CBP if there is a health issue onboard, and they have their own notification trees, but I don't know what they are, so while the Broward Board of Health may not have been notified, I'd like to see the requirement that they need to be notified directly by the ship.  There may be one, but I've never heard of it, and neither has the Captain I ate dinner with this evening.

 

The Coast Guard had an officer, a Captain Burdeen (spelling ?), at the Broward County Commissioners meeting.   She is the Captain of the Port and spoke and answered questions at about the 1:06 hour mark.  Best if you review the meeting.

Edited April 1, 2020 by bluesea321

[chengkp75]

17 minutes ago, bluesea321 said:

 

The Coast Guard had an officer, a Captain Burdeen (spelling ?), at the Broward County Commissioners meeting.   She is the Captain of the Port and spoke and answered questions at about the 1:06 hour mark.  Best if you review the meeting.

As noted, I can't see video on our internet.  What was her response about whether the COTP was notified? And I can tell you that if the USCG felt that an inaccurate ENOA was submitted, the ship would be detained (either docked or at anchor with armed Sea Marshals onboard) or the Captain would have been removed from the ship.

Edited April 1, 2020 by chengkp75

[bluesea321]

Just now, chengkp75 said:

As noted, I can't see video on our internet.  What was her response about whether the COTP was notified?

 

I have been listening to her comments again for over 1/2 hour and I am not through.  I did listen to the whole thing yesterday but I concentrated on the Zaandam issue, not the Crown.  The Crown issue came up much later in the meeting which lasted 6 hours.

 

The Captain seemed to defer or waffle a lot, many questions asked, and I am still listening but will need to quit now.  I rather that you wait until you can see the video and form your own conclusion.  If I get an answer to your question later today I will post it.

[Av8tor]

7 hours ago, Roger88 said:

To such huge corporations its only the matter of price. They got enough money to get away with anything. They understand the consequencies, the only exactly the results of their actions.. and they still commit them cause they simply got enough money to pay all the corresponding fines if they ever occur. Also being a huge tax payer, noone in the government is really intrested in closing their office. 
Simple things.. 

 

Aren't all these cruise companies foreign corporations?  I think they are so they might not necessarily be "a huge tax payer," at least not to the United States... 

 

As to trying to get away with anything and just payinmg the fine as a general price of doing business, I believe that is exactly what the do.

 

[chengkp75]

1 hour ago, bluesea321 said:

 

I have been listening to her comments again for over 1/2 hour and I am not through.  I did listen to the whole thing yesterday but I concentrated on the Zaandam issue, not the Crown.  The Crown issue came up much later in the meeting which lasted 6 hours.

 

The Captain seemed to defer or waffle a lot, many questions asked, and I am still listening but will need to quit now.  I rather that you wait until you can see the video and form your own conclusion.  If I get an answer to your question later today I will post it.

Well, considering that I am currently on a ship, and have been notified that all of our crew changes (US flag ship) have been frozen for the indefinite future, it will be quite some time before I can watch any video from the internet.

[chengkp75]

Okay, lets see if I have the facts straight:

 

1.  The local Port Authority, and a private hospital were not notified in advance that the ship was docking with ill people.

2.  The USCG COTP was present at the meeting, and during the questioning, did not state that the ship submitted an inaccurate, or false health declaration on the ENOA (since no one who has watched the video has stated otherwise)

 

Am I right so far?

 

Then I can answer the OP's title question:  no the ship did not violate any federal law.  Period.  The only federal law involved is the requirement for health notification on the ENOA.  Even the USCG MSIB linked by the OP requiring notification to the USCG of arrangement for commercial transportation on shore, and pre-arranged medical treatment, only applies to MEDEVAC cases by the USCG.  It appears that there was a communication breakdown between the USCG and the local authorities over the plan to disembark patients at the dock.  The MSIB is a policy and procedure document that does not carry the weight of law.

[LMaxwell]

20 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

Okay, lets see if I have the facts straight:

 

1.  The local Port Authority, and a private hospital were not notified in advance that the ship was docking with ill people.

2.  The USCG COTP was present at the meeting, and during the questioning, did not state that the ship submitted an inaccurate, or false health declaration on the ENOA (since no one who has watched the video has stated otherwise)

 

Am I right so far?

 

Then I can answer the OP's title question:  no the ship did not violate any federal law.  Period.  The only federal law involved is the requirement for health notification on the ENOA.  Even the USCG MSIB linked by the OP requiring notification to the USCG of arrangement for commercial transportation on shore, and pre-arranged medical treatment, only applies to MEDEVAC cases by the USCG.  It appears that there was a communication breakdown between the USCG and the local authorities over the plan to disembark patients at the dock.  The MSIB is a policy and procedure document that does not carry the weight of law.

 

 

No, you do not have the facts correct.  I understand you have spotty internet access but there seems to be confusion; the notification of Broward Health is practically irrelevant as relates to federal law. 

Edited April 2, 2020 by LMaxwell

[caribill]

15 hours ago, skynight said:

According to yesterday's Coral Princess reports there are no known cases of COVID-19 on board.

 

Unfortunately, Wednesday's posts do indicate there are now cases of Covid-19 on the Coral.

[SakeDad]

22 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

While I won't comment on the veracity or otherwise of elected officials involved with this, or whether the facts they presented are correct or not, I'll mention the law.

 

Ships are required to submit ENOA (electronic notice of arrival) to the USCG, and this includes a statement of health for the ship (the ship is requesting "free pratique", or the right to dock without quarantine).  This statement of health includes both crew and passengers, for a passenger vessel.  This must be submitted to the USCG at least 72 hours prior to arrival in US waters, and must be updated at regular intervals, or whenever a change occurs.  It is then up to the USCG COTP to notify CBP and CDC of any health issues onboard the ship in question.

 

As for notifying the CDC directly, for respiratory illness I believe it is a "recommendation" for ships to do so, but I don't believe it is mandatory (I would have to double check that), but of course in today's environment, it would be foolish not to.

 

Now, as far as a ship arriving in port with ill people, there isn't a whole lot to stop the ship from entering the "port environs" (like anchoring) and having to remain in a "quarantine anchorage", but of course the US is also required to lend aid to evacuated injured/ill crew from all vessels in the area under UNCLOS.

 

Until I hear a statement from the USCG directly, I will withhold judgement on this, and would like to have a link to the allegation that Celebrity covered up illnesses, as I haven't heard about this.

Thanks Cheng....always the BEST! So then the question is if passengers or crew test positive between the 72 hours and port arrival....what then?

[chengkp75]

8 hours ago, LMaxwell said:

 

 

No, you do not have the facts correct.  I understand you have spotty internet access but there seems to be confusion; the notification of Broward Health is practically irrelevant as relates to federal law. 

So, what is the area of federal law that you feel is relevant?  I'm certainly not following, so perhaps you could explain.

[chengkp75]

51 minutes ago, SakeDad said:

Thanks Cheng....always the BEST! So then the question is if passengers or crew test positive between the 72 hours and port arrival....what then?

Well, in addition to the 72 hour notice, there are 48 and 24 hour notices as well, and any time the conditions listed in the ENOA change (arrival time, illness) an amended report must be submitted.

[Coral]

I never question chengkp75 - he knows more than 99% of us ever will about cruise ships!

 

I appreciate he answers our questions on this board.

[skynight]

14 hours ago, Av8tor said:

 

Aren't all these cruise companies foreign corporations?  I think they are so they might not necessarily be "a huge tax payer," at least not to the United States... 

 

As to trying to get away with anything and just paying the fine as a general price of doing business, I believe that is exactly what the do.

 

Carnival is a dual corporation with Carnival Corporation incorporated in the U.S. (Miami), and Carnival PCL incorporated in the UK. 

Most of the Princess fleet is flagged in Bermuda with a few ships being flagged in the UK. This allows for cost efficient construction and operation. Very few cruise and cargo ships are flagged in the U.S..

 

[LMaxwell]

And sorry to learn that your situation is on hold for now and being "stuck".  Uncertainty is unsettling. Thank you for all of your knowledge and teaching us 

[chengkp75]

3 hours ago, LMaxwell said:

And sorry to learn that your situation is on hold for now and being "stuck".  Uncertainty is unsettling. Thank you for all of your knowledge and teaching us 

Thanks, but its not me I'm worried about.  I did 16 of 18 months during the First Gulf War, so long tours is nothing new, but my relief is forced to stay at home without pay.

[ontheweb]

1 hour ago, chengkp75 said:

Thanks, but its not me I'm worried about.  I did 16 of 18 months during the First Gulf War, so long tours is nothing new, but my relief is forced to stay at home without pay.

That reminds me of a cruise we took that could not get back to Fort Lauderdale until 2 days late (actually on Labor Day) because of a hurricane. Our extra time was fine except for the mess that was disembarkation and the zoo that the airport was. However, you had to feel for the passengers coming for the next cruise.

 

I remember talking to one of the folks at the airport holding a sign for the cruise line. She had no idea how many would show up. They did not have any of the ports they expected in their shortened cruise. I also read that instead of the two dining times (this was before any line was doing any anytime dining), the two were consolidated into one.

[LMaxwell]

ChengP I answered your question with quotation from the Coast Guard; it has been removed from the forum.  Here is a link to the Coast Guard https://homeport.uscg.mil/Lists/Content/Attachments/62863/MSIB 20-001 COVID-19 Cruiseship Medical Capabilities_Signed.29Mar20.pdf