Princess Test Cruises ?

[ontheweb]

1 hour ago, Redwing55 said:

Not sure about point.  I stand by listing unnecessary requirements as being wasteful and borders on showing incompetence.  I don't know what the cruise lines are or aren't doing.  I just saw what the CDC's product is.  Since they are the controlling body, it's up to them to promulgate appropriate recommendations.    Yes, the regulated can and should be part of the process to help develop them, but it is not in the cruise industries' laps to write these.  The CDC should develop appropriate rules.. not ones that don't benefit or are totally risk averse.

No, the cruise lines should be specifying the protocols within the CDC framework, and negotiating with them when something seems not to be practicable. 

[Redwing55]

2 hours ago, ontheweb said:

No, the cruise lines should be specifying the protocols within the CDC framework, and negotiating with them when something seems not to be practicable. 

So the cruise lines suggested the 12 hr delay?  SMH.  And what you wrote sounds quite reasonable  Sign me up.  My understanding is the CDC didn't offer a framework.. maybe some but not everything.  And I admit that I'm using my experience with how the EPA writes regulations, as they will have a draft.  NGO's and industry would comment (with suggestions) and then discuss. Then EPA would propose again and eventually promulgate.   I'm oversimplifying.  And it's pretty hard for the regulated to read the regulatory agencies minds as to what they find acceptable.  I respect that the CDC may operate differently.. but the process described in this thread sounds quite ineffective.

[nocl]

17 minutes ago, Redwing55 said:

So the cruise lines suggested the 12 hr delay?  SMH.  And what you wrote sounds quite reasonable  Sign me up.  My understanding is the CDC didn't offer a framework.. maybe some but not everything.  And I admit that I'm using my experience with how the EPA writes regulations, as they will have a draft.  NGO's and industry would comment (with suggestions) and then discuss. Then EPA would propose again and eventually promulgate.   I'm oversimplifying.  And it's pretty hard for the regulated to read the regulatory agencies minds as to what they find acceptable.  I respect that the CDC may operate differently.. but the process described in this thread sounds quite ineffective.

That is the difference between the permanent regulation process which includes an RFC period from the emergency order process which the CSO is.  Even though the CDC did include a RFI period prior to the issuance of the CSO (the information from the the RFI is included in the CSO).

 

The CDC did provide the framework with the initial CSO.  The cruise lines did nothing, so the CDC published the technical document for the port agreement step which is where the 12 hour requirement was placed.  The CDC changed that requirement within 48 hours of the technical document being published.

 

 

[Syracusefan44]

2 minutes ago, Ken the cruiser said:

This appears to be a pretty big adjustment by CDC. Do you by chance have a link to that article. 

Here is the link to the reporters Twitter account.  I am assuming he will write a story tonight about this development.

 

https://twitter.com/taydolven/status/1387590148615987204?s=21

[Ken the cruiser]

4 minutes ago, Syracusefan44 said:

Here is the link to the reporters Twitter account.  I am assuming he will write a story tonight about this development.

 

https://twitter.com/taydolven/status/1387590148615987204?s=21

In my mind, this is huge! If it's alright with you I'm going to post this link on the "Are vaccines the light at the end of the tunnel" thread. Or better yet, would you mind posting it there?

[OccasionalSanta]

On 4/27/2021 at 9:20 AM, K.T.B. said:

Neither does a mask, which has been medically proven.  So there's that.  

Then why aren't athletes wearing masks when they compete?

[Ken the cruiser]

25 minutes ago, Ken the cruiser said:

In my mind, this is huge! If it's alright with you I'm going to post this link on the "Are vaccines the light at the end of the tunnel" thread. Or better yet, would you mind posting it there?

I just posted it on the other thread. Thanks again for posting this wonderful news!!!

[nocl]

1 hour ago, Ken the cruiser said:

This appears to be a pretty big adjustment by CDC. Do you by chance have a link to that article. 

Not that big. It is basically that if at least 95% of the passengers and 98% of the crew is vaccinated the cruise can bypass the test cruises. 

 

The rest of the CSO remains intact with some minor modifications. 

The cruise lines still need to complete their port agreement, supply their protocols to CDC for approval and submit the required documents signed by senior management for cruising to resume.

 

These changes involve accepting antigen testing at the pier instead of PCR in advance.  Allowing a master port agreement with multiple ports instead of individual port agreements as long as all parties from each port sign the agreement.

 

Basically the cruise lines could get that done and be able to start in July, but only if they do those steps as required by the CSO.

 

Now lets see if the cruise lines actually start working on the agreements.

Edited April 29, 2021 by nocl

[EZ1]

https://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/cruises/2021/04/28/cdc-cruises-could-restart-july/4883450001/ 

 Finally sounds like something positive may happen soon!!!!!! 

[Travlin grrl]

On 4/15/2021 at 5:51 PM, CineGraphic said:

 

This, from a man who wears a fake beard. lol.

Haha I was thinking the same thing. 😃