PVSA Confusion

[CruizinSusan70]

9 minutes ago, greenie082756 said:

We tried to book the following back-to-back and were told that we could not do it because of the PVSA.

 

First cruise is called Circle the Carribean from Ft. Lauderdale to many islands including Curacao which I understand that is a distant foreign port if I read the PVSA correctly. It will return to Ft. Lauderdale.

 

We wanted to do a back-to-back staying on the same ship through the Panama Canal from Ft. Lauderdale to Los Angeles. We were told that the first cruise did not quality so we could not take the second cruise. 

 

Not trying to beat a dead horse, just confused. Put in a question to my PVP and hopefully will have an answer. 

Good afternoon Teresa.   I'm the OP on this thread.  We wanted to go on a B2B2B starting in LA, going to the Mexican Riviera for 7 days, then Vancouver for 4 days and finally to Seattle for another 4 days.  Even though all three individual cruises are OK, combining the three wasn't.  We could have even done the first two, starting in LA and ending in Vancouver legally, but the three would have started in LA and ended in Seattle, so it starts and ends in a US port, so no go.

Your B2B would have started in FLL and ended in LA, so no go.

Edited August 13, 2023 by CruizinSusan70

[CruizinSusan70]

4 minutes ago, BlerkOne said:

Something isn't right there. Curacao is a distant foreign port, but I don't think that matters.

 

The Panama Canal cruise has to have a distant foreign port or that cruise wouldn't be legal.

I believe Cartegena qualifies as the distant port on Panama canal cruises

[Mike07]

16 minutes ago, greenie082756 said:

We tried to book the following back-to-back and were told that we could not do it because of the PVSA.

 

First cruise is called Circle the Carribean from Ft. Lauderdale to many islands including Curacao which I understand that is a distant foreign port if I read the PVSA correctly. It will return to Ft. Lauderdale.

 

We wanted to do a back-to-back staying on the same ship through the Panama Canal from Ft. Lauderdale to Los Angeles. We were told that the first cruise did not quality so we could not take the second cruise. 

 

Not trying to beat a dead horse, just confused. Put in a question to my PVP and hopefully will have an answer. 

 

 

Both cruises qualify with distant foreign ports otherwise they wouldn't be embarking in America. Your issue is that you're going from Fort Lauderdale to Los Angeles with no breaks.

 

Personally, I'd take the Port Everglades to San Pedro all day long

Edited August 13, 2023 by Mike07

[Guest ldtr]

1 hour ago, greenie082756 said:

We tried to book the following back-to-back and were told that we could not do it because of the PVSA.

 

First cruise is called Circle the Carribean from Ft. Lauderdale to many islands including Curacao which I understand that is a distant foreign port if I read the PVSA correctly. It will return to Ft. Lauderdale.

 

We wanted to do a back-to-back staying on the same ship through the Panama Canal from Ft. Lauderdale to Los Angeles. We were told that the first cruise did not quality so we could not take the second cruise. 

 

Not trying to beat a dead horse, just confused. Put in a question to my PVP and hopefully will have an answer. 

Actually it is compliant and whoever told you otherwise is wrong.

[reedprincess]

1 hour ago, greenie082756 said:

We tried to book the following back-to-back and were told that we could not do it because of the PVSA.

 

First cruise is called Circle the Carribean from Ft. Lauderdale to many islands including Curacao which I understand that is a distant foreign port if I read the PVSA correctly. It will return to Ft. Lauderdale.

 

We wanted to do a back-to-back staying on the same ship through the Panama Canal from Ft. Lauderdale to Los Angeles. We were told that the first cruise did not quality so we could not take the second cruise. 

 

Not trying to beat a dead horse, just confused. Put in a question to my PVP and hopefully will have an answer. 

Hopefully, they'll get back to you quickly, as by definition of PVSA, this routing would be compliant.

You're visiting 2 distant foreign ports after embarking in Port Everglades and before disembarking in San Pedro... or, one distant foreign port per sailing..  interesting that someone told you it was not compliant.

 

1 hour ago, CruizinSusan70 said:

Good afternoon Teresa.   I'm the OP on this thread.  We wanted to go on a B2B2B starting in LA, going to the Mexican Riviera for 7 days, then Vancouver for 4 days and finally to Seattle for another 4 days.  Even though all three individual cruises are OK, combining the three wasn't.  We could have even done the first two, starting in LA and ending in Vancouver legally, but the three would have started in LA and ended in Seattle, so it starts and ends in a US port, so no go.

Your B2B would have started in FLL and ended in LA, so no go.

You're attempt, as clearly explained multiple times, is not compliant with PVSA as you would not have visited a DISTANT foreign port at any time during your back to back cruises.. Ports in Canada, MX or much of the Caribbean or Central America are not classified as distant foreign ports 

 

[beg3yrs]

1 hour ago, CruizinSusan70 said:

Good afternoon Teresa.   I'm the OP on this thread.  We wanted to go on a B2B2B starting in LA, going to the Mexican Riviera for 7 days, then Vancouver for 4 days and finally to Seattle for another 4 days.  Even though all three individual cruises are OK, combining the three wasn't.  We could have even done the first two, starting in LA and ending in Vancouver legally, but the three would have started in LA and ended in Seattle, so it starts and ends in a US port, so no go.

Your B2B would have started in FLL and ended in LA, so no go.

No Susan, it is a go because this B2B has stops in distant foreign ports (Cartagena and Curacao) unlike yours which does not stop in a distant foreign port.

[BlerkOne]

1 hour ago, CruizinSusan70 said:

I believe Cartegena qualifies as the distant port on Panama canal cruises

Cartagena does. So do Aruba, Bonaire, and Curacao.

[chengkp75]

4 hours ago, greenie082756 said:

We tried to book the following back-to-back and were told that we could not do it because of the PVSA.

 

First cruise is called Circle the Carribean from Ft. Lauderdale to many islands including Curacao which I understand that is a distant foreign port if I read the PVSA correctly. It will return to Ft. Lauderdale.

 

We wanted to do a back-to-back staying on the same ship through the Panama Canal from Ft. Lauderdale to Los Angeles. We were told that the first cruise did not quality so we could not take the second cruise. 

 

Not trying to beat a dead horse, just confused. Put in a question to my PVP and hopefully will have an answer. 

As others have noted, both cruises have a port call at a "distant" foreign port, so combining them is PVSA compliant, and even if the first cruise did not go to the ABC islands, it is a closed loop, so it does not need to.  Combining the two still creates an "open jaw" cruise from one US port to another, with at least one port call at a "distant" foreign port, so it is also PVSA compliant.  Tell your PVP to contact the Compliance Department to get the correct answer.

[CruizinSusan70]

8 hours ago, reedprincess said:

You're attempt, as clearly explained multiple times, is not compliant with PVSA as you would not have visited a DISTANT foreign port at any time during your back to back cruises.. Ports in Canada, MX or much of the Caribbean or Central America are not classified as distant foreign ports

Fully aware of the situation when this thread was on page two a few days ago.   Listed our different options on post #35  and our final decision on post #48 regarding the revised itinerary of our future vacation in May of 2025.  But thanks for your input on my thread.

[CruizinSusan70]

8 hours ago, beg3yrs said:

No Susan, it is a go because this B2B has stops in distant foreign ports (Cartagena and Curacao) unlike yours which does not stop in a distant foreign port.

Your response was post 81, you obviously have not read post 48 which has our revised itinerary listed, which consists of a 7 day and a 9 day sailing with an overnight stay in Seattle in between. 

[chengkp75]

12 hours ago, CruizinSusan70 said:

Your B2B would have started in FLL and ended in LA, so no go.

This is what others have been trying to tell you is incorrect, not anything about your itinerary.  The closed loop FLL cruise combined with the Panama Canal cruise (which by definition has to have a "distant" foreign port call to exist by itself), is PVSA compliant, just like the FLL to LA cruise is by itself.

 

Virtually the only time the PVSA comes into question is on the West Coast, where the "distant" foreign ports are thousands of miles out of the way.

Edited August 14, 2023 by chengkp75

[skynight]

gfreenie082756

Emphasizing what other have posted. Your b2b FLL to FLL to L.A. IS PVSA compliant. You board in FLL and visit a distant foreign port twice. Go back to your T.A. or whomever you tried to book with and explain the law to them. 

[cr8tiv1]

4 hours ago, skynight said:

gfreenie082756

Emphasizing what other have posted. Your b2b FLL to FLL to L.A. IS PVSA compliant. You board in FLL and visit a distant foreign port twice. Go back to your T.A. or whomever you tried to book with and explain the law to them. 

 

I apologize for the laugh icon.  I think it is so silly that "we" have to educate the source.  I wish the passenger luck in trying to do that.  Not meant to be inflammatory.  Sometimes the "rules" are too taken too strictly.  

[BlerkOne]

2 hours ago, cr8tiv1 said:

 

I apologize for the laugh icon.  I think it is so silly that "we" have to educate the source.  I wish the passenger luck in trying to do that.  Not meant to be inflammatory.  Sometimes the "rules" are too taken too strictly.  

A number of cruise lines mistakenly still refer to the law as the Jones Act. Princess is not alone.

[chengkp75]

26 minutes ago, BlerkOne said:

A number of cruise lines mistakenly still refer to the law as the Jones Act. Princess is not alone.

The thing is, that once passed into law, they really are not "Acts" anymore.  The Jones Act is technically "46 USC 55102", while the PVSA is technically "46 USC 55103", or the very next subchapter of the USC.  So, they are both part of 46 USC (shipping), one right after the other.

[greenie082756]

Thank you all.

Once my PVP gets back to me I will update what I was told.

Crossing fingers its a go 🙂

[Steelers36]

I'd like to know why people are still confused after 90 posts?  🤣

[BlerkOne]

1 hour ago, Steelers36 said:

I'd like to know why people are still confused after 90 posts?  🤣

Passenger Vessel Services Act of 1886 - confusing people for 137 years +/- and growing.

[CruizinSusan70]

5 hours ago, Steelers36 said:

I'd like to know why people are still confused after 90 posts?  🤣

Drink package consumption?

[greenie082756]

Well talked with our PVP and she said yes, the back-to-back can be done and

recalled that the screen had told her it couldn't be done but now it can.

 

Human error and now I've learned more than I wanted about the PVSA !

Thanks all 🙂