coastwise transportation of passengers€¦ · balconies-more than any other cruise ship sailing...
TRANSCRIPT
PRINCESS where i belong
I AS~ 4 j i w bull _ ~ bull lt _ ~)iCRUISE ATL
MAY 200 4 MAY 2 005
Alaska CanadaNew England Caribbean Europe Tahiti amp Polynesia Hawaii AustraliaNew Zealand Asia South America Mexican Riviera Panama Canal and Antarctica
CRUISES amp CRUISETOURS
DISCOVER OVER 80 ITINERARIES TO ALL
SEVEN CONTI N ENTS WITH Princess
MARIANAS I~LANDS MARSHALL ISLANDS
SOLOMON ISLANDS
I WESTERN SAMOA
- - lt~f
~ FI~I i AMERICAN
SAMOA
bull HAWAII -i--
FRENCH POLYNESIA
) - COOK
ISLANDS
MARqUESAS bullbull ISLANDS
Discover THE WORLD WITH Princess THE LEADING DESTINATION CRUISELINE
Big Ship Choice Small Ship Feel 8M_The only big ships with a small ship feel Our ships offer an incredible array of onboard activities from our ScholarShipSea life enhancement lecture series to our Lotus Spa~ plus a multitude of evening entertainment options And due to our revolutionary ship ltIIliJ~ji~~ii1~
design you can enjoy all that our floating resorts offer without ever feeling lost in a crowd
Anytime Dining 8M - Only Princess offers anytime flexible dining at gourmetstyle
restaurants allowing you to dine when where and with whom you want or Traditional Fixed Seating You also have up to seven alternative dining options like ourSaba e
Italian trattoria or Sterling Steakhouse and complimentary 24-hour room service
Affordable Balconies - Princess offers affordable balconies on stand staterooms not just suites and mini-suites With thousands of affordable balcotile on our fleet of floating resorts you can view the worlds most magnificent cities from your own balcony
Princess Service - Our staff is committed to Courtesy and Respect Unfailing in Service ExcellenceCR UISEreg In fact its our credo From your Stateroom Steward who warmly greets you by name to your evening waiter who remembers your favorite dish our service is simply unparalleled
Note Dining options may val by ship
TRAVEL FARTHER ONBOARD THE
CARIBBEAN PRINCESSsM
Caribbean
Caribbean Princess our most amenity- filled ship yet takes Personal Choice Crusing to a new level with Caribbean cuisine the renowned Lotus Spa our newest entertainment option Movies Under the Stars and nearly 900 cabins with balconies-more than any other cruise ship sailing year-round in the Caribbean
Nearly 900 balconies
3110 passengers 116000 gross tons
952 feet in length
Bermudan registered
GRAND PRINCESSmiddot GOLDEN PRINCESSmiddot
AND STAR PRINCESSmiddot
Caribbean bull Europe bull CanadaNew England
Grand Princess Golden Princess and Star Princess are the most luxshyurious ships to sail our Caribbean Europe and CanadaNew England itineraries featuring more affordshyable balconies and the finest shipshyboard amenities
Over 700 balconies
2600 passengers 109000 gross tons
950 feet in length
Bermudan registered
REGAL PRINCESSmiddot
Alaska bull CanadaNew England Panama Canal
Cruise Alaska the Panama Canal and CanadaNew England onboard Regal Princess offering larger standard staterooms many with balconies and spectacular views from her domed entertainment and observation center
Over 180 staterooms
with balconies
1590 passengers
70000 gross tons
804 feet in length British registered
ROYAL PRINCESSmiddot
Europe bull Asia bull Antarctica South America bull Amazon River
Behold the magnificence of each port of call from the Royal Princess wraparound promenade deck and all outside staterooms
More balconies than any
other ship this size
1200 passengers
45000 gross tons
757 feet in length British registered
MOST LUXURIOUS 8H I PS AT SEA
CORAL PRINCESSmiddot AND ISLAND PRINCESSmiddot
Alaska bull Hawaii bull Panama Canal
Coral Princess and Island Princess These two beautiful state-of-the-art ships belong to the newest class of luxury liners cruising the historic Panama Canal Alaska and the Hawaiian Islands They have 90 outshyside staterooms 79 of which offer balconies at a great value
9000 outside staterooms most with a balcony
1970 passengers
92000 gross tons
965 feet in length
Bermudan registered
DAWN PRINCESSmiddot AND SUN PRINCESSmiddot
Alaska bull Caribbean Panama Canal
With wraparound promenade decks and floor-to-ceiling windows Dawn Princess and Sun Princess offer stunning views of Alaska around every corner 410 cabins have balconies to enhance your onboard experience
Over 400 balconies 1950 passengers
77000 gross tons
857 feet in length
British registered
DIAMOND PRINCESSmiddot AND SAPPHIRE PRINCESSmiddot
Alaska bull Mexican Riviera AustraliaNew Zealand bull Asia
Cruise the Mexican Riviera AustraliaNew Zealand Alaska or Asia and celebrate our new Diarrwnd Princess and Sapphire Princess providing a blend of modern amenishyties and classic Princess features plus 750 private balcony staterooms
750 staterooms with balconies 2670 passengers 113000 gross tons
952 feet in length
Bermudan registered
TAHITIAN PRINCESSmiddot AND PACIFIC PRINCESSmiddot
South Pacific Islands TahitiPolynesia bull Asia
Indian Ocean bull West Africa
Designed for a smaller more intimate feel Tahitian Princess and sister ship Pacific Princess feature 92 outshyside cabins 73 with balconies and all the amenities of our larger ships
Over 200 balconies
Only 670 passengers 30000 gross tons
592 feet in length
Gibraltar registered
HOW TO NA YIGATE THIS BROCHURE
CHART A JOURNEY OF DISCOVERY
Alaska Cruises amp Cruisetours
CanadaNew England Cruises pg 7
7
8-10
11-14
Exotics Cruises amp Cruisetours
Mexican Riviera Cruises pg
Caribbean Cruises pgs
Europe Cruises amp Cruisetours pgs
AustraliaNew Zealand pg 15
15-16
16-18
18-19
19
20
Asia pgs
Tahiti Hawaii South Pacific pgs
South America pgs
Connoisseur Voyages pg
Exotics Cruisetours pg
Panama Canal pgs 21-22
Cruise Plusreg
Cruise Calendar
pgs5-6
pgs23
ALASKA CRUISES
VOYAGE OF THE GLACIERS
2004 DEPARTURE DATES
CORAUISLAND PRINCESS7 SaturdllydqxtTturtS May 8 Coni 21 Dawn Aug 2 Dawn 10 Dawn 26 Islmd 7 IslandDAYS SUNDAWN PRINCESS 15 Island 28 Sun 9 SunMondaydqJaTtures 17 Sun )ul 3 Coral 14 Coral 22 Coral S Dawn 16 Dawn 24 Dawn 10 Island 21 Island 29 Island 12 Sun 23 Sun 31 Sun 17 Coni 28 Coral
Jun 5 Coral 19 Dawn 30 Dawn NORTHBOUND 7 Dawn 24 Island Sop 4 Island
12 Island 26 Sun 6 Sun 14 Sun 31 Coral 19 Coral
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Vancouver BC PM 2 Inside Passage Scenic Cruising 3 Ketchikan 4 Juneau 5 Skagway 8PM 6 Glacier Bay National Park Scenic Cruising 3PM 7 College Fjord Scenic Cruising 3PM 8 Whittler (Anchorage) DISEMBARK AM
VOYAGE OF THE GLACIERS
2004 DEPARTURE DATES
7 CORALISlAND PRINCESS Saturday departures
May 15 Coral 26 CoraDAYS SUNDAWN PRINCESS 17 Dawn 28 DawnMondllydtpartures 22 Island )uI 3 Island 24 Sun 5 Sun 29 Coral 10 Coral 31 Dawn 12 Dawn
)un S Island 17 Island 7 Sun 19 Sun
SOUTHBOUND 12 Coral 24 Coral 14 Dawn 26 Dawn 19 Island 31 Island 21 Sun Aug 2 Sun
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE 1 WhlttierIAnrhora
630AM 1030 AM 630AM 630AM 830AM
6PM
7 Coral 9 Dawn
14 Island 16 Sun 21 Coral 23 Dawn 28 Island 30 Sun
Sep 4 6
Coral Dawn
11 Island 13 Sun
DEPART EMBARK PM
~30AM 830 PM
SPM 4PM
545PM
INSIDE PASSAGE
SAPPHIRE PRINCESS 7 DAYS Sundaydtpartuns
ROUNDTRIP from
SEATTLE
2004 DEPARTURE DATES
May 16 18 23 25
Jun 30 6
Aug 1 8
13 15 20 22 27 29
Jul 4 11
Sep S 12
t Endicott Arm wy be substituted on somtYOiiCS due to~orwcatherconditlom
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE 1 Seattle 2 At Sea 3 Ketchikan 630AM 4 Tracy Arm Scenic Cruisingt 6AM 4 Juneau lPM 5 Skagway 6AM 6 At Sea 7 Victoria BC HM 8 Seattle DISEMBARK AM
DEPART EMBARK PM
5PM lOAM 10 PM 6PM
12M
INSIDE PASSAGE
7 DIAMOND PRINCESS DAYS saturday dqllu1uus
ROUNDTRIP from
SEATTLE
2004 DEPARTURE DATES
May 8 17 15 24 22 31 19 Aug 7
Jun 5 14 12 21 19 28 26 Sep 4
Jul 3 11 10
t EndkottAnn maybe substituted on some voyages due tokcQlweuherconditlom
CRUISE ITINERARY
ARRIVE DEPART
INSIDE PASSAGE
10 REGAL PRINCESS DAYS
ROUNDTRIP from
SAN FRANCISCO
2004 DEPARTURE DATES
May 6 Jul 5 16 IS 26 25
)un 5 Aug 4 15 14 15
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE
lPM 7AM 7AM 7AM
7AM
DEPART EMBARK PM
~PM 830PM
12 N 5PM
2PM
Coral Princess in College Fjord Alaska
ALASKA CRUISETOURS
HEART Of ALASKA CRUISETOUR HEART Of ALASKA CRUISETOUR
e 1312 DAYS DAYS e
CRUI5ETOUR CRUI5ETOUR 35 125
2004 DEPARTURE DATES2004 DEPARTURE DATES
Date Ship Date Ship Date Ship Date Ship
May 10 Coral Aug 2 Coral Mayll Coral Aug 3 Coral 12 Dawn 4 Dawn
13 Dawn 5 Dawn 17 Island 9 Island 18 Island 10 Island
DAY PORT 19 Sun 11 Sun
20 Sun 12 Sun 24 Coral 16 Coral 25 Coral 17 Coral 26 Dawn 18 Dawn 27 Dawn 19 Dawn 31 Island 23 Island
Jun 1 Island 24 Island Jun 2 Sun 25 Sun 3 Sun 26 Sun 7 Coral 30 Coral 8 Coral 31 Coral 9 Dawn Sep 1 Dawn
10 Dawn Sep 2 Dawn 14 Island Island6 5 DenaliAnchorage15 Island 7 Island 16 Sun 8 Sun 17 Sun 9 Sun 21 Coral 6 AnchorageWhittierEmbark22 Coral 23 Dawn 24 Dawn 28 Island 7 College Fjord Scenic Cruising 29 Island 30 Sun
)u1 1 Sun Jul 5 Coral 8 Glacier Bay National Park Scenic Cruising 6 Coral 7 Dawn 9 Skagway12 Island
13 Island 14 Sun 8 Dawn
10 Juneau15 Sun 19 Coral 20 Coral 21 Dawn 11 Ketchikan 22 Dawn 26 Island 27 Island 28 Sun 12 Inside Passage Scenic Cruising 29 Sun 13 VancouverPark Rangers are at our lodges to enrich your stay
HEART Of ALASKA CRUISETOUR ALASKA WILDERNESSKENAI CRUISETOUR ALASKA WILDERNESSCOPPER RIVER CRUISETOUR
14 1314 DAYS DAYS DAYSe e e
CRUI5ETOUR CRUI5ETOURCRUI5ETOUR
145 185165
2004 DEPARTURE DATES
2004 DEPARTURE DATESDate Ship Date Ship 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
Date Ship Date ShipMayl Dawn Aug 1 Coral 16 Island 3 Dawn Date Ship Date Ship 18 Sun 8 Island May 11 Dawn Aug 1 Coral 23 Coral 10 Sun MaylO Coral Aug 2 Coral 25 Dawn 15 Coral
16 Island 3 Dawn 12 Dawn 4 Dawn
30 Island 17 Dawn 18 Sun 8 Island
17 Island 9 Island Jun 1 Sun 22 Island
23 Coral 10 Sun 19 Sun 11 Sun
6 Coral 24 Sun 25 Dawn 15 Coral
26 Dawn 18 Dawn 8 Dawn 29 Coral
Jun 1 Sun 17 Dawn 31 Island 23 Island
13 Island 31 Dawn 6 Coral 24 Sun
Jun 2 Sun 25 Sun 15 Sun Sep 5 Island
8 Dawn 29 Coral 7 Coral Sep 1 Dawn
20 Coral 7 Sun 13 Island 31 DaWn
9 Dawn 6 Island 22 Dawn
15 Sun Sep 7 Sun 14 Island 8 Sun
27 Island 20 Coral
16 Sun 29 Sun
22 Dawn 23 Dawn
)ul 4 Coral 29 Sun
28 Island 6 Dawn
Jul 4 Coral 30 Sun
11 Island 6 Dawn
Jul 5 Coral 13 Sun
11 Island 7 Dawn
18 Coral 13 Sun
12 Island 20 Dawn
18 Coral 14 Sun
25 Island 20 Dawn
21 Dawn 27 Sun
27 Sun 26 Island 28 Sun
CRUISETOUR ITINERARY CRUISETOUR ITINERARY
DAY PORT By S~a By Land
1 fairbanks
Mt McKinleyWhittierEmabrk
College fjord ~ce~lc Cnlsi~g
Juneau
CRUISETOUR IIINERARY
DAY PORT
CRUISETOUR ITINERARY
DAY PORT
CRUISETOUR ITINERARY
PORT By Sea By Land
College Fjord Scenic Cruising Glacier Bay National Park Scenic Cruising
13 Vancouver
CANADA amp NEW ENGLAND CRUISES
CANADANEW ENGLAND CANADACOLONIAL AMERICA CANADANEW ENGLAND
10 REGAL 13 REGAL 7 GRAND DAYS PRINCESS DAYS PRINCESSDAYS PRINCESS
sail between ROUNDTRIP NEW YORK
MONTREAL fromto
CITY NEW YORKFT LAUDERDALE and CITY
MONTREAL 2004 DEPARTURE DATE
CRUISE IlINERARY CRUISE ITINERARY 2004 CRUISE IIINERARY Oct 31 DEPARTURE DATES
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 2004 Sep 12 1 1 New York City New York EMBARK PM Montreal Quebec EMBARK PMDEPARTURE DATES Sep 19 New York City New York EMBARK PM
2 Newport Rhode Island 830 AM 4PM 2 Quebec City Quebec 6AM 4PM Sep 261Sep 11 Oct 3
Sep21t 1 3 Bostoni Massachusetts 830AM SPM i3 At Sea Oct 10 2 At Sea
Olttl 4 Bar Harbor Maine 8AM 6PM 4 Halifax Nova Scotia 12 N 6PM Oct I]Octllt
Oct 24Oct 21 S Saint John New Brunswick 7AM 3PM l~ Bar Harbor Maine 8AM 6PM Halifax Nova Scotia 8AM 5 PM
6 Halifax Nova Scotia 8AM 5PM 6 Boston Massachusetts 8AM 5PM
17 At Sea 7 Newport Rhode Island 9AM 6PM 4 Saint John New Brunswick 9AM 5PM
8 Saguenay River Scenic Cruising 9 AM 2PM 8 New York City New York 8AM 5PM Bar Harbor Maine 7AM 6PMi9 ~8 Quebec City Quebec 11 PM Norfolk Virginia 12 N 10 PM
(overnight onboard ship) 10 Baltimore Maryland 8AM 5PM Boston Massachusetts 7AM 5PM 9 Quebec City Quebec 5PM 11 At Sea
Montreal Quebec 8AM10 12 Charleston South Carolina 7AM 5PM 7 Newport Rhode Island 8AM 5PM
tltneTaryoperaresinrtvtrstorder (overnight onboard ship) 13 At Sea t Itnaary opaates in revu5t order 8 New York City DISEMBARK AMPort times may vary Port times may vary11 Montreal Quebec DISEMBARK AM 14 Ft Lauderdale Florida DISEMBARK AM New York
MEXICAN RIVIERA CRUISES
MEXICAN RIVIERA MEXICAN RIVIERA MEXICAN RIVIERA
DIAMOND DAYS
107 DIAMOND PRINCESS 10 SAPPHIRE PRINCESSDAYS DAYS PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIPROUNDTRIP from fromfrom
LOS ANGELES LOS ANGELESSAN FRANCISCO
2004 DEPARTURE OATIS Sep 25 2004 DEPARTURE DATE
Oct 2 9 1623 30 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
Dec 29Sep 22Nov 6 13 20 27 Dec 4 11 22 Oct 2 12 221
Nov 1 11 2005 DEPARTURE OATIS
jan 815 22 29 Feb 5 12 19 26 MarS 12 19 26 tPortordtrllllllllmtsmaYNrApr 291623
CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 San Francisco EMBARK PM 1 Los Angeles (Long Beach) EMBARK PM
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
CRUISE ITINERARY DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
2 Catalina Island 1230 PM 630PM 2 At Sea Sat Los Angeles (Long Beach) EMBARK PM 3 Cabo San Lucas 9AM 6PM3-4 At Sea
5 Poerto Vallart 7AM 6PM 4 A~Sea
6 Mazatlan SAM 6PM 5 Acapulco SAM 11 PM 7 Cabo San Lucas SAM 6PM 6 Ixtapa (ZihaulIlnejo) 7AM 2PM
S At Sea 7 Puerto Vallarta SAM 7PM 9 San Dtego SAM 6PM 8 M~I~middot lAM -1Ft 10 At Sea 9-10 At Sea 11 San Francisco DISEMBARK AM 11 Los Angeles (Long Beach)
Sun AUea Mon AtSea Tue Poerto Vallarta Wed Mazatlan Thu Cabo San Luca( Fri At Sea Satmiddot Los Angeles (Long Beach)
CARIBBEAN CRUISES
EASTERN CARIBBEAN
7
EASTERN CARIBBEAN
7 7 DAYSDAYS DAYS
CARIBBEAN PRINCESS STAR PRINCESS GRAND PRINCESSSUN PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIP from from from
FT LAUDERDALE FT LAUDERDALE GALVESTON 2004 DEPARTIJRE DATES
CARIBBEAN PRINCESS Apr 24 2004 DEPARTURE DATES 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
CRUISE ITINERARYM~yl 1522 CRUISE I1INERARY JuI31724 DAY PORT Nov 14 28 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Dec 4 11 JunS 1226 Oct 31 Nov 13 20 27
Alii 1 1428 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Dec 12 26
Ott 2 9 162330 200S DEPARTURE DATES Sat Galveston EMBARK PMSep41825 Sat ft Lauderdale Sun ft Lauderdale EMBARK PM
Nov 6 132027 200S DEPARTURE DATESDet4 11 26middot Jan 8 15 22 29Sun At Sea Man At Sea 2005 DEPARTURE DATES ]an 9 23 Feb 5 12 19 26 Sun At Sea
CARIBBEAN PRINCESS Feb 6 20 MarS 121926 J~n 8152229 Mar 6 20 12M Apr 29 Man Belize City lPM 7PM Feb 512t 1926 MarS 121926 Apr 317 Apr2t 9 1623 Tue St Thomas 7 AM 6 PM Wed St Thomas BAM 6PM Tue Costa Maya (Mahahual) BAM 4PM
6PM Wed Grand CaYman l2N 7PM
Thu At Sea Fri At Sea Thu Cozumel lOAM 6 PM
4PM Fri At Sea
Sat Ft Lauderdale DISEMBARK AM Sun Ft Lauderdale DISEMBARK AM Sat Galveston DISEMBARK AM
CRUISE IlINERARY
ARRIVE DEPART
EMBARK PM
WESTERN CARIBBEAN
Sf Thomas US Virgin Islands Princess Cays
CARIBBEAN CRUISES
WESTERN CARIBBEAN WESTERN CARIBBEAN SOUTHERN CARIBBEAN EXPLORER
7 6 7 DAYS DAYS DAYS
CARIBBEAN PRINCESS STAR PRINCESS GRAND PRINCESS GOLDEN PRINCESS
DAWN PRINCESS
SAN JUAN ROUNDTRIPROUNDTRIP to fromfrom
GALVESTON SAN JUANFT LAUDERDALE
2004 DEPARTURE DATE2004 DEPARTURE DATES 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
CARIBB~~SflNCESS CRUISE ITINERARY Nov 7 CRUISE ITINERARY
My923 CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTJun 6 20 JUD 19
Jul lOt 31
May829t DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART )uI418 Sun San Juan EMBARK PM
Aug ll t Aug 11529
Sep 11
DAY PORT
Sep 12 26 Mon St Thomas 7AM 6PM STAR PRINCESS Princess Cays 9AM 4PM At Sea Oct 10 24
Nov 721 DecS19 Tue S Kitts 7AM 3PM
2005 DEPARTURE DATES Wed Grenada 9AM 3PM Dec 23 Coumel 7AM 5PM
Grand Cayman 7AM 4PM Jan 21630
2005 DEPARTURE DATES Feb 13 27 Thu Caracas (La Guaira) 9AM 7PM Mar 13 27STAR PRINCESS
Jan 21630 Apr 10 24 Feb 13 27 Ocho Rios 9AM 4PM Fri Aruba BAM 5PM Mar 13 27 Apr 10 24 At Sea
tMonlqQampIyrqlocrsCllhoRfm PltJrtQr-ondlimesmaywlrY Sun San Juan DISEMBARK AMFt Lauderdale DISEMBARK AM
EASTERN CARIBBEAN WESTERN CARIBBEAN CLASSIC SOUTHERN CARIBBEAN
8 7 7DAYS DAYS DAYS
CARIBBEAN GRAND PRINCESS GOLDEN PRINCESS PRINCESS
GALVESTONROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIP tofrom from
SAN JUANFT LAUDERDALE SAN JUAN
2004 DEPARTURE DATE 2004 DEPARTURE DATE 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
DeetS Apr 16CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE IflNERARY May 21630 CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE Jun 13 27DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Jul1125 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
1 Aug 8 221 Galveston EMBARK PM Sun Sanjuan EMBARK PMSep 5 19 Oct 3 17 312-3 At Sea At Sea Nov 14 28 Man At Sea Dec 12 26
st Thomas Cozumel BAM 6PM Tue Barbados 7AM 6PM 2005 DEPARTURE DATES
jan 9 23 Wed St Lucia 7 AMAntigua BAM 6PM Costa Maya (Mahahual) BAM 4PM 5PM Feb 620 Mar 6 20 Thu BAM 6PM Apr 317
At Sea Montego Bay 9AM 4PM Fri St Maarten BAM 6PM
7AM 6PM
Ft Lauderdale DISEMBARK AM Sanjuan DISEMBARK AM Sun San juan DISEMBARK AM
Oct 24 Nov 7 21 DecS19
DAWN PRINCESS
~
I
CARIBBEAN CRUISES
EASTERN CARIBBEAN ISLANDER SOUTHERN CARIBBEAN MEDLEY EASTERN CARIBBEAN
10 10 7 DAYS DAYSDAYS
GRAND PRINCESSDAWN PRINCESSSUN PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP NEW YORK CITYROUNDTRIP from from to
FT LAUDERDALE FT LAUDERDALE SAN JUAN
2004 DEPARnJRf DATE2004 DEPARTURE DATES2004 DEPARTURE DATES
Octn Oct Btl Oct 14CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE ITINERARYCRUISE ITINERARY 200s DEPARTURE DATENov 222 Nov 3t 23
Apr23tDAY PORT DEPART Dec 13 30Dee 12 ARRIVE DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Ft Lauderdale EMBARK PM 1 Ft Lauderdale EMBARK PM EMBARK PM2005 DEPARTURE DATES 2005 DEPARTURE DATES New York City 2 Princess Cays 9AM 4PM 2 At SeaJan 828 Jan 19t
Feb 17tt 3 AlSea Feb 8 28 3 At Sea 2-4 At Sea Mar919 Mar 20
4 St Thomas 7AM 6PM Apr 9 4 Cura~ao 8AM 5PM 5 St Maarten 7AM 6PM 5 Isla Margarita lOAM 4PM St Thomas 7AM 6PM
6 St Kitts 7AM 3PM 6 Barbados 9AM 6PM Dominica SAM 6PM7 8AM 5PM 7 Dominica 7 AM SPM
8 Antigua 9AM 6PM S St Thomas SAM 6PM St Maarten 7AM 6PM
9 9 At Sea
fllrtordtrlllldllmam4YYa1 10 At Sea 10 Princess Cays 9AM 4PM JlilltraryllptfatufnrfYUSfllrllcr t 11I1ll1Il1yopmltnlnrmTtronlcr t ItlntraryaptrattsIn rtVfntOrdtr San Juan DISEMBARK AM Port~rdtrQnd lilrW mil) illI) 11 Ft Lauderdale DISEMBARK AM PortlimtSlIIltlyYllry 11 Ft Lauderdale DISEMBARK AM Port ordtr lind time5 may VIlry
WESTERN CARIBBEAN ADVENTURER EASTERN CARIBBEAN VOYAGER
10 10 DAYS DAYS
SUN PRINCESS DAWN PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIPROUNDTRIP fromfrom
FT LAUDERDALEFT LAUDERDALE
2004 DEPARTURE DATES 2004 DEPARTURE DATES DAWN PRINCESS CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE IIINERARY
Oct 23 Oct 4 24 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Nov 12 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
Nov 13 Dec 2 29 Dec3tt 1 Ft Lauderdale EMBARK PM 1 Ft Lauderdale EMBARK PM
2 Princess Cays 9AM 4PM 2005 DEPARTURE DATES 2 At Sea2005 DEPARTURE DATES
DAWN PRINCESS Jan 183 At Sea 3 At Sea
Feb 7 27Jan 9 296 St Thomas 7AM 6PM Mar19 t 4 St Vincent lPM 6PM
Feb 180 Apr 8St Maarten 7 AM 5PM 5 Grenada 8AM 6PMMar 10f 301 Apr 19 At Sea 6 St Lucia 8AM 6PM
Ocho Rios 12N 6PM 7 Martinique 7AM 3PM
Grand cayman PM S St Thomas SAM 6PM
t IillUGI)lIptfQttsIn rnmtordtr Cozumel 8AM 6PM AlSea tt ~~~oI~~dtr 10 Princess Cays 9AM 4PMMOItQIl8clyrqausOclJollloJ
lwtordtrollllllllyenllllilJllIl) tltllltrlryOptrlll$In rnmtllrdtr AMOIltqollaynplactsOdlDRIos PM IortDrllralldllmallloyWl) Ft Lauderdale DISEMBARK AM
Willemstad Cura~ao
EUROPE CRUISES
GRAND MEDITERRANEAN GREEK ISLES MEDITERRANEANGREEK ISLES
12 1212 DAYS DAYSDAYS
STAR PRINCESS
STARSTAR PRINCESSPRINCESS
sail betweensail between VENICE BARCELONA VENICE to
andand BARCELONA VENICE ROME
CRUISE ITINERARY2004 DEPARTURE 2004 DEPARTURE2004 DEPARTURE CRUISE ITINERARYDATESCRUISE I I INERARY DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DATEDATES
Apr 10 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTMay 16middot DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Venice Italy (overnight onboard ship) EMBARK PM May 4 May18t Sep2St 1 Verdce Italy EMBARK PM
Jun 9 1 Barcelona Spain (overnight onboard ship) EMBARK PM 2 Venice Italy 2PM 2 At Seajune 21 t 2 Barcelona Spain 1 PM Dubrovnik Croatia 8AM 6PMJul3 3 Corfu Greece 8AM 6PM
lullS 3 Monte Carlo Monaco 7 AM 6 PM Corfu Greece 8AM 6PM 4 Katakolon Greece (for Oiympia) 7AM SPMJu127 4 FlorencePisa Italy (Livorno) 630 AM 6 PMAug 8~ Katakolon Greece (for Olympia) 7AM SPM S Athens Greece (Piraeus) 6AM 12 MAug 20deg S NaplesCapri Italy 8 AM 7 PM Sep 1t 6 Athens Greece (Piraeus) 6AM 12 M 6 Mykonos Greece 8AM 12M
6 At Sea 7 Mykonos Greece 8AM 6PM 7 Kusadasi Turkey (for Ephesus) 7 AM SPM7 Athens Greece (Piraeus) 6AM S4S PM
8 Kusadasi Turkey (for Ephesus) 7AM 1PM 8 Kusadasi Turkey (for Ephesus) 8AM 6PM 8 Santorini Greece 7 AM 4PM
9 Jstanbul Turkey 8AM 6PM 9 Rhodes Greece 8AM 6PM 9 At Sea
10 At Sea 10 Santorini Greece 7AM 6PM 10 Rome Italy (Civitavecchia) 8AM 7PM tll1ooil)opcraksinttVUSe
grduPorttlmcsmi)Y6ljI 11 At Sea 11 Cannes France (for Mont Carlo) 8AM 6PM11 At Sea tSamnlQ]latCiIUIe5inplm tltlnerlll)opmlpoundsin
NaplesCapri Italy 630 AM 12 Barcelona Spain (ovrnight onboard ship) 8AMofMo~Urlo ~odcr12 Venice Italy (overnight onboard ship) 8 AM 12 6PM O~lIlalhitRhodalnpUcc Port order md Iimes- JmyVUY Barcelona Spain DISEMBARK AM13 Venice Italy DISEMBARK AM - 13 Iome Italy (qvitavecchia) DISEMBARK AM
MEDITERRANEANAEGEAN MEDITERRANEANMOSAIC
12 12 DAYSDAYS
STAR STAR PRINCESS PRINCESS
ROME BARCELONAto
toVENICE ROME
2004 DEPARTURE DATE 2004 DEPARTURE
CRUISE I I INERARY DATE CRUISE ITINERARYApr 22 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Sep 13 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Rome Italy (Civitavhia) EMBARK pM 1 Barcelona Spaln (overnight onboard ship) EMBARK PM 2 NaplesCapri Italy 7 AM 7 PM Barcelona Spain SPM 3 Messina Italy (for Taormina) 8AM 6PM 3 At Sea 4 Valleta Malta 8AM 6 PM 4 Casablanca Morocco (for Marrakech) 7 AM 8PM
At Sea S Gibraltar 8 AM 6PM Santorini Greece 7 AM 6PM 6 At Sea
7 Kusadasi Turkey (for Ephesus) 8 AM 6PM 7 Cannesfrance (for Mont Carlo) 8 AM 6PM 8 Athens Greece (Piraeus) 6 AM S4SPM 8 At Sea 9 Katakolon Greece (for Olympia) 8 AM 6PM 9 Valleta Malta 8 AM SPM 10 Corfu Greece 8 AM 6PM 10 Messina Italy (for Taormina) 6PM 11 Dubrovnik Croatia 8 AM 6PM 11 NaplesCpri Itiily 6PM 12 Venice Italy (overnight onboard ship) 1230 PM 12 FlorencePisa Italy (Livorno) 830 AM 13 Venice Italy DISEMBARK AM 13 lomeltaly (Clvttavecchia)DISEMBAIKAM Venice Italy
EUROPE CRUISES
EUROPEAN EXPLORER CRUISE MEOffiRRANEANITRANSATLANTIC CRUISE
12 17DAYS DAYS
ROYAL STARPRINCESS PRINCESS
sail between VENICE
ROME to
and FT LAUDERDALE
LONDON
2003 DEPARTURE DATES
2004 DEPARTURE DATE CRUISE ITINERARY
May 7 CRUISE I1INfRARY Oct 7 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Jul30l
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Venice Italy (overnight onboard ship) EMBARK PMAug 11 Sep 41 1 Rome Italy (Civitavecchia) EMBARK PM 2 Vernce Italy 2 PM
2 FlorencePisa Italy (Livorno) 7 AM 7PM 3 At Sea 3 Cannes France (for Monte Carlo) 7 AM 5 PM 4 Barcelona Spain 9 AM 6 PM 5 At Sea 6 Gibraltar 8AM PM 7 Casablanca Morocco (for Marralech) 5AM 6 PM 8 Seville Spain (Cadiz) 8AM 6PM 9 LisbQn Portugal 9AM 5PM 10 Vigo Spain 830AM 4PM 11 At Sea
tllinmryope~te$ 12 ParisNormandy France (Ie Havre) 7 AMlnftYCl5eordu ~rttimesuuyYilY 13 London England (Southampton) DISEMBARK AM
Caudis Park Cuell Barcelona Spain
SCANDINAVIARUSSIA BALTIC HERITAGE WESTERN EUROPEBRITISH ISLES
ROYALGRAND10 GRAND 1210 PRINCESSDAYS PRINCESS PRINCESS DAYSDAYS
ROUNDTRIPROUNDTRIPROUNDTRIP fromframfrom
LONDONCOPENHAGENCOPENHAGEN 2004 DEPARTURE2004 DEPARTURE 2004 DEPARTUREDATESDATES DATES
May19tMay 29 May 19 jul28 JunSJun 18 Aug 231
Jul8 ju118Jul28 Aug 7 CRUISE ITINERARYAug 17
CRUISE IIINERARY ARRIVE DEPART CRUISE IrINERARY EMBARK PMDAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
DAY ARRIVE DEPART 7AM 6PM1 Copenhagen Denmark EMBARK PM EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 7AM 6PM
Stockholm Sweden (Nynilshamn) 7 AM 530PM 6AM PM Helsinki Finland 830 AM 6PM St PetersbUrg Russia (overnight onboard ship) 630 AM 9AM 9PM St Petersburg Russia 6PM
7 Tallinn Estonia 7 AM 1PM 8 Gdansk Poland (Gdynia) 9 AM 4PM 9 Warnemfinde Germany (for amprlin) 8 AM 10 PM 10 Helsing0r Denmark 9 AM 11 AM 10 Copenhagen Denmark (overnight onboard ship) 1 PM 11 Copenhagen Denmark DISEMBARK AM
middotScrvlcctillforlh=CllCIIIlicmIOptoluItllUllwWdlseJnbIDltHdlinprAfbrtour~dllmJlwktbeshJpwl1lPfllClaquodtoCopetWampen and pmenpoundm Qfl tours from HelMp will Rboird ship tPolttimes~myAninliI1ddepartu~itRosythDubJinmdFa1mauthwl)dICtotXLolconditions
tPOrtordermdtlme$maynI) ttCdlitEdinbuJlhotmdedto~mllocunionforMiliblyTltOO~on8123wi1inlmiddotUIIisitSouthQuemsfmyinstudofJosylh
BRITISH ISLES
ROYAL12 PRINCESSDAYS
ROUNDTRIP
from
LONDON
2004 DEPARTURE DATES
Jun 12 jul6
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Lqn4onmiddotpoundngland(Southampton) EMIWlIlt PM 2 Cornwall England (Falmouth) 7AM SPM
Waterford Ireland 8AM 6PM Dublin Ireland 7AM 1130 PM
t PQrtbme5 lliIyyuy Anini Illd departure at Rosytb Dublin md Filmouth ViiYdue to Iiltlal conditions
WESTERN EUROPE
ROYAL12 PRINCESSDAYS
ROUNDTRIP
from
LONDON
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
May 31
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 London England (Southampton) EMBARK PM
CRUISE ITINERARY
EUROPE CRUISES
ICELANDNORWEGIAN FJORDS
ROYAL12 PRINCESSDAYS
ROUNDTRIP
from
LONDON
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
Jun24
CRUISE IflNERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 London Englan4 (Southampton) EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 3 Berge Norway 6PM 4 Hellesylt Norway 830AM 1030 AM 4 Gciranger Norway Geiranger Fjord Sceni Cruising UN 7PM
9AM SPM5
1PM 8AM SPM
10 At Sea
middotStlviceallfof~fjonlovedmdshOR=unlDllOplion1Itourswllldi5anbarilitHelIcsyItAftcrtollrpuKllJClJdisembark
theshlpwiUprocudto~md~lampClSonlounfrwnHdaytwl1lblmd$hip
NORWEGIAN FJORDSNORTH CAPE
ROYAL12 PRINCESSDAYS
ROUNDTRIP
from
LONDON
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
JuilS
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Loridon ~gland (South~mpton) EMBARK PM 2-3 At Sea
Hellesylt Norway 830AM 1030 AM Golranger Norway Geiranger Fjord Scenic Cruising 12N 7PM
TrodheilllNorwaY 9AM SPM At Sea Cross the Ardgt Cirde
6PM 8AM lPM
8AM 130 PM 430PM 630PM
7AM 3PM
Bagpipers Edinburgh Scotland Royal Princess in Geiranger Fjord Norway
EUROPE CRUISES amp CRUISETOURS
17 DAYS
GRAND PRINCESS
FT LAUDERDALE to
COPENHAGEN
2004 DEPARTURE DATE MayZ
CRUISE IfINERARY
DAY 1 2-6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
PORT Ft Lauderdale Florida At Sea ~ores IslandsPortugal (Ponto Delgado) At Sea Lisbon Portugal Vigo Spain At Sea ParislNormandy France (Le Havre) RotterdamThe Netherlands At Sea Hamburg Germay (for Berlin) At Sea Olso Norway Oslo Fjord scnic Cruising Copenhagen Denmark
ARRIVE
N
12N 9AM
7AM
6AM
DISEMBARK AM
DEPART EMBARK PM
6PM
7PM 6PM
7PM 7PM
1UM
MEDITERRANEAN CRUISETOUR
TRANSATLANTICWESTERN EUROPE ICELAND amp GREENLANDTRANSATLANTIC
16 GRAND DAYS PRINCESS
COPENHAGEN to
NEW YORK
2004 DEPARTURE DATE Aug 27
CRUISE IIINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Copenhagen Denmark EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 3 Dover England (forLondon) 7AM 7PM 4 Cornwall England (Falmouth) 9AM 6PM 5 Dublin Ireland lOAM 9PM 6 GlasgowEdinburgh Scotland (Greenock) 8AM 12 M 7 Belfast Northern Ireland 1030 AM 530 PM 8 At Sea 9 Reykjavik Iceland 9AM 9PM 10 At Sea 11 Prins Christian Sund Scenic Cruising 12N 6PM 12 Qaqortoq Greenland 7 AM 2PM 13 At Sea 14 SI Johns Newfoundland Canada 12N 7PM 1516 At Sea 17 New York CIty New York DISEMBARK AM
SCANDINAVIARUSSIA CRUISETOUR
Church of the Savior on the Spilled Blood St Petersburg Russia
WESTERN EUROPE CRUISETOUR
CRUISEIOUR ITINERARY
CRUISETOUR lA11C CRUISETOUR ITINERARY CRUISETOUR 4A14C CRUISETOUR II INERARY
DAY PORT By Sea By Land DAY PORT By Sea By Land CRUISETOUR 7Al7C18 STAR PRINCESS 1 Rome 17 GRAND PRINCESS 1 BudapestDAYS DAYS DAY PORT By Sea By Land 22 Rome Budapest 18 ROYAL PRINCESS 1 Paris
ROMETODI 3 RomeTodi BUDAPEST VIENNA 3 BudapestVienna DAYS 2 Paris and 4 TodiFlorence and 4 Vienna 3 Paris
PARIS EUROSTAR5 Florence 5 ViennaPrague 4 ParisLondon 6 FlorenceVeniceEmbark 6 Prague and 5 London
FLORENCE PRAGUE
plus plus LONDON7 Venice Italy (overnight onboard ship) 7 PragueCopenhagenEmbark 6 LondonSouthamptonEmbark
GRAND MEDITERRANEAN SCANDINAVIARUSSIA plus 7 At Sea CRUISE 8-9 At Sea CRUISE 8 At Sea WESTERN EUROPE 8 Bilbao Spain10 Istanbul Turkey 9 Stockholm Sweden (Nyniishamn) BRITISH ISLES CRUiSE2004 DEPARTURE DATES 2004 DEPARTURE DATES 9 Bordeaux France (Le Verdon)
11 Kusadasi Turkey (for Ephesus) 10 Helsinki FinlandApr Sf 2004 DEPARTURE DATES 10 At SeaMay 131 Jul2Apr 29 12 Athens Greece (Piraeus) 11 SI Petersburg Russia (overnight onboard ship) 11 GlasgowEdinburgh Scotland (Greenock)May 23 JulUt May 141 26middot Jul tt 13~ 250
May 23 Jun 16 13 At Sea JunZt JulU 12 SI Petersburg Russia Jun n 19 Aug 18o 300 12 Dublin Ireland
]un 12 Aug l t 13 Cork IrelandJuliO 14 NaplesCapri Italy 13 Tallinn EstoniaJun 22 t Aug 11 Toun~eonlymilabkwithcruise5indi[itbtAug 3 15 FlorencelPisa Italy (Livorno) 14 Cdansk Poland 14 Cornwall England (Falmouth)
Aug 27 tBritishliksetuise aWEwupeiBritishlslesouist 15 ParisNormandy France (Le Havre)16 Monte Carlo Monaco 15 At Sea bull WestemEuropeCrube middotlcdandINorwqlmFjOllisetuise 16 Rotterdam The Netherlands
t Crulsetour lA only combinable with 12--dayGreck fst 17 Barcelona Spain (overnight onboard ship) 16 Olso NOrway Qsld Fjord Scenic Cruising bull Norwqian FjordsNorth Cipecruise 17 BrusselsBruges Belgium (Zeebrugge)tCruixtour 4A only combinable with lo-day Baltic
crulse shown on PI 11 18 Barcelona Spain Heritage cruise shawn on pg 12 OCrubctnur 7C only combinable with EwuJlWl ExplorerCrube17 Copenhagen Denmark 18 London England (Southampton)
EXOTICS CRUISES
AUSTRALIANEW ZEALAND AUSTRALIANEW ZEALAND AUSTRALIAASIA
12 14 19 DAYS DAYS DAYS
SAPPHIRE PRINCESS SAPPHIRE PRINCESS SAPPHIRE PRINCESS
saH between SYDNEYAUCKLAND SYDNEY
toand to BANGKOKSYDNEY AUCKLAND 2005 DEPARTURE DATES 2005 DEPARTURE DATE
Mar7Jan 6 2004 DEPARTURE DATEJan 1St
Dec 23 CRUISE ITINERARYJr ift Feb 23 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
CRUISE ITINERARY 1 Sydlley Austrli EMBARK PM CRUISE ITINERARY 2 At Sea
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTDAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 3 Brisbane Australia 8AM 6PM 1 Sydlley Australia EMBARK PM 4 At Sea 1 Aucklalld N~w Zealalld EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 5 Cid Harbor Austrlia (for Great Barrier Reef) 7AM 5PM2 At Sea 3 Melbourne Australia 8 AM 6 PM 6 Cirns Australia (Yorkeys) 8AM 6PM
3 WeIUllgton New Zealand 8 AM 6 PM 4 At Sea 7-8 At Sea 4 Christchurch New Zealalld (Lytlelton) 8 AM 6 PM 5 Tasmallia Australia (Hobart) 8 AM 6 PM 9 Darwin Australia lPM 8pM 5 Dunedill N~ Zealalld (Port Chalmers) 8 AM 6 PM 6-7 At Sea 10-11 At Sea 6 Fiordland Natiollal Park Scenic Cruising AM 6 PM 8 Fiordlalld Natiollal Park Scellic Cruising 7 AM 5 PM 12 Bali Illdonesi (Padang Bay) 7AM 6PM
7-8 At Sea J DUlledill New Zealalld (Port Chalmers) 8 AM 6 PM 13-14 At Se 10 Christchurch N~ Zealalld (Lytlelton) 8 AM 6 PM 15 Kuala Lumpur Mlaysia (Port KeIang) 8AM 6PM9 Tasmania Australia (Hobart) 8 AM 6 PM 11 Wellillgtoll New Zealmd 8 AM 6 PM 16 Sillgpore 8AM 6PM
10 At Sea 12 At Sea 17 At Sea 11 Melbourne Australia 8 AM 6 PM 13 Taurallga New Zealalld 8 AM 730 PM 18 Ho Chi Millh City Vietnm (Vung Tau) 7AM 730 PM 12 At S~a 19 At Sea 14 Bay of Islallds New Zealalld 8 AM 7 PM 13 SydPey Australia DISEMBARK AM 20 Bmgkok Thailalld (Laem Chabang) DISEMBARK AM15 Aucklalld New Zealalld DISEMBARK AM
t llinemy opcrnesln reverse order Port times mil1 my
CHINAFAR EAST SOUTHEAST ASIAFAR EAST
1612 DAYSDAYS
PACIFIC PRINCESS
SAPPHIRE PRINCESS PACIFIC PRINCESS
OSAKA BEIJING to
to BANGKOK OSAKA
2004 DEPARTURE DATE 2004 DEPARTURE DATEPAClFlC PRINCESS
julllt Jun 11 2005 DEPARTURE DATE
SAPPHIRE PRINCESS Apr 11
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Osaka Japall EMBARK PM
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Beijillg China (Xingang) EMBARK PM 2 Hiroshima Japall 1 PM 6PM 2 DaHan China AM 5PM 3 At Sea 3 At Sea 4 Shmghai Chilla 7 AM 6PM 4 Shallghai Chilla (overnight onboard ship) 7AM 5 At Sea 5 Shallghai China 6PM 6 Okinaw Jpll 7 AM 1 PM
7 Taipei Taiwm (KeeIung) 9 AM 7PM6 At Sea 8 At Se7 Pusan South Korea 8AM 5PM 9 HOllg KOllg Chill 8 AM 7PM 8 At Sea 10-11 At S~a J Vladivostok Russia 5AM 730 PM 12 Ho Chi MiIJh City Vietnm (Phu My) 7 AM 5PM 10 At Sea 13 At Se 11 Nagasaki Japan 7AM 6PM 14 Singpore 8 AM 6pM
15 KUlltll Mlysi 830 AM 430 PM12 At Sea 16 At Sea 13 Osaka Japan DISEMBARK AM 17 Ballgkok Thaillld DISEMBARK AM t Sailing alls i1t Hiroshima on Dl) 11 In place of Nilgilsaki Port times milY vary
CRUISE I flNERARY CRUISE I flNERARY
Ho Chi Minh City Vietnam
EXOTICS CRUISES
SOUTHEAST ASIACHINA SOUTHEAST ASIACHINA FAR EASTALASKA
PACIflC PRINCISS ROYAL PRINCESS
16 16 19 DAYS DAYS DAYS
SAPPHIRE SAPPHIRE PRINCESS
Sail between PRINCESSBANGKOK
and BANGKOK OSAKA
BEIJING to to
2004 DEPARTURE DATES BEIJING SEATTLEPAClFlC PRINCESS
Jun 27tt 200S DEPARTURE DATE200S DEPARTURE DATE ROYAL PRINCESS
Mar 26 Apr 23Oct 16 Nov lt
CRUISE I I INERARY CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
1 GsakaJpan EMBARK PM1 Bangkok Thailand (Laem Chabang) EMBARKPM 1 Bangkok Thailand (Laern Chabang) EMBARK IM 2 At Sea2 At Sea 2 AtSea bull 3 Nagasaki Japan 7 AM 6PM
9AM 7PM 3 Singapore 7PM 4 Pusan Soqth Korea 8AM 5PM 4-5 At Sea 5 At Sea gt bull
7AM 7PM 6 Da Nwg Vietn~1Il 7AM middot7PM 6 Vladivostok Russia SAM 730 PM 7 At Sea 7 AtSea
7AM 12M 8 Hong lltog ihin~ 7AM 12M 8 Sapporo japan (Muroran) 6AM 6PM 9-10 At Sea 9-10 At Sea 9-12 At Sea cross Intemational Dateline
13 DutchHarbor Alaska (Aleutian Islands) 230 PM 7PM11 ShaJlgllai Cbina (overnight onboard ship) lAM 11 Shangh~t Cllina (ovmightonJoltird $hip) 7 AM 14 At Sea shy12 Shanghai China 6PM 12 Shanghai China
7AM - - tlJf
6PM 15 Anchorage Alaska (Seward) 8AM 6PM13 At Sea 13 AtSea i 16 College Fjord Seni CruIsing 630AM 930 AM
14 Nagasaki japan 7AM 6PM 14 Nagasaki japan 6PM 17 Glacier Ilay Scenic Cruising 1030 AM 830 PM 15 Pusan South lltOrea TAM 4PM 1~ bull Pu~an SQuth iorea middot4lM 18 middotmiddot juneau Alaska 6 AM 2PM 16 At Sea 16 At Sea 19 - At Sea 17 Beijing China (Xingangy OISEMBAlUe AM 17 Beijing Cliina (Xingang) 20 SeattleWashington DISEMBARK AM
t ltinemy Operne5 in rcvmc Older ttPorttimcsmiYnl)middotShlpwilldocklnampngkoknsttadofL1cm~
POLYNESIA amp THE COOK ISLANDS POLYNESIA amp THE MARQUESAS ISLANDS
10 10 DAYS DAYS
TAHITIAN PRINCESSTAHITIAN PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIPROUNDTRIP fromfrom
PAPEETEPAPEETE 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
2004 DEPARTURE DATES Oct 4 24 Mayl 17 27 Sep4 14 24 Nov 13 Jun 6 16 26 0lt 14 00323Ju16 16 26 Nov 323 2005 DEPARTURE DATESAug 5 15 25 Dec 13 Jan 12
Feb 1 21200S DEPARTURE DATES
~~ 122 ~~Il 13 23 CRUISE ITINERARY
CRUISE II INERARY DAY PORT
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Papeete Tahiti 1 Papeete Tahiti (overnight onboard ship) EMBARK PM
2 Moorea Polynesia 2 Papeete Tahiti SPM 3 Huahil1e P9lynesia 8AM 5 PM 3 Tuamotu Atolls Senic Cruising
5 PM8-AM 4 At Sea I At Sea 5 Rarotonga Cook Islands 8AM 5 PI~ 5 Nuku Hiva Marquesas Islands 6 At Sea 6 Hiva Ga Marquesas Islands 8AM 5PM 7 Raiatea Polynesia overnight onboard Ship 6AM
7 At Sea middotai~ RaiateaPQlynesia igt gt 6AM 8 Rangiroa P~iynesia 8AM 4PM8 Tahaa scenic Cryising 630 AM 830 AM
8 BoraBoraPQlyrtesia(ovemightollboard ship) UN 9 Tahaa ~enl Cruising 8 AM middot11AM
9 Bora lora Polynesia 5iM 9 Raiatea Polynesia 12 N 11 PM 10 Moore Polynesfa 8 AM 5 PM la ~ Bora ~oraPoIYnesia 8AM bull 5PM
11 Papeete Tahiti DISEMBARK AM 11 Papeete Tahiti DISEMBARK AM Iong Kong Harbor
3 Singapore 4-5 At Sea 6 Da NangVieinam 7 At Sea 8 liong Kong China
EXOTICS CRU ISES
HAWAIITAHITI HAWAIIAN ISLANDS SOUTH PACIFIC ISLANDS
12 1515 DAYS DAYSDAYS
PACIFIC
TAHITIAN PRINCESS ISLAND PRINCESSPAClFIC PRINCESS
PRINCESS
SYDNEYROUNDTRIP sail between tofrom
PAPEETE PAPEETELOS ANGELES and
2004 DEPARnIRE DATEHONOLULU 2004 DEPARTURE DATES Apr 21
2004 DEPARTURE DATES ~~~l CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE 11 INERARY
Oet21t CRUISE ITINERARY Nov Sf
MayS PACIFIC PRINCESS DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
Nov20t DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DecSt 1 Los Angeles CalifornIa EMBARK AM 1 Sydney AustralIa EMBARK PMAug 17t
Dec20t1 Papeete Tahiti EMBARK PM 2-4 At Sea
2005 DEPARTURE DATE Jan 4 2-5 At Sea
(overnight onboard ship) Jan 19 5 Auckland New Zealand 7 AM 2PMFeb 3t 6 Iiilo Hawaii 8 AM 6 PM
TAHITIAN PRINCESS Papeete Tahiti 11 PM fb 18 6-7 At Sea Kilauea Voko ~enic CruisingApr 12 MarS t 3 Moorea Polynesia 8 AM 5 PM 8 Suva fijI 11 AM 430 PM1~i~t 7 Kona Hawaii 8AM 6PM4 Bora Bora PolYnesia 8 AM 5 PM 9 At Sea Cross International Dateline Apr 19
5-6 At Sea 8 Honolulu Hawaii 8AM 11 PM 10 Apia Western Samoa 830 AM 2PM 7 Christmas Isl~ndKiribati 1Z N 5 PM 9 Kauai Hawaii (Nawlliwlli) 8AM 6PM 11-12 At Sea 8-9 At Sea 10 Maui Hawaii (Lahaina) 6PM 13 Bora Bora Polynesia lOAM 6PM 10 HlloliaWlii 6 PM 13 Raiatea Polynesia (overnight onboard 11 PM11-14 At Sea 11 Maui Hawaii (Lahaina) 8 AM 6 PM 14 Raiatea Polynesia 11 PM
15 Ensenada Mexico (service call)KaUaiH~waii(Nawllfwtli) 8AM 6 PM 15 Moorea Polynesia 8AM 5PM
tllinemyopcr~ttsln=x QnIerPurtlimcslmYvary Honolulu Hawaii DISEMBARK AM 16 Los Angeles CalIfornia DISEMBARK AM 16 Papeete Tahiti DISEMBARK AM
ISLANDS OF THE PACIFIC THEATER SOUTH PACIFIC EXPLORER
24 24 DAYS DAYS
PAClFIC PRINCESS PAClFIC PRINCESS
sail between HONOLULU PAPEETE
and to OSAKA FT LAUDERDALE
2004 DEPARTURE DATES
Mayl 2004 DEPARTURE DATEJul2Sj
Aug 29 CRUISE ITINERARY
CRUISE ITINERARYDAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART EMBARK PM DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
1 Papeete Tahiti EMBARK PM lPM 7PM 2 8AM 11 PM
3 ~~~~~~ ~~~~Sta 8AM 5 PM 4-6 At Sea 7 Pitcairn Island Scenic Cruising 8AM 1211
8AM 12 N
7AM ZPM 8-9 At Sea 10 Easter Island Chile 8AM 2PM
9AM 11-14 At Sea 15 Callao Peru (overnight for Lima and Machu Picchu) 8AM 16 Callao Peru lPM 17 At Sea 18 Manta Ecuador (for Quito) 9fM 7PM 19 At Sea 20 Transit Panama Canal 7 AM 430 PM 21 San BIas Panama 8AM 5 PM 22 ft Sea 23 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands 7AM 4PM 24 At Sea
25 Ft Lauderdale Florida DISEMBARK AMMoorea Polynesia tllinemyoperataln~12onlerPortl1mesmiYmymiddot
EXOTICS CRUISES
HAWAIITAHITISOUTH PACIFIC AMAZONSOUTHERN CARIBBEAN CAPE HORNSTRAIT OF MAGELLAN
1430 12 DAYS DAYSDAYS
ROYAL PRINCESS ROYAL PRINCESSSAPPHIRE PRINCESS
sail betweenFT LAUDERDALE SANTIAGOLOS ANGELES to
andto MANAUS BUENOS AIRESSYDNEY 2005 DEPARTURE DATE 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
2004 DEPARTURE DATE Apr 9 Jan 10
Nov 22 Jan 241 Feb 7
FebZt
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
CRUISE ITINERARY
CRUISE ITINERARYCRUISE ITINERARY 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTDAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 2-3 At Sea 1 Santiago Chile (Valparaiso) EMBARK PM
1 Los ingeles California EMBARK PM 4 Tortola BritIsh Virgin Islands 8 AM 6 PM 2 At Sea 2 Ensenada Mexico 8AM 5PM 3 Puerto Montt Chile 7AM 6PM
3middot6 At Sea 4 At Sea 5 Dominica 9 AM 4 PM 7 Hilo Hawaii 8AM 5 At Sea Chilean Fjords Scenic Cruising6PM 6 Trinidad 9 AM 6 PM
8 Maui Hawaii (Lahaina) 8AM 6PM 6 At Sea Amalia Glacier Scentc CruiSi3f7 At Sea 7 Punta Arenas Chile (Strait of Magei an) 7AM 6PM9 Honolulu Hawaii 7AM 5PM
- 10middot13 At Sea 8 Beagle Channel Scenic Cruising 8 Ushuaia Argentina (Tierra del Fuo) 12N 8PM
8 Devils Island French Guiana (Isle Royal) 8 AM 2 PM 14 Bora Bora Polynesia 8AM 6PM 9 At Sea 9 At Sea Cape Hom Scenic Cruising
10 Santarem Brazil 9 AM 7 PM 10 Moorea Polynesia 8AM 6PM 10 Falkland Islands (Stanley) 8AM 6PM 10 Papeete Tahiti (overnight onboard ship) 9PM 11 At Sea
i 16 Papeete Tahiti 6PM 11 Boca da Valeria Brazil (Amazon River) 7 AM 2 PM 12 Puerto Madryn Argentina 6AM 5PM 17middot18 AtSea 12 Manaus Brazil (overnight onboard ship) 10 AM 13 At Sea
14 Montevideo Uruguay 9AM 6PM19 Pago Pago merlcan Samoa 8AM 6PM 13 Manaus Brazil DISEMBARK AM 15 Buenos Aires Argentina DISEMBARK AM 20 Apia Western Samoa 8AM 6PM 21 At Sea Cross International Dateline middotl1me5forallscenkouisinCile subjectlDclwIgc
tllinmryopefilteslnr=rscordttPorttlmislm)vary22 Suva Fiji 8AM 6PM l 23-24 At Sea
20 Auckland New Zealand 8AM 6PM ORINOCO RIVERSOUTHERN CARIBBEAN ANDESSOUTH AMERICA 26 Tauranga New Zealand 8AM 7PM 27 At Sea
28 Wellington Newealand 8AM 6PM 16 17 DAYS DAYS 29-30 AtSea
31 Sydney Australia DISEMBARK AM ROYAL PRINCESS ROYAL PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP SANTIAGO from to
FT LAUDERDALE FT LAUDERDALE
200S DEPARTURE DATE2005 DEPARTURE DATE
Mar 7Mar 24
CRUISE IIJNERARYCRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Santiago Chlle (Valparaiso) EMBARK PM
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM
2 La Serena Chile (Coquimbo) 8 AM 5 PM2-3 At Sea 3 At Sea Um6n Costa Rica 7AM 7PM 4 Arica Chile 7AM 6PMCristobal Panama (for Panama Canal) 8AM 5PM o At Sea
6 Cartagena Colombia 9AM 2 PM 6 San Martin Peru (for Pisco and Machu Picchu) 7AM 6PM 7 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 130 PM 7PM 7 Callao Peru (overnight for Lima) 530 AM 8-9 At sea 8 Callao Peru 1PM 10 Puerto Ordaz Venezuela (Orinoco River) 8AM 6PM 9 At Sea
i 11 At Sea 10 Manta Ecuador (overnight for Quito) 530AM 12 Greada 8AM i 11 Manta Ecuador 1lM5PMt 1~ Dolllinlca i 7N1 5 PM 12 At Sea
i 13 Transit Panama C~nal 7AM 430 PM14 St Thomas us Virgilslands 9AM 5PM 14 Cartagena Colombia 8AM 130 PMJs AtSei i 15 Aruba Netherlands intiiles 1PM 7PM 16 Princess Cays Bahamas 8AM 16-17 At Sea Tahiti Polynesia 17 FtLallardale Flillilt~ DISEMBARK AM 1ampmiddot Ft L~uderdale Florida DISEMBARK AM
AMAZON RIVERMEDITERRANEAN
21 DAYS
ROYAL PRINCESS
MANAUS
to ROME
2005 DEPARTURE DATE
Apr 21
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE M~naus Brazil (Wemight onboardship) Manaus Brazil
3 BocadaValeria Brazil (AriiazonRivet) 11 AM 4-6 At Sea 7 Recife Brazil 1 PM 8-11 AtSea 12 Dakar Senegal 8AM 13-14 At Sea 15 Agadir Morocco 7AM 16 Casablanca Morocco (for Marrakech) 8AM 17 Gibraltar lOAM 18 Allcante Spain 12 N 19 Barcelona Spain 8AM 20 Cannes France (for Monte Carlo) 8AM 21 FlorencePisa Italy (Livarno) 7AM 22 Rome Italy (Civitavecchia) DISEMBARK AM
INDIAN OCEANAUSTRALIA
28 DAYS
PACIfIC PRINCESS
CAPE TOWN
to SYDNEY
2004 DEPARTURpound DATE
Oct 20
CRUISE ITINERARY1 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Cape Town South Africa EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 3 East London South Africa 7AM 3PM 4 DurbahSouth Africa 8AM 6PM 5-7 At Sea 8 Nosy BeMadagascar 7AM 4PM 9 At Sea 10 Poilit des Galets Reunioll]slahd 11 Port Louis Mauritius 12c19 At Sea 20 Perth Australia (Fremantle) 21-23 At Sea 24 Adelaide Australla 25 At Sea 26 Melbourne Australla 7 27 Tasmania AUstralia (Burnie) 28 At Sea 29 Sydney Australia DISEMBARK AM
I
DEPART EMBARK PM
7PM 6PM
8pM
5PM
3PM 9PM 6PM 6PM 5PM 7PM 7PM
EXOTICS CRUISES
SOUIB ATIANTICANTARCfICNSOUIB AMERICA
24 DAYS
ROYAL PRINCESS
CAPE TOWN
to SANTIAGO
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
Dec 17
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Cape TownSouthAfrica (overnighfol1board ship) EMBARK PM 2 Cape Town South Africa 3PM 2 if~~t Good HopSCenic Crulsing 3-6 6 Tristan DaCunha United Kingdom 8AM 5PM 7-10 At Sea 11 Falkland Islands (Staliley) 8 AM 5PM 12 At Sea 13-16 Antarctica Peninsula ScehltmiddotCruising 14 days ihcludingmiddot Elephant
Island AntarcticSotind Deceptionlslana GerlacheStrait NaxefChannel Schollaert Channel SigJtla Island and Boyd Strait)
17 At Sea Cape Horn Scenic Cruising1amp UshuaiaArgentina (Tierra del fuego) bull middot6 AM 19 Punta Arenas Chile (Strait of Magellan) 7 AM 20 At Sea Amalia Glacier Scenic Cruising21 At Sea Chilean Fjords Scenic Cruising22 AtSea 23 Puerto Mont Chile 7AM 6PM 24 At Sea 25 Santiago Chile (Valparaiso) DISEMBARK AM
-nmes for1l scenlccruisinc are subJect to change
ASIAINDIAMEDITERRANEAN
30 ROYAL PRINCESSDAYS
ROME
to BANGKOK
2004 DEPARlURE DATE
Sep 16
CRUISE Il INERARY
WEST AFRICASOUTH AMERICA
28 DAYS
PACIFIC PRINCESS
FT LAUDERDALE
to CAPE TOWN
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
51 22
CRUISE ITINERARY
DISEMBARK AM
Aruba
EXOTICS CRU ISES amp CRU ISETOU RS
AUSTRALIANEW ZEALAND CRUISETOUR
AUSTRALIAN EXPLORER 2004 DEPARTURE DATESAPPHIRE21 plus
DAYS PRINCESS SYDNEY Dec 17 to
AUCKLAND CRUISETOUR 5P CRUiSE
CRUISETOUR ITINERARY
DAY PORT By Sea By Land DAY PORT
1 Sydney 14 Fiordland National Park 2 Sydney Scenic Cruising
3 SydneyAyers Rock 15 Dunedin New Zealand (Port Chalmers) 4 Ayers ROek
5 Ayers RockPort Douglas 16 Christchurch New Zealand 6 Port Douglas - (Lytleton)
7 Port DouglasSydneyEmbark 17 Wellilgton New Zealand 8 At Sea 18 At Sea 9 Melbourne Australia 19 Tauranga New Zealand
10 At Sea 20 Bay of Islands New Zealand 11 Tasmania Australia (Hobart) 21 Auckland New Zealand 12middot13 At Sea
Sydney Opera House Australia
AUSTRALIANEW ZEALAND CRUISETOUR SOUTHEAST ASIACHINA CRUISETOUR CAPE HORNSTRAIT OF MAGELLAN CRUISETOUR AUSTRALIAN BEIJING Be TERRA COTTA 2004 DEPARTURE DATES RIO 8t IGUAZU FALLS Post-Crulsetour1 Pre-Crulsetour 217EXPLORER 2005 DEPARTURE DATES PACIFICSAPPHIRE WARRIORS19 plw or PRINCESS jul9t loieifie
DAYS PRINCESS SYDNEY Jan 12 plus 19 ROYAL plw Feb 5 Oct 28 Royal BUENOS AIRES
AUCKLAND DAYS ROYAL PRINCESS to 21 ampto DAYS PRINCESS
BEUING CRUISE t ~~S~i BeWln~~~~e
to SANTIAGO~e~s~Ot~r~ih~fi1BANGKOK CRUiSE CRUISECRUISETOUR 3t3P landtourm~yvlty CRUISETOUR 12
DAY PORT DAY PORT
DAY PORT By Sea ltBy LaDd DAY PORT
1 Beijing 11-12 At Sea 1 Rio de janeiro 11 Cape Horn Scenic Cruising
13 Hong Kong 2 Rio de jneiro c 12 Ushuaia Argentina 14 At Sea 3 RiolgUaiu Falls 12 Beagle Channel Scenlc Cruising
15 Nha Trang Vietnam 4 IIDIilZll FaU$13u~os~re$ 13 Punta Arenas Chile
16 Phu My Vietnam 5 Buens AiresEmbark 14 At Sea 17 At Sea 6 Montevideo Uruguay 15 Seno Eyre Fjord Scenic Cruising 18 Singapore 7 At Sea 16 At Sea 19 Kualtan Malaysia 8 Puerto Madryn Argentina 17 Puerto Montt Chile 20 At Sea 9 At Sea 18 At Sea 21 Bangkok Thail3nd 10 Falkland Islands (Stanley) 19 Santiago Chile
DAY PORT DAY PORT
At Sea Pusan SouthKOrea Nagasaki japan At Sea Shanghai China
Note CnIlst route shown for Royil Princess Oct 28 only Timcsforil1lsccnkoulslngmsubjccttothange
CRUISE [OUR ITINERARY
CRUISETOUR ITINERARY
CRUISrrOlJR ITINERARY Fiordland National Park Scenic Cruising DlUedin New Zealand Christchurch New Zealand Wellington New Zealand
14
GRAND PANAMA CANAL CRUISES
ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL
10 10 11 DAYSDAYS DAYS
CORAL PRINCESS GRAND PRINCESS GRAND PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIPfrom from
fromFT LAUDERDALE GALVESTON GALVESTON
2004 DEPARTURE DATES Oct n 21 31 2004 DEPARTURE DATE
2004 DEPARTURE DATENov 10 20 30middot DeelSmiddot
DedSDec 10 28
2005 DEPARTURE DATES CRUISE ITINERARY Jan 7 17 27
CRUISE ITINERARY Feb 6 16 26 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART MarS 1828 CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Galveston Texas EMBARK PMApr 7 17 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTshy 1 Galveston Texas EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 1 ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 3 Belize City Belize 1 PM 7PM 2-3 At Sea 3 Belize City Belize lPM 7PM 4 Costa Maya Mexico (Mahahual) 8AM 4PM 4 Um6n Costa Rica 7AM rPM 4 Costa Maya Mexico (Mahahual) SAM 4 PM 5 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands 12 PM 7PM 5 Panama Canal (to Gatun Lake) 7AM 430 PM 5 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands 12 PM 7PM 6 Ocho Rios Jamaica SAM 5PM 5 Col6n Panama 5PM 8PM 6 At Sea 7 At Sea 6 At Sea Cristobal Panama 7AM 4PM 8 7AM 4PM 7 Grand Cayman Cayman IslandS 7AM 4PM (fot Panama Canal) ftrtpg~niaa~~) S Corumel Mexico SAM 6PM 8 At Sea 9 At Sea 9 Bclize City Belize 7AM 4 PM 6PM 10 Coromel Mexico lOAM 6 PM9 Cozumel Mexico lOAM 10 At Sea 10 At Sea 11 At Sea
Portordtrllndtlmtsmayvllry 11 flo Lauderdale florida DISEMBARK AM Portorntr IInltf timpoundi may vary 11 Galveston Texas DISEMBARK AM Port ordu and Nmes may vary 12 Galv_es~on Texas DISEMBARK AM
ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL
8 DAYS
CORAL PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP
from
FT LAUDERDALE
2004 DEPARTURE DATE Dec 20
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Fl Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM 2-3 At Sea 4 Lim6n Costa Rica 7AM 7PM 5 Panama Canal (to Gatun Lake) 7 AM 430 PM 5 Co16n Panama 5PM SPM 6 At Sea 7 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands SAM 5PM S At Sea 9 Flo Lauderdale Florida DISEMBARK AM Bridge of the Americas Panama
f OptIonll fOllTS inclld1lI tht AtlllnH to Pacific RlIlllfll) joumq will dlmlldrt tilt ship b) tctdtr lit Gfttlm uk AJkr tour plIssmm dlstmlrark tilt shipwin procmlllat through tilt Gatun Locb lIndjlnlllly dock in Gl6lI Hmal1p41Sl11tmmttydiumlmtheJldlo~ lflrshops IInd~llI toIIrsrrnrl CIItutl14ktlllIrtonlflrJhlp
GRAND PANAMA CANAL CRUISES
GRAND PANAMA CANAL GRAND PANAMA CANAL GRAND PANAMA CANAL
150R 18 150R 1715 DAYS DAYS DAYS
CORAL PRINCESS SUN PRINCESS
REGAL PRINCESS REGAL PRINCESS SUN PRINCESS
DAWN PRINCESS REGAL PRINCESS sail between DAWN PRINCESS
sail between FT LAUDERDALE FT LAUDERDALE sail betweenand
FT LAUDERDALEand SAN DIEGO andLOS ANGELES
SAN FRANCISCO 2004 DEPARTURE DATES 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
DAWN PRINCESS 2004 DEPARTURE DATESNov 24Sp191
CRUISE ITINERARY Dec9t CORAL PRINCESSREGAL PRINCESS 5ltp261 CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE ITINERARY
200S DEPARTURE DATES Dec 24 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
SUN PRINCESS DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARIltPM200S DEPARTURE DATES DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Sep 2StMar 24
3 Ocho Rios Jamaica lOAM 6PM 2-3 At5ea 2 At Sea 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBA8KPM
REGAL PRINCESS AprSt 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBA8KPM Jan stu 200S DEPARTURE DATES2 At Sea4 At Sea 4 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 7AM lPMJan 23 5 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 7AM lPM 3 Ocho Rios Jamaica lOAM 6PM REGAL PRINCESS 5 Cartagena Colombia 9AM 3PMFeb7t 4 At Sea Apr 239AM 3PM 6 Transit Panama Canal 7AM 430 PMFb22 ~ yenr~fte~~~~~~u 7AM 430 PM 5 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 7AM lPM At SeaMar9t CORAL PRINCESS 79AM 3PM8 At Sea Apr 27 8 Puntarenas Costa Rica 7AM 7PMSUN PRINCESS 9 Puntarenas Costa Rica 7 AM 7PM ~ yenr~fte~n~~~~~u 7AM 430 PM 9-10 At SeaApr1S 8 At Sea DAWN PRINCESS10-11 At Sea 11 Acapulco Mexico 8AM 5PM
5PM 9 Puntarenas Costa Rica 7AM 7PM Apr 29H ~ae~lcoMexico 8 AM 12 At SeatllWrryopmllzlfrarnLls~in 10-11 At Sea rmrKfIfikTiIIrttimnma1 tlliJlrraryoptJllllsfrlJflSlmFranrimlJn 13 Cabo San lucas Mexico 8AM 5PM
gt This mUJI C4Jl llfwmblnld wlth a 3 14 Cabo San Lucas Mexico 7 AM lPM H ~e~o Mexico 8AM SPM rmruordrrorttimamG)llIryCoIutar CnUK to VlWOIlllr SC Dqs ThUIltIIIflltllnlltCllIIblntdwilhaZ-day 14-15 At Sea 16lhrlllllhI9lllIbtboobdulaquoSC)lQ4k t Illncral) lIpCutcs in mrmt orm Pllrt IiIIIa CocastaICnliutoVan(ouKrBCDlIys16 16 San Francisco California 7AM 4PMcowtlIrcrllisr IIIIYlIl1Ymiddot IhrounIScankboobdlUaK)lllllluU t~A~geles California 6 AM 5PM 14 Cabo San Lucas Mexico 8AM 5PM
Thllwl1JIIICllllslltMOlIkpilllyJmtcad 17-18 At Sea middotmiddotThliIAfllIllCltlllsatMGnIqclBaylnstcadllf 15 At Sea CPlIilldCI1IIu 17 At Sea o[OdKKwsPurllilllrlmllYWlry OchoRicJsPortllmtslllllYVllfymiddot D1SEMBA8K AM19 Vancouver BC DISEMBA8K AM 16 San Die20 California DlSEMBA8K AM 18 Val1couver BC
GRAND PANAMA CANAL COASTAL CRUISING
2-4 CORAL PRINCESS ISLAND PRINCESS SUN PRINCESS18 DAWN PRINCESS DIAMOND PRINCESS STAR PRINCESSDAYSDAYS
COASTAL CRUISE SCHEDULEREGAL PRINCESS
SHIP DAYS FROM TO DEPARTURE DATE DIAMOND PRINCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 5104
SAN FRANCISCO DIAMOND PRINCES5 4 Vancouver Seattle 5404 to CORAL PRINCESS 2 San Francisco Vancouver 5604
NEW YORK DAWN PRiNCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 5704 ISLAND PRiNCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 51204
2004 DEPARTURE DATE SUN PRINCESS 3 San Francisco Vancouver 51404Aug 24 ISLAND PRiNCESS 3 Vancouver LOI Angeles 91804
DIAMOND PRINCESS 1 Seattle Vancouver 91804CRUISE ITINERARY DIAMOND PRINCESS 6 Vancouver Los Angeles 91904 SAPPHIRE PRINCESS 1 Seattle Vancouver 91904 SAPPHREPRINCESS 2 Vancouver San Francisco 92004 DIAMOND PRINCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 43005 DlAMONDPRiNCES$ 4 Vancouver Seattle 5305 SUN PRINCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 5305
ISLAND PRiNCESS 3 Los Angeles VancOllver 5405 CORAL PRiNCESS 2 San Francisco Vancouver 51205
Coral Princess in the Panama Canal
CRUISE PLUS
Extend your adventure with our Cruise Plusreg program Cruise Plusreg enables you to enhance your vacation with one- to four-night hotel
packages in cities that stand on their own as vacation destinations Add nights in Sydney before you cruise or extend your vacation with nights in the city by the
bay San Francisco Transportation and luggage handling costs from the airport to both hotel and ship plus meet and greet services are always included
Wherever you choose to explore youll enjoy properties that are carefully chosen based on service value location and the peace of mind of knowing that Princess
has arranged it all for you
Anchorage Alaska Trevi Fountain Rome Auckland Harbor New Zealand
The Cruise Plusreg Program is available in over 30 major cities including
MEDITERRANEANAEGEAN EXOTICS PANAMA CANAL Barcelona London Rome and Venice Auckland Bangkok Beijing Buenos Aires Ft Lauderdale Los Angeles New York City
Cape Town Ft Lauderdale Honolulu Los San Diego San Francisco Sanjuan Vancouver NORTHERN EUROPE Angeles Montreal Moorea New York City Copenhagen and London MEXICO CARIBBEANOsaka Papeete Rome San Francisco
Ft Lauderdale Galveston Los AngelesTRANSATLANTIC Santiago Seattle Sydney Vancouver Venice Barcelona Copenhagen Ft Lauderdale San Francisco and San Juan
London New York City and Rome ALASKA Anchorage Calgary Fairbanks Kenai San Francisco Seattle and Vancouver
For more information about options and pricing reference a destination specific brochure or contact your travel agent
TRAVEL THE WORLD WITH THE LEADER IN CRUISINGmiddot Princess
Analysis by the Hawaii Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism Comparing the Economic Impact of Foreign Flag Ships with US Flag Cruise Ships Sailing in Hawaii
This is a summary of an analysis prepared by the Hawai Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism (DBEDT) of the economic impact of the foreign flag cruise ship fleet sailing in Hawaii as compared to each of the US flag ships operating in Honolulu
The comparison is set out below
Foreign Pride Pride Pride
Fleet Of Hawaii Of Aloha Of America
Total economic output impact (spendingsales) ($mil) 155 542 4225 4958
Total earnings impact (labor earnings) ($mil) 44 155 1207 1411
Total employment impact Uobs) 1447 5059 3943 4627
This analysis demonstrates that a single US-flagged ship the Pride of America home ported in Honolulu is 32 times more economically impactful and creates 32 times as many jobs as the entire foreign flag fleet that sails into and out of Hawaii ports of call
Economic Impact of Pride of America
Assumptions 1 Annual impact though Pride of Aloha is leaving in May 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existing Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($) 4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of outputl$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job multiplier (jobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
118700 105
2706 3373
147 042
1372
4958
1417
4627
Data sourcelformula Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Line 1 x line 2 x line 31 000000
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 4 x line 5
Line 4 x line 6
Line 4 x line 7
Economic Impact of Pride of Hawaii
Assumptions
1 Annual impact though Pride of Hawaii is leaving in February 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existing Pride of Aloha and Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($) 4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job multiplier (jobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
Data sourceformula 139770 Actual 2007 figure
975 Actual 2007 figure 2706 Actual 2007 figure 3688 Line 1 x line 2 x line 31000000
147 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model 042 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
1372 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
5421 Line 4 x line 5
1549 Line 4 x line 6
5059 Line 4 x line 7
Economic Impact of Pride of Aloha
Assumptions 1 Annual impact though Pride of Aloha is leaving in May 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existlng Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($)
4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job mUltiplier Oobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
95680 111
2706 2874
147 042
1372
4225
1207
3943
Data sourcelformula Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Line 1 x line 2 x line 31000000
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 4 x line 5
Line 4 x line 6
Line 4 x line 7
lt
Methodology Used in Calculating Impact of International Cruise Ships
Cruise ship visitors 1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Came with ships 3 Flied in 4 Average length of stay (days) 5 PPPD ($) 6 Cruise visitor spending ($mil))
Cruise ship crews 7 Ratio of crew spending to cruise visitor spending 8 Cruise crew spending
Cruisline 9 Ratio of crew spending to cruise visitor spending
10 Cruiseline spending
11 Total cruise-related spending ($mil)
12 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 13 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 14 Job multiplier Uobs$ cruise -related spending)
15 Total output impact ($miJ)
16 Total earnings impact ($miJ)
17 Total employment impact (jobs)
106641 98307
8334 739 847 668
02 134
038 254
1055
147 042
1372
1551
444
1447
Data sourceformula Line 2 + line 3 DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report Line 1 x line 4 x line 5
DBEDT 2003 Cruise study Line 7 x line 6
DBEDT 2003 Cruise study Line 9 x line 6
Line 6 + line 8 + line 10
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 11 x line 12
Line 11 x line 13
Line 11 x line 14
Economic Contributions Foreign-Flag Fleet operating in Hawaii vs Three US-Flag Ships
$1500
Pride of Hawaii$1000- $542 million VIc -0-E c Pride of AlohaCo
423 million$500
Pride of America $496 million155 million$shy
Foreign-Flag US-Flag Fleet Fleet
Source State of Hawaii Department of US-Flag $1460 billion Business Economic Development and Tourism
Foreign-Flag $ 155 million 7292008
Employment Foreign-Flag Fleet operating in Hawaii vs Three US-Flag Ships
15000
10000
til c o Pride of Aloha
39435000
Pride of America 1447 4627
~---------
Foreign-Flag US-Flag Fleet Fleet
Source State of Hawaii Department of US-Flag 13629 jobs Business Economic Development and Tourism
Foreign-Flag 1447 jobs 7292008
Foreign Flag Capacity Growth Foreign flag passenger capacity has changed five-fold on roundtrip Hawaii cruises from the West Coast since enactment of the Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative
1600000
1400000
tn 1200000
J enshyZ
1000000
I shyG) en 800000 s G) tn tn
600000 as D 400000
200000
0 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Year
Source US Maritime Administration (derived from the US Customs and Border Patrol Vessel Entrance and Clearance documents - final 2007 data) 7292008
NCL America Hawaii Economic Contributions
(2004-2008)
bull (in Millions) bull $399 in wages benefits and overtime to US seafarers bull $35 in Federal and State payroll Taxes bull $64 in Government Fees and Taxes to Hawaii bull $28 in wages benefits and overtime to US other employees bull $52 in Port Charges to Hawaii Companies (Stevedores tugs pilots etc) bull $85 in Fuel to Tesoro Hawaii bull $130 for shore excursions to Hawaii tour operators bull $39 for Hawaii hotel rooms and ground transport bull $75 for food grown in Hawaii bull $57 in union fees and levies (incl $32M paid directly by employees) bull $1 in MMD fees to the United States Coast Guard bull $51 for recruitment screening processing and training crew bull $76 advertising and promoting Hawaii as a destination bull $1092
COASTWISE CRUISES INTERPRETIVE RULE RESOLUTION Adopted at the
US Conference of Mayors 76th Annual Meeting
June 20-242008 Miami
WHEREAS the Department of Homeland Securitys Customs and Border Protection (CBP) issued a proposed Interpretive Rule regulating Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises on foreign flagged vessels between US ports of call under the Passenger Vessel Services Act at the request of the United States Maritime Administration and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule would require that a foreign-flagged vessel on a coastwise cruise to call at a foreign port for at least 48 hours with that foreign stop constituting at least 50 percent of the cruise itinerary and allowing passengers to disembark the cruise vessel at the foreign port before continuing the cruise to a US port of call and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule establishes burdensome criteria that are wholly inconsistent with industry practice particularly the 48-hour call at foreign port shyinasmuch as the standard port call is six to eight hours - as well as the requirement that 50 percent of a cruise be spent at the foreign port and
WHEREAS the intent of the proposed Interpretive Rule is to protect the single remaining US flag vessel serving the Inter-Hawaiian Island cruise trade that according to the Hawaii Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism generates more than 4600 jobs and generates nearly $500 million in economic benefits for the state annually and
WHEREAS thousands of members of the International Longshore Workers Union (nWU) are employed at US ports serving cruise ships and whose jobs would be at risk if the proposed Interpretive Rule were implemented and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule is vague as to the breadth of its application ie to coastwise cruises between all United States ports or applied solely to coastwise cruises from West Coast ports to Hawaii and
WHEREAS the Cruise Lines International Association estimates the proposed Interpretive Rule would upend the $17 billion in national cruise industry spending and put at risk more than 300000 jobs generated by the international cruise industry including jobs held by nWU at US ports and the local allied industries supporting the cruise industry and
Executive Order Submissions Under Review
II Reglnfogov Where to ind Federal Regulatory Information -~
Home ] Lnitied Agenda and Regulator) Ilan pound012866 Regulator) Review Jnformalion Collection Review
EO 12866 Regulatory Rlvlw dvanced Search IJitorical RepWI Review Counh Jriter XIL
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA)
Executive Order Submissions Under Review July 25 2008 - _------------____ _shy
Department of Homeland Security
AGENCY DHS-TSA RIN 1652-AA53
TITLE Large Aircraft Security Program Other Aircraft Operator Security Programs and Airport Operator Security Program
STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT Yes RECEIVED DATE 06302008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
AGENCY DHS-USCIS RIN Llti15-AB67 TITLE Changes to Requirements Affecting H-2B Nonimmigrants and Their Employers
STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT No RECEIVED DATE 06092008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
AGENCY DHS-USCBP RIN 1651AA11 TITLE Issuance of a Visa and Authorization for Temporary Admission Into the United States for Certain Nonimmigrant Aliens Afflicted W HIV Infection
STAGE Final Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT No RECEIVED DATE 03042008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
-_RE_V-IE-W-E-X-T-EN-D-E-D---------- _
AGENCY DHS-USCBP RIN 1651-AA76 TITLE Coastwise Transportation of Passengers STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT Yes RECEIVED DATE 07142008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
Disclosure I Accessibility I Privacy Policy I Contact Us
httpwwwreginfogovpublicdoeoReviewSearch 7252008
View Rule Page 11
Shere D find Federal ReguLatory InformciiorlReglnfogov Home J Cnified Agenda al1d Regulatory Plan EO 12866 Regulatory Reyiew Information Collection Reiew
Current rnified Agenda and Regulatory Plan Historical Pnified Agenda and Regulatory Plan Search
View Rule
DHSIUSCBP RIN 1651-AA76 Publication ill Spring 2008
Title llCoastwise Transportation of Passengers
Abstract This interim rule amends the Department of Homeland Securitys (DHS) current regulations relating to the transportation of passengers by non-coastwise-qualified vessels on voyages that begin and end at a US port and stop at intervening US and foreign port(s) Under this interim final rule voyages that begin and end at a US port and stop at a foreign port(s) and at intervening US port(s) where a large USshyflag coastwise-qualified passenger vessel engages in regular service are in violation of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) unless the cumulative length of stay(s) at intervening foreign port(s) is more than 50 percent of the total amount of time spent at the intervening US port(s) and passengers are permitted to go ashore at the foreign port(s) The purpose of this amendment is to ensure that the Congressional purpose in enacting the PVSA which is to preserve the economic benefits of US coastwise trade to US-flag coastwise-qualified vessels is properly implemented
Agency Department of Homeland Security(DHS) Priority Substantive Nonsignificant
KIN Status First time published in the Unified Agenda Agenda Stage of Rulemaking Final Rule Stage
Major No Unfunded Mandates No
CFR Citation -LCER 4J~)(h)(plusmnJ
Legal Authority 5JJSS_30J12lJ-SClt16 J9_lJiCJ 431 9_L1C1plusmn3JJ2JScHJ1J2JSCJ624 L(LlLSc207LIl(gtJfHgt~ _CiQJ _46lSC 6QLQ~
Legal Deadline None
Timetable Action Date FR Cite
Interim Final Action 0510012008
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required No Government Levels Affected None
Federalism No
Included in the Regulatory Plan No
RIN Data Printed in the FR No
Agency Contact Glen E Vereb Chief Entry Procedures and Carriers Branch Department of Homeland Security US Customs and Border Protection Office of Regulations and Rulings 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington DC 20229 Phone202572-8730
Disclosure I Accessibility I Privacy Policy I Contact Us
httpwwwreginfogovpublicdoeAgendaViewRuleruleID=286751 7128120
Federal RegisterVol 72 No 224Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules 65487
SPECULATIVE POSITION LIMITS 1-Continued [In contract units)
Contract
Soybeans and Mini-Soybeans 2
Wheat and Mini-Wheat 2 bullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbull
Soybean Oil
SingleSpot month All monthsmonth
600 8600 13300 600 11100 14500 540 6600 8600
Soybean Meal 720 5500 7100
Minneapolis Grain Exchange
Hard Red Spring Wheat I 600 I 11100 I 14500
New York Board of Trade
Cotton No2 I 300 I 5300 I 7300
Kansas City Board of Trade
Hard Winter Wheat I 600 I 11100 I 14500
1 For purposes of compliance with these limits positions in a futures contract that shares ~ubstantially identical terms with a contract market enumerated herein including a futures contract that is cash-settled based on the settlement price of an enumerated contract market shall be agshygregated with positions in the enumerated contract market
2 For purposes of compliance with these limits positions in the regular-sized and mini-sized contracts shall be aggregated
Issued by the Commission this November 152007 in Washington DC David Stawick Secretary of the Commission [FR Doc E7-22681 Filed 11-20-07 845 amI BILLING CODE 6351-Q1-P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Bureau of Customs and Border Protection
19 CFR Part 4
[USCBP-2007-o098]
Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises
AGENCY Customs and Border Protection Department of Homeland Security ACTION Proposed interpretation solicitation of comments
SUMMARY This document proposes new criteria to be used by Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to determine whether non-coastwise-qualified vessels are in violation ofthe Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) when engaging in cruise itineraries in which passengers board at a US port the vessel calls at several Hawaiian ports and then the vessel proceeds to a foreign port or ports for a brief period before ultimately returning to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their cruise CBP believes these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because it appears that the primary objective of the foreign stop is evasion of the PVSA
DATES Comments must be received on or before December 212007 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT Glen E Vereb Cargo Security Carriers amp Immigration Branch Office of International Trade (202) 572-8730 ADDRESSES You may submit comments identified by docket number by one of the following methods
bull Federal eRulemaking Portal http wwwregulationsgov Follow the instructions for submitting comments
bull Mail Border Security Regulations Branch Office of International Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
I Public Participation
Interested persons are invited to participate in this proposed interpretation by submitting written data views or arguments on all aspects of the proposed interpretation Customs and Border Protection (CBP) also invites comments that relate to the economic environmental or federalism effects that might result from this proposed interpretation Comments that will provide the most assistance to CBP in developing these procedures will reference a specific portion of the proposed interpretation explain the reason for any recommended change and include data information or authority that support such recommended change
Instructions All submissions received must include the agency name and docket number for this proposed
interpretation All comments received will be posted without change to http wwwregulationsgov including any personal information provided
Docket For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received go to http wwwregulationsgov Submitted comments may also be inspected on regular business days between the hours of 9 am and 430 pm at the Office of International Trade Customs and Border Protection 799 9th Street NW 5th Floor Washington DC Arrangements to inspect submitted documents should be made in advance by calling Mr Joseph Clark at (202) 572shy8768
II Background
The maritime cabotage law governing the transportation of passengers was first established by section 8 of the Passenger Vessel Services Act of June 191886 (the PVSA) 24 Stat 81 as amended by section 2 of the Act of February 17 1898 30 Stat 248 formerly codified at 46 USC App 289 (now codified at 46 USC 55103) 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 of $200 (now $300 as promulgated in TD 03-11 pursuant to the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 199028 USC 2461 note) for each passenger so transported and landed
The intent of the maritime cabotage laws including the PVSA was to provide a legal structure that guarantees a coastwise monopoly to
65488 Federal RegisterVol 72 No 224Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules
American shipping and thereby promotes development of the American merchant marine Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 28 (DC Cir 1984) see also The Granada 35 FSupp 892 8931940 AMC 1601 (DC Pa 1940) (stating that the legislative aim of section 289 [now 55102] was the creation of a practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping business for United States ships) In other words the PVSA was enacted to advance the United States merchant marine and fleet by restricting the use of foreign-ownedflagged passenger vessels in United States territorial waters
Passenger vessel transportation between United States ports has historically been viewed to be part of the coastwise trade after the enactment of the PVSA This view is premised on the concepts of continuity of the voyage and whether its intended purpose or objective was coastwise transportation In other words the PVSA was held to be violated if the coastwise movement was continuous or if the purpose of the trip was a coastwise voyage (See 18 OAG 445 September 4 1886 28 OAG 204 February 16 1910 29 OAG 318 February 12 1912 30 OAG 44 February 1 1913 34 OAG 340 December 24 1924 and 36 OAG 352 August 13 1930)
The CBP regulations promulgated pursuant to the PVSA are found at section 480a of title 19 of the Code of Federal Regulations (19 CFR 480a) and are reflective of the above cited Office of the Attorney General decisions These regulations provide among other things that a non-coastwise-qualified vessel which embarks a passenger at a port in the United States embraced within the coastwise laws (a coastwise port) will be deemed to have landed that passenger in violation of the PVSA if the passenger disembarks at a different coastwise port on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a nearby foreign port or ports (as defined in 19 CFR 480a(a)(2) see also 19 CFR 480a(b)(2)) The terms embark and disembark are words of art which are defined as going on board a vessel for the duration of a specific voyage and leaving a vessel at the conclusion of a specific voyage respectively (See 19 CFR 480a(a)(4))
The references in section 480a to nearby foreign ports (defined in 19 CFR 480a(a)(2)) are the results of attempts by CBP to apply an Office of the Attorney Generals opinion dated February 26 1910 (28 OAG 204) In that case a foreign-flag vessel transported 615 passengers on a voyage around the world beginning in New
York and concluding in San Francisco The Attorney General opined that since the primary object of the voyage was to visit various parts of the world on a pleasure tour returning home via California and not to be transported in domestic commerce the transportation was not in violation of the PVSA
The 1910 Attorney Generals opinion was extended to voyages that included foreign ports other than nearby foreign ports (See Treasury Decision (TD) 68shy285 (33 FR 16558) November 14 1968) However voyages solely to one or more coastwise ports have always been considered predominantly coastwise Therefore non-coastwise-qualified vessels engaging in such a voyage where passengers temporarily go ashore at a coastwise port have been deemed to have violated the PVSA
m Current Law and Policy Pursuant to Public Law 109-304 120
Stat 1632 enacted on October 6 2006 Title 46 United States Code was substantially reorganized and recodified Consequently the PVSA is now codified at 46 USC 55103 and provides that no vessel shall transport passengers between ports or places in the United States either directly or by way of a foreign port under a penalty of $300 for each person so transported and landed except one that (1) Is wholly owned by citizens of the United States for purposes of engaging in the coastwise trade and (2) has been issued a certificate of documentation with a coastwise endorsement or is exempt from documentation but would otherwise be eligible for such a certificate and endorsement
In 2003 Congress enacted Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II Section 211 for the purpose of revitalizing the oceangoing US-flag cruise industry in Hawaii (the 2003 Act) Three oceangoing US-flag cruise ships PRIDE OF ALOHA PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAII were documented with coastwise privileges pursuant to the 2003 Act These vessels entered regular service in Hawaii in 2004 2005 and 2006 respectively and pursuant to the express language of the 2003 Act are limited in their operation to providing regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands of Hawaii
The CBP regulations promulgated pursuant to the PVSA are set forth in 19 CFR 480a and have remained unchanged throughout both the recodification of Title 46 of the United States Code and the enactment of the 2003 Act They provide that a violation of the PVSA occurs when passengers embark (board a vessel for the
duration of a voyage) a non-coastwiseshyqualified vessel at one US port and disembark (leave the vessel at the conclusion of a voyage) at a different US port unless they proceed with the vessel to a distant foreign port (Le any port not considered a nearby foreign port which is defined as any port located in North America Central America Bermuda or the West Indies including the Bahamas) Currently these regulations do not contain specific criteria for non-coastwise-qualified vessels on itineraries including US ports and either nearby or distant foreign ports in order for such foreign port calls to be compliant with the PVSA
To reiterate the applicable CBP regulations provide that the PVSA is violated when a non-coastwise-qualified vessel transports a passenger on a voyage solely to one or more coastwise ports and the passenger disembarks or goes ashore temporarily at a coastwise port (19 CFR 480a(b)(1)) Furthermore a violation of the PVSA also occurs when a non-coastwise-qualified vessel transports a passenger on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a nearby foreign port or ports (but no other foreign port) and the passenger disembarks at a coastwise port other than the port of embarkation (19 CFR 480a(b)(2)) However there is no violation of the PVSA when a passenger is on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a distant foreign port or ports (whether or not the voyage includes a nearby foreign port or ports) and the passenger disembarks at a coastwise port provided the passenger has proceeded with the vessel to a distant foreign port (19 CFR 480a(b)(3))
IV Request From MARAD To Provide Guidance
The US Department of Transportation Maritime Administration (MARAD) has requested that CBP take action to ensure enforcement of the PVSA MARAD has asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreignshyflag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwiseshyqualified cruise ship operators
In April of 2007 the operator of the three US-flag cruise vessels operating solely in Hawaii pursuant to the 2003 Act announced their intent to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAIl from the Hawaii market and redeploy her to Europe The operator intends to re-flag the vessel to foreign registry directly resulting in the loss of over 1100 crewmember jobs The primary reason cited for this decision is the rapid increase in foreign-flag competition entering the Hawaii market
Federal Register I Vol 72 No 224 I Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules 65489
from the West Coast This competition is evidenced in published cruise itineraries of foreign-flag carriers offering a variety of round trip cruises that depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period usually in the early morning and ultimately return to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their cruise These cruises are often marketed as Hawaii cruises and except for the brief stop in the nearby foreign port of Ensenada are purely coastwise in nature It is these cruise itineraries that pose an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels that pursuant to the 2003 Act are currently engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands
V Preliminary Notice
In response to MARADs concerns CBP sent letters to two carriers known to operate the itineraries in question as well as to the Cruise Lines International Association Inc stating that CBP believes that these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because it appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA The letters further indicated that CBP is taking steps to publish this position
VI CBPs Proposed Interpretive Rule Accordingly in this document CBP is
proposing to provide that cruise itineraries for non-qualified coastwise vessels which allow passengers to board at a US port call at several Hawaiian ports proceed to a foreign port or ports for a brief period and then ultimately return to the original US port of embarkation for disembarkation are not consistent with the PVSA and the regulations promulgated pursuant thereto Specifically CBP interprets a voyage to be solely to one or more coastwise ports even where it stops at a foreign port unless the stop at the foreign port is a legitimate object of the cruise CBP will presume that a stop at a foreign port is not a legitimate object of the cruise unless
(1) The stop lasts at least 48 hours at the foreign port
(2) The amount of time at the foreign port is more than 50 percent of the total amount of time at the US ports of call and
(3) The passengers are permitted to go ashore temporarily at the foreign port
Accordingly CBP proposes to adopt an interpretive rule under which it will presume that any cruise itinerary that does not include a foreign port call that
satisfies each of these three criteria constitutes coastwise transportation of passengers in violation of 19 CFR 480a(b)(1)
Dated November 16 2007 W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection [FR Doc E7-22788 Filed 11-20-07 845 am] BILLING CODe 9111-14-1
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau
27 CFR Part 9
[Notice No 76]
RIN 1513-AB49
Proposed Establishment of the Leona Valley Viticultural Area (2007R-281 P)
AGENCY Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau Treasury ACTION Notice of proposed rulemaking
SUMMARY The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau proposes to establish the 134 square mile Leona Valley viticultural area in the northeast part of Los Angeles County California We designate viticultural areas to allow vintners to better describe the origin of their wines and to allow consumers to better identify wines they may purchase We invite comments on this proposed addition to our regulations DATES We must receive written comments on or before January 22 2008
ADDRESSES You may send comments on this notice to one of the following addresses
bull httpwwwregulationsgov (Federal e-rulemaking portal follow the instructions for submitting comments) or
bull Director Regulations and Rulings Division Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau PO Box 14412 Washington DC 20044-4412
See the Public Participation section of this notice for specific instructions and requirements for submitting comments and for information on how to request a public hearing
You may view copies of this notice selected supporting materials and any comments we receive about this proposal at httpwwwregulationsgov under Docket No 2007-0066 You also may view copies of this notice all related petitions maps or other supporting materials and any comments we receive about this
proposal by appointment at the TTB Information Resource Center 1310 G Street NW Washington DC 20220 To make an appointment call 202-927shy2400
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT NA Sutton Regulations and Rulings Division Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau 925 Lakeville S1 No 158 Petaluma CA 94952 phone 415shy271-1254 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
Background on Viticultural Areas
TTB Authority Section 105(e) of the Federal Alcohol
Administration Act (FAA Act) 27 USC 205(e) authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to prescribe regulations for the labeling of wine distilled spirits and malt beverages The FAA Act provides that these regulations should among other things prohibit consumer deception and the use of misleading statements on labels and ensure that labels provide the consumer with adequate information as to the identity and quality of the product The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) administers the regulations promulgated under the FAA Act
Part 4 ofthe TTB regulations (27 CFR part 4) allows the establishment of definitive viticultural areas and the use of their names as appellations of origin on wine labels and in wine advertisements Part 9 of the TTB regulations (27 CFR part 9) contains the list of approved viticultural areas
Definition Section 425(e)(1)(i) ofthe TTB
regulations (27 CFR 425(e)(1)(i)) defines a viticultural area for American wine as a delimited grape-growing region distinguishable by geographical features the boundaries of which have been recognized and defined in part 9 of the regulations These designations allow vintners and consumers to attribute a given quality reputation or other characteristic of a wine made from grapes grown in an area to its geographic origin The establishment of viticultural areas allows vintners to describe more accurately the origin of their wines to consumers and helps consumers to identify wines they may purchase Establishment of a viticultural area is neither an approval nor an endorsement by TTB of the wine produced in that area
Requirements Section 425(e)(2) of the TTB
regulations outlines the procedure for proposing an American viticultural area and provides that any interested party
Us Department ofHomelaDd Secmity Washington DC 10229
bull ~
US Customs and Border Protection
AUG 15 2fXJJ
VE5-3-02-QTRRBSTCCCI - ti015502-GG-
Mr leon Sutcliffe Director Port Operations Camivai Cruise Unes Camival Place 3655 NW 87Avenue Miami Aorlda 33178
RE P~nger Vessef Services Ad Coastwise Transportation 46 USC sect 55103 19 CFR sect 480a(b)
Dear Mr Sutcliffe
As you know US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) enforces the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) codified at TItle 46 United States Code section 55103 (46 USC 55103) This statute prohibits non-coastwise-qualifled vessels (ie those vessels not US-buill owned and documented with a coastwise endorsement) from transporting passengers between porls or places within the United States The regUlations promUlgated pursuant to the PVSA are found at TrtJe 19 Code of Federal Regulations section 4808 (19 CFR 4808)
It has come to our attention that passenger vessels of your company are engaging in cruise itineraries that include ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands Two USAlagged coastwise-endorsed passenger vessefs are also currenUy engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of caD wittlin the Hawaiian Islands
As part of your cruise itineraries some of your foreign-flagged vessels depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period and ultimately rebJm to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their endse For example the MS ZAANDAM of Holand America Lines departs San Diego cruises the Hawaiian Islands stops in Ensenada from 800pm to 11 OOpmbull and returns to san Diego CBP believes these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because It appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA -- - - ~~~------
Please be advised that CBP is taking steps to publish this position Should have any questions pertaining to this matter please contact Mr Glen Vereb Chief Cargo Security Carriers and Immigration Branch at (202) 572-8724
Sincerely
F Jl E EST Y LEe A U I 5 I N Gmiddot
December 21 2007
The Honorable W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection co Border Security Regulations Branch Office ofInternational Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229
Re Hawaii Coastwise Cruises (USCBP-2007-0098) Comments in Response to Proposed Interpretation
Dear Commissioner Basham
NCL America Inc1 (NCLA) submits these comments in support ofthe efforts ofCustoms and Border Protection to enforce the Passenger Vessel Services Act and the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative as applied to Hawaii coastwise cruises
1 Introduction and Summary of Position
NCLA operates three large oceangoing US flag cruise ships in Hawaii These ships are documented under US flag and are required to operate in regular service in Hawaii pursuant to the authority of the Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative a 2003 federal statute intended to revitalize the US flag cruise industry and to maximize economic and national security benefits to the United States (the 2003 Act)
NCLA has invested $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships pursuant to the 2003 Act and in direct reliance on the protections of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) and its proper enforcement The PVSA limits the transportation ofpassengers between US ports to coastwise documented US flag ships Its statutory protections recognize that US flag ships have significantly higher operational costs in part because they are subject to more stringent US laws including US labor laws and federal
1 NCL America Inc is a US corporation incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware headquartered in Honolulu Hawaii As a US corporation it is subject to US taxes at both the federal and state level The Chief Executive Officer the Chairman of the Board and all of the Board of Directors of NCL America are US citizens The company is also subject to US labor and employment laws and is required by statute to maintain a workforce comprised primarily ofUS citizens
700 Bishop St SUite 900 I Honolulu HawMi 96813 I Tel 8085273800 Fax 8085273820 I ndcom
2
income tax among others The NCLA ships operating in Hawaii are the only large oceangoing cruise ships operating under US flag In furtherance of the policy goals of the PVSA and the 2003 Act these ships have created over 4000 seafaring jobs all subject to US minimum wage and other labor statutes
Since 2003 there has been a significant increase in capacity in the Hawaii market from foreign flag ships providing cruise service to Hawaii from the West Coast Many of these foreign flag cruises are marketed as Hawaii cruises and consist entirely ofUS ports ofcall with the sole exception of a token stop in Mexico for as little as an hour late at night under circumstances where passengers are not permitted to get offthe ship There are no reported rulings approving these particular foreign flag itineraries
Lower cost foreign competition in the Hawaii market has unfairly hurt NCLAs operations NCLA has incurred substantial losses which have contributed significantly to its decision earlier this year to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAll from US flag and reshydeploy it foreign Unfair foreign competition poses an imminent threat to the remaining US flag passenger vessels operating in the Hawaii trades pursuant to the 2003 Act
As the agency statutorily charged with implementation of the 2003 Act the US Department ofTransportation Maritime Administration (MARAn) is aware of the threat foreign flag Hawaii itineraries pose to the US flag fleet and brought the situation to the attention ofthe US Department ofHomeland Security Bureau ofCustoms and Border Protection (CBP or Customs) Customs determined that the primary object of these itineraries was coastwise and that the Ensenada stop was an evasion of the PVSA
In August 2007 Customs provided written notice to the affected foreign lines and their trade association that the existing itineraries were contrary to the PVSA None of these lines sought advance rulings even after the Customs notice with respect to their Hawaii itineraries pursuant to Customs regulations and many continued to market the itineraries as Hawaii cruises NCLA supports the efforts ofCustoms and MARAD to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act for Hawaii cruises
2 Statutory Authority for Customs Proposed Interpretation
(a) Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA)
Congress passed the PVSA in 1886 to protect the US maritime transportation industry from foreign competition2 Protection is afforded through penalty assessments on foreign vessels transporting passengers between US ports or places directly or by way ofa foreign port 3 As Congress and the courts have recognized coastwise protections for the US maritime transportation industry are only one dimension of the PVSA Operating in conjunction with other coastwise laws and with the US
2 See United States v Honduran SS GRANADA 35 F Supp 892 894 (BD Pa 1940)(citing purpose of PVSA to meet threats to the practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping which was to be preserved for US ships)
46 USc sect 55103 (originally 46 USC App 289)
3
documentation laws the PVSA also enhances military sealift in times ofnational emergency sustains a US merchant marine and supports the US shipbuilding and repair industry4
(b) Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative (the 2003 Act)
Over the past decade Congress has sought to reinforce the goals of the PVSA by providing mechanisms to revitalize the oceangoing US flag cruise fleet particularly in Hawaii The Project America legislation enacted in 1997 authorized among other things the re~flagging ofone existing cruise ship contingent on the operator contracting for the construction oftwo new oceangoing cruise shipss Following the default of the operator under the original contract Congress enacted the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative for the purpose ofrecovering economic and national security benefits to the United States bull 6 These same goals of the original PVSA were expressly referenced in the legislative history of the 2003 Act which emphasized that these ships will be assets available in time ofnational emergency and will significantly expand the pool ofqualified seafarers upon which the US Department ofDefense relies to crew non-combatant vessels
The 2003 Act authorizes the US documentation ofthree cruise ships for operation in regular service in Hawaii subject to certain conditions including a prohibition on operating in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico and the Caribbean Sea and a requirement that all vessel repair work be undertaken in the United States MARAD is charged with implementation of the 2003 Act
3 Customs Implementation of PVSA
(a) Regulations
The current regulations implementing the PVSA were published by Customs in 19858 The growth of the foreign flag cruise industry in North America and in particular the development of the Alaska cruise market led to an effort in 1984 to amend the thenshyexisting regulations to increase the ease of administration and operational flexibility The effort to change the regulation had support from US port interests who saw benefit in the potential increase in the number ofUS ports that foreign vessels could call and was opposed by proponents ofpotential US flag projects as detrimental to efforts to revitalize the US fleet 9 The preamble to the 1985 rule emphasized that it was of paramount importance to consider the primary object ofpassengers in taking a
4 See American Hawaii Cruises v Skinner 713 F Supp 452 457 (DDC 1989) (recognizing the contribution of the PVSA and the Jones Act in helping to secure national defense by maintaining a merchant marine oftbe best equipped and most suitable types ofvessels sufficient to serve in time of war or national emergency) see also Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 30 (DC Cir 1984) Wirth Ltd v SIS Acadia Forest 537 F2d 1272 1281 n32 (5th Cir 1976) S Public Law 105-56 Section 8109 (111 Stat 1203 1244) (Oct 81997 ) 6 Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II General Provisions - Department ofCommerce Section 211 (117 Stat 1179) (Feb 20 2003) 1 149 Cong Rec S1118 (dailyed Jan 17 2003(statement ofSenator Inouye) 8 19 CFR sect 480a 950 Fed Reg 26981 (July I 1985)
4
voyage10 a concept which is reinforced elsewhere in Customs regulations11 In its analysis of the comments received at the time Customs accepted the view ofport interests that the modified rule would help their business but did so recognizing the absence ofa regular salt water US flag passenger fleet Customs acknowledged the potential harm to prospective efforts to revitalize the US flag passenger fleet and expressly cautioned that if it were ever shown that coastwise qualified vessels in competition with foreign vessels were in fact hurt by the modified Customs regulation then Customs would immediately reconsider its position12
(b) Customs Rulings
Given the significant penalties associated with violating the PVSA13 Customs regulations expressly provide a mechanism for the owner or charterer of a foreign vessel or any other interested person to request an advisory ruling as to whether a contemplated voyage would be considered in violation of the PVSA14 Customs regulations provide that vessel operators can rely on these ruling letters only to the extent that the facts and circumstances are identical to those in the ruling letter IS
Notwithstanding the fact that several foreign cruise lines offer Hawaii itineraries originating in a US mainland port and calling at Hawaii ports with a token intervening stop in Mexico there are no reported rulings expressly approving such an itinerary for these foreign cruise lines 16
4 The Cruise Industry in Hawaii
(a) NCL America Returns US flag to the Oceangoing Passenger Fleet
Pursuant to the requirements ofthe 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative NCLA agreed to promote US-flag cruising enhance military sealift capacity and expand the US maritime labor base No other major cruise line had ever undertaken such a commitment to the US flag and the public policy objectives Congress sought to achieve under the PVSA or the 2003 Act Introduction ofPRIDE OF ALOHA in 2004 was a significant development in the maritime industry because it marked the restoration ofthe
10 Id at 26983 11 Customs Regulations include a provision on the effect ofruling letters and with respect to carrier rulings the applicable regulation refers to rulings setting forth a determination as to whether or not the primary object of a contemplated voyage is coastwise transportation in violation of46 USC sect 289 [pYSA codified at 46 USC sect55103] 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 12 50 Fed Reg at 26983 13 A modem cruise ship with 2400 passengers for example would be subject to a fine of$720OOO per cruise based on the statutory penalty of$300 for each passenger transported in violation of the Act 14 19 CFR sect 480a(d) IS 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 16 There is one older reported mling involving a request to drop the Ensenada port call from a Los AngeleslHawaiiLos Angeles itinerary which Customs held would violate the PYSA In dicta Customs acknowledged that the itinerary could be in compliance if the Ensenada call were not dropped but did not address the issue ofwhether a one hour service call where no passengers depart the vessel would be sufficient The carrier that obtained that ruling has since left the Hawaii market See Customs Ruling HQ 114078 re Crystal Hannony (Nov 4 1997)
5
us flag to the oceangoing cruise industry A contemporaneous press release from the Us Department ofTransportation reported that the three US-flag cruise ships to be introduced pursuant to the 2003 Act were expected to create more than 20000 US jobs generate more than $825 million ofexpenditures in the US economy and create nearly $360 million in federal tax revenue by the end of 200717 In 2005 the PRIDE OF AMERICA was introduced and in 2006 the third vessel PRIDE OF HAWAll was introduced to Hawaii Both the PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAIl offer 7shyday inter-island Hawaii itineraries whereas PRIDE OF ALOHA operates on 7 and 10 day cruises exclusively among the islands ofHawaii as well as 11 day cruises that include a foreign port call at Fanning Island To date NCLA has invested over $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships in furtherance ofthe policy objectives of the PVSA and the 2003 Act These ships employ over 4000 seafarers and generate hundreds ofmillions of dollars in benefits for Hawaii and the nation
(b) Significant Increase in Foreign Flag Capacity Since 2003
The most significant change in the Hawaii cruise market since 2003 has been the dramatic increase in capacity A significant portion ofthis capacity increase is directly attributable to NCLAs fulfillment ofthe Congressional mandate in the 2003 Act However foreign-flag operations in the Hawaii market as measured in passenger nights18 have skyrocketed Based on MARAn data derived from the US Customs Border Patrol Vessel Entrance and Clearance documents the passenger nights for foreign flag vessels departing from the West Coast to Hawaii on round trip cruise have increased several hundredfold during this period19 See Exhibit A
(c) NCLA Has Incurred Substantial Losses During this Period
Since 2004 NCLA has lost cumulatively more than a quarter ofa billion dollars A principal reason for these losses has been the increase in foreign capacity in this market NCLA has taken significant steps to reduce costs to address the increase in foreign competition but NCLA is at an inherent disadvantage when competing against foreign companies that are not subject to US labor laws US tax laws and other laws Ofcourse the statutory protections of the PVSA are intended to address these very issues That is why Customs immediate action to implement the proposed interpretation is critical for the US flag fleet Regrettably NCLA has already been forced to reduce overall capacity early next year with the withdrawal ofPRIDE OF HAWAlI to another
17 DOT Press Release dated June 72004 see also DOT Press Release dated August 132004 in connection with visit to PRIDE OF ALOHA by US Transportation Secretary Norman Y Mineta 11 Passenger nights (also referred to as passenger capacity days) are calculated by multiplying the number ofpassengers per vessel by the number ofcruise days in each itinerary by the number of cruises This is the unit ofmeasurement employed by MARAn In contrast passenger bed supply (also referred to as passenger capacity) data reflects only the number ofberths per vessel multiplied by the number of cruises and hence understates the market by excluding the full economic value ofthe cruise perfonned 19 In 2003 the total number ofpassenger nights for round-trip West Coast to Hawaii cruises was 303325 which jumped by 353 to 1072329 in 2006 and by 430 to 1304546 from 2003 to 2007 (The 2007 figure is based on MARAD data for six months and a1ll1ualized by published itineraries for the balance of the year)
6
market for operation under foreign flag This move alone will result in the loss ofover 1000 American seafaring jobs
5 Customs Proposed Interpretation is Necessary to Further the Important National Security and Public Policy Objectives Embodied in Federal Law
As Customs has properly noted the increase in foreign competition in the Hawaii trades in contravention of the PVSA pose[s] an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels[] As the operator of these ships NCLA has a vested interest in protecting the jobs ofthe thousands ofAmerican crewmembers and cruise ship service providers who support these vessels NCLA also has an interest in protecting the substantial economic investment it has made to revitalize the US flag passenger vessel fleet But a balancing of interests in the context of Customs enforcement ofexisting law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act requires a much broader focus
The legislative history of the 2003 Act expressly recognized the national security and public policy import ofestablishing a US flag passenger vessel fleet as a means to maintain the countrys preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool of qualified seafarers and as a means to help sustain a fleet ofUS-flag vessels to su~ort
the nations military and maritime industrial base for times ofnational emergency
Congress understood the importance ofestablishing a viable US flag cruise ship fleet as something larger than the vessels themselves These national security and public policy objectives must be weighed in the balance as Customs assesses how best to interpret its rules to give effect to the PVSA and the 2003 Act
6 Customs Should Clarify that the Proposed Interpretation is Limited to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades and Adopt Reasonable Measures to Ensure Sufficient Foreign Content
Since publication ofthe proposed interpretative rule several commenters have observed that the scope of the proposed interpretation is ambiguous because the language of Section VI referencing any cruise itinerary appears broader than the caption Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises and the entire discussion in the published notice which focuses exclusively on US-flag coastwise vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA agrees that the proposed interpretation should be clarified so that its scope is limited to vessels operating roundtrip voyages from US ports that include Hawaii port calls
NCLA supports the concept reflected in the proposed interpretive rule that round trip Hawaii itineraries from US ports on foreign ships must include a material and measurable degree ofoverall foreign port content as compared to US port content
20 149 Congo Rec S1117 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)
7
(a) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is also Consistent with Subsequent Congressional Enactments Modifying the PVSA
As discussed above it is well established that the PVSA was designed toRrotect US-flag vessels from foreign competition in the coastwise and domestic trades 1
Subsequent legislative enactments however have appropriately differentiated among distinct geographic markets and trades including Canada Alaska Puerto Rico and Hawaii based on the existence or non-existence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
In 1938 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers by Canadian passenger vessels on Lake Ontario and the St Lawrence River until such time as passenger service shall be established by vessels of the United States22 Similarly in 1961 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers on Canadian vessels within Alaska or between Alaska and other points in the United States until such time as passenger service is established by vessels ofthe United States23
In 1984 Congress modified the application ofthe PVSA to pennit the transportation ofpassengers between Puerto Rico and other United States ports on foreign-flag vessels24 As with the other statutory exceptions this provision is qualified and expires [o]n a showing that a United States passenger vessel qualified to engage in the coastwise trade is offering or advertising passenger service between a port in Puerto Rico and another port in the United States2S
Congress acted again with respect to the application of the PVSA with the 2003 Act in which it authorized three vessels that did not meet the US-build requirements of the PVSA to operate as modem US-flagged cruise ships in regular service in Hawaii26 The 2003 Act imposes a specific geographic limitation on the operation of any ship documented under this authority to operations only in regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands ofHawaii and shall not transport passengers in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico or the Caribbean Sea except in certain limited circumstances27 As above the limited nature of the 2003 Act is express it is strictly limited to the large ocean-going cruise ships and then only those operating in the regular Hawaii service where there are no US-flag operations28
21 See Act ofJune 19 1886 c 421 sec 8 24 Stat 81 Act of February 171898 c 26 sec 2 30 Stat 248 22 S] Res 174 75th Cong 52 Stat 223 (Alp 251938) codified at46 USC sect 55121(a) 23 See Pub L 87-77 75 Stat 196 (Jun 30 1961) codified at 46 USC sect 55121(b) 24 See Pub L 98-563 98 Stat 2916 (Oct 301984) codified at 46 USC sect 55104(b) 25 46 USC sect 55104(c)(l) see also 46 USC 46 USc sect 55104(cX2)(expiration of exemption upon availability ofa non-coastwise qualified US-flag vessel offering service in the relevant market) 26 149 Congo Rec SI118 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)(statementofSen Inouye) 27 Pub L 108-7 117 Stat 79 (Feb 20 2003) 28 149 Congo Rec S11l9 (dailyed Jan 17 2003Xstatement of Sen Inouye)
8
In each ofthese instances Congress fashioned a narrow exception to the PVSA that differentiated among distinct geographic markets based on the existence or nonshyexistence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
As the federal agency responsible for administering the 2003 Act MARAD requested that Customs act to protect US flag passenger vessel interests in the Hawaii trades29 Limiting the scope ofthe proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades also reflects Customs appreciation of the PVSA in the context of the subsequent Congressional action30 Viewing the Congressional modifications to the PVSA as a whole Congress has specifically and repeatedly differentiated among distinct geographic markets when it has found it necessary and appropriate to do so to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests It is well established that the proper interpretation of a statutory scheme includes consideration ofsubsequent statutes even though the underlying statute itselfhas not been expressly amended31 Accordingly Customs should likewise limit the scope ofthe proposed PVSA interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades because that is the only geographic market as mandated by the 2003 Act in which oceangoing US-flag cruise ships are operating
(b) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Consistent with Public Policy Objectives of the 1985 Rulemaking
In 1985middot Customs liberalized the regulations implementing the PVSA by eliminating certain regulatory prohibitions on foreign flag vessels In the context of the 1985 rulemaking Customs justified a relaxation ofthe regulations on the grounds that it would simplify the administration of the PVSA and would benefit the economy ofcertain American coastwise ports without eroding the statutory protection given to American vessels engaged in solely domestic trade32
Customs thus sought to reconcile US port economic interests with US-flag passenger vessel interests Both of these twin policy objectives are furthered by
29 See 72 Fed Reg 65488 (Nov 21 2007)( MARAn bas asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the ~eratiODS ofcoastwise-qualified cruise ship operators)
See generally FDA v Brown amp Williamson Tobacco Corp 529 US 120 132-133 (2000)(assessing propriety ofagency construction ofFood DIUg and Cosmetics Act and descnbing responsibility of reviewing cowt to assess statutory provisions in the context of subsequent legislative enactments) 31 See Brown amp Williamson 529 US 143 (holding that proper construction ofstatutory provision must necessarily assume that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications ofa later statute This is particularly so where the scope of the earlier statute is broad but the subsequent statutes more specifically address the topic athand) see also United States v Estate ofRomani 523 US 517 530-531 (1998)( holding that a later-enacted statute should control the construction of the federal lien priority statute a specific policy embodied in a later federal statute should control om construction of the [earlier] statute even though it ha[s] not been expressly amended) United States v Fausto 484 US 439453 (1988)(The courts frequently find Congress to have done this - whenever in fact they interpret a statutory text in the light ofsurrounding texts that happen to have been subsequently enacted This classic judicial task of reconciling many laws enacted over time and getting them to make sense in combination necessarily assumes that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications of a later statute) 32 50 Fed Reg 26982 (JuI 11985)
9
limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades
As noted earlier the 2003 Act limits the operation of the NCLA US-flag oceangoing passenger vessels to regular service in Hawaii Because there are no oceangoing US-flag vessels operating in any market other than the Hawaii trades Customs should limit the scope of the proposed interPretation to that market Such a limitation protects US flag passenger vessel interests without prejudicing US port interests In contrast an application of the proposed interpretation to any itinerary would needlessly harm US port interests unrelated to Hawaii without any countervailing benefit to US-flag passenger vessel interests Accordingly limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation is consistent with the public policy objectives of the 1985 rulemaking as well as the 2003 Act
(c) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Also Consistent with Customs Commitment to Revisit the Scope of its Rules to Protect US-Flag Interests
The relaxation ofthe PVSA regulations in 1985 was premised in large part on Customs finding that there was no regular salt water US-flag passenger fleet in operation at that time33 Acknowledging that the relaxed regulations could harm USshyflag interests Customs committed in the preamble ofthe 1985 final rule to immediately reconsider its interpretation if it is ever shown that there is a viable US flag vessel operating in competition with foreign-flag vessels34
Congress enacted the 2003 Act to stimulate the development of a US flag cruise ship industry As noted above the legislative history ofthat Act makes clear that Congress sought to revitalize the US-flag cruise industry as a means to maintain Americas preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool ofqualified seafarers help sustain a fleet of US flag vessels to support our military and a maritime industrial base create thousands of seagoing and shoreside American jobs and stimulate the development ofa US flag cruise ship tourism business with the commensurate benefits to the US tax base the US economy and US employment
Customs is now acting at MARADs request to revisit its interpretation ofthe regulations implementing the PVSA because recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwise-qualified cruise ship operations35 That is to say that the concerns articulated by Customs in the context of the 1985 rulemaking have materialized and US-flag passenger vessel interests are in fact being hanned in the Hawaii trades by foreign competitors
33 50 Fed Reg 26983 34Id
3S 72 Fed Reg 56488 (Nov 21 2007)
I
10
Because the US-flag passenger vessels are limited by statute to regular service in Hawaii limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the
Hawaii trades is consistent with Customs historical commitment to revisit its interpretation ofthe implementing regulations to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests
7 Conclusion
For the reasons stated above NCLA commends the efforts ofCustoms and MARAn to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act as applied to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA respectfully requests Customs to move ahead promptly with p~blicati~nof a final interpretive rule to advance the important national security arid public policy objectives ofthese laws
We greatly appreciate the opportunity to submit these comments
Sincerely
~~~ Alan T Yamamoto Vice President Hawaii Operations
Exhibit A
Ship Name Serenade Of The Seas Departure Port San Diego California Ports of Call San Diego California Kailua Kona Hawaii Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii Hlo Hawaii Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii Ensenada Mexico San Qigo California
2007 Date(s) Oct 05
Sailing Itinerary
Day Port H ~rrive Depart Activity
05-0ct San Diego California 500 PM
06-0ct Cruising
07-0ct Cruising
08-0ct Cruising
09-0ct Cruising
10-0ct Kailua Kona Hawaii 700 AM 900 PM Tendered
11-00t Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 1000 AM Tendered
12middot0ct Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 900 PM Tendered
13-0ct Hilo Hawaii 700 AM 600 PM Docked
14middot0ct Honoulu (Oahu) Hawaii 700 AM Docked
15-0ct Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii 200 AM Docked
6-0ct CrUising
17-0ct Cruising
18-0ct Cruising
19middot0ct Cruising
-7 20-00t
O-Oot
Ensenada ~i1exico
San Deqo California
i 00 ~r1
700 ~M
200 oM D1Jcked ~
DISCOVER OVER 80 ITINERARIES TO ALL
SEVEN CONTI N ENTS WITH Princess
MARIANAS I~LANDS MARSHALL ISLANDS
SOLOMON ISLANDS
I WESTERN SAMOA
- - lt~f
~ FI~I i AMERICAN
SAMOA
bull HAWAII -i--
FRENCH POLYNESIA
) - COOK
ISLANDS
MARqUESAS bullbull ISLANDS
Discover THE WORLD WITH Princess THE LEADING DESTINATION CRUISELINE
Big Ship Choice Small Ship Feel 8M_The only big ships with a small ship feel Our ships offer an incredible array of onboard activities from our ScholarShipSea life enhancement lecture series to our Lotus Spa~ plus a multitude of evening entertainment options And due to our revolutionary ship ltIIliJ~ji~~ii1~
design you can enjoy all that our floating resorts offer without ever feeling lost in a crowd
Anytime Dining 8M - Only Princess offers anytime flexible dining at gourmetstyle
restaurants allowing you to dine when where and with whom you want or Traditional Fixed Seating You also have up to seven alternative dining options like ourSaba e
Italian trattoria or Sterling Steakhouse and complimentary 24-hour room service
Affordable Balconies - Princess offers affordable balconies on stand staterooms not just suites and mini-suites With thousands of affordable balcotile on our fleet of floating resorts you can view the worlds most magnificent cities from your own balcony
Princess Service - Our staff is committed to Courtesy and Respect Unfailing in Service ExcellenceCR UISEreg In fact its our credo From your Stateroom Steward who warmly greets you by name to your evening waiter who remembers your favorite dish our service is simply unparalleled
Note Dining options may val by ship
TRAVEL FARTHER ONBOARD THE
CARIBBEAN PRINCESSsM
Caribbean
Caribbean Princess our most amenity- filled ship yet takes Personal Choice Crusing to a new level with Caribbean cuisine the renowned Lotus Spa our newest entertainment option Movies Under the Stars and nearly 900 cabins with balconies-more than any other cruise ship sailing year-round in the Caribbean
Nearly 900 balconies
3110 passengers 116000 gross tons
952 feet in length
Bermudan registered
GRAND PRINCESSmiddot GOLDEN PRINCESSmiddot
AND STAR PRINCESSmiddot
Caribbean bull Europe bull CanadaNew England
Grand Princess Golden Princess and Star Princess are the most luxshyurious ships to sail our Caribbean Europe and CanadaNew England itineraries featuring more affordshyable balconies and the finest shipshyboard amenities
Over 700 balconies
2600 passengers 109000 gross tons
950 feet in length
Bermudan registered
REGAL PRINCESSmiddot
Alaska bull CanadaNew England Panama Canal
Cruise Alaska the Panama Canal and CanadaNew England onboard Regal Princess offering larger standard staterooms many with balconies and spectacular views from her domed entertainment and observation center
Over 180 staterooms
with balconies
1590 passengers
70000 gross tons
804 feet in length British registered
ROYAL PRINCESSmiddot
Europe bull Asia bull Antarctica South America bull Amazon River
Behold the magnificence of each port of call from the Royal Princess wraparound promenade deck and all outside staterooms
More balconies than any
other ship this size
1200 passengers
45000 gross tons
757 feet in length British registered
MOST LUXURIOUS 8H I PS AT SEA
CORAL PRINCESSmiddot AND ISLAND PRINCESSmiddot
Alaska bull Hawaii bull Panama Canal
Coral Princess and Island Princess These two beautiful state-of-the-art ships belong to the newest class of luxury liners cruising the historic Panama Canal Alaska and the Hawaiian Islands They have 90 outshyside staterooms 79 of which offer balconies at a great value
9000 outside staterooms most with a balcony
1970 passengers
92000 gross tons
965 feet in length
Bermudan registered
DAWN PRINCESSmiddot AND SUN PRINCESSmiddot
Alaska bull Caribbean Panama Canal
With wraparound promenade decks and floor-to-ceiling windows Dawn Princess and Sun Princess offer stunning views of Alaska around every corner 410 cabins have balconies to enhance your onboard experience
Over 400 balconies 1950 passengers
77000 gross tons
857 feet in length
British registered
DIAMOND PRINCESSmiddot AND SAPPHIRE PRINCESSmiddot
Alaska bull Mexican Riviera AustraliaNew Zealand bull Asia
Cruise the Mexican Riviera AustraliaNew Zealand Alaska or Asia and celebrate our new Diarrwnd Princess and Sapphire Princess providing a blend of modern amenishyties and classic Princess features plus 750 private balcony staterooms
750 staterooms with balconies 2670 passengers 113000 gross tons
952 feet in length
Bermudan registered
TAHITIAN PRINCESSmiddot AND PACIFIC PRINCESSmiddot
South Pacific Islands TahitiPolynesia bull Asia
Indian Ocean bull West Africa
Designed for a smaller more intimate feel Tahitian Princess and sister ship Pacific Princess feature 92 outshyside cabins 73 with balconies and all the amenities of our larger ships
Over 200 balconies
Only 670 passengers 30000 gross tons
592 feet in length
Gibraltar registered
HOW TO NA YIGATE THIS BROCHURE
CHART A JOURNEY OF DISCOVERY
Alaska Cruises amp Cruisetours
CanadaNew England Cruises pg 7
7
8-10
11-14
Exotics Cruises amp Cruisetours
Mexican Riviera Cruises pg
Caribbean Cruises pgs
Europe Cruises amp Cruisetours pgs
AustraliaNew Zealand pg 15
15-16
16-18
18-19
19
20
Asia pgs
Tahiti Hawaii South Pacific pgs
South America pgs
Connoisseur Voyages pg
Exotics Cruisetours pg
Panama Canal pgs 21-22
Cruise Plusreg
Cruise Calendar
pgs5-6
pgs23
ALASKA CRUISES
VOYAGE OF THE GLACIERS
2004 DEPARTURE DATES
CORAUISLAND PRINCESS7 SaturdllydqxtTturtS May 8 Coni 21 Dawn Aug 2 Dawn 10 Dawn 26 Islmd 7 IslandDAYS SUNDAWN PRINCESS 15 Island 28 Sun 9 SunMondaydqJaTtures 17 Sun )ul 3 Coral 14 Coral 22 Coral S Dawn 16 Dawn 24 Dawn 10 Island 21 Island 29 Island 12 Sun 23 Sun 31 Sun 17 Coni 28 Coral
Jun 5 Coral 19 Dawn 30 Dawn NORTHBOUND 7 Dawn 24 Island Sop 4 Island
12 Island 26 Sun 6 Sun 14 Sun 31 Coral 19 Coral
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Vancouver BC PM 2 Inside Passage Scenic Cruising 3 Ketchikan 4 Juneau 5 Skagway 8PM 6 Glacier Bay National Park Scenic Cruising 3PM 7 College Fjord Scenic Cruising 3PM 8 Whittler (Anchorage) DISEMBARK AM
VOYAGE OF THE GLACIERS
2004 DEPARTURE DATES
7 CORALISlAND PRINCESS Saturday departures
May 15 Coral 26 CoraDAYS SUNDAWN PRINCESS 17 Dawn 28 DawnMondllydtpartures 22 Island )uI 3 Island 24 Sun 5 Sun 29 Coral 10 Coral 31 Dawn 12 Dawn
)un S Island 17 Island 7 Sun 19 Sun
SOUTHBOUND 12 Coral 24 Coral 14 Dawn 26 Dawn 19 Island 31 Island 21 Sun Aug 2 Sun
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE 1 WhlttierIAnrhora
630AM 1030 AM 630AM 630AM 830AM
6PM
7 Coral 9 Dawn
14 Island 16 Sun 21 Coral 23 Dawn 28 Island 30 Sun
Sep 4 6
Coral Dawn
11 Island 13 Sun
DEPART EMBARK PM
~30AM 830 PM
SPM 4PM
545PM
INSIDE PASSAGE
SAPPHIRE PRINCESS 7 DAYS Sundaydtpartuns
ROUNDTRIP from
SEATTLE
2004 DEPARTURE DATES
May 16 18 23 25
Jun 30 6
Aug 1 8
13 15 20 22 27 29
Jul 4 11
Sep S 12
t Endicott Arm wy be substituted on somtYOiiCS due to~orwcatherconditlom
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE 1 Seattle 2 At Sea 3 Ketchikan 630AM 4 Tracy Arm Scenic Cruisingt 6AM 4 Juneau lPM 5 Skagway 6AM 6 At Sea 7 Victoria BC HM 8 Seattle DISEMBARK AM
DEPART EMBARK PM
5PM lOAM 10 PM 6PM
12M
INSIDE PASSAGE
7 DIAMOND PRINCESS DAYS saturday dqllu1uus
ROUNDTRIP from
SEATTLE
2004 DEPARTURE DATES
May 8 17 15 24 22 31 19 Aug 7
Jun 5 14 12 21 19 28 26 Sep 4
Jul 3 11 10
t EndkottAnn maybe substituted on some voyages due tokcQlweuherconditlom
CRUISE ITINERARY
ARRIVE DEPART
INSIDE PASSAGE
10 REGAL PRINCESS DAYS
ROUNDTRIP from
SAN FRANCISCO
2004 DEPARTURE DATES
May 6 Jul 5 16 IS 26 25
)un 5 Aug 4 15 14 15
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE
lPM 7AM 7AM 7AM
7AM
DEPART EMBARK PM
~PM 830PM
12 N 5PM
2PM
Coral Princess in College Fjord Alaska
ALASKA CRUISETOURS
HEART Of ALASKA CRUISETOUR HEART Of ALASKA CRUISETOUR
e 1312 DAYS DAYS e
CRUI5ETOUR CRUI5ETOUR 35 125
2004 DEPARTURE DATES2004 DEPARTURE DATES
Date Ship Date Ship Date Ship Date Ship
May 10 Coral Aug 2 Coral Mayll Coral Aug 3 Coral 12 Dawn 4 Dawn
13 Dawn 5 Dawn 17 Island 9 Island 18 Island 10 Island
DAY PORT 19 Sun 11 Sun
20 Sun 12 Sun 24 Coral 16 Coral 25 Coral 17 Coral 26 Dawn 18 Dawn 27 Dawn 19 Dawn 31 Island 23 Island
Jun 1 Island 24 Island Jun 2 Sun 25 Sun 3 Sun 26 Sun 7 Coral 30 Coral 8 Coral 31 Coral 9 Dawn Sep 1 Dawn
10 Dawn Sep 2 Dawn 14 Island Island6 5 DenaliAnchorage15 Island 7 Island 16 Sun 8 Sun 17 Sun 9 Sun 21 Coral 6 AnchorageWhittierEmbark22 Coral 23 Dawn 24 Dawn 28 Island 7 College Fjord Scenic Cruising 29 Island 30 Sun
)u1 1 Sun Jul 5 Coral 8 Glacier Bay National Park Scenic Cruising 6 Coral 7 Dawn 9 Skagway12 Island
13 Island 14 Sun 8 Dawn
10 Juneau15 Sun 19 Coral 20 Coral 21 Dawn 11 Ketchikan 22 Dawn 26 Island 27 Island 28 Sun 12 Inside Passage Scenic Cruising 29 Sun 13 VancouverPark Rangers are at our lodges to enrich your stay
HEART Of ALASKA CRUISETOUR ALASKA WILDERNESSKENAI CRUISETOUR ALASKA WILDERNESSCOPPER RIVER CRUISETOUR
14 1314 DAYS DAYS DAYSe e e
CRUI5ETOUR CRUI5ETOURCRUI5ETOUR
145 185165
2004 DEPARTURE DATES
2004 DEPARTURE DATESDate Ship Date Ship 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
Date Ship Date ShipMayl Dawn Aug 1 Coral 16 Island 3 Dawn Date Ship Date Ship 18 Sun 8 Island May 11 Dawn Aug 1 Coral 23 Coral 10 Sun MaylO Coral Aug 2 Coral 25 Dawn 15 Coral
16 Island 3 Dawn 12 Dawn 4 Dawn
30 Island 17 Dawn 18 Sun 8 Island
17 Island 9 Island Jun 1 Sun 22 Island
23 Coral 10 Sun 19 Sun 11 Sun
6 Coral 24 Sun 25 Dawn 15 Coral
26 Dawn 18 Dawn 8 Dawn 29 Coral
Jun 1 Sun 17 Dawn 31 Island 23 Island
13 Island 31 Dawn 6 Coral 24 Sun
Jun 2 Sun 25 Sun 15 Sun Sep 5 Island
8 Dawn 29 Coral 7 Coral Sep 1 Dawn
20 Coral 7 Sun 13 Island 31 DaWn
9 Dawn 6 Island 22 Dawn
15 Sun Sep 7 Sun 14 Island 8 Sun
27 Island 20 Coral
16 Sun 29 Sun
22 Dawn 23 Dawn
)ul 4 Coral 29 Sun
28 Island 6 Dawn
Jul 4 Coral 30 Sun
11 Island 6 Dawn
Jul 5 Coral 13 Sun
11 Island 7 Dawn
18 Coral 13 Sun
12 Island 20 Dawn
18 Coral 14 Sun
25 Island 20 Dawn
21 Dawn 27 Sun
27 Sun 26 Island 28 Sun
CRUISETOUR ITINERARY CRUISETOUR ITINERARY
DAY PORT By S~a By Land
1 fairbanks
Mt McKinleyWhittierEmabrk
College fjord ~ce~lc Cnlsi~g
Juneau
CRUISETOUR IIINERARY
DAY PORT
CRUISETOUR ITINERARY
DAY PORT
CRUISETOUR ITINERARY
PORT By Sea By Land
College Fjord Scenic Cruising Glacier Bay National Park Scenic Cruising
13 Vancouver
CANADA amp NEW ENGLAND CRUISES
CANADANEW ENGLAND CANADACOLONIAL AMERICA CANADANEW ENGLAND
10 REGAL 13 REGAL 7 GRAND DAYS PRINCESS DAYS PRINCESSDAYS PRINCESS
sail between ROUNDTRIP NEW YORK
MONTREAL fromto
CITY NEW YORKFT LAUDERDALE and CITY
MONTREAL 2004 DEPARTURE DATE
CRUISE IlINERARY CRUISE ITINERARY 2004 CRUISE IIINERARY Oct 31 DEPARTURE DATES
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 2004 Sep 12 1 1 New York City New York EMBARK PM Montreal Quebec EMBARK PMDEPARTURE DATES Sep 19 New York City New York EMBARK PM
2 Newport Rhode Island 830 AM 4PM 2 Quebec City Quebec 6AM 4PM Sep 261Sep 11 Oct 3
Sep21t 1 3 Bostoni Massachusetts 830AM SPM i3 At Sea Oct 10 2 At Sea
Olttl 4 Bar Harbor Maine 8AM 6PM 4 Halifax Nova Scotia 12 N 6PM Oct I]Octllt
Oct 24Oct 21 S Saint John New Brunswick 7AM 3PM l~ Bar Harbor Maine 8AM 6PM Halifax Nova Scotia 8AM 5 PM
6 Halifax Nova Scotia 8AM 5PM 6 Boston Massachusetts 8AM 5PM
17 At Sea 7 Newport Rhode Island 9AM 6PM 4 Saint John New Brunswick 9AM 5PM
8 Saguenay River Scenic Cruising 9 AM 2PM 8 New York City New York 8AM 5PM Bar Harbor Maine 7AM 6PMi9 ~8 Quebec City Quebec 11 PM Norfolk Virginia 12 N 10 PM
(overnight onboard ship) 10 Baltimore Maryland 8AM 5PM Boston Massachusetts 7AM 5PM 9 Quebec City Quebec 5PM 11 At Sea
Montreal Quebec 8AM10 12 Charleston South Carolina 7AM 5PM 7 Newport Rhode Island 8AM 5PM
tltneTaryoperaresinrtvtrstorder (overnight onboard ship) 13 At Sea t Itnaary opaates in revu5t order 8 New York City DISEMBARK AMPort times may vary Port times may vary11 Montreal Quebec DISEMBARK AM 14 Ft Lauderdale Florida DISEMBARK AM New York
MEXICAN RIVIERA CRUISES
MEXICAN RIVIERA MEXICAN RIVIERA MEXICAN RIVIERA
DIAMOND DAYS
107 DIAMOND PRINCESS 10 SAPPHIRE PRINCESSDAYS DAYS PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIPROUNDTRIP from fromfrom
LOS ANGELES LOS ANGELESSAN FRANCISCO
2004 DEPARTURE OATIS Sep 25 2004 DEPARTURE DATE
Oct 2 9 1623 30 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
Dec 29Sep 22Nov 6 13 20 27 Dec 4 11 22 Oct 2 12 221
Nov 1 11 2005 DEPARTURE OATIS
jan 815 22 29 Feb 5 12 19 26 MarS 12 19 26 tPortordtrllllllllmtsmaYNrApr 291623
CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 San Francisco EMBARK PM 1 Los Angeles (Long Beach) EMBARK PM
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
CRUISE ITINERARY DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
2 Catalina Island 1230 PM 630PM 2 At Sea Sat Los Angeles (Long Beach) EMBARK PM 3 Cabo San Lucas 9AM 6PM3-4 At Sea
5 Poerto Vallart 7AM 6PM 4 A~Sea
6 Mazatlan SAM 6PM 5 Acapulco SAM 11 PM 7 Cabo San Lucas SAM 6PM 6 Ixtapa (ZihaulIlnejo) 7AM 2PM
S At Sea 7 Puerto Vallarta SAM 7PM 9 San Dtego SAM 6PM 8 M~I~middot lAM -1Ft 10 At Sea 9-10 At Sea 11 San Francisco DISEMBARK AM 11 Los Angeles (Long Beach)
Sun AUea Mon AtSea Tue Poerto Vallarta Wed Mazatlan Thu Cabo San Luca( Fri At Sea Satmiddot Los Angeles (Long Beach)
CARIBBEAN CRUISES
EASTERN CARIBBEAN
7
EASTERN CARIBBEAN
7 7 DAYSDAYS DAYS
CARIBBEAN PRINCESS STAR PRINCESS GRAND PRINCESSSUN PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIP from from from
FT LAUDERDALE FT LAUDERDALE GALVESTON 2004 DEPARTIJRE DATES
CARIBBEAN PRINCESS Apr 24 2004 DEPARTURE DATES 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
CRUISE ITINERARYM~yl 1522 CRUISE I1INERARY JuI31724 DAY PORT Nov 14 28 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Dec 4 11 JunS 1226 Oct 31 Nov 13 20 27
Alii 1 1428 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Dec 12 26
Ott 2 9 162330 200S DEPARTURE DATES Sat Galveston EMBARK PMSep41825 Sat ft Lauderdale Sun ft Lauderdale EMBARK PM
Nov 6 132027 200S DEPARTURE DATESDet4 11 26middot Jan 8 15 22 29Sun At Sea Man At Sea 2005 DEPARTURE DATES ]an 9 23 Feb 5 12 19 26 Sun At Sea
CARIBBEAN PRINCESS Feb 6 20 MarS 121926 J~n 8152229 Mar 6 20 12M Apr 29 Man Belize City lPM 7PM Feb 512t 1926 MarS 121926 Apr 317 Apr2t 9 1623 Tue St Thomas 7 AM 6 PM Wed St Thomas BAM 6PM Tue Costa Maya (Mahahual) BAM 4PM
6PM Wed Grand CaYman l2N 7PM
Thu At Sea Fri At Sea Thu Cozumel lOAM 6 PM
4PM Fri At Sea
Sat Ft Lauderdale DISEMBARK AM Sun Ft Lauderdale DISEMBARK AM Sat Galveston DISEMBARK AM
CRUISE IlINERARY
ARRIVE DEPART
EMBARK PM
WESTERN CARIBBEAN
Sf Thomas US Virgin Islands Princess Cays
CARIBBEAN CRUISES
WESTERN CARIBBEAN WESTERN CARIBBEAN SOUTHERN CARIBBEAN EXPLORER
7 6 7 DAYS DAYS DAYS
CARIBBEAN PRINCESS STAR PRINCESS GRAND PRINCESS GOLDEN PRINCESS
DAWN PRINCESS
SAN JUAN ROUNDTRIPROUNDTRIP to fromfrom
GALVESTON SAN JUANFT LAUDERDALE
2004 DEPARTURE DATE2004 DEPARTURE DATES 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
CARIBB~~SflNCESS CRUISE ITINERARY Nov 7 CRUISE ITINERARY
My923 CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTJun 6 20 JUD 19
Jul lOt 31
May829t DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART )uI418 Sun San Juan EMBARK PM
Aug ll t Aug 11529
Sep 11
DAY PORT
Sep 12 26 Mon St Thomas 7AM 6PM STAR PRINCESS Princess Cays 9AM 4PM At Sea Oct 10 24
Nov 721 DecS19 Tue S Kitts 7AM 3PM
2005 DEPARTURE DATES Wed Grenada 9AM 3PM Dec 23 Coumel 7AM 5PM
Grand Cayman 7AM 4PM Jan 21630
2005 DEPARTURE DATES Feb 13 27 Thu Caracas (La Guaira) 9AM 7PM Mar 13 27STAR PRINCESS
Jan 21630 Apr 10 24 Feb 13 27 Ocho Rios 9AM 4PM Fri Aruba BAM 5PM Mar 13 27 Apr 10 24 At Sea
tMonlqQampIyrqlocrsCllhoRfm PltJrtQr-ondlimesmaywlrY Sun San Juan DISEMBARK AMFt Lauderdale DISEMBARK AM
EASTERN CARIBBEAN WESTERN CARIBBEAN CLASSIC SOUTHERN CARIBBEAN
8 7 7DAYS DAYS DAYS
CARIBBEAN GRAND PRINCESS GOLDEN PRINCESS PRINCESS
GALVESTONROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIP tofrom from
SAN JUANFT LAUDERDALE SAN JUAN
2004 DEPARTURE DATE 2004 DEPARTURE DATE 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
DeetS Apr 16CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE IflNERARY May 21630 CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE Jun 13 27DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Jul1125 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
1 Aug 8 221 Galveston EMBARK PM Sun Sanjuan EMBARK PMSep 5 19 Oct 3 17 312-3 At Sea At Sea Nov 14 28 Man At Sea Dec 12 26
st Thomas Cozumel BAM 6PM Tue Barbados 7AM 6PM 2005 DEPARTURE DATES
jan 9 23 Wed St Lucia 7 AMAntigua BAM 6PM Costa Maya (Mahahual) BAM 4PM 5PM Feb 620 Mar 6 20 Thu BAM 6PM Apr 317
At Sea Montego Bay 9AM 4PM Fri St Maarten BAM 6PM
7AM 6PM
Ft Lauderdale DISEMBARK AM Sanjuan DISEMBARK AM Sun San juan DISEMBARK AM
Oct 24 Nov 7 21 DecS19
DAWN PRINCESS
~
I
CARIBBEAN CRUISES
EASTERN CARIBBEAN ISLANDER SOUTHERN CARIBBEAN MEDLEY EASTERN CARIBBEAN
10 10 7 DAYS DAYSDAYS
GRAND PRINCESSDAWN PRINCESSSUN PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP NEW YORK CITYROUNDTRIP from from to
FT LAUDERDALE FT LAUDERDALE SAN JUAN
2004 DEPARnJRf DATE2004 DEPARTURE DATES2004 DEPARTURE DATES
Octn Oct Btl Oct 14CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE ITINERARYCRUISE ITINERARY 200s DEPARTURE DATENov 222 Nov 3t 23
Apr23tDAY PORT DEPART Dec 13 30Dee 12 ARRIVE DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Ft Lauderdale EMBARK PM 1 Ft Lauderdale EMBARK PM EMBARK PM2005 DEPARTURE DATES 2005 DEPARTURE DATES New York City 2 Princess Cays 9AM 4PM 2 At SeaJan 828 Jan 19t
Feb 17tt 3 AlSea Feb 8 28 3 At Sea 2-4 At Sea Mar919 Mar 20
4 St Thomas 7AM 6PM Apr 9 4 Cura~ao 8AM 5PM 5 St Maarten 7AM 6PM 5 Isla Margarita lOAM 4PM St Thomas 7AM 6PM
6 St Kitts 7AM 3PM 6 Barbados 9AM 6PM Dominica SAM 6PM7 8AM 5PM 7 Dominica 7 AM SPM
8 Antigua 9AM 6PM S St Thomas SAM 6PM St Maarten 7AM 6PM
9 9 At Sea
fllrtordtrlllldllmam4YYa1 10 At Sea 10 Princess Cays 9AM 4PM JlilltraryllptfatufnrfYUSfllrllcr t 11I1ll1Il1yopmltnlnrmTtronlcr t ItlntraryaptrattsIn rtVfntOrdtr San Juan DISEMBARK AM Port~rdtrQnd lilrW mil) illI) 11 Ft Lauderdale DISEMBARK AM PortlimtSlIIltlyYllry 11 Ft Lauderdale DISEMBARK AM Port ordtr lind time5 may VIlry
WESTERN CARIBBEAN ADVENTURER EASTERN CARIBBEAN VOYAGER
10 10 DAYS DAYS
SUN PRINCESS DAWN PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIPROUNDTRIP fromfrom
FT LAUDERDALEFT LAUDERDALE
2004 DEPARTURE DATES 2004 DEPARTURE DATES DAWN PRINCESS CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE IIINERARY
Oct 23 Oct 4 24 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Nov 12 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
Nov 13 Dec 2 29 Dec3tt 1 Ft Lauderdale EMBARK PM 1 Ft Lauderdale EMBARK PM
2 Princess Cays 9AM 4PM 2005 DEPARTURE DATES 2 At Sea2005 DEPARTURE DATES
DAWN PRINCESS Jan 183 At Sea 3 At Sea
Feb 7 27Jan 9 296 St Thomas 7AM 6PM Mar19 t 4 St Vincent lPM 6PM
Feb 180 Apr 8St Maarten 7 AM 5PM 5 Grenada 8AM 6PMMar 10f 301 Apr 19 At Sea 6 St Lucia 8AM 6PM
Ocho Rios 12N 6PM 7 Martinique 7AM 3PM
Grand cayman PM S St Thomas SAM 6PM
t IillUGI)lIptfQttsIn rnmtordtr Cozumel 8AM 6PM AlSea tt ~~~oI~~dtr 10 Princess Cays 9AM 4PMMOItQIl8clyrqausOclJollloJ
lwtordtrollllllllyenllllilJllIl) tltllltrlryOptrlll$In rnmtllrdtr AMOIltqollaynplactsOdlDRIos PM IortDrllralldllmallloyWl) Ft Lauderdale DISEMBARK AM
Willemstad Cura~ao
EUROPE CRUISES
GRAND MEDITERRANEAN GREEK ISLES MEDITERRANEANGREEK ISLES
12 1212 DAYS DAYSDAYS
STAR PRINCESS
STARSTAR PRINCESSPRINCESS
sail betweensail between VENICE BARCELONA VENICE to
andand BARCELONA VENICE ROME
CRUISE ITINERARY2004 DEPARTURE 2004 DEPARTURE2004 DEPARTURE CRUISE ITINERARYDATESCRUISE I I INERARY DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DATEDATES
Apr 10 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTMay 16middot DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Venice Italy (overnight onboard ship) EMBARK PM May 4 May18t Sep2St 1 Verdce Italy EMBARK PM
Jun 9 1 Barcelona Spain (overnight onboard ship) EMBARK PM 2 Venice Italy 2PM 2 At Seajune 21 t 2 Barcelona Spain 1 PM Dubrovnik Croatia 8AM 6PMJul3 3 Corfu Greece 8AM 6PM
lullS 3 Monte Carlo Monaco 7 AM 6 PM Corfu Greece 8AM 6PM 4 Katakolon Greece (for Oiympia) 7AM SPMJu127 4 FlorencePisa Italy (Livorno) 630 AM 6 PMAug 8~ Katakolon Greece (for Olympia) 7AM SPM S Athens Greece (Piraeus) 6AM 12 MAug 20deg S NaplesCapri Italy 8 AM 7 PM Sep 1t 6 Athens Greece (Piraeus) 6AM 12 M 6 Mykonos Greece 8AM 12M
6 At Sea 7 Mykonos Greece 8AM 6PM 7 Kusadasi Turkey (for Ephesus) 7 AM SPM7 Athens Greece (Piraeus) 6AM S4S PM
8 Kusadasi Turkey (for Ephesus) 7AM 1PM 8 Kusadasi Turkey (for Ephesus) 8AM 6PM 8 Santorini Greece 7 AM 4PM
9 Jstanbul Turkey 8AM 6PM 9 Rhodes Greece 8AM 6PM 9 At Sea
10 At Sea 10 Santorini Greece 7AM 6PM 10 Rome Italy (Civitavecchia) 8AM 7PM tll1ooil)opcraksinttVUSe
grduPorttlmcsmi)Y6ljI 11 At Sea 11 Cannes France (for Mont Carlo) 8AM 6PM11 At Sea tSamnlQ]latCiIUIe5inplm tltlnerlll)opmlpoundsin
NaplesCapri Italy 630 AM 12 Barcelona Spain (ovrnight onboard ship) 8AMofMo~Urlo ~odcr12 Venice Italy (overnight onboard ship) 8 AM 12 6PM O~lIlalhitRhodalnpUcc Port order md Iimes- JmyVUY Barcelona Spain DISEMBARK AM13 Venice Italy DISEMBARK AM - 13 Iome Italy (qvitavecchia) DISEMBARK AM
MEDITERRANEANAEGEAN MEDITERRANEANMOSAIC
12 12 DAYSDAYS
STAR STAR PRINCESS PRINCESS
ROME BARCELONAto
toVENICE ROME
2004 DEPARTURE DATE 2004 DEPARTURE
CRUISE I I INERARY DATE CRUISE ITINERARYApr 22 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Sep 13 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Rome Italy (Civitavhia) EMBARK pM 1 Barcelona Spaln (overnight onboard ship) EMBARK PM 2 NaplesCapri Italy 7 AM 7 PM Barcelona Spain SPM 3 Messina Italy (for Taormina) 8AM 6PM 3 At Sea 4 Valleta Malta 8AM 6 PM 4 Casablanca Morocco (for Marrakech) 7 AM 8PM
At Sea S Gibraltar 8 AM 6PM Santorini Greece 7 AM 6PM 6 At Sea
7 Kusadasi Turkey (for Ephesus) 8 AM 6PM 7 Cannesfrance (for Mont Carlo) 8 AM 6PM 8 Athens Greece (Piraeus) 6 AM S4SPM 8 At Sea 9 Katakolon Greece (for Olympia) 8 AM 6PM 9 Valleta Malta 8 AM SPM 10 Corfu Greece 8 AM 6PM 10 Messina Italy (for Taormina) 6PM 11 Dubrovnik Croatia 8 AM 6PM 11 NaplesCpri Itiily 6PM 12 Venice Italy (overnight onboard ship) 1230 PM 12 FlorencePisa Italy (Livorno) 830 AM 13 Venice Italy DISEMBARK AM 13 lomeltaly (Clvttavecchia)DISEMBAIKAM Venice Italy
EUROPE CRUISES
EUROPEAN EXPLORER CRUISE MEOffiRRANEANITRANSATLANTIC CRUISE
12 17DAYS DAYS
ROYAL STARPRINCESS PRINCESS
sail between VENICE
ROME to
and FT LAUDERDALE
LONDON
2003 DEPARTURE DATES
2004 DEPARTURE DATE CRUISE ITINERARY
May 7 CRUISE I1INfRARY Oct 7 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Jul30l
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Venice Italy (overnight onboard ship) EMBARK PMAug 11 Sep 41 1 Rome Italy (Civitavecchia) EMBARK PM 2 Vernce Italy 2 PM
2 FlorencePisa Italy (Livorno) 7 AM 7PM 3 At Sea 3 Cannes France (for Monte Carlo) 7 AM 5 PM 4 Barcelona Spain 9 AM 6 PM 5 At Sea 6 Gibraltar 8AM PM 7 Casablanca Morocco (for Marralech) 5AM 6 PM 8 Seville Spain (Cadiz) 8AM 6PM 9 LisbQn Portugal 9AM 5PM 10 Vigo Spain 830AM 4PM 11 At Sea
tllinmryope~te$ 12 ParisNormandy France (Ie Havre) 7 AMlnftYCl5eordu ~rttimesuuyYilY 13 London England (Southampton) DISEMBARK AM
Caudis Park Cuell Barcelona Spain
SCANDINAVIARUSSIA BALTIC HERITAGE WESTERN EUROPEBRITISH ISLES
ROYALGRAND10 GRAND 1210 PRINCESSDAYS PRINCESS PRINCESS DAYSDAYS
ROUNDTRIPROUNDTRIPROUNDTRIP fromframfrom
LONDONCOPENHAGENCOPENHAGEN 2004 DEPARTURE2004 DEPARTURE 2004 DEPARTUREDATESDATES DATES
May19tMay 29 May 19 jul28 JunSJun 18 Aug 231
Jul8 ju118Jul28 Aug 7 CRUISE ITINERARYAug 17
CRUISE IIINERARY ARRIVE DEPART CRUISE IrINERARY EMBARK PMDAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
DAY ARRIVE DEPART 7AM 6PM1 Copenhagen Denmark EMBARK PM EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 7AM 6PM
Stockholm Sweden (Nynilshamn) 7 AM 530PM 6AM PM Helsinki Finland 830 AM 6PM St PetersbUrg Russia (overnight onboard ship) 630 AM 9AM 9PM St Petersburg Russia 6PM
7 Tallinn Estonia 7 AM 1PM 8 Gdansk Poland (Gdynia) 9 AM 4PM 9 Warnemfinde Germany (for amprlin) 8 AM 10 PM 10 Helsing0r Denmark 9 AM 11 AM 10 Copenhagen Denmark (overnight onboard ship) 1 PM 11 Copenhagen Denmark DISEMBARK AM
middotScrvlcctillforlh=CllCIIIlicmIOptoluItllUllwWdlseJnbIDltHdlinprAfbrtour~dllmJlwktbeshJpwl1lPfllClaquodtoCopetWampen and pmenpoundm Qfl tours from HelMp will Rboird ship tPolttimes~myAninliI1ddepartu~itRosythDubJinmdFa1mauthwl)dICtotXLolconditions
tPOrtordermdtlme$maynI) ttCdlitEdinbuJlhotmdedto~mllocunionforMiliblyTltOO~on8123wi1inlmiddotUIIisitSouthQuemsfmyinstudofJosylh
BRITISH ISLES
ROYAL12 PRINCESSDAYS
ROUNDTRIP
from
LONDON
2004 DEPARTURE DATES
Jun 12 jul6
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Lqn4onmiddotpoundngland(Southampton) EMIWlIlt PM 2 Cornwall England (Falmouth) 7AM SPM
Waterford Ireland 8AM 6PM Dublin Ireland 7AM 1130 PM
t PQrtbme5 lliIyyuy Anini Illd departure at Rosytb Dublin md Filmouth ViiYdue to Iiltlal conditions
WESTERN EUROPE
ROYAL12 PRINCESSDAYS
ROUNDTRIP
from
LONDON
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
May 31
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 London England (Southampton) EMBARK PM
CRUISE ITINERARY
EUROPE CRUISES
ICELANDNORWEGIAN FJORDS
ROYAL12 PRINCESSDAYS
ROUNDTRIP
from
LONDON
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
Jun24
CRUISE IflNERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 London Englan4 (Southampton) EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 3 Berge Norway 6PM 4 Hellesylt Norway 830AM 1030 AM 4 Gciranger Norway Geiranger Fjord Sceni Cruising UN 7PM
9AM SPM5
1PM 8AM SPM
10 At Sea
middotStlviceallfof~fjonlovedmdshOR=unlDllOplion1Itourswllldi5anbarilitHelIcsyItAftcrtollrpuKllJClJdisembark
theshlpwiUprocudto~md~lampClSonlounfrwnHdaytwl1lblmd$hip
NORWEGIAN FJORDSNORTH CAPE
ROYAL12 PRINCESSDAYS
ROUNDTRIP
from
LONDON
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
JuilS
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Loridon ~gland (South~mpton) EMBARK PM 2-3 At Sea
Hellesylt Norway 830AM 1030 AM Golranger Norway Geiranger Fjord Scenic Cruising 12N 7PM
TrodheilllNorwaY 9AM SPM At Sea Cross the Ardgt Cirde
6PM 8AM lPM
8AM 130 PM 430PM 630PM
7AM 3PM
Bagpipers Edinburgh Scotland Royal Princess in Geiranger Fjord Norway
EUROPE CRUISES amp CRUISETOURS
17 DAYS
GRAND PRINCESS
FT LAUDERDALE to
COPENHAGEN
2004 DEPARTURE DATE MayZ
CRUISE IfINERARY
DAY 1 2-6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
PORT Ft Lauderdale Florida At Sea ~ores IslandsPortugal (Ponto Delgado) At Sea Lisbon Portugal Vigo Spain At Sea ParislNormandy France (Le Havre) RotterdamThe Netherlands At Sea Hamburg Germay (for Berlin) At Sea Olso Norway Oslo Fjord scnic Cruising Copenhagen Denmark
ARRIVE
N
12N 9AM
7AM
6AM
DISEMBARK AM
DEPART EMBARK PM
6PM
7PM 6PM
7PM 7PM
1UM
MEDITERRANEAN CRUISETOUR
TRANSATLANTICWESTERN EUROPE ICELAND amp GREENLANDTRANSATLANTIC
16 GRAND DAYS PRINCESS
COPENHAGEN to
NEW YORK
2004 DEPARTURE DATE Aug 27
CRUISE IIINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Copenhagen Denmark EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 3 Dover England (forLondon) 7AM 7PM 4 Cornwall England (Falmouth) 9AM 6PM 5 Dublin Ireland lOAM 9PM 6 GlasgowEdinburgh Scotland (Greenock) 8AM 12 M 7 Belfast Northern Ireland 1030 AM 530 PM 8 At Sea 9 Reykjavik Iceland 9AM 9PM 10 At Sea 11 Prins Christian Sund Scenic Cruising 12N 6PM 12 Qaqortoq Greenland 7 AM 2PM 13 At Sea 14 SI Johns Newfoundland Canada 12N 7PM 1516 At Sea 17 New York CIty New York DISEMBARK AM
SCANDINAVIARUSSIA CRUISETOUR
Church of the Savior on the Spilled Blood St Petersburg Russia
WESTERN EUROPE CRUISETOUR
CRUISEIOUR ITINERARY
CRUISETOUR lA11C CRUISETOUR ITINERARY CRUISETOUR 4A14C CRUISETOUR II INERARY
DAY PORT By Sea By Land DAY PORT By Sea By Land CRUISETOUR 7Al7C18 STAR PRINCESS 1 Rome 17 GRAND PRINCESS 1 BudapestDAYS DAYS DAY PORT By Sea By Land 22 Rome Budapest 18 ROYAL PRINCESS 1 Paris
ROMETODI 3 RomeTodi BUDAPEST VIENNA 3 BudapestVienna DAYS 2 Paris and 4 TodiFlorence and 4 Vienna 3 Paris
PARIS EUROSTAR5 Florence 5 ViennaPrague 4 ParisLondon 6 FlorenceVeniceEmbark 6 Prague and 5 London
FLORENCE PRAGUE
plus plus LONDON7 Venice Italy (overnight onboard ship) 7 PragueCopenhagenEmbark 6 LondonSouthamptonEmbark
GRAND MEDITERRANEAN SCANDINAVIARUSSIA plus 7 At Sea CRUISE 8-9 At Sea CRUISE 8 At Sea WESTERN EUROPE 8 Bilbao Spain10 Istanbul Turkey 9 Stockholm Sweden (Nyniishamn) BRITISH ISLES CRUiSE2004 DEPARTURE DATES 2004 DEPARTURE DATES 9 Bordeaux France (Le Verdon)
11 Kusadasi Turkey (for Ephesus) 10 Helsinki FinlandApr Sf 2004 DEPARTURE DATES 10 At SeaMay 131 Jul2Apr 29 12 Athens Greece (Piraeus) 11 SI Petersburg Russia (overnight onboard ship) 11 GlasgowEdinburgh Scotland (Greenock)May 23 JulUt May 141 26middot Jul tt 13~ 250
May 23 Jun 16 13 At Sea JunZt JulU 12 SI Petersburg Russia Jun n 19 Aug 18o 300 12 Dublin Ireland
]un 12 Aug l t 13 Cork IrelandJuliO 14 NaplesCapri Italy 13 Tallinn EstoniaJun 22 t Aug 11 Toun~eonlymilabkwithcruise5indi[itbtAug 3 15 FlorencelPisa Italy (Livorno) 14 Cdansk Poland 14 Cornwall England (Falmouth)
Aug 27 tBritishliksetuise aWEwupeiBritishlslesouist 15 ParisNormandy France (Le Havre)16 Monte Carlo Monaco 15 At Sea bull WestemEuropeCrube middotlcdandINorwqlmFjOllisetuise 16 Rotterdam The Netherlands
t Crulsetour lA only combinable with 12--dayGreck fst 17 Barcelona Spain (overnight onboard ship) 16 Olso NOrway Qsld Fjord Scenic Cruising bull Norwqian FjordsNorth Cipecruise 17 BrusselsBruges Belgium (Zeebrugge)tCruixtour 4A only combinable with lo-day Baltic
crulse shown on PI 11 18 Barcelona Spain Heritage cruise shawn on pg 12 OCrubctnur 7C only combinable with EwuJlWl ExplorerCrube17 Copenhagen Denmark 18 London England (Southampton)
EXOTICS CRUISES
AUSTRALIANEW ZEALAND AUSTRALIANEW ZEALAND AUSTRALIAASIA
12 14 19 DAYS DAYS DAYS
SAPPHIRE PRINCESS SAPPHIRE PRINCESS SAPPHIRE PRINCESS
saH between SYDNEYAUCKLAND SYDNEY
toand to BANGKOKSYDNEY AUCKLAND 2005 DEPARTURE DATES 2005 DEPARTURE DATE
Mar7Jan 6 2004 DEPARTURE DATEJan 1St
Dec 23 CRUISE ITINERARYJr ift Feb 23 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
CRUISE ITINERARY 1 Sydlley Austrli EMBARK PM CRUISE ITINERARY 2 At Sea
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTDAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 3 Brisbane Australia 8AM 6PM 1 Sydlley Australia EMBARK PM 4 At Sea 1 Aucklalld N~w Zealalld EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 5 Cid Harbor Austrlia (for Great Barrier Reef) 7AM 5PM2 At Sea 3 Melbourne Australia 8 AM 6 PM 6 Cirns Australia (Yorkeys) 8AM 6PM
3 WeIUllgton New Zealand 8 AM 6 PM 4 At Sea 7-8 At Sea 4 Christchurch New Zealalld (Lytlelton) 8 AM 6 PM 5 Tasmallia Australia (Hobart) 8 AM 6 PM 9 Darwin Australia lPM 8pM 5 Dunedill N~ Zealalld (Port Chalmers) 8 AM 6 PM 6-7 At Sea 10-11 At Sea 6 Fiordland Natiollal Park Scenic Cruising AM 6 PM 8 Fiordlalld Natiollal Park Scellic Cruising 7 AM 5 PM 12 Bali Illdonesi (Padang Bay) 7AM 6PM
7-8 At Sea J DUlledill New Zealalld (Port Chalmers) 8 AM 6 PM 13-14 At Se 10 Christchurch N~ Zealalld (Lytlelton) 8 AM 6 PM 15 Kuala Lumpur Mlaysia (Port KeIang) 8AM 6PM9 Tasmania Australia (Hobart) 8 AM 6 PM 11 Wellillgtoll New Zealmd 8 AM 6 PM 16 Sillgpore 8AM 6PM
10 At Sea 12 At Sea 17 At Sea 11 Melbourne Australia 8 AM 6 PM 13 Taurallga New Zealalld 8 AM 730 PM 18 Ho Chi Millh City Vietnm (Vung Tau) 7AM 730 PM 12 At S~a 19 At Sea 14 Bay of Islallds New Zealalld 8 AM 7 PM 13 SydPey Australia DISEMBARK AM 20 Bmgkok Thailalld (Laem Chabang) DISEMBARK AM15 Aucklalld New Zealalld DISEMBARK AM
t llinemy opcrnesln reverse order Port times mil1 my
CHINAFAR EAST SOUTHEAST ASIAFAR EAST
1612 DAYSDAYS
PACIFIC PRINCESS
SAPPHIRE PRINCESS PACIFIC PRINCESS
OSAKA BEIJING to
to BANGKOK OSAKA
2004 DEPARTURE DATE 2004 DEPARTURE DATEPAClFlC PRINCESS
julllt Jun 11 2005 DEPARTURE DATE
SAPPHIRE PRINCESS Apr 11
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Osaka Japall EMBARK PM
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Beijillg China (Xingang) EMBARK PM 2 Hiroshima Japall 1 PM 6PM 2 DaHan China AM 5PM 3 At Sea 3 At Sea 4 Shmghai Chilla 7 AM 6PM 4 Shallghai Chilla (overnight onboard ship) 7AM 5 At Sea 5 Shallghai China 6PM 6 Okinaw Jpll 7 AM 1 PM
7 Taipei Taiwm (KeeIung) 9 AM 7PM6 At Sea 8 At Se7 Pusan South Korea 8AM 5PM 9 HOllg KOllg Chill 8 AM 7PM 8 At Sea 10-11 At S~a J Vladivostok Russia 5AM 730 PM 12 Ho Chi MiIJh City Vietnm (Phu My) 7 AM 5PM 10 At Sea 13 At Se 11 Nagasaki Japan 7AM 6PM 14 Singpore 8 AM 6pM
15 KUlltll Mlysi 830 AM 430 PM12 At Sea 16 At Sea 13 Osaka Japan DISEMBARK AM 17 Ballgkok Thaillld DISEMBARK AM t Sailing alls i1t Hiroshima on Dl) 11 In place of Nilgilsaki Port times milY vary
CRUISE I flNERARY CRUISE I flNERARY
Ho Chi Minh City Vietnam
EXOTICS CRUISES
SOUTHEAST ASIACHINA SOUTHEAST ASIACHINA FAR EASTALASKA
PACIflC PRINCISS ROYAL PRINCESS
16 16 19 DAYS DAYS DAYS
SAPPHIRE SAPPHIRE PRINCESS
Sail between PRINCESSBANGKOK
and BANGKOK OSAKA
BEIJING to to
2004 DEPARTURE DATES BEIJING SEATTLEPAClFlC PRINCESS
Jun 27tt 200S DEPARTURE DATE200S DEPARTURE DATE ROYAL PRINCESS
Mar 26 Apr 23Oct 16 Nov lt
CRUISE I I INERARY CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
1 GsakaJpan EMBARK PM1 Bangkok Thailand (Laem Chabang) EMBARKPM 1 Bangkok Thailand (Laern Chabang) EMBARK IM 2 At Sea2 At Sea 2 AtSea bull 3 Nagasaki Japan 7 AM 6PM
9AM 7PM 3 Singapore 7PM 4 Pusan Soqth Korea 8AM 5PM 4-5 At Sea 5 At Sea gt bull
7AM 7PM 6 Da Nwg Vietn~1Il 7AM middot7PM 6 Vladivostok Russia SAM 730 PM 7 At Sea 7 AtSea
7AM 12M 8 Hong lltog ihin~ 7AM 12M 8 Sapporo japan (Muroran) 6AM 6PM 9-10 At Sea 9-10 At Sea 9-12 At Sea cross Intemational Dateline
13 DutchHarbor Alaska (Aleutian Islands) 230 PM 7PM11 ShaJlgllai Cbina (overnight onboard ship) lAM 11 Shangh~t Cllina (ovmightonJoltird $hip) 7 AM 14 At Sea shy12 Shanghai China 6PM 12 Shanghai China
7AM - - tlJf
6PM 15 Anchorage Alaska (Seward) 8AM 6PM13 At Sea 13 AtSea i 16 College Fjord Seni CruIsing 630AM 930 AM
14 Nagasaki japan 7AM 6PM 14 Nagasaki japan 6PM 17 Glacier Ilay Scenic Cruising 1030 AM 830 PM 15 Pusan South lltOrea TAM 4PM 1~ bull Pu~an SQuth iorea middot4lM 18 middotmiddot juneau Alaska 6 AM 2PM 16 At Sea 16 At Sea 19 - At Sea 17 Beijing China (Xingangy OISEMBAlUe AM 17 Beijing Cliina (Xingang) 20 SeattleWashington DISEMBARK AM
t ltinemy Operne5 in rcvmc Older ttPorttimcsmiYnl)middotShlpwilldocklnampngkoknsttadofL1cm~
POLYNESIA amp THE COOK ISLANDS POLYNESIA amp THE MARQUESAS ISLANDS
10 10 DAYS DAYS
TAHITIAN PRINCESSTAHITIAN PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIPROUNDTRIP fromfrom
PAPEETEPAPEETE 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
2004 DEPARTURE DATES Oct 4 24 Mayl 17 27 Sep4 14 24 Nov 13 Jun 6 16 26 0lt 14 00323Ju16 16 26 Nov 323 2005 DEPARTURE DATESAug 5 15 25 Dec 13 Jan 12
Feb 1 21200S DEPARTURE DATES
~~ 122 ~~Il 13 23 CRUISE ITINERARY
CRUISE II INERARY DAY PORT
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Papeete Tahiti 1 Papeete Tahiti (overnight onboard ship) EMBARK PM
2 Moorea Polynesia 2 Papeete Tahiti SPM 3 Huahil1e P9lynesia 8AM 5 PM 3 Tuamotu Atolls Senic Cruising
5 PM8-AM 4 At Sea I At Sea 5 Rarotonga Cook Islands 8AM 5 PI~ 5 Nuku Hiva Marquesas Islands 6 At Sea 6 Hiva Ga Marquesas Islands 8AM 5PM 7 Raiatea Polynesia overnight onboard Ship 6AM
7 At Sea middotai~ RaiateaPQlynesia igt gt 6AM 8 Rangiroa P~iynesia 8AM 4PM8 Tahaa scenic Cryising 630 AM 830 AM
8 BoraBoraPQlyrtesia(ovemightollboard ship) UN 9 Tahaa ~enl Cruising 8 AM middot11AM
9 Bora lora Polynesia 5iM 9 Raiatea Polynesia 12 N 11 PM 10 Moore Polynesfa 8 AM 5 PM la ~ Bora ~oraPoIYnesia 8AM bull 5PM
11 Papeete Tahiti DISEMBARK AM 11 Papeete Tahiti DISEMBARK AM Iong Kong Harbor
3 Singapore 4-5 At Sea 6 Da NangVieinam 7 At Sea 8 liong Kong China
EXOTICS CRU ISES
HAWAIITAHITI HAWAIIAN ISLANDS SOUTH PACIFIC ISLANDS
12 1515 DAYS DAYSDAYS
PACIFIC
TAHITIAN PRINCESS ISLAND PRINCESSPAClFIC PRINCESS
PRINCESS
SYDNEYROUNDTRIP sail between tofrom
PAPEETE PAPEETELOS ANGELES and
2004 DEPARnIRE DATEHONOLULU 2004 DEPARTURE DATES Apr 21
2004 DEPARTURE DATES ~~~l CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE 11 INERARY
Oet21t CRUISE ITINERARY Nov Sf
MayS PACIFIC PRINCESS DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
Nov20t DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DecSt 1 Los Angeles CalifornIa EMBARK AM 1 Sydney AustralIa EMBARK PMAug 17t
Dec20t1 Papeete Tahiti EMBARK PM 2-4 At Sea
2005 DEPARTURE DATE Jan 4 2-5 At Sea
(overnight onboard ship) Jan 19 5 Auckland New Zealand 7 AM 2PMFeb 3t 6 Iiilo Hawaii 8 AM 6 PM
TAHITIAN PRINCESS Papeete Tahiti 11 PM fb 18 6-7 At Sea Kilauea Voko ~enic CruisingApr 12 MarS t 3 Moorea Polynesia 8 AM 5 PM 8 Suva fijI 11 AM 430 PM1~i~t 7 Kona Hawaii 8AM 6PM4 Bora Bora PolYnesia 8 AM 5 PM 9 At Sea Cross International Dateline Apr 19
5-6 At Sea 8 Honolulu Hawaii 8AM 11 PM 10 Apia Western Samoa 830 AM 2PM 7 Christmas Isl~ndKiribati 1Z N 5 PM 9 Kauai Hawaii (Nawlliwlli) 8AM 6PM 11-12 At Sea 8-9 At Sea 10 Maui Hawaii (Lahaina) 6PM 13 Bora Bora Polynesia lOAM 6PM 10 HlloliaWlii 6 PM 13 Raiatea Polynesia (overnight onboard 11 PM11-14 At Sea 11 Maui Hawaii (Lahaina) 8 AM 6 PM 14 Raiatea Polynesia 11 PM
15 Ensenada Mexico (service call)KaUaiH~waii(Nawllfwtli) 8AM 6 PM 15 Moorea Polynesia 8AM 5PM
tllinemyopcr~ttsln=x QnIerPurtlimcslmYvary Honolulu Hawaii DISEMBARK AM 16 Los Angeles CalIfornia DISEMBARK AM 16 Papeete Tahiti DISEMBARK AM
ISLANDS OF THE PACIFIC THEATER SOUTH PACIFIC EXPLORER
24 24 DAYS DAYS
PAClFIC PRINCESS PAClFIC PRINCESS
sail between HONOLULU PAPEETE
and to OSAKA FT LAUDERDALE
2004 DEPARTURE DATES
Mayl 2004 DEPARTURE DATEJul2Sj
Aug 29 CRUISE ITINERARY
CRUISE ITINERARYDAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART EMBARK PM DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
1 Papeete Tahiti EMBARK PM lPM 7PM 2 8AM 11 PM
3 ~~~~~~ ~~~~Sta 8AM 5 PM 4-6 At Sea 7 Pitcairn Island Scenic Cruising 8AM 1211
8AM 12 N
7AM ZPM 8-9 At Sea 10 Easter Island Chile 8AM 2PM
9AM 11-14 At Sea 15 Callao Peru (overnight for Lima and Machu Picchu) 8AM 16 Callao Peru lPM 17 At Sea 18 Manta Ecuador (for Quito) 9fM 7PM 19 At Sea 20 Transit Panama Canal 7 AM 430 PM 21 San BIas Panama 8AM 5 PM 22 ft Sea 23 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands 7AM 4PM 24 At Sea
25 Ft Lauderdale Florida DISEMBARK AMMoorea Polynesia tllinemyoperataln~12onlerPortl1mesmiYmymiddot
EXOTICS CRUISES
HAWAIITAHITISOUTH PACIFIC AMAZONSOUTHERN CARIBBEAN CAPE HORNSTRAIT OF MAGELLAN
1430 12 DAYS DAYSDAYS
ROYAL PRINCESS ROYAL PRINCESSSAPPHIRE PRINCESS
sail betweenFT LAUDERDALE SANTIAGOLOS ANGELES to
andto MANAUS BUENOS AIRESSYDNEY 2005 DEPARTURE DATE 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
2004 DEPARTURE DATE Apr 9 Jan 10
Nov 22 Jan 241 Feb 7
FebZt
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
CRUISE ITINERARY
CRUISE ITINERARYCRUISE ITINERARY 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTDAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 2-3 At Sea 1 Santiago Chile (Valparaiso) EMBARK PM
1 Los ingeles California EMBARK PM 4 Tortola BritIsh Virgin Islands 8 AM 6 PM 2 At Sea 2 Ensenada Mexico 8AM 5PM 3 Puerto Montt Chile 7AM 6PM
3middot6 At Sea 4 At Sea 5 Dominica 9 AM 4 PM 7 Hilo Hawaii 8AM 5 At Sea Chilean Fjords Scenic Cruising6PM 6 Trinidad 9 AM 6 PM
8 Maui Hawaii (Lahaina) 8AM 6PM 6 At Sea Amalia Glacier Scentc CruiSi3f7 At Sea 7 Punta Arenas Chile (Strait of Magei an) 7AM 6PM9 Honolulu Hawaii 7AM 5PM
- 10middot13 At Sea 8 Beagle Channel Scenic Cruising 8 Ushuaia Argentina (Tierra del Fuo) 12N 8PM
8 Devils Island French Guiana (Isle Royal) 8 AM 2 PM 14 Bora Bora Polynesia 8AM 6PM 9 At Sea 9 At Sea Cape Hom Scenic Cruising
10 Santarem Brazil 9 AM 7 PM 10 Moorea Polynesia 8AM 6PM 10 Falkland Islands (Stanley) 8AM 6PM 10 Papeete Tahiti (overnight onboard ship) 9PM 11 At Sea
i 16 Papeete Tahiti 6PM 11 Boca da Valeria Brazil (Amazon River) 7 AM 2 PM 12 Puerto Madryn Argentina 6AM 5PM 17middot18 AtSea 12 Manaus Brazil (overnight onboard ship) 10 AM 13 At Sea
14 Montevideo Uruguay 9AM 6PM19 Pago Pago merlcan Samoa 8AM 6PM 13 Manaus Brazil DISEMBARK AM 15 Buenos Aires Argentina DISEMBARK AM 20 Apia Western Samoa 8AM 6PM 21 At Sea Cross International Dateline middotl1me5forallscenkouisinCile subjectlDclwIgc
tllinmryopefilteslnr=rscordttPorttlmislm)vary22 Suva Fiji 8AM 6PM l 23-24 At Sea
20 Auckland New Zealand 8AM 6PM ORINOCO RIVERSOUTHERN CARIBBEAN ANDESSOUTH AMERICA 26 Tauranga New Zealand 8AM 7PM 27 At Sea
28 Wellington Newealand 8AM 6PM 16 17 DAYS DAYS 29-30 AtSea
31 Sydney Australia DISEMBARK AM ROYAL PRINCESS ROYAL PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP SANTIAGO from to
FT LAUDERDALE FT LAUDERDALE
200S DEPARTURE DATE2005 DEPARTURE DATE
Mar 7Mar 24
CRUISE IIJNERARYCRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Santiago Chlle (Valparaiso) EMBARK PM
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM
2 La Serena Chile (Coquimbo) 8 AM 5 PM2-3 At Sea 3 At Sea Um6n Costa Rica 7AM 7PM 4 Arica Chile 7AM 6PMCristobal Panama (for Panama Canal) 8AM 5PM o At Sea
6 Cartagena Colombia 9AM 2 PM 6 San Martin Peru (for Pisco and Machu Picchu) 7AM 6PM 7 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 130 PM 7PM 7 Callao Peru (overnight for Lima) 530 AM 8-9 At sea 8 Callao Peru 1PM 10 Puerto Ordaz Venezuela (Orinoco River) 8AM 6PM 9 At Sea
i 11 At Sea 10 Manta Ecuador (overnight for Quito) 530AM 12 Greada 8AM i 11 Manta Ecuador 1lM5PMt 1~ Dolllinlca i 7N1 5 PM 12 At Sea
i 13 Transit Panama C~nal 7AM 430 PM14 St Thomas us Virgilslands 9AM 5PM 14 Cartagena Colombia 8AM 130 PMJs AtSei i 15 Aruba Netherlands intiiles 1PM 7PM 16 Princess Cays Bahamas 8AM 16-17 At Sea Tahiti Polynesia 17 FtLallardale Flillilt~ DISEMBARK AM 1ampmiddot Ft L~uderdale Florida DISEMBARK AM
AMAZON RIVERMEDITERRANEAN
21 DAYS
ROYAL PRINCESS
MANAUS
to ROME
2005 DEPARTURE DATE
Apr 21
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE M~naus Brazil (Wemight onboardship) Manaus Brazil
3 BocadaValeria Brazil (AriiazonRivet) 11 AM 4-6 At Sea 7 Recife Brazil 1 PM 8-11 AtSea 12 Dakar Senegal 8AM 13-14 At Sea 15 Agadir Morocco 7AM 16 Casablanca Morocco (for Marrakech) 8AM 17 Gibraltar lOAM 18 Allcante Spain 12 N 19 Barcelona Spain 8AM 20 Cannes France (for Monte Carlo) 8AM 21 FlorencePisa Italy (Livarno) 7AM 22 Rome Italy (Civitavecchia) DISEMBARK AM
INDIAN OCEANAUSTRALIA
28 DAYS
PACIfIC PRINCESS
CAPE TOWN
to SYDNEY
2004 DEPARTURpound DATE
Oct 20
CRUISE ITINERARY1 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Cape Town South Africa EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 3 East London South Africa 7AM 3PM 4 DurbahSouth Africa 8AM 6PM 5-7 At Sea 8 Nosy BeMadagascar 7AM 4PM 9 At Sea 10 Poilit des Galets Reunioll]slahd 11 Port Louis Mauritius 12c19 At Sea 20 Perth Australia (Fremantle) 21-23 At Sea 24 Adelaide Australla 25 At Sea 26 Melbourne Australla 7 27 Tasmania AUstralia (Burnie) 28 At Sea 29 Sydney Australia DISEMBARK AM
I
DEPART EMBARK PM
7PM 6PM
8pM
5PM
3PM 9PM 6PM 6PM 5PM 7PM 7PM
EXOTICS CRUISES
SOUIB ATIANTICANTARCfICNSOUIB AMERICA
24 DAYS
ROYAL PRINCESS
CAPE TOWN
to SANTIAGO
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
Dec 17
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Cape TownSouthAfrica (overnighfol1board ship) EMBARK PM 2 Cape Town South Africa 3PM 2 if~~t Good HopSCenic Crulsing 3-6 6 Tristan DaCunha United Kingdom 8AM 5PM 7-10 At Sea 11 Falkland Islands (Staliley) 8 AM 5PM 12 At Sea 13-16 Antarctica Peninsula ScehltmiddotCruising 14 days ihcludingmiddot Elephant
Island AntarcticSotind Deceptionlslana GerlacheStrait NaxefChannel Schollaert Channel SigJtla Island and Boyd Strait)
17 At Sea Cape Horn Scenic Cruising1amp UshuaiaArgentina (Tierra del fuego) bull middot6 AM 19 Punta Arenas Chile (Strait of Magellan) 7 AM 20 At Sea Amalia Glacier Scenic Cruising21 At Sea Chilean Fjords Scenic Cruising22 AtSea 23 Puerto Mont Chile 7AM 6PM 24 At Sea 25 Santiago Chile (Valparaiso) DISEMBARK AM
-nmes for1l scenlccruisinc are subJect to change
ASIAINDIAMEDITERRANEAN
30 ROYAL PRINCESSDAYS
ROME
to BANGKOK
2004 DEPARlURE DATE
Sep 16
CRUISE Il INERARY
WEST AFRICASOUTH AMERICA
28 DAYS
PACIFIC PRINCESS
FT LAUDERDALE
to CAPE TOWN
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
51 22
CRUISE ITINERARY
DISEMBARK AM
Aruba
EXOTICS CRU ISES amp CRU ISETOU RS
AUSTRALIANEW ZEALAND CRUISETOUR
AUSTRALIAN EXPLORER 2004 DEPARTURE DATESAPPHIRE21 plus
DAYS PRINCESS SYDNEY Dec 17 to
AUCKLAND CRUISETOUR 5P CRUiSE
CRUISETOUR ITINERARY
DAY PORT By Sea By Land DAY PORT
1 Sydney 14 Fiordland National Park 2 Sydney Scenic Cruising
3 SydneyAyers Rock 15 Dunedin New Zealand (Port Chalmers) 4 Ayers ROek
5 Ayers RockPort Douglas 16 Christchurch New Zealand 6 Port Douglas - (Lytleton)
7 Port DouglasSydneyEmbark 17 Wellilgton New Zealand 8 At Sea 18 At Sea 9 Melbourne Australia 19 Tauranga New Zealand
10 At Sea 20 Bay of Islands New Zealand 11 Tasmania Australia (Hobart) 21 Auckland New Zealand 12middot13 At Sea
Sydney Opera House Australia
AUSTRALIANEW ZEALAND CRUISETOUR SOUTHEAST ASIACHINA CRUISETOUR CAPE HORNSTRAIT OF MAGELLAN CRUISETOUR AUSTRALIAN BEIJING Be TERRA COTTA 2004 DEPARTURE DATES RIO 8t IGUAZU FALLS Post-Crulsetour1 Pre-Crulsetour 217EXPLORER 2005 DEPARTURE DATES PACIFICSAPPHIRE WARRIORS19 plw or PRINCESS jul9t loieifie
DAYS PRINCESS SYDNEY Jan 12 plus 19 ROYAL plw Feb 5 Oct 28 Royal BUENOS AIRES
AUCKLAND DAYS ROYAL PRINCESS to 21 ampto DAYS PRINCESS
BEUING CRUISE t ~~S~i BeWln~~~~e
to SANTIAGO~e~s~Ot~r~ih~fi1BANGKOK CRUiSE CRUISECRUISETOUR 3t3P landtourm~yvlty CRUISETOUR 12
DAY PORT DAY PORT
DAY PORT By Sea ltBy LaDd DAY PORT
1 Beijing 11-12 At Sea 1 Rio de janeiro 11 Cape Horn Scenic Cruising
13 Hong Kong 2 Rio de jneiro c 12 Ushuaia Argentina 14 At Sea 3 RiolgUaiu Falls 12 Beagle Channel Scenlc Cruising
15 Nha Trang Vietnam 4 IIDIilZll FaU$13u~os~re$ 13 Punta Arenas Chile
16 Phu My Vietnam 5 Buens AiresEmbark 14 At Sea 17 At Sea 6 Montevideo Uruguay 15 Seno Eyre Fjord Scenic Cruising 18 Singapore 7 At Sea 16 At Sea 19 Kualtan Malaysia 8 Puerto Madryn Argentina 17 Puerto Montt Chile 20 At Sea 9 At Sea 18 At Sea 21 Bangkok Thail3nd 10 Falkland Islands (Stanley) 19 Santiago Chile
DAY PORT DAY PORT
At Sea Pusan SouthKOrea Nagasaki japan At Sea Shanghai China
Note CnIlst route shown for Royil Princess Oct 28 only Timcsforil1lsccnkoulslngmsubjccttothange
CRUISE [OUR ITINERARY
CRUISETOUR ITINERARY
CRUISrrOlJR ITINERARY Fiordland National Park Scenic Cruising DlUedin New Zealand Christchurch New Zealand Wellington New Zealand
14
GRAND PANAMA CANAL CRUISES
ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL
10 10 11 DAYSDAYS DAYS
CORAL PRINCESS GRAND PRINCESS GRAND PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIPfrom from
fromFT LAUDERDALE GALVESTON GALVESTON
2004 DEPARTURE DATES Oct n 21 31 2004 DEPARTURE DATE
2004 DEPARTURE DATENov 10 20 30middot DeelSmiddot
DedSDec 10 28
2005 DEPARTURE DATES CRUISE ITINERARY Jan 7 17 27
CRUISE ITINERARY Feb 6 16 26 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART MarS 1828 CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Galveston Texas EMBARK PMApr 7 17 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTshy 1 Galveston Texas EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 1 ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 3 Belize City Belize 1 PM 7PM 2-3 At Sea 3 Belize City Belize lPM 7PM 4 Costa Maya Mexico (Mahahual) 8AM 4PM 4 Um6n Costa Rica 7AM rPM 4 Costa Maya Mexico (Mahahual) SAM 4 PM 5 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands 12 PM 7PM 5 Panama Canal (to Gatun Lake) 7AM 430 PM 5 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands 12 PM 7PM 6 Ocho Rios Jamaica SAM 5PM 5 Col6n Panama 5PM 8PM 6 At Sea 7 At Sea 6 At Sea Cristobal Panama 7AM 4PM 8 7AM 4PM 7 Grand Cayman Cayman IslandS 7AM 4PM (fot Panama Canal) ftrtpg~niaa~~) S Corumel Mexico SAM 6PM 8 At Sea 9 At Sea 9 Bclize City Belize 7AM 4 PM 6PM 10 Coromel Mexico lOAM 6 PM9 Cozumel Mexico lOAM 10 At Sea 10 At Sea 11 At Sea
Portordtrllndtlmtsmayvllry 11 flo Lauderdale florida DISEMBARK AM Portorntr IInltf timpoundi may vary 11 Galveston Texas DISEMBARK AM Port ordu and Nmes may vary 12 Galv_es~on Texas DISEMBARK AM
ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL
8 DAYS
CORAL PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP
from
FT LAUDERDALE
2004 DEPARTURE DATE Dec 20
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Fl Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM 2-3 At Sea 4 Lim6n Costa Rica 7AM 7PM 5 Panama Canal (to Gatun Lake) 7 AM 430 PM 5 Co16n Panama 5PM SPM 6 At Sea 7 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands SAM 5PM S At Sea 9 Flo Lauderdale Florida DISEMBARK AM Bridge of the Americas Panama
f OptIonll fOllTS inclld1lI tht AtlllnH to Pacific RlIlllfll) joumq will dlmlldrt tilt ship b) tctdtr lit Gfttlm uk AJkr tour plIssmm dlstmlrark tilt shipwin procmlllat through tilt Gatun Locb lIndjlnlllly dock in Gl6lI Hmal1p41Sl11tmmttydiumlmtheJldlo~ lflrshops IInd~llI toIIrsrrnrl CIItutl14ktlllIrtonlflrJhlp
GRAND PANAMA CANAL CRUISES
GRAND PANAMA CANAL GRAND PANAMA CANAL GRAND PANAMA CANAL
150R 18 150R 1715 DAYS DAYS DAYS
CORAL PRINCESS SUN PRINCESS
REGAL PRINCESS REGAL PRINCESS SUN PRINCESS
DAWN PRINCESS REGAL PRINCESS sail between DAWN PRINCESS
sail between FT LAUDERDALE FT LAUDERDALE sail betweenand
FT LAUDERDALEand SAN DIEGO andLOS ANGELES
SAN FRANCISCO 2004 DEPARTURE DATES 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
DAWN PRINCESS 2004 DEPARTURE DATESNov 24Sp191
CRUISE ITINERARY Dec9t CORAL PRINCESSREGAL PRINCESS 5ltp261 CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE ITINERARY
200S DEPARTURE DATES Dec 24 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
SUN PRINCESS DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARIltPM200S DEPARTURE DATES DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Sep 2StMar 24
3 Ocho Rios Jamaica lOAM 6PM 2-3 At5ea 2 At Sea 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBA8KPM
REGAL PRINCESS AprSt 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBA8KPM Jan stu 200S DEPARTURE DATES2 At Sea4 At Sea 4 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 7AM lPMJan 23 5 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 7AM lPM 3 Ocho Rios Jamaica lOAM 6PM REGAL PRINCESS 5 Cartagena Colombia 9AM 3PMFeb7t 4 At Sea Apr 239AM 3PM 6 Transit Panama Canal 7AM 430 PMFb22 ~ yenr~fte~~~~~~u 7AM 430 PM 5 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 7AM lPM At SeaMar9t CORAL PRINCESS 79AM 3PM8 At Sea Apr 27 8 Puntarenas Costa Rica 7AM 7PMSUN PRINCESS 9 Puntarenas Costa Rica 7 AM 7PM ~ yenr~fte~n~~~~~u 7AM 430 PM 9-10 At SeaApr1S 8 At Sea DAWN PRINCESS10-11 At Sea 11 Acapulco Mexico 8AM 5PM
5PM 9 Puntarenas Costa Rica 7AM 7PM Apr 29H ~ae~lcoMexico 8 AM 12 At SeatllWrryopmllzlfrarnLls~in 10-11 At Sea rmrKfIfikTiIIrttimnma1 tlliJlrraryoptJllllsfrlJflSlmFranrimlJn 13 Cabo San lucas Mexico 8AM 5PM
gt This mUJI C4Jl llfwmblnld wlth a 3 14 Cabo San Lucas Mexico 7 AM lPM H ~e~o Mexico 8AM SPM rmruordrrorttimamG)llIryCoIutar CnUK to VlWOIlllr SC Dqs ThUIltIIIflltllnlltCllIIblntdwilhaZ-day 14-15 At Sea 16lhrlllllhI9lllIbtboobdulaquoSC)lQ4k t Illncral) lIpCutcs in mrmt orm Pllrt IiIIIa CocastaICnliutoVan(ouKrBCDlIys16 16 San Francisco California 7AM 4PMcowtlIrcrllisr IIIIYlIl1Ymiddot IhrounIScankboobdlUaK)lllllluU t~A~geles California 6 AM 5PM 14 Cabo San Lucas Mexico 8AM 5PM
Thllwl1JIIICllllslltMOlIkpilllyJmtcad 17-18 At Sea middotmiddotThliIAfllIllCltlllsatMGnIqclBaylnstcadllf 15 At Sea CPlIilldCI1IIu 17 At Sea o[OdKKwsPurllilllrlmllYWlry OchoRicJsPortllmtslllllYVllfymiddot D1SEMBA8K AM19 Vancouver BC DISEMBA8K AM 16 San Die20 California DlSEMBA8K AM 18 Val1couver BC
GRAND PANAMA CANAL COASTAL CRUISING
2-4 CORAL PRINCESS ISLAND PRINCESS SUN PRINCESS18 DAWN PRINCESS DIAMOND PRINCESS STAR PRINCESSDAYSDAYS
COASTAL CRUISE SCHEDULEREGAL PRINCESS
SHIP DAYS FROM TO DEPARTURE DATE DIAMOND PRINCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 5104
SAN FRANCISCO DIAMOND PRINCES5 4 Vancouver Seattle 5404 to CORAL PRINCESS 2 San Francisco Vancouver 5604
NEW YORK DAWN PRiNCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 5704 ISLAND PRiNCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 51204
2004 DEPARTURE DATE SUN PRINCESS 3 San Francisco Vancouver 51404Aug 24 ISLAND PRiNCESS 3 Vancouver LOI Angeles 91804
DIAMOND PRINCESS 1 Seattle Vancouver 91804CRUISE ITINERARY DIAMOND PRINCESS 6 Vancouver Los Angeles 91904 SAPPHIRE PRINCESS 1 Seattle Vancouver 91904 SAPPHREPRINCESS 2 Vancouver San Francisco 92004 DIAMOND PRINCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 43005 DlAMONDPRiNCES$ 4 Vancouver Seattle 5305 SUN PRINCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 5305
ISLAND PRiNCESS 3 Los Angeles VancOllver 5405 CORAL PRiNCESS 2 San Francisco Vancouver 51205
Coral Princess in the Panama Canal
CRUISE PLUS
Extend your adventure with our Cruise Plusreg program Cruise Plusreg enables you to enhance your vacation with one- to four-night hotel
packages in cities that stand on their own as vacation destinations Add nights in Sydney before you cruise or extend your vacation with nights in the city by the
bay San Francisco Transportation and luggage handling costs from the airport to both hotel and ship plus meet and greet services are always included
Wherever you choose to explore youll enjoy properties that are carefully chosen based on service value location and the peace of mind of knowing that Princess
has arranged it all for you
Anchorage Alaska Trevi Fountain Rome Auckland Harbor New Zealand
The Cruise Plusreg Program is available in over 30 major cities including
MEDITERRANEANAEGEAN EXOTICS PANAMA CANAL Barcelona London Rome and Venice Auckland Bangkok Beijing Buenos Aires Ft Lauderdale Los Angeles New York City
Cape Town Ft Lauderdale Honolulu Los San Diego San Francisco Sanjuan Vancouver NORTHERN EUROPE Angeles Montreal Moorea New York City Copenhagen and London MEXICO CARIBBEANOsaka Papeete Rome San Francisco
Ft Lauderdale Galveston Los AngelesTRANSATLANTIC Santiago Seattle Sydney Vancouver Venice Barcelona Copenhagen Ft Lauderdale San Francisco and San Juan
London New York City and Rome ALASKA Anchorage Calgary Fairbanks Kenai San Francisco Seattle and Vancouver
For more information about options and pricing reference a destination specific brochure or contact your travel agent
TRAVEL THE WORLD WITH THE LEADER IN CRUISINGmiddot Princess
Analysis by the Hawaii Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism Comparing the Economic Impact of Foreign Flag Ships with US Flag Cruise Ships Sailing in Hawaii
This is a summary of an analysis prepared by the Hawai Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism (DBEDT) of the economic impact of the foreign flag cruise ship fleet sailing in Hawaii as compared to each of the US flag ships operating in Honolulu
The comparison is set out below
Foreign Pride Pride Pride
Fleet Of Hawaii Of Aloha Of America
Total economic output impact (spendingsales) ($mil) 155 542 4225 4958
Total earnings impact (labor earnings) ($mil) 44 155 1207 1411
Total employment impact Uobs) 1447 5059 3943 4627
This analysis demonstrates that a single US-flagged ship the Pride of America home ported in Honolulu is 32 times more economically impactful and creates 32 times as many jobs as the entire foreign flag fleet that sails into and out of Hawaii ports of call
Economic Impact of Pride of America
Assumptions 1 Annual impact though Pride of Aloha is leaving in May 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existing Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($) 4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of outputl$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job multiplier (jobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
118700 105
2706 3373
147 042
1372
4958
1417
4627
Data sourcelformula Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Line 1 x line 2 x line 31 000000
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 4 x line 5
Line 4 x line 6
Line 4 x line 7
Economic Impact of Pride of Hawaii
Assumptions
1 Annual impact though Pride of Hawaii is leaving in February 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existing Pride of Aloha and Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($) 4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job multiplier (jobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
Data sourceformula 139770 Actual 2007 figure
975 Actual 2007 figure 2706 Actual 2007 figure 3688 Line 1 x line 2 x line 31000000
147 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model 042 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
1372 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
5421 Line 4 x line 5
1549 Line 4 x line 6
5059 Line 4 x line 7
Economic Impact of Pride of Aloha
Assumptions 1 Annual impact though Pride of Aloha is leaving in May 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existlng Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($)
4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job mUltiplier Oobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
95680 111
2706 2874
147 042
1372
4225
1207
3943
Data sourcelformula Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Line 1 x line 2 x line 31000000
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 4 x line 5
Line 4 x line 6
Line 4 x line 7
lt
Methodology Used in Calculating Impact of International Cruise Ships
Cruise ship visitors 1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Came with ships 3 Flied in 4 Average length of stay (days) 5 PPPD ($) 6 Cruise visitor spending ($mil))
Cruise ship crews 7 Ratio of crew spending to cruise visitor spending 8 Cruise crew spending
Cruisline 9 Ratio of crew spending to cruise visitor spending
10 Cruiseline spending
11 Total cruise-related spending ($mil)
12 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 13 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 14 Job multiplier Uobs$ cruise -related spending)
15 Total output impact ($miJ)
16 Total earnings impact ($miJ)
17 Total employment impact (jobs)
106641 98307
8334 739 847 668
02 134
038 254
1055
147 042
1372
1551
444
1447
Data sourceformula Line 2 + line 3 DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report Line 1 x line 4 x line 5
DBEDT 2003 Cruise study Line 7 x line 6
DBEDT 2003 Cruise study Line 9 x line 6
Line 6 + line 8 + line 10
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 11 x line 12
Line 11 x line 13
Line 11 x line 14
Economic Contributions Foreign-Flag Fleet operating in Hawaii vs Three US-Flag Ships
$1500
Pride of Hawaii$1000- $542 million VIc -0-E c Pride of AlohaCo
423 million$500
Pride of America $496 million155 million$shy
Foreign-Flag US-Flag Fleet Fleet
Source State of Hawaii Department of US-Flag $1460 billion Business Economic Development and Tourism
Foreign-Flag $ 155 million 7292008
Employment Foreign-Flag Fleet operating in Hawaii vs Three US-Flag Ships
15000
10000
til c o Pride of Aloha
39435000
Pride of America 1447 4627
~---------
Foreign-Flag US-Flag Fleet Fleet
Source State of Hawaii Department of US-Flag 13629 jobs Business Economic Development and Tourism
Foreign-Flag 1447 jobs 7292008
Foreign Flag Capacity Growth Foreign flag passenger capacity has changed five-fold on roundtrip Hawaii cruises from the West Coast since enactment of the Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative
1600000
1400000
tn 1200000
J enshyZ
1000000
I shyG) en 800000 s G) tn tn
600000 as D 400000
200000
0 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Year
Source US Maritime Administration (derived from the US Customs and Border Patrol Vessel Entrance and Clearance documents - final 2007 data) 7292008
NCL America Hawaii Economic Contributions
(2004-2008)
bull (in Millions) bull $399 in wages benefits and overtime to US seafarers bull $35 in Federal and State payroll Taxes bull $64 in Government Fees and Taxes to Hawaii bull $28 in wages benefits and overtime to US other employees bull $52 in Port Charges to Hawaii Companies (Stevedores tugs pilots etc) bull $85 in Fuel to Tesoro Hawaii bull $130 for shore excursions to Hawaii tour operators bull $39 for Hawaii hotel rooms and ground transport bull $75 for food grown in Hawaii bull $57 in union fees and levies (incl $32M paid directly by employees) bull $1 in MMD fees to the United States Coast Guard bull $51 for recruitment screening processing and training crew bull $76 advertising and promoting Hawaii as a destination bull $1092
COASTWISE CRUISES INTERPRETIVE RULE RESOLUTION Adopted at the
US Conference of Mayors 76th Annual Meeting
June 20-242008 Miami
WHEREAS the Department of Homeland Securitys Customs and Border Protection (CBP) issued a proposed Interpretive Rule regulating Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises on foreign flagged vessels between US ports of call under the Passenger Vessel Services Act at the request of the United States Maritime Administration and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule would require that a foreign-flagged vessel on a coastwise cruise to call at a foreign port for at least 48 hours with that foreign stop constituting at least 50 percent of the cruise itinerary and allowing passengers to disembark the cruise vessel at the foreign port before continuing the cruise to a US port of call and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule establishes burdensome criteria that are wholly inconsistent with industry practice particularly the 48-hour call at foreign port shyinasmuch as the standard port call is six to eight hours - as well as the requirement that 50 percent of a cruise be spent at the foreign port and
WHEREAS the intent of the proposed Interpretive Rule is to protect the single remaining US flag vessel serving the Inter-Hawaiian Island cruise trade that according to the Hawaii Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism generates more than 4600 jobs and generates nearly $500 million in economic benefits for the state annually and
WHEREAS thousands of members of the International Longshore Workers Union (nWU) are employed at US ports serving cruise ships and whose jobs would be at risk if the proposed Interpretive Rule were implemented and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule is vague as to the breadth of its application ie to coastwise cruises between all United States ports or applied solely to coastwise cruises from West Coast ports to Hawaii and
WHEREAS the Cruise Lines International Association estimates the proposed Interpretive Rule would upend the $17 billion in national cruise industry spending and put at risk more than 300000 jobs generated by the international cruise industry including jobs held by nWU at US ports and the local allied industries supporting the cruise industry and
Executive Order Submissions Under Review
II Reglnfogov Where to ind Federal Regulatory Information -~
Home ] Lnitied Agenda and Regulator) Ilan pound012866 Regulator) Review Jnformalion Collection Review
EO 12866 Regulatory Rlvlw dvanced Search IJitorical RepWI Review Counh Jriter XIL
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA)
Executive Order Submissions Under Review July 25 2008 - _------------____ _shy
Department of Homeland Security
AGENCY DHS-TSA RIN 1652-AA53
TITLE Large Aircraft Security Program Other Aircraft Operator Security Programs and Airport Operator Security Program
STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT Yes RECEIVED DATE 06302008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
AGENCY DHS-USCIS RIN Llti15-AB67 TITLE Changes to Requirements Affecting H-2B Nonimmigrants and Their Employers
STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT No RECEIVED DATE 06092008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
AGENCY DHS-USCBP RIN 1651AA11 TITLE Issuance of a Visa and Authorization for Temporary Admission Into the United States for Certain Nonimmigrant Aliens Afflicted W HIV Infection
STAGE Final Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT No RECEIVED DATE 03042008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
-_RE_V-IE-W-E-X-T-EN-D-E-D---------- _
AGENCY DHS-USCBP RIN 1651-AA76 TITLE Coastwise Transportation of Passengers STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT Yes RECEIVED DATE 07142008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
Disclosure I Accessibility I Privacy Policy I Contact Us
httpwwwreginfogovpublicdoeoReviewSearch 7252008
View Rule Page 11
Shere D find Federal ReguLatory InformciiorlReglnfogov Home J Cnified Agenda al1d Regulatory Plan EO 12866 Regulatory Reyiew Information Collection Reiew
Current rnified Agenda and Regulatory Plan Historical Pnified Agenda and Regulatory Plan Search
View Rule
DHSIUSCBP RIN 1651-AA76 Publication ill Spring 2008
Title llCoastwise Transportation of Passengers
Abstract This interim rule amends the Department of Homeland Securitys (DHS) current regulations relating to the transportation of passengers by non-coastwise-qualified vessels on voyages that begin and end at a US port and stop at intervening US and foreign port(s) Under this interim final rule voyages that begin and end at a US port and stop at a foreign port(s) and at intervening US port(s) where a large USshyflag coastwise-qualified passenger vessel engages in regular service are in violation of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) unless the cumulative length of stay(s) at intervening foreign port(s) is more than 50 percent of the total amount of time spent at the intervening US port(s) and passengers are permitted to go ashore at the foreign port(s) The purpose of this amendment is to ensure that the Congressional purpose in enacting the PVSA which is to preserve the economic benefits of US coastwise trade to US-flag coastwise-qualified vessels is properly implemented
Agency Department of Homeland Security(DHS) Priority Substantive Nonsignificant
KIN Status First time published in the Unified Agenda Agenda Stage of Rulemaking Final Rule Stage
Major No Unfunded Mandates No
CFR Citation -LCER 4J~)(h)(plusmnJ
Legal Authority 5JJSS_30J12lJ-SClt16 J9_lJiCJ 431 9_L1C1plusmn3JJ2JScHJ1J2JSCJ624 L(LlLSc207LIl(gtJfHgt~ _CiQJ _46lSC 6QLQ~
Legal Deadline None
Timetable Action Date FR Cite
Interim Final Action 0510012008
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required No Government Levels Affected None
Federalism No
Included in the Regulatory Plan No
RIN Data Printed in the FR No
Agency Contact Glen E Vereb Chief Entry Procedures and Carriers Branch Department of Homeland Security US Customs and Border Protection Office of Regulations and Rulings 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington DC 20229 Phone202572-8730
Disclosure I Accessibility I Privacy Policy I Contact Us
httpwwwreginfogovpublicdoeAgendaViewRuleruleID=286751 7128120
Federal RegisterVol 72 No 224Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules 65487
SPECULATIVE POSITION LIMITS 1-Continued [In contract units)
Contract
Soybeans and Mini-Soybeans 2
Wheat and Mini-Wheat 2 bullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbull
Soybean Oil
SingleSpot month All monthsmonth
600 8600 13300 600 11100 14500 540 6600 8600
Soybean Meal 720 5500 7100
Minneapolis Grain Exchange
Hard Red Spring Wheat I 600 I 11100 I 14500
New York Board of Trade
Cotton No2 I 300 I 5300 I 7300
Kansas City Board of Trade
Hard Winter Wheat I 600 I 11100 I 14500
1 For purposes of compliance with these limits positions in a futures contract that shares ~ubstantially identical terms with a contract market enumerated herein including a futures contract that is cash-settled based on the settlement price of an enumerated contract market shall be agshygregated with positions in the enumerated contract market
2 For purposes of compliance with these limits positions in the regular-sized and mini-sized contracts shall be aggregated
Issued by the Commission this November 152007 in Washington DC David Stawick Secretary of the Commission [FR Doc E7-22681 Filed 11-20-07 845 amI BILLING CODE 6351-Q1-P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Bureau of Customs and Border Protection
19 CFR Part 4
[USCBP-2007-o098]
Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises
AGENCY Customs and Border Protection Department of Homeland Security ACTION Proposed interpretation solicitation of comments
SUMMARY This document proposes new criteria to be used by Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to determine whether non-coastwise-qualified vessels are in violation ofthe Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) when engaging in cruise itineraries in which passengers board at a US port the vessel calls at several Hawaiian ports and then the vessel proceeds to a foreign port or ports for a brief period before ultimately returning to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their cruise CBP believes these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because it appears that the primary objective of the foreign stop is evasion of the PVSA
DATES Comments must be received on or before December 212007 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT Glen E Vereb Cargo Security Carriers amp Immigration Branch Office of International Trade (202) 572-8730 ADDRESSES You may submit comments identified by docket number by one of the following methods
bull Federal eRulemaking Portal http wwwregulationsgov Follow the instructions for submitting comments
bull Mail Border Security Regulations Branch Office of International Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
I Public Participation
Interested persons are invited to participate in this proposed interpretation by submitting written data views or arguments on all aspects of the proposed interpretation Customs and Border Protection (CBP) also invites comments that relate to the economic environmental or federalism effects that might result from this proposed interpretation Comments that will provide the most assistance to CBP in developing these procedures will reference a specific portion of the proposed interpretation explain the reason for any recommended change and include data information or authority that support such recommended change
Instructions All submissions received must include the agency name and docket number for this proposed
interpretation All comments received will be posted without change to http wwwregulationsgov including any personal information provided
Docket For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received go to http wwwregulationsgov Submitted comments may also be inspected on regular business days between the hours of 9 am and 430 pm at the Office of International Trade Customs and Border Protection 799 9th Street NW 5th Floor Washington DC Arrangements to inspect submitted documents should be made in advance by calling Mr Joseph Clark at (202) 572shy8768
II Background
The maritime cabotage law governing the transportation of passengers was first established by section 8 of the Passenger Vessel Services Act of June 191886 (the PVSA) 24 Stat 81 as amended by section 2 of the Act of February 17 1898 30 Stat 248 formerly codified at 46 USC App 289 (now codified at 46 USC 55103) 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 of $200 (now $300 as promulgated in TD 03-11 pursuant to the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 199028 USC 2461 note) for each passenger so transported and landed
The intent of the maritime cabotage laws including the PVSA was to provide a legal structure that guarantees a coastwise monopoly to
65488 Federal RegisterVol 72 No 224Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules
American shipping and thereby promotes development of the American merchant marine Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 28 (DC Cir 1984) see also The Granada 35 FSupp 892 8931940 AMC 1601 (DC Pa 1940) (stating that the legislative aim of section 289 [now 55102] was the creation of a practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping business for United States ships) In other words the PVSA was enacted to advance the United States merchant marine and fleet by restricting the use of foreign-ownedflagged passenger vessels in United States territorial waters
Passenger vessel transportation between United States ports has historically been viewed to be part of the coastwise trade after the enactment of the PVSA This view is premised on the concepts of continuity of the voyage and whether its intended purpose or objective was coastwise transportation In other words the PVSA was held to be violated if the coastwise movement was continuous or if the purpose of the trip was a coastwise voyage (See 18 OAG 445 September 4 1886 28 OAG 204 February 16 1910 29 OAG 318 February 12 1912 30 OAG 44 February 1 1913 34 OAG 340 December 24 1924 and 36 OAG 352 August 13 1930)
The CBP regulations promulgated pursuant to the PVSA are found at section 480a of title 19 of the Code of Federal Regulations (19 CFR 480a) and are reflective of the above cited Office of the Attorney General decisions These regulations provide among other things that a non-coastwise-qualified vessel which embarks a passenger at a port in the United States embraced within the coastwise laws (a coastwise port) will be deemed to have landed that passenger in violation of the PVSA if the passenger disembarks at a different coastwise port on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a nearby foreign port or ports (as defined in 19 CFR 480a(a)(2) see also 19 CFR 480a(b)(2)) The terms embark and disembark are words of art which are defined as going on board a vessel for the duration of a specific voyage and leaving a vessel at the conclusion of a specific voyage respectively (See 19 CFR 480a(a)(4))
The references in section 480a to nearby foreign ports (defined in 19 CFR 480a(a)(2)) are the results of attempts by CBP to apply an Office of the Attorney Generals opinion dated February 26 1910 (28 OAG 204) In that case a foreign-flag vessel transported 615 passengers on a voyage around the world beginning in New
York and concluding in San Francisco The Attorney General opined that since the primary object of the voyage was to visit various parts of the world on a pleasure tour returning home via California and not to be transported in domestic commerce the transportation was not in violation of the PVSA
The 1910 Attorney Generals opinion was extended to voyages that included foreign ports other than nearby foreign ports (See Treasury Decision (TD) 68shy285 (33 FR 16558) November 14 1968) However voyages solely to one or more coastwise ports have always been considered predominantly coastwise Therefore non-coastwise-qualified vessels engaging in such a voyage where passengers temporarily go ashore at a coastwise port have been deemed to have violated the PVSA
m Current Law and Policy Pursuant to Public Law 109-304 120
Stat 1632 enacted on October 6 2006 Title 46 United States Code was substantially reorganized and recodified Consequently the PVSA is now codified at 46 USC 55103 and provides that no vessel shall transport passengers between ports or places in the United States either directly or by way of a foreign port under a penalty of $300 for each person so transported and landed except one that (1) Is wholly owned by citizens of the United States for purposes of engaging in the coastwise trade and (2) has been issued a certificate of documentation with a coastwise endorsement or is exempt from documentation but would otherwise be eligible for such a certificate and endorsement
In 2003 Congress enacted Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II Section 211 for the purpose of revitalizing the oceangoing US-flag cruise industry in Hawaii (the 2003 Act) Three oceangoing US-flag cruise ships PRIDE OF ALOHA PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAII were documented with coastwise privileges pursuant to the 2003 Act These vessels entered regular service in Hawaii in 2004 2005 and 2006 respectively and pursuant to the express language of the 2003 Act are limited in their operation to providing regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands of Hawaii
The CBP regulations promulgated pursuant to the PVSA are set forth in 19 CFR 480a and have remained unchanged throughout both the recodification of Title 46 of the United States Code and the enactment of the 2003 Act They provide that a violation of the PVSA occurs when passengers embark (board a vessel for the
duration of a voyage) a non-coastwiseshyqualified vessel at one US port and disembark (leave the vessel at the conclusion of a voyage) at a different US port unless they proceed with the vessel to a distant foreign port (Le any port not considered a nearby foreign port which is defined as any port located in North America Central America Bermuda or the West Indies including the Bahamas) Currently these regulations do not contain specific criteria for non-coastwise-qualified vessels on itineraries including US ports and either nearby or distant foreign ports in order for such foreign port calls to be compliant with the PVSA
To reiterate the applicable CBP regulations provide that the PVSA is violated when a non-coastwise-qualified vessel transports a passenger on a voyage solely to one or more coastwise ports and the passenger disembarks or goes ashore temporarily at a coastwise port (19 CFR 480a(b)(1)) Furthermore a violation of the PVSA also occurs when a non-coastwise-qualified vessel transports a passenger on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a nearby foreign port or ports (but no other foreign port) and the passenger disembarks at a coastwise port other than the port of embarkation (19 CFR 480a(b)(2)) However there is no violation of the PVSA when a passenger is on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a distant foreign port or ports (whether or not the voyage includes a nearby foreign port or ports) and the passenger disembarks at a coastwise port provided the passenger has proceeded with the vessel to a distant foreign port (19 CFR 480a(b)(3))
IV Request From MARAD To Provide Guidance
The US Department of Transportation Maritime Administration (MARAD) has requested that CBP take action to ensure enforcement of the PVSA MARAD has asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreignshyflag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwiseshyqualified cruise ship operators
In April of 2007 the operator of the three US-flag cruise vessels operating solely in Hawaii pursuant to the 2003 Act announced their intent to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAIl from the Hawaii market and redeploy her to Europe The operator intends to re-flag the vessel to foreign registry directly resulting in the loss of over 1100 crewmember jobs The primary reason cited for this decision is the rapid increase in foreign-flag competition entering the Hawaii market
Federal Register I Vol 72 No 224 I Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules 65489
from the West Coast This competition is evidenced in published cruise itineraries of foreign-flag carriers offering a variety of round trip cruises that depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period usually in the early morning and ultimately return to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their cruise These cruises are often marketed as Hawaii cruises and except for the brief stop in the nearby foreign port of Ensenada are purely coastwise in nature It is these cruise itineraries that pose an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels that pursuant to the 2003 Act are currently engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands
V Preliminary Notice
In response to MARADs concerns CBP sent letters to two carriers known to operate the itineraries in question as well as to the Cruise Lines International Association Inc stating that CBP believes that these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because it appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA The letters further indicated that CBP is taking steps to publish this position
VI CBPs Proposed Interpretive Rule Accordingly in this document CBP is
proposing to provide that cruise itineraries for non-qualified coastwise vessels which allow passengers to board at a US port call at several Hawaiian ports proceed to a foreign port or ports for a brief period and then ultimately return to the original US port of embarkation for disembarkation are not consistent with the PVSA and the regulations promulgated pursuant thereto Specifically CBP interprets a voyage to be solely to one or more coastwise ports even where it stops at a foreign port unless the stop at the foreign port is a legitimate object of the cruise CBP will presume that a stop at a foreign port is not a legitimate object of the cruise unless
(1) The stop lasts at least 48 hours at the foreign port
(2) The amount of time at the foreign port is more than 50 percent of the total amount of time at the US ports of call and
(3) The passengers are permitted to go ashore temporarily at the foreign port
Accordingly CBP proposes to adopt an interpretive rule under which it will presume that any cruise itinerary that does not include a foreign port call that
satisfies each of these three criteria constitutes coastwise transportation of passengers in violation of 19 CFR 480a(b)(1)
Dated November 16 2007 W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection [FR Doc E7-22788 Filed 11-20-07 845 am] BILLING CODe 9111-14-1
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau
27 CFR Part 9
[Notice No 76]
RIN 1513-AB49
Proposed Establishment of the Leona Valley Viticultural Area (2007R-281 P)
AGENCY Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau Treasury ACTION Notice of proposed rulemaking
SUMMARY The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau proposes to establish the 134 square mile Leona Valley viticultural area in the northeast part of Los Angeles County California We designate viticultural areas to allow vintners to better describe the origin of their wines and to allow consumers to better identify wines they may purchase We invite comments on this proposed addition to our regulations DATES We must receive written comments on or before January 22 2008
ADDRESSES You may send comments on this notice to one of the following addresses
bull httpwwwregulationsgov (Federal e-rulemaking portal follow the instructions for submitting comments) or
bull Director Regulations and Rulings Division Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau PO Box 14412 Washington DC 20044-4412
See the Public Participation section of this notice for specific instructions and requirements for submitting comments and for information on how to request a public hearing
You may view copies of this notice selected supporting materials and any comments we receive about this proposal at httpwwwregulationsgov under Docket No 2007-0066 You also may view copies of this notice all related petitions maps or other supporting materials and any comments we receive about this
proposal by appointment at the TTB Information Resource Center 1310 G Street NW Washington DC 20220 To make an appointment call 202-927shy2400
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT NA Sutton Regulations and Rulings Division Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau 925 Lakeville S1 No 158 Petaluma CA 94952 phone 415shy271-1254 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
Background on Viticultural Areas
TTB Authority Section 105(e) of the Federal Alcohol
Administration Act (FAA Act) 27 USC 205(e) authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to prescribe regulations for the labeling of wine distilled spirits and malt beverages The FAA Act provides that these regulations should among other things prohibit consumer deception and the use of misleading statements on labels and ensure that labels provide the consumer with adequate information as to the identity and quality of the product The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) administers the regulations promulgated under the FAA Act
Part 4 ofthe TTB regulations (27 CFR part 4) allows the establishment of definitive viticultural areas and the use of their names as appellations of origin on wine labels and in wine advertisements Part 9 of the TTB regulations (27 CFR part 9) contains the list of approved viticultural areas
Definition Section 425(e)(1)(i) ofthe TTB
regulations (27 CFR 425(e)(1)(i)) defines a viticultural area for American wine as a delimited grape-growing region distinguishable by geographical features the boundaries of which have been recognized and defined in part 9 of the regulations These designations allow vintners and consumers to attribute a given quality reputation or other characteristic of a wine made from grapes grown in an area to its geographic origin The establishment of viticultural areas allows vintners to describe more accurately the origin of their wines to consumers and helps consumers to identify wines they may purchase Establishment of a viticultural area is neither an approval nor an endorsement by TTB of the wine produced in that area
Requirements Section 425(e)(2) of the TTB
regulations outlines the procedure for proposing an American viticultural area and provides that any interested party
Us Department ofHomelaDd Secmity Washington DC 10229
bull ~
US Customs and Border Protection
AUG 15 2fXJJ
VE5-3-02-QTRRBSTCCCI - ti015502-GG-
Mr leon Sutcliffe Director Port Operations Camivai Cruise Unes Camival Place 3655 NW 87Avenue Miami Aorlda 33178
RE P~nger Vessef Services Ad Coastwise Transportation 46 USC sect 55103 19 CFR sect 480a(b)
Dear Mr Sutcliffe
As you know US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) enforces the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) codified at TItle 46 United States Code section 55103 (46 USC 55103) This statute prohibits non-coastwise-qualifled vessels (ie those vessels not US-buill owned and documented with a coastwise endorsement) from transporting passengers between porls or places within the United States The regUlations promUlgated pursuant to the PVSA are found at TrtJe 19 Code of Federal Regulations section 4808 (19 CFR 4808)
It has come to our attention that passenger vessels of your company are engaging in cruise itineraries that include ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands Two USAlagged coastwise-endorsed passenger vessefs are also currenUy engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of caD wittlin the Hawaiian Islands
As part of your cruise itineraries some of your foreign-flagged vessels depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period and ultimately rebJm to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their endse For example the MS ZAANDAM of Holand America Lines departs San Diego cruises the Hawaiian Islands stops in Ensenada from 800pm to 11 OOpmbull and returns to san Diego CBP believes these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because It appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA -- - - ~~~------
Please be advised that CBP is taking steps to publish this position Should have any questions pertaining to this matter please contact Mr Glen Vereb Chief Cargo Security Carriers and Immigration Branch at (202) 572-8724
Sincerely
F Jl E EST Y LEe A U I 5 I N Gmiddot
December 21 2007
The Honorable W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection co Border Security Regulations Branch Office ofInternational Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229
Re Hawaii Coastwise Cruises (USCBP-2007-0098) Comments in Response to Proposed Interpretation
Dear Commissioner Basham
NCL America Inc1 (NCLA) submits these comments in support ofthe efforts ofCustoms and Border Protection to enforce the Passenger Vessel Services Act and the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative as applied to Hawaii coastwise cruises
1 Introduction and Summary of Position
NCLA operates three large oceangoing US flag cruise ships in Hawaii These ships are documented under US flag and are required to operate in regular service in Hawaii pursuant to the authority of the Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative a 2003 federal statute intended to revitalize the US flag cruise industry and to maximize economic and national security benefits to the United States (the 2003 Act)
NCLA has invested $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships pursuant to the 2003 Act and in direct reliance on the protections of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) and its proper enforcement The PVSA limits the transportation ofpassengers between US ports to coastwise documented US flag ships Its statutory protections recognize that US flag ships have significantly higher operational costs in part because they are subject to more stringent US laws including US labor laws and federal
1 NCL America Inc is a US corporation incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware headquartered in Honolulu Hawaii As a US corporation it is subject to US taxes at both the federal and state level The Chief Executive Officer the Chairman of the Board and all of the Board of Directors of NCL America are US citizens The company is also subject to US labor and employment laws and is required by statute to maintain a workforce comprised primarily ofUS citizens
700 Bishop St SUite 900 I Honolulu HawMi 96813 I Tel 8085273800 Fax 8085273820 I ndcom
2
income tax among others The NCLA ships operating in Hawaii are the only large oceangoing cruise ships operating under US flag In furtherance of the policy goals of the PVSA and the 2003 Act these ships have created over 4000 seafaring jobs all subject to US minimum wage and other labor statutes
Since 2003 there has been a significant increase in capacity in the Hawaii market from foreign flag ships providing cruise service to Hawaii from the West Coast Many of these foreign flag cruises are marketed as Hawaii cruises and consist entirely ofUS ports ofcall with the sole exception of a token stop in Mexico for as little as an hour late at night under circumstances where passengers are not permitted to get offthe ship There are no reported rulings approving these particular foreign flag itineraries
Lower cost foreign competition in the Hawaii market has unfairly hurt NCLAs operations NCLA has incurred substantial losses which have contributed significantly to its decision earlier this year to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAll from US flag and reshydeploy it foreign Unfair foreign competition poses an imminent threat to the remaining US flag passenger vessels operating in the Hawaii trades pursuant to the 2003 Act
As the agency statutorily charged with implementation of the 2003 Act the US Department ofTransportation Maritime Administration (MARAn) is aware of the threat foreign flag Hawaii itineraries pose to the US flag fleet and brought the situation to the attention ofthe US Department ofHomeland Security Bureau ofCustoms and Border Protection (CBP or Customs) Customs determined that the primary object of these itineraries was coastwise and that the Ensenada stop was an evasion of the PVSA
In August 2007 Customs provided written notice to the affected foreign lines and their trade association that the existing itineraries were contrary to the PVSA None of these lines sought advance rulings even after the Customs notice with respect to their Hawaii itineraries pursuant to Customs regulations and many continued to market the itineraries as Hawaii cruises NCLA supports the efforts ofCustoms and MARAD to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act for Hawaii cruises
2 Statutory Authority for Customs Proposed Interpretation
(a) Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA)
Congress passed the PVSA in 1886 to protect the US maritime transportation industry from foreign competition2 Protection is afforded through penalty assessments on foreign vessels transporting passengers between US ports or places directly or by way ofa foreign port 3 As Congress and the courts have recognized coastwise protections for the US maritime transportation industry are only one dimension of the PVSA Operating in conjunction with other coastwise laws and with the US
2 See United States v Honduran SS GRANADA 35 F Supp 892 894 (BD Pa 1940)(citing purpose of PVSA to meet threats to the practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping which was to be preserved for US ships)
46 USc sect 55103 (originally 46 USC App 289)
3
documentation laws the PVSA also enhances military sealift in times ofnational emergency sustains a US merchant marine and supports the US shipbuilding and repair industry4
(b) Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative (the 2003 Act)
Over the past decade Congress has sought to reinforce the goals of the PVSA by providing mechanisms to revitalize the oceangoing US flag cruise fleet particularly in Hawaii The Project America legislation enacted in 1997 authorized among other things the re~flagging ofone existing cruise ship contingent on the operator contracting for the construction oftwo new oceangoing cruise shipss Following the default of the operator under the original contract Congress enacted the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative for the purpose ofrecovering economic and national security benefits to the United States bull 6 These same goals of the original PVSA were expressly referenced in the legislative history of the 2003 Act which emphasized that these ships will be assets available in time ofnational emergency and will significantly expand the pool ofqualified seafarers upon which the US Department ofDefense relies to crew non-combatant vessels
The 2003 Act authorizes the US documentation ofthree cruise ships for operation in regular service in Hawaii subject to certain conditions including a prohibition on operating in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico and the Caribbean Sea and a requirement that all vessel repair work be undertaken in the United States MARAD is charged with implementation of the 2003 Act
3 Customs Implementation of PVSA
(a) Regulations
The current regulations implementing the PVSA were published by Customs in 19858 The growth of the foreign flag cruise industry in North America and in particular the development of the Alaska cruise market led to an effort in 1984 to amend the thenshyexisting regulations to increase the ease of administration and operational flexibility The effort to change the regulation had support from US port interests who saw benefit in the potential increase in the number ofUS ports that foreign vessels could call and was opposed by proponents ofpotential US flag projects as detrimental to efforts to revitalize the US fleet 9 The preamble to the 1985 rule emphasized that it was of paramount importance to consider the primary object ofpassengers in taking a
4 See American Hawaii Cruises v Skinner 713 F Supp 452 457 (DDC 1989) (recognizing the contribution of the PVSA and the Jones Act in helping to secure national defense by maintaining a merchant marine oftbe best equipped and most suitable types ofvessels sufficient to serve in time of war or national emergency) see also Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 30 (DC Cir 1984) Wirth Ltd v SIS Acadia Forest 537 F2d 1272 1281 n32 (5th Cir 1976) S Public Law 105-56 Section 8109 (111 Stat 1203 1244) (Oct 81997 ) 6 Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II General Provisions - Department ofCommerce Section 211 (117 Stat 1179) (Feb 20 2003) 1 149 Cong Rec S1118 (dailyed Jan 17 2003(statement ofSenator Inouye) 8 19 CFR sect 480a 950 Fed Reg 26981 (July I 1985)
4
voyage10 a concept which is reinforced elsewhere in Customs regulations11 In its analysis of the comments received at the time Customs accepted the view ofport interests that the modified rule would help their business but did so recognizing the absence ofa regular salt water US flag passenger fleet Customs acknowledged the potential harm to prospective efforts to revitalize the US flag passenger fleet and expressly cautioned that if it were ever shown that coastwise qualified vessels in competition with foreign vessels were in fact hurt by the modified Customs regulation then Customs would immediately reconsider its position12
(b) Customs Rulings
Given the significant penalties associated with violating the PVSA13 Customs regulations expressly provide a mechanism for the owner or charterer of a foreign vessel or any other interested person to request an advisory ruling as to whether a contemplated voyage would be considered in violation of the PVSA14 Customs regulations provide that vessel operators can rely on these ruling letters only to the extent that the facts and circumstances are identical to those in the ruling letter IS
Notwithstanding the fact that several foreign cruise lines offer Hawaii itineraries originating in a US mainland port and calling at Hawaii ports with a token intervening stop in Mexico there are no reported rulings expressly approving such an itinerary for these foreign cruise lines 16
4 The Cruise Industry in Hawaii
(a) NCL America Returns US flag to the Oceangoing Passenger Fleet
Pursuant to the requirements ofthe 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative NCLA agreed to promote US-flag cruising enhance military sealift capacity and expand the US maritime labor base No other major cruise line had ever undertaken such a commitment to the US flag and the public policy objectives Congress sought to achieve under the PVSA or the 2003 Act Introduction ofPRIDE OF ALOHA in 2004 was a significant development in the maritime industry because it marked the restoration ofthe
10 Id at 26983 11 Customs Regulations include a provision on the effect ofruling letters and with respect to carrier rulings the applicable regulation refers to rulings setting forth a determination as to whether or not the primary object of a contemplated voyage is coastwise transportation in violation of46 USC sect 289 [pYSA codified at 46 USC sect55103] 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 12 50 Fed Reg at 26983 13 A modem cruise ship with 2400 passengers for example would be subject to a fine of$720OOO per cruise based on the statutory penalty of$300 for each passenger transported in violation of the Act 14 19 CFR sect 480a(d) IS 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 16 There is one older reported mling involving a request to drop the Ensenada port call from a Los AngeleslHawaiiLos Angeles itinerary which Customs held would violate the PYSA In dicta Customs acknowledged that the itinerary could be in compliance if the Ensenada call were not dropped but did not address the issue ofwhether a one hour service call where no passengers depart the vessel would be sufficient The carrier that obtained that ruling has since left the Hawaii market See Customs Ruling HQ 114078 re Crystal Hannony (Nov 4 1997)
5
us flag to the oceangoing cruise industry A contemporaneous press release from the Us Department ofTransportation reported that the three US-flag cruise ships to be introduced pursuant to the 2003 Act were expected to create more than 20000 US jobs generate more than $825 million ofexpenditures in the US economy and create nearly $360 million in federal tax revenue by the end of 200717 In 2005 the PRIDE OF AMERICA was introduced and in 2006 the third vessel PRIDE OF HAWAll was introduced to Hawaii Both the PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAIl offer 7shyday inter-island Hawaii itineraries whereas PRIDE OF ALOHA operates on 7 and 10 day cruises exclusively among the islands ofHawaii as well as 11 day cruises that include a foreign port call at Fanning Island To date NCLA has invested over $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships in furtherance ofthe policy objectives of the PVSA and the 2003 Act These ships employ over 4000 seafarers and generate hundreds ofmillions of dollars in benefits for Hawaii and the nation
(b) Significant Increase in Foreign Flag Capacity Since 2003
The most significant change in the Hawaii cruise market since 2003 has been the dramatic increase in capacity A significant portion ofthis capacity increase is directly attributable to NCLAs fulfillment ofthe Congressional mandate in the 2003 Act However foreign-flag operations in the Hawaii market as measured in passenger nights18 have skyrocketed Based on MARAn data derived from the US Customs Border Patrol Vessel Entrance and Clearance documents the passenger nights for foreign flag vessels departing from the West Coast to Hawaii on round trip cruise have increased several hundredfold during this period19 See Exhibit A
(c) NCLA Has Incurred Substantial Losses During this Period
Since 2004 NCLA has lost cumulatively more than a quarter ofa billion dollars A principal reason for these losses has been the increase in foreign capacity in this market NCLA has taken significant steps to reduce costs to address the increase in foreign competition but NCLA is at an inherent disadvantage when competing against foreign companies that are not subject to US labor laws US tax laws and other laws Ofcourse the statutory protections of the PVSA are intended to address these very issues That is why Customs immediate action to implement the proposed interpretation is critical for the US flag fleet Regrettably NCLA has already been forced to reduce overall capacity early next year with the withdrawal ofPRIDE OF HAWAlI to another
17 DOT Press Release dated June 72004 see also DOT Press Release dated August 132004 in connection with visit to PRIDE OF ALOHA by US Transportation Secretary Norman Y Mineta 11 Passenger nights (also referred to as passenger capacity days) are calculated by multiplying the number ofpassengers per vessel by the number ofcruise days in each itinerary by the number of cruises This is the unit ofmeasurement employed by MARAn In contrast passenger bed supply (also referred to as passenger capacity) data reflects only the number ofberths per vessel multiplied by the number of cruises and hence understates the market by excluding the full economic value ofthe cruise perfonned 19 In 2003 the total number ofpassenger nights for round-trip West Coast to Hawaii cruises was 303325 which jumped by 353 to 1072329 in 2006 and by 430 to 1304546 from 2003 to 2007 (The 2007 figure is based on MARAD data for six months and a1ll1ualized by published itineraries for the balance of the year)
6
market for operation under foreign flag This move alone will result in the loss ofover 1000 American seafaring jobs
5 Customs Proposed Interpretation is Necessary to Further the Important National Security and Public Policy Objectives Embodied in Federal Law
As Customs has properly noted the increase in foreign competition in the Hawaii trades in contravention of the PVSA pose[s] an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels[] As the operator of these ships NCLA has a vested interest in protecting the jobs ofthe thousands ofAmerican crewmembers and cruise ship service providers who support these vessels NCLA also has an interest in protecting the substantial economic investment it has made to revitalize the US flag passenger vessel fleet But a balancing of interests in the context of Customs enforcement ofexisting law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act requires a much broader focus
The legislative history of the 2003 Act expressly recognized the national security and public policy import ofestablishing a US flag passenger vessel fleet as a means to maintain the countrys preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool of qualified seafarers and as a means to help sustain a fleet ofUS-flag vessels to su~ort
the nations military and maritime industrial base for times ofnational emergency
Congress understood the importance ofestablishing a viable US flag cruise ship fleet as something larger than the vessels themselves These national security and public policy objectives must be weighed in the balance as Customs assesses how best to interpret its rules to give effect to the PVSA and the 2003 Act
6 Customs Should Clarify that the Proposed Interpretation is Limited to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades and Adopt Reasonable Measures to Ensure Sufficient Foreign Content
Since publication ofthe proposed interpretative rule several commenters have observed that the scope of the proposed interpretation is ambiguous because the language of Section VI referencing any cruise itinerary appears broader than the caption Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises and the entire discussion in the published notice which focuses exclusively on US-flag coastwise vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA agrees that the proposed interpretation should be clarified so that its scope is limited to vessels operating roundtrip voyages from US ports that include Hawaii port calls
NCLA supports the concept reflected in the proposed interpretive rule that round trip Hawaii itineraries from US ports on foreign ships must include a material and measurable degree ofoverall foreign port content as compared to US port content
20 149 Congo Rec S1117 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)
7
(a) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is also Consistent with Subsequent Congressional Enactments Modifying the PVSA
As discussed above it is well established that the PVSA was designed toRrotect US-flag vessels from foreign competition in the coastwise and domestic trades 1
Subsequent legislative enactments however have appropriately differentiated among distinct geographic markets and trades including Canada Alaska Puerto Rico and Hawaii based on the existence or non-existence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
In 1938 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers by Canadian passenger vessels on Lake Ontario and the St Lawrence River until such time as passenger service shall be established by vessels of the United States22 Similarly in 1961 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers on Canadian vessels within Alaska or between Alaska and other points in the United States until such time as passenger service is established by vessels ofthe United States23
In 1984 Congress modified the application ofthe PVSA to pennit the transportation ofpassengers between Puerto Rico and other United States ports on foreign-flag vessels24 As with the other statutory exceptions this provision is qualified and expires [o]n a showing that a United States passenger vessel qualified to engage in the coastwise trade is offering or advertising passenger service between a port in Puerto Rico and another port in the United States2S
Congress acted again with respect to the application of the PVSA with the 2003 Act in which it authorized three vessels that did not meet the US-build requirements of the PVSA to operate as modem US-flagged cruise ships in regular service in Hawaii26 The 2003 Act imposes a specific geographic limitation on the operation of any ship documented under this authority to operations only in regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands ofHawaii and shall not transport passengers in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico or the Caribbean Sea except in certain limited circumstances27 As above the limited nature of the 2003 Act is express it is strictly limited to the large ocean-going cruise ships and then only those operating in the regular Hawaii service where there are no US-flag operations28
21 See Act ofJune 19 1886 c 421 sec 8 24 Stat 81 Act of February 171898 c 26 sec 2 30 Stat 248 22 S] Res 174 75th Cong 52 Stat 223 (Alp 251938) codified at46 USC sect 55121(a) 23 See Pub L 87-77 75 Stat 196 (Jun 30 1961) codified at 46 USC sect 55121(b) 24 See Pub L 98-563 98 Stat 2916 (Oct 301984) codified at 46 USC sect 55104(b) 25 46 USC sect 55104(c)(l) see also 46 USC 46 USc sect 55104(cX2)(expiration of exemption upon availability ofa non-coastwise qualified US-flag vessel offering service in the relevant market) 26 149 Congo Rec SI118 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)(statementofSen Inouye) 27 Pub L 108-7 117 Stat 79 (Feb 20 2003) 28 149 Congo Rec S11l9 (dailyed Jan 17 2003Xstatement of Sen Inouye)
8
In each ofthese instances Congress fashioned a narrow exception to the PVSA that differentiated among distinct geographic markets based on the existence or nonshyexistence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
As the federal agency responsible for administering the 2003 Act MARAD requested that Customs act to protect US flag passenger vessel interests in the Hawaii trades29 Limiting the scope ofthe proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades also reflects Customs appreciation of the PVSA in the context of the subsequent Congressional action30 Viewing the Congressional modifications to the PVSA as a whole Congress has specifically and repeatedly differentiated among distinct geographic markets when it has found it necessary and appropriate to do so to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests It is well established that the proper interpretation of a statutory scheme includes consideration ofsubsequent statutes even though the underlying statute itselfhas not been expressly amended31 Accordingly Customs should likewise limit the scope ofthe proposed PVSA interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades because that is the only geographic market as mandated by the 2003 Act in which oceangoing US-flag cruise ships are operating
(b) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Consistent with Public Policy Objectives of the 1985 Rulemaking
In 1985middot Customs liberalized the regulations implementing the PVSA by eliminating certain regulatory prohibitions on foreign flag vessels In the context of the 1985 rulemaking Customs justified a relaxation ofthe regulations on the grounds that it would simplify the administration of the PVSA and would benefit the economy ofcertain American coastwise ports without eroding the statutory protection given to American vessels engaged in solely domestic trade32
Customs thus sought to reconcile US port economic interests with US-flag passenger vessel interests Both of these twin policy objectives are furthered by
29 See 72 Fed Reg 65488 (Nov 21 2007)( MARAn bas asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the ~eratiODS ofcoastwise-qualified cruise ship operators)
See generally FDA v Brown amp Williamson Tobacco Corp 529 US 120 132-133 (2000)(assessing propriety ofagency construction ofFood DIUg and Cosmetics Act and descnbing responsibility of reviewing cowt to assess statutory provisions in the context of subsequent legislative enactments) 31 See Brown amp Williamson 529 US 143 (holding that proper construction ofstatutory provision must necessarily assume that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications ofa later statute This is particularly so where the scope of the earlier statute is broad but the subsequent statutes more specifically address the topic athand) see also United States v Estate ofRomani 523 US 517 530-531 (1998)( holding that a later-enacted statute should control the construction of the federal lien priority statute a specific policy embodied in a later federal statute should control om construction of the [earlier] statute even though it ha[s] not been expressly amended) United States v Fausto 484 US 439453 (1988)(The courts frequently find Congress to have done this - whenever in fact they interpret a statutory text in the light ofsurrounding texts that happen to have been subsequently enacted This classic judicial task of reconciling many laws enacted over time and getting them to make sense in combination necessarily assumes that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications of a later statute) 32 50 Fed Reg 26982 (JuI 11985)
9
limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades
As noted earlier the 2003 Act limits the operation of the NCLA US-flag oceangoing passenger vessels to regular service in Hawaii Because there are no oceangoing US-flag vessels operating in any market other than the Hawaii trades Customs should limit the scope of the proposed interPretation to that market Such a limitation protects US flag passenger vessel interests without prejudicing US port interests In contrast an application of the proposed interpretation to any itinerary would needlessly harm US port interests unrelated to Hawaii without any countervailing benefit to US-flag passenger vessel interests Accordingly limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation is consistent with the public policy objectives of the 1985 rulemaking as well as the 2003 Act
(c) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Also Consistent with Customs Commitment to Revisit the Scope of its Rules to Protect US-Flag Interests
The relaxation ofthe PVSA regulations in 1985 was premised in large part on Customs finding that there was no regular salt water US-flag passenger fleet in operation at that time33 Acknowledging that the relaxed regulations could harm USshyflag interests Customs committed in the preamble ofthe 1985 final rule to immediately reconsider its interpretation if it is ever shown that there is a viable US flag vessel operating in competition with foreign-flag vessels34
Congress enacted the 2003 Act to stimulate the development of a US flag cruise ship industry As noted above the legislative history ofthat Act makes clear that Congress sought to revitalize the US-flag cruise industry as a means to maintain Americas preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool ofqualified seafarers help sustain a fleet of US flag vessels to support our military and a maritime industrial base create thousands of seagoing and shoreside American jobs and stimulate the development ofa US flag cruise ship tourism business with the commensurate benefits to the US tax base the US economy and US employment
Customs is now acting at MARADs request to revisit its interpretation ofthe regulations implementing the PVSA because recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwise-qualified cruise ship operations35 That is to say that the concerns articulated by Customs in the context of the 1985 rulemaking have materialized and US-flag passenger vessel interests are in fact being hanned in the Hawaii trades by foreign competitors
33 50 Fed Reg 26983 34Id
3S 72 Fed Reg 56488 (Nov 21 2007)
I
10
Because the US-flag passenger vessels are limited by statute to regular service in Hawaii limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the
Hawaii trades is consistent with Customs historical commitment to revisit its interpretation ofthe implementing regulations to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests
7 Conclusion
For the reasons stated above NCLA commends the efforts ofCustoms and MARAn to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act as applied to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA respectfully requests Customs to move ahead promptly with p~blicati~nof a final interpretive rule to advance the important national security arid public policy objectives ofthese laws
We greatly appreciate the opportunity to submit these comments
Sincerely
~~~ Alan T Yamamoto Vice President Hawaii Operations
Exhibit A
Ship Name Serenade Of The Seas Departure Port San Diego California Ports of Call San Diego California Kailua Kona Hawaii Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii Hlo Hawaii Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii Ensenada Mexico San Qigo California
2007 Date(s) Oct 05
Sailing Itinerary
Day Port H ~rrive Depart Activity
05-0ct San Diego California 500 PM
06-0ct Cruising
07-0ct Cruising
08-0ct Cruising
09-0ct Cruising
10-0ct Kailua Kona Hawaii 700 AM 900 PM Tendered
11-00t Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 1000 AM Tendered
12middot0ct Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 900 PM Tendered
13-0ct Hilo Hawaii 700 AM 600 PM Docked
14middot0ct Honoulu (Oahu) Hawaii 700 AM Docked
15-0ct Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii 200 AM Docked
6-0ct CrUising
17-0ct Cruising
18-0ct Cruising
19middot0ct Cruising
-7 20-00t
O-Oot
Ensenada ~i1exico
San Deqo California
i 00 ~r1
700 ~M
200 oM D1Jcked ~
Discover THE WORLD WITH Princess THE LEADING DESTINATION CRUISELINE
Big Ship Choice Small Ship Feel 8M_The only big ships with a small ship feel Our ships offer an incredible array of onboard activities from our ScholarShipSea life enhancement lecture series to our Lotus Spa~ plus a multitude of evening entertainment options And due to our revolutionary ship ltIIliJ~ji~~ii1~
design you can enjoy all that our floating resorts offer without ever feeling lost in a crowd
Anytime Dining 8M - Only Princess offers anytime flexible dining at gourmetstyle
restaurants allowing you to dine when where and with whom you want or Traditional Fixed Seating You also have up to seven alternative dining options like ourSaba e
Italian trattoria or Sterling Steakhouse and complimentary 24-hour room service
Affordable Balconies - Princess offers affordable balconies on stand staterooms not just suites and mini-suites With thousands of affordable balcotile on our fleet of floating resorts you can view the worlds most magnificent cities from your own balcony
Princess Service - Our staff is committed to Courtesy and Respect Unfailing in Service ExcellenceCR UISEreg In fact its our credo From your Stateroom Steward who warmly greets you by name to your evening waiter who remembers your favorite dish our service is simply unparalleled
Note Dining options may val by ship
TRAVEL FARTHER ONBOARD THE
CARIBBEAN PRINCESSsM
Caribbean
Caribbean Princess our most amenity- filled ship yet takes Personal Choice Crusing to a new level with Caribbean cuisine the renowned Lotus Spa our newest entertainment option Movies Under the Stars and nearly 900 cabins with balconies-more than any other cruise ship sailing year-round in the Caribbean
Nearly 900 balconies
3110 passengers 116000 gross tons
952 feet in length
Bermudan registered
GRAND PRINCESSmiddot GOLDEN PRINCESSmiddot
AND STAR PRINCESSmiddot
Caribbean bull Europe bull CanadaNew England
Grand Princess Golden Princess and Star Princess are the most luxshyurious ships to sail our Caribbean Europe and CanadaNew England itineraries featuring more affordshyable balconies and the finest shipshyboard amenities
Over 700 balconies
2600 passengers 109000 gross tons
950 feet in length
Bermudan registered
REGAL PRINCESSmiddot
Alaska bull CanadaNew England Panama Canal
Cruise Alaska the Panama Canal and CanadaNew England onboard Regal Princess offering larger standard staterooms many with balconies and spectacular views from her domed entertainment and observation center
Over 180 staterooms
with balconies
1590 passengers
70000 gross tons
804 feet in length British registered
ROYAL PRINCESSmiddot
Europe bull Asia bull Antarctica South America bull Amazon River
Behold the magnificence of each port of call from the Royal Princess wraparound promenade deck and all outside staterooms
More balconies than any
other ship this size
1200 passengers
45000 gross tons
757 feet in length British registered
MOST LUXURIOUS 8H I PS AT SEA
CORAL PRINCESSmiddot AND ISLAND PRINCESSmiddot
Alaska bull Hawaii bull Panama Canal
Coral Princess and Island Princess These two beautiful state-of-the-art ships belong to the newest class of luxury liners cruising the historic Panama Canal Alaska and the Hawaiian Islands They have 90 outshyside staterooms 79 of which offer balconies at a great value
9000 outside staterooms most with a balcony
1970 passengers
92000 gross tons
965 feet in length
Bermudan registered
DAWN PRINCESSmiddot AND SUN PRINCESSmiddot
Alaska bull Caribbean Panama Canal
With wraparound promenade decks and floor-to-ceiling windows Dawn Princess and Sun Princess offer stunning views of Alaska around every corner 410 cabins have balconies to enhance your onboard experience
Over 400 balconies 1950 passengers
77000 gross tons
857 feet in length
British registered
DIAMOND PRINCESSmiddot AND SAPPHIRE PRINCESSmiddot
Alaska bull Mexican Riviera AustraliaNew Zealand bull Asia
Cruise the Mexican Riviera AustraliaNew Zealand Alaska or Asia and celebrate our new Diarrwnd Princess and Sapphire Princess providing a blend of modern amenishyties and classic Princess features plus 750 private balcony staterooms
750 staterooms with balconies 2670 passengers 113000 gross tons
952 feet in length
Bermudan registered
TAHITIAN PRINCESSmiddot AND PACIFIC PRINCESSmiddot
South Pacific Islands TahitiPolynesia bull Asia
Indian Ocean bull West Africa
Designed for a smaller more intimate feel Tahitian Princess and sister ship Pacific Princess feature 92 outshyside cabins 73 with balconies and all the amenities of our larger ships
Over 200 balconies
Only 670 passengers 30000 gross tons
592 feet in length
Gibraltar registered
HOW TO NA YIGATE THIS BROCHURE
CHART A JOURNEY OF DISCOVERY
Alaska Cruises amp Cruisetours
CanadaNew England Cruises pg 7
7
8-10
11-14
Exotics Cruises amp Cruisetours
Mexican Riviera Cruises pg
Caribbean Cruises pgs
Europe Cruises amp Cruisetours pgs
AustraliaNew Zealand pg 15
15-16
16-18
18-19
19
20
Asia pgs
Tahiti Hawaii South Pacific pgs
South America pgs
Connoisseur Voyages pg
Exotics Cruisetours pg
Panama Canal pgs 21-22
Cruise Plusreg
Cruise Calendar
pgs5-6
pgs23
ALASKA CRUISES
VOYAGE OF THE GLACIERS
2004 DEPARTURE DATES
CORAUISLAND PRINCESS7 SaturdllydqxtTturtS May 8 Coni 21 Dawn Aug 2 Dawn 10 Dawn 26 Islmd 7 IslandDAYS SUNDAWN PRINCESS 15 Island 28 Sun 9 SunMondaydqJaTtures 17 Sun )ul 3 Coral 14 Coral 22 Coral S Dawn 16 Dawn 24 Dawn 10 Island 21 Island 29 Island 12 Sun 23 Sun 31 Sun 17 Coni 28 Coral
Jun 5 Coral 19 Dawn 30 Dawn NORTHBOUND 7 Dawn 24 Island Sop 4 Island
12 Island 26 Sun 6 Sun 14 Sun 31 Coral 19 Coral
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Vancouver BC PM 2 Inside Passage Scenic Cruising 3 Ketchikan 4 Juneau 5 Skagway 8PM 6 Glacier Bay National Park Scenic Cruising 3PM 7 College Fjord Scenic Cruising 3PM 8 Whittler (Anchorage) DISEMBARK AM
VOYAGE OF THE GLACIERS
2004 DEPARTURE DATES
7 CORALISlAND PRINCESS Saturday departures
May 15 Coral 26 CoraDAYS SUNDAWN PRINCESS 17 Dawn 28 DawnMondllydtpartures 22 Island )uI 3 Island 24 Sun 5 Sun 29 Coral 10 Coral 31 Dawn 12 Dawn
)un S Island 17 Island 7 Sun 19 Sun
SOUTHBOUND 12 Coral 24 Coral 14 Dawn 26 Dawn 19 Island 31 Island 21 Sun Aug 2 Sun
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE 1 WhlttierIAnrhora
630AM 1030 AM 630AM 630AM 830AM
6PM
7 Coral 9 Dawn
14 Island 16 Sun 21 Coral 23 Dawn 28 Island 30 Sun
Sep 4 6
Coral Dawn
11 Island 13 Sun
DEPART EMBARK PM
~30AM 830 PM
SPM 4PM
545PM
INSIDE PASSAGE
SAPPHIRE PRINCESS 7 DAYS Sundaydtpartuns
ROUNDTRIP from
SEATTLE
2004 DEPARTURE DATES
May 16 18 23 25
Jun 30 6
Aug 1 8
13 15 20 22 27 29
Jul 4 11
Sep S 12
t Endicott Arm wy be substituted on somtYOiiCS due to~orwcatherconditlom
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE 1 Seattle 2 At Sea 3 Ketchikan 630AM 4 Tracy Arm Scenic Cruisingt 6AM 4 Juneau lPM 5 Skagway 6AM 6 At Sea 7 Victoria BC HM 8 Seattle DISEMBARK AM
DEPART EMBARK PM
5PM lOAM 10 PM 6PM
12M
INSIDE PASSAGE
7 DIAMOND PRINCESS DAYS saturday dqllu1uus
ROUNDTRIP from
SEATTLE
2004 DEPARTURE DATES
May 8 17 15 24 22 31 19 Aug 7
Jun 5 14 12 21 19 28 26 Sep 4
Jul 3 11 10
t EndkottAnn maybe substituted on some voyages due tokcQlweuherconditlom
CRUISE ITINERARY
ARRIVE DEPART
INSIDE PASSAGE
10 REGAL PRINCESS DAYS
ROUNDTRIP from
SAN FRANCISCO
2004 DEPARTURE DATES
May 6 Jul 5 16 IS 26 25
)un 5 Aug 4 15 14 15
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE
lPM 7AM 7AM 7AM
7AM
DEPART EMBARK PM
~PM 830PM
12 N 5PM
2PM
Coral Princess in College Fjord Alaska
ALASKA CRUISETOURS
HEART Of ALASKA CRUISETOUR HEART Of ALASKA CRUISETOUR
e 1312 DAYS DAYS e
CRUI5ETOUR CRUI5ETOUR 35 125
2004 DEPARTURE DATES2004 DEPARTURE DATES
Date Ship Date Ship Date Ship Date Ship
May 10 Coral Aug 2 Coral Mayll Coral Aug 3 Coral 12 Dawn 4 Dawn
13 Dawn 5 Dawn 17 Island 9 Island 18 Island 10 Island
DAY PORT 19 Sun 11 Sun
20 Sun 12 Sun 24 Coral 16 Coral 25 Coral 17 Coral 26 Dawn 18 Dawn 27 Dawn 19 Dawn 31 Island 23 Island
Jun 1 Island 24 Island Jun 2 Sun 25 Sun 3 Sun 26 Sun 7 Coral 30 Coral 8 Coral 31 Coral 9 Dawn Sep 1 Dawn
10 Dawn Sep 2 Dawn 14 Island Island6 5 DenaliAnchorage15 Island 7 Island 16 Sun 8 Sun 17 Sun 9 Sun 21 Coral 6 AnchorageWhittierEmbark22 Coral 23 Dawn 24 Dawn 28 Island 7 College Fjord Scenic Cruising 29 Island 30 Sun
)u1 1 Sun Jul 5 Coral 8 Glacier Bay National Park Scenic Cruising 6 Coral 7 Dawn 9 Skagway12 Island
13 Island 14 Sun 8 Dawn
10 Juneau15 Sun 19 Coral 20 Coral 21 Dawn 11 Ketchikan 22 Dawn 26 Island 27 Island 28 Sun 12 Inside Passage Scenic Cruising 29 Sun 13 VancouverPark Rangers are at our lodges to enrich your stay
HEART Of ALASKA CRUISETOUR ALASKA WILDERNESSKENAI CRUISETOUR ALASKA WILDERNESSCOPPER RIVER CRUISETOUR
14 1314 DAYS DAYS DAYSe e e
CRUI5ETOUR CRUI5ETOURCRUI5ETOUR
145 185165
2004 DEPARTURE DATES
2004 DEPARTURE DATESDate Ship Date Ship 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
Date Ship Date ShipMayl Dawn Aug 1 Coral 16 Island 3 Dawn Date Ship Date Ship 18 Sun 8 Island May 11 Dawn Aug 1 Coral 23 Coral 10 Sun MaylO Coral Aug 2 Coral 25 Dawn 15 Coral
16 Island 3 Dawn 12 Dawn 4 Dawn
30 Island 17 Dawn 18 Sun 8 Island
17 Island 9 Island Jun 1 Sun 22 Island
23 Coral 10 Sun 19 Sun 11 Sun
6 Coral 24 Sun 25 Dawn 15 Coral
26 Dawn 18 Dawn 8 Dawn 29 Coral
Jun 1 Sun 17 Dawn 31 Island 23 Island
13 Island 31 Dawn 6 Coral 24 Sun
Jun 2 Sun 25 Sun 15 Sun Sep 5 Island
8 Dawn 29 Coral 7 Coral Sep 1 Dawn
20 Coral 7 Sun 13 Island 31 DaWn
9 Dawn 6 Island 22 Dawn
15 Sun Sep 7 Sun 14 Island 8 Sun
27 Island 20 Coral
16 Sun 29 Sun
22 Dawn 23 Dawn
)ul 4 Coral 29 Sun
28 Island 6 Dawn
Jul 4 Coral 30 Sun
11 Island 6 Dawn
Jul 5 Coral 13 Sun
11 Island 7 Dawn
18 Coral 13 Sun
12 Island 20 Dawn
18 Coral 14 Sun
25 Island 20 Dawn
21 Dawn 27 Sun
27 Sun 26 Island 28 Sun
CRUISETOUR ITINERARY CRUISETOUR ITINERARY
DAY PORT By S~a By Land
1 fairbanks
Mt McKinleyWhittierEmabrk
College fjord ~ce~lc Cnlsi~g
Juneau
CRUISETOUR IIINERARY
DAY PORT
CRUISETOUR ITINERARY
DAY PORT
CRUISETOUR ITINERARY
PORT By Sea By Land
College Fjord Scenic Cruising Glacier Bay National Park Scenic Cruising
13 Vancouver
CANADA amp NEW ENGLAND CRUISES
CANADANEW ENGLAND CANADACOLONIAL AMERICA CANADANEW ENGLAND
10 REGAL 13 REGAL 7 GRAND DAYS PRINCESS DAYS PRINCESSDAYS PRINCESS
sail between ROUNDTRIP NEW YORK
MONTREAL fromto
CITY NEW YORKFT LAUDERDALE and CITY
MONTREAL 2004 DEPARTURE DATE
CRUISE IlINERARY CRUISE ITINERARY 2004 CRUISE IIINERARY Oct 31 DEPARTURE DATES
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 2004 Sep 12 1 1 New York City New York EMBARK PM Montreal Quebec EMBARK PMDEPARTURE DATES Sep 19 New York City New York EMBARK PM
2 Newport Rhode Island 830 AM 4PM 2 Quebec City Quebec 6AM 4PM Sep 261Sep 11 Oct 3
Sep21t 1 3 Bostoni Massachusetts 830AM SPM i3 At Sea Oct 10 2 At Sea
Olttl 4 Bar Harbor Maine 8AM 6PM 4 Halifax Nova Scotia 12 N 6PM Oct I]Octllt
Oct 24Oct 21 S Saint John New Brunswick 7AM 3PM l~ Bar Harbor Maine 8AM 6PM Halifax Nova Scotia 8AM 5 PM
6 Halifax Nova Scotia 8AM 5PM 6 Boston Massachusetts 8AM 5PM
17 At Sea 7 Newport Rhode Island 9AM 6PM 4 Saint John New Brunswick 9AM 5PM
8 Saguenay River Scenic Cruising 9 AM 2PM 8 New York City New York 8AM 5PM Bar Harbor Maine 7AM 6PMi9 ~8 Quebec City Quebec 11 PM Norfolk Virginia 12 N 10 PM
(overnight onboard ship) 10 Baltimore Maryland 8AM 5PM Boston Massachusetts 7AM 5PM 9 Quebec City Quebec 5PM 11 At Sea
Montreal Quebec 8AM10 12 Charleston South Carolina 7AM 5PM 7 Newport Rhode Island 8AM 5PM
tltneTaryoperaresinrtvtrstorder (overnight onboard ship) 13 At Sea t Itnaary opaates in revu5t order 8 New York City DISEMBARK AMPort times may vary Port times may vary11 Montreal Quebec DISEMBARK AM 14 Ft Lauderdale Florida DISEMBARK AM New York
MEXICAN RIVIERA CRUISES
MEXICAN RIVIERA MEXICAN RIVIERA MEXICAN RIVIERA
DIAMOND DAYS
107 DIAMOND PRINCESS 10 SAPPHIRE PRINCESSDAYS DAYS PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIPROUNDTRIP from fromfrom
LOS ANGELES LOS ANGELESSAN FRANCISCO
2004 DEPARTURE OATIS Sep 25 2004 DEPARTURE DATE
Oct 2 9 1623 30 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
Dec 29Sep 22Nov 6 13 20 27 Dec 4 11 22 Oct 2 12 221
Nov 1 11 2005 DEPARTURE OATIS
jan 815 22 29 Feb 5 12 19 26 MarS 12 19 26 tPortordtrllllllllmtsmaYNrApr 291623
CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 San Francisco EMBARK PM 1 Los Angeles (Long Beach) EMBARK PM
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
CRUISE ITINERARY DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
2 Catalina Island 1230 PM 630PM 2 At Sea Sat Los Angeles (Long Beach) EMBARK PM 3 Cabo San Lucas 9AM 6PM3-4 At Sea
5 Poerto Vallart 7AM 6PM 4 A~Sea
6 Mazatlan SAM 6PM 5 Acapulco SAM 11 PM 7 Cabo San Lucas SAM 6PM 6 Ixtapa (ZihaulIlnejo) 7AM 2PM
S At Sea 7 Puerto Vallarta SAM 7PM 9 San Dtego SAM 6PM 8 M~I~middot lAM -1Ft 10 At Sea 9-10 At Sea 11 San Francisco DISEMBARK AM 11 Los Angeles (Long Beach)
Sun AUea Mon AtSea Tue Poerto Vallarta Wed Mazatlan Thu Cabo San Luca( Fri At Sea Satmiddot Los Angeles (Long Beach)
CARIBBEAN CRUISES
EASTERN CARIBBEAN
7
EASTERN CARIBBEAN
7 7 DAYSDAYS DAYS
CARIBBEAN PRINCESS STAR PRINCESS GRAND PRINCESSSUN PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIP from from from
FT LAUDERDALE FT LAUDERDALE GALVESTON 2004 DEPARTIJRE DATES
CARIBBEAN PRINCESS Apr 24 2004 DEPARTURE DATES 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
CRUISE ITINERARYM~yl 1522 CRUISE I1INERARY JuI31724 DAY PORT Nov 14 28 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Dec 4 11 JunS 1226 Oct 31 Nov 13 20 27
Alii 1 1428 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Dec 12 26
Ott 2 9 162330 200S DEPARTURE DATES Sat Galveston EMBARK PMSep41825 Sat ft Lauderdale Sun ft Lauderdale EMBARK PM
Nov 6 132027 200S DEPARTURE DATESDet4 11 26middot Jan 8 15 22 29Sun At Sea Man At Sea 2005 DEPARTURE DATES ]an 9 23 Feb 5 12 19 26 Sun At Sea
CARIBBEAN PRINCESS Feb 6 20 MarS 121926 J~n 8152229 Mar 6 20 12M Apr 29 Man Belize City lPM 7PM Feb 512t 1926 MarS 121926 Apr 317 Apr2t 9 1623 Tue St Thomas 7 AM 6 PM Wed St Thomas BAM 6PM Tue Costa Maya (Mahahual) BAM 4PM
6PM Wed Grand CaYman l2N 7PM
Thu At Sea Fri At Sea Thu Cozumel lOAM 6 PM
4PM Fri At Sea
Sat Ft Lauderdale DISEMBARK AM Sun Ft Lauderdale DISEMBARK AM Sat Galveston DISEMBARK AM
CRUISE IlINERARY
ARRIVE DEPART
EMBARK PM
WESTERN CARIBBEAN
Sf Thomas US Virgin Islands Princess Cays
CARIBBEAN CRUISES
WESTERN CARIBBEAN WESTERN CARIBBEAN SOUTHERN CARIBBEAN EXPLORER
7 6 7 DAYS DAYS DAYS
CARIBBEAN PRINCESS STAR PRINCESS GRAND PRINCESS GOLDEN PRINCESS
DAWN PRINCESS
SAN JUAN ROUNDTRIPROUNDTRIP to fromfrom
GALVESTON SAN JUANFT LAUDERDALE
2004 DEPARTURE DATE2004 DEPARTURE DATES 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
CARIBB~~SflNCESS CRUISE ITINERARY Nov 7 CRUISE ITINERARY
My923 CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTJun 6 20 JUD 19
Jul lOt 31
May829t DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART )uI418 Sun San Juan EMBARK PM
Aug ll t Aug 11529
Sep 11
DAY PORT
Sep 12 26 Mon St Thomas 7AM 6PM STAR PRINCESS Princess Cays 9AM 4PM At Sea Oct 10 24
Nov 721 DecS19 Tue S Kitts 7AM 3PM
2005 DEPARTURE DATES Wed Grenada 9AM 3PM Dec 23 Coumel 7AM 5PM
Grand Cayman 7AM 4PM Jan 21630
2005 DEPARTURE DATES Feb 13 27 Thu Caracas (La Guaira) 9AM 7PM Mar 13 27STAR PRINCESS
Jan 21630 Apr 10 24 Feb 13 27 Ocho Rios 9AM 4PM Fri Aruba BAM 5PM Mar 13 27 Apr 10 24 At Sea
tMonlqQampIyrqlocrsCllhoRfm PltJrtQr-ondlimesmaywlrY Sun San Juan DISEMBARK AMFt Lauderdale DISEMBARK AM
EASTERN CARIBBEAN WESTERN CARIBBEAN CLASSIC SOUTHERN CARIBBEAN
8 7 7DAYS DAYS DAYS
CARIBBEAN GRAND PRINCESS GOLDEN PRINCESS PRINCESS
GALVESTONROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIP tofrom from
SAN JUANFT LAUDERDALE SAN JUAN
2004 DEPARTURE DATE 2004 DEPARTURE DATE 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
DeetS Apr 16CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE IflNERARY May 21630 CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE Jun 13 27DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Jul1125 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
1 Aug 8 221 Galveston EMBARK PM Sun Sanjuan EMBARK PMSep 5 19 Oct 3 17 312-3 At Sea At Sea Nov 14 28 Man At Sea Dec 12 26
st Thomas Cozumel BAM 6PM Tue Barbados 7AM 6PM 2005 DEPARTURE DATES
jan 9 23 Wed St Lucia 7 AMAntigua BAM 6PM Costa Maya (Mahahual) BAM 4PM 5PM Feb 620 Mar 6 20 Thu BAM 6PM Apr 317
At Sea Montego Bay 9AM 4PM Fri St Maarten BAM 6PM
7AM 6PM
Ft Lauderdale DISEMBARK AM Sanjuan DISEMBARK AM Sun San juan DISEMBARK AM
Oct 24 Nov 7 21 DecS19
DAWN PRINCESS
~
I
CARIBBEAN CRUISES
EASTERN CARIBBEAN ISLANDER SOUTHERN CARIBBEAN MEDLEY EASTERN CARIBBEAN
10 10 7 DAYS DAYSDAYS
GRAND PRINCESSDAWN PRINCESSSUN PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP NEW YORK CITYROUNDTRIP from from to
FT LAUDERDALE FT LAUDERDALE SAN JUAN
2004 DEPARnJRf DATE2004 DEPARTURE DATES2004 DEPARTURE DATES
Octn Oct Btl Oct 14CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE ITINERARYCRUISE ITINERARY 200s DEPARTURE DATENov 222 Nov 3t 23
Apr23tDAY PORT DEPART Dec 13 30Dee 12 ARRIVE DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Ft Lauderdale EMBARK PM 1 Ft Lauderdale EMBARK PM EMBARK PM2005 DEPARTURE DATES 2005 DEPARTURE DATES New York City 2 Princess Cays 9AM 4PM 2 At SeaJan 828 Jan 19t
Feb 17tt 3 AlSea Feb 8 28 3 At Sea 2-4 At Sea Mar919 Mar 20
4 St Thomas 7AM 6PM Apr 9 4 Cura~ao 8AM 5PM 5 St Maarten 7AM 6PM 5 Isla Margarita lOAM 4PM St Thomas 7AM 6PM
6 St Kitts 7AM 3PM 6 Barbados 9AM 6PM Dominica SAM 6PM7 8AM 5PM 7 Dominica 7 AM SPM
8 Antigua 9AM 6PM S St Thomas SAM 6PM St Maarten 7AM 6PM
9 9 At Sea
fllrtordtrlllldllmam4YYa1 10 At Sea 10 Princess Cays 9AM 4PM JlilltraryllptfatufnrfYUSfllrllcr t 11I1ll1Il1yopmltnlnrmTtronlcr t ItlntraryaptrattsIn rtVfntOrdtr San Juan DISEMBARK AM Port~rdtrQnd lilrW mil) illI) 11 Ft Lauderdale DISEMBARK AM PortlimtSlIIltlyYllry 11 Ft Lauderdale DISEMBARK AM Port ordtr lind time5 may VIlry
WESTERN CARIBBEAN ADVENTURER EASTERN CARIBBEAN VOYAGER
10 10 DAYS DAYS
SUN PRINCESS DAWN PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIPROUNDTRIP fromfrom
FT LAUDERDALEFT LAUDERDALE
2004 DEPARTURE DATES 2004 DEPARTURE DATES DAWN PRINCESS CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE IIINERARY
Oct 23 Oct 4 24 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Nov 12 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
Nov 13 Dec 2 29 Dec3tt 1 Ft Lauderdale EMBARK PM 1 Ft Lauderdale EMBARK PM
2 Princess Cays 9AM 4PM 2005 DEPARTURE DATES 2 At Sea2005 DEPARTURE DATES
DAWN PRINCESS Jan 183 At Sea 3 At Sea
Feb 7 27Jan 9 296 St Thomas 7AM 6PM Mar19 t 4 St Vincent lPM 6PM
Feb 180 Apr 8St Maarten 7 AM 5PM 5 Grenada 8AM 6PMMar 10f 301 Apr 19 At Sea 6 St Lucia 8AM 6PM
Ocho Rios 12N 6PM 7 Martinique 7AM 3PM
Grand cayman PM S St Thomas SAM 6PM
t IillUGI)lIptfQttsIn rnmtordtr Cozumel 8AM 6PM AlSea tt ~~~oI~~dtr 10 Princess Cays 9AM 4PMMOItQIl8clyrqausOclJollloJ
lwtordtrollllllllyenllllilJllIl) tltllltrlryOptrlll$In rnmtllrdtr AMOIltqollaynplactsOdlDRIos PM IortDrllralldllmallloyWl) Ft Lauderdale DISEMBARK AM
Willemstad Cura~ao
EUROPE CRUISES
GRAND MEDITERRANEAN GREEK ISLES MEDITERRANEANGREEK ISLES
12 1212 DAYS DAYSDAYS
STAR PRINCESS
STARSTAR PRINCESSPRINCESS
sail betweensail between VENICE BARCELONA VENICE to
andand BARCELONA VENICE ROME
CRUISE ITINERARY2004 DEPARTURE 2004 DEPARTURE2004 DEPARTURE CRUISE ITINERARYDATESCRUISE I I INERARY DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DATEDATES
Apr 10 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTMay 16middot DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Venice Italy (overnight onboard ship) EMBARK PM May 4 May18t Sep2St 1 Verdce Italy EMBARK PM
Jun 9 1 Barcelona Spain (overnight onboard ship) EMBARK PM 2 Venice Italy 2PM 2 At Seajune 21 t 2 Barcelona Spain 1 PM Dubrovnik Croatia 8AM 6PMJul3 3 Corfu Greece 8AM 6PM
lullS 3 Monte Carlo Monaco 7 AM 6 PM Corfu Greece 8AM 6PM 4 Katakolon Greece (for Oiympia) 7AM SPMJu127 4 FlorencePisa Italy (Livorno) 630 AM 6 PMAug 8~ Katakolon Greece (for Olympia) 7AM SPM S Athens Greece (Piraeus) 6AM 12 MAug 20deg S NaplesCapri Italy 8 AM 7 PM Sep 1t 6 Athens Greece (Piraeus) 6AM 12 M 6 Mykonos Greece 8AM 12M
6 At Sea 7 Mykonos Greece 8AM 6PM 7 Kusadasi Turkey (for Ephesus) 7 AM SPM7 Athens Greece (Piraeus) 6AM S4S PM
8 Kusadasi Turkey (for Ephesus) 7AM 1PM 8 Kusadasi Turkey (for Ephesus) 8AM 6PM 8 Santorini Greece 7 AM 4PM
9 Jstanbul Turkey 8AM 6PM 9 Rhodes Greece 8AM 6PM 9 At Sea
10 At Sea 10 Santorini Greece 7AM 6PM 10 Rome Italy (Civitavecchia) 8AM 7PM tll1ooil)opcraksinttVUSe
grduPorttlmcsmi)Y6ljI 11 At Sea 11 Cannes France (for Mont Carlo) 8AM 6PM11 At Sea tSamnlQ]latCiIUIe5inplm tltlnerlll)opmlpoundsin
NaplesCapri Italy 630 AM 12 Barcelona Spain (ovrnight onboard ship) 8AMofMo~Urlo ~odcr12 Venice Italy (overnight onboard ship) 8 AM 12 6PM O~lIlalhitRhodalnpUcc Port order md Iimes- JmyVUY Barcelona Spain DISEMBARK AM13 Venice Italy DISEMBARK AM - 13 Iome Italy (qvitavecchia) DISEMBARK AM
MEDITERRANEANAEGEAN MEDITERRANEANMOSAIC
12 12 DAYSDAYS
STAR STAR PRINCESS PRINCESS
ROME BARCELONAto
toVENICE ROME
2004 DEPARTURE DATE 2004 DEPARTURE
CRUISE I I INERARY DATE CRUISE ITINERARYApr 22 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Sep 13 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Rome Italy (Civitavhia) EMBARK pM 1 Barcelona Spaln (overnight onboard ship) EMBARK PM 2 NaplesCapri Italy 7 AM 7 PM Barcelona Spain SPM 3 Messina Italy (for Taormina) 8AM 6PM 3 At Sea 4 Valleta Malta 8AM 6 PM 4 Casablanca Morocco (for Marrakech) 7 AM 8PM
At Sea S Gibraltar 8 AM 6PM Santorini Greece 7 AM 6PM 6 At Sea
7 Kusadasi Turkey (for Ephesus) 8 AM 6PM 7 Cannesfrance (for Mont Carlo) 8 AM 6PM 8 Athens Greece (Piraeus) 6 AM S4SPM 8 At Sea 9 Katakolon Greece (for Olympia) 8 AM 6PM 9 Valleta Malta 8 AM SPM 10 Corfu Greece 8 AM 6PM 10 Messina Italy (for Taormina) 6PM 11 Dubrovnik Croatia 8 AM 6PM 11 NaplesCpri Itiily 6PM 12 Venice Italy (overnight onboard ship) 1230 PM 12 FlorencePisa Italy (Livorno) 830 AM 13 Venice Italy DISEMBARK AM 13 lomeltaly (Clvttavecchia)DISEMBAIKAM Venice Italy
EUROPE CRUISES
EUROPEAN EXPLORER CRUISE MEOffiRRANEANITRANSATLANTIC CRUISE
12 17DAYS DAYS
ROYAL STARPRINCESS PRINCESS
sail between VENICE
ROME to
and FT LAUDERDALE
LONDON
2003 DEPARTURE DATES
2004 DEPARTURE DATE CRUISE ITINERARY
May 7 CRUISE I1INfRARY Oct 7 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Jul30l
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Venice Italy (overnight onboard ship) EMBARK PMAug 11 Sep 41 1 Rome Italy (Civitavecchia) EMBARK PM 2 Vernce Italy 2 PM
2 FlorencePisa Italy (Livorno) 7 AM 7PM 3 At Sea 3 Cannes France (for Monte Carlo) 7 AM 5 PM 4 Barcelona Spain 9 AM 6 PM 5 At Sea 6 Gibraltar 8AM PM 7 Casablanca Morocco (for Marralech) 5AM 6 PM 8 Seville Spain (Cadiz) 8AM 6PM 9 LisbQn Portugal 9AM 5PM 10 Vigo Spain 830AM 4PM 11 At Sea
tllinmryope~te$ 12 ParisNormandy France (Ie Havre) 7 AMlnftYCl5eordu ~rttimesuuyYilY 13 London England (Southampton) DISEMBARK AM
Caudis Park Cuell Barcelona Spain
SCANDINAVIARUSSIA BALTIC HERITAGE WESTERN EUROPEBRITISH ISLES
ROYALGRAND10 GRAND 1210 PRINCESSDAYS PRINCESS PRINCESS DAYSDAYS
ROUNDTRIPROUNDTRIPROUNDTRIP fromframfrom
LONDONCOPENHAGENCOPENHAGEN 2004 DEPARTURE2004 DEPARTURE 2004 DEPARTUREDATESDATES DATES
May19tMay 29 May 19 jul28 JunSJun 18 Aug 231
Jul8 ju118Jul28 Aug 7 CRUISE ITINERARYAug 17
CRUISE IIINERARY ARRIVE DEPART CRUISE IrINERARY EMBARK PMDAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
DAY ARRIVE DEPART 7AM 6PM1 Copenhagen Denmark EMBARK PM EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 7AM 6PM
Stockholm Sweden (Nynilshamn) 7 AM 530PM 6AM PM Helsinki Finland 830 AM 6PM St PetersbUrg Russia (overnight onboard ship) 630 AM 9AM 9PM St Petersburg Russia 6PM
7 Tallinn Estonia 7 AM 1PM 8 Gdansk Poland (Gdynia) 9 AM 4PM 9 Warnemfinde Germany (for amprlin) 8 AM 10 PM 10 Helsing0r Denmark 9 AM 11 AM 10 Copenhagen Denmark (overnight onboard ship) 1 PM 11 Copenhagen Denmark DISEMBARK AM
middotScrvlcctillforlh=CllCIIIlicmIOptoluItllUllwWdlseJnbIDltHdlinprAfbrtour~dllmJlwktbeshJpwl1lPfllClaquodtoCopetWampen and pmenpoundm Qfl tours from HelMp will Rboird ship tPolttimes~myAninliI1ddepartu~itRosythDubJinmdFa1mauthwl)dICtotXLolconditions
tPOrtordermdtlme$maynI) ttCdlitEdinbuJlhotmdedto~mllocunionforMiliblyTltOO~on8123wi1inlmiddotUIIisitSouthQuemsfmyinstudofJosylh
BRITISH ISLES
ROYAL12 PRINCESSDAYS
ROUNDTRIP
from
LONDON
2004 DEPARTURE DATES
Jun 12 jul6
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Lqn4onmiddotpoundngland(Southampton) EMIWlIlt PM 2 Cornwall England (Falmouth) 7AM SPM
Waterford Ireland 8AM 6PM Dublin Ireland 7AM 1130 PM
t PQrtbme5 lliIyyuy Anini Illd departure at Rosytb Dublin md Filmouth ViiYdue to Iiltlal conditions
WESTERN EUROPE
ROYAL12 PRINCESSDAYS
ROUNDTRIP
from
LONDON
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
May 31
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 London England (Southampton) EMBARK PM
CRUISE ITINERARY
EUROPE CRUISES
ICELANDNORWEGIAN FJORDS
ROYAL12 PRINCESSDAYS
ROUNDTRIP
from
LONDON
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
Jun24
CRUISE IflNERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 London Englan4 (Southampton) EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 3 Berge Norway 6PM 4 Hellesylt Norway 830AM 1030 AM 4 Gciranger Norway Geiranger Fjord Sceni Cruising UN 7PM
9AM SPM5
1PM 8AM SPM
10 At Sea
middotStlviceallfof~fjonlovedmdshOR=unlDllOplion1Itourswllldi5anbarilitHelIcsyItAftcrtollrpuKllJClJdisembark
theshlpwiUprocudto~md~lampClSonlounfrwnHdaytwl1lblmd$hip
NORWEGIAN FJORDSNORTH CAPE
ROYAL12 PRINCESSDAYS
ROUNDTRIP
from
LONDON
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
JuilS
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Loridon ~gland (South~mpton) EMBARK PM 2-3 At Sea
Hellesylt Norway 830AM 1030 AM Golranger Norway Geiranger Fjord Scenic Cruising 12N 7PM
TrodheilllNorwaY 9AM SPM At Sea Cross the Ardgt Cirde
6PM 8AM lPM
8AM 130 PM 430PM 630PM
7AM 3PM
Bagpipers Edinburgh Scotland Royal Princess in Geiranger Fjord Norway
EUROPE CRUISES amp CRUISETOURS
17 DAYS
GRAND PRINCESS
FT LAUDERDALE to
COPENHAGEN
2004 DEPARTURE DATE MayZ
CRUISE IfINERARY
DAY 1 2-6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
PORT Ft Lauderdale Florida At Sea ~ores IslandsPortugal (Ponto Delgado) At Sea Lisbon Portugal Vigo Spain At Sea ParislNormandy France (Le Havre) RotterdamThe Netherlands At Sea Hamburg Germay (for Berlin) At Sea Olso Norway Oslo Fjord scnic Cruising Copenhagen Denmark
ARRIVE
N
12N 9AM
7AM
6AM
DISEMBARK AM
DEPART EMBARK PM
6PM
7PM 6PM
7PM 7PM
1UM
MEDITERRANEAN CRUISETOUR
TRANSATLANTICWESTERN EUROPE ICELAND amp GREENLANDTRANSATLANTIC
16 GRAND DAYS PRINCESS
COPENHAGEN to
NEW YORK
2004 DEPARTURE DATE Aug 27
CRUISE IIINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Copenhagen Denmark EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 3 Dover England (forLondon) 7AM 7PM 4 Cornwall England (Falmouth) 9AM 6PM 5 Dublin Ireland lOAM 9PM 6 GlasgowEdinburgh Scotland (Greenock) 8AM 12 M 7 Belfast Northern Ireland 1030 AM 530 PM 8 At Sea 9 Reykjavik Iceland 9AM 9PM 10 At Sea 11 Prins Christian Sund Scenic Cruising 12N 6PM 12 Qaqortoq Greenland 7 AM 2PM 13 At Sea 14 SI Johns Newfoundland Canada 12N 7PM 1516 At Sea 17 New York CIty New York DISEMBARK AM
SCANDINAVIARUSSIA CRUISETOUR
Church of the Savior on the Spilled Blood St Petersburg Russia
WESTERN EUROPE CRUISETOUR
CRUISEIOUR ITINERARY
CRUISETOUR lA11C CRUISETOUR ITINERARY CRUISETOUR 4A14C CRUISETOUR II INERARY
DAY PORT By Sea By Land DAY PORT By Sea By Land CRUISETOUR 7Al7C18 STAR PRINCESS 1 Rome 17 GRAND PRINCESS 1 BudapestDAYS DAYS DAY PORT By Sea By Land 22 Rome Budapest 18 ROYAL PRINCESS 1 Paris
ROMETODI 3 RomeTodi BUDAPEST VIENNA 3 BudapestVienna DAYS 2 Paris and 4 TodiFlorence and 4 Vienna 3 Paris
PARIS EUROSTAR5 Florence 5 ViennaPrague 4 ParisLondon 6 FlorenceVeniceEmbark 6 Prague and 5 London
FLORENCE PRAGUE
plus plus LONDON7 Venice Italy (overnight onboard ship) 7 PragueCopenhagenEmbark 6 LondonSouthamptonEmbark
GRAND MEDITERRANEAN SCANDINAVIARUSSIA plus 7 At Sea CRUISE 8-9 At Sea CRUISE 8 At Sea WESTERN EUROPE 8 Bilbao Spain10 Istanbul Turkey 9 Stockholm Sweden (Nyniishamn) BRITISH ISLES CRUiSE2004 DEPARTURE DATES 2004 DEPARTURE DATES 9 Bordeaux France (Le Verdon)
11 Kusadasi Turkey (for Ephesus) 10 Helsinki FinlandApr Sf 2004 DEPARTURE DATES 10 At SeaMay 131 Jul2Apr 29 12 Athens Greece (Piraeus) 11 SI Petersburg Russia (overnight onboard ship) 11 GlasgowEdinburgh Scotland (Greenock)May 23 JulUt May 141 26middot Jul tt 13~ 250
May 23 Jun 16 13 At Sea JunZt JulU 12 SI Petersburg Russia Jun n 19 Aug 18o 300 12 Dublin Ireland
]un 12 Aug l t 13 Cork IrelandJuliO 14 NaplesCapri Italy 13 Tallinn EstoniaJun 22 t Aug 11 Toun~eonlymilabkwithcruise5indi[itbtAug 3 15 FlorencelPisa Italy (Livorno) 14 Cdansk Poland 14 Cornwall England (Falmouth)
Aug 27 tBritishliksetuise aWEwupeiBritishlslesouist 15 ParisNormandy France (Le Havre)16 Monte Carlo Monaco 15 At Sea bull WestemEuropeCrube middotlcdandINorwqlmFjOllisetuise 16 Rotterdam The Netherlands
t Crulsetour lA only combinable with 12--dayGreck fst 17 Barcelona Spain (overnight onboard ship) 16 Olso NOrway Qsld Fjord Scenic Cruising bull Norwqian FjordsNorth Cipecruise 17 BrusselsBruges Belgium (Zeebrugge)tCruixtour 4A only combinable with lo-day Baltic
crulse shown on PI 11 18 Barcelona Spain Heritage cruise shawn on pg 12 OCrubctnur 7C only combinable with EwuJlWl ExplorerCrube17 Copenhagen Denmark 18 London England (Southampton)
EXOTICS CRUISES
AUSTRALIANEW ZEALAND AUSTRALIANEW ZEALAND AUSTRALIAASIA
12 14 19 DAYS DAYS DAYS
SAPPHIRE PRINCESS SAPPHIRE PRINCESS SAPPHIRE PRINCESS
saH between SYDNEYAUCKLAND SYDNEY
toand to BANGKOKSYDNEY AUCKLAND 2005 DEPARTURE DATES 2005 DEPARTURE DATE
Mar7Jan 6 2004 DEPARTURE DATEJan 1St
Dec 23 CRUISE ITINERARYJr ift Feb 23 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
CRUISE ITINERARY 1 Sydlley Austrli EMBARK PM CRUISE ITINERARY 2 At Sea
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTDAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 3 Brisbane Australia 8AM 6PM 1 Sydlley Australia EMBARK PM 4 At Sea 1 Aucklalld N~w Zealalld EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 5 Cid Harbor Austrlia (for Great Barrier Reef) 7AM 5PM2 At Sea 3 Melbourne Australia 8 AM 6 PM 6 Cirns Australia (Yorkeys) 8AM 6PM
3 WeIUllgton New Zealand 8 AM 6 PM 4 At Sea 7-8 At Sea 4 Christchurch New Zealalld (Lytlelton) 8 AM 6 PM 5 Tasmallia Australia (Hobart) 8 AM 6 PM 9 Darwin Australia lPM 8pM 5 Dunedill N~ Zealalld (Port Chalmers) 8 AM 6 PM 6-7 At Sea 10-11 At Sea 6 Fiordland Natiollal Park Scenic Cruising AM 6 PM 8 Fiordlalld Natiollal Park Scellic Cruising 7 AM 5 PM 12 Bali Illdonesi (Padang Bay) 7AM 6PM
7-8 At Sea J DUlledill New Zealalld (Port Chalmers) 8 AM 6 PM 13-14 At Se 10 Christchurch N~ Zealalld (Lytlelton) 8 AM 6 PM 15 Kuala Lumpur Mlaysia (Port KeIang) 8AM 6PM9 Tasmania Australia (Hobart) 8 AM 6 PM 11 Wellillgtoll New Zealmd 8 AM 6 PM 16 Sillgpore 8AM 6PM
10 At Sea 12 At Sea 17 At Sea 11 Melbourne Australia 8 AM 6 PM 13 Taurallga New Zealalld 8 AM 730 PM 18 Ho Chi Millh City Vietnm (Vung Tau) 7AM 730 PM 12 At S~a 19 At Sea 14 Bay of Islallds New Zealalld 8 AM 7 PM 13 SydPey Australia DISEMBARK AM 20 Bmgkok Thailalld (Laem Chabang) DISEMBARK AM15 Aucklalld New Zealalld DISEMBARK AM
t llinemy opcrnesln reverse order Port times mil1 my
CHINAFAR EAST SOUTHEAST ASIAFAR EAST
1612 DAYSDAYS
PACIFIC PRINCESS
SAPPHIRE PRINCESS PACIFIC PRINCESS
OSAKA BEIJING to
to BANGKOK OSAKA
2004 DEPARTURE DATE 2004 DEPARTURE DATEPAClFlC PRINCESS
julllt Jun 11 2005 DEPARTURE DATE
SAPPHIRE PRINCESS Apr 11
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Osaka Japall EMBARK PM
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Beijillg China (Xingang) EMBARK PM 2 Hiroshima Japall 1 PM 6PM 2 DaHan China AM 5PM 3 At Sea 3 At Sea 4 Shmghai Chilla 7 AM 6PM 4 Shallghai Chilla (overnight onboard ship) 7AM 5 At Sea 5 Shallghai China 6PM 6 Okinaw Jpll 7 AM 1 PM
7 Taipei Taiwm (KeeIung) 9 AM 7PM6 At Sea 8 At Se7 Pusan South Korea 8AM 5PM 9 HOllg KOllg Chill 8 AM 7PM 8 At Sea 10-11 At S~a J Vladivostok Russia 5AM 730 PM 12 Ho Chi MiIJh City Vietnm (Phu My) 7 AM 5PM 10 At Sea 13 At Se 11 Nagasaki Japan 7AM 6PM 14 Singpore 8 AM 6pM
15 KUlltll Mlysi 830 AM 430 PM12 At Sea 16 At Sea 13 Osaka Japan DISEMBARK AM 17 Ballgkok Thaillld DISEMBARK AM t Sailing alls i1t Hiroshima on Dl) 11 In place of Nilgilsaki Port times milY vary
CRUISE I flNERARY CRUISE I flNERARY
Ho Chi Minh City Vietnam
EXOTICS CRUISES
SOUTHEAST ASIACHINA SOUTHEAST ASIACHINA FAR EASTALASKA
PACIflC PRINCISS ROYAL PRINCESS
16 16 19 DAYS DAYS DAYS
SAPPHIRE SAPPHIRE PRINCESS
Sail between PRINCESSBANGKOK
and BANGKOK OSAKA
BEIJING to to
2004 DEPARTURE DATES BEIJING SEATTLEPAClFlC PRINCESS
Jun 27tt 200S DEPARTURE DATE200S DEPARTURE DATE ROYAL PRINCESS
Mar 26 Apr 23Oct 16 Nov lt
CRUISE I I INERARY CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
1 GsakaJpan EMBARK PM1 Bangkok Thailand (Laem Chabang) EMBARKPM 1 Bangkok Thailand (Laern Chabang) EMBARK IM 2 At Sea2 At Sea 2 AtSea bull 3 Nagasaki Japan 7 AM 6PM
9AM 7PM 3 Singapore 7PM 4 Pusan Soqth Korea 8AM 5PM 4-5 At Sea 5 At Sea gt bull
7AM 7PM 6 Da Nwg Vietn~1Il 7AM middot7PM 6 Vladivostok Russia SAM 730 PM 7 At Sea 7 AtSea
7AM 12M 8 Hong lltog ihin~ 7AM 12M 8 Sapporo japan (Muroran) 6AM 6PM 9-10 At Sea 9-10 At Sea 9-12 At Sea cross Intemational Dateline
13 DutchHarbor Alaska (Aleutian Islands) 230 PM 7PM11 ShaJlgllai Cbina (overnight onboard ship) lAM 11 Shangh~t Cllina (ovmightonJoltird $hip) 7 AM 14 At Sea shy12 Shanghai China 6PM 12 Shanghai China
7AM - - tlJf
6PM 15 Anchorage Alaska (Seward) 8AM 6PM13 At Sea 13 AtSea i 16 College Fjord Seni CruIsing 630AM 930 AM
14 Nagasaki japan 7AM 6PM 14 Nagasaki japan 6PM 17 Glacier Ilay Scenic Cruising 1030 AM 830 PM 15 Pusan South lltOrea TAM 4PM 1~ bull Pu~an SQuth iorea middot4lM 18 middotmiddot juneau Alaska 6 AM 2PM 16 At Sea 16 At Sea 19 - At Sea 17 Beijing China (Xingangy OISEMBAlUe AM 17 Beijing Cliina (Xingang) 20 SeattleWashington DISEMBARK AM
t ltinemy Operne5 in rcvmc Older ttPorttimcsmiYnl)middotShlpwilldocklnampngkoknsttadofL1cm~
POLYNESIA amp THE COOK ISLANDS POLYNESIA amp THE MARQUESAS ISLANDS
10 10 DAYS DAYS
TAHITIAN PRINCESSTAHITIAN PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIPROUNDTRIP fromfrom
PAPEETEPAPEETE 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
2004 DEPARTURE DATES Oct 4 24 Mayl 17 27 Sep4 14 24 Nov 13 Jun 6 16 26 0lt 14 00323Ju16 16 26 Nov 323 2005 DEPARTURE DATESAug 5 15 25 Dec 13 Jan 12
Feb 1 21200S DEPARTURE DATES
~~ 122 ~~Il 13 23 CRUISE ITINERARY
CRUISE II INERARY DAY PORT
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Papeete Tahiti 1 Papeete Tahiti (overnight onboard ship) EMBARK PM
2 Moorea Polynesia 2 Papeete Tahiti SPM 3 Huahil1e P9lynesia 8AM 5 PM 3 Tuamotu Atolls Senic Cruising
5 PM8-AM 4 At Sea I At Sea 5 Rarotonga Cook Islands 8AM 5 PI~ 5 Nuku Hiva Marquesas Islands 6 At Sea 6 Hiva Ga Marquesas Islands 8AM 5PM 7 Raiatea Polynesia overnight onboard Ship 6AM
7 At Sea middotai~ RaiateaPQlynesia igt gt 6AM 8 Rangiroa P~iynesia 8AM 4PM8 Tahaa scenic Cryising 630 AM 830 AM
8 BoraBoraPQlyrtesia(ovemightollboard ship) UN 9 Tahaa ~enl Cruising 8 AM middot11AM
9 Bora lora Polynesia 5iM 9 Raiatea Polynesia 12 N 11 PM 10 Moore Polynesfa 8 AM 5 PM la ~ Bora ~oraPoIYnesia 8AM bull 5PM
11 Papeete Tahiti DISEMBARK AM 11 Papeete Tahiti DISEMBARK AM Iong Kong Harbor
3 Singapore 4-5 At Sea 6 Da NangVieinam 7 At Sea 8 liong Kong China
EXOTICS CRU ISES
HAWAIITAHITI HAWAIIAN ISLANDS SOUTH PACIFIC ISLANDS
12 1515 DAYS DAYSDAYS
PACIFIC
TAHITIAN PRINCESS ISLAND PRINCESSPAClFIC PRINCESS
PRINCESS
SYDNEYROUNDTRIP sail between tofrom
PAPEETE PAPEETELOS ANGELES and
2004 DEPARnIRE DATEHONOLULU 2004 DEPARTURE DATES Apr 21
2004 DEPARTURE DATES ~~~l CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE 11 INERARY
Oet21t CRUISE ITINERARY Nov Sf
MayS PACIFIC PRINCESS DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
Nov20t DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DecSt 1 Los Angeles CalifornIa EMBARK AM 1 Sydney AustralIa EMBARK PMAug 17t
Dec20t1 Papeete Tahiti EMBARK PM 2-4 At Sea
2005 DEPARTURE DATE Jan 4 2-5 At Sea
(overnight onboard ship) Jan 19 5 Auckland New Zealand 7 AM 2PMFeb 3t 6 Iiilo Hawaii 8 AM 6 PM
TAHITIAN PRINCESS Papeete Tahiti 11 PM fb 18 6-7 At Sea Kilauea Voko ~enic CruisingApr 12 MarS t 3 Moorea Polynesia 8 AM 5 PM 8 Suva fijI 11 AM 430 PM1~i~t 7 Kona Hawaii 8AM 6PM4 Bora Bora PolYnesia 8 AM 5 PM 9 At Sea Cross International Dateline Apr 19
5-6 At Sea 8 Honolulu Hawaii 8AM 11 PM 10 Apia Western Samoa 830 AM 2PM 7 Christmas Isl~ndKiribati 1Z N 5 PM 9 Kauai Hawaii (Nawlliwlli) 8AM 6PM 11-12 At Sea 8-9 At Sea 10 Maui Hawaii (Lahaina) 6PM 13 Bora Bora Polynesia lOAM 6PM 10 HlloliaWlii 6 PM 13 Raiatea Polynesia (overnight onboard 11 PM11-14 At Sea 11 Maui Hawaii (Lahaina) 8 AM 6 PM 14 Raiatea Polynesia 11 PM
15 Ensenada Mexico (service call)KaUaiH~waii(Nawllfwtli) 8AM 6 PM 15 Moorea Polynesia 8AM 5PM
tllinemyopcr~ttsln=x QnIerPurtlimcslmYvary Honolulu Hawaii DISEMBARK AM 16 Los Angeles CalIfornia DISEMBARK AM 16 Papeete Tahiti DISEMBARK AM
ISLANDS OF THE PACIFIC THEATER SOUTH PACIFIC EXPLORER
24 24 DAYS DAYS
PAClFIC PRINCESS PAClFIC PRINCESS
sail between HONOLULU PAPEETE
and to OSAKA FT LAUDERDALE
2004 DEPARTURE DATES
Mayl 2004 DEPARTURE DATEJul2Sj
Aug 29 CRUISE ITINERARY
CRUISE ITINERARYDAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART EMBARK PM DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
1 Papeete Tahiti EMBARK PM lPM 7PM 2 8AM 11 PM
3 ~~~~~~ ~~~~Sta 8AM 5 PM 4-6 At Sea 7 Pitcairn Island Scenic Cruising 8AM 1211
8AM 12 N
7AM ZPM 8-9 At Sea 10 Easter Island Chile 8AM 2PM
9AM 11-14 At Sea 15 Callao Peru (overnight for Lima and Machu Picchu) 8AM 16 Callao Peru lPM 17 At Sea 18 Manta Ecuador (for Quito) 9fM 7PM 19 At Sea 20 Transit Panama Canal 7 AM 430 PM 21 San BIas Panama 8AM 5 PM 22 ft Sea 23 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands 7AM 4PM 24 At Sea
25 Ft Lauderdale Florida DISEMBARK AMMoorea Polynesia tllinemyoperataln~12onlerPortl1mesmiYmymiddot
EXOTICS CRUISES
HAWAIITAHITISOUTH PACIFIC AMAZONSOUTHERN CARIBBEAN CAPE HORNSTRAIT OF MAGELLAN
1430 12 DAYS DAYSDAYS
ROYAL PRINCESS ROYAL PRINCESSSAPPHIRE PRINCESS
sail betweenFT LAUDERDALE SANTIAGOLOS ANGELES to
andto MANAUS BUENOS AIRESSYDNEY 2005 DEPARTURE DATE 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
2004 DEPARTURE DATE Apr 9 Jan 10
Nov 22 Jan 241 Feb 7
FebZt
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
CRUISE ITINERARY
CRUISE ITINERARYCRUISE ITINERARY 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTDAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 2-3 At Sea 1 Santiago Chile (Valparaiso) EMBARK PM
1 Los ingeles California EMBARK PM 4 Tortola BritIsh Virgin Islands 8 AM 6 PM 2 At Sea 2 Ensenada Mexico 8AM 5PM 3 Puerto Montt Chile 7AM 6PM
3middot6 At Sea 4 At Sea 5 Dominica 9 AM 4 PM 7 Hilo Hawaii 8AM 5 At Sea Chilean Fjords Scenic Cruising6PM 6 Trinidad 9 AM 6 PM
8 Maui Hawaii (Lahaina) 8AM 6PM 6 At Sea Amalia Glacier Scentc CruiSi3f7 At Sea 7 Punta Arenas Chile (Strait of Magei an) 7AM 6PM9 Honolulu Hawaii 7AM 5PM
- 10middot13 At Sea 8 Beagle Channel Scenic Cruising 8 Ushuaia Argentina (Tierra del Fuo) 12N 8PM
8 Devils Island French Guiana (Isle Royal) 8 AM 2 PM 14 Bora Bora Polynesia 8AM 6PM 9 At Sea 9 At Sea Cape Hom Scenic Cruising
10 Santarem Brazil 9 AM 7 PM 10 Moorea Polynesia 8AM 6PM 10 Falkland Islands (Stanley) 8AM 6PM 10 Papeete Tahiti (overnight onboard ship) 9PM 11 At Sea
i 16 Papeete Tahiti 6PM 11 Boca da Valeria Brazil (Amazon River) 7 AM 2 PM 12 Puerto Madryn Argentina 6AM 5PM 17middot18 AtSea 12 Manaus Brazil (overnight onboard ship) 10 AM 13 At Sea
14 Montevideo Uruguay 9AM 6PM19 Pago Pago merlcan Samoa 8AM 6PM 13 Manaus Brazil DISEMBARK AM 15 Buenos Aires Argentina DISEMBARK AM 20 Apia Western Samoa 8AM 6PM 21 At Sea Cross International Dateline middotl1me5forallscenkouisinCile subjectlDclwIgc
tllinmryopefilteslnr=rscordttPorttlmislm)vary22 Suva Fiji 8AM 6PM l 23-24 At Sea
20 Auckland New Zealand 8AM 6PM ORINOCO RIVERSOUTHERN CARIBBEAN ANDESSOUTH AMERICA 26 Tauranga New Zealand 8AM 7PM 27 At Sea
28 Wellington Newealand 8AM 6PM 16 17 DAYS DAYS 29-30 AtSea
31 Sydney Australia DISEMBARK AM ROYAL PRINCESS ROYAL PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP SANTIAGO from to
FT LAUDERDALE FT LAUDERDALE
200S DEPARTURE DATE2005 DEPARTURE DATE
Mar 7Mar 24
CRUISE IIJNERARYCRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Santiago Chlle (Valparaiso) EMBARK PM
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM
2 La Serena Chile (Coquimbo) 8 AM 5 PM2-3 At Sea 3 At Sea Um6n Costa Rica 7AM 7PM 4 Arica Chile 7AM 6PMCristobal Panama (for Panama Canal) 8AM 5PM o At Sea
6 Cartagena Colombia 9AM 2 PM 6 San Martin Peru (for Pisco and Machu Picchu) 7AM 6PM 7 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 130 PM 7PM 7 Callao Peru (overnight for Lima) 530 AM 8-9 At sea 8 Callao Peru 1PM 10 Puerto Ordaz Venezuela (Orinoco River) 8AM 6PM 9 At Sea
i 11 At Sea 10 Manta Ecuador (overnight for Quito) 530AM 12 Greada 8AM i 11 Manta Ecuador 1lM5PMt 1~ Dolllinlca i 7N1 5 PM 12 At Sea
i 13 Transit Panama C~nal 7AM 430 PM14 St Thomas us Virgilslands 9AM 5PM 14 Cartagena Colombia 8AM 130 PMJs AtSei i 15 Aruba Netherlands intiiles 1PM 7PM 16 Princess Cays Bahamas 8AM 16-17 At Sea Tahiti Polynesia 17 FtLallardale Flillilt~ DISEMBARK AM 1ampmiddot Ft L~uderdale Florida DISEMBARK AM
AMAZON RIVERMEDITERRANEAN
21 DAYS
ROYAL PRINCESS
MANAUS
to ROME
2005 DEPARTURE DATE
Apr 21
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE M~naus Brazil (Wemight onboardship) Manaus Brazil
3 BocadaValeria Brazil (AriiazonRivet) 11 AM 4-6 At Sea 7 Recife Brazil 1 PM 8-11 AtSea 12 Dakar Senegal 8AM 13-14 At Sea 15 Agadir Morocco 7AM 16 Casablanca Morocco (for Marrakech) 8AM 17 Gibraltar lOAM 18 Allcante Spain 12 N 19 Barcelona Spain 8AM 20 Cannes France (for Monte Carlo) 8AM 21 FlorencePisa Italy (Livarno) 7AM 22 Rome Italy (Civitavecchia) DISEMBARK AM
INDIAN OCEANAUSTRALIA
28 DAYS
PACIfIC PRINCESS
CAPE TOWN
to SYDNEY
2004 DEPARTURpound DATE
Oct 20
CRUISE ITINERARY1 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Cape Town South Africa EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 3 East London South Africa 7AM 3PM 4 DurbahSouth Africa 8AM 6PM 5-7 At Sea 8 Nosy BeMadagascar 7AM 4PM 9 At Sea 10 Poilit des Galets Reunioll]slahd 11 Port Louis Mauritius 12c19 At Sea 20 Perth Australia (Fremantle) 21-23 At Sea 24 Adelaide Australla 25 At Sea 26 Melbourne Australla 7 27 Tasmania AUstralia (Burnie) 28 At Sea 29 Sydney Australia DISEMBARK AM
I
DEPART EMBARK PM
7PM 6PM
8pM
5PM
3PM 9PM 6PM 6PM 5PM 7PM 7PM
EXOTICS CRUISES
SOUIB ATIANTICANTARCfICNSOUIB AMERICA
24 DAYS
ROYAL PRINCESS
CAPE TOWN
to SANTIAGO
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
Dec 17
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Cape TownSouthAfrica (overnighfol1board ship) EMBARK PM 2 Cape Town South Africa 3PM 2 if~~t Good HopSCenic Crulsing 3-6 6 Tristan DaCunha United Kingdom 8AM 5PM 7-10 At Sea 11 Falkland Islands (Staliley) 8 AM 5PM 12 At Sea 13-16 Antarctica Peninsula ScehltmiddotCruising 14 days ihcludingmiddot Elephant
Island AntarcticSotind Deceptionlslana GerlacheStrait NaxefChannel Schollaert Channel SigJtla Island and Boyd Strait)
17 At Sea Cape Horn Scenic Cruising1amp UshuaiaArgentina (Tierra del fuego) bull middot6 AM 19 Punta Arenas Chile (Strait of Magellan) 7 AM 20 At Sea Amalia Glacier Scenic Cruising21 At Sea Chilean Fjords Scenic Cruising22 AtSea 23 Puerto Mont Chile 7AM 6PM 24 At Sea 25 Santiago Chile (Valparaiso) DISEMBARK AM
-nmes for1l scenlccruisinc are subJect to change
ASIAINDIAMEDITERRANEAN
30 ROYAL PRINCESSDAYS
ROME
to BANGKOK
2004 DEPARlURE DATE
Sep 16
CRUISE Il INERARY
WEST AFRICASOUTH AMERICA
28 DAYS
PACIFIC PRINCESS
FT LAUDERDALE
to CAPE TOWN
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
51 22
CRUISE ITINERARY
DISEMBARK AM
Aruba
EXOTICS CRU ISES amp CRU ISETOU RS
AUSTRALIANEW ZEALAND CRUISETOUR
AUSTRALIAN EXPLORER 2004 DEPARTURE DATESAPPHIRE21 plus
DAYS PRINCESS SYDNEY Dec 17 to
AUCKLAND CRUISETOUR 5P CRUiSE
CRUISETOUR ITINERARY
DAY PORT By Sea By Land DAY PORT
1 Sydney 14 Fiordland National Park 2 Sydney Scenic Cruising
3 SydneyAyers Rock 15 Dunedin New Zealand (Port Chalmers) 4 Ayers ROek
5 Ayers RockPort Douglas 16 Christchurch New Zealand 6 Port Douglas - (Lytleton)
7 Port DouglasSydneyEmbark 17 Wellilgton New Zealand 8 At Sea 18 At Sea 9 Melbourne Australia 19 Tauranga New Zealand
10 At Sea 20 Bay of Islands New Zealand 11 Tasmania Australia (Hobart) 21 Auckland New Zealand 12middot13 At Sea
Sydney Opera House Australia
AUSTRALIANEW ZEALAND CRUISETOUR SOUTHEAST ASIACHINA CRUISETOUR CAPE HORNSTRAIT OF MAGELLAN CRUISETOUR AUSTRALIAN BEIJING Be TERRA COTTA 2004 DEPARTURE DATES RIO 8t IGUAZU FALLS Post-Crulsetour1 Pre-Crulsetour 217EXPLORER 2005 DEPARTURE DATES PACIFICSAPPHIRE WARRIORS19 plw or PRINCESS jul9t loieifie
DAYS PRINCESS SYDNEY Jan 12 plus 19 ROYAL plw Feb 5 Oct 28 Royal BUENOS AIRES
AUCKLAND DAYS ROYAL PRINCESS to 21 ampto DAYS PRINCESS
BEUING CRUISE t ~~S~i BeWln~~~~e
to SANTIAGO~e~s~Ot~r~ih~fi1BANGKOK CRUiSE CRUISECRUISETOUR 3t3P landtourm~yvlty CRUISETOUR 12
DAY PORT DAY PORT
DAY PORT By Sea ltBy LaDd DAY PORT
1 Beijing 11-12 At Sea 1 Rio de janeiro 11 Cape Horn Scenic Cruising
13 Hong Kong 2 Rio de jneiro c 12 Ushuaia Argentina 14 At Sea 3 RiolgUaiu Falls 12 Beagle Channel Scenlc Cruising
15 Nha Trang Vietnam 4 IIDIilZll FaU$13u~os~re$ 13 Punta Arenas Chile
16 Phu My Vietnam 5 Buens AiresEmbark 14 At Sea 17 At Sea 6 Montevideo Uruguay 15 Seno Eyre Fjord Scenic Cruising 18 Singapore 7 At Sea 16 At Sea 19 Kualtan Malaysia 8 Puerto Madryn Argentina 17 Puerto Montt Chile 20 At Sea 9 At Sea 18 At Sea 21 Bangkok Thail3nd 10 Falkland Islands (Stanley) 19 Santiago Chile
DAY PORT DAY PORT
At Sea Pusan SouthKOrea Nagasaki japan At Sea Shanghai China
Note CnIlst route shown for Royil Princess Oct 28 only Timcsforil1lsccnkoulslngmsubjccttothange
CRUISE [OUR ITINERARY
CRUISETOUR ITINERARY
CRUISrrOlJR ITINERARY Fiordland National Park Scenic Cruising DlUedin New Zealand Christchurch New Zealand Wellington New Zealand
14
GRAND PANAMA CANAL CRUISES
ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL
10 10 11 DAYSDAYS DAYS
CORAL PRINCESS GRAND PRINCESS GRAND PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIPfrom from
fromFT LAUDERDALE GALVESTON GALVESTON
2004 DEPARTURE DATES Oct n 21 31 2004 DEPARTURE DATE
2004 DEPARTURE DATENov 10 20 30middot DeelSmiddot
DedSDec 10 28
2005 DEPARTURE DATES CRUISE ITINERARY Jan 7 17 27
CRUISE ITINERARY Feb 6 16 26 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART MarS 1828 CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Galveston Texas EMBARK PMApr 7 17 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTshy 1 Galveston Texas EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 1 ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 3 Belize City Belize 1 PM 7PM 2-3 At Sea 3 Belize City Belize lPM 7PM 4 Costa Maya Mexico (Mahahual) 8AM 4PM 4 Um6n Costa Rica 7AM rPM 4 Costa Maya Mexico (Mahahual) SAM 4 PM 5 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands 12 PM 7PM 5 Panama Canal (to Gatun Lake) 7AM 430 PM 5 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands 12 PM 7PM 6 Ocho Rios Jamaica SAM 5PM 5 Col6n Panama 5PM 8PM 6 At Sea 7 At Sea 6 At Sea Cristobal Panama 7AM 4PM 8 7AM 4PM 7 Grand Cayman Cayman IslandS 7AM 4PM (fot Panama Canal) ftrtpg~niaa~~) S Corumel Mexico SAM 6PM 8 At Sea 9 At Sea 9 Bclize City Belize 7AM 4 PM 6PM 10 Coromel Mexico lOAM 6 PM9 Cozumel Mexico lOAM 10 At Sea 10 At Sea 11 At Sea
Portordtrllndtlmtsmayvllry 11 flo Lauderdale florida DISEMBARK AM Portorntr IInltf timpoundi may vary 11 Galveston Texas DISEMBARK AM Port ordu and Nmes may vary 12 Galv_es~on Texas DISEMBARK AM
ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL
8 DAYS
CORAL PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP
from
FT LAUDERDALE
2004 DEPARTURE DATE Dec 20
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Fl Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM 2-3 At Sea 4 Lim6n Costa Rica 7AM 7PM 5 Panama Canal (to Gatun Lake) 7 AM 430 PM 5 Co16n Panama 5PM SPM 6 At Sea 7 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands SAM 5PM S At Sea 9 Flo Lauderdale Florida DISEMBARK AM Bridge of the Americas Panama
f OptIonll fOllTS inclld1lI tht AtlllnH to Pacific RlIlllfll) joumq will dlmlldrt tilt ship b) tctdtr lit Gfttlm uk AJkr tour plIssmm dlstmlrark tilt shipwin procmlllat through tilt Gatun Locb lIndjlnlllly dock in Gl6lI Hmal1p41Sl11tmmttydiumlmtheJldlo~ lflrshops IInd~llI toIIrsrrnrl CIItutl14ktlllIrtonlflrJhlp
GRAND PANAMA CANAL CRUISES
GRAND PANAMA CANAL GRAND PANAMA CANAL GRAND PANAMA CANAL
150R 18 150R 1715 DAYS DAYS DAYS
CORAL PRINCESS SUN PRINCESS
REGAL PRINCESS REGAL PRINCESS SUN PRINCESS
DAWN PRINCESS REGAL PRINCESS sail between DAWN PRINCESS
sail between FT LAUDERDALE FT LAUDERDALE sail betweenand
FT LAUDERDALEand SAN DIEGO andLOS ANGELES
SAN FRANCISCO 2004 DEPARTURE DATES 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
DAWN PRINCESS 2004 DEPARTURE DATESNov 24Sp191
CRUISE ITINERARY Dec9t CORAL PRINCESSREGAL PRINCESS 5ltp261 CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE ITINERARY
200S DEPARTURE DATES Dec 24 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
SUN PRINCESS DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARIltPM200S DEPARTURE DATES DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Sep 2StMar 24
3 Ocho Rios Jamaica lOAM 6PM 2-3 At5ea 2 At Sea 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBA8KPM
REGAL PRINCESS AprSt 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBA8KPM Jan stu 200S DEPARTURE DATES2 At Sea4 At Sea 4 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 7AM lPMJan 23 5 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 7AM lPM 3 Ocho Rios Jamaica lOAM 6PM REGAL PRINCESS 5 Cartagena Colombia 9AM 3PMFeb7t 4 At Sea Apr 239AM 3PM 6 Transit Panama Canal 7AM 430 PMFb22 ~ yenr~fte~~~~~~u 7AM 430 PM 5 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 7AM lPM At SeaMar9t CORAL PRINCESS 79AM 3PM8 At Sea Apr 27 8 Puntarenas Costa Rica 7AM 7PMSUN PRINCESS 9 Puntarenas Costa Rica 7 AM 7PM ~ yenr~fte~n~~~~~u 7AM 430 PM 9-10 At SeaApr1S 8 At Sea DAWN PRINCESS10-11 At Sea 11 Acapulco Mexico 8AM 5PM
5PM 9 Puntarenas Costa Rica 7AM 7PM Apr 29H ~ae~lcoMexico 8 AM 12 At SeatllWrryopmllzlfrarnLls~in 10-11 At Sea rmrKfIfikTiIIrttimnma1 tlliJlrraryoptJllllsfrlJflSlmFranrimlJn 13 Cabo San lucas Mexico 8AM 5PM
gt This mUJI C4Jl llfwmblnld wlth a 3 14 Cabo San Lucas Mexico 7 AM lPM H ~e~o Mexico 8AM SPM rmruordrrorttimamG)llIryCoIutar CnUK to VlWOIlllr SC Dqs ThUIltIIIflltllnlltCllIIblntdwilhaZ-day 14-15 At Sea 16lhrlllllhI9lllIbtboobdulaquoSC)lQ4k t Illncral) lIpCutcs in mrmt orm Pllrt IiIIIa CocastaICnliutoVan(ouKrBCDlIys16 16 San Francisco California 7AM 4PMcowtlIrcrllisr IIIIYlIl1Ymiddot IhrounIScankboobdlUaK)lllllluU t~A~geles California 6 AM 5PM 14 Cabo San Lucas Mexico 8AM 5PM
Thllwl1JIIICllllslltMOlIkpilllyJmtcad 17-18 At Sea middotmiddotThliIAfllIllCltlllsatMGnIqclBaylnstcadllf 15 At Sea CPlIilldCI1IIu 17 At Sea o[OdKKwsPurllilllrlmllYWlry OchoRicJsPortllmtslllllYVllfymiddot D1SEMBA8K AM19 Vancouver BC DISEMBA8K AM 16 San Die20 California DlSEMBA8K AM 18 Val1couver BC
GRAND PANAMA CANAL COASTAL CRUISING
2-4 CORAL PRINCESS ISLAND PRINCESS SUN PRINCESS18 DAWN PRINCESS DIAMOND PRINCESS STAR PRINCESSDAYSDAYS
COASTAL CRUISE SCHEDULEREGAL PRINCESS
SHIP DAYS FROM TO DEPARTURE DATE DIAMOND PRINCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 5104
SAN FRANCISCO DIAMOND PRINCES5 4 Vancouver Seattle 5404 to CORAL PRINCESS 2 San Francisco Vancouver 5604
NEW YORK DAWN PRiNCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 5704 ISLAND PRiNCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 51204
2004 DEPARTURE DATE SUN PRINCESS 3 San Francisco Vancouver 51404Aug 24 ISLAND PRiNCESS 3 Vancouver LOI Angeles 91804
DIAMOND PRINCESS 1 Seattle Vancouver 91804CRUISE ITINERARY DIAMOND PRINCESS 6 Vancouver Los Angeles 91904 SAPPHIRE PRINCESS 1 Seattle Vancouver 91904 SAPPHREPRINCESS 2 Vancouver San Francisco 92004 DIAMOND PRINCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 43005 DlAMONDPRiNCES$ 4 Vancouver Seattle 5305 SUN PRINCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 5305
ISLAND PRiNCESS 3 Los Angeles VancOllver 5405 CORAL PRiNCESS 2 San Francisco Vancouver 51205
Coral Princess in the Panama Canal
CRUISE PLUS
Extend your adventure with our Cruise Plusreg program Cruise Plusreg enables you to enhance your vacation with one- to four-night hotel
packages in cities that stand on their own as vacation destinations Add nights in Sydney before you cruise or extend your vacation with nights in the city by the
bay San Francisco Transportation and luggage handling costs from the airport to both hotel and ship plus meet and greet services are always included
Wherever you choose to explore youll enjoy properties that are carefully chosen based on service value location and the peace of mind of knowing that Princess
has arranged it all for you
Anchorage Alaska Trevi Fountain Rome Auckland Harbor New Zealand
The Cruise Plusreg Program is available in over 30 major cities including
MEDITERRANEANAEGEAN EXOTICS PANAMA CANAL Barcelona London Rome and Venice Auckland Bangkok Beijing Buenos Aires Ft Lauderdale Los Angeles New York City
Cape Town Ft Lauderdale Honolulu Los San Diego San Francisco Sanjuan Vancouver NORTHERN EUROPE Angeles Montreal Moorea New York City Copenhagen and London MEXICO CARIBBEANOsaka Papeete Rome San Francisco
Ft Lauderdale Galveston Los AngelesTRANSATLANTIC Santiago Seattle Sydney Vancouver Venice Barcelona Copenhagen Ft Lauderdale San Francisco and San Juan
London New York City and Rome ALASKA Anchorage Calgary Fairbanks Kenai San Francisco Seattle and Vancouver
For more information about options and pricing reference a destination specific brochure or contact your travel agent
TRAVEL THE WORLD WITH THE LEADER IN CRUISINGmiddot Princess
Analysis by the Hawaii Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism Comparing the Economic Impact of Foreign Flag Ships with US Flag Cruise Ships Sailing in Hawaii
This is a summary of an analysis prepared by the Hawai Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism (DBEDT) of the economic impact of the foreign flag cruise ship fleet sailing in Hawaii as compared to each of the US flag ships operating in Honolulu
The comparison is set out below
Foreign Pride Pride Pride
Fleet Of Hawaii Of Aloha Of America
Total economic output impact (spendingsales) ($mil) 155 542 4225 4958
Total earnings impact (labor earnings) ($mil) 44 155 1207 1411
Total employment impact Uobs) 1447 5059 3943 4627
This analysis demonstrates that a single US-flagged ship the Pride of America home ported in Honolulu is 32 times more economically impactful and creates 32 times as many jobs as the entire foreign flag fleet that sails into and out of Hawaii ports of call
Economic Impact of Pride of America
Assumptions 1 Annual impact though Pride of Aloha is leaving in May 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existing Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($) 4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of outputl$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job multiplier (jobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
118700 105
2706 3373
147 042
1372
4958
1417
4627
Data sourcelformula Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Line 1 x line 2 x line 31 000000
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 4 x line 5
Line 4 x line 6
Line 4 x line 7
Economic Impact of Pride of Hawaii
Assumptions
1 Annual impact though Pride of Hawaii is leaving in February 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existing Pride of Aloha and Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($) 4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job multiplier (jobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
Data sourceformula 139770 Actual 2007 figure
975 Actual 2007 figure 2706 Actual 2007 figure 3688 Line 1 x line 2 x line 31000000
147 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model 042 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
1372 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
5421 Line 4 x line 5
1549 Line 4 x line 6
5059 Line 4 x line 7
Economic Impact of Pride of Aloha
Assumptions 1 Annual impact though Pride of Aloha is leaving in May 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existlng Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($)
4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job mUltiplier Oobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
95680 111
2706 2874
147 042
1372
4225
1207
3943
Data sourcelformula Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Line 1 x line 2 x line 31000000
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 4 x line 5
Line 4 x line 6
Line 4 x line 7
lt
Methodology Used in Calculating Impact of International Cruise Ships
Cruise ship visitors 1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Came with ships 3 Flied in 4 Average length of stay (days) 5 PPPD ($) 6 Cruise visitor spending ($mil))
Cruise ship crews 7 Ratio of crew spending to cruise visitor spending 8 Cruise crew spending
Cruisline 9 Ratio of crew spending to cruise visitor spending
10 Cruiseline spending
11 Total cruise-related spending ($mil)
12 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 13 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 14 Job multiplier Uobs$ cruise -related spending)
15 Total output impact ($miJ)
16 Total earnings impact ($miJ)
17 Total employment impact (jobs)
106641 98307
8334 739 847 668
02 134
038 254
1055
147 042
1372
1551
444
1447
Data sourceformula Line 2 + line 3 DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report Line 1 x line 4 x line 5
DBEDT 2003 Cruise study Line 7 x line 6
DBEDT 2003 Cruise study Line 9 x line 6
Line 6 + line 8 + line 10
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 11 x line 12
Line 11 x line 13
Line 11 x line 14
Economic Contributions Foreign-Flag Fleet operating in Hawaii vs Three US-Flag Ships
$1500
Pride of Hawaii$1000- $542 million VIc -0-E c Pride of AlohaCo
423 million$500
Pride of America $496 million155 million$shy
Foreign-Flag US-Flag Fleet Fleet
Source State of Hawaii Department of US-Flag $1460 billion Business Economic Development and Tourism
Foreign-Flag $ 155 million 7292008
Employment Foreign-Flag Fleet operating in Hawaii vs Three US-Flag Ships
15000
10000
til c o Pride of Aloha
39435000
Pride of America 1447 4627
~---------
Foreign-Flag US-Flag Fleet Fleet
Source State of Hawaii Department of US-Flag 13629 jobs Business Economic Development and Tourism
Foreign-Flag 1447 jobs 7292008
Foreign Flag Capacity Growth Foreign flag passenger capacity has changed five-fold on roundtrip Hawaii cruises from the West Coast since enactment of the Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative
1600000
1400000
tn 1200000
J enshyZ
1000000
I shyG) en 800000 s G) tn tn
600000 as D 400000
200000
0 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Year
Source US Maritime Administration (derived from the US Customs and Border Patrol Vessel Entrance and Clearance documents - final 2007 data) 7292008
NCL America Hawaii Economic Contributions
(2004-2008)
bull (in Millions) bull $399 in wages benefits and overtime to US seafarers bull $35 in Federal and State payroll Taxes bull $64 in Government Fees and Taxes to Hawaii bull $28 in wages benefits and overtime to US other employees bull $52 in Port Charges to Hawaii Companies (Stevedores tugs pilots etc) bull $85 in Fuel to Tesoro Hawaii bull $130 for shore excursions to Hawaii tour operators bull $39 for Hawaii hotel rooms and ground transport bull $75 for food grown in Hawaii bull $57 in union fees and levies (incl $32M paid directly by employees) bull $1 in MMD fees to the United States Coast Guard bull $51 for recruitment screening processing and training crew bull $76 advertising and promoting Hawaii as a destination bull $1092
COASTWISE CRUISES INTERPRETIVE RULE RESOLUTION Adopted at the
US Conference of Mayors 76th Annual Meeting
June 20-242008 Miami
WHEREAS the Department of Homeland Securitys Customs and Border Protection (CBP) issued a proposed Interpretive Rule regulating Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises on foreign flagged vessels between US ports of call under the Passenger Vessel Services Act at the request of the United States Maritime Administration and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule would require that a foreign-flagged vessel on a coastwise cruise to call at a foreign port for at least 48 hours with that foreign stop constituting at least 50 percent of the cruise itinerary and allowing passengers to disembark the cruise vessel at the foreign port before continuing the cruise to a US port of call and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule establishes burdensome criteria that are wholly inconsistent with industry practice particularly the 48-hour call at foreign port shyinasmuch as the standard port call is six to eight hours - as well as the requirement that 50 percent of a cruise be spent at the foreign port and
WHEREAS the intent of the proposed Interpretive Rule is to protect the single remaining US flag vessel serving the Inter-Hawaiian Island cruise trade that according to the Hawaii Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism generates more than 4600 jobs and generates nearly $500 million in economic benefits for the state annually and
WHEREAS thousands of members of the International Longshore Workers Union (nWU) are employed at US ports serving cruise ships and whose jobs would be at risk if the proposed Interpretive Rule were implemented and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule is vague as to the breadth of its application ie to coastwise cruises between all United States ports or applied solely to coastwise cruises from West Coast ports to Hawaii and
WHEREAS the Cruise Lines International Association estimates the proposed Interpretive Rule would upend the $17 billion in national cruise industry spending and put at risk more than 300000 jobs generated by the international cruise industry including jobs held by nWU at US ports and the local allied industries supporting the cruise industry and
Executive Order Submissions Under Review
II Reglnfogov Where to ind Federal Regulatory Information -~
Home ] Lnitied Agenda and Regulator) Ilan pound012866 Regulator) Review Jnformalion Collection Review
EO 12866 Regulatory Rlvlw dvanced Search IJitorical RepWI Review Counh Jriter XIL
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA)
Executive Order Submissions Under Review July 25 2008 - _------------____ _shy
Department of Homeland Security
AGENCY DHS-TSA RIN 1652-AA53
TITLE Large Aircraft Security Program Other Aircraft Operator Security Programs and Airport Operator Security Program
STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT Yes RECEIVED DATE 06302008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
AGENCY DHS-USCIS RIN Llti15-AB67 TITLE Changes to Requirements Affecting H-2B Nonimmigrants and Their Employers
STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT No RECEIVED DATE 06092008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
AGENCY DHS-USCBP RIN 1651AA11 TITLE Issuance of a Visa and Authorization for Temporary Admission Into the United States for Certain Nonimmigrant Aliens Afflicted W HIV Infection
STAGE Final Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT No RECEIVED DATE 03042008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
-_RE_V-IE-W-E-X-T-EN-D-E-D---------- _
AGENCY DHS-USCBP RIN 1651-AA76 TITLE Coastwise Transportation of Passengers STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT Yes RECEIVED DATE 07142008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
Disclosure I Accessibility I Privacy Policy I Contact Us
httpwwwreginfogovpublicdoeoReviewSearch 7252008
View Rule Page 11
Shere D find Federal ReguLatory InformciiorlReglnfogov Home J Cnified Agenda al1d Regulatory Plan EO 12866 Regulatory Reyiew Information Collection Reiew
Current rnified Agenda and Regulatory Plan Historical Pnified Agenda and Regulatory Plan Search
View Rule
DHSIUSCBP RIN 1651-AA76 Publication ill Spring 2008
Title llCoastwise Transportation of Passengers
Abstract This interim rule amends the Department of Homeland Securitys (DHS) current regulations relating to the transportation of passengers by non-coastwise-qualified vessels on voyages that begin and end at a US port and stop at intervening US and foreign port(s) Under this interim final rule voyages that begin and end at a US port and stop at a foreign port(s) and at intervening US port(s) where a large USshyflag coastwise-qualified passenger vessel engages in regular service are in violation of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) unless the cumulative length of stay(s) at intervening foreign port(s) is more than 50 percent of the total amount of time spent at the intervening US port(s) and passengers are permitted to go ashore at the foreign port(s) The purpose of this amendment is to ensure that the Congressional purpose in enacting the PVSA which is to preserve the economic benefits of US coastwise trade to US-flag coastwise-qualified vessels is properly implemented
Agency Department of Homeland Security(DHS) Priority Substantive Nonsignificant
KIN Status First time published in the Unified Agenda Agenda Stage of Rulemaking Final Rule Stage
Major No Unfunded Mandates No
CFR Citation -LCER 4J~)(h)(plusmnJ
Legal Authority 5JJSS_30J12lJ-SClt16 J9_lJiCJ 431 9_L1C1plusmn3JJ2JScHJ1J2JSCJ624 L(LlLSc207LIl(gtJfHgt~ _CiQJ _46lSC 6QLQ~
Legal Deadline None
Timetable Action Date FR Cite
Interim Final Action 0510012008
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required No Government Levels Affected None
Federalism No
Included in the Regulatory Plan No
RIN Data Printed in the FR No
Agency Contact Glen E Vereb Chief Entry Procedures and Carriers Branch Department of Homeland Security US Customs and Border Protection Office of Regulations and Rulings 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington DC 20229 Phone202572-8730
Disclosure I Accessibility I Privacy Policy I Contact Us
httpwwwreginfogovpublicdoeAgendaViewRuleruleID=286751 7128120
Federal RegisterVol 72 No 224Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules 65487
SPECULATIVE POSITION LIMITS 1-Continued [In contract units)
Contract
Soybeans and Mini-Soybeans 2
Wheat and Mini-Wheat 2 bullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbull
Soybean Oil
SingleSpot month All monthsmonth
600 8600 13300 600 11100 14500 540 6600 8600
Soybean Meal 720 5500 7100
Minneapolis Grain Exchange
Hard Red Spring Wheat I 600 I 11100 I 14500
New York Board of Trade
Cotton No2 I 300 I 5300 I 7300
Kansas City Board of Trade
Hard Winter Wheat I 600 I 11100 I 14500
1 For purposes of compliance with these limits positions in a futures contract that shares ~ubstantially identical terms with a contract market enumerated herein including a futures contract that is cash-settled based on the settlement price of an enumerated contract market shall be agshygregated with positions in the enumerated contract market
2 For purposes of compliance with these limits positions in the regular-sized and mini-sized contracts shall be aggregated
Issued by the Commission this November 152007 in Washington DC David Stawick Secretary of the Commission [FR Doc E7-22681 Filed 11-20-07 845 amI BILLING CODE 6351-Q1-P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Bureau of Customs and Border Protection
19 CFR Part 4
[USCBP-2007-o098]
Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises
AGENCY Customs and Border Protection Department of Homeland Security ACTION Proposed interpretation solicitation of comments
SUMMARY This document proposes new criteria to be used by Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to determine whether non-coastwise-qualified vessels are in violation ofthe Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) when engaging in cruise itineraries in which passengers board at a US port the vessel calls at several Hawaiian ports and then the vessel proceeds to a foreign port or ports for a brief period before ultimately returning to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their cruise CBP believes these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because it appears that the primary objective of the foreign stop is evasion of the PVSA
DATES Comments must be received on or before December 212007 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT Glen E Vereb Cargo Security Carriers amp Immigration Branch Office of International Trade (202) 572-8730 ADDRESSES You may submit comments identified by docket number by one of the following methods
bull Federal eRulemaking Portal http wwwregulationsgov Follow the instructions for submitting comments
bull Mail Border Security Regulations Branch Office of International Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
I Public Participation
Interested persons are invited to participate in this proposed interpretation by submitting written data views or arguments on all aspects of the proposed interpretation Customs and Border Protection (CBP) also invites comments that relate to the economic environmental or federalism effects that might result from this proposed interpretation Comments that will provide the most assistance to CBP in developing these procedures will reference a specific portion of the proposed interpretation explain the reason for any recommended change and include data information or authority that support such recommended change
Instructions All submissions received must include the agency name and docket number for this proposed
interpretation All comments received will be posted without change to http wwwregulationsgov including any personal information provided
Docket For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received go to http wwwregulationsgov Submitted comments may also be inspected on regular business days between the hours of 9 am and 430 pm at the Office of International Trade Customs and Border Protection 799 9th Street NW 5th Floor Washington DC Arrangements to inspect submitted documents should be made in advance by calling Mr Joseph Clark at (202) 572shy8768
II Background
The maritime cabotage law governing the transportation of passengers was first established by section 8 of the Passenger Vessel Services Act of June 191886 (the PVSA) 24 Stat 81 as amended by section 2 of the Act of February 17 1898 30 Stat 248 formerly codified at 46 USC App 289 (now codified at 46 USC 55103) 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 of $200 (now $300 as promulgated in TD 03-11 pursuant to the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 199028 USC 2461 note) for each passenger so transported and landed
The intent of the maritime cabotage laws including the PVSA was to provide a legal structure that guarantees a coastwise monopoly to
65488 Federal RegisterVol 72 No 224Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules
American shipping and thereby promotes development of the American merchant marine Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 28 (DC Cir 1984) see also The Granada 35 FSupp 892 8931940 AMC 1601 (DC Pa 1940) (stating that the legislative aim of section 289 [now 55102] was the creation of a practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping business for United States ships) In other words the PVSA was enacted to advance the United States merchant marine and fleet by restricting the use of foreign-ownedflagged passenger vessels in United States territorial waters
Passenger vessel transportation between United States ports has historically been viewed to be part of the coastwise trade after the enactment of the PVSA This view is premised on the concepts of continuity of the voyage and whether its intended purpose or objective was coastwise transportation In other words the PVSA was held to be violated if the coastwise movement was continuous or if the purpose of the trip was a coastwise voyage (See 18 OAG 445 September 4 1886 28 OAG 204 February 16 1910 29 OAG 318 February 12 1912 30 OAG 44 February 1 1913 34 OAG 340 December 24 1924 and 36 OAG 352 August 13 1930)
The CBP regulations promulgated pursuant to the PVSA are found at section 480a of title 19 of the Code of Federal Regulations (19 CFR 480a) and are reflective of the above cited Office of the Attorney General decisions These regulations provide among other things that a non-coastwise-qualified vessel which embarks a passenger at a port in the United States embraced within the coastwise laws (a coastwise port) will be deemed to have landed that passenger in violation of the PVSA if the passenger disembarks at a different coastwise port on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a nearby foreign port or ports (as defined in 19 CFR 480a(a)(2) see also 19 CFR 480a(b)(2)) The terms embark and disembark are words of art which are defined as going on board a vessel for the duration of a specific voyage and leaving a vessel at the conclusion of a specific voyage respectively (See 19 CFR 480a(a)(4))
The references in section 480a to nearby foreign ports (defined in 19 CFR 480a(a)(2)) are the results of attempts by CBP to apply an Office of the Attorney Generals opinion dated February 26 1910 (28 OAG 204) In that case a foreign-flag vessel transported 615 passengers on a voyage around the world beginning in New
York and concluding in San Francisco The Attorney General opined that since the primary object of the voyage was to visit various parts of the world on a pleasure tour returning home via California and not to be transported in domestic commerce the transportation was not in violation of the PVSA
The 1910 Attorney Generals opinion was extended to voyages that included foreign ports other than nearby foreign ports (See Treasury Decision (TD) 68shy285 (33 FR 16558) November 14 1968) However voyages solely to one or more coastwise ports have always been considered predominantly coastwise Therefore non-coastwise-qualified vessels engaging in such a voyage where passengers temporarily go ashore at a coastwise port have been deemed to have violated the PVSA
m Current Law and Policy Pursuant to Public Law 109-304 120
Stat 1632 enacted on October 6 2006 Title 46 United States Code was substantially reorganized and recodified Consequently the PVSA is now codified at 46 USC 55103 and provides that no vessel shall transport passengers between ports or places in the United States either directly or by way of a foreign port under a penalty of $300 for each person so transported and landed except one that (1) Is wholly owned by citizens of the United States for purposes of engaging in the coastwise trade and (2) has been issued a certificate of documentation with a coastwise endorsement or is exempt from documentation but would otherwise be eligible for such a certificate and endorsement
In 2003 Congress enacted Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II Section 211 for the purpose of revitalizing the oceangoing US-flag cruise industry in Hawaii (the 2003 Act) Three oceangoing US-flag cruise ships PRIDE OF ALOHA PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAII were documented with coastwise privileges pursuant to the 2003 Act These vessels entered regular service in Hawaii in 2004 2005 and 2006 respectively and pursuant to the express language of the 2003 Act are limited in their operation to providing regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands of Hawaii
The CBP regulations promulgated pursuant to the PVSA are set forth in 19 CFR 480a and have remained unchanged throughout both the recodification of Title 46 of the United States Code and the enactment of the 2003 Act They provide that a violation of the PVSA occurs when passengers embark (board a vessel for the
duration of a voyage) a non-coastwiseshyqualified vessel at one US port and disembark (leave the vessel at the conclusion of a voyage) at a different US port unless they proceed with the vessel to a distant foreign port (Le any port not considered a nearby foreign port which is defined as any port located in North America Central America Bermuda or the West Indies including the Bahamas) Currently these regulations do not contain specific criteria for non-coastwise-qualified vessels on itineraries including US ports and either nearby or distant foreign ports in order for such foreign port calls to be compliant with the PVSA
To reiterate the applicable CBP regulations provide that the PVSA is violated when a non-coastwise-qualified vessel transports a passenger on a voyage solely to one or more coastwise ports and the passenger disembarks or goes ashore temporarily at a coastwise port (19 CFR 480a(b)(1)) Furthermore a violation of the PVSA also occurs when a non-coastwise-qualified vessel transports a passenger on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a nearby foreign port or ports (but no other foreign port) and the passenger disembarks at a coastwise port other than the port of embarkation (19 CFR 480a(b)(2)) However there is no violation of the PVSA when a passenger is on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a distant foreign port or ports (whether or not the voyage includes a nearby foreign port or ports) and the passenger disembarks at a coastwise port provided the passenger has proceeded with the vessel to a distant foreign port (19 CFR 480a(b)(3))
IV Request From MARAD To Provide Guidance
The US Department of Transportation Maritime Administration (MARAD) has requested that CBP take action to ensure enforcement of the PVSA MARAD has asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreignshyflag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwiseshyqualified cruise ship operators
In April of 2007 the operator of the three US-flag cruise vessels operating solely in Hawaii pursuant to the 2003 Act announced their intent to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAIl from the Hawaii market and redeploy her to Europe The operator intends to re-flag the vessel to foreign registry directly resulting in the loss of over 1100 crewmember jobs The primary reason cited for this decision is the rapid increase in foreign-flag competition entering the Hawaii market
Federal Register I Vol 72 No 224 I Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules 65489
from the West Coast This competition is evidenced in published cruise itineraries of foreign-flag carriers offering a variety of round trip cruises that depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period usually in the early morning and ultimately return to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their cruise These cruises are often marketed as Hawaii cruises and except for the brief stop in the nearby foreign port of Ensenada are purely coastwise in nature It is these cruise itineraries that pose an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels that pursuant to the 2003 Act are currently engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands
V Preliminary Notice
In response to MARADs concerns CBP sent letters to two carriers known to operate the itineraries in question as well as to the Cruise Lines International Association Inc stating that CBP believes that these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because it appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA The letters further indicated that CBP is taking steps to publish this position
VI CBPs Proposed Interpretive Rule Accordingly in this document CBP is
proposing to provide that cruise itineraries for non-qualified coastwise vessels which allow passengers to board at a US port call at several Hawaiian ports proceed to a foreign port or ports for a brief period and then ultimately return to the original US port of embarkation for disembarkation are not consistent with the PVSA and the regulations promulgated pursuant thereto Specifically CBP interprets a voyage to be solely to one or more coastwise ports even where it stops at a foreign port unless the stop at the foreign port is a legitimate object of the cruise CBP will presume that a stop at a foreign port is not a legitimate object of the cruise unless
(1) The stop lasts at least 48 hours at the foreign port
(2) The amount of time at the foreign port is more than 50 percent of the total amount of time at the US ports of call and
(3) The passengers are permitted to go ashore temporarily at the foreign port
Accordingly CBP proposes to adopt an interpretive rule under which it will presume that any cruise itinerary that does not include a foreign port call that
satisfies each of these three criteria constitutes coastwise transportation of passengers in violation of 19 CFR 480a(b)(1)
Dated November 16 2007 W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection [FR Doc E7-22788 Filed 11-20-07 845 am] BILLING CODe 9111-14-1
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau
27 CFR Part 9
[Notice No 76]
RIN 1513-AB49
Proposed Establishment of the Leona Valley Viticultural Area (2007R-281 P)
AGENCY Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau Treasury ACTION Notice of proposed rulemaking
SUMMARY The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau proposes to establish the 134 square mile Leona Valley viticultural area in the northeast part of Los Angeles County California We designate viticultural areas to allow vintners to better describe the origin of their wines and to allow consumers to better identify wines they may purchase We invite comments on this proposed addition to our regulations DATES We must receive written comments on or before January 22 2008
ADDRESSES You may send comments on this notice to one of the following addresses
bull httpwwwregulationsgov (Federal e-rulemaking portal follow the instructions for submitting comments) or
bull Director Regulations and Rulings Division Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau PO Box 14412 Washington DC 20044-4412
See the Public Participation section of this notice for specific instructions and requirements for submitting comments and for information on how to request a public hearing
You may view copies of this notice selected supporting materials and any comments we receive about this proposal at httpwwwregulationsgov under Docket No 2007-0066 You also may view copies of this notice all related petitions maps or other supporting materials and any comments we receive about this
proposal by appointment at the TTB Information Resource Center 1310 G Street NW Washington DC 20220 To make an appointment call 202-927shy2400
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT NA Sutton Regulations and Rulings Division Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau 925 Lakeville S1 No 158 Petaluma CA 94952 phone 415shy271-1254 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
Background on Viticultural Areas
TTB Authority Section 105(e) of the Federal Alcohol
Administration Act (FAA Act) 27 USC 205(e) authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to prescribe regulations for the labeling of wine distilled spirits and malt beverages The FAA Act provides that these regulations should among other things prohibit consumer deception and the use of misleading statements on labels and ensure that labels provide the consumer with adequate information as to the identity and quality of the product The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) administers the regulations promulgated under the FAA Act
Part 4 ofthe TTB regulations (27 CFR part 4) allows the establishment of definitive viticultural areas and the use of their names as appellations of origin on wine labels and in wine advertisements Part 9 of the TTB regulations (27 CFR part 9) contains the list of approved viticultural areas
Definition Section 425(e)(1)(i) ofthe TTB
regulations (27 CFR 425(e)(1)(i)) defines a viticultural area for American wine as a delimited grape-growing region distinguishable by geographical features the boundaries of which have been recognized and defined in part 9 of the regulations These designations allow vintners and consumers to attribute a given quality reputation or other characteristic of a wine made from grapes grown in an area to its geographic origin The establishment of viticultural areas allows vintners to describe more accurately the origin of their wines to consumers and helps consumers to identify wines they may purchase Establishment of a viticultural area is neither an approval nor an endorsement by TTB of the wine produced in that area
Requirements Section 425(e)(2) of the TTB
regulations outlines the procedure for proposing an American viticultural area and provides that any interested party
Us Department ofHomelaDd Secmity Washington DC 10229
bull ~
US Customs and Border Protection
AUG 15 2fXJJ
VE5-3-02-QTRRBSTCCCI - ti015502-GG-
Mr leon Sutcliffe Director Port Operations Camivai Cruise Unes Camival Place 3655 NW 87Avenue Miami Aorlda 33178
RE P~nger Vessef Services Ad Coastwise Transportation 46 USC sect 55103 19 CFR sect 480a(b)
Dear Mr Sutcliffe
As you know US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) enforces the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) codified at TItle 46 United States Code section 55103 (46 USC 55103) This statute prohibits non-coastwise-qualifled vessels (ie those vessels not US-buill owned and documented with a coastwise endorsement) from transporting passengers between porls or places within the United States The regUlations promUlgated pursuant to the PVSA are found at TrtJe 19 Code of Federal Regulations section 4808 (19 CFR 4808)
It has come to our attention that passenger vessels of your company are engaging in cruise itineraries that include ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands Two USAlagged coastwise-endorsed passenger vessefs are also currenUy engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of caD wittlin the Hawaiian Islands
As part of your cruise itineraries some of your foreign-flagged vessels depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period and ultimately rebJm to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their endse For example the MS ZAANDAM of Holand America Lines departs San Diego cruises the Hawaiian Islands stops in Ensenada from 800pm to 11 OOpmbull and returns to san Diego CBP believes these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because It appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA -- - - ~~~------
Please be advised that CBP is taking steps to publish this position Should have any questions pertaining to this matter please contact Mr Glen Vereb Chief Cargo Security Carriers and Immigration Branch at (202) 572-8724
Sincerely
F Jl E EST Y LEe A U I 5 I N Gmiddot
December 21 2007
The Honorable W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection co Border Security Regulations Branch Office ofInternational Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229
Re Hawaii Coastwise Cruises (USCBP-2007-0098) Comments in Response to Proposed Interpretation
Dear Commissioner Basham
NCL America Inc1 (NCLA) submits these comments in support ofthe efforts ofCustoms and Border Protection to enforce the Passenger Vessel Services Act and the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative as applied to Hawaii coastwise cruises
1 Introduction and Summary of Position
NCLA operates three large oceangoing US flag cruise ships in Hawaii These ships are documented under US flag and are required to operate in regular service in Hawaii pursuant to the authority of the Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative a 2003 federal statute intended to revitalize the US flag cruise industry and to maximize economic and national security benefits to the United States (the 2003 Act)
NCLA has invested $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships pursuant to the 2003 Act and in direct reliance on the protections of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) and its proper enforcement The PVSA limits the transportation ofpassengers between US ports to coastwise documented US flag ships Its statutory protections recognize that US flag ships have significantly higher operational costs in part because they are subject to more stringent US laws including US labor laws and federal
1 NCL America Inc is a US corporation incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware headquartered in Honolulu Hawaii As a US corporation it is subject to US taxes at both the federal and state level The Chief Executive Officer the Chairman of the Board and all of the Board of Directors of NCL America are US citizens The company is also subject to US labor and employment laws and is required by statute to maintain a workforce comprised primarily ofUS citizens
700 Bishop St SUite 900 I Honolulu HawMi 96813 I Tel 8085273800 Fax 8085273820 I ndcom
2
income tax among others The NCLA ships operating in Hawaii are the only large oceangoing cruise ships operating under US flag In furtherance of the policy goals of the PVSA and the 2003 Act these ships have created over 4000 seafaring jobs all subject to US minimum wage and other labor statutes
Since 2003 there has been a significant increase in capacity in the Hawaii market from foreign flag ships providing cruise service to Hawaii from the West Coast Many of these foreign flag cruises are marketed as Hawaii cruises and consist entirely ofUS ports ofcall with the sole exception of a token stop in Mexico for as little as an hour late at night under circumstances where passengers are not permitted to get offthe ship There are no reported rulings approving these particular foreign flag itineraries
Lower cost foreign competition in the Hawaii market has unfairly hurt NCLAs operations NCLA has incurred substantial losses which have contributed significantly to its decision earlier this year to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAll from US flag and reshydeploy it foreign Unfair foreign competition poses an imminent threat to the remaining US flag passenger vessels operating in the Hawaii trades pursuant to the 2003 Act
As the agency statutorily charged with implementation of the 2003 Act the US Department ofTransportation Maritime Administration (MARAn) is aware of the threat foreign flag Hawaii itineraries pose to the US flag fleet and brought the situation to the attention ofthe US Department ofHomeland Security Bureau ofCustoms and Border Protection (CBP or Customs) Customs determined that the primary object of these itineraries was coastwise and that the Ensenada stop was an evasion of the PVSA
In August 2007 Customs provided written notice to the affected foreign lines and their trade association that the existing itineraries were contrary to the PVSA None of these lines sought advance rulings even after the Customs notice with respect to their Hawaii itineraries pursuant to Customs regulations and many continued to market the itineraries as Hawaii cruises NCLA supports the efforts ofCustoms and MARAD to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act for Hawaii cruises
2 Statutory Authority for Customs Proposed Interpretation
(a) Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA)
Congress passed the PVSA in 1886 to protect the US maritime transportation industry from foreign competition2 Protection is afforded through penalty assessments on foreign vessels transporting passengers between US ports or places directly or by way ofa foreign port 3 As Congress and the courts have recognized coastwise protections for the US maritime transportation industry are only one dimension of the PVSA Operating in conjunction with other coastwise laws and with the US
2 See United States v Honduran SS GRANADA 35 F Supp 892 894 (BD Pa 1940)(citing purpose of PVSA to meet threats to the practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping which was to be preserved for US ships)
46 USc sect 55103 (originally 46 USC App 289)
3
documentation laws the PVSA also enhances military sealift in times ofnational emergency sustains a US merchant marine and supports the US shipbuilding and repair industry4
(b) Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative (the 2003 Act)
Over the past decade Congress has sought to reinforce the goals of the PVSA by providing mechanisms to revitalize the oceangoing US flag cruise fleet particularly in Hawaii The Project America legislation enacted in 1997 authorized among other things the re~flagging ofone existing cruise ship contingent on the operator contracting for the construction oftwo new oceangoing cruise shipss Following the default of the operator under the original contract Congress enacted the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative for the purpose ofrecovering economic and national security benefits to the United States bull 6 These same goals of the original PVSA were expressly referenced in the legislative history of the 2003 Act which emphasized that these ships will be assets available in time ofnational emergency and will significantly expand the pool ofqualified seafarers upon which the US Department ofDefense relies to crew non-combatant vessels
The 2003 Act authorizes the US documentation ofthree cruise ships for operation in regular service in Hawaii subject to certain conditions including a prohibition on operating in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico and the Caribbean Sea and a requirement that all vessel repair work be undertaken in the United States MARAD is charged with implementation of the 2003 Act
3 Customs Implementation of PVSA
(a) Regulations
The current regulations implementing the PVSA were published by Customs in 19858 The growth of the foreign flag cruise industry in North America and in particular the development of the Alaska cruise market led to an effort in 1984 to amend the thenshyexisting regulations to increase the ease of administration and operational flexibility The effort to change the regulation had support from US port interests who saw benefit in the potential increase in the number ofUS ports that foreign vessels could call and was opposed by proponents ofpotential US flag projects as detrimental to efforts to revitalize the US fleet 9 The preamble to the 1985 rule emphasized that it was of paramount importance to consider the primary object ofpassengers in taking a
4 See American Hawaii Cruises v Skinner 713 F Supp 452 457 (DDC 1989) (recognizing the contribution of the PVSA and the Jones Act in helping to secure national defense by maintaining a merchant marine oftbe best equipped and most suitable types ofvessels sufficient to serve in time of war or national emergency) see also Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 30 (DC Cir 1984) Wirth Ltd v SIS Acadia Forest 537 F2d 1272 1281 n32 (5th Cir 1976) S Public Law 105-56 Section 8109 (111 Stat 1203 1244) (Oct 81997 ) 6 Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II General Provisions - Department ofCommerce Section 211 (117 Stat 1179) (Feb 20 2003) 1 149 Cong Rec S1118 (dailyed Jan 17 2003(statement ofSenator Inouye) 8 19 CFR sect 480a 950 Fed Reg 26981 (July I 1985)
4
voyage10 a concept which is reinforced elsewhere in Customs regulations11 In its analysis of the comments received at the time Customs accepted the view ofport interests that the modified rule would help their business but did so recognizing the absence ofa regular salt water US flag passenger fleet Customs acknowledged the potential harm to prospective efforts to revitalize the US flag passenger fleet and expressly cautioned that if it were ever shown that coastwise qualified vessels in competition with foreign vessels were in fact hurt by the modified Customs regulation then Customs would immediately reconsider its position12
(b) Customs Rulings
Given the significant penalties associated with violating the PVSA13 Customs regulations expressly provide a mechanism for the owner or charterer of a foreign vessel or any other interested person to request an advisory ruling as to whether a contemplated voyage would be considered in violation of the PVSA14 Customs regulations provide that vessel operators can rely on these ruling letters only to the extent that the facts and circumstances are identical to those in the ruling letter IS
Notwithstanding the fact that several foreign cruise lines offer Hawaii itineraries originating in a US mainland port and calling at Hawaii ports with a token intervening stop in Mexico there are no reported rulings expressly approving such an itinerary for these foreign cruise lines 16
4 The Cruise Industry in Hawaii
(a) NCL America Returns US flag to the Oceangoing Passenger Fleet
Pursuant to the requirements ofthe 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative NCLA agreed to promote US-flag cruising enhance military sealift capacity and expand the US maritime labor base No other major cruise line had ever undertaken such a commitment to the US flag and the public policy objectives Congress sought to achieve under the PVSA or the 2003 Act Introduction ofPRIDE OF ALOHA in 2004 was a significant development in the maritime industry because it marked the restoration ofthe
10 Id at 26983 11 Customs Regulations include a provision on the effect ofruling letters and with respect to carrier rulings the applicable regulation refers to rulings setting forth a determination as to whether or not the primary object of a contemplated voyage is coastwise transportation in violation of46 USC sect 289 [pYSA codified at 46 USC sect55103] 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 12 50 Fed Reg at 26983 13 A modem cruise ship with 2400 passengers for example would be subject to a fine of$720OOO per cruise based on the statutory penalty of$300 for each passenger transported in violation of the Act 14 19 CFR sect 480a(d) IS 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 16 There is one older reported mling involving a request to drop the Ensenada port call from a Los AngeleslHawaiiLos Angeles itinerary which Customs held would violate the PYSA In dicta Customs acknowledged that the itinerary could be in compliance if the Ensenada call were not dropped but did not address the issue ofwhether a one hour service call where no passengers depart the vessel would be sufficient The carrier that obtained that ruling has since left the Hawaii market See Customs Ruling HQ 114078 re Crystal Hannony (Nov 4 1997)
5
us flag to the oceangoing cruise industry A contemporaneous press release from the Us Department ofTransportation reported that the three US-flag cruise ships to be introduced pursuant to the 2003 Act were expected to create more than 20000 US jobs generate more than $825 million ofexpenditures in the US economy and create nearly $360 million in federal tax revenue by the end of 200717 In 2005 the PRIDE OF AMERICA was introduced and in 2006 the third vessel PRIDE OF HAWAll was introduced to Hawaii Both the PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAIl offer 7shyday inter-island Hawaii itineraries whereas PRIDE OF ALOHA operates on 7 and 10 day cruises exclusively among the islands ofHawaii as well as 11 day cruises that include a foreign port call at Fanning Island To date NCLA has invested over $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships in furtherance ofthe policy objectives of the PVSA and the 2003 Act These ships employ over 4000 seafarers and generate hundreds ofmillions of dollars in benefits for Hawaii and the nation
(b) Significant Increase in Foreign Flag Capacity Since 2003
The most significant change in the Hawaii cruise market since 2003 has been the dramatic increase in capacity A significant portion ofthis capacity increase is directly attributable to NCLAs fulfillment ofthe Congressional mandate in the 2003 Act However foreign-flag operations in the Hawaii market as measured in passenger nights18 have skyrocketed Based on MARAn data derived from the US Customs Border Patrol Vessel Entrance and Clearance documents the passenger nights for foreign flag vessels departing from the West Coast to Hawaii on round trip cruise have increased several hundredfold during this period19 See Exhibit A
(c) NCLA Has Incurred Substantial Losses During this Period
Since 2004 NCLA has lost cumulatively more than a quarter ofa billion dollars A principal reason for these losses has been the increase in foreign capacity in this market NCLA has taken significant steps to reduce costs to address the increase in foreign competition but NCLA is at an inherent disadvantage when competing against foreign companies that are not subject to US labor laws US tax laws and other laws Ofcourse the statutory protections of the PVSA are intended to address these very issues That is why Customs immediate action to implement the proposed interpretation is critical for the US flag fleet Regrettably NCLA has already been forced to reduce overall capacity early next year with the withdrawal ofPRIDE OF HAWAlI to another
17 DOT Press Release dated June 72004 see also DOT Press Release dated August 132004 in connection with visit to PRIDE OF ALOHA by US Transportation Secretary Norman Y Mineta 11 Passenger nights (also referred to as passenger capacity days) are calculated by multiplying the number ofpassengers per vessel by the number ofcruise days in each itinerary by the number of cruises This is the unit ofmeasurement employed by MARAn In contrast passenger bed supply (also referred to as passenger capacity) data reflects only the number ofberths per vessel multiplied by the number of cruises and hence understates the market by excluding the full economic value ofthe cruise perfonned 19 In 2003 the total number ofpassenger nights for round-trip West Coast to Hawaii cruises was 303325 which jumped by 353 to 1072329 in 2006 and by 430 to 1304546 from 2003 to 2007 (The 2007 figure is based on MARAD data for six months and a1ll1ualized by published itineraries for the balance of the year)
6
market for operation under foreign flag This move alone will result in the loss ofover 1000 American seafaring jobs
5 Customs Proposed Interpretation is Necessary to Further the Important National Security and Public Policy Objectives Embodied in Federal Law
As Customs has properly noted the increase in foreign competition in the Hawaii trades in contravention of the PVSA pose[s] an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels[] As the operator of these ships NCLA has a vested interest in protecting the jobs ofthe thousands ofAmerican crewmembers and cruise ship service providers who support these vessels NCLA also has an interest in protecting the substantial economic investment it has made to revitalize the US flag passenger vessel fleet But a balancing of interests in the context of Customs enforcement ofexisting law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act requires a much broader focus
The legislative history of the 2003 Act expressly recognized the national security and public policy import ofestablishing a US flag passenger vessel fleet as a means to maintain the countrys preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool of qualified seafarers and as a means to help sustain a fleet ofUS-flag vessels to su~ort
the nations military and maritime industrial base for times ofnational emergency
Congress understood the importance ofestablishing a viable US flag cruise ship fleet as something larger than the vessels themselves These national security and public policy objectives must be weighed in the balance as Customs assesses how best to interpret its rules to give effect to the PVSA and the 2003 Act
6 Customs Should Clarify that the Proposed Interpretation is Limited to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades and Adopt Reasonable Measures to Ensure Sufficient Foreign Content
Since publication ofthe proposed interpretative rule several commenters have observed that the scope of the proposed interpretation is ambiguous because the language of Section VI referencing any cruise itinerary appears broader than the caption Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises and the entire discussion in the published notice which focuses exclusively on US-flag coastwise vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA agrees that the proposed interpretation should be clarified so that its scope is limited to vessels operating roundtrip voyages from US ports that include Hawaii port calls
NCLA supports the concept reflected in the proposed interpretive rule that round trip Hawaii itineraries from US ports on foreign ships must include a material and measurable degree ofoverall foreign port content as compared to US port content
20 149 Congo Rec S1117 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)
7
(a) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is also Consistent with Subsequent Congressional Enactments Modifying the PVSA
As discussed above it is well established that the PVSA was designed toRrotect US-flag vessels from foreign competition in the coastwise and domestic trades 1
Subsequent legislative enactments however have appropriately differentiated among distinct geographic markets and trades including Canada Alaska Puerto Rico and Hawaii based on the existence or non-existence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
In 1938 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers by Canadian passenger vessels on Lake Ontario and the St Lawrence River until such time as passenger service shall be established by vessels of the United States22 Similarly in 1961 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers on Canadian vessels within Alaska or between Alaska and other points in the United States until such time as passenger service is established by vessels ofthe United States23
In 1984 Congress modified the application ofthe PVSA to pennit the transportation ofpassengers between Puerto Rico and other United States ports on foreign-flag vessels24 As with the other statutory exceptions this provision is qualified and expires [o]n a showing that a United States passenger vessel qualified to engage in the coastwise trade is offering or advertising passenger service between a port in Puerto Rico and another port in the United States2S
Congress acted again with respect to the application of the PVSA with the 2003 Act in which it authorized three vessels that did not meet the US-build requirements of the PVSA to operate as modem US-flagged cruise ships in regular service in Hawaii26 The 2003 Act imposes a specific geographic limitation on the operation of any ship documented under this authority to operations only in regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands ofHawaii and shall not transport passengers in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico or the Caribbean Sea except in certain limited circumstances27 As above the limited nature of the 2003 Act is express it is strictly limited to the large ocean-going cruise ships and then only those operating in the regular Hawaii service where there are no US-flag operations28
21 See Act ofJune 19 1886 c 421 sec 8 24 Stat 81 Act of February 171898 c 26 sec 2 30 Stat 248 22 S] Res 174 75th Cong 52 Stat 223 (Alp 251938) codified at46 USC sect 55121(a) 23 See Pub L 87-77 75 Stat 196 (Jun 30 1961) codified at 46 USC sect 55121(b) 24 See Pub L 98-563 98 Stat 2916 (Oct 301984) codified at 46 USC sect 55104(b) 25 46 USC sect 55104(c)(l) see also 46 USC 46 USc sect 55104(cX2)(expiration of exemption upon availability ofa non-coastwise qualified US-flag vessel offering service in the relevant market) 26 149 Congo Rec SI118 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)(statementofSen Inouye) 27 Pub L 108-7 117 Stat 79 (Feb 20 2003) 28 149 Congo Rec S11l9 (dailyed Jan 17 2003Xstatement of Sen Inouye)
8
In each ofthese instances Congress fashioned a narrow exception to the PVSA that differentiated among distinct geographic markets based on the existence or nonshyexistence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
As the federal agency responsible for administering the 2003 Act MARAD requested that Customs act to protect US flag passenger vessel interests in the Hawaii trades29 Limiting the scope ofthe proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades also reflects Customs appreciation of the PVSA in the context of the subsequent Congressional action30 Viewing the Congressional modifications to the PVSA as a whole Congress has specifically and repeatedly differentiated among distinct geographic markets when it has found it necessary and appropriate to do so to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests It is well established that the proper interpretation of a statutory scheme includes consideration ofsubsequent statutes even though the underlying statute itselfhas not been expressly amended31 Accordingly Customs should likewise limit the scope ofthe proposed PVSA interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades because that is the only geographic market as mandated by the 2003 Act in which oceangoing US-flag cruise ships are operating
(b) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Consistent with Public Policy Objectives of the 1985 Rulemaking
In 1985middot Customs liberalized the regulations implementing the PVSA by eliminating certain regulatory prohibitions on foreign flag vessels In the context of the 1985 rulemaking Customs justified a relaxation ofthe regulations on the grounds that it would simplify the administration of the PVSA and would benefit the economy ofcertain American coastwise ports without eroding the statutory protection given to American vessels engaged in solely domestic trade32
Customs thus sought to reconcile US port economic interests with US-flag passenger vessel interests Both of these twin policy objectives are furthered by
29 See 72 Fed Reg 65488 (Nov 21 2007)( MARAn bas asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the ~eratiODS ofcoastwise-qualified cruise ship operators)
See generally FDA v Brown amp Williamson Tobacco Corp 529 US 120 132-133 (2000)(assessing propriety ofagency construction ofFood DIUg and Cosmetics Act and descnbing responsibility of reviewing cowt to assess statutory provisions in the context of subsequent legislative enactments) 31 See Brown amp Williamson 529 US 143 (holding that proper construction ofstatutory provision must necessarily assume that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications ofa later statute This is particularly so where the scope of the earlier statute is broad but the subsequent statutes more specifically address the topic athand) see also United States v Estate ofRomani 523 US 517 530-531 (1998)( holding that a later-enacted statute should control the construction of the federal lien priority statute a specific policy embodied in a later federal statute should control om construction of the [earlier] statute even though it ha[s] not been expressly amended) United States v Fausto 484 US 439453 (1988)(The courts frequently find Congress to have done this - whenever in fact they interpret a statutory text in the light ofsurrounding texts that happen to have been subsequently enacted This classic judicial task of reconciling many laws enacted over time and getting them to make sense in combination necessarily assumes that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications of a later statute) 32 50 Fed Reg 26982 (JuI 11985)
9
limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades
As noted earlier the 2003 Act limits the operation of the NCLA US-flag oceangoing passenger vessels to regular service in Hawaii Because there are no oceangoing US-flag vessels operating in any market other than the Hawaii trades Customs should limit the scope of the proposed interPretation to that market Such a limitation protects US flag passenger vessel interests without prejudicing US port interests In contrast an application of the proposed interpretation to any itinerary would needlessly harm US port interests unrelated to Hawaii without any countervailing benefit to US-flag passenger vessel interests Accordingly limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation is consistent with the public policy objectives of the 1985 rulemaking as well as the 2003 Act
(c) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Also Consistent with Customs Commitment to Revisit the Scope of its Rules to Protect US-Flag Interests
The relaxation ofthe PVSA regulations in 1985 was premised in large part on Customs finding that there was no regular salt water US-flag passenger fleet in operation at that time33 Acknowledging that the relaxed regulations could harm USshyflag interests Customs committed in the preamble ofthe 1985 final rule to immediately reconsider its interpretation if it is ever shown that there is a viable US flag vessel operating in competition with foreign-flag vessels34
Congress enacted the 2003 Act to stimulate the development of a US flag cruise ship industry As noted above the legislative history ofthat Act makes clear that Congress sought to revitalize the US-flag cruise industry as a means to maintain Americas preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool ofqualified seafarers help sustain a fleet of US flag vessels to support our military and a maritime industrial base create thousands of seagoing and shoreside American jobs and stimulate the development ofa US flag cruise ship tourism business with the commensurate benefits to the US tax base the US economy and US employment
Customs is now acting at MARADs request to revisit its interpretation ofthe regulations implementing the PVSA because recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwise-qualified cruise ship operations35 That is to say that the concerns articulated by Customs in the context of the 1985 rulemaking have materialized and US-flag passenger vessel interests are in fact being hanned in the Hawaii trades by foreign competitors
33 50 Fed Reg 26983 34Id
3S 72 Fed Reg 56488 (Nov 21 2007)
I
10
Because the US-flag passenger vessels are limited by statute to regular service in Hawaii limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the
Hawaii trades is consistent with Customs historical commitment to revisit its interpretation ofthe implementing regulations to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests
7 Conclusion
For the reasons stated above NCLA commends the efforts ofCustoms and MARAn to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act as applied to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA respectfully requests Customs to move ahead promptly with p~blicati~nof a final interpretive rule to advance the important national security arid public policy objectives ofthese laws
We greatly appreciate the opportunity to submit these comments
Sincerely
~~~ Alan T Yamamoto Vice President Hawaii Operations
Exhibit A
Ship Name Serenade Of The Seas Departure Port San Diego California Ports of Call San Diego California Kailua Kona Hawaii Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii Hlo Hawaii Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii Ensenada Mexico San Qigo California
2007 Date(s) Oct 05
Sailing Itinerary
Day Port H ~rrive Depart Activity
05-0ct San Diego California 500 PM
06-0ct Cruising
07-0ct Cruising
08-0ct Cruising
09-0ct Cruising
10-0ct Kailua Kona Hawaii 700 AM 900 PM Tendered
11-00t Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 1000 AM Tendered
12middot0ct Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 900 PM Tendered
13-0ct Hilo Hawaii 700 AM 600 PM Docked
14middot0ct Honoulu (Oahu) Hawaii 700 AM Docked
15-0ct Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii 200 AM Docked
6-0ct CrUising
17-0ct Cruising
18-0ct Cruising
19middot0ct Cruising
-7 20-00t
O-Oot
Ensenada ~i1exico
San Deqo California
i 00 ~r1
700 ~M
200 oM D1Jcked ~
TRAVEL FARTHER ONBOARD THE
CARIBBEAN PRINCESSsM
Caribbean
Caribbean Princess our most amenity- filled ship yet takes Personal Choice Crusing to a new level with Caribbean cuisine the renowned Lotus Spa our newest entertainment option Movies Under the Stars and nearly 900 cabins with balconies-more than any other cruise ship sailing year-round in the Caribbean
Nearly 900 balconies
3110 passengers 116000 gross tons
952 feet in length
Bermudan registered
GRAND PRINCESSmiddot GOLDEN PRINCESSmiddot
AND STAR PRINCESSmiddot
Caribbean bull Europe bull CanadaNew England
Grand Princess Golden Princess and Star Princess are the most luxshyurious ships to sail our Caribbean Europe and CanadaNew England itineraries featuring more affordshyable balconies and the finest shipshyboard amenities
Over 700 balconies
2600 passengers 109000 gross tons
950 feet in length
Bermudan registered
REGAL PRINCESSmiddot
Alaska bull CanadaNew England Panama Canal
Cruise Alaska the Panama Canal and CanadaNew England onboard Regal Princess offering larger standard staterooms many with balconies and spectacular views from her domed entertainment and observation center
Over 180 staterooms
with balconies
1590 passengers
70000 gross tons
804 feet in length British registered
ROYAL PRINCESSmiddot
Europe bull Asia bull Antarctica South America bull Amazon River
Behold the magnificence of each port of call from the Royal Princess wraparound promenade deck and all outside staterooms
More balconies than any
other ship this size
1200 passengers
45000 gross tons
757 feet in length British registered
MOST LUXURIOUS 8H I PS AT SEA
CORAL PRINCESSmiddot AND ISLAND PRINCESSmiddot
Alaska bull Hawaii bull Panama Canal
Coral Princess and Island Princess These two beautiful state-of-the-art ships belong to the newest class of luxury liners cruising the historic Panama Canal Alaska and the Hawaiian Islands They have 90 outshyside staterooms 79 of which offer balconies at a great value
9000 outside staterooms most with a balcony
1970 passengers
92000 gross tons
965 feet in length
Bermudan registered
DAWN PRINCESSmiddot AND SUN PRINCESSmiddot
Alaska bull Caribbean Panama Canal
With wraparound promenade decks and floor-to-ceiling windows Dawn Princess and Sun Princess offer stunning views of Alaska around every corner 410 cabins have balconies to enhance your onboard experience
Over 400 balconies 1950 passengers
77000 gross tons
857 feet in length
British registered
DIAMOND PRINCESSmiddot AND SAPPHIRE PRINCESSmiddot
Alaska bull Mexican Riviera AustraliaNew Zealand bull Asia
Cruise the Mexican Riviera AustraliaNew Zealand Alaska or Asia and celebrate our new Diarrwnd Princess and Sapphire Princess providing a blend of modern amenishyties and classic Princess features plus 750 private balcony staterooms
750 staterooms with balconies 2670 passengers 113000 gross tons
952 feet in length
Bermudan registered
TAHITIAN PRINCESSmiddot AND PACIFIC PRINCESSmiddot
South Pacific Islands TahitiPolynesia bull Asia
Indian Ocean bull West Africa
Designed for a smaller more intimate feel Tahitian Princess and sister ship Pacific Princess feature 92 outshyside cabins 73 with balconies and all the amenities of our larger ships
Over 200 balconies
Only 670 passengers 30000 gross tons
592 feet in length
Gibraltar registered
HOW TO NA YIGATE THIS BROCHURE
CHART A JOURNEY OF DISCOVERY
Alaska Cruises amp Cruisetours
CanadaNew England Cruises pg 7
7
8-10
11-14
Exotics Cruises amp Cruisetours
Mexican Riviera Cruises pg
Caribbean Cruises pgs
Europe Cruises amp Cruisetours pgs
AustraliaNew Zealand pg 15
15-16
16-18
18-19
19
20
Asia pgs
Tahiti Hawaii South Pacific pgs
South America pgs
Connoisseur Voyages pg
Exotics Cruisetours pg
Panama Canal pgs 21-22
Cruise Plusreg
Cruise Calendar
pgs5-6
pgs23
ALASKA CRUISES
VOYAGE OF THE GLACIERS
2004 DEPARTURE DATES
CORAUISLAND PRINCESS7 SaturdllydqxtTturtS May 8 Coni 21 Dawn Aug 2 Dawn 10 Dawn 26 Islmd 7 IslandDAYS SUNDAWN PRINCESS 15 Island 28 Sun 9 SunMondaydqJaTtures 17 Sun )ul 3 Coral 14 Coral 22 Coral S Dawn 16 Dawn 24 Dawn 10 Island 21 Island 29 Island 12 Sun 23 Sun 31 Sun 17 Coni 28 Coral
Jun 5 Coral 19 Dawn 30 Dawn NORTHBOUND 7 Dawn 24 Island Sop 4 Island
12 Island 26 Sun 6 Sun 14 Sun 31 Coral 19 Coral
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Vancouver BC PM 2 Inside Passage Scenic Cruising 3 Ketchikan 4 Juneau 5 Skagway 8PM 6 Glacier Bay National Park Scenic Cruising 3PM 7 College Fjord Scenic Cruising 3PM 8 Whittler (Anchorage) DISEMBARK AM
VOYAGE OF THE GLACIERS
2004 DEPARTURE DATES
7 CORALISlAND PRINCESS Saturday departures
May 15 Coral 26 CoraDAYS SUNDAWN PRINCESS 17 Dawn 28 DawnMondllydtpartures 22 Island )uI 3 Island 24 Sun 5 Sun 29 Coral 10 Coral 31 Dawn 12 Dawn
)un S Island 17 Island 7 Sun 19 Sun
SOUTHBOUND 12 Coral 24 Coral 14 Dawn 26 Dawn 19 Island 31 Island 21 Sun Aug 2 Sun
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE 1 WhlttierIAnrhora
630AM 1030 AM 630AM 630AM 830AM
6PM
7 Coral 9 Dawn
14 Island 16 Sun 21 Coral 23 Dawn 28 Island 30 Sun
Sep 4 6
Coral Dawn
11 Island 13 Sun
DEPART EMBARK PM
~30AM 830 PM
SPM 4PM
545PM
INSIDE PASSAGE
SAPPHIRE PRINCESS 7 DAYS Sundaydtpartuns
ROUNDTRIP from
SEATTLE
2004 DEPARTURE DATES
May 16 18 23 25
Jun 30 6
Aug 1 8
13 15 20 22 27 29
Jul 4 11
Sep S 12
t Endicott Arm wy be substituted on somtYOiiCS due to~orwcatherconditlom
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE 1 Seattle 2 At Sea 3 Ketchikan 630AM 4 Tracy Arm Scenic Cruisingt 6AM 4 Juneau lPM 5 Skagway 6AM 6 At Sea 7 Victoria BC HM 8 Seattle DISEMBARK AM
DEPART EMBARK PM
5PM lOAM 10 PM 6PM
12M
INSIDE PASSAGE
7 DIAMOND PRINCESS DAYS saturday dqllu1uus
ROUNDTRIP from
SEATTLE
2004 DEPARTURE DATES
May 8 17 15 24 22 31 19 Aug 7
Jun 5 14 12 21 19 28 26 Sep 4
Jul 3 11 10
t EndkottAnn maybe substituted on some voyages due tokcQlweuherconditlom
CRUISE ITINERARY
ARRIVE DEPART
INSIDE PASSAGE
10 REGAL PRINCESS DAYS
ROUNDTRIP from
SAN FRANCISCO
2004 DEPARTURE DATES
May 6 Jul 5 16 IS 26 25
)un 5 Aug 4 15 14 15
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE
lPM 7AM 7AM 7AM
7AM
DEPART EMBARK PM
~PM 830PM
12 N 5PM
2PM
Coral Princess in College Fjord Alaska
ALASKA CRUISETOURS
HEART Of ALASKA CRUISETOUR HEART Of ALASKA CRUISETOUR
e 1312 DAYS DAYS e
CRUI5ETOUR CRUI5ETOUR 35 125
2004 DEPARTURE DATES2004 DEPARTURE DATES
Date Ship Date Ship Date Ship Date Ship
May 10 Coral Aug 2 Coral Mayll Coral Aug 3 Coral 12 Dawn 4 Dawn
13 Dawn 5 Dawn 17 Island 9 Island 18 Island 10 Island
DAY PORT 19 Sun 11 Sun
20 Sun 12 Sun 24 Coral 16 Coral 25 Coral 17 Coral 26 Dawn 18 Dawn 27 Dawn 19 Dawn 31 Island 23 Island
Jun 1 Island 24 Island Jun 2 Sun 25 Sun 3 Sun 26 Sun 7 Coral 30 Coral 8 Coral 31 Coral 9 Dawn Sep 1 Dawn
10 Dawn Sep 2 Dawn 14 Island Island6 5 DenaliAnchorage15 Island 7 Island 16 Sun 8 Sun 17 Sun 9 Sun 21 Coral 6 AnchorageWhittierEmbark22 Coral 23 Dawn 24 Dawn 28 Island 7 College Fjord Scenic Cruising 29 Island 30 Sun
)u1 1 Sun Jul 5 Coral 8 Glacier Bay National Park Scenic Cruising 6 Coral 7 Dawn 9 Skagway12 Island
13 Island 14 Sun 8 Dawn
10 Juneau15 Sun 19 Coral 20 Coral 21 Dawn 11 Ketchikan 22 Dawn 26 Island 27 Island 28 Sun 12 Inside Passage Scenic Cruising 29 Sun 13 VancouverPark Rangers are at our lodges to enrich your stay
HEART Of ALASKA CRUISETOUR ALASKA WILDERNESSKENAI CRUISETOUR ALASKA WILDERNESSCOPPER RIVER CRUISETOUR
14 1314 DAYS DAYS DAYSe e e
CRUI5ETOUR CRUI5ETOURCRUI5ETOUR
145 185165
2004 DEPARTURE DATES
2004 DEPARTURE DATESDate Ship Date Ship 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
Date Ship Date ShipMayl Dawn Aug 1 Coral 16 Island 3 Dawn Date Ship Date Ship 18 Sun 8 Island May 11 Dawn Aug 1 Coral 23 Coral 10 Sun MaylO Coral Aug 2 Coral 25 Dawn 15 Coral
16 Island 3 Dawn 12 Dawn 4 Dawn
30 Island 17 Dawn 18 Sun 8 Island
17 Island 9 Island Jun 1 Sun 22 Island
23 Coral 10 Sun 19 Sun 11 Sun
6 Coral 24 Sun 25 Dawn 15 Coral
26 Dawn 18 Dawn 8 Dawn 29 Coral
Jun 1 Sun 17 Dawn 31 Island 23 Island
13 Island 31 Dawn 6 Coral 24 Sun
Jun 2 Sun 25 Sun 15 Sun Sep 5 Island
8 Dawn 29 Coral 7 Coral Sep 1 Dawn
20 Coral 7 Sun 13 Island 31 DaWn
9 Dawn 6 Island 22 Dawn
15 Sun Sep 7 Sun 14 Island 8 Sun
27 Island 20 Coral
16 Sun 29 Sun
22 Dawn 23 Dawn
)ul 4 Coral 29 Sun
28 Island 6 Dawn
Jul 4 Coral 30 Sun
11 Island 6 Dawn
Jul 5 Coral 13 Sun
11 Island 7 Dawn
18 Coral 13 Sun
12 Island 20 Dawn
18 Coral 14 Sun
25 Island 20 Dawn
21 Dawn 27 Sun
27 Sun 26 Island 28 Sun
CRUISETOUR ITINERARY CRUISETOUR ITINERARY
DAY PORT By S~a By Land
1 fairbanks
Mt McKinleyWhittierEmabrk
College fjord ~ce~lc Cnlsi~g
Juneau
CRUISETOUR IIINERARY
DAY PORT
CRUISETOUR ITINERARY
DAY PORT
CRUISETOUR ITINERARY
PORT By Sea By Land
College Fjord Scenic Cruising Glacier Bay National Park Scenic Cruising
13 Vancouver
CANADA amp NEW ENGLAND CRUISES
CANADANEW ENGLAND CANADACOLONIAL AMERICA CANADANEW ENGLAND
10 REGAL 13 REGAL 7 GRAND DAYS PRINCESS DAYS PRINCESSDAYS PRINCESS
sail between ROUNDTRIP NEW YORK
MONTREAL fromto
CITY NEW YORKFT LAUDERDALE and CITY
MONTREAL 2004 DEPARTURE DATE
CRUISE IlINERARY CRUISE ITINERARY 2004 CRUISE IIINERARY Oct 31 DEPARTURE DATES
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 2004 Sep 12 1 1 New York City New York EMBARK PM Montreal Quebec EMBARK PMDEPARTURE DATES Sep 19 New York City New York EMBARK PM
2 Newport Rhode Island 830 AM 4PM 2 Quebec City Quebec 6AM 4PM Sep 261Sep 11 Oct 3
Sep21t 1 3 Bostoni Massachusetts 830AM SPM i3 At Sea Oct 10 2 At Sea
Olttl 4 Bar Harbor Maine 8AM 6PM 4 Halifax Nova Scotia 12 N 6PM Oct I]Octllt
Oct 24Oct 21 S Saint John New Brunswick 7AM 3PM l~ Bar Harbor Maine 8AM 6PM Halifax Nova Scotia 8AM 5 PM
6 Halifax Nova Scotia 8AM 5PM 6 Boston Massachusetts 8AM 5PM
17 At Sea 7 Newport Rhode Island 9AM 6PM 4 Saint John New Brunswick 9AM 5PM
8 Saguenay River Scenic Cruising 9 AM 2PM 8 New York City New York 8AM 5PM Bar Harbor Maine 7AM 6PMi9 ~8 Quebec City Quebec 11 PM Norfolk Virginia 12 N 10 PM
(overnight onboard ship) 10 Baltimore Maryland 8AM 5PM Boston Massachusetts 7AM 5PM 9 Quebec City Quebec 5PM 11 At Sea
Montreal Quebec 8AM10 12 Charleston South Carolina 7AM 5PM 7 Newport Rhode Island 8AM 5PM
tltneTaryoperaresinrtvtrstorder (overnight onboard ship) 13 At Sea t Itnaary opaates in revu5t order 8 New York City DISEMBARK AMPort times may vary Port times may vary11 Montreal Quebec DISEMBARK AM 14 Ft Lauderdale Florida DISEMBARK AM New York
MEXICAN RIVIERA CRUISES
MEXICAN RIVIERA MEXICAN RIVIERA MEXICAN RIVIERA
DIAMOND DAYS
107 DIAMOND PRINCESS 10 SAPPHIRE PRINCESSDAYS DAYS PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIPROUNDTRIP from fromfrom
LOS ANGELES LOS ANGELESSAN FRANCISCO
2004 DEPARTURE OATIS Sep 25 2004 DEPARTURE DATE
Oct 2 9 1623 30 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
Dec 29Sep 22Nov 6 13 20 27 Dec 4 11 22 Oct 2 12 221
Nov 1 11 2005 DEPARTURE OATIS
jan 815 22 29 Feb 5 12 19 26 MarS 12 19 26 tPortordtrllllllllmtsmaYNrApr 291623
CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 San Francisco EMBARK PM 1 Los Angeles (Long Beach) EMBARK PM
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
CRUISE ITINERARY DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
2 Catalina Island 1230 PM 630PM 2 At Sea Sat Los Angeles (Long Beach) EMBARK PM 3 Cabo San Lucas 9AM 6PM3-4 At Sea
5 Poerto Vallart 7AM 6PM 4 A~Sea
6 Mazatlan SAM 6PM 5 Acapulco SAM 11 PM 7 Cabo San Lucas SAM 6PM 6 Ixtapa (ZihaulIlnejo) 7AM 2PM
S At Sea 7 Puerto Vallarta SAM 7PM 9 San Dtego SAM 6PM 8 M~I~middot lAM -1Ft 10 At Sea 9-10 At Sea 11 San Francisco DISEMBARK AM 11 Los Angeles (Long Beach)
Sun AUea Mon AtSea Tue Poerto Vallarta Wed Mazatlan Thu Cabo San Luca( Fri At Sea Satmiddot Los Angeles (Long Beach)
CARIBBEAN CRUISES
EASTERN CARIBBEAN
7
EASTERN CARIBBEAN
7 7 DAYSDAYS DAYS
CARIBBEAN PRINCESS STAR PRINCESS GRAND PRINCESSSUN PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIP from from from
FT LAUDERDALE FT LAUDERDALE GALVESTON 2004 DEPARTIJRE DATES
CARIBBEAN PRINCESS Apr 24 2004 DEPARTURE DATES 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
CRUISE ITINERARYM~yl 1522 CRUISE I1INERARY JuI31724 DAY PORT Nov 14 28 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Dec 4 11 JunS 1226 Oct 31 Nov 13 20 27
Alii 1 1428 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Dec 12 26
Ott 2 9 162330 200S DEPARTURE DATES Sat Galveston EMBARK PMSep41825 Sat ft Lauderdale Sun ft Lauderdale EMBARK PM
Nov 6 132027 200S DEPARTURE DATESDet4 11 26middot Jan 8 15 22 29Sun At Sea Man At Sea 2005 DEPARTURE DATES ]an 9 23 Feb 5 12 19 26 Sun At Sea
CARIBBEAN PRINCESS Feb 6 20 MarS 121926 J~n 8152229 Mar 6 20 12M Apr 29 Man Belize City lPM 7PM Feb 512t 1926 MarS 121926 Apr 317 Apr2t 9 1623 Tue St Thomas 7 AM 6 PM Wed St Thomas BAM 6PM Tue Costa Maya (Mahahual) BAM 4PM
6PM Wed Grand CaYman l2N 7PM
Thu At Sea Fri At Sea Thu Cozumel lOAM 6 PM
4PM Fri At Sea
Sat Ft Lauderdale DISEMBARK AM Sun Ft Lauderdale DISEMBARK AM Sat Galveston DISEMBARK AM
CRUISE IlINERARY
ARRIVE DEPART
EMBARK PM
WESTERN CARIBBEAN
Sf Thomas US Virgin Islands Princess Cays
CARIBBEAN CRUISES
WESTERN CARIBBEAN WESTERN CARIBBEAN SOUTHERN CARIBBEAN EXPLORER
7 6 7 DAYS DAYS DAYS
CARIBBEAN PRINCESS STAR PRINCESS GRAND PRINCESS GOLDEN PRINCESS
DAWN PRINCESS
SAN JUAN ROUNDTRIPROUNDTRIP to fromfrom
GALVESTON SAN JUANFT LAUDERDALE
2004 DEPARTURE DATE2004 DEPARTURE DATES 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
CARIBB~~SflNCESS CRUISE ITINERARY Nov 7 CRUISE ITINERARY
My923 CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTJun 6 20 JUD 19
Jul lOt 31
May829t DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART )uI418 Sun San Juan EMBARK PM
Aug ll t Aug 11529
Sep 11
DAY PORT
Sep 12 26 Mon St Thomas 7AM 6PM STAR PRINCESS Princess Cays 9AM 4PM At Sea Oct 10 24
Nov 721 DecS19 Tue S Kitts 7AM 3PM
2005 DEPARTURE DATES Wed Grenada 9AM 3PM Dec 23 Coumel 7AM 5PM
Grand Cayman 7AM 4PM Jan 21630
2005 DEPARTURE DATES Feb 13 27 Thu Caracas (La Guaira) 9AM 7PM Mar 13 27STAR PRINCESS
Jan 21630 Apr 10 24 Feb 13 27 Ocho Rios 9AM 4PM Fri Aruba BAM 5PM Mar 13 27 Apr 10 24 At Sea
tMonlqQampIyrqlocrsCllhoRfm PltJrtQr-ondlimesmaywlrY Sun San Juan DISEMBARK AMFt Lauderdale DISEMBARK AM
EASTERN CARIBBEAN WESTERN CARIBBEAN CLASSIC SOUTHERN CARIBBEAN
8 7 7DAYS DAYS DAYS
CARIBBEAN GRAND PRINCESS GOLDEN PRINCESS PRINCESS
GALVESTONROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIP tofrom from
SAN JUANFT LAUDERDALE SAN JUAN
2004 DEPARTURE DATE 2004 DEPARTURE DATE 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
DeetS Apr 16CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE IflNERARY May 21630 CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE Jun 13 27DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Jul1125 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
1 Aug 8 221 Galveston EMBARK PM Sun Sanjuan EMBARK PMSep 5 19 Oct 3 17 312-3 At Sea At Sea Nov 14 28 Man At Sea Dec 12 26
st Thomas Cozumel BAM 6PM Tue Barbados 7AM 6PM 2005 DEPARTURE DATES
jan 9 23 Wed St Lucia 7 AMAntigua BAM 6PM Costa Maya (Mahahual) BAM 4PM 5PM Feb 620 Mar 6 20 Thu BAM 6PM Apr 317
At Sea Montego Bay 9AM 4PM Fri St Maarten BAM 6PM
7AM 6PM
Ft Lauderdale DISEMBARK AM Sanjuan DISEMBARK AM Sun San juan DISEMBARK AM
Oct 24 Nov 7 21 DecS19
DAWN PRINCESS
~
I
CARIBBEAN CRUISES
EASTERN CARIBBEAN ISLANDER SOUTHERN CARIBBEAN MEDLEY EASTERN CARIBBEAN
10 10 7 DAYS DAYSDAYS
GRAND PRINCESSDAWN PRINCESSSUN PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP NEW YORK CITYROUNDTRIP from from to
FT LAUDERDALE FT LAUDERDALE SAN JUAN
2004 DEPARnJRf DATE2004 DEPARTURE DATES2004 DEPARTURE DATES
Octn Oct Btl Oct 14CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE ITINERARYCRUISE ITINERARY 200s DEPARTURE DATENov 222 Nov 3t 23
Apr23tDAY PORT DEPART Dec 13 30Dee 12 ARRIVE DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Ft Lauderdale EMBARK PM 1 Ft Lauderdale EMBARK PM EMBARK PM2005 DEPARTURE DATES 2005 DEPARTURE DATES New York City 2 Princess Cays 9AM 4PM 2 At SeaJan 828 Jan 19t
Feb 17tt 3 AlSea Feb 8 28 3 At Sea 2-4 At Sea Mar919 Mar 20
4 St Thomas 7AM 6PM Apr 9 4 Cura~ao 8AM 5PM 5 St Maarten 7AM 6PM 5 Isla Margarita lOAM 4PM St Thomas 7AM 6PM
6 St Kitts 7AM 3PM 6 Barbados 9AM 6PM Dominica SAM 6PM7 8AM 5PM 7 Dominica 7 AM SPM
8 Antigua 9AM 6PM S St Thomas SAM 6PM St Maarten 7AM 6PM
9 9 At Sea
fllrtordtrlllldllmam4YYa1 10 At Sea 10 Princess Cays 9AM 4PM JlilltraryllptfatufnrfYUSfllrllcr t 11I1ll1Il1yopmltnlnrmTtronlcr t ItlntraryaptrattsIn rtVfntOrdtr San Juan DISEMBARK AM Port~rdtrQnd lilrW mil) illI) 11 Ft Lauderdale DISEMBARK AM PortlimtSlIIltlyYllry 11 Ft Lauderdale DISEMBARK AM Port ordtr lind time5 may VIlry
WESTERN CARIBBEAN ADVENTURER EASTERN CARIBBEAN VOYAGER
10 10 DAYS DAYS
SUN PRINCESS DAWN PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIPROUNDTRIP fromfrom
FT LAUDERDALEFT LAUDERDALE
2004 DEPARTURE DATES 2004 DEPARTURE DATES DAWN PRINCESS CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE IIINERARY
Oct 23 Oct 4 24 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Nov 12 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
Nov 13 Dec 2 29 Dec3tt 1 Ft Lauderdale EMBARK PM 1 Ft Lauderdale EMBARK PM
2 Princess Cays 9AM 4PM 2005 DEPARTURE DATES 2 At Sea2005 DEPARTURE DATES
DAWN PRINCESS Jan 183 At Sea 3 At Sea
Feb 7 27Jan 9 296 St Thomas 7AM 6PM Mar19 t 4 St Vincent lPM 6PM
Feb 180 Apr 8St Maarten 7 AM 5PM 5 Grenada 8AM 6PMMar 10f 301 Apr 19 At Sea 6 St Lucia 8AM 6PM
Ocho Rios 12N 6PM 7 Martinique 7AM 3PM
Grand cayman PM S St Thomas SAM 6PM
t IillUGI)lIptfQttsIn rnmtordtr Cozumel 8AM 6PM AlSea tt ~~~oI~~dtr 10 Princess Cays 9AM 4PMMOItQIl8clyrqausOclJollloJ
lwtordtrollllllllyenllllilJllIl) tltllltrlryOptrlll$In rnmtllrdtr AMOIltqollaynplactsOdlDRIos PM IortDrllralldllmallloyWl) Ft Lauderdale DISEMBARK AM
Willemstad Cura~ao
EUROPE CRUISES
GRAND MEDITERRANEAN GREEK ISLES MEDITERRANEANGREEK ISLES
12 1212 DAYS DAYSDAYS
STAR PRINCESS
STARSTAR PRINCESSPRINCESS
sail betweensail between VENICE BARCELONA VENICE to
andand BARCELONA VENICE ROME
CRUISE ITINERARY2004 DEPARTURE 2004 DEPARTURE2004 DEPARTURE CRUISE ITINERARYDATESCRUISE I I INERARY DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DATEDATES
Apr 10 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTMay 16middot DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Venice Italy (overnight onboard ship) EMBARK PM May 4 May18t Sep2St 1 Verdce Italy EMBARK PM
Jun 9 1 Barcelona Spain (overnight onboard ship) EMBARK PM 2 Venice Italy 2PM 2 At Seajune 21 t 2 Barcelona Spain 1 PM Dubrovnik Croatia 8AM 6PMJul3 3 Corfu Greece 8AM 6PM
lullS 3 Monte Carlo Monaco 7 AM 6 PM Corfu Greece 8AM 6PM 4 Katakolon Greece (for Oiympia) 7AM SPMJu127 4 FlorencePisa Italy (Livorno) 630 AM 6 PMAug 8~ Katakolon Greece (for Olympia) 7AM SPM S Athens Greece (Piraeus) 6AM 12 MAug 20deg S NaplesCapri Italy 8 AM 7 PM Sep 1t 6 Athens Greece (Piraeus) 6AM 12 M 6 Mykonos Greece 8AM 12M
6 At Sea 7 Mykonos Greece 8AM 6PM 7 Kusadasi Turkey (for Ephesus) 7 AM SPM7 Athens Greece (Piraeus) 6AM S4S PM
8 Kusadasi Turkey (for Ephesus) 7AM 1PM 8 Kusadasi Turkey (for Ephesus) 8AM 6PM 8 Santorini Greece 7 AM 4PM
9 Jstanbul Turkey 8AM 6PM 9 Rhodes Greece 8AM 6PM 9 At Sea
10 At Sea 10 Santorini Greece 7AM 6PM 10 Rome Italy (Civitavecchia) 8AM 7PM tll1ooil)opcraksinttVUSe
grduPorttlmcsmi)Y6ljI 11 At Sea 11 Cannes France (for Mont Carlo) 8AM 6PM11 At Sea tSamnlQ]latCiIUIe5inplm tltlnerlll)opmlpoundsin
NaplesCapri Italy 630 AM 12 Barcelona Spain (ovrnight onboard ship) 8AMofMo~Urlo ~odcr12 Venice Italy (overnight onboard ship) 8 AM 12 6PM O~lIlalhitRhodalnpUcc Port order md Iimes- JmyVUY Barcelona Spain DISEMBARK AM13 Venice Italy DISEMBARK AM - 13 Iome Italy (qvitavecchia) DISEMBARK AM
MEDITERRANEANAEGEAN MEDITERRANEANMOSAIC
12 12 DAYSDAYS
STAR STAR PRINCESS PRINCESS
ROME BARCELONAto
toVENICE ROME
2004 DEPARTURE DATE 2004 DEPARTURE
CRUISE I I INERARY DATE CRUISE ITINERARYApr 22 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Sep 13 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Rome Italy (Civitavhia) EMBARK pM 1 Barcelona Spaln (overnight onboard ship) EMBARK PM 2 NaplesCapri Italy 7 AM 7 PM Barcelona Spain SPM 3 Messina Italy (for Taormina) 8AM 6PM 3 At Sea 4 Valleta Malta 8AM 6 PM 4 Casablanca Morocco (for Marrakech) 7 AM 8PM
At Sea S Gibraltar 8 AM 6PM Santorini Greece 7 AM 6PM 6 At Sea
7 Kusadasi Turkey (for Ephesus) 8 AM 6PM 7 Cannesfrance (for Mont Carlo) 8 AM 6PM 8 Athens Greece (Piraeus) 6 AM S4SPM 8 At Sea 9 Katakolon Greece (for Olympia) 8 AM 6PM 9 Valleta Malta 8 AM SPM 10 Corfu Greece 8 AM 6PM 10 Messina Italy (for Taormina) 6PM 11 Dubrovnik Croatia 8 AM 6PM 11 NaplesCpri Itiily 6PM 12 Venice Italy (overnight onboard ship) 1230 PM 12 FlorencePisa Italy (Livorno) 830 AM 13 Venice Italy DISEMBARK AM 13 lomeltaly (Clvttavecchia)DISEMBAIKAM Venice Italy
EUROPE CRUISES
EUROPEAN EXPLORER CRUISE MEOffiRRANEANITRANSATLANTIC CRUISE
12 17DAYS DAYS
ROYAL STARPRINCESS PRINCESS
sail between VENICE
ROME to
and FT LAUDERDALE
LONDON
2003 DEPARTURE DATES
2004 DEPARTURE DATE CRUISE ITINERARY
May 7 CRUISE I1INfRARY Oct 7 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Jul30l
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Venice Italy (overnight onboard ship) EMBARK PMAug 11 Sep 41 1 Rome Italy (Civitavecchia) EMBARK PM 2 Vernce Italy 2 PM
2 FlorencePisa Italy (Livorno) 7 AM 7PM 3 At Sea 3 Cannes France (for Monte Carlo) 7 AM 5 PM 4 Barcelona Spain 9 AM 6 PM 5 At Sea 6 Gibraltar 8AM PM 7 Casablanca Morocco (for Marralech) 5AM 6 PM 8 Seville Spain (Cadiz) 8AM 6PM 9 LisbQn Portugal 9AM 5PM 10 Vigo Spain 830AM 4PM 11 At Sea
tllinmryope~te$ 12 ParisNormandy France (Ie Havre) 7 AMlnftYCl5eordu ~rttimesuuyYilY 13 London England (Southampton) DISEMBARK AM
Caudis Park Cuell Barcelona Spain
SCANDINAVIARUSSIA BALTIC HERITAGE WESTERN EUROPEBRITISH ISLES
ROYALGRAND10 GRAND 1210 PRINCESSDAYS PRINCESS PRINCESS DAYSDAYS
ROUNDTRIPROUNDTRIPROUNDTRIP fromframfrom
LONDONCOPENHAGENCOPENHAGEN 2004 DEPARTURE2004 DEPARTURE 2004 DEPARTUREDATESDATES DATES
May19tMay 29 May 19 jul28 JunSJun 18 Aug 231
Jul8 ju118Jul28 Aug 7 CRUISE ITINERARYAug 17
CRUISE IIINERARY ARRIVE DEPART CRUISE IrINERARY EMBARK PMDAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
DAY ARRIVE DEPART 7AM 6PM1 Copenhagen Denmark EMBARK PM EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 7AM 6PM
Stockholm Sweden (Nynilshamn) 7 AM 530PM 6AM PM Helsinki Finland 830 AM 6PM St PetersbUrg Russia (overnight onboard ship) 630 AM 9AM 9PM St Petersburg Russia 6PM
7 Tallinn Estonia 7 AM 1PM 8 Gdansk Poland (Gdynia) 9 AM 4PM 9 Warnemfinde Germany (for amprlin) 8 AM 10 PM 10 Helsing0r Denmark 9 AM 11 AM 10 Copenhagen Denmark (overnight onboard ship) 1 PM 11 Copenhagen Denmark DISEMBARK AM
middotScrvlcctillforlh=CllCIIIlicmIOptoluItllUllwWdlseJnbIDltHdlinprAfbrtour~dllmJlwktbeshJpwl1lPfllClaquodtoCopetWampen and pmenpoundm Qfl tours from HelMp will Rboird ship tPolttimes~myAninliI1ddepartu~itRosythDubJinmdFa1mauthwl)dICtotXLolconditions
tPOrtordermdtlme$maynI) ttCdlitEdinbuJlhotmdedto~mllocunionforMiliblyTltOO~on8123wi1inlmiddotUIIisitSouthQuemsfmyinstudofJosylh
BRITISH ISLES
ROYAL12 PRINCESSDAYS
ROUNDTRIP
from
LONDON
2004 DEPARTURE DATES
Jun 12 jul6
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Lqn4onmiddotpoundngland(Southampton) EMIWlIlt PM 2 Cornwall England (Falmouth) 7AM SPM
Waterford Ireland 8AM 6PM Dublin Ireland 7AM 1130 PM
t PQrtbme5 lliIyyuy Anini Illd departure at Rosytb Dublin md Filmouth ViiYdue to Iiltlal conditions
WESTERN EUROPE
ROYAL12 PRINCESSDAYS
ROUNDTRIP
from
LONDON
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
May 31
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 London England (Southampton) EMBARK PM
CRUISE ITINERARY
EUROPE CRUISES
ICELANDNORWEGIAN FJORDS
ROYAL12 PRINCESSDAYS
ROUNDTRIP
from
LONDON
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
Jun24
CRUISE IflNERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 London Englan4 (Southampton) EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 3 Berge Norway 6PM 4 Hellesylt Norway 830AM 1030 AM 4 Gciranger Norway Geiranger Fjord Sceni Cruising UN 7PM
9AM SPM5
1PM 8AM SPM
10 At Sea
middotStlviceallfof~fjonlovedmdshOR=unlDllOplion1Itourswllldi5anbarilitHelIcsyItAftcrtollrpuKllJClJdisembark
theshlpwiUprocudto~md~lampClSonlounfrwnHdaytwl1lblmd$hip
NORWEGIAN FJORDSNORTH CAPE
ROYAL12 PRINCESSDAYS
ROUNDTRIP
from
LONDON
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
JuilS
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Loridon ~gland (South~mpton) EMBARK PM 2-3 At Sea
Hellesylt Norway 830AM 1030 AM Golranger Norway Geiranger Fjord Scenic Cruising 12N 7PM
TrodheilllNorwaY 9AM SPM At Sea Cross the Ardgt Cirde
6PM 8AM lPM
8AM 130 PM 430PM 630PM
7AM 3PM
Bagpipers Edinburgh Scotland Royal Princess in Geiranger Fjord Norway
EUROPE CRUISES amp CRUISETOURS
17 DAYS
GRAND PRINCESS
FT LAUDERDALE to
COPENHAGEN
2004 DEPARTURE DATE MayZ
CRUISE IfINERARY
DAY 1 2-6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
PORT Ft Lauderdale Florida At Sea ~ores IslandsPortugal (Ponto Delgado) At Sea Lisbon Portugal Vigo Spain At Sea ParislNormandy France (Le Havre) RotterdamThe Netherlands At Sea Hamburg Germay (for Berlin) At Sea Olso Norway Oslo Fjord scnic Cruising Copenhagen Denmark
ARRIVE
N
12N 9AM
7AM
6AM
DISEMBARK AM
DEPART EMBARK PM
6PM
7PM 6PM
7PM 7PM
1UM
MEDITERRANEAN CRUISETOUR
TRANSATLANTICWESTERN EUROPE ICELAND amp GREENLANDTRANSATLANTIC
16 GRAND DAYS PRINCESS
COPENHAGEN to
NEW YORK
2004 DEPARTURE DATE Aug 27
CRUISE IIINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Copenhagen Denmark EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 3 Dover England (forLondon) 7AM 7PM 4 Cornwall England (Falmouth) 9AM 6PM 5 Dublin Ireland lOAM 9PM 6 GlasgowEdinburgh Scotland (Greenock) 8AM 12 M 7 Belfast Northern Ireland 1030 AM 530 PM 8 At Sea 9 Reykjavik Iceland 9AM 9PM 10 At Sea 11 Prins Christian Sund Scenic Cruising 12N 6PM 12 Qaqortoq Greenland 7 AM 2PM 13 At Sea 14 SI Johns Newfoundland Canada 12N 7PM 1516 At Sea 17 New York CIty New York DISEMBARK AM
SCANDINAVIARUSSIA CRUISETOUR
Church of the Savior on the Spilled Blood St Petersburg Russia
WESTERN EUROPE CRUISETOUR
CRUISEIOUR ITINERARY
CRUISETOUR lA11C CRUISETOUR ITINERARY CRUISETOUR 4A14C CRUISETOUR II INERARY
DAY PORT By Sea By Land DAY PORT By Sea By Land CRUISETOUR 7Al7C18 STAR PRINCESS 1 Rome 17 GRAND PRINCESS 1 BudapestDAYS DAYS DAY PORT By Sea By Land 22 Rome Budapest 18 ROYAL PRINCESS 1 Paris
ROMETODI 3 RomeTodi BUDAPEST VIENNA 3 BudapestVienna DAYS 2 Paris and 4 TodiFlorence and 4 Vienna 3 Paris
PARIS EUROSTAR5 Florence 5 ViennaPrague 4 ParisLondon 6 FlorenceVeniceEmbark 6 Prague and 5 London
FLORENCE PRAGUE
plus plus LONDON7 Venice Italy (overnight onboard ship) 7 PragueCopenhagenEmbark 6 LondonSouthamptonEmbark
GRAND MEDITERRANEAN SCANDINAVIARUSSIA plus 7 At Sea CRUISE 8-9 At Sea CRUISE 8 At Sea WESTERN EUROPE 8 Bilbao Spain10 Istanbul Turkey 9 Stockholm Sweden (Nyniishamn) BRITISH ISLES CRUiSE2004 DEPARTURE DATES 2004 DEPARTURE DATES 9 Bordeaux France (Le Verdon)
11 Kusadasi Turkey (for Ephesus) 10 Helsinki FinlandApr Sf 2004 DEPARTURE DATES 10 At SeaMay 131 Jul2Apr 29 12 Athens Greece (Piraeus) 11 SI Petersburg Russia (overnight onboard ship) 11 GlasgowEdinburgh Scotland (Greenock)May 23 JulUt May 141 26middot Jul tt 13~ 250
May 23 Jun 16 13 At Sea JunZt JulU 12 SI Petersburg Russia Jun n 19 Aug 18o 300 12 Dublin Ireland
]un 12 Aug l t 13 Cork IrelandJuliO 14 NaplesCapri Italy 13 Tallinn EstoniaJun 22 t Aug 11 Toun~eonlymilabkwithcruise5indi[itbtAug 3 15 FlorencelPisa Italy (Livorno) 14 Cdansk Poland 14 Cornwall England (Falmouth)
Aug 27 tBritishliksetuise aWEwupeiBritishlslesouist 15 ParisNormandy France (Le Havre)16 Monte Carlo Monaco 15 At Sea bull WestemEuropeCrube middotlcdandINorwqlmFjOllisetuise 16 Rotterdam The Netherlands
t Crulsetour lA only combinable with 12--dayGreck fst 17 Barcelona Spain (overnight onboard ship) 16 Olso NOrway Qsld Fjord Scenic Cruising bull Norwqian FjordsNorth Cipecruise 17 BrusselsBruges Belgium (Zeebrugge)tCruixtour 4A only combinable with lo-day Baltic
crulse shown on PI 11 18 Barcelona Spain Heritage cruise shawn on pg 12 OCrubctnur 7C only combinable with EwuJlWl ExplorerCrube17 Copenhagen Denmark 18 London England (Southampton)
EXOTICS CRUISES
AUSTRALIANEW ZEALAND AUSTRALIANEW ZEALAND AUSTRALIAASIA
12 14 19 DAYS DAYS DAYS
SAPPHIRE PRINCESS SAPPHIRE PRINCESS SAPPHIRE PRINCESS
saH between SYDNEYAUCKLAND SYDNEY
toand to BANGKOKSYDNEY AUCKLAND 2005 DEPARTURE DATES 2005 DEPARTURE DATE
Mar7Jan 6 2004 DEPARTURE DATEJan 1St
Dec 23 CRUISE ITINERARYJr ift Feb 23 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
CRUISE ITINERARY 1 Sydlley Austrli EMBARK PM CRUISE ITINERARY 2 At Sea
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTDAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 3 Brisbane Australia 8AM 6PM 1 Sydlley Australia EMBARK PM 4 At Sea 1 Aucklalld N~w Zealalld EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 5 Cid Harbor Austrlia (for Great Barrier Reef) 7AM 5PM2 At Sea 3 Melbourne Australia 8 AM 6 PM 6 Cirns Australia (Yorkeys) 8AM 6PM
3 WeIUllgton New Zealand 8 AM 6 PM 4 At Sea 7-8 At Sea 4 Christchurch New Zealalld (Lytlelton) 8 AM 6 PM 5 Tasmallia Australia (Hobart) 8 AM 6 PM 9 Darwin Australia lPM 8pM 5 Dunedill N~ Zealalld (Port Chalmers) 8 AM 6 PM 6-7 At Sea 10-11 At Sea 6 Fiordland Natiollal Park Scenic Cruising AM 6 PM 8 Fiordlalld Natiollal Park Scellic Cruising 7 AM 5 PM 12 Bali Illdonesi (Padang Bay) 7AM 6PM
7-8 At Sea J DUlledill New Zealalld (Port Chalmers) 8 AM 6 PM 13-14 At Se 10 Christchurch N~ Zealalld (Lytlelton) 8 AM 6 PM 15 Kuala Lumpur Mlaysia (Port KeIang) 8AM 6PM9 Tasmania Australia (Hobart) 8 AM 6 PM 11 Wellillgtoll New Zealmd 8 AM 6 PM 16 Sillgpore 8AM 6PM
10 At Sea 12 At Sea 17 At Sea 11 Melbourne Australia 8 AM 6 PM 13 Taurallga New Zealalld 8 AM 730 PM 18 Ho Chi Millh City Vietnm (Vung Tau) 7AM 730 PM 12 At S~a 19 At Sea 14 Bay of Islallds New Zealalld 8 AM 7 PM 13 SydPey Australia DISEMBARK AM 20 Bmgkok Thailalld (Laem Chabang) DISEMBARK AM15 Aucklalld New Zealalld DISEMBARK AM
t llinemy opcrnesln reverse order Port times mil1 my
CHINAFAR EAST SOUTHEAST ASIAFAR EAST
1612 DAYSDAYS
PACIFIC PRINCESS
SAPPHIRE PRINCESS PACIFIC PRINCESS
OSAKA BEIJING to
to BANGKOK OSAKA
2004 DEPARTURE DATE 2004 DEPARTURE DATEPAClFlC PRINCESS
julllt Jun 11 2005 DEPARTURE DATE
SAPPHIRE PRINCESS Apr 11
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Osaka Japall EMBARK PM
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Beijillg China (Xingang) EMBARK PM 2 Hiroshima Japall 1 PM 6PM 2 DaHan China AM 5PM 3 At Sea 3 At Sea 4 Shmghai Chilla 7 AM 6PM 4 Shallghai Chilla (overnight onboard ship) 7AM 5 At Sea 5 Shallghai China 6PM 6 Okinaw Jpll 7 AM 1 PM
7 Taipei Taiwm (KeeIung) 9 AM 7PM6 At Sea 8 At Se7 Pusan South Korea 8AM 5PM 9 HOllg KOllg Chill 8 AM 7PM 8 At Sea 10-11 At S~a J Vladivostok Russia 5AM 730 PM 12 Ho Chi MiIJh City Vietnm (Phu My) 7 AM 5PM 10 At Sea 13 At Se 11 Nagasaki Japan 7AM 6PM 14 Singpore 8 AM 6pM
15 KUlltll Mlysi 830 AM 430 PM12 At Sea 16 At Sea 13 Osaka Japan DISEMBARK AM 17 Ballgkok Thaillld DISEMBARK AM t Sailing alls i1t Hiroshima on Dl) 11 In place of Nilgilsaki Port times milY vary
CRUISE I flNERARY CRUISE I flNERARY
Ho Chi Minh City Vietnam
EXOTICS CRUISES
SOUTHEAST ASIACHINA SOUTHEAST ASIACHINA FAR EASTALASKA
PACIflC PRINCISS ROYAL PRINCESS
16 16 19 DAYS DAYS DAYS
SAPPHIRE SAPPHIRE PRINCESS
Sail between PRINCESSBANGKOK
and BANGKOK OSAKA
BEIJING to to
2004 DEPARTURE DATES BEIJING SEATTLEPAClFlC PRINCESS
Jun 27tt 200S DEPARTURE DATE200S DEPARTURE DATE ROYAL PRINCESS
Mar 26 Apr 23Oct 16 Nov lt
CRUISE I I INERARY CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
1 GsakaJpan EMBARK PM1 Bangkok Thailand (Laem Chabang) EMBARKPM 1 Bangkok Thailand (Laern Chabang) EMBARK IM 2 At Sea2 At Sea 2 AtSea bull 3 Nagasaki Japan 7 AM 6PM
9AM 7PM 3 Singapore 7PM 4 Pusan Soqth Korea 8AM 5PM 4-5 At Sea 5 At Sea gt bull
7AM 7PM 6 Da Nwg Vietn~1Il 7AM middot7PM 6 Vladivostok Russia SAM 730 PM 7 At Sea 7 AtSea
7AM 12M 8 Hong lltog ihin~ 7AM 12M 8 Sapporo japan (Muroran) 6AM 6PM 9-10 At Sea 9-10 At Sea 9-12 At Sea cross Intemational Dateline
13 DutchHarbor Alaska (Aleutian Islands) 230 PM 7PM11 ShaJlgllai Cbina (overnight onboard ship) lAM 11 Shangh~t Cllina (ovmightonJoltird $hip) 7 AM 14 At Sea shy12 Shanghai China 6PM 12 Shanghai China
7AM - - tlJf
6PM 15 Anchorage Alaska (Seward) 8AM 6PM13 At Sea 13 AtSea i 16 College Fjord Seni CruIsing 630AM 930 AM
14 Nagasaki japan 7AM 6PM 14 Nagasaki japan 6PM 17 Glacier Ilay Scenic Cruising 1030 AM 830 PM 15 Pusan South lltOrea TAM 4PM 1~ bull Pu~an SQuth iorea middot4lM 18 middotmiddot juneau Alaska 6 AM 2PM 16 At Sea 16 At Sea 19 - At Sea 17 Beijing China (Xingangy OISEMBAlUe AM 17 Beijing Cliina (Xingang) 20 SeattleWashington DISEMBARK AM
t ltinemy Operne5 in rcvmc Older ttPorttimcsmiYnl)middotShlpwilldocklnampngkoknsttadofL1cm~
POLYNESIA amp THE COOK ISLANDS POLYNESIA amp THE MARQUESAS ISLANDS
10 10 DAYS DAYS
TAHITIAN PRINCESSTAHITIAN PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIPROUNDTRIP fromfrom
PAPEETEPAPEETE 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
2004 DEPARTURE DATES Oct 4 24 Mayl 17 27 Sep4 14 24 Nov 13 Jun 6 16 26 0lt 14 00323Ju16 16 26 Nov 323 2005 DEPARTURE DATESAug 5 15 25 Dec 13 Jan 12
Feb 1 21200S DEPARTURE DATES
~~ 122 ~~Il 13 23 CRUISE ITINERARY
CRUISE II INERARY DAY PORT
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Papeete Tahiti 1 Papeete Tahiti (overnight onboard ship) EMBARK PM
2 Moorea Polynesia 2 Papeete Tahiti SPM 3 Huahil1e P9lynesia 8AM 5 PM 3 Tuamotu Atolls Senic Cruising
5 PM8-AM 4 At Sea I At Sea 5 Rarotonga Cook Islands 8AM 5 PI~ 5 Nuku Hiva Marquesas Islands 6 At Sea 6 Hiva Ga Marquesas Islands 8AM 5PM 7 Raiatea Polynesia overnight onboard Ship 6AM
7 At Sea middotai~ RaiateaPQlynesia igt gt 6AM 8 Rangiroa P~iynesia 8AM 4PM8 Tahaa scenic Cryising 630 AM 830 AM
8 BoraBoraPQlyrtesia(ovemightollboard ship) UN 9 Tahaa ~enl Cruising 8 AM middot11AM
9 Bora lora Polynesia 5iM 9 Raiatea Polynesia 12 N 11 PM 10 Moore Polynesfa 8 AM 5 PM la ~ Bora ~oraPoIYnesia 8AM bull 5PM
11 Papeete Tahiti DISEMBARK AM 11 Papeete Tahiti DISEMBARK AM Iong Kong Harbor
3 Singapore 4-5 At Sea 6 Da NangVieinam 7 At Sea 8 liong Kong China
EXOTICS CRU ISES
HAWAIITAHITI HAWAIIAN ISLANDS SOUTH PACIFIC ISLANDS
12 1515 DAYS DAYSDAYS
PACIFIC
TAHITIAN PRINCESS ISLAND PRINCESSPAClFIC PRINCESS
PRINCESS
SYDNEYROUNDTRIP sail between tofrom
PAPEETE PAPEETELOS ANGELES and
2004 DEPARnIRE DATEHONOLULU 2004 DEPARTURE DATES Apr 21
2004 DEPARTURE DATES ~~~l CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE 11 INERARY
Oet21t CRUISE ITINERARY Nov Sf
MayS PACIFIC PRINCESS DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
Nov20t DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DecSt 1 Los Angeles CalifornIa EMBARK AM 1 Sydney AustralIa EMBARK PMAug 17t
Dec20t1 Papeete Tahiti EMBARK PM 2-4 At Sea
2005 DEPARTURE DATE Jan 4 2-5 At Sea
(overnight onboard ship) Jan 19 5 Auckland New Zealand 7 AM 2PMFeb 3t 6 Iiilo Hawaii 8 AM 6 PM
TAHITIAN PRINCESS Papeete Tahiti 11 PM fb 18 6-7 At Sea Kilauea Voko ~enic CruisingApr 12 MarS t 3 Moorea Polynesia 8 AM 5 PM 8 Suva fijI 11 AM 430 PM1~i~t 7 Kona Hawaii 8AM 6PM4 Bora Bora PolYnesia 8 AM 5 PM 9 At Sea Cross International Dateline Apr 19
5-6 At Sea 8 Honolulu Hawaii 8AM 11 PM 10 Apia Western Samoa 830 AM 2PM 7 Christmas Isl~ndKiribati 1Z N 5 PM 9 Kauai Hawaii (Nawlliwlli) 8AM 6PM 11-12 At Sea 8-9 At Sea 10 Maui Hawaii (Lahaina) 6PM 13 Bora Bora Polynesia lOAM 6PM 10 HlloliaWlii 6 PM 13 Raiatea Polynesia (overnight onboard 11 PM11-14 At Sea 11 Maui Hawaii (Lahaina) 8 AM 6 PM 14 Raiatea Polynesia 11 PM
15 Ensenada Mexico (service call)KaUaiH~waii(Nawllfwtli) 8AM 6 PM 15 Moorea Polynesia 8AM 5PM
tllinemyopcr~ttsln=x QnIerPurtlimcslmYvary Honolulu Hawaii DISEMBARK AM 16 Los Angeles CalIfornia DISEMBARK AM 16 Papeete Tahiti DISEMBARK AM
ISLANDS OF THE PACIFIC THEATER SOUTH PACIFIC EXPLORER
24 24 DAYS DAYS
PAClFIC PRINCESS PAClFIC PRINCESS
sail between HONOLULU PAPEETE
and to OSAKA FT LAUDERDALE
2004 DEPARTURE DATES
Mayl 2004 DEPARTURE DATEJul2Sj
Aug 29 CRUISE ITINERARY
CRUISE ITINERARYDAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART EMBARK PM DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
1 Papeete Tahiti EMBARK PM lPM 7PM 2 8AM 11 PM
3 ~~~~~~ ~~~~Sta 8AM 5 PM 4-6 At Sea 7 Pitcairn Island Scenic Cruising 8AM 1211
8AM 12 N
7AM ZPM 8-9 At Sea 10 Easter Island Chile 8AM 2PM
9AM 11-14 At Sea 15 Callao Peru (overnight for Lima and Machu Picchu) 8AM 16 Callao Peru lPM 17 At Sea 18 Manta Ecuador (for Quito) 9fM 7PM 19 At Sea 20 Transit Panama Canal 7 AM 430 PM 21 San BIas Panama 8AM 5 PM 22 ft Sea 23 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands 7AM 4PM 24 At Sea
25 Ft Lauderdale Florida DISEMBARK AMMoorea Polynesia tllinemyoperataln~12onlerPortl1mesmiYmymiddot
EXOTICS CRUISES
HAWAIITAHITISOUTH PACIFIC AMAZONSOUTHERN CARIBBEAN CAPE HORNSTRAIT OF MAGELLAN
1430 12 DAYS DAYSDAYS
ROYAL PRINCESS ROYAL PRINCESSSAPPHIRE PRINCESS
sail betweenFT LAUDERDALE SANTIAGOLOS ANGELES to
andto MANAUS BUENOS AIRESSYDNEY 2005 DEPARTURE DATE 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
2004 DEPARTURE DATE Apr 9 Jan 10
Nov 22 Jan 241 Feb 7
FebZt
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
CRUISE ITINERARY
CRUISE ITINERARYCRUISE ITINERARY 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTDAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 2-3 At Sea 1 Santiago Chile (Valparaiso) EMBARK PM
1 Los ingeles California EMBARK PM 4 Tortola BritIsh Virgin Islands 8 AM 6 PM 2 At Sea 2 Ensenada Mexico 8AM 5PM 3 Puerto Montt Chile 7AM 6PM
3middot6 At Sea 4 At Sea 5 Dominica 9 AM 4 PM 7 Hilo Hawaii 8AM 5 At Sea Chilean Fjords Scenic Cruising6PM 6 Trinidad 9 AM 6 PM
8 Maui Hawaii (Lahaina) 8AM 6PM 6 At Sea Amalia Glacier Scentc CruiSi3f7 At Sea 7 Punta Arenas Chile (Strait of Magei an) 7AM 6PM9 Honolulu Hawaii 7AM 5PM
- 10middot13 At Sea 8 Beagle Channel Scenic Cruising 8 Ushuaia Argentina (Tierra del Fuo) 12N 8PM
8 Devils Island French Guiana (Isle Royal) 8 AM 2 PM 14 Bora Bora Polynesia 8AM 6PM 9 At Sea 9 At Sea Cape Hom Scenic Cruising
10 Santarem Brazil 9 AM 7 PM 10 Moorea Polynesia 8AM 6PM 10 Falkland Islands (Stanley) 8AM 6PM 10 Papeete Tahiti (overnight onboard ship) 9PM 11 At Sea
i 16 Papeete Tahiti 6PM 11 Boca da Valeria Brazil (Amazon River) 7 AM 2 PM 12 Puerto Madryn Argentina 6AM 5PM 17middot18 AtSea 12 Manaus Brazil (overnight onboard ship) 10 AM 13 At Sea
14 Montevideo Uruguay 9AM 6PM19 Pago Pago merlcan Samoa 8AM 6PM 13 Manaus Brazil DISEMBARK AM 15 Buenos Aires Argentina DISEMBARK AM 20 Apia Western Samoa 8AM 6PM 21 At Sea Cross International Dateline middotl1me5forallscenkouisinCile subjectlDclwIgc
tllinmryopefilteslnr=rscordttPorttlmislm)vary22 Suva Fiji 8AM 6PM l 23-24 At Sea
20 Auckland New Zealand 8AM 6PM ORINOCO RIVERSOUTHERN CARIBBEAN ANDESSOUTH AMERICA 26 Tauranga New Zealand 8AM 7PM 27 At Sea
28 Wellington Newealand 8AM 6PM 16 17 DAYS DAYS 29-30 AtSea
31 Sydney Australia DISEMBARK AM ROYAL PRINCESS ROYAL PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP SANTIAGO from to
FT LAUDERDALE FT LAUDERDALE
200S DEPARTURE DATE2005 DEPARTURE DATE
Mar 7Mar 24
CRUISE IIJNERARYCRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Santiago Chlle (Valparaiso) EMBARK PM
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM
2 La Serena Chile (Coquimbo) 8 AM 5 PM2-3 At Sea 3 At Sea Um6n Costa Rica 7AM 7PM 4 Arica Chile 7AM 6PMCristobal Panama (for Panama Canal) 8AM 5PM o At Sea
6 Cartagena Colombia 9AM 2 PM 6 San Martin Peru (for Pisco and Machu Picchu) 7AM 6PM 7 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 130 PM 7PM 7 Callao Peru (overnight for Lima) 530 AM 8-9 At sea 8 Callao Peru 1PM 10 Puerto Ordaz Venezuela (Orinoco River) 8AM 6PM 9 At Sea
i 11 At Sea 10 Manta Ecuador (overnight for Quito) 530AM 12 Greada 8AM i 11 Manta Ecuador 1lM5PMt 1~ Dolllinlca i 7N1 5 PM 12 At Sea
i 13 Transit Panama C~nal 7AM 430 PM14 St Thomas us Virgilslands 9AM 5PM 14 Cartagena Colombia 8AM 130 PMJs AtSei i 15 Aruba Netherlands intiiles 1PM 7PM 16 Princess Cays Bahamas 8AM 16-17 At Sea Tahiti Polynesia 17 FtLallardale Flillilt~ DISEMBARK AM 1ampmiddot Ft L~uderdale Florida DISEMBARK AM
AMAZON RIVERMEDITERRANEAN
21 DAYS
ROYAL PRINCESS
MANAUS
to ROME
2005 DEPARTURE DATE
Apr 21
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE M~naus Brazil (Wemight onboardship) Manaus Brazil
3 BocadaValeria Brazil (AriiazonRivet) 11 AM 4-6 At Sea 7 Recife Brazil 1 PM 8-11 AtSea 12 Dakar Senegal 8AM 13-14 At Sea 15 Agadir Morocco 7AM 16 Casablanca Morocco (for Marrakech) 8AM 17 Gibraltar lOAM 18 Allcante Spain 12 N 19 Barcelona Spain 8AM 20 Cannes France (for Monte Carlo) 8AM 21 FlorencePisa Italy (Livarno) 7AM 22 Rome Italy (Civitavecchia) DISEMBARK AM
INDIAN OCEANAUSTRALIA
28 DAYS
PACIfIC PRINCESS
CAPE TOWN
to SYDNEY
2004 DEPARTURpound DATE
Oct 20
CRUISE ITINERARY1 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Cape Town South Africa EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 3 East London South Africa 7AM 3PM 4 DurbahSouth Africa 8AM 6PM 5-7 At Sea 8 Nosy BeMadagascar 7AM 4PM 9 At Sea 10 Poilit des Galets Reunioll]slahd 11 Port Louis Mauritius 12c19 At Sea 20 Perth Australia (Fremantle) 21-23 At Sea 24 Adelaide Australla 25 At Sea 26 Melbourne Australla 7 27 Tasmania AUstralia (Burnie) 28 At Sea 29 Sydney Australia DISEMBARK AM
I
DEPART EMBARK PM
7PM 6PM
8pM
5PM
3PM 9PM 6PM 6PM 5PM 7PM 7PM
EXOTICS CRUISES
SOUIB ATIANTICANTARCfICNSOUIB AMERICA
24 DAYS
ROYAL PRINCESS
CAPE TOWN
to SANTIAGO
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
Dec 17
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Cape TownSouthAfrica (overnighfol1board ship) EMBARK PM 2 Cape Town South Africa 3PM 2 if~~t Good HopSCenic Crulsing 3-6 6 Tristan DaCunha United Kingdom 8AM 5PM 7-10 At Sea 11 Falkland Islands (Staliley) 8 AM 5PM 12 At Sea 13-16 Antarctica Peninsula ScehltmiddotCruising 14 days ihcludingmiddot Elephant
Island AntarcticSotind Deceptionlslana GerlacheStrait NaxefChannel Schollaert Channel SigJtla Island and Boyd Strait)
17 At Sea Cape Horn Scenic Cruising1amp UshuaiaArgentina (Tierra del fuego) bull middot6 AM 19 Punta Arenas Chile (Strait of Magellan) 7 AM 20 At Sea Amalia Glacier Scenic Cruising21 At Sea Chilean Fjords Scenic Cruising22 AtSea 23 Puerto Mont Chile 7AM 6PM 24 At Sea 25 Santiago Chile (Valparaiso) DISEMBARK AM
-nmes for1l scenlccruisinc are subJect to change
ASIAINDIAMEDITERRANEAN
30 ROYAL PRINCESSDAYS
ROME
to BANGKOK
2004 DEPARlURE DATE
Sep 16
CRUISE Il INERARY
WEST AFRICASOUTH AMERICA
28 DAYS
PACIFIC PRINCESS
FT LAUDERDALE
to CAPE TOWN
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
51 22
CRUISE ITINERARY
DISEMBARK AM
Aruba
EXOTICS CRU ISES amp CRU ISETOU RS
AUSTRALIANEW ZEALAND CRUISETOUR
AUSTRALIAN EXPLORER 2004 DEPARTURE DATESAPPHIRE21 plus
DAYS PRINCESS SYDNEY Dec 17 to
AUCKLAND CRUISETOUR 5P CRUiSE
CRUISETOUR ITINERARY
DAY PORT By Sea By Land DAY PORT
1 Sydney 14 Fiordland National Park 2 Sydney Scenic Cruising
3 SydneyAyers Rock 15 Dunedin New Zealand (Port Chalmers) 4 Ayers ROek
5 Ayers RockPort Douglas 16 Christchurch New Zealand 6 Port Douglas - (Lytleton)
7 Port DouglasSydneyEmbark 17 Wellilgton New Zealand 8 At Sea 18 At Sea 9 Melbourne Australia 19 Tauranga New Zealand
10 At Sea 20 Bay of Islands New Zealand 11 Tasmania Australia (Hobart) 21 Auckland New Zealand 12middot13 At Sea
Sydney Opera House Australia
AUSTRALIANEW ZEALAND CRUISETOUR SOUTHEAST ASIACHINA CRUISETOUR CAPE HORNSTRAIT OF MAGELLAN CRUISETOUR AUSTRALIAN BEIJING Be TERRA COTTA 2004 DEPARTURE DATES RIO 8t IGUAZU FALLS Post-Crulsetour1 Pre-Crulsetour 217EXPLORER 2005 DEPARTURE DATES PACIFICSAPPHIRE WARRIORS19 plw or PRINCESS jul9t loieifie
DAYS PRINCESS SYDNEY Jan 12 plus 19 ROYAL plw Feb 5 Oct 28 Royal BUENOS AIRES
AUCKLAND DAYS ROYAL PRINCESS to 21 ampto DAYS PRINCESS
BEUING CRUISE t ~~S~i BeWln~~~~e
to SANTIAGO~e~s~Ot~r~ih~fi1BANGKOK CRUiSE CRUISECRUISETOUR 3t3P landtourm~yvlty CRUISETOUR 12
DAY PORT DAY PORT
DAY PORT By Sea ltBy LaDd DAY PORT
1 Beijing 11-12 At Sea 1 Rio de janeiro 11 Cape Horn Scenic Cruising
13 Hong Kong 2 Rio de jneiro c 12 Ushuaia Argentina 14 At Sea 3 RiolgUaiu Falls 12 Beagle Channel Scenlc Cruising
15 Nha Trang Vietnam 4 IIDIilZll FaU$13u~os~re$ 13 Punta Arenas Chile
16 Phu My Vietnam 5 Buens AiresEmbark 14 At Sea 17 At Sea 6 Montevideo Uruguay 15 Seno Eyre Fjord Scenic Cruising 18 Singapore 7 At Sea 16 At Sea 19 Kualtan Malaysia 8 Puerto Madryn Argentina 17 Puerto Montt Chile 20 At Sea 9 At Sea 18 At Sea 21 Bangkok Thail3nd 10 Falkland Islands (Stanley) 19 Santiago Chile
DAY PORT DAY PORT
At Sea Pusan SouthKOrea Nagasaki japan At Sea Shanghai China
Note CnIlst route shown for Royil Princess Oct 28 only Timcsforil1lsccnkoulslngmsubjccttothange
CRUISE [OUR ITINERARY
CRUISETOUR ITINERARY
CRUISrrOlJR ITINERARY Fiordland National Park Scenic Cruising DlUedin New Zealand Christchurch New Zealand Wellington New Zealand
14
GRAND PANAMA CANAL CRUISES
ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL
10 10 11 DAYSDAYS DAYS
CORAL PRINCESS GRAND PRINCESS GRAND PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIPfrom from
fromFT LAUDERDALE GALVESTON GALVESTON
2004 DEPARTURE DATES Oct n 21 31 2004 DEPARTURE DATE
2004 DEPARTURE DATENov 10 20 30middot DeelSmiddot
DedSDec 10 28
2005 DEPARTURE DATES CRUISE ITINERARY Jan 7 17 27
CRUISE ITINERARY Feb 6 16 26 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART MarS 1828 CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Galveston Texas EMBARK PMApr 7 17 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTshy 1 Galveston Texas EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 1 ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 3 Belize City Belize 1 PM 7PM 2-3 At Sea 3 Belize City Belize lPM 7PM 4 Costa Maya Mexico (Mahahual) 8AM 4PM 4 Um6n Costa Rica 7AM rPM 4 Costa Maya Mexico (Mahahual) SAM 4 PM 5 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands 12 PM 7PM 5 Panama Canal (to Gatun Lake) 7AM 430 PM 5 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands 12 PM 7PM 6 Ocho Rios Jamaica SAM 5PM 5 Col6n Panama 5PM 8PM 6 At Sea 7 At Sea 6 At Sea Cristobal Panama 7AM 4PM 8 7AM 4PM 7 Grand Cayman Cayman IslandS 7AM 4PM (fot Panama Canal) ftrtpg~niaa~~) S Corumel Mexico SAM 6PM 8 At Sea 9 At Sea 9 Bclize City Belize 7AM 4 PM 6PM 10 Coromel Mexico lOAM 6 PM9 Cozumel Mexico lOAM 10 At Sea 10 At Sea 11 At Sea
Portordtrllndtlmtsmayvllry 11 flo Lauderdale florida DISEMBARK AM Portorntr IInltf timpoundi may vary 11 Galveston Texas DISEMBARK AM Port ordu and Nmes may vary 12 Galv_es~on Texas DISEMBARK AM
ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL
8 DAYS
CORAL PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP
from
FT LAUDERDALE
2004 DEPARTURE DATE Dec 20
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Fl Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM 2-3 At Sea 4 Lim6n Costa Rica 7AM 7PM 5 Panama Canal (to Gatun Lake) 7 AM 430 PM 5 Co16n Panama 5PM SPM 6 At Sea 7 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands SAM 5PM S At Sea 9 Flo Lauderdale Florida DISEMBARK AM Bridge of the Americas Panama
f OptIonll fOllTS inclld1lI tht AtlllnH to Pacific RlIlllfll) joumq will dlmlldrt tilt ship b) tctdtr lit Gfttlm uk AJkr tour plIssmm dlstmlrark tilt shipwin procmlllat through tilt Gatun Locb lIndjlnlllly dock in Gl6lI Hmal1p41Sl11tmmttydiumlmtheJldlo~ lflrshops IInd~llI toIIrsrrnrl CIItutl14ktlllIrtonlflrJhlp
GRAND PANAMA CANAL CRUISES
GRAND PANAMA CANAL GRAND PANAMA CANAL GRAND PANAMA CANAL
150R 18 150R 1715 DAYS DAYS DAYS
CORAL PRINCESS SUN PRINCESS
REGAL PRINCESS REGAL PRINCESS SUN PRINCESS
DAWN PRINCESS REGAL PRINCESS sail between DAWN PRINCESS
sail between FT LAUDERDALE FT LAUDERDALE sail betweenand
FT LAUDERDALEand SAN DIEGO andLOS ANGELES
SAN FRANCISCO 2004 DEPARTURE DATES 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
DAWN PRINCESS 2004 DEPARTURE DATESNov 24Sp191
CRUISE ITINERARY Dec9t CORAL PRINCESSREGAL PRINCESS 5ltp261 CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE ITINERARY
200S DEPARTURE DATES Dec 24 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
SUN PRINCESS DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARIltPM200S DEPARTURE DATES DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Sep 2StMar 24
3 Ocho Rios Jamaica lOAM 6PM 2-3 At5ea 2 At Sea 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBA8KPM
REGAL PRINCESS AprSt 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBA8KPM Jan stu 200S DEPARTURE DATES2 At Sea4 At Sea 4 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 7AM lPMJan 23 5 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 7AM lPM 3 Ocho Rios Jamaica lOAM 6PM REGAL PRINCESS 5 Cartagena Colombia 9AM 3PMFeb7t 4 At Sea Apr 239AM 3PM 6 Transit Panama Canal 7AM 430 PMFb22 ~ yenr~fte~~~~~~u 7AM 430 PM 5 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 7AM lPM At SeaMar9t CORAL PRINCESS 79AM 3PM8 At Sea Apr 27 8 Puntarenas Costa Rica 7AM 7PMSUN PRINCESS 9 Puntarenas Costa Rica 7 AM 7PM ~ yenr~fte~n~~~~~u 7AM 430 PM 9-10 At SeaApr1S 8 At Sea DAWN PRINCESS10-11 At Sea 11 Acapulco Mexico 8AM 5PM
5PM 9 Puntarenas Costa Rica 7AM 7PM Apr 29H ~ae~lcoMexico 8 AM 12 At SeatllWrryopmllzlfrarnLls~in 10-11 At Sea rmrKfIfikTiIIrttimnma1 tlliJlrraryoptJllllsfrlJflSlmFranrimlJn 13 Cabo San lucas Mexico 8AM 5PM
gt This mUJI C4Jl llfwmblnld wlth a 3 14 Cabo San Lucas Mexico 7 AM lPM H ~e~o Mexico 8AM SPM rmruordrrorttimamG)llIryCoIutar CnUK to VlWOIlllr SC Dqs ThUIltIIIflltllnlltCllIIblntdwilhaZ-day 14-15 At Sea 16lhrlllllhI9lllIbtboobdulaquoSC)lQ4k t Illncral) lIpCutcs in mrmt orm Pllrt IiIIIa CocastaICnliutoVan(ouKrBCDlIys16 16 San Francisco California 7AM 4PMcowtlIrcrllisr IIIIYlIl1Ymiddot IhrounIScankboobdlUaK)lllllluU t~A~geles California 6 AM 5PM 14 Cabo San Lucas Mexico 8AM 5PM
Thllwl1JIIICllllslltMOlIkpilllyJmtcad 17-18 At Sea middotmiddotThliIAfllIllCltlllsatMGnIqclBaylnstcadllf 15 At Sea CPlIilldCI1IIu 17 At Sea o[OdKKwsPurllilllrlmllYWlry OchoRicJsPortllmtslllllYVllfymiddot D1SEMBA8K AM19 Vancouver BC DISEMBA8K AM 16 San Die20 California DlSEMBA8K AM 18 Val1couver BC
GRAND PANAMA CANAL COASTAL CRUISING
2-4 CORAL PRINCESS ISLAND PRINCESS SUN PRINCESS18 DAWN PRINCESS DIAMOND PRINCESS STAR PRINCESSDAYSDAYS
COASTAL CRUISE SCHEDULEREGAL PRINCESS
SHIP DAYS FROM TO DEPARTURE DATE DIAMOND PRINCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 5104
SAN FRANCISCO DIAMOND PRINCES5 4 Vancouver Seattle 5404 to CORAL PRINCESS 2 San Francisco Vancouver 5604
NEW YORK DAWN PRiNCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 5704 ISLAND PRiNCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 51204
2004 DEPARTURE DATE SUN PRINCESS 3 San Francisco Vancouver 51404Aug 24 ISLAND PRiNCESS 3 Vancouver LOI Angeles 91804
DIAMOND PRINCESS 1 Seattle Vancouver 91804CRUISE ITINERARY DIAMOND PRINCESS 6 Vancouver Los Angeles 91904 SAPPHIRE PRINCESS 1 Seattle Vancouver 91904 SAPPHREPRINCESS 2 Vancouver San Francisco 92004 DIAMOND PRINCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 43005 DlAMONDPRiNCES$ 4 Vancouver Seattle 5305 SUN PRINCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 5305
ISLAND PRiNCESS 3 Los Angeles VancOllver 5405 CORAL PRiNCESS 2 San Francisco Vancouver 51205
Coral Princess in the Panama Canal
CRUISE PLUS
Extend your adventure with our Cruise Plusreg program Cruise Plusreg enables you to enhance your vacation with one- to four-night hotel
packages in cities that stand on their own as vacation destinations Add nights in Sydney before you cruise or extend your vacation with nights in the city by the
bay San Francisco Transportation and luggage handling costs from the airport to both hotel and ship plus meet and greet services are always included
Wherever you choose to explore youll enjoy properties that are carefully chosen based on service value location and the peace of mind of knowing that Princess
has arranged it all for you
Anchorage Alaska Trevi Fountain Rome Auckland Harbor New Zealand
The Cruise Plusreg Program is available in over 30 major cities including
MEDITERRANEANAEGEAN EXOTICS PANAMA CANAL Barcelona London Rome and Venice Auckland Bangkok Beijing Buenos Aires Ft Lauderdale Los Angeles New York City
Cape Town Ft Lauderdale Honolulu Los San Diego San Francisco Sanjuan Vancouver NORTHERN EUROPE Angeles Montreal Moorea New York City Copenhagen and London MEXICO CARIBBEANOsaka Papeete Rome San Francisco
Ft Lauderdale Galveston Los AngelesTRANSATLANTIC Santiago Seattle Sydney Vancouver Venice Barcelona Copenhagen Ft Lauderdale San Francisco and San Juan
London New York City and Rome ALASKA Anchorage Calgary Fairbanks Kenai San Francisco Seattle and Vancouver
For more information about options and pricing reference a destination specific brochure or contact your travel agent
TRAVEL THE WORLD WITH THE LEADER IN CRUISINGmiddot Princess
Analysis by the Hawaii Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism Comparing the Economic Impact of Foreign Flag Ships with US Flag Cruise Ships Sailing in Hawaii
This is a summary of an analysis prepared by the Hawai Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism (DBEDT) of the economic impact of the foreign flag cruise ship fleet sailing in Hawaii as compared to each of the US flag ships operating in Honolulu
The comparison is set out below
Foreign Pride Pride Pride
Fleet Of Hawaii Of Aloha Of America
Total economic output impact (spendingsales) ($mil) 155 542 4225 4958
Total earnings impact (labor earnings) ($mil) 44 155 1207 1411
Total employment impact Uobs) 1447 5059 3943 4627
This analysis demonstrates that a single US-flagged ship the Pride of America home ported in Honolulu is 32 times more economically impactful and creates 32 times as many jobs as the entire foreign flag fleet that sails into and out of Hawaii ports of call
Economic Impact of Pride of America
Assumptions 1 Annual impact though Pride of Aloha is leaving in May 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existing Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($) 4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of outputl$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job multiplier (jobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
118700 105
2706 3373
147 042
1372
4958
1417
4627
Data sourcelformula Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Line 1 x line 2 x line 31 000000
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 4 x line 5
Line 4 x line 6
Line 4 x line 7
Economic Impact of Pride of Hawaii
Assumptions
1 Annual impact though Pride of Hawaii is leaving in February 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existing Pride of Aloha and Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($) 4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job multiplier (jobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
Data sourceformula 139770 Actual 2007 figure
975 Actual 2007 figure 2706 Actual 2007 figure 3688 Line 1 x line 2 x line 31000000
147 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model 042 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
1372 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
5421 Line 4 x line 5
1549 Line 4 x line 6
5059 Line 4 x line 7
Economic Impact of Pride of Aloha
Assumptions 1 Annual impact though Pride of Aloha is leaving in May 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existlng Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($)
4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job mUltiplier Oobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
95680 111
2706 2874
147 042
1372
4225
1207
3943
Data sourcelformula Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Line 1 x line 2 x line 31000000
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 4 x line 5
Line 4 x line 6
Line 4 x line 7
lt
Methodology Used in Calculating Impact of International Cruise Ships
Cruise ship visitors 1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Came with ships 3 Flied in 4 Average length of stay (days) 5 PPPD ($) 6 Cruise visitor spending ($mil))
Cruise ship crews 7 Ratio of crew spending to cruise visitor spending 8 Cruise crew spending
Cruisline 9 Ratio of crew spending to cruise visitor spending
10 Cruiseline spending
11 Total cruise-related spending ($mil)
12 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 13 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 14 Job multiplier Uobs$ cruise -related spending)
15 Total output impact ($miJ)
16 Total earnings impact ($miJ)
17 Total employment impact (jobs)
106641 98307
8334 739 847 668
02 134
038 254
1055
147 042
1372
1551
444
1447
Data sourceformula Line 2 + line 3 DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report Line 1 x line 4 x line 5
DBEDT 2003 Cruise study Line 7 x line 6
DBEDT 2003 Cruise study Line 9 x line 6
Line 6 + line 8 + line 10
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 11 x line 12
Line 11 x line 13
Line 11 x line 14
Economic Contributions Foreign-Flag Fleet operating in Hawaii vs Three US-Flag Ships
$1500
Pride of Hawaii$1000- $542 million VIc -0-E c Pride of AlohaCo
423 million$500
Pride of America $496 million155 million$shy
Foreign-Flag US-Flag Fleet Fleet
Source State of Hawaii Department of US-Flag $1460 billion Business Economic Development and Tourism
Foreign-Flag $ 155 million 7292008
Employment Foreign-Flag Fleet operating in Hawaii vs Three US-Flag Ships
15000
10000
til c o Pride of Aloha
39435000
Pride of America 1447 4627
~---------
Foreign-Flag US-Flag Fleet Fleet
Source State of Hawaii Department of US-Flag 13629 jobs Business Economic Development and Tourism
Foreign-Flag 1447 jobs 7292008
Foreign Flag Capacity Growth Foreign flag passenger capacity has changed five-fold on roundtrip Hawaii cruises from the West Coast since enactment of the Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative
1600000
1400000
tn 1200000
J enshyZ
1000000
I shyG) en 800000 s G) tn tn
600000 as D 400000
200000
0 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Year
Source US Maritime Administration (derived from the US Customs and Border Patrol Vessel Entrance and Clearance documents - final 2007 data) 7292008
NCL America Hawaii Economic Contributions
(2004-2008)
bull (in Millions) bull $399 in wages benefits and overtime to US seafarers bull $35 in Federal and State payroll Taxes bull $64 in Government Fees and Taxes to Hawaii bull $28 in wages benefits and overtime to US other employees bull $52 in Port Charges to Hawaii Companies (Stevedores tugs pilots etc) bull $85 in Fuel to Tesoro Hawaii bull $130 for shore excursions to Hawaii tour operators bull $39 for Hawaii hotel rooms and ground transport bull $75 for food grown in Hawaii bull $57 in union fees and levies (incl $32M paid directly by employees) bull $1 in MMD fees to the United States Coast Guard bull $51 for recruitment screening processing and training crew bull $76 advertising and promoting Hawaii as a destination bull $1092
COASTWISE CRUISES INTERPRETIVE RULE RESOLUTION Adopted at the
US Conference of Mayors 76th Annual Meeting
June 20-242008 Miami
WHEREAS the Department of Homeland Securitys Customs and Border Protection (CBP) issued a proposed Interpretive Rule regulating Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises on foreign flagged vessels between US ports of call under the Passenger Vessel Services Act at the request of the United States Maritime Administration and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule would require that a foreign-flagged vessel on a coastwise cruise to call at a foreign port for at least 48 hours with that foreign stop constituting at least 50 percent of the cruise itinerary and allowing passengers to disembark the cruise vessel at the foreign port before continuing the cruise to a US port of call and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule establishes burdensome criteria that are wholly inconsistent with industry practice particularly the 48-hour call at foreign port shyinasmuch as the standard port call is six to eight hours - as well as the requirement that 50 percent of a cruise be spent at the foreign port and
WHEREAS the intent of the proposed Interpretive Rule is to protect the single remaining US flag vessel serving the Inter-Hawaiian Island cruise trade that according to the Hawaii Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism generates more than 4600 jobs and generates nearly $500 million in economic benefits for the state annually and
WHEREAS thousands of members of the International Longshore Workers Union (nWU) are employed at US ports serving cruise ships and whose jobs would be at risk if the proposed Interpretive Rule were implemented and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule is vague as to the breadth of its application ie to coastwise cruises between all United States ports or applied solely to coastwise cruises from West Coast ports to Hawaii and
WHEREAS the Cruise Lines International Association estimates the proposed Interpretive Rule would upend the $17 billion in national cruise industry spending and put at risk more than 300000 jobs generated by the international cruise industry including jobs held by nWU at US ports and the local allied industries supporting the cruise industry and
Executive Order Submissions Under Review
II Reglnfogov Where to ind Federal Regulatory Information -~
Home ] Lnitied Agenda and Regulator) Ilan pound012866 Regulator) Review Jnformalion Collection Review
EO 12866 Regulatory Rlvlw dvanced Search IJitorical RepWI Review Counh Jriter XIL
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA)
Executive Order Submissions Under Review July 25 2008 - _------------____ _shy
Department of Homeland Security
AGENCY DHS-TSA RIN 1652-AA53
TITLE Large Aircraft Security Program Other Aircraft Operator Security Programs and Airport Operator Security Program
STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT Yes RECEIVED DATE 06302008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
AGENCY DHS-USCIS RIN Llti15-AB67 TITLE Changes to Requirements Affecting H-2B Nonimmigrants and Their Employers
STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT No RECEIVED DATE 06092008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
AGENCY DHS-USCBP RIN 1651AA11 TITLE Issuance of a Visa and Authorization for Temporary Admission Into the United States for Certain Nonimmigrant Aliens Afflicted W HIV Infection
STAGE Final Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT No RECEIVED DATE 03042008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
-_RE_V-IE-W-E-X-T-EN-D-E-D---------- _
AGENCY DHS-USCBP RIN 1651-AA76 TITLE Coastwise Transportation of Passengers STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT Yes RECEIVED DATE 07142008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
Disclosure I Accessibility I Privacy Policy I Contact Us
httpwwwreginfogovpublicdoeoReviewSearch 7252008
View Rule Page 11
Shere D find Federal ReguLatory InformciiorlReglnfogov Home J Cnified Agenda al1d Regulatory Plan EO 12866 Regulatory Reyiew Information Collection Reiew
Current rnified Agenda and Regulatory Plan Historical Pnified Agenda and Regulatory Plan Search
View Rule
DHSIUSCBP RIN 1651-AA76 Publication ill Spring 2008
Title llCoastwise Transportation of Passengers
Abstract This interim rule amends the Department of Homeland Securitys (DHS) current regulations relating to the transportation of passengers by non-coastwise-qualified vessels on voyages that begin and end at a US port and stop at intervening US and foreign port(s) Under this interim final rule voyages that begin and end at a US port and stop at a foreign port(s) and at intervening US port(s) where a large USshyflag coastwise-qualified passenger vessel engages in regular service are in violation of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) unless the cumulative length of stay(s) at intervening foreign port(s) is more than 50 percent of the total amount of time spent at the intervening US port(s) and passengers are permitted to go ashore at the foreign port(s) The purpose of this amendment is to ensure that the Congressional purpose in enacting the PVSA which is to preserve the economic benefits of US coastwise trade to US-flag coastwise-qualified vessels is properly implemented
Agency Department of Homeland Security(DHS) Priority Substantive Nonsignificant
KIN Status First time published in the Unified Agenda Agenda Stage of Rulemaking Final Rule Stage
Major No Unfunded Mandates No
CFR Citation -LCER 4J~)(h)(plusmnJ
Legal Authority 5JJSS_30J12lJ-SClt16 J9_lJiCJ 431 9_L1C1plusmn3JJ2JScHJ1J2JSCJ624 L(LlLSc207LIl(gtJfHgt~ _CiQJ _46lSC 6QLQ~
Legal Deadline None
Timetable Action Date FR Cite
Interim Final Action 0510012008
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required No Government Levels Affected None
Federalism No
Included in the Regulatory Plan No
RIN Data Printed in the FR No
Agency Contact Glen E Vereb Chief Entry Procedures and Carriers Branch Department of Homeland Security US Customs and Border Protection Office of Regulations and Rulings 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington DC 20229 Phone202572-8730
Disclosure I Accessibility I Privacy Policy I Contact Us
httpwwwreginfogovpublicdoeAgendaViewRuleruleID=286751 7128120
Federal RegisterVol 72 No 224Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules 65487
SPECULATIVE POSITION LIMITS 1-Continued [In contract units)
Contract
Soybeans and Mini-Soybeans 2
Wheat and Mini-Wheat 2 bullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbull
Soybean Oil
SingleSpot month All monthsmonth
600 8600 13300 600 11100 14500 540 6600 8600
Soybean Meal 720 5500 7100
Minneapolis Grain Exchange
Hard Red Spring Wheat I 600 I 11100 I 14500
New York Board of Trade
Cotton No2 I 300 I 5300 I 7300
Kansas City Board of Trade
Hard Winter Wheat I 600 I 11100 I 14500
1 For purposes of compliance with these limits positions in a futures contract that shares ~ubstantially identical terms with a contract market enumerated herein including a futures contract that is cash-settled based on the settlement price of an enumerated contract market shall be agshygregated with positions in the enumerated contract market
2 For purposes of compliance with these limits positions in the regular-sized and mini-sized contracts shall be aggregated
Issued by the Commission this November 152007 in Washington DC David Stawick Secretary of the Commission [FR Doc E7-22681 Filed 11-20-07 845 amI BILLING CODE 6351-Q1-P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Bureau of Customs and Border Protection
19 CFR Part 4
[USCBP-2007-o098]
Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises
AGENCY Customs and Border Protection Department of Homeland Security ACTION Proposed interpretation solicitation of comments
SUMMARY This document proposes new criteria to be used by Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to determine whether non-coastwise-qualified vessels are in violation ofthe Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) when engaging in cruise itineraries in which passengers board at a US port the vessel calls at several Hawaiian ports and then the vessel proceeds to a foreign port or ports for a brief period before ultimately returning to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their cruise CBP believes these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because it appears that the primary objective of the foreign stop is evasion of the PVSA
DATES Comments must be received on or before December 212007 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT Glen E Vereb Cargo Security Carriers amp Immigration Branch Office of International Trade (202) 572-8730 ADDRESSES You may submit comments identified by docket number by one of the following methods
bull Federal eRulemaking Portal http wwwregulationsgov Follow the instructions for submitting comments
bull Mail Border Security Regulations Branch Office of International Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
I Public Participation
Interested persons are invited to participate in this proposed interpretation by submitting written data views or arguments on all aspects of the proposed interpretation Customs and Border Protection (CBP) also invites comments that relate to the economic environmental or federalism effects that might result from this proposed interpretation Comments that will provide the most assistance to CBP in developing these procedures will reference a specific portion of the proposed interpretation explain the reason for any recommended change and include data information or authority that support such recommended change
Instructions All submissions received must include the agency name and docket number for this proposed
interpretation All comments received will be posted without change to http wwwregulationsgov including any personal information provided
Docket For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received go to http wwwregulationsgov Submitted comments may also be inspected on regular business days between the hours of 9 am and 430 pm at the Office of International Trade Customs and Border Protection 799 9th Street NW 5th Floor Washington DC Arrangements to inspect submitted documents should be made in advance by calling Mr Joseph Clark at (202) 572shy8768
II Background
The maritime cabotage law governing the transportation of passengers was first established by section 8 of the Passenger Vessel Services Act of June 191886 (the PVSA) 24 Stat 81 as amended by section 2 of the Act of February 17 1898 30 Stat 248 formerly codified at 46 USC App 289 (now codified at 46 USC 55103) 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 of $200 (now $300 as promulgated in TD 03-11 pursuant to the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 199028 USC 2461 note) for each passenger so transported and landed
The intent of the maritime cabotage laws including the PVSA was to provide a legal structure that guarantees a coastwise monopoly to
65488 Federal RegisterVol 72 No 224Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules
American shipping and thereby promotes development of the American merchant marine Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 28 (DC Cir 1984) see also The Granada 35 FSupp 892 8931940 AMC 1601 (DC Pa 1940) (stating that the legislative aim of section 289 [now 55102] was the creation of a practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping business for United States ships) In other words the PVSA was enacted to advance the United States merchant marine and fleet by restricting the use of foreign-ownedflagged passenger vessels in United States territorial waters
Passenger vessel transportation between United States ports has historically been viewed to be part of the coastwise trade after the enactment of the PVSA This view is premised on the concepts of continuity of the voyage and whether its intended purpose or objective was coastwise transportation In other words the PVSA was held to be violated if the coastwise movement was continuous or if the purpose of the trip was a coastwise voyage (See 18 OAG 445 September 4 1886 28 OAG 204 February 16 1910 29 OAG 318 February 12 1912 30 OAG 44 February 1 1913 34 OAG 340 December 24 1924 and 36 OAG 352 August 13 1930)
The CBP regulations promulgated pursuant to the PVSA are found at section 480a of title 19 of the Code of Federal Regulations (19 CFR 480a) and are reflective of the above cited Office of the Attorney General decisions These regulations provide among other things that a non-coastwise-qualified vessel which embarks a passenger at a port in the United States embraced within the coastwise laws (a coastwise port) will be deemed to have landed that passenger in violation of the PVSA if the passenger disembarks at a different coastwise port on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a nearby foreign port or ports (as defined in 19 CFR 480a(a)(2) see also 19 CFR 480a(b)(2)) The terms embark and disembark are words of art which are defined as going on board a vessel for the duration of a specific voyage and leaving a vessel at the conclusion of a specific voyage respectively (See 19 CFR 480a(a)(4))
The references in section 480a to nearby foreign ports (defined in 19 CFR 480a(a)(2)) are the results of attempts by CBP to apply an Office of the Attorney Generals opinion dated February 26 1910 (28 OAG 204) In that case a foreign-flag vessel transported 615 passengers on a voyage around the world beginning in New
York and concluding in San Francisco The Attorney General opined that since the primary object of the voyage was to visit various parts of the world on a pleasure tour returning home via California and not to be transported in domestic commerce the transportation was not in violation of the PVSA
The 1910 Attorney Generals opinion was extended to voyages that included foreign ports other than nearby foreign ports (See Treasury Decision (TD) 68shy285 (33 FR 16558) November 14 1968) However voyages solely to one or more coastwise ports have always been considered predominantly coastwise Therefore non-coastwise-qualified vessels engaging in such a voyage where passengers temporarily go ashore at a coastwise port have been deemed to have violated the PVSA
m Current Law and Policy Pursuant to Public Law 109-304 120
Stat 1632 enacted on October 6 2006 Title 46 United States Code was substantially reorganized and recodified Consequently the PVSA is now codified at 46 USC 55103 and provides that no vessel shall transport passengers between ports or places in the United States either directly or by way of a foreign port under a penalty of $300 for each person so transported and landed except one that (1) Is wholly owned by citizens of the United States for purposes of engaging in the coastwise trade and (2) has been issued a certificate of documentation with a coastwise endorsement or is exempt from documentation but would otherwise be eligible for such a certificate and endorsement
In 2003 Congress enacted Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II Section 211 for the purpose of revitalizing the oceangoing US-flag cruise industry in Hawaii (the 2003 Act) Three oceangoing US-flag cruise ships PRIDE OF ALOHA PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAII were documented with coastwise privileges pursuant to the 2003 Act These vessels entered regular service in Hawaii in 2004 2005 and 2006 respectively and pursuant to the express language of the 2003 Act are limited in their operation to providing regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands of Hawaii
The CBP regulations promulgated pursuant to the PVSA are set forth in 19 CFR 480a and have remained unchanged throughout both the recodification of Title 46 of the United States Code and the enactment of the 2003 Act They provide that a violation of the PVSA occurs when passengers embark (board a vessel for the
duration of a voyage) a non-coastwiseshyqualified vessel at one US port and disembark (leave the vessel at the conclusion of a voyage) at a different US port unless they proceed with the vessel to a distant foreign port (Le any port not considered a nearby foreign port which is defined as any port located in North America Central America Bermuda or the West Indies including the Bahamas) Currently these regulations do not contain specific criteria for non-coastwise-qualified vessels on itineraries including US ports and either nearby or distant foreign ports in order for such foreign port calls to be compliant with the PVSA
To reiterate the applicable CBP regulations provide that the PVSA is violated when a non-coastwise-qualified vessel transports a passenger on a voyage solely to one or more coastwise ports and the passenger disembarks or goes ashore temporarily at a coastwise port (19 CFR 480a(b)(1)) Furthermore a violation of the PVSA also occurs when a non-coastwise-qualified vessel transports a passenger on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a nearby foreign port or ports (but no other foreign port) and the passenger disembarks at a coastwise port other than the port of embarkation (19 CFR 480a(b)(2)) However there is no violation of the PVSA when a passenger is on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a distant foreign port or ports (whether or not the voyage includes a nearby foreign port or ports) and the passenger disembarks at a coastwise port provided the passenger has proceeded with the vessel to a distant foreign port (19 CFR 480a(b)(3))
IV Request From MARAD To Provide Guidance
The US Department of Transportation Maritime Administration (MARAD) has requested that CBP take action to ensure enforcement of the PVSA MARAD has asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreignshyflag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwiseshyqualified cruise ship operators
In April of 2007 the operator of the three US-flag cruise vessels operating solely in Hawaii pursuant to the 2003 Act announced their intent to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAIl from the Hawaii market and redeploy her to Europe The operator intends to re-flag the vessel to foreign registry directly resulting in the loss of over 1100 crewmember jobs The primary reason cited for this decision is the rapid increase in foreign-flag competition entering the Hawaii market
Federal Register I Vol 72 No 224 I Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules 65489
from the West Coast This competition is evidenced in published cruise itineraries of foreign-flag carriers offering a variety of round trip cruises that depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period usually in the early morning and ultimately return to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their cruise These cruises are often marketed as Hawaii cruises and except for the brief stop in the nearby foreign port of Ensenada are purely coastwise in nature It is these cruise itineraries that pose an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels that pursuant to the 2003 Act are currently engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands
V Preliminary Notice
In response to MARADs concerns CBP sent letters to two carriers known to operate the itineraries in question as well as to the Cruise Lines International Association Inc stating that CBP believes that these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because it appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA The letters further indicated that CBP is taking steps to publish this position
VI CBPs Proposed Interpretive Rule Accordingly in this document CBP is
proposing to provide that cruise itineraries for non-qualified coastwise vessels which allow passengers to board at a US port call at several Hawaiian ports proceed to a foreign port or ports for a brief period and then ultimately return to the original US port of embarkation for disembarkation are not consistent with the PVSA and the regulations promulgated pursuant thereto Specifically CBP interprets a voyage to be solely to one or more coastwise ports even where it stops at a foreign port unless the stop at the foreign port is a legitimate object of the cruise CBP will presume that a stop at a foreign port is not a legitimate object of the cruise unless
(1) The stop lasts at least 48 hours at the foreign port
(2) The amount of time at the foreign port is more than 50 percent of the total amount of time at the US ports of call and
(3) The passengers are permitted to go ashore temporarily at the foreign port
Accordingly CBP proposes to adopt an interpretive rule under which it will presume that any cruise itinerary that does not include a foreign port call that
satisfies each of these three criteria constitutes coastwise transportation of passengers in violation of 19 CFR 480a(b)(1)
Dated November 16 2007 W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection [FR Doc E7-22788 Filed 11-20-07 845 am] BILLING CODe 9111-14-1
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau
27 CFR Part 9
[Notice No 76]
RIN 1513-AB49
Proposed Establishment of the Leona Valley Viticultural Area (2007R-281 P)
AGENCY Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau Treasury ACTION Notice of proposed rulemaking
SUMMARY The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau proposes to establish the 134 square mile Leona Valley viticultural area in the northeast part of Los Angeles County California We designate viticultural areas to allow vintners to better describe the origin of their wines and to allow consumers to better identify wines they may purchase We invite comments on this proposed addition to our regulations DATES We must receive written comments on or before January 22 2008
ADDRESSES You may send comments on this notice to one of the following addresses
bull httpwwwregulationsgov (Federal e-rulemaking portal follow the instructions for submitting comments) or
bull Director Regulations and Rulings Division Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau PO Box 14412 Washington DC 20044-4412
See the Public Participation section of this notice for specific instructions and requirements for submitting comments and for information on how to request a public hearing
You may view copies of this notice selected supporting materials and any comments we receive about this proposal at httpwwwregulationsgov under Docket No 2007-0066 You also may view copies of this notice all related petitions maps or other supporting materials and any comments we receive about this
proposal by appointment at the TTB Information Resource Center 1310 G Street NW Washington DC 20220 To make an appointment call 202-927shy2400
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT NA Sutton Regulations and Rulings Division Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau 925 Lakeville S1 No 158 Petaluma CA 94952 phone 415shy271-1254 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
Background on Viticultural Areas
TTB Authority Section 105(e) of the Federal Alcohol
Administration Act (FAA Act) 27 USC 205(e) authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to prescribe regulations for the labeling of wine distilled spirits and malt beverages The FAA Act provides that these regulations should among other things prohibit consumer deception and the use of misleading statements on labels and ensure that labels provide the consumer with adequate information as to the identity and quality of the product The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) administers the regulations promulgated under the FAA Act
Part 4 ofthe TTB regulations (27 CFR part 4) allows the establishment of definitive viticultural areas and the use of their names as appellations of origin on wine labels and in wine advertisements Part 9 of the TTB regulations (27 CFR part 9) contains the list of approved viticultural areas
Definition Section 425(e)(1)(i) ofthe TTB
regulations (27 CFR 425(e)(1)(i)) defines a viticultural area for American wine as a delimited grape-growing region distinguishable by geographical features the boundaries of which have been recognized and defined in part 9 of the regulations These designations allow vintners and consumers to attribute a given quality reputation or other characteristic of a wine made from grapes grown in an area to its geographic origin The establishment of viticultural areas allows vintners to describe more accurately the origin of their wines to consumers and helps consumers to identify wines they may purchase Establishment of a viticultural area is neither an approval nor an endorsement by TTB of the wine produced in that area
Requirements Section 425(e)(2) of the TTB
regulations outlines the procedure for proposing an American viticultural area and provides that any interested party
Us Department ofHomelaDd Secmity Washington DC 10229
bull ~
US Customs and Border Protection
AUG 15 2fXJJ
VE5-3-02-QTRRBSTCCCI - ti015502-GG-
Mr leon Sutcliffe Director Port Operations Camivai Cruise Unes Camival Place 3655 NW 87Avenue Miami Aorlda 33178
RE P~nger Vessef Services Ad Coastwise Transportation 46 USC sect 55103 19 CFR sect 480a(b)
Dear Mr Sutcliffe
As you know US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) enforces the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) codified at TItle 46 United States Code section 55103 (46 USC 55103) This statute prohibits non-coastwise-qualifled vessels (ie those vessels not US-buill owned and documented with a coastwise endorsement) from transporting passengers between porls or places within the United States The regUlations promUlgated pursuant to the PVSA are found at TrtJe 19 Code of Federal Regulations section 4808 (19 CFR 4808)
It has come to our attention that passenger vessels of your company are engaging in cruise itineraries that include ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands Two USAlagged coastwise-endorsed passenger vessefs are also currenUy engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of caD wittlin the Hawaiian Islands
As part of your cruise itineraries some of your foreign-flagged vessels depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period and ultimately rebJm to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their endse For example the MS ZAANDAM of Holand America Lines departs San Diego cruises the Hawaiian Islands stops in Ensenada from 800pm to 11 OOpmbull and returns to san Diego CBP believes these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because It appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA -- - - ~~~------
Please be advised that CBP is taking steps to publish this position Should have any questions pertaining to this matter please contact Mr Glen Vereb Chief Cargo Security Carriers and Immigration Branch at (202) 572-8724
Sincerely
F Jl E EST Y LEe A U I 5 I N Gmiddot
December 21 2007
The Honorable W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection co Border Security Regulations Branch Office ofInternational Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229
Re Hawaii Coastwise Cruises (USCBP-2007-0098) Comments in Response to Proposed Interpretation
Dear Commissioner Basham
NCL America Inc1 (NCLA) submits these comments in support ofthe efforts ofCustoms and Border Protection to enforce the Passenger Vessel Services Act and the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative as applied to Hawaii coastwise cruises
1 Introduction and Summary of Position
NCLA operates three large oceangoing US flag cruise ships in Hawaii These ships are documented under US flag and are required to operate in regular service in Hawaii pursuant to the authority of the Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative a 2003 federal statute intended to revitalize the US flag cruise industry and to maximize economic and national security benefits to the United States (the 2003 Act)
NCLA has invested $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships pursuant to the 2003 Act and in direct reliance on the protections of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) and its proper enforcement The PVSA limits the transportation ofpassengers between US ports to coastwise documented US flag ships Its statutory protections recognize that US flag ships have significantly higher operational costs in part because they are subject to more stringent US laws including US labor laws and federal
1 NCL America Inc is a US corporation incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware headquartered in Honolulu Hawaii As a US corporation it is subject to US taxes at both the federal and state level The Chief Executive Officer the Chairman of the Board and all of the Board of Directors of NCL America are US citizens The company is also subject to US labor and employment laws and is required by statute to maintain a workforce comprised primarily ofUS citizens
700 Bishop St SUite 900 I Honolulu HawMi 96813 I Tel 8085273800 Fax 8085273820 I ndcom
2
income tax among others The NCLA ships operating in Hawaii are the only large oceangoing cruise ships operating under US flag In furtherance of the policy goals of the PVSA and the 2003 Act these ships have created over 4000 seafaring jobs all subject to US minimum wage and other labor statutes
Since 2003 there has been a significant increase in capacity in the Hawaii market from foreign flag ships providing cruise service to Hawaii from the West Coast Many of these foreign flag cruises are marketed as Hawaii cruises and consist entirely ofUS ports ofcall with the sole exception of a token stop in Mexico for as little as an hour late at night under circumstances where passengers are not permitted to get offthe ship There are no reported rulings approving these particular foreign flag itineraries
Lower cost foreign competition in the Hawaii market has unfairly hurt NCLAs operations NCLA has incurred substantial losses which have contributed significantly to its decision earlier this year to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAll from US flag and reshydeploy it foreign Unfair foreign competition poses an imminent threat to the remaining US flag passenger vessels operating in the Hawaii trades pursuant to the 2003 Act
As the agency statutorily charged with implementation of the 2003 Act the US Department ofTransportation Maritime Administration (MARAn) is aware of the threat foreign flag Hawaii itineraries pose to the US flag fleet and brought the situation to the attention ofthe US Department ofHomeland Security Bureau ofCustoms and Border Protection (CBP or Customs) Customs determined that the primary object of these itineraries was coastwise and that the Ensenada stop was an evasion of the PVSA
In August 2007 Customs provided written notice to the affected foreign lines and their trade association that the existing itineraries were contrary to the PVSA None of these lines sought advance rulings even after the Customs notice with respect to their Hawaii itineraries pursuant to Customs regulations and many continued to market the itineraries as Hawaii cruises NCLA supports the efforts ofCustoms and MARAD to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act for Hawaii cruises
2 Statutory Authority for Customs Proposed Interpretation
(a) Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA)
Congress passed the PVSA in 1886 to protect the US maritime transportation industry from foreign competition2 Protection is afforded through penalty assessments on foreign vessels transporting passengers between US ports or places directly or by way ofa foreign port 3 As Congress and the courts have recognized coastwise protections for the US maritime transportation industry are only one dimension of the PVSA Operating in conjunction with other coastwise laws and with the US
2 See United States v Honduran SS GRANADA 35 F Supp 892 894 (BD Pa 1940)(citing purpose of PVSA to meet threats to the practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping which was to be preserved for US ships)
46 USc sect 55103 (originally 46 USC App 289)
3
documentation laws the PVSA also enhances military sealift in times ofnational emergency sustains a US merchant marine and supports the US shipbuilding and repair industry4
(b) Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative (the 2003 Act)
Over the past decade Congress has sought to reinforce the goals of the PVSA by providing mechanisms to revitalize the oceangoing US flag cruise fleet particularly in Hawaii The Project America legislation enacted in 1997 authorized among other things the re~flagging ofone existing cruise ship contingent on the operator contracting for the construction oftwo new oceangoing cruise shipss Following the default of the operator under the original contract Congress enacted the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative for the purpose ofrecovering economic and national security benefits to the United States bull 6 These same goals of the original PVSA were expressly referenced in the legislative history of the 2003 Act which emphasized that these ships will be assets available in time ofnational emergency and will significantly expand the pool ofqualified seafarers upon which the US Department ofDefense relies to crew non-combatant vessels
The 2003 Act authorizes the US documentation ofthree cruise ships for operation in regular service in Hawaii subject to certain conditions including a prohibition on operating in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico and the Caribbean Sea and a requirement that all vessel repair work be undertaken in the United States MARAD is charged with implementation of the 2003 Act
3 Customs Implementation of PVSA
(a) Regulations
The current regulations implementing the PVSA were published by Customs in 19858 The growth of the foreign flag cruise industry in North America and in particular the development of the Alaska cruise market led to an effort in 1984 to amend the thenshyexisting regulations to increase the ease of administration and operational flexibility The effort to change the regulation had support from US port interests who saw benefit in the potential increase in the number ofUS ports that foreign vessels could call and was opposed by proponents ofpotential US flag projects as detrimental to efforts to revitalize the US fleet 9 The preamble to the 1985 rule emphasized that it was of paramount importance to consider the primary object ofpassengers in taking a
4 See American Hawaii Cruises v Skinner 713 F Supp 452 457 (DDC 1989) (recognizing the contribution of the PVSA and the Jones Act in helping to secure national defense by maintaining a merchant marine oftbe best equipped and most suitable types ofvessels sufficient to serve in time of war or national emergency) see also Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 30 (DC Cir 1984) Wirth Ltd v SIS Acadia Forest 537 F2d 1272 1281 n32 (5th Cir 1976) S Public Law 105-56 Section 8109 (111 Stat 1203 1244) (Oct 81997 ) 6 Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II General Provisions - Department ofCommerce Section 211 (117 Stat 1179) (Feb 20 2003) 1 149 Cong Rec S1118 (dailyed Jan 17 2003(statement ofSenator Inouye) 8 19 CFR sect 480a 950 Fed Reg 26981 (July I 1985)
4
voyage10 a concept which is reinforced elsewhere in Customs regulations11 In its analysis of the comments received at the time Customs accepted the view ofport interests that the modified rule would help their business but did so recognizing the absence ofa regular salt water US flag passenger fleet Customs acknowledged the potential harm to prospective efforts to revitalize the US flag passenger fleet and expressly cautioned that if it were ever shown that coastwise qualified vessels in competition with foreign vessels were in fact hurt by the modified Customs regulation then Customs would immediately reconsider its position12
(b) Customs Rulings
Given the significant penalties associated with violating the PVSA13 Customs regulations expressly provide a mechanism for the owner or charterer of a foreign vessel or any other interested person to request an advisory ruling as to whether a contemplated voyage would be considered in violation of the PVSA14 Customs regulations provide that vessel operators can rely on these ruling letters only to the extent that the facts and circumstances are identical to those in the ruling letter IS
Notwithstanding the fact that several foreign cruise lines offer Hawaii itineraries originating in a US mainland port and calling at Hawaii ports with a token intervening stop in Mexico there are no reported rulings expressly approving such an itinerary for these foreign cruise lines 16
4 The Cruise Industry in Hawaii
(a) NCL America Returns US flag to the Oceangoing Passenger Fleet
Pursuant to the requirements ofthe 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative NCLA agreed to promote US-flag cruising enhance military sealift capacity and expand the US maritime labor base No other major cruise line had ever undertaken such a commitment to the US flag and the public policy objectives Congress sought to achieve under the PVSA or the 2003 Act Introduction ofPRIDE OF ALOHA in 2004 was a significant development in the maritime industry because it marked the restoration ofthe
10 Id at 26983 11 Customs Regulations include a provision on the effect ofruling letters and with respect to carrier rulings the applicable regulation refers to rulings setting forth a determination as to whether or not the primary object of a contemplated voyage is coastwise transportation in violation of46 USC sect 289 [pYSA codified at 46 USC sect55103] 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 12 50 Fed Reg at 26983 13 A modem cruise ship with 2400 passengers for example would be subject to a fine of$720OOO per cruise based on the statutory penalty of$300 for each passenger transported in violation of the Act 14 19 CFR sect 480a(d) IS 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 16 There is one older reported mling involving a request to drop the Ensenada port call from a Los AngeleslHawaiiLos Angeles itinerary which Customs held would violate the PYSA In dicta Customs acknowledged that the itinerary could be in compliance if the Ensenada call were not dropped but did not address the issue ofwhether a one hour service call where no passengers depart the vessel would be sufficient The carrier that obtained that ruling has since left the Hawaii market See Customs Ruling HQ 114078 re Crystal Hannony (Nov 4 1997)
5
us flag to the oceangoing cruise industry A contemporaneous press release from the Us Department ofTransportation reported that the three US-flag cruise ships to be introduced pursuant to the 2003 Act were expected to create more than 20000 US jobs generate more than $825 million ofexpenditures in the US economy and create nearly $360 million in federal tax revenue by the end of 200717 In 2005 the PRIDE OF AMERICA was introduced and in 2006 the third vessel PRIDE OF HAWAll was introduced to Hawaii Both the PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAIl offer 7shyday inter-island Hawaii itineraries whereas PRIDE OF ALOHA operates on 7 and 10 day cruises exclusively among the islands ofHawaii as well as 11 day cruises that include a foreign port call at Fanning Island To date NCLA has invested over $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships in furtherance ofthe policy objectives of the PVSA and the 2003 Act These ships employ over 4000 seafarers and generate hundreds ofmillions of dollars in benefits for Hawaii and the nation
(b) Significant Increase in Foreign Flag Capacity Since 2003
The most significant change in the Hawaii cruise market since 2003 has been the dramatic increase in capacity A significant portion ofthis capacity increase is directly attributable to NCLAs fulfillment ofthe Congressional mandate in the 2003 Act However foreign-flag operations in the Hawaii market as measured in passenger nights18 have skyrocketed Based on MARAn data derived from the US Customs Border Patrol Vessel Entrance and Clearance documents the passenger nights for foreign flag vessels departing from the West Coast to Hawaii on round trip cruise have increased several hundredfold during this period19 See Exhibit A
(c) NCLA Has Incurred Substantial Losses During this Period
Since 2004 NCLA has lost cumulatively more than a quarter ofa billion dollars A principal reason for these losses has been the increase in foreign capacity in this market NCLA has taken significant steps to reduce costs to address the increase in foreign competition but NCLA is at an inherent disadvantage when competing against foreign companies that are not subject to US labor laws US tax laws and other laws Ofcourse the statutory protections of the PVSA are intended to address these very issues That is why Customs immediate action to implement the proposed interpretation is critical for the US flag fleet Regrettably NCLA has already been forced to reduce overall capacity early next year with the withdrawal ofPRIDE OF HAWAlI to another
17 DOT Press Release dated June 72004 see also DOT Press Release dated August 132004 in connection with visit to PRIDE OF ALOHA by US Transportation Secretary Norman Y Mineta 11 Passenger nights (also referred to as passenger capacity days) are calculated by multiplying the number ofpassengers per vessel by the number ofcruise days in each itinerary by the number of cruises This is the unit ofmeasurement employed by MARAn In contrast passenger bed supply (also referred to as passenger capacity) data reflects only the number ofberths per vessel multiplied by the number of cruises and hence understates the market by excluding the full economic value ofthe cruise perfonned 19 In 2003 the total number ofpassenger nights for round-trip West Coast to Hawaii cruises was 303325 which jumped by 353 to 1072329 in 2006 and by 430 to 1304546 from 2003 to 2007 (The 2007 figure is based on MARAD data for six months and a1ll1ualized by published itineraries for the balance of the year)
6
market for operation under foreign flag This move alone will result in the loss ofover 1000 American seafaring jobs
5 Customs Proposed Interpretation is Necessary to Further the Important National Security and Public Policy Objectives Embodied in Federal Law
As Customs has properly noted the increase in foreign competition in the Hawaii trades in contravention of the PVSA pose[s] an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels[] As the operator of these ships NCLA has a vested interest in protecting the jobs ofthe thousands ofAmerican crewmembers and cruise ship service providers who support these vessels NCLA also has an interest in protecting the substantial economic investment it has made to revitalize the US flag passenger vessel fleet But a balancing of interests in the context of Customs enforcement ofexisting law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act requires a much broader focus
The legislative history of the 2003 Act expressly recognized the national security and public policy import ofestablishing a US flag passenger vessel fleet as a means to maintain the countrys preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool of qualified seafarers and as a means to help sustain a fleet ofUS-flag vessels to su~ort
the nations military and maritime industrial base for times ofnational emergency
Congress understood the importance ofestablishing a viable US flag cruise ship fleet as something larger than the vessels themselves These national security and public policy objectives must be weighed in the balance as Customs assesses how best to interpret its rules to give effect to the PVSA and the 2003 Act
6 Customs Should Clarify that the Proposed Interpretation is Limited to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades and Adopt Reasonable Measures to Ensure Sufficient Foreign Content
Since publication ofthe proposed interpretative rule several commenters have observed that the scope of the proposed interpretation is ambiguous because the language of Section VI referencing any cruise itinerary appears broader than the caption Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises and the entire discussion in the published notice which focuses exclusively on US-flag coastwise vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA agrees that the proposed interpretation should be clarified so that its scope is limited to vessels operating roundtrip voyages from US ports that include Hawaii port calls
NCLA supports the concept reflected in the proposed interpretive rule that round trip Hawaii itineraries from US ports on foreign ships must include a material and measurable degree ofoverall foreign port content as compared to US port content
20 149 Congo Rec S1117 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)
7
(a) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is also Consistent with Subsequent Congressional Enactments Modifying the PVSA
As discussed above it is well established that the PVSA was designed toRrotect US-flag vessels from foreign competition in the coastwise and domestic trades 1
Subsequent legislative enactments however have appropriately differentiated among distinct geographic markets and trades including Canada Alaska Puerto Rico and Hawaii based on the existence or non-existence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
In 1938 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers by Canadian passenger vessels on Lake Ontario and the St Lawrence River until such time as passenger service shall be established by vessels of the United States22 Similarly in 1961 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers on Canadian vessels within Alaska or between Alaska and other points in the United States until such time as passenger service is established by vessels ofthe United States23
In 1984 Congress modified the application ofthe PVSA to pennit the transportation ofpassengers between Puerto Rico and other United States ports on foreign-flag vessels24 As with the other statutory exceptions this provision is qualified and expires [o]n a showing that a United States passenger vessel qualified to engage in the coastwise trade is offering or advertising passenger service between a port in Puerto Rico and another port in the United States2S
Congress acted again with respect to the application of the PVSA with the 2003 Act in which it authorized three vessels that did not meet the US-build requirements of the PVSA to operate as modem US-flagged cruise ships in regular service in Hawaii26 The 2003 Act imposes a specific geographic limitation on the operation of any ship documented under this authority to operations only in regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands ofHawaii and shall not transport passengers in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico or the Caribbean Sea except in certain limited circumstances27 As above the limited nature of the 2003 Act is express it is strictly limited to the large ocean-going cruise ships and then only those operating in the regular Hawaii service where there are no US-flag operations28
21 See Act ofJune 19 1886 c 421 sec 8 24 Stat 81 Act of February 171898 c 26 sec 2 30 Stat 248 22 S] Res 174 75th Cong 52 Stat 223 (Alp 251938) codified at46 USC sect 55121(a) 23 See Pub L 87-77 75 Stat 196 (Jun 30 1961) codified at 46 USC sect 55121(b) 24 See Pub L 98-563 98 Stat 2916 (Oct 301984) codified at 46 USC sect 55104(b) 25 46 USC sect 55104(c)(l) see also 46 USC 46 USc sect 55104(cX2)(expiration of exemption upon availability ofa non-coastwise qualified US-flag vessel offering service in the relevant market) 26 149 Congo Rec SI118 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)(statementofSen Inouye) 27 Pub L 108-7 117 Stat 79 (Feb 20 2003) 28 149 Congo Rec S11l9 (dailyed Jan 17 2003Xstatement of Sen Inouye)
8
In each ofthese instances Congress fashioned a narrow exception to the PVSA that differentiated among distinct geographic markets based on the existence or nonshyexistence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
As the federal agency responsible for administering the 2003 Act MARAD requested that Customs act to protect US flag passenger vessel interests in the Hawaii trades29 Limiting the scope ofthe proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades also reflects Customs appreciation of the PVSA in the context of the subsequent Congressional action30 Viewing the Congressional modifications to the PVSA as a whole Congress has specifically and repeatedly differentiated among distinct geographic markets when it has found it necessary and appropriate to do so to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests It is well established that the proper interpretation of a statutory scheme includes consideration ofsubsequent statutes even though the underlying statute itselfhas not been expressly amended31 Accordingly Customs should likewise limit the scope ofthe proposed PVSA interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades because that is the only geographic market as mandated by the 2003 Act in which oceangoing US-flag cruise ships are operating
(b) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Consistent with Public Policy Objectives of the 1985 Rulemaking
In 1985middot Customs liberalized the regulations implementing the PVSA by eliminating certain regulatory prohibitions on foreign flag vessels In the context of the 1985 rulemaking Customs justified a relaxation ofthe regulations on the grounds that it would simplify the administration of the PVSA and would benefit the economy ofcertain American coastwise ports without eroding the statutory protection given to American vessels engaged in solely domestic trade32
Customs thus sought to reconcile US port economic interests with US-flag passenger vessel interests Both of these twin policy objectives are furthered by
29 See 72 Fed Reg 65488 (Nov 21 2007)( MARAn bas asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the ~eratiODS ofcoastwise-qualified cruise ship operators)
See generally FDA v Brown amp Williamson Tobacco Corp 529 US 120 132-133 (2000)(assessing propriety ofagency construction ofFood DIUg and Cosmetics Act and descnbing responsibility of reviewing cowt to assess statutory provisions in the context of subsequent legislative enactments) 31 See Brown amp Williamson 529 US 143 (holding that proper construction ofstatutory provision must necessarily assume that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications ofa later statute This is particularly so where the scope of the earlier statute is broad but the subsequent statutes more specifically address the topic athand) see also United States v Estate ofRomani 523 US 517 530-531 (1998)( holding that a later-enacted statute should control the construction of the federal lien priority statute a specific policy embodied in a later federal statute should control om construction of the [earlier] statute even though it ha[s] not been expressly amended) United States v Fausto 484 US 439453 (1988)(The courts frequently find Congress to have done this - whenever in fact they interpret a statutory text in the light ofsurrounding texts that happen to have been subsequently enacted This classic judicial task of reconciling many laws enacted over time and getting them to make sense in combination necessarily assumes that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications of a later statute) 32 50 Fed Reg 26982 (JuI 11985)
9
limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades
As noted earlier the 2003 Act limits the operation of the NCLA US-flag oceangoing passenger vessels to regular service in Hawaii Because there are no oceangoing US-flag vessels operating in any market other than the Hawaii trades Customs should limit the scope of the proposed interPretation to that market Such a limitation protects US flag passenger vessel interests without prejudicing US port interests In contrast an application of the proposed interpretation to any itinerary would needlessly harm US port interests unrelated to Hawaii without any countervailing benefit to US-flag passenger vessel interests Accordingly limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation is consistent with the public policy objectives of the 1985 rulemaking as well as the 2003 Act
(c) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Also Consistent with Customs Commitment to Revisit the Scope of its Rules to Protect US-Flag Interests
The relaxation ofthe PVSA regulations in 1985 was premised in large part on Customs finding that there was no regular salt water US-flag passenger fleet in operation at that time33 Acknowledging that the relaxed regulations could harm USshyflag interests Customs committed in the preamble ofthe 1985 final rule to immediately reconsider its interpretation if it is ever shown that there is a viable US flag vessel operating in competition with foreign-flag vessels34
Congress enacted the 2003 Act to stimulate the development of a US flag cruise ship industry As noted above the legislative history ofthat Act makes clear that Congress sought to revitalize the US-flag cruise industry as a means to maintain Americas preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool ofqualified seafarers help sustain a fleet of US flag vessels to support our military and a maritime industrial base create thousands of seagoing and shoreside American jobs and stimulate the development ofa US flag cruise ship tourism business with the commensurate benefits to the US tax base the US economy and US employment
Customs is now acting at MARADs request to revisit its interpretation ofthe regulations implementing the PVSA because recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwise-qualified cruise ship operations35 That is to say that the concerns articulated by Customs in the context of the 1985 rulemaking have materialized and US-flag passenger vessel interests are in fact being hanned in the Hawaii trades by foreign competitors
33 50 Fed Reg 26983 34Id
3S 72 Fed Reg 56488 (Nov 21 2007)
I
10
Because the US-flag passenger vessels are limited by statute to regular service in Hawaii limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the
Hawaii trades is consistent with Customs historical commitment to revisit its interpretation ofthe implementing regulations to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests
7 Conclusion
For the reasons stated above NCLA commends the efforts ofCustoms and MARAn to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act as applied to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA respectfully requests Customs to move ahead promptly with p~blicati~nof a final interpretive rule to advance the important national security arid public policy objectives ofthese laws
We greatly appreciate the opportunity to submit these comments
Sincerely
~~~ Alan T Yamamoto Vice President Hawaii Operations
Exhibit A
Ship Name Serenade Of The Seas Departure Port San Diego California Ports of Call San Diego California Kailua Kona Hawaii Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii Hlo Hawaii Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii Ensenada Mexico San Qigo California
2007 Date(s) Oct 05
Sailing Itinerary
Day Port H ~rrive Depart Activity
05-0ct San Diego California 500 PM
06-0ct Cruising
07-0ct Cruising
08-0ct Cruising
09-0ct Cruising
10-0ct Kailua Kona Hawaii 700 AM 900 PM Tendered
11-00t Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 1000 AM Tendered
12middot0ct Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 900 PM Tendered
13-0ct Hilo Hawaii 700 AM 600 PM Docked
14middot0ct Honoulu (Oahu) Hawaii 700 AM Docked
15-0ct Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii 200 AM Docked
6-0ct CrUising
17-0ct Cruising
18-0ct Cruising
19middot0ct Cruising
-7 20-00t
O-Oot
Ensenada ~i1exico
San Deqo California
i 00 ~r1
700 ~M
200 oM D1Jcked ~
MOST LUXURIOUS 8H I PS AT SEA
CORAL PRINCESSmiddot AND ISLAND PRINCESSmiddot
Alaska bull Hawaii bull Panama Canal
Coral Princess and Island Princess These two beautiful state-of-the-art ships belong to the newest class of luxury liners cruising the historic Panama Canal Alaska and the Hawaiian Islands They have 90 outshyside staterooms 79 of which offer balconies at a great value
9000 outside staterooms most with a balcony
1970 passengers
92000 gross tons
965 feet in length
Bermudan registered
DAWN PRINCESSmiddot AND SUN PRINCESSmiddot
Alaska bull Caribbean Panama Canal
With wraparound promenade decks and floor-to-ceiling windows Dawn Princess and Sun Princess offer stunning views of Alaska around every corner 410 cabins have balconies to enhance your onboard experience
Over 400 balconies 1950 passengers
77000 gross tons
857 feet in length
British registered
DIAMOND PRINCESSmiddot AND SAPPHIRE PRINCESSmiddot
Alaska bull Mexican Riviera AustraliaNew Zealand bull Asia
Cruise the Mexican Riviera AustraliaNew Zealand Alaska or Asia and celebrate our new Diarrwnd Princess and Sapphire Princess providing a blend of modern amenishyties and classic Princess features plus 750 private balcony staterooms
750 staterooms with balconies 2670 passengers 113000 gross tons
952 feet in length
Bermudan registered
TAHITIAN PRINCESSmiddot AND PACIFIC PRINCESSmiddot
South Pacific Islands TahitiPolynesia bull Asia
Indian Ocean bull West Africa
Designed for a smaller more intimate feel Tahitian Princess and sister ship Pacific Princess feature 92 outshyside cabins 73 with balconies and all the amenities of our larger ships
Over 200 balconies
Only 670 passengers 30000 gross tons
592 feet in length
Gibraltar registered
HOW TO NA YIGATE THIS BROCHURE
CHART A JOURNEY OF DISCOVERY
Alaska Cruises amp Cruisetours
CanadaNew England Cruises pg 7
7
8-10
11-14
Exotics Cruises amp Cruisetours
Mexican Riviera Cruises pg
Caribbean Cruises pgs
Europe Cruises amp Cruisetours pgs
AustraliaNew Zealand pg 15
15-16
16-18
18-19
19
20
Asia pgs
Tahiti Hawaii South Pacific pgs
South America pgs
Connoisseur Voyages pg
Exotics Cruisetours pg
Panama Canal pgs 21-22
Cruise Plusreg
Cruise Calendar
pgs5-6
pgs23
ALASKA CRUISES
VOYAGE OF THE GLACIERS
2004 DEPARTURE DATES
CORAUISLAND PRINCESS7 SaturdllydqxtTturtS May 8 Coni 21 Dawn Aug 2 Dawn 10 Dawn 26 Islmd 7 IslandDAYS SUNDAWN PRINCESS 15 Island 28 Sun 9 SunMondaydqJaTtures 17 Sun )ul 3 Coral 14 Coral 22 Coral S Dawn 16 Dawn 24 Dawn 10 Island 21 Island 29 Island 12 Sun 23 Sun 31 Sun 17 Coni 28 Coral
Jun 5 Coral 19 Dawn 30 Dawn NORTHBOUND 7 Dawn 24 Island Sop 4 Island
12 Island 26 Sun 6 Sun 14 Sun 31 Coral 19 Coral
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Vancouver BC PM 2 Inside Passage Scenic Cruising 3 Ketchikan 4 Juneau 5 Skagway 8PM 6 Glacier Bay National Park Scenic Cruising 3PM 7 College Fjord Scenic Cruising 3PM 8 Whittler (Anchorage) DISEMBARK AM
VOYAGE OF THE GLACIERS
2004 DEPARTURE DATES
7 CORALISlAND PRINCESS Saturday departures
May 15 Coral 26 CoraDAYS SUNDAWN PRINCESS 17 Dawn 28 DawnMondllydtpartures 22 Island )uI 3 Island 24 Sun 5 Sun 29 Coral 10 Coral 31 Dawn 12 Dawn
)un S Island 17 Island 7 Sun 19 Sun
SOUTHBOUND 12 Coral 24 Coral 14 Dawn 26 Dawn 19 Island 31 Island 21 Sun Aug 2 Sun
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE 1 WhlttierIAnrhora
630AM 1030 AM 630AM 630AM 830AM
6PM
7 Coral 9 Dawn
14 Island 16 Sun 21 Coral 23 Dawn 28 Island 30 Sun
Sep 4 6
Coral Dawn
11 Island 13 Sun
DEPART EMBARK PM
~30AM 830 PM
SPM 4PM
545PM
INSIDE PASSAGE
SAPPHIRE PRINCESS 7 DAYS Sundaydtpartuns
ROUNDTRIP from
SEATTLE
2004 DEPARTURE DATES
May 16 18 23 25
Jun 30 6
Aug 1 8
13 15 20 22 27 29
Jul 4 11
Sep S 12
t Endicott Arm wy be substituted on somtYOiiCS due to~orwcatherconditlom
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE 1 Seattle 2 At Sea 3 Ketchikan 630AM 4 Tracy Arm Scenic Cruisingt 6AM 4 Juneau lPM 5 Skagway 6AM 6 At Sea 7 Victoria BC HM 8 Seattle DISEMBARK AM
DEPART EMBARK PM
5PM lOAM 10 PM 6PM
12M
INSIDE PASSAGE
7 DIAMOND PRINCESS DAYS saturday dqllu1uus
ROUNDTRIP from
SEATTLE
2004 DEPARTURE DATES
May 8 17 15 24 22 31 19 Aug 7
Jun 5 14 12 21 19 28 26 Sep 4
Jul 3 11 10
t EndkottAnn maybe substituted on some voyages due tokcQlweuherconditlom
CRUISE ITINERARY
ARRIVE DEPART
INSIDE PASSAGE
10 REGAL PRINCESS DAYS
ROUNDTRIP from
SAN FRANCISCO
2004 DEPARTURE DATES
May 6 Jul 5 16 IS 26 25
)un 5 Aug 4 15 14 15
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE
lPM 7AM 7AM 7AM
7AM
DEPART EMBARK PM
~PM 830PM
12 N 5PM
2PM
Coral Princess in College Fjord Alaska
ALASKA CRUISETOURS
HEART Of ALASKA CRUISETOUR HEART Of ALASKA CRUISETOUR
e 1312 DAYS DAYS e
CRUI5ETOUR CRUI5ETOUR 35 125
2004 DEPARTURE DATES2004 DEPARTURE DATES
Date Ship Date Ship Date Ship Date Ship
May 10 Coral Aug 2 Coral Mayll Coral Aug 3 Coral 12 Dawn 4 Dawn
13 Dawn 5 Dawn 17 Island 9 Island 18 Island 10 Island
DAY PORT 19 Sun 11 Sun
20 Sun 12 Sun 24 Coral 16 Coral 25 Coral 17 Coral 26 Dawn 18 Dawn 27 Dawn 19 Dawn 31 Island 23 Island
Jun 1 Island 24 Island Jun 2 Sun 25 Sun 3 Sun 26 Sun 7 Coral 30 Coral 8 Coral 31 Coral 9 Dawn Sep 1 Dawn
10 Dawn Sep 2 Dawn 14 Island Island6 5 DenaliAnchorage15 Island 7 Island 16 Sun 8 Sun 17 Sun 9 Sun 21 Coral 6 AnchorageWhittierEmbark22 Coral 23 Dawn 24 Dawn 28 Island 7 College Fjord Scenic Cruising 29 Island 30 Sun
)u1 1 Sun Jul 5 Coral 8 Glacier Bay National Park Scenic Cruising 6 Coral 7 Dawn 9 Skagway12 Island
13 Island 14 Sun 8 Dawn
10 Juneau15 Sun 19 Coral 20 Coral 21 Dawn 11 Ketchikan 22 Dawn 26 Island 27 Island 28 Sun 12 Inside Passage Scenic Cruising 29 Sun 13 VancouverPark Rangers are at our lodges to enrich your stay
HEART Of ALASKA CRUISETOUR ALASKA WILDERNESSKENAI CRUISETOUR ALASKA WILDERNESSCOPPER RIVER CRUISETOUR
14 1314 DAYS DAYS DAYSe e e
CRUI5ETOUR CRUI5ETOURCRUI5ETOUR
145 185165
2004 DEPARTURE DATES
2004 DEPARTURE DATESDate Ship Date Ship 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
Date Ship Date ShipMayl Dawn Aug 1 Coral 16 Island 3 Dawn Date Ship Date Ship 18 Sun 8 Island May 11 Dawn Aug 1 Coral 23 Coral 10 Sun MaylO Coral Aug 2 Coral 25 Dawn 15 Coral
16 Island 3 Dawn 12 Dawn 4 Dawn
30 Island 17 Dawn 18 Sun 8 Island
17 Island 9 Island Jun 1 Sun 22 Island
23 Coral 10 Sun 19 Sun 11 Sun
6 Coral 24 Sun 25 Dawn 15 Coral
26 Dawn 18 Dawn 8 Dawn 29 Coral
Jun 1 Sun 17 Dawn 31 Island 23 Island
13 Island 31 Dawn 6 Coral 24 Sun
Jun 2 Sun 25 Sun 15 Sun Sep 5 Island
8 Dawn 29 Coral 7 Coral Sep 1 Dawn
20 Coral 7 Sun 13 Island 31 DaWn
9 Dawn 6 Island 22 Dawn
15 Sun Sep 7 Sun 14 Island 8 Sun
27 Island 20 Coral
16 Sun 29 Sun
22 Dawn 23 Dawn
)ul 4 Coral 29 Sun
28 Island 6 Dawn
Jul 4 Coral 30 Sun
11 Island 6 Dawn
Jul 5 Coral 13 Sun
11 Island 7 Dawn
18 Coral 13 Sun
12 Island 20 Dawn
18 Coral 14 Sun
25 Island 20 Dawn
21 Dawn 27 Sun
27 Sun 26 Island 28 Sun
CRUISETOUR ITINERARY CRUISETOUR ITINERARY
DAY PORT By S~a By Land
1 fairbanks
Mt McKinleyWhittierEmabrk
College fjord ~ce~lc Cnlsi~g
Juneau
CRUISETOUR IIINERARY
DAY PORT
CRUISETOUR ITINERARY
DAY PORT
CRUISETOUR ITINERARY
PORT By Sea By Land
College Fjord Scenic Cruising Glacier Bay National Park Scenic Cruising
13 Vancouver
CANADA amp NEW ENGLAND CRUISES
CANADANEW ENGLAND CANADACOLONIAL AMERICA CANADANEW ENGLAND
10 REGAL 13 REGAL 7 GRAND DAYS PRINCESS DAYS PRINCESSDAYS PRINCESS
sail between ROUNDTRIP NEW YORK
MONTREAL fromto
CITY NEW YORKFT LAUDERDALE and CITY
MONTREAL 2004 DEPARTURE DATE
CRUISE IlINERARY CRUISE ITINERARY 2004 CRUISE IIINERARY Oct 31 DEPARTURE DATES
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 2004 Sep 12 1 1 New York City New York EMBARK PM Montreal Quebec EMBARK PMDEPARTURE DATES Sep 19 New York City New York EMBARK PM
2 Newport Rhode Island 830 AM 4PM 2 Quebec City Quebec 6AM 4PM Sep 261Sep 11 Oct 3
Sep21t 1 3 Bostoni Massachusetts 830AM SPM i3 At Sea Oct 10 2 At Sea
Olttl 4 Bar Harbor Maine 8AM 6PM 4 Halifax Nova Scotia 12 N 6PM Oct I]Octllt
Oct 24Oct 21 S Saint John New Brunswick 7AM 3PM l~ Bar Harbor Maine 8AM 6PM Halifax Nova Scotia 8AM 5 PM
6 Halifax Nova Scotia 8AM 5PM 6 Boston Massachusetts 8AM 5PM
17 At Sea 7 Newport Rhode Island 9AM 6PM 4 Saint John New Brunswick 9AM 5PM
8 Saguenay River Scenic Cruising 9 AM 2PM 8 New York City New York 8AM 5PM Bar Harbor Maine 7AM 6PMi9 ~8 Quebec City Quebec 11 PM Norfolk Virginia 12 N 10 PM
(overnight onboard ship) 10 Baltimore Maryland 8AM 5PM Boston Massachusetts 7AM 5PM 9 Quebec City Quebec 5PM 11 At Sea
Montreal Quebec 8AM10 12 Charleston South Carolina 7AM 5PM 7 Newport Rhode Island 8AM 5PM
tltneTaryoperaresinrtvtrstorder (overnight onboard ship) 13 At Sea t Itnaary opaates in revu5t order 8 New York City DISEMBARK AMPort times may vary Port times may vary11 Montreal Quebec DISEMBARK AM 14 Ft Lauderdale Florida DISEMBARK AM New York
MEXICAN RIVIERA CRUISES
MEXICAN RIVIERA MEXICAN RIVIERA MEXICAN RIVIERA
DIAMOND DAYS
107 DIAMOND PRINCESS 10 SAPPHIRE PRINCESSDAYS DAYS PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIPROUNDTRIP from fromfrom
LOS ANGELES LOS ANGELESSAN FRANCISCO
2004 DEPARTURE OATIS Sep 25 2004 DEPARTURE DATE
Oct 2 9 1623 30 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
Dec 29Sep 22Nov 6 13 20 27 Dec 4 11 22 Oct 2 12 221
Nov 1 11 2005 DEPARTURE OATIS
jan 815 22 29 Feb 5 12 19 26 MarS 12 19 26 tPortordtrllllllllmtsmaYNrApr 291623
CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 San Francisco EMBARK PM 1 Los Angeles (Long Beach) EMBARK PM
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
CRUISE ITINERARY DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
2 Catalina Island 1230 PM 630PM 2 At Sea Sat Los Angeles (Long Beach) EMBARK PM 3 Cabo San Lucas 9AM 6PM3-4 At Sea
5 Poerto Vallart 7AM 6PM 4 A~Sea
6 Mazatlan SAM 6PM 5 Acapulco SAM 11 PM 7 Cabo San Lucas SAM 6PM 6 Ixtapa (ZihaulIlnejo) 7AM 2PM
S At Sea 7 Puerto Vallarta SAM 7PM 9 San Dtego SAM 6PM 8 M~I~middot lAM -1Ft 10 At Sea 9-10 At Sea 11 San Francisco DISEMBARK AM 11 Los Angeles (Long Beach)
Sun AUea Mon AtSea Tue Poerto Vallarta Wed Mazatlan Thu Cabo San Luca( Fri At Sea Satmiddot Los Angeles (Long Beach)
CARIBBEAN CRUISES
EASTERN CARIBBEAN
7
EASTERN CARIBBEAN
7 7 DAYSDAYS DAYS
CARIBBEAN PRINCESS STAR PRINCESS GRAND PRINCESSSUN PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIP from from from
FT LAUDERDALE FT LAUDERDALE GALVESTON 2004 DEPARTIJRE DATES
CARIBBEAN PRINCESS Apr 24 2004 DEPARTURE DATES 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
CRUISE ITINERARYM~yl 1522 CRUISE I1INERARY JuI31724 DAY PORT Nov 14 28 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Dec 4 11 JunS 1226 Oct 31 Nov 13 20 27
Alii 1 1428 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Dec 12 26
Ott 2 9 162330 200S DEPARTURE DATES Sat Galveston EMBARK PMSep41825 Sat ft Lauderdale Sun ft Lauderdale EMBARK PM
Nov 6 132027 200S DEPARTURE DATESDet4 11 26middot Jan 8 15 22 29Sun At Sea Man At Sea 2005 DEPARTURE DATES ]an 9 23 Feb 5 12 19 26 Sun At Sea
CARIBBEAN PRINCESS Feb 6 20 MarS 121926 J~n 8152229 Mar 6 20 12M Apr 29 Man Belize City lPM 7PM Feb 512t 1926 MarS 121926 Apr 317 Apr2t 9 1623 Tue St Thomas 7 AM 6 PM Wed St Thomas BAM 6PM Tue Costa Maya (Mahahual) BAM 4PM
6PM Wed Grand CaYman l2N 7PM
Thu At Sea Fri At Sea Thu Cozumel lOAM 6 PM
4PM Fri At Sea
Sat Ft Lauderdale DISEMBARK AM Sun Ft Lauderdale DISEMBARK AM Sat Galveston DISEMBARK AM
CRUISE IlINERARY
ARRIVE DEPART
EMBARK PM
WESTERN CARIBBEAN
Sf Thomas US Virgin Islands Princess Cays
CARIBBEAN CRUISES
WESTERN CARIBBEAN WESTERN CARIBBEAN SOUTHERN CARIBBEAN EXPLORER
7 6 7 DAYS DAYS DAYS
CARIBBEAN PRINCESS STAR PRINCESS GRAND PRINCESS GOLDEN PRINCESS
DAWN PRINCESS
SAN JUAN ROUNDTRIPROUNDTRIP to fromfrom
GALVESTON SAN JUANFT LAUDERDALE
2004 DEPARTURE DATE2004 DEPARTURE DATES 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
CARIBB~~SflNCESS CRUISE ITINERARY Nov 7 CRUISE ITINERARY
My923 CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTJun 6 20 JUD 19
Jul lOt 31
May829t DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART )uI418 Sun San Juan EMBARK PM
Aug ll t Aug 11529
Sep 11
DAY PORT
Sep 12 26 Mon St Thomas 7AM 6PM STAR PRINCESS Princess Cays 9AM 4PM At Sea Oct 10 24
Nov 721 DecS19 Tue S Kitts 7AM 3PM
2005 DEPARTURE DATES Wed Grenada 9AM 3PM Dec 23 Coumel 7AM 5PM
Grand Cayman 7AM 4PM Jan 21630
2005 DEPARTURE DATES Feb 13 27 Thu Caracas (La Guaira) 9AM 7PM Mar 13 27STAR PRINCESS
Jan 21630 Apr 10 24 Feb 13 27 Ocho Rios 9AM 4PM Fri Aruba BAM 5PM Mar 13 27 Apr 10 24 At Sea
tMonlqQampIyrqlocrsCllhoRfm PltJrtQr-ondlimesmaywlrY Sun San Juan DISEMBARK AMFt Lauderdale DISEMBARK AM
EASTERN CARIBBEAN WESTERN CARIBBEAN CLASSIC SOUTHERN CARIBBEAN
8 7 7DAYS DAYS DAYS
CARIBBEAN GRAND PRINCESS GOLDEN PRINCESS PRINCESS
GALVESTONROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIP tofrom from
SAN JUANFT LAUDERDALE SAN JUAN
2004 DEPARTURE DATE 2004 DEPARTURE DATE 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
DeetS Apr 16CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE IflNERARY May 21630 CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE Jun 13 27DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Jul1125 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
1 Aug 8 221 Galveston EMBARK PM Sun Sanjuan EMBARK PMSep 5 19 Oct 3 17 312-3 At Sea At Sea Nov 14 28 Man At Sea Dec 12 26
st Thomas Cozumel BAM 6PM Tue Barbados 7AM 6PM 2005 DEPARTURE DATES
jan 9 23 Wed St Lucia 7 AMAntigua BAM 6PM Costa Maya (Mahahual) BAM 4PM 5PM Feb 620 Mar 6 20 Thu BAM 6PM Apr 317
At Sea Montego Bay 9AM 4PM Fri St Maarten BAM 6PM
7AM 6PM
Ft Lauderdale DISEMBARK AM Sanjuan DISEMBARK AM Sun San juan DISEMBARK AM
Oct 24 Nov 7 21 DecS19
DAWN PRINCESS
~
I
CARIBBEAN CRUISES
EASTERN CARIBBEAN ISLANDER SOUTHERN CARIBBEAN MEDLEY EASTERN CARIBBEAN
10 10 7 DAYS DAYSDAYS
GRAND PRINCESSDAWN PRINCESSSUN PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP NEW YORK CITYROUNDTRIP from from to
FT LAUDERDALE FT LAUDERDALE SAN JUAN
2004 DEPARnJRf DATE2004 DEPARTURE DATES2004 DEPARTURE DATES
Octn Oct Btl Oct 14CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE ITINERARYCRUISE ITINERARY 200s DEPARTURE DATENov 222 Nov 3t 23
Apr23tDAY PORT DEPART Dec 13 30Dee 12 ARRIVE DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Ft Lauderdale EMBARK PM 1 Ft Lauderdale EMBARK PM EMBARK PM2005 DEPARTURE DATES 2005 DEPARTURE DATES New York City 2 Princess Cays 9AM 4PM 2 At SeaJan 828 Jan 19t
Feb 17tt 3 AlSea Feb 8 28 3 At Sea 2-4 At Sea Mar919 Mar 20
4 St Thomas 7AM 6PM Apr 9 4 Cura~ao 8AM 5PM 5 St Maarten 7AM 6PM 5 Isla Margarita lOAM 4PM St Thomas 7AM 6PM
6 St Kitts 7AM 3PM 6 Barbados 9AM 6PM Dominica SAM 6PM7 8AM 5PM 7 Dominica 7 AM SPM
8 Antigua 9AM 6PM S St Thomas SAM 6PM St Maarten 7AM 6PM
9 9 At Sea
fllrtordtrlllldllmam4YYa1 10 At Sea 10 Princess Cays 9AM 4PM JlilltraryllptfatufnrfYUSfllrllcr t 11I1ll1Il1yopmltnlnrmTtronlcr t ItlntraryaptrattsIn rtVfntOrdtr San Juan DISEMBARK AM Port~rdtrQnd lilrW mil) illI) 11 Ft Lauderdale DISEMBARK AM PortlimtSlIIltlyYllry 11 Ft Lauderdale DISEMBARK AM Port ordtr lind time5 may VIlry
WESTERN CARIBBEAN ADVENTURER EASTERN CARIBBEAN VOYAGER
10 10 DAYS DAYS
SUN PRINCESS DAWN PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIPROUNDTRIP fromfrom
FT LAUDERDALEFT LAUDERDALE
2004 DEPARTURE DATES 2004 DEPARTURE DATES DAWN PRINCESS CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE IIINERARY
Oct 23 Oct 4 24 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Nov 12 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
Nov 13 Dec 2 29 Dec3tt 1 Ft Lauderdale EMBARK PM 1 Ft Lauderdale EMBARK PM
2 Princess Cays 9AM 4PM 2005 DEPARTURE DATES 2 At Sea2005 DEPARTURE DATES
DAWN PRINCESS Jan 183 At Sea 3 At Sea
Feb 7 27Jan 9 296 St Thomas 7AM 6PM Mar19 t 4 St Vincent lPM 6PM
Feb 180 Apr 8St Maarten 7 AM 5PM 5 Grenada 8AM 6PMMar 10f 301 Apr 19 At Sea 6 St Lucia 8AM 6PM
Ocho Rios 12N 6PM 7 Martinique 7AM 3PM
Grand cayman PM S St Thomas SAM 6PM
t IillUGI)lIptfQttsIn rnmtordtr Cozumel 8AM 6PM AlSea tt ~~~oI~~dtr 10 Princess Cays 9AM 4PMMOItQIl8clyrqausOclJollloJ
lwtordtrollllllllyenllllilJllIl) tltllltrlryOptrlll$In rnmtllrdtr AMOIltqollaynplactsOdlDRIos PM IortDrllralldllmallloyWl) Ft Lauderdale DISEMBARK AM
Willemstad Cura~ao
EUROPE CRUISES
GRAND MEDITERRANEAN GREEK ISLES MEDITERRANEANGREEK ISLES
12 1212 DAYS DAYSDAYS
STAR PRINCESS
STARSTAR PRINCESSPRINCESS
sail betweensail between VENICE BARCELONA VENICE to
andand BARCELONA VENICE ROME
CRUISE ITINERARY2004 DEPARTURE 2004 DEPARTURE2004 DEPARTURE CRUISE ITINERARYDATESCRUISE I I INERARY DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DATEDATES
Apr 10 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTMay 16middot DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Venice Italy (overnight onboard ship) EMBARK PM May 4 May18t Sep2St 1 Verdce Italy EMBARK PM
Jun 9 1 Barcelona Spain (overnight onboard ship) EMBARK PM 2 Venice Italy 2PM 2 At Seajune 21 t 2 Barcelona Spain 1 PM Dubrovnik Croatia 8AM 6PMJul3 3 Corfu Greece 8AM 6PM
lullS 3 Monte Carlo Monaco 7 AM 6 PM Corfu Greece 8AM 6PM 4 Katakolon Greece (for Oiympia) 7AM SPMJu127 4 FlorencePisa Italy (Livorno) 630 AM 6 PMAug 8~ Katakolon Greece (for Olympia) 7AM SPM S Athens Greece (Piraeus) 6AM 12 MAug 20deg S NaplesCapri Italy 8 AM 7 PM Sep 1t 6 Athens Greece (Piraeus) 6AM 12 M 6 Mykonos Greece 8AM 12M
6 At Sea 7 Mykonos Greece 8AM 6PM 7 Kusadasi Turkey (for Ephesus) 7 AM SPM7 Athens Greece (Piraeus) 6AM S4S PM
8 Kusadasi Turkey (for Ephesus) 7AM 1PM 8 Kusadasi Turkey (for Ephesus) 8AM 6PM 8 Santorini Greece 7 AM 4PM
9 Jstanbul Turkey 8AM 6PM 9 Rhodes Greece 8AM 6PM 9 At Sea
10 At Sea 10 Santorini Greece 7AM 6PM 10 Rome Italy (Civitavecchia) 8AM 7PM tll1ooil)opcraksinttVUSe
grduPorttlmcsmi)Y6ljI 11 At Sea 11 Cannes France (for Mont Carlo) 8AM 6PM11 At Sea tSamnlQ]latCiIUIe5inplm tltlnerlll)opmlpoundsin
NaplesCapri Italy 630 AM 12 Barcelona Spain (ovrnight onboard ship) 8AMofMo~Urlo ~odcr12 Venice Italy (overnight onboard ship) 8 AM 12 6PM O~lIlalhitRhodalnpUcc Port order md Iimes- JmyVUY Barcelona Spain DISEMBARK AM13 Venice Italy DISEMBARK AM - 13 Iome Italy (qvitavecchia) DISEMBARK AM
MEDITERRANEANAEGEAN MEDITERRANEANMOSAIC
12 12 DAYSDAYS
STAR STAR PRINCESS PRINCESS
ROME BARCELONAto
toVENICE ROME
2004 DEPARTURE DATE 2004 DEPARTURE
CRUISE I I INERARY DATE CRUISE ITINERARYApr 22 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Sep 13 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Rome Italy (Civitavhia) EMBARK pM 1 Barcelona Spaln (overnight onboard ship) EMBARK PM 2 NaplesCapri Italy 7 AM 7 PM Barcelona Spain SPM 3 Messina Italy (for Taormina) 8AM 6PM 3 At Sea 4 Valleta Malta 8AM 6 PM 4 Casablanca Morocco (for Marrakech) 7 AM 8PM
At Sea S Gibraltar 8 AM 6PM Santorini Greece 7 AM 6PM 6 At Sea
7 Kusadasi Turkey (for Ephesus) 8 AM 6PM 7 Cannesfrance (for Mont Carlo) 8 AM 6PM 8 Athens Greece (Piraeus) 6 AM S4SPM 8 At Sea 9 Katakolon Greece (for Olympia) 8 AM 6PM 9 Valleta Malta 8 AM SPM 10 Corfu Greece 8 AM 6PM 10 Messina Italy (for Taormina) 6PM 11 Dubrovnik Croatia 8 AM 6PM 11 NaplesCpri Itiily 6PM 12 Venice Italy (overnight onboard ship) 1230 PM 12 FlorencePisa Italy (Livorno) 830 AM 13 Venice Italy DISEMBARK AM 13 lomeltaly (Clvttavecchia)DISEMBAIKAM Venice Italy
EUROPE CRUISES
EUROPEAN EXPLORER CRUISE MEOffiRRANEANITRANSATLANTIC CRUISE
12 17DAYS DAYS
ROYAL STARPRINCESS PRINCESS
sail between VENICE
ROME to
and FT LAUDERDALE
LONDON
2003 DEPARTURE DATES
2004 DEPARTURE DATE CRUISE ITINERARY
May 7 CRUISE I1INfRARY Oct 7 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Jul30l
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Venice Italy (overnight onboard ship) EMBARK PMAug 11 Sep 41 1 Rome Italy (Civitavecchia) EMBARK PM 2 Vernce Italy 2 PM
2 FlorencePisa Italy (Livorno) 7 AM 7PM 3 At Sea 3 Cannes France (for Monte Carlo) 7 AM 5 PM 4 Barcelona Spain 9 AM 6 PM 5 At Sea 6 Gibraltar 8AM PM 7 Casablanca Morocco (for Marralech) 5AM 6 PM 8 Seville Spain (Cadiz) 8AM 6PM 9 LisbQn Portugal 9AM 5PM 10 Vigo Spain 830AM 4PM 11 At Sea
tllinmryope~te$ 12 ParisNormandy France (Ie Havre) 7 AMlnftYCl5eordu ~rttimesuuyYilY 13 London England (Southampton) DISEMBARK AM
Caudis Park Cuell Barcelona Spain
SCANDINAVIARUSSIA BALTIC HERITAGE WESTERN EUROPEBRITISH ISLES
ROYALGRAND10 GRAND 1210 PRINCESSDAYS PRINCESS PRINCESS DAYSDAYS
ROUNDTRIPROUNDTRIPROUNDTRIP fromframfrom
LONDONCOPENHAGENCOPENHAGEN 2004 DEPARTURE2004 DEPARTURE 2004 DEPARTUREDATESDATES DATES
May19tMay 29 May 19 jul28 JunSJun 18 Aug 231
Jul8 ju118Jul28 Aug 7 CRUISE ITINERARYAug 17
CRUISE IIINERARY ARRIVE DEPART CRUISE IrINERARY EMBARK PMDAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
DAY ARRIVE DEPART 7AM 6PM1 Copenhagen Denmark EMBARK PM EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 7AM 6PM
Stockholm Sweden (Nynilshamn) 7 AM 530PM 6AM PM Helsinki Finland 830 AM 6PM St PetersbUrg Russia (overnight onboard ship) 630 AM 9AM 9PM St Petersburg Russia 6PM
7 Tallinn Estonia 7 AM 1PM 8 Gdansk Poland (Gdynia) 9 AM 4PM 9 Warnemfinde Germany (for amprlin) 8 AM 10 PM 10 Helsing0r Denmark 9 AM 11 AM 10 Copenhagen Denmark (overnight onboard ship) 1 PM 11 Copenhagen Denmark DISEMBARK AM
middotScrvlcctillforlh=CllCIIIlicmIOptoluItllUllwWdlseJnbIDltHdlinprAfbrtour~dllmJlwktbeshJpwl1lPfllClaquodtoCopetWampen and pmenpoundm Qfl tours from HelMp will Rboird ship tPolttimes~myAninliI1ddepartu~itRosythDubJinmdFa1mauthwl)dICtotXLolconditions
tPOrtordermdtlme$maynI) ttCdlitEdinbuJlhotmdedto~mllocunionforMiliblyTltOO~on8123wi1inlmiddotUIIisitSouthQuemsfmyinstudofJosylh
BRITISH ISLES
ROYAL12 PRINCESSDAYS
ROUNDTRIP
from
LONDON
2004 DEPARTURE DATES
Jun 12 jul6
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Lqn4onmiddotpoundngland(Southampton) EMIWlIlt PM 2 Cornwall England (Falmouth) 7AM SPM
Waterford Ireland 8AM 6PM Dublin Ireland 7AM 1130 PM
t PQrtbme5 lliIyyuy Anini Illd departure at Rosytb Dublin md Filmouth ViiYdue to Iiltlal conditions
WESTERN EUROPE
ROYAL12 PRINCESSDAYS
ROUNDTRIP
from
LONDON
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
May 31
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 London England (Southampton) EMBARK PM
CRUISE ITINERARY
EUROPE CRUISES
ICELANDNORWEGIAN FJORDS
ROYAL12 PRINCESSDAYS
ROUNDTRIP
from
LONDON
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
Jun24
CRUISE IflNERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 London Englan4 (Southampton) EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 3 Berge Norway 6PM 4 Hellesylt Norway 830AM 1030 AM 4 Gciranger Norway Geiranger Fjord Sceni Cruising UN 7PM
9AM SPM5
1PM 8AM SPM
10 At Sea
middotStlviceallfof~fjonlovedmdshOR=unlDllOplion1Itourswllldi5anbarilitHelIcsyItAftcrtollrpuKllJClJdisembark
theshlpwiUprocudto~md~lampClSonlounfrwnHdaytwl1lblmd$hip
NORWEGIAN FJORDSNORTH CAPE
ROYAL12 PRINCESSDAYS
ROUNDTRIP
from
LONDON
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
JuilS
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Loridon ~gland (South~mpton) EMBARK PM 2-3 At Sea
Hellesylt Norway 830AM 1030 AM Golranger Norway Geiranger Fjord Scenic Cruising 12N 7PM
TrodheilllNorwaY 9AM SPM At Sea Cross the Ardgt Cirde
6PM 8AM lPM
8AM 130 PM 430PM 630PM
7AM 3PM
Bagpipers Edinburgh Scotland Royal Princess in Geiranger Fjord Norway
EUROPE CRUISES amp CRUISETOURS
17 DAYS
GRAND PRINCESS
FT LAUDERDALE to
COPENHAGEN
2004 DEPARTURE DATE MayZ
CRUISE IfINERARY
DAY 1 2-6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
PORT Ft Lauderdale Florida At Sea ~ores IslandsPortugal (Ponto Delgado) At Sea Lisbon Portugal Vigo Spain At Sea ParislNormandy France (Le Havre) RotterdamThe Netherlands At Sea Hamburg Germay (for Berlin) At Sea Olso Norway Oslo Fjord scnic Cruising Copenhagen Denmark
ARRIVE
N
12N 9AM
7AM
6AM
DISEMBARK AM
DEPART EMBARK PM
6PM
7PM 6PM
7PM 7PM
1UM
MEDITERRANEAN CRUISETOUR
TRANSATLANTICWESTERN EUROPE ICELAND amp GREENLANDTRANSATLANTIC
16 GRAND DAYS PRINCESS
COPENHAGEN to
NEW YORK
2004 DEPARTURE DATE Aug 27
CRUISE IIINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Copenhagen Denmark EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 3 Dover England (forLondon) 7AM 7PM 4 Cornwall England (Falmouth) 9AM 6PM 5 Dublin Ireland lOAM 9PM 6 GlasgowEdinburgh Scotland (Greenock) 8AM 12 M 7 Belfast Northern Ireland 1030 AM 530 PM 8 At Sea 9 Reykjavik Iceland 9AM 9PM 10 At Sea 11 Prins Christian Sund Scenic Cruising 12N 6PM 12 Qaqortoq Greenland 7 AM 2PM 13 At Sea 14 SI Johns Newfoundland Canada 12N 7PM 1516 At Sea 17 New York CIty New York DISEMBARK AM
SCANDINAVIARUSSIA CRUISETOUR
Church of the Savior on the Spilled Blood St Petersburg Russia
WESTERN EUROPE CRUISETOUR
CRUISEIOUR ITINERARY
CRUISETOUR lA11C CRUISETOUR ITINERARY CRUISETOUR 4A14C CRUISETOUR II INERARY
DAY PORT By Sea By Land DAY PORT By Sea By Land CRUISETOUR 7Al7C18 STAR PRINCESS 1 Rome 17 GRAND PRINCESS 1 BudapestDAYS DAYS DAY PORT By Sea By Land 22 Rome Budapest 18 ROYAL PRINCESS 1 Paris
ROMETODI 3 RomeTodi BUDAPEST VIENNA 3 BudapestVienna DAYS 2 Paris and 4 TodiFlorence and 4 Vienna 3 Paris
PARIS EUROSTAR5 Florence 5 ViennaPrague 4 ParisLondon 6 FlorenceVeniceEmbark 6 Prague and 5 London
FLORENCE PRAGUE
plus plus LONDON7 Venice Italy (overnight onboard ship) 7 PragueCopenhagenEmbark 6 LondonSouthamptonEmbark
GRAND MEDITERRANEAN SCANDINAVIARUSSIA plus 7 At Sea CRUISE 8-9 At Sea CRUISE 8 At Sea WESTERN EUROPE 8 Bilbao Spain10 Istanbul Turkey 9 Stockholm Sweden (Nyniishamn) BRITISH ISLES CRUiSE2004 DEPARTURE DATES 2004 DEPARTURE DATES 9 Bordeaux France (Le Verdon)
11 Kusadasi Turkey (for Ephesus) 10 Helsinki FinlandApr Sf 2004 DEPARTURE DATES 10 At SeaMay 131 Jul2Apr 29 12 Athens Greece (Piraeus) 11 SI Petersburg Russia (overnight onboard ship) 11 GlasgowEdinburgh Scotland (Greenock)May 23 JulUt May 141 26middot Jul tt 13~ 250
May 23 Jun 16 13 At Sea JunZt JulU 12 SI Petersburg Russia Jun n 19 Aug 18o 300 12 Dublin Ireland
]un 12 Aug l t 13 Cork IrelandJuliO 14 NaplesCapri Italy 13 Tallinn EstoniaJun 22 t Aug 11 Toun~eonlymilabkwithcruise5indi[itbtAug 3 15 FlorencelPisa Italy (Livorno) 14 Cdansk Poland 14 Cornwall England (Falmouth)
Aug 27 tBritishliksetuise aWEwupeiBritishlslesouist 15 ParisNormandy France (Le Havre)16 Monte Carlo Monaco 15 At Sea bull WestemEuropeCrube middotlcdandINorwqlmFjOllisetuise 16 Rotterdam The Netherlands
t Crulsetour lA only combinable with 12--dayGreck fst 17 Barcelona Spain (overnight onboard ship) 16 Olso NOrway Qsld Fjord Scenic Cruising bull Norwqian FjordsNorth Cipecruise 17 BrusselsBruges Belgium (Zeebrugge)tCruixtour 4A only combinable with lo-day Baltic
crulse shown on PI 11 18 Barcelona Spain Heritage cruise shawn on pg 12 OCrubctnur 7C only combinable with EwuJlWl ExplorerCrube17 Copenhagen Denmark 18 London England (Southampton)
EXOTICS CRUISES
AUSTRALIANEW ZEALAND AUSTRALIANEW ZEALAND AUSTRALIAASIA
12 14 19 DAYS DAYS DAYS
SAPPHIRE PRINCESS SAPPHIRE PRINCESS SAPPHIRE PRINCESS
saH between SYDNEYAUCKLAND SYDNEY
toand to BANGKOKSYDNEY AUCKLAND 2005 DEPARTURE DATES 2005 DEPARTURE DATE
Mar7Jan 6 2004 DEPARTURE DATEJan 1St
Dec 23 CRUISE ITINERARYJr ift Feb 23 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
CRUISE ITINERARY 1 Sydlley Austrli EMBARK PM CRUISE ITINERARY 2 At Sea
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTDAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 3 Brisbane Australia 8AM 6PM 1 Sydlley Australia EMBARK PM 4 At Sea 1 Aucklalld N~w Zealalld EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 5 Cid Harbor Austrlia (for Great Barrier Reef) 7AM 5PM2 At Sea 3 Melbourne Australia 8 AM 6 PM 6 Cirns Australia (Yorkeys) 8AM 6PM
3 WeIUllgton New Zealand 8 AM 6 PM 4 At Sea 7-8 At Sea 4 Christchurch New Zealalld (Lytlelton) 8 AM 6 PM 5 Tasmallia Australia (Hobart) 8 AM 6 PM 9 Darwin Australia lPM 8pM 5 Dunedill N~ Zealalld (Port Chalmers) 8 AM 6 PM 6-7 At Sea 10-11 At Sea 6 Fiordland Natiollal Park Scenic Cruising AM 6 PM 8 Fiordlalld Natiollal Park Scellic Cruising 7 AM 5 PM 12 Bali Illdonesi (Padang Bay) 7AM 6PM
7-8 At Sea J DUlledill New Zealalld (Port Chalmers) 8 AM 6 PM 13-14 At Se 10 Christchurch N~ Zealalld (Lytlelton) 8 AM 6 PM 15 Kuala Lumpur Mlaysia (Port KeIang) 8AM 6PM9 Tasmania Australia (Hobart) 8 AM 6 PM 11 Wellillgtoll New Zealmd 8 AM 6 PM 16 Sillgpore 8AM 6PM
10 At Sea 12 At Sea 17 At Sea 11 Melbourne Australia 8 AM 6 PM 13 Taurallga New Zealalld 8 AM 730 PM 18 Ho Chi Millh City Vietnm (Vung Tau) 7AM 730 PM 12 At S~a 19 At Sea 14 Bay of Islallds New Zealalld 8 AM 7 PM 13 SydPey Australia DISEMBARK AM 20 Bmgkok Thailalld (Laem Chabang) DISEMBARK AM15 Aucklalld New Zealalld DISEMBARK AM
t llinemy opcrnesln reverse order Port times mil1 my
CHINAFAR EAST SOUTHEAST ASIAFAR EAST
1612 DAYSDAYS
PACIFIC PRINCESS
SAPPHIRE PRINCESS PACIFIC PRINCESS
OSAKA BEIJING to
to BANGKOK OSAKA
2004 DEPARTURE DATE 2004 DEPARTURE DATEPAClFlC PRINCESS
julllt Jun 11 2005 DEPARTURE DATE
SAPPHIRE PRINCESS Apr 11
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Osaka Japall EMBARK PM
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Beijillg China (Xingang) EMBARK PM 2 Hiroshima Japall 1 PM 6PM 2 DaHan China AM 5PM 3 At Sea 3 At Sea 4 Shmghai Chilla 7 AM 6PM 4 Shallghai Chilla (overnight onboard ship) 7AM 5 At Sea 5 Shallghai China 6PM 6 Okinaw Jpll 7 AM 1 PM
7 Taipei Taiwm (KeeIung) 9 AM 7PM6 At Sea 8 At Se7 Pusan South Korea 8AM 5PM 9 HOllg KOllg Chill 8 AM 7PM 8 At Sea 10-11 At S~a J Vladivostok Russia 5AM 730 PM 12 Ho Chi MiIJh City Vietnm (Phu My) 7 AM 5PM 10 At Sea 13 At Se 11 Nagasaki Japan 7AM 6PM 14 Singpore 8 AM 6pM
15 KUlltll Mlysi 830 AM 430 PM12 At Sea 16 At Sea 13 Osaka Japan DISEMBARK AM 17 Ballgkok Thaillld DISEMBARK AM t Sailing alls i1t Hiroshima on Dl) 11 In place of Nilgilsaki Port times milY vary
CRUISE I flNERARY CRUISE I flNERARY
Ho Chi Minh City Vietnam
EXOTICS CRUISES
SOUTHEAST ASIACHINA SOUTHEAST ASIACHINA FAR EASTALASKA
PACIflC PRINCISS ROYAL PRINCESS
16 16 19 DAYS DAYS DAYS
SAPPHIRE SAPPHIRE PRINCESS
Sail between PRINCESSBANGKOK
and BANGKOK OSAKA
BEIJING to to
2004 DEPARTURE DATES BEIJING SEATTLEPAClFlC PRINCESS
Jun 27tt 200S DEPARTURE DATE200S DEPARTURE DATE ROYAL PRINCESS
Mar 26 Apr 23Oct 16 Nov lt
CRUISE I I INERARY CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
1 GsakaJpan EMBARK PM1 Bangkok Thailand (Laem Chabang) EMBARKPM 1 Bangkok Thailand (Laern Chabang) EMBARK IM 2 At Sea2 At Sea 2 AtSea bull 3 Nagasaki Japan 7 AM 6PM
9AM 7PM 3 Singapore 7PM 4 Pusan Soqth Korea 8AM 5PM 4-5 At Sea 5 At Sea gt bull
7AM 7PM 6 Da Nwg Vietn~1Il 7AM middot7PM 6 Vladivostok Russia SAM 730 PM 7 At Sea 7 AtSea
7AM 12M 8 Hong lltog ihin~ 7AM 12M 8 Sapporo japan (Muroran) 6AM 6PM 9-10 At Sea 9-10 At Sea 9-12 At Sea cross Intemational Dateline
13 DutchHarbor Alaska (Aleutian Islands) 230 PM 7PM11 ShaJlgllai Cbina (overnight onboard ship) lAM 11 Shangh~t Cllina (ovmightonJoltird $hip) 7 AM 14 At Sea shy12 Shanghai China 6PM 12 Shanghai China
7AM - - tlJf
6PM 15 Anchorage Alaska (Seward) 8AM 6PM13 At Sea 13 AtSea i 16 College Fjord Seni CruIsing 630AM 930 AM
14 Nagasaki japan 7AM 6PM 14 Nagasaki japan 6PM 17 Glacier Ilay Scenic Cruising 1030 AM 830 PM 15 Pusan South lltOrea TAM 4PM 1~ bull Pu~an SQuth iorea middot4lM 18 middotmiddot juneau Alaska 6 AM 2PM 16 At Sea 16 At Sea 19 - At Sea 17 Beijing China (Xingangy OISEMBAlUe AM 17 Beijing Cliina (Xingang) 20 SeattleWashington DISEMBARK AM
t ltinemy Operne5 in rcvmc Older ttPorttimcsmiYnl)middotShlpwilldocklnampngkoknsttadofL1cm~
POLYNESIA amp THE COOK ISLANDS POLYNESIA amp THE MARQUESAS ISLANDS
10 10 DAYS DAYS
TAHITIAN PRINCESSTAHITIAN PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIPROUNDTRIP fromfrom
PAPEETEPAPEETE 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
2004 DEPARTURE DATES Oct 4 24 Mayl 17 27 Sep4 14 24 Nov 13 Jun 6 16 26 0lt 14 00323Ju16 16 26 Nov 323 2005 DEPARTURE DATESAug 5 15 25 Dec 13 Jan 12
Feb 1 21200S DEPARTURE DATES
~~ 122 ~~Il 13 23 CRUISE ITINERARY
CRUISE II INERARY DAY PORT
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Papeete Tahiti 1 Papeete Tahiti (overnight onboard ship) EMBARK PM
2 Moorea Polynesia 2 Papeete Tahiti SPM 3 Huahil1e P9lynesia 8AM 5 PM 3 Tuamotu Atolls Senic Cruising
5 PM8-AM 4 At Sea I At Sea 5 Rarotonga Cook Islands 8AM 5 PI~ 5 Nuku Hiva Marquesas Islands 6 At Sea 6 Hiva Ga Marquesas Islands 8AM 5PM 7 Raiatea Polynesia overnight onboard Ship 6AM
7 At Sea middotai~ RaiateaPQlynesia igt gt 6AM 8 Rangiroa P~iynesia 8AM 4PM8 Tahaa scenic Cryising 630 AM 830 AM
8 BoraBoraPQlyrtesia(ovemightollboard ship) UN 9 Tahaa ~enl Cruising 8 AM middot11AM
9 Bora lora Polynesia 5iM 9 Raiatea Polynesia 12 N 11 PM 10 Moore Polynesfa 8 AM 5 PM la ~ Bora ~oraPoIYnesia 8AM bull 5PM
11 Papeete Tahiti DISEMBARK AM 11 Papeete Tahiti DISEMBARK AM Iong Kong Harbor
3 Singapore 4-5 At Sea 6 Da NangVieinam 7 At Sea 8 liong Kong China
EXOTICS CRU ISES
HAWAIITAHITI HAWAIIAN ISLANDS SOUTH PACIFIC ISLANDS
12 1515 DAYS DAYSDAYS
PACIFIC
TAHITIAN PRINCESS ISLAND PRINCESSPAClFIC PRINCESS
PRINCESS
SYDNEYROUNDTRIP sail between tofrom
PAPEETE PAPEETELOS ANGELES and
2004 DEPARnIRE DATEHONOLULU 2004 DEPARTURE DATES Apr 21
2004 DEPARTURE DATES ~~~l CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE 11 INERARY
Oet21t CRUISE ITINERARY Nov Sf
MayS PACIFIC PRINCESS DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
Nov20t DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DecSt 1 Los Angeles CalifornIa EMBARK AM 1 Sydney AustralIa EMBARK PMAug 17t
Dec20t1 Papeete Tahiti EMBARK PM 2-4 At Sea
2005 DEPARTURE DATE Jan 4 2-5 At Sea
(overnight onboard ship) Jan 19 5 Auckland New Zealand 7 AM 2PMFeb 3t 6 Iiilo Hawaii 8 AM 6 PM
TAHITIAN PRINCESS Papeete Tahiti 11 PM fb 18 6-7 At Sea Kilauea Voko ~enic CruisingApr 12 MarS t 3 Moorea Polynesia 8 AM 5 PM 8 Suva fijI 11 AM 430 PM1~i~t 7 Kona Hawaii 8AM 6PM4 Bora Bora PolYnesia 8 AM 5 PM 9 At Sea Cross International Dateline Apr 19
5-6 At Sea 8 Honolulu Hawaii 8AM 11 PM 10 Apia Western Samoa 830 AM 2PM 7 Christmas Isl~ndKiribati 1Z N 5 PM 9 Kauai Hawaii (Nawlliwlli) 8AM 6PM 11-12 At Sea 8-9 At Sea 10 Maui Hawaii (Lahaina) 6PM 13 Bora Bora Polynesia lOAM 6PM 10 HlloliaWlii 6 PM 13 Raiatea Polynesia (overnight onboard 11 PM11-14 At Sea 11 Maui Hawaii (Lahaina) 8 AM 6 PM 14 Raiatea Polynesia 11 PM
15 Ensenada Mexico (service call)KaUaiH~waii(Nawllfwtli) 8AM 6 PM 15 Moorea Polynesia 8AM 5PM
tllinemyopcr~ttsln=x QnIerPurtlimcslmYvary Honolulu Hawaii DISEMBARK AM 16 Los Angeles CalIfornia DISEMBARK AM 16 Papeete Tahiti DISEMBARK AM
ISLANDS OF THE PACIFIC THEATER SOUTH PACIFIC EXPLORER
24 24 DAYS DAYS
PAClFIC PRINCESS PAClFIC PRINCESS
sail between HONOLULU PAPEETE
and to OSAKA FT LAUDERDALE
2004 DEPARTURE DATES
Mayl 2004 DEPARTURE DATEJul2Sj
Aug 29 CRUISE ITINERARY
CRUISE ITINERARYDAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART EMBARK PM DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
1 Papeete Tahiti EMBARK PM lPM 7PM 2 8AM 11 PM
3 ~~~~~~ ~~~~Sta 8AM 5 PM 4-6 At Sea 7 Pitcairn Island Scenic Cruising 8AM 1211
8AM 12 N
7AM ZPM 8-9 At Sea 10 Easter Island Chile 8AM 2PM
9AM 11-14 At Sea 15 Callao Peru (overnight for Lima and Machu Picchu) 8AM 16 Callao Peru lPM 17 At Sea 18 Manta Ecuador (for Quito) 9fM 7PM 19 At Sea 20 Transit Panama Canal 7 AM 430 PM 21 San BIas Panama 8AM 5 PM 22 ft Sea 23 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands 7AM 4PM 24 At Sea
25 Ft Lauderdale Florida DISEMBARK AMMoorea Polynesia tllinemyoperataln~12onlerPortl1mesmiYmymiddot
EXOTICS CRUISES
HAWAIITAHITISOUTH PACIFIC AMAZONSOUTHERN CARIBBEAN CAPE HORNSTRAIT OF MAGELLAN
1430 12 DAYS DAYSDAYS
ROYAL PRINCESS ROYAL PRINCESSSAPPHIRE PRINCESS
sail betweenFT LAUDERDALE SANTIAGOLOS ANGELES to
andto MANAUS BUENOS AIRESSYDNEY 2005 DEPARTURE DATE 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
2004 DEPARTURE DATE Apr 9 Jan 10
Nov 22 Jan 241 Feb 7
FebZt
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
CRUISE ITINERARY
CRUISE ITINERARYCRUISE ITINERARY 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTDAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 2-3 At Sea 1 Santiago Chile (Valparaiso) EMBARK PM
1 Los ingeles California EMBARK PM 4 Tortola BritIsh Virgin Islands 8 AM 6 PM 2 At Sea 2 Ensenada Mexico 8AM 5PM 3 Puerto Montt Chile 7AM 6PM
3middot6 At Sea 4 At Sea 5 Dominica 9 AM 4 PM 7 Hilo Hawaii 8AM 5 At Sea Chilean Fjords Scenic Cruising6PM 6 Trinidad 9 AM 6 PM
8 Maui Hawaii (Lahaina) 8AM 6PM 6 At Sea Amalia Glacier Scentc CruiSi3f7 At Sea 7 Punta Arenas Chile (Strait of Magei an) 7AM 6PM9 Honolulu Hawaii 7AM 5PM
- 10middot13 At Sea 8 Beagle Channel Scenic Cruising 8 Ushuaia Argentina (Tierra del Fuo) 12N 8PM
8 Devils Island French Guiana (Isle Royal) 8 AM 2 PM 14 Bora Bora Polynesia 8AM 6PM 9 At Sea 9 At Sea Cape Hom Scenic Cruising
10 Santarem Brazil 9 AM 7 PM 10 Moorea Polynesia 8AM 6PM 10 Falkland Islands (Stanley) 8AM 6PM 10 Papeete Tahiti (overnight onboard ship) 9PM 11 At Sea
i 16 Papeete Tahiti 6PM 11 Boca da Valeria Brazil (Amazon River) 7 AM 2 PM 12 Puerto Madryn Argentina 6AM 5PM 17middot18 AtSea 12 Manaus Brazil (overnight onboard ship) 10 AM 13 At Sea
14 Montevideo Uruguay 9AM 6PM19 Pago Pago merlcan Samoa 8AM 6PM 13 Manaus Brazil DISEMBARK AM 15 Buenos Aires Argentina DISEMBARK AM 20 Apia Western Samoa 8AM 6PM 21 At Sea Cross International Dateline middotl1me5forallscenkouisinCile subjectlDclwIgc
tllinmryopefilteslnr=rscordttPorttlmislm)vary22 Suva Fiji 8AM 6PM l 23-24 At Sea
20 Auckland New Zealand 8AM 6PM ORINOCO RIVERSOUTHERN CARIBBEAN ANDESSOUTH AMERICA 26 Tauranga New Zealand 8AM 7PM 27 At Sea
28 Wellington Newealand 8AM 6PM 16 17 DAYS DAYS 29-30 AtSea
31 Sydney Australia DISEMBARK AM ROYAL PRINCESS ROYAL PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP SANTIAGO from to
FT LAUDERDALE FT LAUDERDALE
200S DEPARTURE DATE2005 DEPARTURE DATE
Mar 7Mar 24
CRUISE IIJNERARYCRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Santiago Chlle (Valparaiso) EMBARK PM
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM
2 La Serena Chile (Coquimbo) 8 AM 5 PM2-3 At Sea 3 At Sea Um6n Costa Rica 7AM 7PM 4 Arica Chile 7AM 6PMCristobal Panama (for Panama Canal) 8AM 5PM o At Sea
6 Cartagena Colombia 9AM 2 PM 6 San Martin Peru (for Pisco and Machu Picchu) 7AM 6PM 7 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 130 PM 7PM 7 Callao Peru (overnight for Lima) 530 AM 8-9 At sea 8 Callao Peru 1PM 10 Puerto Ordaz Venezuela (Orinoco River) 8AM 6PM 9 At Sea
i 11 At Sea 10 Manta Ecuador (overnight for Quito) 530AM 12 Greada 8AM i 11 Manta Ecuador 1lM5PMt 1~ Dolllinlca i 7N1 5 PM 12 At Sea
i 13 Transit Panama C~nal 7AM 430 PM14 St Thomas us Virgilslands 9AM 5PM 14 Cartagena Colombia 8AM 130 PMJs AtSei i 15 Aruba Netherlands intiiles 1PM 7PM 16 Princess Cays Bahamas 8AM 16-17 At Sea Tahiti Polynesia 17 FtLallardale Flillilt~ DISEMBARK AM 1ampmiddot Ft L~uderdale Florida DISEMBARK AM
AMAZON RIVERMEDITERRANEAN
21 DAYS
ROYAL PRINCESS
MANAUS
to ROME
2005 DEPARTURE DATE
Apr 21
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE M~naus Brazil (Wemight onboardship) Manaus Brazil
3 BocadaValeria Brazil (AriiazonRivet) 11 AM 4-6 At Sea 7 Recife Brazil 1 PM 8-11 AtSea 12 Dakar Senegal 8AM 13-14 At Sea 15 Agadir Morocco 7AM 16 Casablanca Morocco (for Marrakech) 8AM 17 Gibraltar lOAM 18 Allcante Spain 12 N 19 Barcelona Spain 8AM 20 Cannes France (for Monte Carlo) 8AM 21 FlorencePisa Italy (Livarno) 7AM 22 Rome Italy (Civitavecchia) DISEMBARK AM
INDIAN OCEANAUSTRALIA
28 DAYS
PACIfIC PRINCESS
CAPE TOWN
to SYDNEY
2004 DEPARTURpound DATE
Oct 20
CRUISE ITINERARY1 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Cape Town South Africa EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 3 East London South Africa 7AM 3PM 4 DurbahSouth Africa 8AM 6PM 5-7 At Sea 8 Nosy BeMadagascar 7AM 4PM 9 At Sea 10 Poilit des Galets Reunioll]slahd 11 Port Louis Mauritius 12c19 At Sea 20 Perth Australia (Fremantle) 21-23 At Sea 24 Adelaide Australla 25 At Sea 26 Melbourne Australla 7 27 Tasmania AUstralia (Burnie) 28 At Sea 29 Sydney Australia DISEMBARK AM
I
DEPART EMBARK PM
7PM 6PM
8pM
5PM
3PM 9PM 6PM 6PM 5PM 7PM 7PM
EXOTICS CRUISES
SOUIB ATIANTICANTARCfICNSOUIB AMERICA
24 DAYS
ROYAL PRINCESS
CAPE TOWN
to SANTIAGO
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
Dec 17
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Cape TownSouthAfrica (overnighfol1board ship) EMBARK PM 2 Cape Town South Africa 3PM 2 if~~t Good HopSCenic Crulsing 3-6 6 Tristan DaCunha United Kingdom 8AM 5PM 7-10 At Sea 11 Falkland Islands (Staliley) 8 AM 5PM 12 At Sea 13-16 Antarctica Peninsula ScehltmiddotCruising 14 days ihcludingmiddot Elephant
Island AntarcticSotind Deceptionlslana GerlacheStrait NaxefChannel Schollaert Channel SigJtla Island and Boyd Strait)
17 At Sea Cape Horn Scenic Cruising1amp UshuaiaArgentina (Tierra del fuego) bull middot6 AM 19 Punta Arenas Chile (Strait of Magellan) 7 AM 20 At Sea Amalia Glacier Scenic Cruising21 At Sea Chilean Fjords Scenic Cruising22 AtSea 23 Puerto Mont Chile 7AM 6PM 24 At Sea 25 Santiago Chile (Valparaiso) DISEMBARK AM
-nmes for1l scenlccruisinc are subJect to change
ASIAINDIAMEDITERRANEAN
30 ROYAL PRINCESSDAYS
ROME
to BANGKOK
2004 DEPARlURE DATE
Sep 16
CRUISE Il INERARY
WEST AFRICASOUTH AMERICA
28 DAYS
PACIFIC PRINCESS
FT LAUDERDALE
to CAPE TOWN
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
51 22
CRUISE ITINERARY
DISEMBARK AM
Aruba
EXOTICS CRU ISES amp CRU ISETOU RS
AUSTRALIANEW ZEALAND CRUISETOUR
AUSTRALIAN EXPLORER 2004 DEPARTURE DATESAPPHIRE21 plus
DAYS PRINCESS SYDNEY Dec 17 to
AUCKLAND CRUISETOUR 5P CRUiSE
CRUISETOUR ITINERARY
DAY PORT By Sea By Land DAY PORT
1 Sydney 14 Fiordland National Park 2 Sydney Scenic Cruising
3 SydneyAyers Rock 15 Dunedin New Zealand (Port Chalmers) 4 Ayers ROek
5 Ayers RockPort Douglas 16 Christchurch New Zealand 6 Port Douglas - (Lytleton)
7 Port DouglasSydneyEmbark 17 Wellilgton New Zealand 8 At Sea 18 At Sea 9 Melbourne Australia 19 Tauranga New Zealand
10 At Sea 20 Bay of Islands New Zealand 11 Tasmania Australia (Hobart) 21 Auckland New Zealand 12middot13 At Sea
Sydney Opera House Australia
AUSTRALIANEW ZEALAND CRUISETOUR SOUTHEAST ASIACHINA CRUISETOUR CAPE HORNSTRAIT OF MAGELLAN CRUISETOUR AUSTRALIAN BEIJING Be TERRA COTTA 2004 DEPARTURE DATES RIO 8t IGUAZU FALLS Post-Crulsetour1 Pre-Crulsetour 217EXPLORER 2005 DEPARTURE DATES PACIFICSAPPHIRE WARRIORS19 plw or PRINCESS jul9t loieifie
DAYS PRINCESS SYDNEY Jan 12 plus 19 ROYAL plw Feb 5 Oct 28 Royal BUENOS AIRES
AUCKLAND DAYS ROYAL PRINCESS to 21 ampto DAYS PRINCESS
BEUING CRUISE t ~~S~i BeWln~~~~e
to SANTIAGO~e~s~Ot~r~ih~fi1BANGKOK CRUiSE CRUISECRUISETOUR 3t3P landtourm~yvlty CRUISETOUR 12
DAY PORT DAY PORT
DAY PORT By Sea ltBy LaDd DAY PORT
1 Beijing 11-12 At Sea 1 Rio de janeiro 11 Cape Horn Scenic Cruising
13 Hong Kong 2 Rio de jneiro c 12 Ushuaia Argentina 14 At Sea 3 RiolgUaiu Falls 12 Beagle Channel Scenlc Cruising
15 Nha Trang Vietnam 4 IIDIilZll FaU$13u~os~re$ 13 Punta Arenas Chile
16 Phu My Vietnam 5 Buens AiresEmbark 14 At Sea 17 At Sea 6 Montevideo Uruguay 15 Seno Eyre Fjord Scenic Cruising 18 Singapore 7 At Sea 16 At Sea 19 Kualtan Malaysia 8 Puerto Madryn Argentina 17 Puerto Montt Chile 20 At Sea 9 At Sea 18 At Sea 21 Bangkok Thail3nd 10 Falkland Islands (Stanley) 19 Santiago Chile
DAY PORT DAY PORT
At Sea Pusan SouthKOrea Nagasaki japan At Sea Shanghai China
Note CnIlst route shown for Royil Princess Oct 28 only Timcsforil1lsccnkoulslngmsubjccttothange
CRUISE [OUR ITINERARY
CRUISETOUR ITINERARY
CRUISrrOlJR ITINERARY Fiordland National Park Scenic Cruising DlUedin New Zealand Christchurch New Zealand Wellington New Zealand
14
GRAND PANAMA CANAL CRUISES
ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL
10 10 11 DAYSDAYS DAYS
CORAL PRINCESS GRAND PRINCESS GRAND PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIPfrom from
fromFT LAUDERDALE GALVESTON GALVESTON
2004 DEPARTURE DATES Oct n 21 31 2004 DEPARTURE DATE
2004 DEPARTURE DATENov 10 20 30middot DeelSmiddot
DedSDec 10 28
2005 DEPARTURE DATES CRUISE ITINERARY Jan 7 17 27
CRUISE ITINERARY Feb 6 16 26 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART MarS 1828 CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Galveston Texas EMBARK PMApr 7 17 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTshy 1 Galveston Texas EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 1 ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 3 Belize City Belize 1 PM 7PM 2-3 At Sea 3 Belize City Belize lPM 7PM 4 Costa Maya Mexico (Mahahual) 8AM 4PM 4 Um6n Costa Rica 7AM rPM 4 Costa Maya Mexico (Mahahual) SAM 4 PM 5 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands 12 PM 7PM 5 Panama Canal (to Gatun Lake) 7AM 430 PM 5 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands 12 PM 7PM 6 Ocho Rios Jamaica SAM 5PM 5 Col6n Panama 5PM 8PM 6 At Sea 7 At Sea 6 At Sea Cristobal Panama 7AM 4PM 8 7AM 4PM 7 Grand Cayman Cayman IslandS 7AM 4PM (fot Panama Canal) ftrtpg~niaa~~) S Corumel Mexico SAM 6PM 8 At Sea 9 At Sea 9 Bclize City Belize 7AM 4 PM 6PM 10 Coromel Mexico lOAM 6 PM9 Cozumel Mexico lOAM 10 At Sea 10 At Sea 11 At Sea
Portordtrllndtlmtsmayvllry 11 flo Lauderdale florida DISEMBARK AM Portorntr IInltf timpoundi may vary 11 Galveston Texas DISEMBARK AM Port ordu and Nmes may vary 12 Galv_es~on Texas DISEMBARK AM
ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL
8 DAYS
CORAL PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP
from
FT LAUDERDALE
2004 DEPARTURE DATE Dec 20
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Fl Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM 2-3 At Sea 4 Lim6n Costa Rica 7AM 7PM 5 Panama Canal (to Gatun Lake) 7 AM 430 PM 5 Co16n Panama 5PM SPM 6 At Sea 7 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands SAM 5PM S At Sea 9 Flo Lauderdale Florida DISEMBARK AM Bridge of the Americas Panama
f OptIonll fOllTS inclld1lI tht AtlllnH to Pacific RlIlllfll) joumq will dlmlldrt tilt ship b) tctdtr lit Gfttlm uk AJkr tour plIssmm dlstmlrark tilt shipwin procmlllat through tilt Gatun Locb lIndjlnlllly dock in Gl6lI Hmal1p41Sl11tmmttydiumlmtheJldlo~ lflrshops IInd~llI toIIrsrrnrl CIItutl14ktlllIrtonlflrJhlp
GRAND PANAMA CANAL CRUISES
GRAND PANAMA CANAL GRAND PANAMA CANAL GRAND PANAMA CANAL
150R 18 150R 1715 DAYS DAYS DAYS
CORAL PRINCESS SUN PRINCESS
REGAL PRINCESS REGAL PRINCESS SUN PRINCESS
DAWN PRINCESS REGAL PRINCESS sail between DAWN PRINCESS
sail between FT LAUDERDALE FT LAUDERDALE sail betweenand
FT LAUDERDALEand SAN DIEGO andLOS ANGELES
SAN FRANCISCO 2004 DEPARTURE DATES 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
DAWN PRINCESS 2004 DEPARTURE DATESNov 24Sp191
CRUISE ITINERARY Dec9t CORAL PRINCESSREGAL PRINCESS 5ltp261 CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE ITINERARY
200S DEPARTURE DATES Dec 24 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
SUN PRINCESS DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARIltPM200S DEPARTURE DATES DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Sep 2StMar 24
3 Ocho Rios Jamaica lOAM 6PM 2-3 At5ea 2 At Sea 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBA8KPM
REGAL PRINCESS AprSt 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBA8KPM Jan stu 200S DEPARTURE DATES2 At Sea4 At Sea 4 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 7AM lPMJan 23 5 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 7AM lPM 3 Ocho Rios Jamaica lOAM 6PM REGAL PRINCESS 5 Cartagena Colombia 9AM 3PMFeb7t 4 At Sea Apr 239AM 3PM 6 Transit Panama Canal 7AM 430 PMFb22 ~ yenr~fte~~~~~~u 7AM 430 PM 5 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 7AM lPM At SeaMar9t CORAL PRINCESS 79AM 3PM8 At Sea Apr 27 8 Puntarenas Costa Rica 7AM 7PMSUN PRINCESS 9 Puntarenas Costa Rica 7 AM 7PM ~ yenr~fte~n~~~~~u 7AM 430 PM 9-10 At SeaApr1S 8 At Sea DAWN PRINCESS10-11 At Sea 11 Acapulco Mexico 8AM 5PM
5PM 9 Puntarenas Costa Rica 7AM 7PM Apr 29H ~ae~lcoMexico 8 AM 12 At SeatllWrryopmllzlfrarnLls~in 10-11 At Sea rmrKfIfikTiIIrttimnma1 tlliJlrraryoptJllllsfrlJflSlmFranrimlJn 13 Cabo San lucas Mexico 8AM 5PM
gt This mUJI C4Jl llfwmblnld wlth a 3 14 Cabo San Lucas Mexico 7 AM lPM H ~e~o Mexico 8AM SPM rmruordrrorttimamG)llIryCoIutar CnUK to VlWOIlllr SC Dqs ThUIltIIIflltllnlltCllIIblntdwilhaZ-day 14-15 At Sea 16lhrlllllhI9lllIbtboobdulaquoSC)lQ4k t Illncral) lIpCutcs in mrmt orm Pllrt IiIIIa CocastaICnliutoVan(ouKrBCDlIys16 16 San Francisco California 7AM 4PMcowtlIrcrllisr IIIIYlIl1Ymiddot IhrounIScankboobdlUaK)lllllluU t~A~geles California 6 AM 5PM 14 Cabo San Lucas Mexico 8AM 5PM
Thllwl1JIIICllllslltMOlIkpilllyJmtcad 17-18 At Sea middotmiddotThliIAfllIllCltlllsatMGnIqclBaylnstcadllf 15 At Sea CPlIilldCI1IIu 17 At Sea o[OdKKwsPurllilllrlmllYWlry OchoRicJsPortllmtslllllYVllfymiddot D1SEMBA8K AM19 Vancouver BC DISEMBA8K AM 16 San Die20 California DlSEMBA8K AM 18 Val1couver BC
GRAND PANAMA CANAL COASTAL CRUISING
2-4 CORAL PRINCESS ISLAND PRINCESS SUN PRINCESS18 DAWN PRINCESS DIAMOND PRINCESS STAR PRINCESSDAYSDAYS
COASTAL CRUISE SCHEDULEREGAL PRINCESS
SHIP DAYS FROM TO DEPARTURE DATE DIAMOND PRINCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 5104
SAN FRANCISCO DIAMOND PRINCES5 4 Vancouver Seattle 5404 to CORAL PRINCESS 2 San Francisco Vancouver 5604
NEW YORK DAWN PRiNCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 5704 ISLAND PRiNCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 51204
2004 DEPARTURE DATE SUN PRINCESS 3 San Francisco Vancouver 51404Aug 24 ISLAND PRiNCESS 3 Vancouver LOI Angeles 91804
DIAMOND PRINCESS 1 Seattle Vancouver 91804CRUISE ITINERARY DIAMOND PRINCESS 6 Vancouver Los Angeles 91904 SAPPHIRE PRINCESS 1 Seattle Vancouver 91904 SAPPHREPRINCESS 2 Vancouver San Francisco 92004 DIAMOND PRINCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 43005 DlAMONDPRiNCES$ 4 Vancouver Seattle 5305 SUN PRINCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 5305
ISLAND PRiNCESS 3 Los Angeles VancOllver 5405 CORAL PRiNCESS 2 San Francisco Vancouver 51205
Coral Princess in the Panama Canal
CRUISE PLUS
Extend your adventure with our Cruise Plusreg program Cruise Plusreg enables you to enhance your vacation with one- to four-night hotel
packages in cities that stand on their own as vacation destinations Add nights in Sydney before you cruise or extend your vacation with nights in the city by the
bay San Francisco Transportation and luggage handling costs from the airport to both hotel and ship plus meet and greet services are always included
Wherever you choose to explore youll enjoy properties that are carefully chosen based on service value location and the peace of mind of knowing that Princess
has arranged it all for you
Anchorage Alaska Trevi Fountain Rome Auckland Harbor New Zealand
The Cruise Plusreg Program is available in over 30 major cities including
MEDITERRANEANAEGEAN EXOTICS PANAMA CANAL Barcelona London Rome and Venice Auckland Bangkok Beijing Buenos Aires Ft Lauderdale Los Angeles New York City
Cape Town Ft Lauderdale Honolulu Los San Diego San Francisco Sanjuan Vancouver NORTHERN EUROPE Angeles Montreal Moorea New York City Copenhagen and London MEXICO CARIBBEANOsaka Papeete Rome San Francisco
Ft Lauderdale Galveston Los AngelesTRANSATLANTIC Santiago Seattle Sydney Vancouver Venice Barcelona Copenhagen Ft Lauderdale San Francisco and San Juan
London New York City and Rome ALASKA Anchorage Calgary Fairbanks Kenai San Francisco Seattle and Vancouver
For more information about options and pricing reference a destination specific brochure or contact your travel agent
TRAVEL THE WORLD WITH THE LEADER IN CRUISINGmiddot Princess
Analysis by the Hawaii Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism Comparing the Economic Impact of Foreign Flag Ships with US Flag Cruise Ships Sailing in Hawaii
This is a summary of an analysis prepared by the Hawai Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism (DBEDT) of the economic impact of the foreign flag cruise ship fleet sailing in Hawaii as compared to each of the US flag ships operating in Honolulu
The comparison is set out below
Foreign Pride Pride Pride
Fleet Of Hawaii Of Aloha Of America
Total economic output impact (spendingsales) ($mil) 155 542 4225 4958
Total earnings impact (labor earnings) ($mil) 44 155 1207 1411
Total employment impact Uobs) 1447 5059 3943 4627
This analysis demonstrates that a single US-flagged ship the Pride of America home ported in Honolulu is 32 times more economically impactful and creates 32 times as many jobs as the entire foreign flag fleet that sails into and out of Hawaii ports of call
Economic Impact of Pride of America
Assumptions 1 Annual impact though Pride of Aloha is leaving in May 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existing Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($) 4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of outputl$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job multiplier (jobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
118700 105
2706 3373
147 042
1372
4958
1417
4627
Data sourcelformula Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Line 1 x line 2 x line 31 000000
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 4 x line 5
Line 4 x line 6
Line 4 x line 7
Economic Impact of Pride of Hawaii
Assumptions
1 Annual impact though Pride of Hawaii is leaving in February 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existing Pride of Aloha and Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($) 4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job multiplier (jobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
Data sourceformula 139770 Actual 2007 figure
975 Actual 2007 figure 2706 Actual 2007 figure 3688 Line 1 x line 2 x line 31000000
147 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model 042 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
1372 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
5421 Line 4 x line 5
1549 Line 4 x line 6
5059 Line 4 x line 7
Economic Impact of Pride of Aloha
Assumptions 1 Annual impact though Pride of Aloha is leaving in May 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existlng Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($)
4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job mUltiplier Oobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
95680 111
2706 2874
147 042
1372
4225
1207
3943
Data sourcelformula Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Line 1 x line 2 x line 31000000
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 4 x line 5
Line 4 x line 6
Line 4 x line 7
lt
Methodology Used in Calculating Impact of International Cruise Ships
Cruise ship visitors 1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Came with ships 3 Flied in 4 Average length of stay (days) 5 PPPD ($) 6 Cruise visitor spending ($mil))
Cruise ship crews 7 Ratio of crew spending to cruise visitor spending 8 Cruise crew spending
Cruisline 9 Ratio of crew spending to cruise visitor spending
10 Cruiseline spending
11 Total cruise-related spending ($mil)
12 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 13 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 14 Job multiplier Uobs$ cruise -related spending)
15 Total output impact ($miJ)
16 Total earnings impact ($miJ)
17 Total employment impact (jobs)
106641 98307
8334 739 847 668
02 134
038 254
1055
147 042
1372
1551
444
1447
Data sourceformula Line 2 + line 3 DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report Line 1 x line 4 x line 5
DBEDT 2003 Cruise study Line 7 x line 6
DBEDT 2003 Cruise study Line 9 x line 6
Line 6 + line 8 + line 10
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 11 x line 12
Line 11 x line 13
Line 11 x line 14
Economic Contributions Foreign-Flag Fleet operating in Hawaii vs Three US-Flag Ships
$1500
Pride of Hawaii$1000- $542 million VIc -0-E c Pride of AlohaCo
423 million$500
Pride of America $496 million155 million$shy
Foreign-Flag US-Flag Fleet Fleet
Source State of Hawaii Department of US-Flag $1460 billion Business Economic Development and Tourism
Foreign-Flag $ 155 million 7292008
Employment Foreign-Flag Fleet operating in Hawaii vs Three US-Flag Ships
15000
10000
til c o Pride of Aloha
39435000
Pride of America 1447 4627
~---------
Foreign-Flag US-Flag Fleet Fleet
Source State of Hawaii Department of US-Flag 13629 jobs Business Economic Development and Tourism
Foreign-Flag 1447 jobs 7292008
Foreign Flag Capacity Growth Foreign flag passenger capacity has changed five-fold on roundtrip Hawaii cruises from the West Coast since enactment of the Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative
1600000
1400000
tn 1200000
J enshyZ
1000000
I shyG) en 800000 s G) tn tn
600000 as D 400000
200000
0 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Year
Source US Maritime Administration (derived from the US Customs and Border Patrol Vessel Entrance and Clearance documents - final 2007 data) 7292008
NCL America Hawaii Economic Contributions
(2004-2008)
bull (in Millions) bull $399 in wages benefits and overtime to US seafarers bull $35 in Federal and State payroll Taxes bull $64 in Government Fees and Taxes to Hawaii bull $28 in wages benefits and overtime to US other employees bull $52 in Port Charges to Hawaii Companies (Stevedores tugs pilots etc) bull $85 in Fuel to Tesoro Hawaii bull $130 for shore excursions to Hawaii tour operators bull $39 for Hawaii hotel rooms and ground transport bull $75 for food grown in Hawaii bull $57 in union fees and levies (incl $32M paid directly by employees) bull $1 in MMD fees to the United States Coast Guard bull $51 for recruitment screening processing and training crew bull $76 advertising and promoting Hawaii as a destination bull $1092
COASTWISE CRUISES INTERPRETIVE RULE RESOLUTION Adopted at the
US Conference of Mayors 76th Annual Meeting
June 20-242008 Miami
WHEREAS the Department of Homeland Securitys Customs and Border Protection (CBP) issued a proposed Interpretive Rule regulating Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises on foreign flagged vessels between US ports of call under the Passenger Vessel Services Act at the request of the United States Maritime Administration and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule would require that a foreign-flagged vessel on a coastwise cruise to call at a foreign port for at least 48 hours with that foreign stop constituting at least 50 percent of the cruise itinerary and allowing passengers to disembark the cruise vessel at the foreign port before continuing the cruise to a US port of call and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule establishes burdensome criteria that are wholly inconsistent with industry practice particularly the 48-hour call at foreign port shyinasmuch as the standard port call is six to eight hours - as well as the requirement that 50 percent of a cruise be spent at the foreign port and
WHEREAS the intent of the proposed Interpretive Rule is to protect the single remaining US flag vessel serving the Inter-Hawaiian Island cruise trade that according to the Hawaii Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism generates more than 4600 jobs and generates nearly $500 million in economic benefits for the state annually and
WHEREAS thousands of members of the International Longshore Workers Union (nWU) are employed at US ports serving cruise ships and whose jobs would be at risk if the proposed Interpretive Rule were implemented and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule is vague as to the breadth of its application ie to coastwise cruises between all United States ports or applied solely to coastwise cruises from West Coast ports to Hawaii and
WHEREAS the Cruise Lines International Association estimates the proposed Interpretive Rule would upend the $17 billion in national cruise industry spending and put at risk more than 300000 jobs generated by the international cruise industry including jobs held by nWU at US ports and the local allied industries supporting the cruise industry and
Executive Order Submissions Under Review
II Reglnfogov Where to ind Federal Regulatory Information -~
Home ] Lnitied Agenda and Regulator) Ilan pound012866 Regulator) Review Jnformalion Collection Review
EO 12866 Regulatory Rlvlw dvanced Search IJitorical RepWI Review Counh Jriter XIL
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA)
Executive Order Submissions Under Review July 25 2008 - _------------____ _shy
Department of Homeland Security
AGENCY DHS-TSA RIN 1652-AA53
TITLE Large Aircraft Security Program Other Aircraft Operator Security Programs and Airport Operator Security Program
STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT Yes RECEIVED DATE 06302008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
AGENCY DHS-USCIS RIN Llti15-AB67 TITLE Changes to Requirements Affecting H-2B Nonimmigrants and Their Employers
STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT No RECEIVED DATE 06092008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
AGENCY DHS-USCBP RIN 1651AA11 TITLE Issuance of a Visa and Authorization for Temporary Admission Into the United States for Certain Nonimmigrant Aliens Afflicted W HIV Infection
STAGE Final Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT No RECEIVED DATE 03042008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
-_RE_V-IE-W-E-X-T-EN-D-E-D---------- _
AGENCY DHS-USCBP RIN 1651-AA76 TITLE Coastwise Transportation of Passengers STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT Yes RECEIVED DATE 07142008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
Disclosure I Accessibility I Privacy Policy I Contact Us
httpwwwreginfogovpublicdoeoReviewSearch 7252008
View Rule Page 11
Shere D find Federal ReguLatory InformciiorlReglnfogov Home J Cnified Agenda al1d Regulatory Plan EO 12866 Regulatory Reyiew Information Collection Reiew
Current rnified Agenda and Regulatory Plan Historical Pnified Agenda and Regulatory Plan Search
View Rule
DHSIUSCBP RIN 1651-AA76 Publication ill Spring 2008
Title llCoastwise Transportation of Passengers
Abstract This interim rule amends the Department of Homeland Securitys (DHS) current regulations relating to the transportation of passengers by non-coastwise-qualified vessels on voyages that begin and end at a US port and stop at intervening US and foreign port(s) Under this interim final rule voyages that begin and end at a US port and stop at a foreign port(s) and at intervening US port(s) where a large USshyflag coastwise-qualified passenger vessel engages in regular service are in violation of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) unless the cumulative length of stay(s) at intervening foreign port(s) is more than 50 percent of the total amount of time spent at the intervening US port(s) and passengers are permitted to go ashore at the foreign port(s) The purpose of this amendment is to ensure that the Congressional purpose in enacting the PVSA which is to preserve the economic benefits of US coastwise trade to US-flag coastwise-qualified vessels is properly implemented
Agency Department of Homeland Security(DHS) Priority Substantive Nonsignificant
KIN Status First time published in the Unified Agenda Agenda Stage of Rulemaking Final Rule Stage
Major No Unfunded Mandates No
CFR Citation -LCER 4J~)(h)(plusmnJ
Legal Authority 5JJSS_30J12lJ-SClt16 J9_lJiCJ 431 9_L1C1plusmn3JJ2JScHJ1J2JSCJ624 L(LlLSc207LIl(gtJfHgt~ _CiQJ _46lSC 6QLQ~
Legal Deadline None
Timetable Action Date FR Cite
Interim Final Action 0510012008
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required No Government Levels Affected None
Federalism No
Included in the Regulatory Plan No
RIN Data Printed in the FR No
Agency Contact Glen E Vereb Chief Entry Procedures and Carriers Branch Department of Homeland Security US Customs and Border Protection Office of Regulations and Rulings 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington DC 20229 Phone202572-8730
Disclosure I Accessibility I Privacy Policy I Contact Us
httpwwwreginfogovpublicdoeAgendaViewRuleruleID=286751 7128120
Federal RegisterVol 72 No 224Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules 65487
SPECULATIVE POSITION LIMITS 1-Continued [In contract units)
Contract
Soybeans and Mini-Soybeans 2
Wheat and Mini-Wheat 2 bullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbull
Soybean Oil
SingleSpot month All monthsmonth
600 8600 13300 600 11100 14500 540 6600 8600
Soybean Meal 720 5500 7100
Minneapolis Grain Exchange
Hard Red Spring Wheat I 600 I 11100 I 14500
New York Board of Trade
Cotton No2 I 300 I 5300 I 7300
Kansas City Board of Trade
Hard Winter Wheat I 600 I 11100 I 14500
1 For purposes of compliance with these limits positions in a futures contract that shares ~ubstantially identical terms with a contract market enumerated herein including a futures contract that is cash-settled based on the settlement price of an enumerated contract market shall be agshygregated with positions in the enumerated contract market
2 For purposes of compliance with these limits positions in the regular-sized and mini-sized contracts shall be aggregated
Issued by the Commission this November 152007 in Washington DC David Stawick Secretary of the Commission [FR Doc E7-22681 Filed 11-20-07 845 amI BILLING CODE 6351-Q1-P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Bureau of Customs and Border Protection
19 CFR Part 4
[USCBP-2007-o098]
Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises
AGENCY Customs and Border Protection Department of Homeland Security ACTION Proposed interpretation solicitation of comments
SUMMARY This document proposes new criteria to be used by Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to determine whether non-coastwise-qualified vessels are in violation ofthe Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) when engaging in cruise itineraries in which passengers board at a US port the vessel calls at several Hawaiian ports and then the vessel proceeds to a foreign port or ports for a brief period before ultimately returning to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their cruise CBP believes these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because it appears that the primary objective of the foreign stop is evasion of the PVSA
DATES Comments must be received on or before December 212007 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT Glen E Vereb Cargo Security Carriers amp Immigration Branch Office of International Trade (202) 572-8730 ADDRESSES You may submit comments identified by docket number by one of the following methods
bull Federal eRulemaking Portal http wwwregulationsgov Follow the instructions for submitting comments
bull Mail Border Security Regulations Branch Office of International Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
I Public Participation
Interested persons are invited to participate in this proposed interpretation by submitting written data views or arguments on all aspects of the proposed interpretation Customs and Border Protection (CBP) also invites comments that relate to the economic environmental or federalism effects that might result from this proposed interpretation Comments that will provide the most assistance to CBP in developing these procedures will reference a specific portion of the proposed interpretation explain the reason for any recommended change and include data information or authority that support such recommended change
Instructions All submissions received must include the agency name and docket number for this proposed
interpretation All comments received will be posted without change to http wwwregulationsgov including any personal information provided
Docket For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received go to http wwwregulationsgov Submitted comments may also be inspected on regular business days between the hours of 9 am and 430 pm at the Office of International Trade Customs and Border Protection 799 9th Street NW 5th Floor Washington DC Arrangements to inspect submitted documents should be made in advance by calling Mr Joseph Clark at (202) 572shy8768
II Background
The maritime cabotage law governing the transportation of passengers was first established by section 8 of the Passenger Vessel Services Act of June 191886 (the PVSA) 24 Stat 81 as amended by section 2 of the Act of February 17 1898 30 Stat 248 formerly codified at 46 USC App 289 (now codified at 46 USC 55103) 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 of $200 (now $300 as promulgated in TD 03-11 pursuant to the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 199028 USC 2461 note) for each passenger so transported and landed
The intent of the maritime cabotage laws including the PVSA was to provide a legal structure that guarantees a coastwise monopoly to
65488 Federal RegisterVol 72 No 224Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules
American shipping and thereby promotes development of the American merchant marine Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 28 (DC Cir 1984) see also The Granada 35 FSupp 892 8931940 AMC 1601 (DC Pa 1940) (stating that the legislative aim of section 289 [now 55102] was the creation of a practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping business for United States ships) In other words the PVSA was enacted to advance the United States merchant marine and fleet by restricting the use of foreign-ownedflagged passenger vessels in United States territorial waters
Passenger vessel transportation between United States ports has historically been viewed to be part of the coastwise trade after the enactment of the PVSA This view is premised on the concepts of continuity of the voyage and whether its intended purpose or objective was coastwise transportation In other words the PVSA was held to be violated if the coastwise movement was continuous or if the purpose of the trip was a coastwise voyage (See 18 OAG 445 September 4 1886 28 OAG 204 February 16 1910 29 OAG 318 February 12 1912 30 OAG 44 February 1 1913 34 OAG 340 December 24 1924 and 36 OAG 352 August 13 1930)
The CBP regulations promulgated pursuant to the PVSA are found at section 480a of title 19 of the Code of Federal Regulations (19 CFR 480a) and are reflective of the above cited Office of the Attorney General decisions These regulations provide among other things that a non-coastwise-qualified vessel which embarks a passenger at a port in the United States embraced within the coastwise laws (a coastwise port) will be deemed to have landed that passenger in violation of the PVSA if the passenger disembarks at a different coastwise port on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a nearby foreign port or ports (as defined in 19 CFR 480a(a)(2) see also 19 CFR 480a(b)(2)) The terms embark and disembark are words of art which are defined as going on board a vessel for the duration of a specific voyage and leaving a vessel at the conclusion of a specific voyage respectively (See 19 CFR 480a(a)(4))
The references in section 480a to nearby foreign ports (defined in 19 CFR 480a(a)(2)) are the results of attempts by CBP to apply an Office of the Attorney Generals opinion dated February 26 1910 (28 OAG 204) In that case a foreign-flag vessel transported 615 passengers on a voyage around the world beginning in New
York and concluding in San Francisco The Attorney General opined that since the primary object of the voyage was to visit various parts of the world on a pleasure tour returning home via California and not to be transported in domestic commerce the transportation was not in violation of the PVSA
The 1910 Attorney Generals opinion was extended to voyages that included foreign ports other than nearby foreign ports (See Treasury Decision (TD) 68shy285 (33 FR 16558) November 14 1968) However voyages solely to one or more coastwise ports have always been considered predominantly coastwise Therefore non-coastwise-qualified vessels engaging in such a voyage where passengers temporarily go ashore at a coastwise port have been deemed to have violated the PVSA
m Current Law and Policy Pursuant to Public Law 109-304 120
Stat 1632 enacted on October 6 2006 Title 46 United States Code was substantially reorganized and recodified Consequently the PVSA is now codified at 46 USC 55103 and provides that no vessel shall transport passengers between ports or places in the United States either directly or by way of a foreign port under a penalty of $300 for each person so transported and landed except one that (1) Is wholly owned by citizens of the United States for purposes of engaging in the coastwise trade and (2) has been issued a certificate of documentation with a coastwise endorsement or is exempt from documentation but would otherwise be eligible for such a certificate and endorsement
In 2003 Congress enacted Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II Section 211 for the purpose of revitalizing the oceangoing US-flag cruise industry in Hawaii (the 2003 Act) Three oceangoing US-flag cruise ships PRIDE OF ALOHA PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAII were documented with coastwise privileges pursuant to the 2003 Act These vessels entered regular service in Hawaii in 2004 2005 and 2006 respectively and pursuant to the express language of the 2003 Act are limited in their operation to providing regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands of Hawaii
The CBP regulations promulgated pursuant to the PVSA are set forth in 19 CFR 480a and have remained unchanged throughout both the recodification of Title 46 of the United States Code and the enactment of the 2003 Act They provide that a violation of the PVSA occurs when passengers embark (board a vessel for the
duration of a voyage) a non-coastwiseshyqualified vessel at one US port and disembark (leave the vessel at the conclusion of a voyage) at a different US port unless they proceed with the vessel to a distant foreign port (Le any port not considered a nearby foreign port which is defined as any port located in North America Central America Bermuda or the West Indies including the Bahamas) Currently these regulations do not contain specific criteria for non-coastwise-qualified vessels on itineraries including US ports and either nearby or distant foreign ports in order for such foreign port calls to be compliant with the PVSA
To reiterate the applicable CBP regulations provide that the PVSA is violated when a non-coastwise-qualified vessel transports a passenger on a voyage solely to one or more coastwise ports and the passenger disembarks or goes ashore temporarily at a coastwise port (19 CFR 480a(b)(1)) Furthermore a violation of the PVSA also occurs when a non-coastwise-qualified vessel transports a passenger on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a nearby foreign port or ports (but no other foreign port) and the passenger disembarks at a coastwise port other than the port of embarkation (19 CFR 480a(b)(2)) However there is no violation of the PVSA when a passenger is on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a distant foreign port or ports (whether or not the voyage includes a nearby foreign port or ports) and the passenger disembarks at a coastwise port provided the passenger has proceeded with the vessel to a distant foreign port (19 CFR 480a(b)(3))
IV Request From MARAD To Provide Guidance
The US Department of Transportation Maritime Administration (MARAD) has requested that CBP take action to ensure enforcement of the PVSA MARAD has asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreignshyflag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwiseshyqualified cruise ship operators
In April of 2007 the operator of the three US-flag cruise vessels operating solely in Hawaii pursuant to the 2003 Act announced their intent to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAIl from the Hawaii market and redeploy her to Europe The operator intends to re-flag the vessel to foreign registry directly resulting in the loss of over 1100 crewmember jobs The primary reason cited for this decision is the rapid increase in foreign-flag competition entering the Hawaii market
Federal Register I Vol 72 No 224 I Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules 65489
from the West Coast This competition is evidenced in published cruise itineraries of foreign-flag carriers offering a variety of round trip cruises that depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period usually in the early morning and ultimately return to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their cruise These cruises are often marketed as Hawaii cruises and except for the brief stop in the nearby foreign port of Ensenada are purely coastwise in nature It is these cruise itineraries that pose an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels that pursuant to the 2003 Act are currently engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands
V Preliminary Notice
In response to MARADs concerns CBP sent letters to two carriers known to operate the itineraries in question as well as to the Cruise Lines International Association Inc stating that CBP believes that these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because it appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA The letters further indicated that CBP is taking steps to publish this position
VI CBPs Proposed Interpretive Rule Accordingly in this document CBP is
proposing to provide that cruise itineraries for non-qualified coastwise vessels which allow passengers to board at a US port call at several Hawaiian ports proceed to a foreign port or ports for a brief period and then ultimately return to the original US port of embarkation for disembarkation are not consistent with the PVSA and the regulations promulgated pursuant thereto Specifically CBP interprets a voyage to be solely to one or more coastwise ports even where it stops at a foreign port unless the stop at the foreign port is a legitimate object of the cruise CBP will presume that a stop at a foreign port is not a legitimate object of the cruise unless
(1) The stop lasts at least 48 hours at the foreign port
(2) The amount of time at the foreign port is more than 50 percent of the total amount of time at the US ports of call and
(3) The passengers are permitted to go ashore temporarily at the foreign port
Accordingly CBP proposes to adopt an interpretive rule under which it will presume that any cruise itinerary that does not include a foreign port call that
satisfies each of these three criteria constitutes coastwise transportation of passengers in violation of 19 CFR 480a(b)(1)
Dated November 16 2007 W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection [FR Doc E7-22788 Filed 11-20-07 845 am] BILLING CODe 9111-14-1
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau
27 CFR Part 9
[Notice No 76]
RIN 1513-AB49
Proposed Establishment of the Leona Valley Viticultural Area (2007R-281 P)
AGENCY Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau Treasury ACTION Notice of proposed rulemaking
SUMMARY The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau proposes to establish the 134 square mile Leona Valley viticultural area in the northeast part of Los Angeles County California We designate viticultural areas to allow vintners to better describe the origin of their wines and to allow consumers to better identify wines they may purchase We invite comments on this proposed addition to our regulations DATES We must receive written comments on or before January 22 2008
ADDRESSES You may send comments on this notice to one of the following addresses
bull httpwwwregulationsgov (Federal e-rulemaking portal follow the instructions for submitting comments) or
bull Director Regulations and Rulings Division Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau PO Box 14412 Washington DC 20044-4412
See the Public Participation section of this notice for specific instructions and requirements for submitting comments and for information on how to request a public hearing
You may view copies of this notice selected supporting materials and any comments we receive about this proposal at httpwwwregulationsgov under Docket No 2007-0066 You also may view copies of this notice all related petitions maps or other supporting materials and any comments we receive about this
proposal by appointment at the TTB Information Resource Center 1310 G Street NW Washington DC 20220 To make an appointment call 202-927shy2400
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT NA Sutton Regulations and Rulings Division Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau 925 Lakeville S1 No 158 Petaluma CA 94952 phone 415shy271-1254 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
Background on Viticultural Areas
TTB Authority Section 105(e) of the Federal Alcohol
Administration Act (FAA Act) 27 USC 205(e) authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to prescribe regulations for the labeling of wine distilled spirits and malt beverages The FAA Act provides that these regulations should among other things prohibit consumer deception and the use of misleading statements on labels and ensure that labels provide the consumer with adequate information as to the identity and quality of the product The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) administers the regulations promulgated under the FAA Act
Part 4 ofthe TTB regulations (27 CFR part 4) allows the establishment of definitive viticultural areas and the use of their names as appellations of origin on wine labels and in wine advertisements Part 9 of the TTB regulations (27 CFR part 9) contains the list of approved viticultural areas
Definition Section 425(e)(1)(i) ofthe TTB
regulations (27 CFR 425(e)(1)(i)) defines a viticultural area for American wine as a delimited grape-growing region distinguishable by geographical features the boundaries of which have been recognized and defined in part 9 of the regulations These designations allow vintners and consumers to attribute a given quality reputation or other characteristic of a wine made from grapes grown in an area to its geographic origin The establishment of viticultural areas allows vintners to describe more accurately the origin of their wines to consumers and helps consumers to identify wines they may purchase Establishment of a viticultural area is neither an approval nor an endorsement by TTB of the wine produced in that area
Requirements Section 425(e)(2) of the TTB
regulations outlines the procedure for proposing an American viticultural area and provides that any interested party
Us Department ofHomelaDd Secmity Washington DC 10229
bull ~
US Customs and Border Protection
AUG 15 2fXJJ
VE5-3-02-QTRRBSTCCCI - ti015502-GG-
Mr leon Sutcliffe Director Port Operations Camivai Cruise Unes Camival Place 3655 NW 87Avenue Miami Aorlda 33178
RE P~nger Vessef Services Ad Coastwise Transportation 46 USC sect 55103 19 CFR sect 480a(b)
Dear Mr Sutcliffe
As you know US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) enforces the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) codified at TItle 46 United States Code section 55103 (46 USC 55103) This statute prohibits non-coastwise-qualifled vessels (ie those vessels not US-buill owned and documented with a coastwise endorsement) from transporting passengers between porls or places within the United States The regUlations promUlgated pursuant to the PVSA are found at TrtJe 19 Code of Federal Regulations section 4808 (19 CFR 4808)
It has come to our attention that passenger vessels of your company are engaging in cruise itineraries that include ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands Two USAlagged coastwise-endorsed passenger vessefs are also currenUy engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of caD wittlin the Hawaiian Islands
As part of your cruise itineraries some of your foreign-flagged vessels depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period and ultimately rebJm to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their endse For example the MS ZAANDAM of Holand America Lines departs San Diego cruises the Hawaiian Islands stops in Ensenada from 800pm to 11 OOpmbull and returns to san Diego CBP believes these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because It appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA -- - - ~~~------
Please be advised that CBP is taking steps to publish this position Should have any questions pertaining to this matter please contact Mr Glen Vereb Chief Cargo Security Carriers and Immigration Branch at (202) 572-8724
Sincerely
F Jl E EST Y LEe A U I 5 I N Gmiddot
December 21 2007
The Honorable W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection co Border Security Regulations Branch Office ofInternational Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229
Re Hawaii Coastwise Cruises (USCBP-2007-0098) Comments in Response to Proposed Interpretation
Dear Commissioner Basham
NCL America Inc1 (NCLA) submits these comments in support ofthe efforts ofCustoms and Border Protection to enforce the Passenger Vessel Services Act and the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative as applied to Hawaii coastwise cruises
1 Introduction and Summary of Position
NCLA operates three large oceangoing US flag cruise ships in Hawaii These ships are documented under US flag and are required to operate in regular service in Hawaii pursuant to the authority of the Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative a 2003 federal statute intended to revitalize the US flag cruise industry and to maximize economic and national security benefits to the United States (the 2003 Act)
NCLA has invested $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships pursuant to the 2003 Act and in direct reliance on the protections of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) and its proper enforcement The PVSA limits the transportation ofpassengers between US ports to coastwise documented US flag ships Its statutory protections recognize that US flag ships have significantly higher operational costs in part because they are subject to more stringent US laws including US labor laws and federal
1 NCL America Inc is a US corporation incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware headquartered in Honolulu Hawaii As a US corporation it is subject to US taxes at both the federal and state level The Chief Executive Officer the Chairman of the Board and all of the Board of Directors of NCL America are US citizens The company is also subject to US labor and employment laws and is required by statute to maintain a workforce comprised primarily ofUS citizens
700 Bishop St SUite 900 I Honolulu HawMi 96813 I Tel 8085273800 Fax 8085273820 I ndcom
2
income tax among others The NCLA ships operating in Hawaii are the only large oceangoing cruise ships operating under US flag In furtherance of the policy goals of the PVSA and the 2003 Act these ships have created over 4000 seafaring jobs all subject to US minimum wage and other labor statutes
Since 2003 there has been a significant increase in capacity in the Hawaii market from foreign flag ships providing cruise service to Hawaii from the West Coast Many of these foreign flag cruises are marketed as Hawaii cruises and consist entirely ofUS ports ofcall with the sole exception of a token stop in Mexico for as little as an hour late at night under circumstances where passengers are not permitted to get offthe ship There are no reported rulings approving these particular foreign flag itineraries
Lower cost foreign competition in the Hawaii market has unfairly hurt NCLAs operations NCLA has incurred substantial losses which have contributed significantly to its decision earlier this year to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAll from US flag and reshydeploy it foreign Unfair foreign competition poses an imminent threat to the remaining US flag passenger vessels operating in the Hawaii trades pursuant to the 2003 Act
As the agency statutorily charged with implementation of the 2003 Act the US Department ofTransportation Maritime Administration (MARAn) is aware of the threat foreign flag Hawaii itineraries pose to the US flag fleet and brought the situation to the attention ofthe US Department ofHomeland Security Bureau ofCustoms and Border Protection (CBP or Customs) Customs determined that the primary object of these itineraries was coastwise and that the Ensenada stop was an evasion of the PVSA
In August 2007 Customs provided written notice to the affected foreign lines and their trade association that the existing itineraries were contrary to the PVSA None of these lines sought advance rulings even after the Customs notice with respect to their Hawaii itineraries pursuant to Customs regulations and many continued to market the itineraries as Hawaii cruises NCLA supports the efforts ofCustoms and MARAD to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act for Hawaii cruises
2 Statutory Authority for Customs Proposed Interpretation
(a) Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA)
Congress passed the PVSA in 1886 to protect the US maritime transportation industry from foreign competition2 Protection is afforded through penalty assessments on foreign vessels transporting passengers between US ports or places directly or by way ofa foreign port 3 As Congress and the courts have recognized coastwise protections for the US maritime transportation industry are only one dimension of the PVSA Operating in conjunction with other coastwise laws and with the US
2 See United States v Honduran SS GRANADA 35 F Supp 892 894 (BD Pa 1940)(citing purpose of PVSA to meet threats to the practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping which was to be preserved for US ships)
46 USc sect 55103 (originally 46 USC App 289)
3
documentation laws the PVSA also enhances military sealift in times ofnational emergency sustains a US merchant marine and supports the US shipbuilding and repair industry4
(b) Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative (the 2003 Act)
Over the past decade Congress has sought to reinforce the goals of the PVSA by providing mechanisms to revitalize the oceangoing US flag cruise fleet particularly in Hawaii The Project America legislation enacted in 1997 authorized among other things the re~flagging ofone existing cruise ship contingent on the operator contracting for the construction oftwo new oceangoing cruise shipss Following the default of the operator under the original contract Congress enacted the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative for the purpose ofrecovering economic and national security benefits to the United States bull 6 These same goals of the original PVSA were expressly referenced in the legislative history of the 2003 Act which emphasized that these ships will be assets available in time ofnational emergency and will significantly expand the pool ofqualified seafarers upon which the US Department ofDefense relies to crew non-combatant vessels
The 2003 Act authorizes the US documentation ofthree cruise ships for operation in regular service in Hawaii subject to certain conditions including a prohibition on operating in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico and the Caribbean Sea and a requirement that all vessel repair work be undertaken in the United States MARAD is charged with implementation of the 2003 Act
3 Customs Implementation of PVSA
(a) Regulations
The current regulations implementing the PVSA were published by Customs in 19858 The growth of the foreign flag cruise industry in North America and in particular the development of the Alaska cruise market led to an effort in 1984 to amend the thenshyexisting regulations to increase the ease of administration and operational flexibility The effort to change the regulation had support from US port interests who saw benefit in the potential increase in the number ofUS ports that foreign vessels could call and was opposed by proponents ofpotential US flag projects as detrimental to efforts to revitalize the US fleet 9 The preamble to the 1985 rule emphasized that it was of paramount importance to consider the primary object ofpassengers in taking a
4 See American Hawaii Cruises v Skinner 713 F Supp 452 457 (DDC 1989) (recognizing the contribution of the PVSA and the Jones Act in helping to secure national defense by maintaining a merchant marine oftbe best equipped and most suitable types ofvessels sufficient to serve in time of war or national emergency) see also Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 30 (DC Cir 1984) Wirth Ltd v SIS Acadia Forest 537 F2d 1272 1281 n32 (5th Cir 1976) S Public Law 105-56 Section 8109 (111 Stat 1203 1244) (Oct 81997 ) 6 Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II General Provisions - Department ofCommerce Section 211 (117 Stat 1179) (Feb 20 2003) 1 149 Cong Rec S1118 (dailyed Jan 17 2003(statement ofSenator Inouye) 8 19 CFR sect 480a 950 Fed Reg 26981 (July I 1985)
4
voyage10 a concept which is reinforced elsewhere in Customs regulations11 In its analysis of the comments received at the time Customs accepted the view ofport interests that the modified rule would help their business but did so recognizing the absence ofa regular salt water US flag passenger fleet Customs acknowledged the potential harm to prospective efforts to revitalize the US flag passenger fleet and expressly cautioned that if it were ever shown that coastwise qualified vessels in competition with foreign vessels were in fact hurt by the modified Customs regulation then Customs would immediately reconsider its position12
(b) Customs Rulings
Given the significant penalties associated with violating the PVSA13 Customs regulations expressly provide a mechanism for the owner or charterer of a foreign vessel or any other interested person to request an advisory ruling as to whether a contemplated voyage would be considered in violation of the PVSA14 Customs regulations provide that vessel operators can rely on these ruling letters only to the extent that the facts and circumstances are identical to those in the ruling letter IS
Notwithstanding the fact that several foreign cruise lines offer Hawaii itineraries originating in a US mainland port and calling at Hawaii ports with a token intervening stop in Mexico there are no reported rulings expressly approving such an itinerary for these foreign cruise lines 16
4 The Cruise Industry in Hawaii
(a) NCL America Returns US flag to the Oceangoing Passenger Fleet
Pursuant to the requirements ofthe 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative NCLA agreed to promote US-flag cruising enhance military sealift capacity and expand the US maritime labor base No other major cruise line had ever undertaken such a commitment to the US flag and the public policy objectives Congress sought to achieve under the PVSA or the 2003 Act Introduction ofPRIDE OF ALOHA in 2004 was a significant development in the maritime industry because it marked the restoration ofthe
10 Id at 26983 11 Customs Regulations include a provision on the effect ofruling letters and with respect to carrier rulings the applicable regulation refers to rulings setting forth a determination as to whether or not the primary object of a contemplated voyage is coastwise transportation in violation of46 USC sect 289 [pYSA codified at 46 USC sect55103] 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 12 50 Fed Reg at 26983 13 A modem cruise ship with 2400 passengers for example would be subject to a fine of$720OOO per cruise based on the statutory penalty of$300 for each passenger transported in violation of the Act 14 19 CFR sect 480a(d) IS 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 16 There is one older reported mling involving a request to drop the Ensenada port call from a Los AngeleslHawaiiLos Angeles itinerary which Customs held would violate the PYSA In dicta Customs acknowledged that the itinerary could be in compliance if the Ensenada call were not dropped but did not address the issue ofwhether a one hour service call where no passengers depart the vessel would be sufficient The carrier that obtained that ruling has since left the Hawaii market See Customs Ruling HQ 114078 re Crystal Hannony (Nov 4 1997)
5
us flag to the oceangoing cruise industry A contemporaneous press release from the Us Department ofTransportation reported that the three US-flag cruise ships to be introduced pursuant to the 2003 Act were expected to create more than 20000 US jobs generate more than $825 million ofexpenditures in the US economy and create nearly $360 million in federal tax revenue by the end of 200717 In 2005 the PRIDE OF AMERICA was introduced and in 2006 the third vessel PRIDE OF HAWAll was introduced to Hawaii Both the PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAIl offer 7shyday inter-island Hawaii itineraries whereas PRIDE OF ALOHA operates on 7 and 10 day cruises exclusively among the islands ofHawaii as well as 11 day cruises that include a foreign port call at Fanning Island To date NCLA has invested over $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships in furtherance ofthe policy objectives of the PVSA and the 2003 Act These ships employ over 4000 seafarers and generate hundreds ofmillions of dollars in benefits for Hawaii and the nation
(b) Significant Increase in Foreign Flag Capacity Since 2003
The most significant change in the Hawaii cruise market since 2003 has been the dramatic increase in capacity A significant portion ofthis capacity increase is directly attributable to NCLAs fulfillment ofthe Congressional mandate in the 2003 Act However foreign-flag operations in the Hawaii market as measured in passenger nights18 have skyrocketed Based on MARAn data derived from the US Customs Border Patrol Vessel Entrance and Clearance documents the passenger nights for foreign flag vessels departing from the West Coast to Hawaii on round trip cruise have increased several hundredfold during this period19 See Exhibit A
(c) NCLA Has Incurred Substantial Losses During this Period
Since 2004 NCLA has lost cumulatively more than a quarter ofa billion dollars A principal reason for these losses has been the increase in foreign capacity in this market NCLA has taken significant steps to reduce costs to address the increase in foreign competition but NCLA is at an inherent disadvantage when competing against foreign companies that are not subject to US labor laws US tax laws and other laws Ofcourse the statutory protections of the PVSA are intended to address these very issues That is why Customs immediate action to implement the proposed interpretation is critical for the US flag fleet Regrettably NCLA has already been forced to reduce overall capacity early next year with the withdrawal ofPRIDE OF HAWAlI to another
17 DOT Press Release dated June 72004 see also DOT Press Release dated August 132004 in connection with visit to PRIDE OF ALOHA by US Transportation Secretary Norman Y Mineta 11 Passenger nights (also referred to as passenger capacity days) are calculated by multiplying the number ofpassengers per vessel by the number ofcruise days in each itinerary by the number of cruises This is the unit ofmeasurement employed by MARAn In contrast passenger bed supply (also referred to as passenger capacity) data reflects only the number ofberths per vessel multiplied by the number of cruises and hence understates the market by excluding the full economic value ofthe cruise perfonned 19 In 2003 the total number ofpassenger nights for round-trip West Coast to Hawaii cruises was 303325 which jumped by 353 to 1072329 in 2006 and by 430 to 1304546 from 2003 to 2007 (The 2007 figure is based on MARAD data for six months and a1ll1ualized by published itineraries for the balance of the year)
6
market for operation under foreign flag This move alone will result in the loss ofover 1000 American seafaring jobs
5 Customs Proposed Interpretation is Necessary to Further the Important National Security and Public Policy Objectives Embodied in Federal Law
As Customs has properly noted the increase in foreign competition in the Hawaii trades in contravention of the PVSA pose[s] an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels[] As the operator of these ships NCLA has a vested interest in protecting the jobs ofthe thousands ofAmerican crewmembers and cruise ship service providers who support these vessels NCLA also has an interest in protecting the substantial economic investment it has made to revitalize the US flag passenger vessel fleet But a balancing of interests in the context of Customs enforcement ofexisting law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act requires a much broader focus
The legislative history of the 2003 Act expressly recognized the national security and public policy import ofestablishing a US flag passenger vessel fleet as a means to maintain the countrys preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool of qualified seafarers and as a means to help sustain a fleet ofUS-flag vessels to su~ort
the nations military and maritime industrial base for times ofnational emergency
Congress understood the importance ofestablishing a viable US flag cruise ship fleet as something larger than the vessels themselves These national security and public policy objectives must be weighed in the balance as Customs assesses how best to interpret its rules to give effect to the PVSA and the 2003 Act
6 Customs Should Clarify that the Proposed Interpretation is Limited to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades and Adopt Reasonable Measures to Ensure Sufficient Foreign Content
Since publication ofthe proposed interpretative rule several commenters have observed that the scope of the proposed interpretation is ambiguous because the language of Section VI referencing any cruise itinerary appears broader than the caption Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises and the entire discussion in the published notice which focuses exclusively on US-flag coastwise vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA agrees that the proposed interpretation should be clarified so that its scope is limited to vessels operating roundtrip voyages from US ports that include Hawaii port calls
NCLA supports the concept reflected in the proposed interpretive rule that round trip Hawaii itineraries from US ports on foreign ships must include a material and measurable degree ofoverall foreign port content as compared to US port content
20 149 Congo Rec S1117 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)
7
(a) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is also Consistent with Subsequent Congressional Enactments Modifying the PVSA
As discussed above it is well established that the PVSA was designed toRrotect US-flag vessels from foreign competition in the coastwise and domestic trades 1
Subsequent legislative enactments however have appropriately differentiated among distinct geographic markets and trades including Canada Alaska Puerto Rico and Hawaii based on the existence or non-existence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
In 1938 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers by Canadian passenger vessels on Lake Ontario and the St Lawrence River until such time as passenger service shall be established by vessels of the United States22 Similarly in 1961 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers on Canadian vessels within Alaska or between Alaska and other points in the United States until such time as passenger service is established by vessels ofthe United States23
In 1984 Congress modified the application ofthe PVSA to pennit the transportation ofpassengers between Puerto Rico and other United States ports on foreign-flag vessels24 As with the other statutory exceptions this provision is qualified and expires [o]n a showing that a United States passenger vessel qualified to engage in the coastwise trade is offering or advertising passenger service between a port in Puerto Rico and another port in the United States2S
Congress acted again with respect to the application of the PVSA with the 2003 Act in which it authorized three vessels that did not meet the US-build requirements of the PVSA to operate as modem US-flagged cruise ships in regular service in Hawaii26 The 2003 Act imposes a specific geographic limitation on the operation of any ship documented under this authority to operations only in regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands ofHawaii and shall not transport passengers in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico or the Caribbean Sea except in certain limited circumstances27 As above the limited nature of the 2003 Act is express it is strictly limited to the large ocean-going cruise ships and then only those operating in the regular Hawaii service where there are no US-flag operations28
21 See Act ofJune 19 1886 c 421 sec 8 24 Stat 81 Act of February 171898 c 26 sec 2 30 Stat 248 22 S] Res 174 75th Cong 52 Stat 223 (Alp 251938) codified at46 USC sect 55121(a) 23 See Pub L 87-77 75 Stat 196 (Jun 30 1961) codified at 46 USC sect 55121(b) 24 See Pub L 98-563 98 Stat 2916 (Oct 301984) codified at 46 USC sect 55104(b) 25 46 USC sect 55104(c)(l) see also 46 USC 46 USc sect 55104(cX2)(expiration of exemption upon availability ofa non-coastwise qualified US-flag vessel offering service in the relevant market) 26 149 Congo Rec SI118 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)(statementofSen Inouye) 27 Pub L 108-7 117 Stat 79 (Feb 20 2003) 28 149 Congo Rec S11l9 (dailyed Jan 17 2003Xstatement of Sen Inouye)
8
In each ofthese instances Congress fashioned a narrow exception to the PVSA that differentiated among distinct geographic markets based on the existence or nonshyexistence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
As the federal agency responsible for administering the 2003 Act MARAD requested that Customs act to protect US flag passenger vessel interests in the Hawaii trades29 Limiting the scope ofthe proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades also reflects Customs appreciation of the PVSA in the context of the subsequent Congressional action30 Viewing the Congressional modifications to the PVSA as a whole Congress has specifically and repeatedly differentiated among distinct geographic markets when it has found it necessary and appropriate to do so to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests It is well established that the proper interpretation of a statutory scheme includes consideration ofsubsequent statutes even though the underlying statute itselfhas not been expressly amended31 Accordingly Customs should likewise limit the scope ofthe proposed PVSA interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades because that is the only geographic market as mandated by the 2003 Act in which oceangoing US-flag cruise ships are operating
(b) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Consistent with Public Policy Objectives of the 1985 Rulemaking
In 1985middot Customs liberalized the regulations implementing the PVSA by eliminating certain regulatory prohibitions on foreign flag vessels In the context of the 1985 rulemaking Customs justified a relaxation ofthe regulations on the grounds that it would simplify the administration of the PVSA and would benefit the economy ofcertain American coastwise ports without eroding the statutory protection given to American vessels engaged in solely domestic trade32
Customs thus sought to reconcile US port economic interests with US-flag passenger vessel interests Both of these twin policy objectives are furthered by
29 See 72 Fed Reg 65488 (Nov 21 2007)( MARAn bas asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the ~eratiODS ofcoastwise-qualified cruise ship operators)
See generally FDA v Brown amp Williamson Tobacco Corp 529 US 120 132-133 (2000)(assessing propriety ofagency construction ofFood DIUg and Cosmetics Act and descnbing responsibility of reviewing cowt to assess statutory provisions in the context of subsequent legislative enactments) 31 See Brown amp Williamson 529 US 143 (holding that proper construction ofstatutory provision must necessarily assume that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications ofa later statute This is particularly so where the scope of the earlier statute is broad but the subsequent statutes more specifically address the topic athand) see also United States v Estate ofRomani 523 US 517 530-531 (1998)( holding that a later-enacted statute should control the construction of the federal lien priority statute a specific policy embodied in a later federal statute should control om construction of the [earlier] statute even though it ha[s] not been expressly amended) United States v Fausto 484 US 439453 (1988)(The courts frequently find Congress to have done this - whenever in fact they interpret a statutory text in the light ofsurrounding texts that happen to have been subsequently enacted This classic judicial task of reconciling many laws enacted over time and getting them to make sense in combination necessarily assumes that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications of a later statute) 32 50 Fed Reg 26982 (JuI 11985)
9
limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades
As noted earlier the 2003 Act limits the operation of the NCLA US-flag oceangoing passenger vessels to regular service in Hawaii Because there are no oceangoing US-flag vessels operating in any market other than the Hawaii trades Customs should limit the scope of the proposed interPretation to that market Such a limitation protects US flag passenger vessel interests without prejudicing US port interests In contrast an application of the proposed interpretation to any itinerary would needlessly harm US port interests unrelated to Hawaii without any countervailing benefit to US-flag passenger vessel interests Accordingly limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation is consistent with the public policy objectives of the 1985 rulemaking as well as the 2003 Act
(c) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Also Consistent with Customs Commitment to Revisit the Scope of its Rules to Protect US-Flag Interests
The relaxation ofthe PVSA regulations in 1985 was premised in large part on Customs finding that there was no regular salt water US-flag passenger fleet in operation at that time33 Acknowledging that the relaxed regulations could harm USshyflag interests Customs committed in the preamble ofthe 1985 final rule to immediately reconsider its interpretation if it is ever shown that there is a viable US flag vessel operating in competition with foreign-flag vessels34
Congress enacted the 2003 Act to stimulate the development of a US flag cruise ship industry As noted above the legislative history ofthat Act makes clear that Congress sought to revitalize the US-flag cruise industry as a means to maintain Americas preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool ofqualified seafarers help sustain a fleet of US flag vessels to support our military and a maritime industrial base create thousands of seagoing and shoreside American jobs and stimulate the development ofa US flag cruise ship tourism business with the commensurate benefits to the US tax base the US economy and US employment
Customs is now acting at MARADs request to revisit its interpretation ofthe regulations implementing the PVSA because recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwise-qualified cruise ship operations35 That is to say that the concerns articulated by Customs in the context of the 1985 rulemaking have materialized and US-flag passenger vessel interests are in fact being hanned in the Hawaii trades by foreign competitors
33 50 Fed Reg 26983 34Id
3S 72 Fed Reg 56488 (Nov 21 2007)
I
10
Because the US-flag passenger vessels are limited by statute to regular service in Hawaii limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the
Hawaii trades is consistent with Customs historical commitment to revisit its interpretation ofthe implementing regulations to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests
7 Conclusion
For the reasons stated above NCLA commends the efforts ofCustoms and MARAn to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act as applied to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA respectfully requests Customs to move ahead promptly with p~blicati~nof a final interpretive rule to advance the important national security arid public policy objectives ofthese laws
We greatly appreciate the opportunity to submit these comments
Sincerely
~~~ Alan T Yamamoto Vice President Hawaii Operations
Exhibit A
Ship Name Serenade Of The Seas Departure Port San Diego California Ports of Call San Diego California Kailua Kona Hawaii Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii Hlo Hawaii Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii Ensenada Mexico San Qigo California
2007 Date(s) Oct 05
Sailing Itinerary
Day Port H ~rrive Depart Activity
05-0ct San Diego California 500 PM
06-0ct Cruising
07-0ct Cruising
08-0ct Cruising
09-0ct Cruising
10-0ct Kailua Kona Hawaii 700 AM 900 PM Tendered
11-00t Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 1000 AM Tendered
12middot0ct Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 900 PM Tendered
13-0ct Hilo Hawaii 700 AM 600 PM Docked
14middot0ct Honoulu (Oahu) Hawaii 700 AM Docked
15-0ct Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii 200 AM Docked
6-0ct CrUising
17-0ct Cruising
18-0ct Cruising
19middot0ct Cruising
-7 20-00t
O-Oot
Ensenada ~i1exico
San Deqo California
i 00 ~r1
700 ~M
200 oM D1Jcked ~
HOW TO NA YIGATE THIS BROCHURE
CHART A JOURNEY OF DISCOVERY
Alaska Cruises amp Cruisetours
CanadaNew England Cruises pg 7
7
8-10
11-14
Exotics Cruises amp Cruisetours
Mexican Riviera Cruises pg
Caribbean Cruises pgs
Europe Cruises amp Cruisetours pgs
AustraliaNew Zealand pg 15
15-16
16-18
18-19
19
20
Asia pgs
Tahiti Hawaii South Pacific pgs
South America pgs
Connoisseur Voyages pg
Exotics Cruisetours pg
Panama Canal pgs 21-22
Cruise Plusreg
Cruise Calendar
pgs5-6
pgs23
ALASKA CRUISES
VOYAGE OF THE GLACIERS
2004 DEPARTURE DATES
CORAUISLAND PRINCESS7 SaturdllydqxtTturtS May 8 Coni 21 Dawn Aug 2 Dawn 10 Dawn 26 Islmd 7 IslandDAYS SUNDAWN PRINCESS 15 Island 28 Sun 9 SunMondaydqJaTtures 17 Sun )ul 3 Coral 14 Coral 22 Coral S Dawn 16 Dawn 24 Dawn 10 Island 21 Island 29 Island 12 Sun 23 Sun 31 Sun 17 Coni 28 Coral
Jun 5 Coral 19 Dawn 30 Dawn NORTHBOUND 7 Dawn 24 Island Sop 4 Island
12 Island 26 Sun 6 Sun 14 Sun 31 Coral 19 Coral
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Vancouver BC PM 2 Inside Passage Scenic Cruising 3 Ketchikan 4 Juneau 5 Skagway 8PM 6 Glacier Bay National Park Scenic Cruising 3PM 7 College Fjord Scenic Cruising 3PM 8 Whittler (Anchorage) DISEMBARK AM
VOYAGE OF THE GLACIERS
2004 DEPARTURE DATES
7 CORALISlAND PRINCESS Saturday departures
May 15 Coral 26 CoraDAYS SUNDAWN PRINCESS 17 Dawn 28 DawnMondllydtpartures 22 Island )uI 3 Island 24 Sun 5 Sun 29 Coral 10 Coral 31 Dawn 12 Dawn
)un S Island 17 Island 7 Sun 19 Sun
SOUTHBOUND 12 Coral 24 Coral 14 Dawn 26 Dawn 19 Island 31 Island 21 Sun Aug 2 Sun
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE 1 WhlttierIAnrhora
630AM 1030 AM 630AM 630AM 830AM
6PM
7 Coral 9 Dawn
14 Island 16 Sun 21 Coral 23 Dawn 28 Island 30 Sun
Sep 4 6
Coral Dawn
11 Island 13 Sun
DEPART EMBARK PM
~30AM 830 PM
SPM 4PM
545PM
INSIDE PASSAGE
SAPPHIRE PRINCESS 7 DAYS Sundaydtpartuns
ROUNDTRIP from
SEATTLE
2004 DEPARTURE DATES
May 16 18 23 25
Jun 30 6
Aug 1 8
13 15 20 22 27 29
Jul 4 11
Sep S 12
t Endicott Arm wy be substituted on somtYOiiCS due to~orwcatherconditlom
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE 1 Seattle 2 At Sea 3 Ketchikan 630AM 4 Tracy Arm Scenic Cruisingt 6AM 4 Juneau lPM 5 Skagway 6AM 6 At Sea 7 Victoria BC HM 8 Seattle DISEMBARK AM
DEPART EMBARK PM
5PM lOAM 10 PM 6PM
12M
INSIDE PASSAGE
7 DIAMOND PRINCESS DAYS saturday dqllu1uus
ROUNDTRIP from
SEATTLE
2004 DEPARTURE DATES
May 8 17 15 24 22 31 19 Aug 7
Jun 5 14 12 21 19 28 26 Sep 4
Jul 3 11 10
t EndkottAnn maybe substituted on some voyages due tokcQlweuherconditlom
CRUISE ITINERARY
ARRIVE DEPART
INSIDE PASSAGE
10 REGAL PRINCESS DAYS
ROUNDTRIP from
SAN FRANCISCO
2004 DEPARTURE DATES
May 6 Jul 5 16 IS 26 25
)un 5 Aug 4 15 14 15
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE
lPM 7AM 7AM 7AM
7AM
DEPART EMBARK PM
~PM 830PM
12 N 5PM
2PM
Coral Princess in College Fjord Alaska
ALASKA CRUISETOURS
HEART Of ALASKA CRUISETOUR HEART Of ALASKA CRUISETOUR
e 1312 DAYS DAYS e
CRUI5ETOUR CRUI5ETOUR 35 125
2004 DEPARTURE DATES2004 DEPARTURE DATES
Date Ship Date Ship Date Ship Date Ship
May 10 Coral Aug 2 Coral Mayll Coral Aug 3 Coral 12 Dawn 4 Dawn
13 Dawn 5 Dawn 17 Island 9 Island 18 Island 10 Island
DAY PORT 19 Sun 11 Sun
20 Sun 12 Sun 24 Coral 16 Coral 25 Coral 17 Coral 26 Dawn 18 Dawn 27 Dawn 19 Dawn 31 Island 23 Island
Jun 1 Island 24 Island Jun 2 Sun 25 Sun 3 Sun 26 Sun 7 Coral 30 Coral 8 Coral 31 Coral 9 Dawn Sep 1 Dawn
10 Dawn Sep 2 Dawn 14 Island Island6 5 DenaliAnchorage15 Island 7 Island 16 Sun 8 Sun 17 Sun 9 Sun 21 Coral 6 AnchorageWhittierEmbark22 Coral 23 Dawn 24 Dawn 28 Island 7 College Fjord Scenic Cruising 29 Island 30 Sun
)u1 1 Sun Jul 5 Coral 8 Glacier Bay National Park Scenic Cruising 6 Coral 7 Dawn 9 Skagway12 Island
13 Island 14 Sun 8 Dawn
10 Juneau15 Sun 19 Coral 20 Coral 21 Dawn 11 Ketchikan 22 Dawn 26 Island 27 Island 28 Sun 12 Inside Passage Scenic Cruising 29 Sun 13 VancouverPark Rangers are at our lodges to enrich your stay
HEART Of ALASKA CRUISETOUR ALASKA WILDERNESSKENAI CRUISETOUR ALASKA WILDERNESSCOPPER RIVER CRUISETOUR
14 1314 DAYS DAYS DAYSe e e
CRUI5ETOUR CRUI5ETOURCRUI5ETOUR
145 185165
2004 DEPARTURE DATES
2004 DEPARTURE DATESDate Ship Date Ship 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
Date Ship Date ShipMayl Dawn Aug 1 Coral 16 Island 3 Dawn Date Ship Date Ship 18 Sun 8 Island May 11 Dawn Aug 1 Coral 23 Coral 10 Sun MaylO Coral Aug 2 Coral 25 Dawn 15 Coral
16 Island 3 Dawn 12 Dawn 4 Dawn
30 Island 17 Dawn 18 Sun 8 Island
17 Island 9 Island Jun 1 Sun 22 Island
23 Coral 10 Sun 19 Sun 11 Sun
6 Coral 24 Sun 25 Dawn 15 Coral
26 Dawn 18 Dawn 8 Dawn 29 Coral
Jun 1 Sun 17 Dawn 31 Island 23 Island
13 Island 31 Dawn 6 Coral 24 Sun
Jun 2 Sun 25 Sun 15 Sun Sep 5 Island
8 Dawn 29 Coral 7 Coral Sep 1 Dawn
20 Coral 7 Sun 13 Island 31 DaWn
9 Dawn 6 Island 22 Dawn
15 Sun Sep 7 Sun 14 Island 8 Sun
27 Island 20 Coral
16 Sun 29 Sun
22 Dawn 23 Dawn
)ul 4 Coral 29 Sun
28 Island 6 Dawn
Jul 4 Coral 30 Sun
11 Island 6 Dawn
Jul 5 Coral 13 Sun
11 Island 7 Dawn
18 Coral 13 Sun
12 Island 20 Dawn
18 Coral 14 Sun
25 Island 20 Dawn
21 Dawn 27 Sun
27 Sun 26 Island 28 Sun
CRUISETOUR ITINERARY CRUISETOUR ITINERARY
DAY PORT By S~a By Land
1 fairbanks
Mt McKinleyWhittierEmabrk
College fjord ~ce~lc Cnlsi~g
Juneau
CRUISETOUR IIINERARY
DAY PORT
CRUISETOUR ITINERARY
DAY PORT
CRUISETOUR ITINERARY
PORT By Sea By Land
College Fjord Scenic Cruising Glacier Bay National Park Scenic Cruising
13 Vancouver
CANADA amp NEW ENGLAND CRUISES
CANADANEW ENGLAND CANADACOLONIAL AMERICA CANADANEW ENGLAND
10 REGAL 13 REGAL 7 GRAND DAYS PRINCESS DAYS PRINCESSDAYS PRINCESS
sail between ROUNDTRIP NEW YORK
MONTREAL fromto
CITY NEW YORKFT LAUDERDALE and CITY
MONTREAL 2004 DEPARTURE DATE
CRUISE IlINERARY CRUISE ITINERARY 2004 CRUISE IIINERARY Oct 31 DEPARTURE DATES
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 2004 Sep 12 1 1 New York City New York EMBARK PM Montreal Quebec EMBARK PMDEPARTURE DATES Sep 19 New York City New York EMBARK PM
2 Newport Rhode Island 830 AM 4PM 2 Quebec City Quebec 6AM 4PM Sep 261Sep 11 Oct 3
Sep21t 1 3 Bostoni Massachusetts 830AM SPM i3 At Sea Oct 10 2 At Sea
Olttl 4 Bar Harbor Maine 8AM 6PM 4 Halifax Nova Scotia 12 N 6PM Oct I]Octllt
Oct 24Oct 21 S Saint John New Brunswick 7AM 3PM l~ Bar Harbor Maine 8AM 6PM Halifax Nova Scotia 8AM 5 PM
6 Halifax Nova Scotia 8AM 5PM 6 Boston Massachusetts 8AM 5PM
17 At Sea 7 Newport Rhode Island 9AM 6PM 4 Saint John New Brunswick 9AM 5PM
8 Saguenay River Scenic Cruising 9 AM 2PM 8 New York City New York 8AM 5PM Bar Harbor Maine 7AM 6PMi9 ~8 Quebec City Quebec 11 PM Norfolk Virginia 12 N 10 PM
(overnight onboard ship) 10 Baltimore Maryland 8AM 5PM Boston Massachusetts 7AM 5PM 9 Quebec City Quebec 5PM 11 At Sea
Montreal Quebec 8AM10 12 Charleston South Carolina 7AM 5PM 7 Newport Rhode Island 8AM 5PM
tltneTaryoperaresinrtvtrstorder (overnight onboard ship) 13 At Sea t Itnaary opaates in revu5t order 8 New York City DISEMBARK AMPort times may vary Port times may vary11 Montreal Quebec DISEMBARK AM 14 Ft Lauderdale Florida DISEMBARK AM New York
MEXICAN RIVIERA CRUISES
MEXICAN RIVIERA MEXICAN RIVIERA MEXICAN RIVIERA
DIAMOND DAYS
107 DIAMOND PRINCESS 10 SAPPHIRE PRINCESSDAYS DAYS PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIPROUNDTRIP from fromfrom
LOS ANGELES LOS ANGELESSAN FRANCISCO
2004 DEPARTURE OATIS Sep 25 2004 DEPARTURE DATE
Oct 2 9 1623 30 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
Dec 29Sep 22Nov 6 13 20 27 Dec 4 11 22 Oct 2 12 221
Nov 1 11 2005 DEPARTURE OATIS
jan 815 22 29 Feb 5 12 19 26 MarS 12 19 26 tPortordtrllllllllmtsmaYNrApr 291623
CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 San Francisco EMBARK PM 1 Los Angeles (Long Beach) EMBARK PM
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
CRUISE ITINERARY DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
2 Catalina Island 1230 PM 630PM 2 At Sea Sat Los Angeles (Long Beach) EMBARK PM 3 Cabo San Lucas 9AM 6PM3-4 At Sea
5 Poerto Vallart 7AM 6PM 4 A~Sea
6 Mazatlan SAM 6PM 5 Acapulco SAM 11 PM 7 Cabo San Lucas SAM 6PM 6 Ixtapa (ZihaulIlnejo) 7AM 2PM
S At Sea 7 Puerto Vallarta SAM 7PM 9 San Dtego SAM 6PM 8 M~I~middot lAM -1Ft 10 At Sea 9-10 At Sea 11 San Francisco DISEMBARK AM 11 Los Angeles (Long Beach)
Sun AUea Mon AtSea Tue Poerto Vallarta Wed Mazatlan Thu Cabo San Luca( Fri At Sea Satmiddot Los Angeles (Long Beach)
CARIBBEAN CRUISES
EASTERN CARIBBEAN
7
EASTERN CARIBBEAN
7 7 DAYSDAYS DAYS
CARIBBEAN PRINCESS STAR PRINCESS GRAND PRINCESSSUN PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIP from from from
FT LAUDERDALE FT LAUDERDALE GALVESTON 2004 DEPARTIJRE DATES
CARIBBEAN PRINCESS Apr 24 2004 DEPARTURE DATES 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
CRUISE ITINERARYM~yl 1522 CRUISE I1INERARY JuI31724 DAY PORT Nov 14 28 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Dec 4 11 JunS 1226 Oct 31 Nov 13 20 27
Alii 1 1428 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Dec 12 26
Ott 2 9 162330 200S DEPARTURE DATES Sat Galveston EMBARK PMSep41825 Sat ft Lauderdale Sun ft Lauderdale EMBARK PM
Nov 6 132027 200S DEPARTURE DATESDet4 11 26middot Jan 8 15 22 29Sun At Sea Man At Sea 2005 DEPARTURE DATES ]an 9 23 Feb 5 12 19 26 Sun At Sea
CARIBBEAN PRINCESS Feb 6 20 MarS 121926 J~n 8152229 Mar 6 20 12M Apr 29 Man Belize City lPM 7PM Feb 512t 1926 MarS 121926 Apr 317 Apr2t 9 1623 Tue St Thomas 7 AM 6 PM Wed St Thomas BAM 6PM Tue Costa Maya (Mahahual) BAM 4PM
6PM Wed Grand CaYman l2N 7PM
Thu At Sea Fri At Sea Thu Cozumel lOAM 6 PM
4PM Fri At Sea
Sat Ft Lauderdale DISEMBARK AM Sun Ft Lauderdale DISEMBARK AM Sat Galveston DISEMBARK AM
CRUISE IlINERARY
ARRIVE DEPART
EMBARK PM
WESTERN CARIBBEAN
Sf Thomas US Virgin Islands Princess Cays
CARIBBEAN CRUISES
WESTERN CARIBBEAN WESTERN CARIBBEAN SOUTHERN CARIBBEAN EXPLORER
7 6 7 DAYS DAYS DAYS
CARIBBEAN PRINCESS STAR PRINCESS GRAND PRINCESS GOLDEN PRINCESS
DAWN PRINCESS
SAN JUAN ROUNDTRIPROUNDTRIP to fromfrom
GALVESTON SAN JUANFT LAUDERDALE
2004 DEPARTURE DATE2004 DEPARTURE DATES 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
CARIBB~~SflNCESS CRUISE ITINERARY Nov 7 CRUISE ITINERARY
My923 CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTJun 6 20 JUD 19
Jul lOt 31
May829t DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART )uI418 Sun San Juan EMBARK PM
Aug ll t Aug 11529
Sep 11
DAY PORT
Sep 12 26 Mon St Thomas 7AM 6PM STAR PRINCESS Princess Cays 9AM 4PM At Sea Oct 10 24
Nov 721 DecS19 Tue S Kitts 7AM 3PM
2005 DEPARTURE DATES Wed Grenada 9AM 3PM Dec 23 Coumel 7AM 5PM
Grand Cayman 7AM 4PM Jan 21630
2005 DEPARTURE DATES Feb 13 27 Thu Caracas (La Guaira) 9AM 7PM Mar 13 27STAR PRINCESS
Jan 21630 Apr 10 24 Feb 13 27 Ocho Rios 9AM 4PM Fri Aruba BAM 5PM Mar 13 27 Apr 10 24 At Sea
tMonlqQampIyrqlocrsCllhoRfm PltJrtQr-ondlimesmaywlrY Sun San Juan DISEMBARK AMFt Lauderdale DISEMBARK AM
EASTERN CARIBBEAN WESTERN CARIBBEAN CLASSIC SOUTHERN CARIBBEAN
8 7 7DAYS DAYS DAYS
CARIBBEAN GRAND PRINCESS GOLDEN PRINCESS PRINCESS
GALVESTONROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIP tofrom from
SAN JUANFT LAUDERDALE SAN JUAN
2004 DEPARTURE DATE 2004 DEPARTURE DATE 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
DeetS Apr 16CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE IflNERARY May 21630 CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE Jun 13 27DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Jul1125 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
1 Aug 8 221 Galveston EMBARK PM Sun Sanjuan EMBARK PMSep 5 19 Oct 3 17 312-3 At Sea At Sea Nov 14 28 Man At Sea Dec 12 26
st Thomas Cozumel BAM 6PM Tue Barbados 7AM 6PM 2005 DEPARTURE DATES
jan 9 23 Wed St Lucia 7 AMAntigua BAM 6PM Costa Maya (Mahahual) BAM 4PM 5PM Feb 620 Mar 6 20 Thu BAM 6PM Apr 317
At Sea Montego Bay 9AM 4PM Fri St Maarten BAM 6PM
7AM 6PM
Ft Lauderdale DISEMBARK AM Sanjuan DISEMBARK AM Sun San juan DISEMBARK AM
Oct 24 Nov 7 21 DecS19
DAWN PRINCESS
~
I
CARIBBEAN CRUISES
EASTERN CARIBBEAN ISLANDER SOUTHERN CARIBBEAN MEDLEY EASTERN CARIBBEAN
10 10 7 DAYS DAYSDAYS
GRAND PRINCESSDAWN PRINCESSSUN PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP NEW YORK CITYROUNDTRIP from from to
FT LAUDERDALE FT LAUDERDALE SAN JUAN
2004 DEPARnJRf DATE2004 DEPARTURE DATES2004 DEPARTURE DATES
Octn Oct Btl Oct 14CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE ITINERARYCRUISE ITINERARY 200s DEPARTURE DATENov 222 Nov 3t 23
Apr23tDAY PORT DEPART Dec 13 30Dee 12 ARRIVE DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Ft Lauderdale EMBARK PM 1 Ft Lauderdale EMBARK PM EMBARK PM2005 DEPARTURE DATES 2005 DEPARTURE DATES New York City 2 Princess Cays 9AM 4PM 2 At SeaJan 828 Jan 19t
Feb 17tt 3 AlSea Feb 8 28 3 At Sea 2-4 At Sea Mar919 Mar 20
4 St Thomas 7AM 6PM Apr 9 4 Cura~ao 8AM 5PM 5 St Maarten 7AM 6PM 5 Isla Margarita lOAM 4PM St Thomas 7AM 6PM
6 St Kitts 7AM 3PM 6 Barbados 9AM 6PM Dominica SAM 6PM7 8AM 5PM 7 Dominica 7 AM SPM
8 Antigua 9AM 6PM S St Thomas SAM 6PM St Maarten 7AM 6PM
9 9 At Sea
fllrtordtrlllldllmam4YYa1 10 At Sea 10 Princess Cays 9AM 4PM JlilltraryllptfatufnrfYUSfllrllcr t 11I1ll1Il1yopmltnlnrmTtronlcr t ItlntraryaptrattsIn rtVfntOrdtr San Juan DISEMBARK AM Port~rdtrQnd lilrW mil) illI) 11 Ft Lauderdale DISEMBARK AM PortlimtSlIIltlyYllry 11 Ft Lauderdale DISEMBARK AM Port ordtr lind time5 may VIlry
WESTERN CARIBBEAN ADVENTURER EASTERN CARIBBEAN VOYAGER
10 10 DAYS DAYS
SUN PRINCESS DAWN PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIPROUNDTRIP fromfrom
FT LAUDERDALEFT LAUDERDALE
2004 DEPARTURE DATES 2004 DEPARTURE DATES DAWN PRINCESS CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE IIINERARY
Oct 23 Oct 4 24 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Nov 12 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
Nov 13 Dec 2 29 Dec3tt 1 Ft Lauderdale EMBARK PM 1 Ft Lauderdale EMBARK PM
2 Princess Cays 9AM 4PM 2005 DEPARTURE DATES 2 At Sea2005 DEPARTURE DATES
DAWN PRINCESS Jan 183 At Sea 3 At Sea
Feb 7 27Jan 9 296 St Thomas 7AM 6PM Mar19 t 4 St Vincent lPM 6PM
Feb 180 Apr 8St Maarten 7 AM 5PM 5 Grenada 8AM 6PMMar 10f 301 Apr 19 At Sea 6 St Lucia 8AM 6PM
Ocho Rios 12N 6PM 7 Martinique 7AM 3PM
Grand cayman PM S St Thomas SAM 6PM
t IillUGI)lIptfQttsIn rnmtordtr Cozumel 8AM 6PM AlSea tt ~~~oI~~dtr 10 Princess Cays 9AM 4PMMOItQIl8clyrqausOclJollloJ
lwtordtrollllllllyenllllilJllIl) tltllltrlryOptrlll$In rnmtllrdtr AMOIltqollaynplactsOdlDRIos PM IortDrllralldllmallloyWl) Ft Lauderdale DISEMBARK AM
Willemstad Cura~ao
EUROPE CRUISES
GRAND MEDITERRANEAN GREEK ISLES MEDITERRANEANGREEK ISLES
12 1212 DAYS DAYSDAYS
STAR PRINCESS
STARSTAR PRINCESSPRINCESS
sail betweensail between VENICE BARCELONA VENICE to
andand BARCELONA VENICE ROME
CRUISE ITINERARY2004 DEPARTURE 2004 DEPARTURE2004 DEPARTURE CRUISE ITINERARYDATESCRUISE I I INERARY DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DATEDATES
Apr 10 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTMay 16middot DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Venice Italy (overnight onboard ship) EMBARK PM May 4 May18t Sep2St 1 Verdce Italy EMBARK PM
Jun 9 1 Barcelona Spain (overnight onboard ship) EMBARK PM 2 Venice Italy 2PM 2 At Seajune 21 t 2 Barcelona Spain 1 PM Dubrovnik Croatia 8AM 6PMJul3 3 Corfu Greece 8AM 6PM
lullS 3 Monte Carlo Monaco 7 AM 6 PM Corfu Greece 8AM 6PM 4 Katakolon Greece (for Oiympia) 7AM SPMJu127 4 FlorencePisa Italy (Livorno) 630 AM 6 PMAug 8~ Katakolon Greece (for Olympia) 7AM SPM S Athens Greece (Piraeus) 6AM 12 MAug 20deg S NaplesCapri Italy 8 AM 7 PM Sep 1t 6 Athens Greece (Piraeus) 6AM 12 M 6 Mykonos Greece 8AM 12M
6 At Sea 7 Mykonos Greece 8AM 6PM 7 Kusadasi Turkey (for Ephesus) 7 AM SPM7 Athens Greece (Piraeus) 6AM S4S PM
8 Kusadasi Turkey (for Ephesus) 7AM 1PM 8 Kusadasi Turkey (for Ephesus) 8AM 6PM 8 Santorini Greece 7 AM 4PM
9 Jstanbul Turkey 8AM 6PM 9 Rhodes Greece 8AM 6PM 9 At Sea
10 At Sea 10 Santorini Greece 7AM 6PM 10 Rome Italy (Civitavecchia) 8AM 7PM tll1ooil)opcraksinttVUSe
grduPorttlmcsmi)Y6ljI 11 At Sea 11 Cannes France (for Mont Carlo) 8AM 6PM11 At Sea tSamnlQ]latCiIUIe5inplm tltlnerlll)opmlpoundsin
NaplesCapri Italy 630 AM 12 Barcelona Spain (ovrnight onboard ship) 8AMofMo~Urlo ~odcr12 Venice Italy (overnight onboard ship) 8 AM 12 6PM O~lIlalhitRhodalnpUcc Port order md Iimes- JmyVUY Barcelona Spain DISEMBARK AM13 Venice Italy DISEMBARK AM - 13 Iome Italy (qvitavecchia) DISEMBARK AM
MEDITERRANEANAEGEAN MEDITERRANEANMOSAIC
12 12 DAYSDAYS
STAR STAR PRINCESS PRINCESS
ROME BARCELONAto
toVENICE ROME
2004 DEPARTURE DATE 2004 DEPARTURE
CRUISE I I INERARY DATE CRUISE ITINERARYApr 22 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Sep 13 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Rome Italy (Civitavhia) EMBARK pM 1 Barcelona Spaln (overnight onboard ship) EMBARK PM 2 NaplesCapri Italy 7 AM 7 PM Barcelona Spain SPM 3 Messina Italy (for Taormina) 8AM 6PM 3 At Sea 4 Valleta Malta 8AM 6 PM 4 Casablanca Morocco (for Marrakech) 7 AM 8PM
At Sea S Gibraltar 8 AM 6PM Santorini Greece 7 AM 6PM 6 At Sea
7 Kusadasi Turkey (for Ephesus) 8 AM 6PM 7 Cannesfrance (for Mont Carlo) 8 AM 6PM 8 Athens Greece (Piraeus) 6 AM S4SPM 8 At Sea 9 Katakolon Greece (for Olympia) 8 AM 6PM 9 Valleta Malta 8 AM SPM 10 Corfu Greece 8 AM 6PM 10 Messina Italy (for Taormina) 6PM 11 Dubrovnik Croatia 8 AM 6PM 11 NaplesCpri Itiily 6PM 12 Venice Italy (overnight onboard ship) 1230 PM 12 FlorencePisa Italy (Livorno) 830 AM 13 Venice Italy DISEMBARK AM 13 lomeltaly (Clvttavecchia)DISEMBAIKAM Venice Italy
EUROPE CRUISES
EUROPEAN EXPLORER CRUISE MEOffiRRANEANITRANSATLANTIC CRUISE
12 17DAYS DAYS
ROYAL STARPRINCESS PRINCESS
sail between VENICE
ROME to
and FT LAUDERDALE
LONDON
2003 DEPARTURE DATES
2004 DEPARTURE DATE CRUISE ITINERARY
May 7 CRUISE I1INfRARY Oct 7 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Jul30l
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Venice Italy (overnight onboard ship) EMBARK PMAug 11 Sep 41 1 Rome Italy (Civitavecchia) EMBARK PM 2 Vernce Italy 2 PM
2 FlorencePisa Italy (Livorno) 7 AM 7PM 3 At Sea 3 Cannes France (for Monte Carlo) 7 AM 5 PM 4 Barcelona Spain 9 AM 6 PM 5 At Sea 6 Gibraltar 8AM PM 7 Casablanca Morocco (for Marralech) 5AM 6 PM 8 Seville Spain (Cadiz) 8AM 6PM 9 LisbQn Portugal 9AM 5PM 10 Vigo Spain 830AM 4PM 11 At Sea
tllinmryope~te$ 12 ParisNormandy France (Ie Havre) 7 AMlnftYCl5eordu ~rttimesuuyYilY 13 London England (Southampton) DISEMBARK AM
Caudis Park Cuell Barcelona Spain
SCANDINAVIARUSSIA BALTIC HERITAGE WESTERN EUROPEBRITISH ISLES
ROYALGRAND10 GRAND 1210 PRINCESSDAYS PRINCESS PRINCESS DAYSDAYS
ROUNDTRIPROUNDTRIPROUNDTRIP fromframfrom
LONDONCOPENHAGENCOPENHAGEN 2004 DEPARTURE2004 DEPARTURE 2004 DEPARTUREDATESDATES DATES
May19tMay 29 May 19 jul28 JunSJun 18 Aug 231
Jul8 ju118Jul28 Aug 7 CRUISE ITINERARYAug 17
CRUISE IIINERARY ARRIVE DEPART CRUISE IrINERARY EMBARK PMDAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
DAY ARRIVE DEPART 7AM 6PM1 Copenhagen Denmark EMBARK PM EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 7AM 6PM
Stockholm Sweden (Nynilshamn) 7 AM 530PM 6AM PM Helsinki Finland 830 AM 6PM St PetersbUrg Russia (overnight onboard ship) 630 AM 9AM 9PM St Petersburg Russia 6PM
7 Tallinn Estonia 7 AM 1PM 8 Gdansk Poland (Gdynia) 9 AM 4PM 9 Warnemfinde Germany (for amprlin) 8 AM 10 PM 10 Helsing0r Denmark 9 AM 11 AM 10 Copenhagen Denmark (overnight onboard ship) 1 PM 11 Copenhagen Denmark DISEMBARK AM
middotScrvlcctillforlh=CllCIIIlicmIOptoluItllUllwWdlseJnbIDltHdlinprAfbrtour~dllmJlwktbeshJpwl1lPfllClaquodtoCopetWampen and pmenpoundm Qfl tours from HelMp will Rboird ship tPolttimes~myAninliI1ddepartu~itRosythDubJinmdFa1mauthwl)dICtotXLolconditions
tPOrtordermdtlme$maynI) ttCdlitEdinbuJlhotmdedto~mllocunionforMiliblyTltOO~on8123wi1inlmiddotUIIisitSouthQuemsfmyinstudofJosylh
BRITISH ISLES
ROYAL12 PRINCESSDAYS
ROUNDTRIP
from
LONDON
2004 DEPARTURE DATES
Jun 12 jul6
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Lqn4onmiddotpoundngland(Southampton) EMIWlIlt PM 2 Cornwall England (Falmouth) 7AM SPM
Waterford Ireland 8AM 6PM Dublin Ireland 7AM 1130 PM
t PQrtbme5 lliIyyuy Anini Illd departure at Rosytb Dublin md Filmouth ViiYdue to Iiltlal conditions
WESTERN EUROPE
ROYAL12 PRINCESSDAYS
ROUNDTRIP
from
LONDON
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
May 31
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 London England (Southampton) EMBARK PM
CRUISE ITINERARY
EUROPE CRUISES
ICELANDNORWEGIAN FJORDS
ROYAL12 PRINCESSDAYS
ROUNDTRIP
from
LONDON
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
Jun24
CRUISE IflNERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 London Englan4 (Southampton) EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 3 Berge Norway 6PM 4 Hellesylt Norway 830AM 1030 AM 4 Gciranger Norway Geiranger Fjord Sceni Cruising UN 7PM
9AM SPM5
1PM 8AM SPM
10 At Sea
middotStlviceallfof~fjonlovedmdshOR=unlDllOplion1Itourswllldi5anbarilitHelIcsyItAftcrtollrpuKllJClJdisembark
theshlpwiUprocudto~md~lampClSonlounfrwnHdaytwl1lblmd$hip
NORWEGIAN FJORDSNORTH CAPE
ROYAL12 PRINCESSDAYS
ROUNDTRIP
from
LONDON
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
JuilS
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Loridon ~gland (South~mpton) EMBARK PM 2-3 At Sea
Hellesylt Norway 830AM 1030 AM Golranger Norway Geiranger Fjord Scenic Cruising 12N 7PM
TrodheilllNorwaY 9AM SPM At Sea Cross the Ardgt Cirde
6PM 8AM lPM
8AM 130 PM 430PM 630PM
7AM 3PM
Bagpipers Edinburgh Scotland Royal Princess in Geiranger Fjord Norway
EUROPE CRUISES amp CRUISETOURS
17 DAYS
GRAND PRINCESS
FT LAUDERDALE to
COPENHAGEN
2004 DEPARTURE DATE MayZ
CRUISE IfINERARY
DAY 1 2-6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
PORT Ft Lauderdale Florida At Sea ~ores IslandsPortugal (Ponto Delgado) At Sea Lisbon Portugal Vigo Spain At Sea ParislNormandy France (Le Havre) RotterdamThe Netherlands At Sea Hamburg Germay (for Berlin) At Sea Olso Norway Oslo Fjord scnic Cruising Copenhagen Denmark
ARRIVE
N
12N 9AM
7AM
6AM
DISEMBARK AM
DEPART EMBARK PM
6PM
7PM 6PM
7PM 7PM
1UM
MEDITERRANEAN CRUISETOUR
TRANSATLANTICWESTERN EUROPE ICELAND amp GREENLANDTRANSATLANTIC
16 GRAND DAYS PRINCESS
COPENHAGEN to
NEW YORK
2004 DEPARTURE DATE Aug 27
CRUISE IIINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Copenhagen Denmark EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 3 Dover England (forLondon) 7AM 7PM 4 Cornwall England (Falmouth) 9AM 6PM 5 Dublin Ireland lOAM 9PM 6 GlasgowEdinburgh Scotland (Greenock) 8AM 12 M 7 Belfast Northern Ireland 1030 AM 530 PM 8 At Sea 9 Reykjavik Iceland 9AM 9PM 10 At Sea 11 Prins Christian Sund Scenic Cruising 12N 6PM 12 Qaqortoq Greenland 7 AM 2PM 13 At Sea 14 SI Johns Newfoundland Canada 12N 7PM 1516 At Sea 17 New York CIty New York DISEMBARK AM
SCANDINAVIARUSSIA CRUISETOUR
Church of the Savior on the Spilled Blood St Petersburg Russia
WESTERN EUROPE CRUISETOUR
CRUISEIOUR ITINERARY
CRUISETOUR lA11C CRUISETOUR ITINERARY CRUISETOUR 4A14C CRUISETOUR II INERARY
DAY PORT By Sea By Land DAY PORT By Sea By Land CRUISETOUR 7Al7C18 STAR PRINCESS 1 Rome 17 GRAND PRINCESS 1 BudapestDAYS DAYS DAY PORT By Sea By Land 22 Rome Budapest 18 ROYAL PRINCESS 1 Paris
ROMETODI 3 RomeTodi BUDAPEST VIENNA 3 BudapestVienna DAYS 2 Paris and 4 TodiFlorence and 4 Vienna 3 Paris
PARIS EUROSTAR5 Florence 5 ViennaPrague 4 ParisLondon 6 FlorenceVeniceEmbark 6 Prague and 5 London
FLORENCE PRAGUE
plus plus LONDON7 Venice Italy (overnight onboard ship) 7 PragueCopenhagenEmbark 6 LondonSouthamptonEmbark
GRAND MEDITERRANEAN SCANDINAVIARUSSIA plus 7 At Sea CRUISE 8-9 At Sea CRUISE 8 At Sea WESTERN EUROPE 8 Bilbao Spain10 Istanbul Turkey 9 Stockholm Sweden (Nyniishamn) BRITISH ISLES CRUiSE2004 DEPARTURE DATES 2004 DEPARTURE DATES 9 Bordeaux France (Le Verdon)
11 Kusadasi Turkey (for Ephesus) 10 Helsinki FinlandApr Sf 2004 DEPARTURE DATES 10 At SeaMay 131 Jul2Apr 29 12 Athens Greece (Piraeus) 11 SI Petersburg Russia (overnight onboard ship) 11 GlasgowEdinburgh Scotland (Greenock)May 23 JulUt May 141 26middot Jul tt 13~ 250
May 23 Jun 16 13 At Sea JunZt JulU 12 SI Petersburg Russia Jun n 19 Aug 18o 300 12 Dublin Ireland
]un 12 Aug l t 13 Cork IrelandJuliO 14 NaplesCapri Italy 13 Tallinn EstoniaJun 22 t Aug 11 Toun~eonlymilabkwithcruise5indi[itbtAug 3 15 FlorencelPisa Italy (Livorno) 14 Cdansk Poland 14 Cornwall England (Falmouth)
Aug 27 tBritishliksetuise aWEwupeiBritishlslesouist 15 ParisNormandy France (Le Havre)16 Monte Carlo Monaco 15 At Sea bull WestemEuropeCrube middotlcdandINorwqlmFjOllisetuise 16 Rotterdam The Netherlands
t Crulsetour lA only combinable with 12--dayGreck fst 17 Barcelona Spain (overnight onboard ship) 16 Olso NOrway Qsld Fjord Scenic Cruising bull Norwqian FjordsNorth Cipecruise 17 BrusselsBruges Belgium (Zeebrugge)tCruixtour 4A only combinable with lo-day Baltic
crulse shown on PI 11 18 Barcelona Spain Heritage cruise shawn on pg 12 OCrubctnur 7C only combinable with EwuJlWl ExplorerCrube17 Copenhagen Denmark 18 London England (Southampton)
EXOTICS CRUISES
AUSTRALIANEW ZEALAND AUSTRALIANEW ZEALAND AUSTRALIAASIA
12 14 19 DAYS DAYS DAYS
SAPPHIRE PRINCESS SAPPHIRE PRINCESS SAPPHIRE PRINCESS
saH between SYDNEYAUCKLAND SYDNEY
toand to BANGKOKSYDNEY AUCKLAND 2005 DEPARTURE DATES 2005 DEPARTURE DATE
Mar7Jan 6 2004 DEPARTURE DATEJan 1St
Dec 23 CRUISE ITINERARYJr ift Feb 23 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
CRUISE ITINERARY 1 Sydlley Austrli EMBARK PM CRUISE ITINERARY 2 At Sea
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTDAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 3 Brisbane Australia 8AM 6PM 1 Sydlley Australia EMBARK PM 4 At Sea 1 Aucklalld N~w Zealalld EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 5 Cid Harbor Austrlia (for Great Barrier Reef) 7AM 5PM2 At Sea 3 Melbourne Australia 8 AM 6 PM 6 Cirns Australia (Yorkeys) 8AM 6PM
3 WeIUllgton New Zealand 8 AM 6 PM 4 At Sea 7-8 At Sea 4 Christchurch New Zealalld (Lytlelton) 8 AM 6 PM 5 Tasmallia Australia (Hobart) 8 AM 6 PM 9 Darwin Australia lPM 8pM 5 Dunedill N~ Zealalld (Port Chalmers) 8 AM 6 PM 6-7 At Sea 10-11 At Sea 6 Fiordland Natiollal Park Scenic Cruising AM 6 PM 8 Fiordlalld Natiollal Park Scellic Cruising 7 AM 5 PM 12 Bali Illdonesi (Padang Bay) 7AM 6PM
7-8 At Sea J DUlledill New Zealalld (Port Chalmers) 8 AM 6 PM 13-14 At Se 10 Christchurch N~ Zealalld (Lytlelton) 8 AM 6 PM 15 Kuala Lumpur Mlaysia (Port KeIang) 8AM 6PM9 Tasmania Australia (Hobart) 8 AM 6 PM 11 Wellillgtoll New Zealmd 8 AM 6 PM 16 Sillgpore 8AM 6PM
10 At Sea 12 At Sea 17 At Sea 11 Melbourne Australia 8 AM 6 PM 13 Taurallga New Zealalld 8 AM 730 PM 18 Ho Chi Millh City Vietnm (Vung Tau) 7AM 730 PM 12 At S~a 19 At Sea 14 Bay of Islallds New Zealalld 8 AM 7 PM 13 SydPey Australia DISEMBARK AM 20 Bmgkok Thailalld (Laem Chabang) DISEMBARK AM15 Aucklalld New Zealalld DISEMBARK AM
t llinemy opcrnesln reverse order Port times mil1 my
CHINAFAR EAST SOUTHEAST ASIAFAR EAST
1612 DAYSDAYS
PACIFIC PRINCESS
SAPPHIRE PRINCESS PACIFIC PRINCESS
OSAKA BEIJING to
to BANGKOK OSAKA
2004 DEPARTURE DATE 2004 DEPARTURE DATEPAClFlC PRINCESS
julllt Jun 11 2005 DEPARTURE DATE
SAPPHIRE PRINCESS Apr 11
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Osaka Japall EMBARK PM
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Beijillg China (Xingang) EMBARK PM 2 Hiroshima Japall 1 PM 6PM 2 DaHan China AM 5PM 3 At Sea 3 At Sea 4 Shmghai Chilla 7 AM 6PM 4 Shallghai Chilla (overnight onboard ship) 7AM 5 At Sea 5 Shallghai China 6PM 6 Okinaw Jpll 7 AM 1 PM
7 Taipei Taiwm (KeeIung) 9 AM 7PM6 At Sea 8 At Se7 Pusan South Korea 8AM 5PM 9 HOllg KOllg Chill 8 AM 7PM 8 At Sea 10-11 At S~a J Vladivostok Russia 5AM 730 PM 12 Ho Chi MiIJh City Vietnm (Phu My) 7 AM 5PM 10 At Sea 13 At Se 11 Nagasaki Japan 7AM 6PM 14 Singpore 8 AM 6pM
15 KUlltll Mlysi 830 AM 430 PM12 At Sea 16 At Sea 13 Osaka Japan DISEMBARK AM 17 Ballgkok Thaillld DISEMBARK AM t Sailing alls i1t Hiroshima on Dl) 11 In place of Nilgilsaki Port times milY vary
CRUISE I flNERARY CRUISE I flNERARY
Ho Chi Minh City Vietnam
EXOTICS CRUISES
SOUTHEAST ASIACHINA SOUTHEAST ASIACHINA FAR EASTALASKA
PACIflC PRINCISS ROYAL PRINCESS
16 16 19 DAYS DAYS DAYS
SAPPHIRE SAPPHIRE PRINCESS
Sail between PRINCESSBANGKOK
and BANGKOK OSAKA
BEIJING to to
2004 DEPARTURE DATES BEIJING SEATTLEPAClFlC PRINCESS
Jun 27tt 200S DEPARTURE DATE200S DEPARTURE DATE ROYAL PRINCESS
Mar 26 Apr 23Oct 16 Nov lt
CRUISE I I INERARY CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
1 GsakaJpan EMBARK PM1 Bangkok Thailand (Laem Chabang) EMBARKPM 1 Bangkok Thailand (Laern Chabang) EMBARK IM 2 At Sea2 At Sea 2 AtSea bull 3 Nagasaki Japan 7 AM 6PM
9AM 7PM 3 Singapore 7PM 4 Pusan Soqth Korea 8AM 5PM 4-5 At Sea 5 At Sea gt bull
7AM 7PM 6 Da Nwg Vietn~1Il 7AM middot7PM 6 Vladivostok Russia SAM 730 PM 7 At Sea 7 AtSea
7AM 12M 8 Hong lltog ihin~ 7AM 12M 8 Sapporo japan (Muroran) 6AM 6PM 9-10 At Sea 9-10 At Sea 9-12 At Sea cross Intemational Dateline
13 DutchHarbor Alaska (Aleutian Islands) 230 PM 7PM11 ShaJlgllai Cbina (overnight onboard ship) lAM 11 Shangh~t Cllina (ovmightonJoltird $hip) 7 AM 14 At Sea shy12 Shanghai China 6PM 12 Shanghai China
7AM - - tlJf
6PM 15 Anchorage Alaska (Seward) 8AM 6PM13 At Sea 13 AtSea i 16 College Fjord Seni CruIsing 630AM 930 AM
14 Nagasaki japan 7AM 6PM 14 Nagasaki japan 6PM 17 Glacier Ilay Scenic Cruising 1030 AM 830 PM 15 Pusan South lltOrea TAM 4PM 1~ bull Pu~an SQuth iorea middot4lM 18 middotmiddot juneau Alaska 6 AM 2PM 16 At Sea 16 At Sea 19 - At Sea 17 Beijing China (Xingangy OISEMBAlUe AM 17 Beijing Cliina (Xingang) 20 SeattleWashington DISEMBARK AM
t ltinemy Operne5 in rcvmc Older ttPorttimcsmiYnl)middotShlpwilldocklnampngkoknsttadofL1cm~
POLYNESIA amp THE COOK ISLANDS POLYNESIA amp THE MARQUESAS ISLANDS
10 10 DAYS DAYS
TAHITIAN PRINCESSTAHITIAN PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIPROUNDTRIP fromfrom
PAPEETEPAPEETE 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
2004 DEPARTURE DATES Oct 4 24 Mayl 17 27 Sep4 14 24 Nov 13 Jun 6 16 26 0lt 14 00323Ju16 16 26 Nov 323 2005 DEPARTURE DATESAug 5 15 25 Dec 13 Jan 12
Feb 1 21200S DEPARTURE DATES
~~ 122 ~~Il 13 23 CRUISE ITINERARY
CRUISE II INERARY DAY PORT
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Papeete Tahiti 1 Papeete Tahiti (overnight onboard ship) EMBARK PM
2 Moorea Polynesia 2 Papeete Tahiti SPM 3 Huahil1e P9lynesia 8AM 5 PM 3 Tuamotu Atolls Senic Cruising
5 PM8-AM 4 At Sea I At Sea 5 Rarotonga Cook Islands 8AM 5 PI~ 5 Nuku Hiva Marquesas Islands 6 At Sea 6 Hiva Ga Marquesas Islands 8AM 5PM 7 Raiatea Polynesia overnight onboard Ship 6AM
7 At Sea middotai~ RaiateaPQlynesia igt gt 6AM 8 Rangiroa P~iynesia 8AM 4PM8 Tahaa scenic Cryising 630 AM 830 AM
8 BoraBoraPQlyrtesia(ovemightollboard ship) UN 9 Tahaa ~enl Cruising 8 AM middot11AM
9 Bora lora Polynesia 5iM 9 Raiatea Polynesia 12 N 11 PM 10 Moore Polynesfa 8 AM 5 PM la ~ Bora ~oraPoIYnesia 8AM bull 5PM
11 Papeete Tahiti DISEMBARK AM 11 Papeete Tahiti DISEMBARK AM Iong Kong Harbor
3 Singapore 4-5 At Sea 6 Da NangVieinam 7 At Sea 8 liong Kong China
EXOTICS CRU ISES
HAWAIITAHITI HAWAIIAN ISLANDS SOUTH PACIFIC ISLANDS
12 1515 DAYS DAYSDAYS
PACIFIC
TAHITIAN PRINCESS ISLAND PRINCESSPAClFIC PRINCESS
PRINCESS
SYDNEYROUNDTRIP sail between tofrom
PAPEETE PAPEETELOS ANGELES and
2004 DEPARnIRE DATEHONOLULU 2004 DEPARTURE DATES Apr 21
2004 DEPARTURE DATES ~~~l CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE 11 INERARY
Oet21t CRUISE ITINERARY Nov Sf
MayS PACIFIC PRINCESS DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
Nov20t DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DecSt 1 Los Angeles CalifornIa EMBARK AM 1 Sydney AustralIa EMBARK PMAug 17t
Dec20t1 Papeete Tahiti EMBARK PM 2-4 At Sea
2005 DEPARTURE DATE Jan 4 2-5 At Sea
(overnight onboard ship) Jan 19 5 Auckland New Zealand 7 AM 2PMFeb 3t 6 Iiilo Hawaii 8 AM 6 PM
TAHITIAN PRINCESS Papeete Tahiti 11 PM fb 18 6-7 At Sea Kilauea Voko ~enic CruisingApr 12 MarS t 3 Moorea Polynesia 8 AM 5 PM 8 Suva fijI 11 AM 430 PM1~i~t 7 Kona Hawaii 8AM 6PM4 Bora Bora PolYnesia 8 AM 5 PM 9 At Sea Cross International Dateline Apr 19
5-6 At Sea 8 Honolulu Hawaii 8AM 11 PM 10 Apia Western Samoa 830 AM 2PM 7 Christmas Isl~ndKiribati 1Z N 5 PM 9 Kauai Hawaii (Nawlliwlli) 8AM 6PM 11-12 At Sea 8-9 At Sea 10 Maui Hawaii (Lahaina) 6PM 13 Bora Bora Polynesia lOAM 6PM 10 HlloliaWlii 6 PM 13 Raiatea Polynesia (overnight onboard 11 PM11-14 At Sea 11 Maui Hawaii (Lahaina) 8 AM 6 PM 14 Raiatea Polynesia 11 PM
15 Ensenada Mexico (service call)KaUaiH~waii(Nawllfwtli) 8AM 6 PM 15 Moorea Polynesia 8AM 5PM
tllinemyopcr~ttsln=x QnIerPurtlimcslmYvary Honolulu Hawaii DISEMBARK AM 16 Los Angeles CalIfornia DISEMBARK AM 16 Papeete Tahiti DISEMBARK AM
ISLANDS OF THE PACIFIC THEATER SOUTH PACIFIC EXPLORER
24 24 DAYS DAYS
PAClFIC PRINCESS PAClFIC PRINCESS
sail between HONOLULU PAPEETE
and to OSAKA FT LAUDERDALE
2004 DEPARTURE DATES
Mayl 2004 DEPARTURE DATEJul2Sj
Aug 29 CRUISE ITINERARY
CRUISE ITINERARYDAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART EMBARK PM DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
1 Papeete Tahiti EMBARK PM lPM 7PM 2 8AM 11 PM
3 ~~~~~~ ~~~~Sta 8AM 5 PM 4-6 At Sea 7 Pitcairn Island Scenic Cruising 8AM 1211
8AM 12 N
7AM ZPM 8-9 At Sea 10 Easter Island Chile 8AM 2PM
9AM 11-14 At Sea 15 Callao Peru (overnight for Lima and Machu Picchu) 8AM 16 Callao Peru lPM 17 At Sea 18 Manta Ecuador (for Quito) 9fM 7PM 19 At Sea 20 Transit Panama Canal 7 AM 430 PM 21 San BIas Panama 8AM 5 PM 22 ft Sea 23 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands 7AM 4PM 24 At Sea
25 Ft Lauderdale Florida DISEMBARK AMMoorea Polynesia tllinemyoperataln~12onlerPortl1mesmiYmymiddot
EXOTICS CRUISES
HAWAIITAHITISOUTH PACIFIC AMAZONSOUTHERN CARIBBEAN CAPE HORNSTRAIT OF MAGELLAN
1430 12 DAYS DAYSDAYS
ROYAL PRINCESS ROYAL PRINCESSSAPPHIRE PRINCESS
sail betweenFT LAUDERDALE SANTIAGOLOS ANGELES to
andto MANAUS BUENOS AIRESSYDNEY 2005 DEPARTURE DATE 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
2004 DEPARTURE DATE Apr 9 Jan 10
Nov 22 Jan 241 Feb 7
FebZt
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
CRUISE ITINERARY
CRUISE ITINERARYCRUISE ITINERARY 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTDAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 2-3 At Sea 1 Santiago Chile (Valparaiso) EMBARK PM
1 Los ingeles California EMBARK PM 4 Tortola BritIsh Virgin Islands 8 AM 6 PM 2 At Sea 2 Ensenada Mexico 8AM 5PM 3 Puerto Montt Chile 7AM 6PM
3middot6 At Sea 4 At Sea 5 Dominica 9 AM 4 PM 7 Hilo Hawaii 8AM 5 At Sea Chilean Fjords Scenic Cruising6PM 6 Trinidad 9 AM 6 PM
8 Maui Hawaii (Lahaina) 8AM 6PM 6 At Sea Amalia Glacier Scentc CruiSi3f7 At Sea 7 Punta Arenas Chile (Strait of Magei an) 7AM 6PM9 Honolulu Hawaii 7AM 5PM
- 10middot13 At Sea 8 Beagle Channel Scenic Cruising 8 Ushuaia Argentina (Tierra del Fuo) 12N 8PM
8 Devils Island French Guiana (Isle Royal) 8 AM 2 PM 14 Bora Bora Polynesia 8AM 6PM 9 At Sea 9 At Sea Cape Hom Scenic Cruising
10 Santarem Brazil 9 AM 7 PM 10 Moorea Polynesia 8AM 6PM 10 Falkland Islands (Stanley) 8AM 6PM 10 Papeete Tahiti (overnight onboard ship) 9PM 11 At Sea
i 16 Papeete Tahiti 6PM 11 Boca da Valeria Brazil (Amazon River) 7 AM 2 PM 12 Puerto Madryn Argentina 6AM 5PM 17middot18 AtSea 12 Manaus Brazil (overnight onboard ship) 10 AM 13 At Sea
14 Montevideo Uruguay 9AM 6PM19 Pago Pago merlcan Samoa 8AM 6PM 13 Manaus Brazil DISEMBARK AM 15 Buenos Aires Argentina DISEMBARK AM 20 Apia Western Samoa 8AM 6PM 21 At Sea Cross International Dateline middotl1me5forallscenkouisinCile subjectlDclwIgc
tllinmryopefilteslnr=rscordttPorttlmislm)vary22 Suva Fiji 8AM 6PM l 23-24 At Sea
20 Auckland New Zealand 8AM 6PM ORINOCO RIVERSOUTHERN CARIBBEAN ANDESSOUTH AMERICA 26 Tauranga New Zealand 8AM 7PM 27 At Sea
28 Wellington Newealand 8AM 6PM 16 17 DAYS DAYS 29-30 AtSea
31 Sydney Australia DISEMBARK AM ROYAL PRINCESS ROYAL PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP SANTIAGO from to
FT LAUDERDALE FT LAUDERDALE
200S DEPARTURE DATE2005 DEPARTURE DATE
Mar 7Mar 24
CRUISE IIJNERARYCRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Santiago Chlle (Valparaiso) EMBARK PM
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM
2 La Serena Chile (Coquimbo) 8 AM 5 PM2-3 At Sea 3 At Sea Um6n Costa Rica 7AM 7PM 4 Arica Chile 7AM 6PMCristobal Panama (for Panama Canal) 8AM 5PM o At Sea
6 Cartagena Colombia 9AM 2 PM 6 San Martin Peru (for Pisco and Machu Picchu) 7AM 6PM 7 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 130 PM 7PM 7 Callao Peru (overnight for Lima) 530 AM 8-9 At sea 8 Callao Peru 1PM 10 Puerto Ordaz Venezuela (Orinoco River) 8AM 6PM 9 At Sea
i 11 At Sea 10 Manta Ecuador (overnight for Quito) 530AM 12 Greada 8AM i 11 Manta Ecuador 1lM5PMt 1~ Dolllinlca i 7N1 5 PM 12 At Sea
i 13 Transit Panama C~nal 7AM 430 PM14 St Thomas us Virgilslands 9AM 5PM 14 Cartagena Colombia 8AM 130 PMJs AtSei i 15 Aruba Netherlands intiiles 1PM 7PM 16 Princess Cays Bahamas 8AM 16-17 At Sea Tahiti Polynesia 17 FtLallardale Flillilt~ DISEMBARK AM 1ampmiddot Ft L~uderdale Florida DISEMBARK AM
AMAZON RIVERMEDITERRANEAN
21 DAYS
ROYAL PRINCESS
MANAUS
to ROME
2005 DEPARTURE DATE
Apr 21
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE M~naus Brazil (Wemight onboardship) Manaus Brazil
3 BocadaValeria Brazil (AriiazonRivet) 11 AM 4-6 At Sea 7 Recife Brazil 1 PM 8-11 AtSea 12 Dakar Senegal 8AM 13-14 At Sea 15 Agadir Morocco 7AM 16 Casablanca Morocco (for Marrakech) 8AM 17 Gibraltar lOAM 18 Allcante Spain 12 N 19 Barcelona Spain 8AM 20 Cannes France (for Monte Carlo) 8AM 21 FlorencePisa Italy (Livarno) 7AM 22 Rome Italy (Civitavecchia) DISEMBARK AM
INDIAN OCEANAUSTRALIA
28 DAYS
PACIfIC PRINCESS
CAPE TOWN
to SYDNEY
2004 DEPARTURpound DATE
Oct 20
CRUISE ITINERARY1 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Cape Town South Africa EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 3 East London South Africa 7AM 3PM 4 DurbahSouth Africa 8AM 6PM 5-7 At Sea 8 Nosy BeMadagascar 7AM 4PM 9 At Sea 10 Poilit des Galets Reunioll]slahd 11 Port Louis Mauritius 12c19 At Sea 20 Perth Australia (Fremantle) 21-23 At Sea 24 Adelaide Australla 25 At Sea 26 Melbourne Australla 7 27 Tasmania AUstralia (Burnie) 28 At Sea 29 Sydney Australia DISEMBARK AM
I
DEPART EMBARK PM
7PM 6PM
8pM
5PM
3PM 9PM 6PM 6PM 5PM 7PM 7PM
EXOTICS CRUISES
SOUIB ATIANTICANTARCfICNSOUIB AMERICA
24 DAYS
ROYAL PRINCESS
CAPE TOWN
to SANTIAGO
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
Dec 17
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Cape TownSouthAfrica (overnighfol1board ship) EMBARK PM 2 Cape Town South Africa 3PM 2 if~~t Good HopSCenic Crulsing 3-6 6 Tristan DaCunha United Kingdom 8AM 5PM 7-10 At Sea 11 Falkland Islands (Staliley) 8 AM 5PM 12 At Sea 13-16 Antarctica Peninsula ScehltmiddotCruising 14 days ihcludingmiddot Elephant
Island AntarcticSotind Deceptionlslana GerlacheStrait NaxefChannel Schollaert Channel SigJtla Island and Boyd Strait)
17 At Sea Cape Horn Scenic Cruising1amp UshuaiaArgentina (Tierra del fuego) bull middot6 AM 19 Punta Arenas Chile (Strait of Magellan) 7 AM 20 At Sea Amalia Glacier Scenic Cruising21 At Sea Chilean Fjords Scenic Cruising22 AtSea 23 Puerto Mont Chile 7AM 6PM 24 At Sea 25 Santiago Chile (Valparaiso) DISEMBARK AM
-nmes for1l scenlccruisinc are subJect to change
ASIAINDIAMEDITERRANEAN
30 ROYAL PRINCESSDAYS
ROME
to BANGKOK
2004 DEPARlURE DATE
Sep 16
CRUISE Il INERARY
WEST AFRICASOUTH AMERICA
28 DAYS
PACIFIC PRINCESS
FT LAUDERDALE
to CAPE TOWN
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
51 22
CRUISE ITINERARY
DISEMBARK AM
Aruba
EXOTICS CRU ISES amp CRU ISETOU RS
AUSTRALIANEW ZEALAND CRUISETOUR
AUSTRALIAN EXPLORER 2004 DEPARTURE DATESAPPHIRE21 plus
DAYS PRINCESS SYDNEY Dec 17 to
AUCKLAND CRUISETOUR 5P CRUiSE
CRUISETOUR ITINERARY
DAY PORT By Sea By Land DAY PORT
1 Sydney 14 Fiordland National Park 2 Sydney Scenic Cruising
3 SydneyAyers Rock 15 Dunedin New Zealand (Port Chalmers) 4 Ayers ROek
5 Ayers RockPort Douglas 16 Christchurch New Zealand 6 Port Douglas - (Lytleton)
7 Port DouglasSydneyEmbark 17 Wellilgton New Zealand 8 At Sea 18 At Sea 9 Melbourne Australia 19 Tauranga New Zealand
10 At Sea 20 Bay of Islands New Zealand 11 Tasmania Australia (Hobart) 21 Auckland New Zealand 12middot13 At Sea
Sydney Opera House Australia
AUSTRALIANEW ZEALAND CRUISETOUR SOUTHEAST ASIACHINA CRUISETOUR CAPE HORNSTRAIT OF MAGELLAN CRUISETOUR AUSTRALIAN BEIJING Be TERRA COTTA 2004 DEPARTURE DATES RIO 8t IGUAZU FALLS Post-Crulsetour1 Pre-Crulsetour 217EXPLORER 2005 DEPARTURE DATES PACIFICSAPPHIRE WARRIORS19 plw or PRINCESS jul9t loieifie
DAYS PRINCESS SYDNEY Jan 12 plus 19 ROYAL plw Feb 5 Oct 28 Royal BUENOS AIRES
AUCKLAND DAYS ROYAL PRINCESS to 21 ampto DAYS PRINCESS
BEUING CRUISE t ~~S~i BeWln~~~~e
to SANTIAGO~e~s~Ot~r~ih~fi1BANGKOK CRUiSE CRUISECRUISETOUR 3t3P landtourm~yvlty CRUISETOUR 12
DAY PORT DAY PORT
DAY PORT By Sea ltBy LaDd DAY PORT
1 Beijing 11-12 At Sea 1 Rio de janeiro 11 Cape Horn Scenic Cruising
13 Hong Kong 2 Rio de jneiro c 12 Ushuaia Argentina 14 At Sea 3 RiolgUaiu Falls 12 Beagle Channel Scenlc Cruising
15 Nha Trang Vietnam 4 IIDIilZll FaU$13u~os~re$ 13 Punta Arenas Chile
16 Phu My Vietnam 5 Buens AiresEmbark 14 At Sea 17 At Sea 6 Montevideo Uruguay 15 Seno Eyre Fjord Scenic Cruising 18 Singapore 7 At Sea 16 At Sea 19 Kualtan Malaysia 8 Puerto Madryn Argentina 17 Puerto Montt Chile 20 At Sea 9 At Sea 18 At Sea 21 Bangkok Thail3nd 10 Falkland Islands (Stanley) 19 Santiago Chile
DAY PORT DAY PORT
At Sea Pusan SouthKOrea Nagasaki japan At Sea Shanghai China
Note CnIlst route shown for Royil Princess Oct 28 only Timcsforil1lsccnkoulslngmsubjccttothange
CRUISE [OUR ITINERARY
CRUISETOUR ITINERARY
CRUISrrOlJR ITINERARY Fiordland National Park Scenic Cruising DlUedin New Zealand Christchurch New Zealand Wellington New Zealand
14
GRAND PANAMA CANAL CRUISES
ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL
10 10 11 DAYSDAYS DAYS
CORAL PRINCESS GRAND PRINCESS GRAND PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIPfrom from
fromFT LAUDERDALE GALVESTON GALVESTON
2004 DEPARTURE DATES Oct n 21 31 2004 DEPARTURE DATE
2004 DEPARTURE DATENov 10 20 30middot DeelSmiddot
DedSDec 10 28
2005 DEPARTURE DATES CRUISE ITINERARY Jan 7 17 27
CRUISE ITINERARY Feb 6 16 26 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART MarS 1828 CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Galveston Texas EMBARK PMApr 7 17 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTshy 1 Galveston Texas EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 1 ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 3 Belize City Belize 1 PM 7PM 2-3 At Sea 3 Belize City Belize lPM 7PM 4 Costa Maya Mexico (Mahahual) 8AM 4PM 4 Um6n Costa Rica 7AM rPM 4 Costa Maya Mexico (Mahahual) SAM 4 PM 5 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands 12 PM 7PM 5 Panama Canal (to Gatun Lake) 7AM 430 PM 5 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands 12 PM 7PM 6 Ocho Rios Jamaica SAM 5PM 5 Col6n Panama 5PM 8PM 6 At Sea 7 At Sea 6 At Sea Cristobal Panama 7AM 4PM 8 7AM 4PM 7 Grand Cayman Cayman IslandS 7AM 4PM (fot Panama Canal) ftrtpg~niaa~~) S Corumel Mexico SAM 6PM 8 At Sea 9 At Sea 9 Bclize City Belize 7AM 4 PM 6PM 10 Coromel Mexico lOAM 6 PM9 Cozumel Mexico lOAM 10 At Sea 10 At Sea 11 At Sea
Portordtrllndtlmtsmayvllry 11 flo Lauderdale florida DISEMBARK AM Portorntr IInltf timpoundi may vary 11 Galveston Texas DISEMBARK AM Port ordu and Nmes may vary 12 Galv_es~on Texas DISEMBARK AM
ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL
8 DAYS
CORAL PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP
from
FT LAUDERDALE
2004 DEPARTURE DATE Dec 20
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Fl Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM 2-3 At Sea 4 Lim6n Costa Rica 7AM 7PM 5 Panama Canal (to Gatun Lake) 7 AM 430 PM 5 Co16n Panama 5PM SPM 6 At Sea 7 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands SAM 5PM S At Sea 9 Flo Lauderdale Florida DISEMBARK AM Bridge of the Americas Panama
f OptIonll fOllTS inclld1lI tht AtlllnH to Pacific RlIlllfll) joumq will dlmlldrt tilt ship b) tctdtr lit Gfttlm uk AJkr tour plIssmm dlstmlrark tilt shipwin procmlllat through tilt Gatun Locb lIndjlnlllly dock in Gl6lI Hmal1p41Sl11tmmttydiumlmtheJldlo~ lflrshops IInd~llI toIIrsrrnrl CIItutl14ktlllIrtonlflrJhlp
GRAND PANAMA CANAL CRUISES
GRAND PANAMA CANAL GRAND PANAMA CANAL GRAND PANAMA CANAL
150R 18 150R 1715 DAYS DAYS DAYS
CORAL PRINCESS SUN PRINCESS
REGAL PRINCESS REGAL PRINCESS SUN PRINCESS
DAWN PRINCESS REGAL PRINCESS sail between DAWN PRINCESS
sail between FT LAUDERDALE FT LAUDERDALE sail betweenand
FT LAUDERDALEand SAN DIEGO andLOS ANGELES
SAN FRANCISCO 2004 DEPARTURE DATES 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
DAWN PRINCESS 2004 DEPARTURE DATESNov 24Sp191
CRUISE ITINERARY Dec9t CORAL PRINCESSREGAL PRINCESS 5ltp261 CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE ITINERARY
200S DEPARTURE DATES Dec 24 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
SUN PRINCESS DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARIltPM200S DEPARTURE DATES DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Sep 2StMar 24
3 Ocho Rios Jamaica lOAM 6PM 2-3 At5ea 2 At Sea 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBA8KPM
REGAL PRINCESS AprSt 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBA8KPM Jan stu 200S DEPARTURE DATES2 At Sea4 At Sea 4 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 7AM lPMJan 23 5 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 7AM lPM 3 Ocho Rios Jamaica lOAM 6PM REGAL PRINCESS 5 Cartagena Colombia 9AM 3PMFeb7t 4 At Sea Apr 239AM 3PM 6 Transit Panama Canal 7AM 430 PMFb22 ~ yenr~fte~~~~~~u 7AM 430 PM 5 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 7AM lPM At SeaMar9t CORAL PRINCESS 79AM 3PM8 At Sea Apr 27 8 Puntarenas Costa Rica 7AM 7PMSUN PRINCESS 9 Puntarenas Costa Rica 7 AM 7PM ~ yenr~fte~n~~~~~u 7AM 430 PM 9-10 At SeaApr1S 8 At Sea DAWN PRINCESS10-11 At Sea 11 Acapulco Mexico 8AM 5PM
5PM 9 Puntarenas Costa Rica 7AM 7PM Apr 29H ~ae~lcoMexico 8 AM 12 At SeatllWrryopmllzlfrarnLls~in 10-11 At Sea rmrKfIfikTiIIrttimnma1 tlliJlrraryoptJllllsfrlJflSlmFranrimlJn 13 Cabo San lucas Mexico 8AM 5PM
gt This mUJI C4Jl llfwmblnld wlth a 3 14 Cabo San Lucas Mexico 7 AM lPM H ~e~o Mexico 8AM SPM rmruordrrorttimamG)llIryCoIutar CnUK to VlWOIlllr SC Dqs ThUIltIIIflltllnlltCllIIblntdwilhaZ-day 14-15 At Sea 16lhrlllllhI9lllIbtboobdulaquoSC)lQ4k t Illncral) lIpCutcs in mrmt orm Pllrt IiIIIa CocastaICnliutoVan(ouKrBCDlIys16 16 San Francisco California 7AM 4PMcowtlIrcrllisr IIIIYlIl1Ymiddot IhrounIScankboobdlUaK)lllllluU t~A~geles California 6 AM 5PM 14 Cabo San Lucas Mexico 8AM 5PM
Thllwl1JIIICllllslltMOlIkpilllyJmtcad 17-18 At Sea middotmiddotThliIAfllIllCltlllsatMGnIqclBaylnstcadllf 15 At Sea CPlIilldCI1IIu 17 At Sea o[OdKKwsPurllilllrlmllYWlry OchoRicJsPortllmtslllllYVllfymiddot D1SEMBA8K AM19 Vancouver BC DISEMBA8K AM 16 San Die20 California DlSEMBA8K AM 18 Val1couver BC
GRAND PANAMA CANAL COASTAL CRUISING
2-4 CORAL PRINCESS ISLAND PRINCESS SUN PRINCESS18 DAWN PRINCESS DIAMOND PRINCESS STAR PRINCESSDAYSDAYS
COASTAL CRUISE SCHEDULEREGAL PRINCESS
SHIP DAYS FROM TO DEPARTURE DATE DIAMOND PRINCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 5104
SAN FRANCISCO DIAMOND PRINCES5 4 Vancouver Seattle 5404 to CORAL PRINCESS 2 San Francisco Vancouver 5604
NEW YORK DAWN PRiNCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 5704 ISLAND PRiNCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 51204
2004 DEPARTURE DATE SUN PRINCESS 3 San Francisco Vancouver 51404Aug 24 ISLAND PRiNCESS 3 Vancouver LOI Angeles 91804
DIAMOND PRINCESS 1 Seattle Vancouver 91804CRUISE ITINERARY DIAMOND PRINCESS 6 Vancouver Los Angeles 91904 SAPPHIRE PRINCESS 1 Seattle Vancouver 91904 SAPPHREPRINCESS 2 Vancouver San Francisco 92004 DIAMOND PRINCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 43005 DlAMONDPRiNCES$ 4 Vancouver Seattle 5305 SUN PRINCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 5305
ISLAND PRiNCESS 3 Los Angeles VancOllver 5405 CORAL PRiNCESS 2 San Francisco Vancouver 51205
Coral Princess in the Panama Canal
CRUISE PLUS
Extend your adventure with our Cruise Plusreg program Cruise Plusreg enables you to enhance your vacation with one- to four-night hotel
packages in cities that stand on their own as vacation destinations Add nights in Sydney before you cruise or extend your vacation with nights in the city by the
bay San Francisco Transportation and luggage handling costs from the airport to both hotel and ship plus meet and greet services are always included
Wherever you choose to explore youll enjoy properties that are carefully chosen based on service value location and the peace of mind of knowing that Princess
has arranged it all for you
Anchorage Alaska Trevi Fountain Rome Auckland Harbor New Zealand
The Cruise Plusreg Program is available in over 30 major cities including
MEDITERRANEANAEGEAN EXOTICS PANAMA CANAL Barcelona London Rome and Venice Auckland Bangkok Beijing Buenos Aires Ft Lauderdale Los Angeles New York City
Cape Town Ft Lauderdale Honolulu Los San Diego San Francisco Sanjuan Vancouver NORTHERN EUROPE Angeles Montreal Moorea New York City Copenhagen and London MEXICO CARIBBEANOsaka Papeete Rome San Francisco
Ft Lauderdale Galveston Los AngelesTRANSATLANTIC Santiago Seattle Sydney Vancouver Venice Barcelona Copenhagen Ft Lauderdale San Francisco and San Juan
London New York City and Rome ALASKA Anchorage Calgary Fairbanks Kenai San Francisco Seattle and Vancouver
For more information about options and pricing reference a destination specific brochure or contact your travel agent
TRAVEL THE WORLD WITH THE LEADER IN CRUISINGmiddot Princess
Analysis by the Hawaii Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism Comparing the Economic Impact of Foreign Flag Ships with US Flag Cruise Ships Sailing in Hawaii
This is a summary of an analysis prepared by the Hawai Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism (DBEDT) of the economic impact of the foreign flag cruise ship fleet sailing in Hawaii as compared to each of the US flag ships operating in Honolulu
The comparison is set out below
Foreign Pride Pride Pride
Fleet Of Hawaii Of Aloha Of America
Total economic output impact (spendingsales) ($mil) 155 542 4225 4958
Total earnings impact (labor earnings) ($mil) 44 155 1207 1411
Total employment impact Uobs) 1447 5059 3943 4627
This analysis demonstrates that a single US-flagged ship the Pride of America home ported in Honolulu is 32 times more economically impactful and creates 32 times as many jobs as the entire foreign flag fleet that sails into and out of Hawaii ports of call
Economic Impact of Pride of America
Assumptions 1 Annual impact though Pride of Aloha is leaving in May 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existing Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($) 4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of outputl$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job multiplier (jobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
118700 105
2706 3373
147 042
1372
4958
1417
4627
Data sourcelformula Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Line 1 x line 2 x line 31 000000
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 4 x line 5
Line 4 x line 6
Line 4 x line 7
Economic Impact of Pride of Hawaii
Assumptions
1 Annual impact though Pride of Hawaii is leaving in February 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existing Pride of Aloha and Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($) 4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job multiplier (jobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
Data sourceformula 139770 Actual 2007 figure
975 Actual 2007 figure 2706 Actual 2007 figure 3688 Line 1 x line 2 x line 31000000
147 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model 042 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
1372 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
5421 Line 4 x line 5
1549 Line 4 x line 6
5059 Line 4 x line 7
Economic Impact of Pride of Aloha
Assumptions 1 Annual impact though Pride of Aloha is leaving in May 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existlng Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($)
4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job mUltiplier Oobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
95680 111
2706 2874
147 042
1372
4225
1207
3943
Data sourcelformula Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Line 1 x line 2 x line 31000000
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 4 x line 5
Line 4 x line 6
Line 4 x line 7
lt
Methodology Used in Calculating Impact of International Cruise Ships
Cruise ship visitors 1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Came with ships 3 Flied in 4 Average length of stay (days) 5 PPPD ($) 6 Cruise visitor spending ($mil))
Cruise ship crews 7 Ratio of crew spending to cruise visitor spending 8 Cruise crew spending
Cruisline 9 Ratio of crew spending to cruise visitor spending
10 Cruiseline spending
11 Total cruise-related spending ($mil)
12 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 13 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 14 Job multiplier Uobs$ cruise -related spending)
15 Total output impact ($miJ)
16 Total earnings impact ($miJ)
17 Total employment impact (jobs)
106641 98307
8334 739 847 668
02 134
038 254
1055
147 042
1372
1551
444
1447
Data sourceformula Line 2 + line 3 DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report Line 1 x line 4 x line 5
DBEDT 2003 Cruise study Line 7 x line 6
DBEDT 2003 Cruise study Line 9 x line 6
Line 6 + line 8 + line 10
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 11 x line 12
Line 11 x line 13
Line 11 x line 14
Economic Contributions Foreign-Flag Fleet operating in Hawaii vs Three US-Flag Ships
$1500
Pride of Hawaii$1000- $542 million VIc -0-E c Pride of AlohaCo
423 million$500
Pride of America $496 million155 million$shy
Foreign-Flag US-Flag Fleet Fleet
Source State of Hawaii Department of US-Flag $1460 billion Business Economic Development and Tourism
Foreign-Flag $ 155 million 7292008
Employment Foreign-Flag Fleet operating in Hawaii vs Three US-Flag Ships
15000
10000
til c o Pride of Aloha
39435000
Pride of America 1447 4627
~---------
Foreign-Flag US-Flag Fleet Fleet
Source State of Hawaii Department of US-Flag 13629 jobs Business Economic Development and Tourism
Foreign-Flag 1447 jobs 7292008
Foreign Flag Capacity Growth Foreign flag passenger capacity has changed five-fold on roundtrip Hawaii cruises from the West Coast since enactment of the Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative
1600000
1400000
tn 1200000
J enshyZ
1000000
I shyG) en 800000 s G) tn tn
600000 as D 400000
200000
0 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Year
Source US Maritime Administration (derived from the US Customs and Border Patrol Vessel Entrance and Clearance documents - final 2007 data) 7292008
NCL America Hawaii Economic Contributions
(2004-2008)
bull (in Millions) bull $399 in wages benefits and overtime to US seafarers bull $35 in Federal and State payroll Taxes bull $64 in Government Fees and Taxes to Hawaii bull $28 in wages benefits and overtime to US other employees bull $52 in Port Charges to Hawaii Companies (Stevedores tugs pilots etc) bull $85 in Fuel to Tesoro Hawaii bull $130 for shore excursions to Hawaii tour operators bull $39 for Hawaii hotel rooms and ground transport bull $75 for food grown in Hawaii bull $57 in union fees and levies (incl $32M paid directly by employees) bull $1 in MMD fees to the United States Coast Guard bull $51 for recruitment screening processing and training crew bull $76 advertising and promoting Hawaii as a destination bull $1092
COASTWISE CRUISES INTERPRETIVE RULE RESOLUTION Adopted at the
US Conference of Mayors 76th Annual Meeting
June 20-242008 Miami
WHEREAS the Department of Homeland Securitys Customs and Border Protection (CBP) issued a proposed Interpretive Rule regulating Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises on foreign flagged vessels between US ports of call under the Passenger Vessel Services Act at the request of the United States Maritime Administration and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule would require that a foreign-flagged vessel on a coastwise cruise to call at a foreign port for at least 48 hours with that foreign stop constituting at least 50 percent of the cruise itinerary and allowing passengers to disembark the cruise vessel at the foreign port before continuing the cruise to a US port of call and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule establishes burdensome criteria that are wholly inconsistent with industry practice particularly the 48-hour call at foreign port shyinasmuch as the standard port call is six to eight hours - as well as the requirement that 50 percent of a cruise be spent at the foreign port and
WHEREAS the intent of the proposed Interpretive Rule is to protect the single remaining US flag vessel serving the Inter-Hawaiian Island cruise trade that according to the Hawaii Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism generates more than 4600 jobs and generates nearly $500 million in economic benefits for the state annually and
WHEREAS thousands of members of the International Longshore Workers Union (nWU) are employed at US ports serving cruise ships and whose jobs would be at risk if the proposed Interpretive Rule were implemented and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule is vague as to the breadth of its application ie to coastwise cruises between all United States ports or applied solely to coastwise cruises from West Coast ports to Hawaii and
WHEREAS the Cruise Lines International Association estimates the proposed Interpretive Rule would upend the $17 billion in national cruise industry spending and put at risk more than 300000 jobs generated by the international cruise industry including jobs held by nWU at US ports and the local allied industries supporting the cruise industry and
Executive Order Submissions Under Review
II Reglnfogov Where to ind Federal Regulatory Information -~
Home ] Lnitied Agenda and Regulator) Ilan pound012866 Regulator) Review Jnformalion Collection Review
EO 12866 Regulatory Rlvlw dvanced Search IJitorical RepWI Review Counh Jriter XIL
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA)
Executive Order Submissions Under Review July 25 2008 - _------------____ _shy
Department of Homeland Security
AGENCY DHS-TSA RIN 1652-AA53
TITLE Large Aircraft Security Program Other Aircraft Operator Security Programs and Airport Operator Security Program
STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT Yes RECEIVED DATE 06302008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
AGENCY DHS-USCIS RIN Llti15-AB67 TITLE Changes to Requirements Affecting H-2B Nonimmigrants and Their Employers
STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT No RECEIVED DATE 06092008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
AGENCY DHS-USCBP RIN 1651AA11 TITLE Issuance of a Visa and Authorization for Temporary Admission Into the United States for Certain Nonimmigrant Aliens Afflicted W HIV Infection
STAGE Final Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT No RECEIVED DATE 03042008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
-_RE_V-IE-W-E-X-T-EN-D-E-D---------- _
AGENCY DHS-USCBP RIN 1651-AA76 TITLE Coastwise Transportation of Passengers STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT Yes RECEIVED DATE 07142008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
Disclosure I Accessibility I Privacy Policy I Contact Us
httpwwwreginfogovpublicdoeoReviewSearch 7252008
View Rule Page 11
Shere D find Federal ReguLatory InformciiorlReglnfogov Home J Cnified Agenda al1d Regulatory Plan EO 12866 Regulatory Reyiew Information Collection Reiew
Current rnified Agenda and Regulatory Plan Historical Pnified Agenda and Regulatory Plan Search
View Rule
DHSIUSCBP RIN 1651-AA76 Publication ill Spring 2008
Title llCoastwise Transportation of Passengers
Abstract This interim rule amends the Department of Homeland Securitys (DHS) current regulations relating to the transportation of passengers by non-coastwise-qualified vessels on voyages that begin and end at a US port and stop at intervening US and foreign port(s) Under this interim final rule voyages that begin and end at a US port and stop at a foreign port(s) and at intervening US port(s) where a large USshyflag coastwise-qualified passenger vessel engages in regular service are in violation of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) unless the cumulative length of stay(s) at intervening foreign port(s) is more than 50 percent of the total amount of time spent at the intervening US port(s) and passengers are permitted to go ashore at the foreign port(s) The purpose of this amendment is to ensure that the Congressional purpose in enacting the PVSA which is to preserve the economic benefits of US coastwise trade to US-flag coastwise-qualified vessels is properly implemented
Agency Department of Homeland Security(DHS) Priority Substantive Nonsignificant
KIN Status First time published in the Unified Agenda Agenda Stage of Rulemaking Final Rule Stage
Major No Unfunded Mandates No
CFR Citation -LCER 4J~)(h)(plusmnJ
Legal Authority 5JJSS_30J12lJ-SClt16 J9_lJiCJ 431 9_L1C1plusmn3JJ2JScHJ1J2JSCJ624 L(LlLSc207LIl(gtJfHgt~ _CiQJ _46lSC 6QLQ~
Legal Deadline None
Timetable Action Date FR Cite
Interim Final Action 0510012008
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required No Government Levels Affected None
Federalism No
Included in the Regulatory Plan No
RIN Data Printed in the FR No
Agency Contact Glen E Vereb Chief Entry Procedures and Carriers Branch Department of Homeland Security US Customs and Border Protection Office of Regulations and Rulings 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington DC 20229 Phone202572-8730
Disclosure I Accessibility I Privacy Policy I Contact Us
httpwwwreginfogovpublicdoeAgendaViewRuleruleID=286751 7128120
Federal RegisterVol 72 No 224Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules 65487
SPECULATIVE POSITION LIMITS 1-Continued [In contract units)
Contract
Soybeans and Mini-Soybeans 2
Wheat and Mini-Wheat 2 bullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbull
Soybean Oil
SingleSpot month All monthsmonth
600 8600 13300 600 11100 14500 540 6600 8600
Soybean Meal 720 5500 7100
Minneapolis Grain Exchange
Hard Red Spring Wheat I 600 I 11100 I 14500
New York Board of Trade
Cotton No2 I 300 I 5300 I 7300
Kansas City Board of Trade
Hard Winter Wheat I 600 I 11100 I 14500
1 For purposes of compliance with these limits positions in a futures contract that shares ~ubstantially identical terms with a contract market enumerated herein including a futures contract that is cash-settled based on the settlement price of an enumerated contract market shall be agshygregated with positions in the enumerated contract market
2 For purposes of compliance with these limits positions in the regular-sized and mini-sized contracts shall be aggregated
Issued by the Commission this November 152007 in Washington DC David Stawick Secretary of the Commission [FR Doc E7-22681 Filed 11-20-07 845 amI BILLING CODE 6351-Q1-P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Bureau of Customs and Border Protection
19 CFR Part 4
[USCBP-2007-o098]
Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises
AGENCY Customs and Border Protection Department of Homeland Security ACTION Proposed interpretation solicitation of comments
SUMMARY This document proposes new criteria to be used by Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to determine whether non-coastwise-qualified vessels are in violation ofthe Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) when engaging in cruise itineraries in which passengers board at a US port the vessel calls at several Hawaiian ports and then the vessel proceeds to a foreign port or ports for a brief period before ultimately returning to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their cruise CBP believes these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because it appears that the primary objective of the foreign stop is evasion of the PVSA
DATES Comments must be received on or before December 212007 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT Glen E Vereb Cargo Security Carriers amp Immigration Branch Office of International Trade (202) 572-8730 ADDRESSES You may submit comments identified by docket number by one of the following methods
bull Federal eRulemaking Portal http wwwregulationsgov Follow the instructions for submitting comments
bull Mail Border Security Regulations Branch Office of International Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
I Public Participation
Interested persons are invited to participate in this proposed interpretation by submitting written data views or arguments on all aspects of the proposed interpretation Customs and Border Protection (CBP) also invites comments that relate to the economic environmental or federalism effects that might result from this proposed interpretation Comments that will provide the most assistance to CBP in developing these procedures will reference a specific portion of the proposed interpretation explain the reason for any recommended change and include data information or authority that support such recommended change
Instructions All submissions received must include the agency name and docket number for this proposed
interpretation All comments received will be posted without change to http wwwregulationsgov including any personal information provided
Docket For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received go to http wwwregulationsgov Submitted comments may also be inspected on regular business days between the hours of 9 am and 430 pm at the Office of International Trade Customs and Border Protection 799 9th Street NW 5th Floor Washington DC Arrangements to inspect submitted documents should be made in advance by calling Mr Joseph Clark at (202) 572shy8768
II Background
The maritime cabotage law governing the transportation of passengers was first established by section 8 of the Passenger Vessel Services Act of June 191886 (the PVSA) 24 Stat 81 as amended by section 2 of the Act of February 17 1898 30 Stat 248 formerly codified at 46 USC App 289 (now codified at 46 USC 55103) 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 of $200 (now $300 as promulgated in TD 03-11 pursuant to the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 199028 USC 2461 note) for each passenger so transported and landed
The intent of the maritime cabotage laws including the PVSA was to provide a legal structure that guarantees a coastwise monopoly to
65488 Federal RegisterVol 72 No 224Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules
American shipping and thereby promotes development of the American merchant marine Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 28 (DC Cir 1984) see also The Granada 35 FSupp 892 8931940 AMC 1601 (DC Pa 1940) (stating that the legislative aim of section 289 [now 55102] was the creation of a practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping business for United States ships) In other words the PVSA was enacted to advance the United States merchant marine and fleet by restricting the use of foreign-ownedflagged passenger vessels in United States territorial waters
Passenger vessel transportation between United States ports has historically been viewed to be part of the coastwise trade after the enactment of the PVSA This view is premised on the concepts of continuity of the voyage and whether its intended purpose or objective was coastwise transportation In other words the PVSA was held to be violated if the coastwise movement was continuous or if the purpose of the trip was a coastwise voyage (See 18 OAG 445 September 4 1886 28 OAG 204 February 16 1910 29 OAG 318 February 12 1912 30 OAG 44 February 1 1913 34 OAG 340 December 24 1924 and 36 OAG 352 August 13 1930)
The CBP regulations promulgated pursuant to the PVSA are found at section 480a of title 19 of the Code of Federal Regulations (19 CFR 480a) and are reflective of the above cited Office of the Attorney General decisions These regulations provide among other things that a non-coastwise-qualified vessel which embarks a passenger at a port in the United States embraced within the coastwise laws (a coastwise port) will be deemed to have landed that passenger in violation of the PVSA if the passenger disembarks at a different coastwise port on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a nearby foreign port or ports (as defined in 19 CFR 480a(a)(2) see also 19 CFR 480a(b)(2)) The terms embark and disembark are words of art which are defined as going on board a vessel for the duration of a specific voyage and leaving a vessel at the conclusion of a specific voyage respectively (See 19 CFR 480a(a)(4))
The references in section 480a to nearby foreign ports (defined in 19 CFR 480a(a)(2)) are the results of attempts by CBP to apply an Office of the Attorney Generals opinion dated February 26 1910 (28 OAG 204) In that case a foreign-flag vessel transported 615 passengers on a voyage around the world beginning in New
York and concluding in San Francisco The Attorney General opined that since the primary object of the voyage was to visit various parts of the world on a pleasure tour returning home via California and not to be transported in domestic commerce the transportation was not in violation of the PVSA
The 1910 Attorney Generals opinion was extended to voyages that included foreign ports other than nearby foreign ports (See Treasury Decision (TD) 68shy285 (33 FR 16558) November 14 1968) However voyages solely to one or more coastwise ports have always been considered predominantly coastwise Therefore non-coastwise-qualified vessels engaging in such a voyage where passengers temporarily go ashore at a coastwise port have been deemed to have violated the PVSA
m Current Law and Policy Pursuant to Public Law 109-304 120
Stat 1632 enacted on October 6 2006 Title 46 United States Code was substantially reorganized and recodified Consequently the PVSA is now codified at 46 USC 55103 and provides that no vessel shall transport passengers between ports or places in the United States either directly or by way of a foreign port under a penalty of $300 for each person so transported and landed except one that (1) Is wholly owned by citizens of the United States for purposes of engaging in the coastwise trade and (2) has been issued a certificate of documentation with a coastwise endorsement or is exempt from documentation but would otherwise be eligible for such a certificate and endorsement
In 2003 Congress enacted Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II Section 211 for the purpose of revitalizing the oceangoing US-flag cruise industry in Hawaii (the 2003 Act) Three oceangoing US-flag cruise ships PRIDE OF ALOHA PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAII were documented with coastwise privileges pursuant to the 2003 Act These vessels entered regular service in Hawaii in 2004 2005 and 2006 respectively and pursuant to the express language of the 2003 Act are limited in their operation to providing regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands of Hawaii
The CBP regulations promulgated pursuant to the PVSA are set forth in 19 CFR 480a and have remained unchanged throughout both the recodification of Title 46 of the United States Code and the enactment of the 2003 Act They provide that a violation of the PVSA occurs when passengers embark (board a vessel for the
duration of a voyage) a non-coastwiseshyqualified vessel at one US port and disembark (leave the vessel at the conclusion of a voyage) at a different US port unless they proceed with the vessel to a distant foreign port (Le any port not considered a nearby foreign port which is defined as any port located in North America Central America Bermuda or the West Indies including the Bahamas) Currently these regulations do not contain specific criteria for non-coastwise-qualified vessels on itineraries including US ports and either nearby or distant foreign ports in order for such foreign port calls to be compliant with the PVSA
To reiterate the applicable CBP regulations provide that the PVSA is violated when a non-coastwise-qualified vessel transports a passenger on a voyage solely to one or more coastwise ports and the passenger disembarks or goes ashore temporarily at a coastwise port (19 CFR 480a(b)(1)) Furthermore a violation of the PVSA also occurs when a non-coastwise-qualified vessel transports a passenger on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a nearby foreign port or ports (but no other foreign port) and the passenger disembarks at a coastwise port other than the port of embarkation (19 CFR 480a(b)(2)) However there is no violation of the PVSA when a passenger is on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a distant foreign port or ports (whether or not the voyage includes a nearby foreign port or ports) and the passenger disembarks at a coastwise port provided the passenger has proceeded with the vessel to a distant foreign port (19 CFR 480a(b)(3))
IV Request From MARAD To Provide Guidance
The US Department of Transportation Maritime Administration (MARAD) has requested that CBP take action to ensure enforcement of the PVSA MARAD has asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreignshyflag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwiseshyqualified cruise ship operators
In April of 2007 the operator of the three US-flag cruise vessels operating solely in Hawaii pursuant to the 2003 Act announced their intent to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAIl from the Hawaii market and redeploy her to Europe The operator intends to re-flag the vessel to foreign registry directly resulting in the loss of over 1100 crewmember jobs The primary reason cited for this decision is the rapid increase in foreign-flag competition entering the Hawaii market
Federal Register I Vol 72 No 224 I Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules 65489
from the West Coast This competition is evidenced in published cruise itineraries of foreign-flag carriers offering a variety of round trip cruises that depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period usually in the early morning and ultimately return to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their cruise These cruises are often marketed as Hawaii cruises and except for the brief stop in the nearby foreign port of Ensenada are purely coastwise in nature It is these cruise itineraries that pose an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels that pursuant to the 2003 Act are currently engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands
V Preliminary Notice
In response to MARADs concerns CBP sent letters to two carriers known to operate the itineraries in question as well as to the Cruise Lines International Association Inc stating that CBP believes that these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because it appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA The letters further indicated that CBP is taking steps to publish this position
VI CBPs Proposed Interpretive Rule Accordingly in this document CBP is
proposing to provide that cruise itineraries for non-qualified coastwise vessels which allow passengers to board at a US port call at several Hawaiian ports proceed to a foreign port or ports for a brief period and then ultimately return to the original US port of embarkation for disembarkation are not consistent with the PVSA and the regulations promulgated pursuant thereto Specifically CBP interprets a voyage to be solely to one or more coastwise ports even where it stops at a foreign port unless the stop at the foreign port is a legitimate object of the cruise CBP will presume that a stop at a foreign port is not a legitimate object of the cruise unless
(1) The stop lasts at least 48 hours at the foreign port
(2) The amount of time at the foreign port is more than 50 percent of the total amount of time at the US ports of call and
(3) The passengers are permitted to go ashore temporarily at the foreign port
Accordingly CBP proposes to adopt an interpretive rule under which it will presume that any cruise itinerary that does not include a foreign port call that
satisfies each of these three criteria constitutes coastwise transportation of passengers in violation of 19 CFR 480a(b)(1)
Dated November 16 2007 W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection [FR Doc E7-22788 Filed 11-20-07 845 am] BILLING CODe 9111-14-1
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau
27 CFR Part 9
[Notice No 76]
RIN 1513-AB49
Proposed Establishment of the Leona Valley Viticultural Area (2007R-281 P)
AGENCY Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau Treasury ACTION Notice of proposed rulemaking
SUMMARY The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau proposes to establish the 134 square mile Leona Valley viticultural area in the northeast part of Los Angeles County California We designate viticultural areas to allow vintners to better describe the origin of their wines and to allow consumers to better identify wines they may purchase We invite comments on this proposed addition to our regulations DATES We must receive written comments on or before January 22 2008
ADDRESSES You may send comments on this notice to one of the following addresses
bull httpwwwregulationsgov (Federal e-rulemaking portal follow the instructions for submitting comments) or
bull Director Regulations and Rulings Division Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau PO Box 14412 Washington DC 20044-4412
See the Public Participation section of this notice for specific instructions and requirements for submitting comments and for information on how to request a public hearing
You may view copies of this notice selected supporting materials and any comments we receive about this proposal at httpwwwregulationsgov under Docket No 2007-0066 You also may view copies of this notice all related petitions maps or other supporting materials and any comments we receive about this
proposal by appointment at the TTB Information Resource Center 1310 G Street NW Washington DC 20220 To make an appointment call 202-927shy2400
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT NA Sutton Regulations and Rulings Division Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau 925 Lakeville S1 No 158 Petaluma CA 94952 phone 415shy271-1254 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
Background on Viticultural Areas
TTB Authority Section 105(e) of the Federal Alcohol
Administration Act (FAA Act) 27 USC 205(e) authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to prescribe regulations for the labeling of wine distilled spirits and malt beverages The FAA Act provides that these regulations should among other things prohibit consumer deception and the use of misleading statements on labels and ensure that labels provide the consumer with adequate information as to the identity and quality of the product The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) administers the regulations promulgated under the FAA Act
Part 4 ofthe TTB regulations (27 CFR part 4) allows the establishment of definitive viticultural areas and the use of their names as appellations of origin on wine labels and in wine advertisements Part 9 of the TTB regulations (27 CFR part 9) contains the list of approved viticultural areas
Definition Section 425(e)(1)(i) ofthe TTB
regulations (27 CFR 425(e)(1)(i)) defines a viticultural area for American wine as a delimited grape-growing region distinguishable by geographical features the boundaries of which have been recognized and defined in part 9 of the regulations These designations allow vintners and consumers to attribute a given quality reputation or other characteristic of a wine made from grapes grown in an area to its geographic origin The establishment of viticultural areas allows vintners to describe more accurately the origin of their wines to consumers and helps consumers to identify wines they may purchase Establishment of a viticultural area is neither an approval nor an endorsement by TTB of the wine produced in that area
Requirements Section 425(e)(2) of the TTB
regulations outlines the procedure for proposing an American viticultural area and provides that any interested party
Us Department ofHomelaDd Secmity Washington DC 10229
bull ~
US Customs and Border Protection
AUG 15 2fXJJ
VE5-3-02-QTRRBSTCCCI - ti015502-GG-
Mr leon Sutcliffe Director Port Operations Camivai Cruise Unes Camival Place 3655 NW 87Avenue Miami Aorlda 33178
RE P~nger Vessef Services Ad Coastwise Transportation 46 USC sect 55103 19 CFR sect 480a(b)
Dear Mr Sutcliffe
As you know US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) enforces the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) codified at TItle 46 United States Code section 55103 (46 USC 55103) This statute prohibits non-coastwise-qualifled vessels (ie those vessels not US-buill owned and documented with a coastwise endorsement) from transporting passengers between porls or places within the United States The regUlations promUlgated pursuant to the PVSA are found at TrtJe 19 Code of Federal Regulations section 4808 (19 CFR 4808)
It has come to our attention that passenger vessels of your company are engaging in cruise itineraries that include ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands Two USAlagged coastwise-endorsed passenger vessefs are also currenUy engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of caD wittlin the Hawaiian Islands
As part of your cruise itineraries some of your foreign-flagged vessels depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period and ultimately rebJm to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their endse For example the MS ZAANDAM of Holand America Lines departs San Diego cruises the Hawaiian Islands stops in Ensenada from 800pm to 11 OOpmbull and returns to san Diego CBP believes these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because It appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA -- - - ~~~------
Please be advised that CBP is taking steps to publish this position Should have any questions pertaining to this matter please contact Mr Glen Vereb Chief Cargo Security Carriers and Immigration Branch at (202) 572-8724
Sincerely
F Jl E EST Y LEe A U I 5 I N Gmiddot
December 21 2007
The Honorable W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection co Border Security Regulations Branch Office ofInternational Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229
Re Hawaii Coastwise Cruises (USCBP-2007-0098) Comments in Response to Proposed Interpretation
Dear Commissioner Basham
NCL America Inc1 (NCLA) submits these comments in support ofthe efforts ofCustoms and Border Protection to enforce the Passenger Vessel Services Act and the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative as applied to Hawaii coastwise cruises
1 Introduction and Summary of Position
NCLA operates three large oceangoing US flag cruise ships in Hawaii These ships are documented under US flag and are required to operate in regular service in Hawaii pursuant to the authority of the Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative a 2003 federal statute intended to revitalize the US flag cruise industry and to maximize economic and national security benefits to the United States (the 2003 Act)
NCLA has invested $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships pursuant to the 2003 Act and in direct reliance on the protections of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) and its proper enforcement The PVSA limits the transportation ofpassengers between US ports to coastwise documented US flag ships Its statutory protections recognize that US flag ships have significantly higher operational costs in part because they are subject to more stringent US laws including US labor laws and federal
1 NCL America Inc is a US corporation incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware headquartered in Honolulu Hawaii As a US corporation it is subject to US taxes at both the federal and state level The Chief Executive Officer the Chairman of the Board and all of the Board of Directors of NCL America are US citizens The company is also subject to US labor and employment laws and is required by statute to maintain a workforce comprised primarily ofUS citizens
700 Bishop St SUite 900 I Honolulu HawMi 96813 I Tel 8085273800 Fax 8085273820 I ndcom
2
income tax among others The NCLA ships operating in Hawaii are the only large oceangoing cruise ships operating under US flag In furtherance of the policy goals of the PVSA and the 2003 Act these ships have created over 4000 seafaring jobs all subject to US minimum wage and other labor statutes
Since 2003 there has been a significant increase in capacity in the Hawaii market from foreign flag ships providing cruise service to Hawaii from the West Coast Many of these foreign flag cruises are marketed as Hawaii cruises and consist entirely ofUS ports ofcall with the sole exception of a token stop in Mexico for as little as an hour late at night under circumstances where passengers are not permitted to get offthe ship There are no reported rulings approving these particular foreign flag itineraries
Lower cost foreign competition in the Hawaii market has unfairly hurt NCLAs operations NCLA has incurred substantial losses which have contributed significantly to its decision earlier this year to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAll from US flag and reshydeploy it foreign Unfair foreign competition poses an imminent threat to the remaining US flag passenger vessels operating in the Hawaii trades pursuant to the 2003 Act
As the agency statutorily charged with implementation of the 2003 Act the US Department ofTransportation Maritime Administration (MARAn) is aware of the threat foreign flag Hawaii itineraries pose to the US flag fleet and brought the situation to the attention ofthe US Department ofHomeland Security Bureau ofCustoms and Border Protection (CBP or Customs) Customs determined that the primary object of these itineraries was coastwise and that the Ensenada stop was an evasion of the PVSA
In August 2007 Customs provided written notice to the affected foreign lines and their trade association that the existing itineraries were contrary to the PVSA None of these lines sought advance rulings even after the Customs notice with respect to their Hawaii itineraries pursuant to Customs regulations and many continued to market the itineraries as Hawaii cruises NCLA supports the efforts ofCustoms and MARAD to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act for Hawaii cruises
2 Statutory Authority for Customs Proposed Interpretation
(a) Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA)
Congress passed the PVSA in 1886 to protect the US maritime transportation industry from foreign competition2 Protection is afforded through penalty assessments on foreign vessels transporting passengers between US ports or places directly or by way ofa foreign port 3 As Congress and the courts have recognized coastwise protections for the US maritime transportation industry are only one dimension of the PVSA Operating in conjunction with other coastwise laws and with the US
2 See United States v Honduran SS GRANADA 35 F Supp 892 894 (BD Pa 1940)(citing purpose of PVSA to meet threats to the practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping which was to be preserved for US ships)
46 USc sect 55103 (originally 46 USC App 289)
3
documentation laws the PVSA also enhances military sealift in times ofnational emergency sustains a US merchant marine and supports the US shipbuilding and repair industry4
(b) Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative (the 2003 Act)
Over the past decade Congress has sought to reinforce the goals of the PVSA by providing mechanisms to revitalize the oceangoing US flag cruise fleet particularly in Hawaii The Project America legislation enacted in 1997 authorized among other things the re~flagging ofone existing cruise ship contingent on the operator contracting for the construction oftwo new oceangoing cruise shipss Following the default of the operator under the original contract Congress enacted the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative for the purpose ofrecovering economic and national security benefits to the United States bull 6 These same goals of the original PVSA were expressly referenced in the legislative history of the 2003 Act which emphasized that these ships will be assets available in time ofnational emergency and will significantly expand the pool ofqualified seafarers upon which the US Department ofDefense relies to crew non-combatant vessels
The 2003 Act authorizes the US documentation ofthree cruise ships for operation in regular service in Hawaii subject to certain conditions including a prohibition on operating in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico and the Caribbean Sea and a requirement that all vessel repair work be undertaken in the United States MARAD is charged with implementation of the 2003 Act
3 Customs Implementation of PVSA
(a) Regulations
The current regulations implementing the PVSA were published by Customs in 19858 The growth of the foreign flag cruise industry in North America and in particular the development of the Alaska cruise market led to an effort in 1984 to amend the thenshyexisting regulations to increase the ease of administration and operational flexibility The effort to change the regulation had support from US port interests who saw benefit in the potential increase in the number ofUS ports that foreign vessels could call and was opposed by proponents ofpotential US flag projects as detrimental to efforts to revitalize the US fleet 9 The preamble to the 1985 rule emphasized that it was of paramount importance to consider the primary object ofpassengers in taking a
4 See American Hawaii Cruises v Skinner 713 F Supp 452 457 (DDC 1989) (recognizing the contribution of the PVSA and the Jones Act in helping to secure national defense by maintaining a merchant marine oftbe best equipped and most suitable types ofvessels sufficient to serve in time of war or national emergency) see also Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 30 (DC Cir 1984) Wirth Ltd v SIS Acadia Forest 537 F2d 1272 1281 n32 (5th Cir 1976) S Public Law 105-56 Section 8109 (111 Stat 1203 1244) (Oct 81997 ) 6 Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II General Provisions - Department ofCommerce Section 211 (117 Stat 1179) (Feb 20 2003) 1 149 Cong Rec S1118 (dailyed Jan 17 2003(statement ofSenator Inouye) 8 19 CFR sect 480a 950 Fed Reg 26981 (July I 1985)
4
voyage10 a concept which is reinforced elsewhere in Customs regulations11 In its analysis of the comments received at the time Customs accepted the view ofport interests that the modified rule would help their business but did so recognizing the absence ofa regular salt water US flag passenger fleet Customs acknowledged the potential harm to prospective efforts to revitalize the US flag passenger fleet and expressly cautioned that if it were ever shown that coastwise qualified vessels in competition with foreign vessels were in fact hurt by the modified Customs regulation then Customs would immediately reconsider its position12
(b) Customs Rulings
Given the significant penalties associated with violating the PVSA13 Customs regulations expressly provide a mechanism for the owner or charterer of a foreign vessel or any other interested person to request an advisory ruling as to whether a contemplated voyage would be considered in violation of the PVSA14 Customs regulations provide that vessel operators can rely on these ruling letters only to the extent that the facts and circumstances are identical to those in the ruling letter IS
Notwithstanding the fact that several foreign cruise lines offer Hawaii itineraries originating in a US mainland port and calling at Hawaii ports with a token intervening stop in Mexico there are no reported rulings expressly approving such an itinerary for these foreign cruise lines 16
4 The Cruise Industry in Hawaii
(a) NCL America Returns US flag to the Oceangoing Passenger Fleet
Pursuant to the requirements ofthe 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative NCLA agreed to promote US-flag cruising enhance military sealift capacity and expand the US maritime labor base No other major cruise line had ever undertaken such a commitment to the US flag and the public policy objectives Congress sought to achieve under the PVSA or the 2003 Act Introduction ofPRIDE OF ALOHA in 2004 was a significant development in the maritime industry because it marked the restoration ofthe
10 Id at 26983 11 Customs Regulations include a provision on the effect ofruling letters and with respect to carrier rulings the applicable regulation refers to rulings setting forth a determination as to whether or not the primary object of a contemplated voyage is coastwise transportation in violation of46 USC sect 289 [pYSA codified at 46 USC sect55103] 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 12 50 Fed Reg at 26983 13 A modem cruise ship with 2400 passengers for example would be subject to a fine of$720OOO per cruise based on the statutory penalty of$300 for each passenger transported in violation of the Act 14 19 CFR sect 480a(d) IS 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 16 There is one older reported mling involving a request to drop the Ensenada port call from a Los AngeleslHawaiiLos Angeles itinerary which Customs held would violate the PYSA In dicta Customs acknowledged that the itinerary could be in compliance if the Ensenada call were not dropped but did not address the issue ofwhether a one hour service call where no passengers depart the vessel would be sufficient The carrier that obtained that ruling has since left the Hawaii market See Customs Ruling HQ 114078 re Crystal Hannony (Nov 4 1997)
5
us flag to the oceangoing cruise industry A contemporaneous press release from the Us Department ofTransportation reported that the three US-flag cruise ships to be introduced pursuant to the 2003 Act were expected to create more than 20000 US jobs generate more than $825 million ofexpenditures in the US economy and create nearly $360 million in federal tax revenue by the end of 200717 In 2005 the PRIDE OF AMERICA was introduced and in 2006 the third vessel PRIDE OF HAWAll was introduced to Hawaii Both the PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAIl offer 7shyday inter-island Hawaii itineraries whereas PRIDE OF ALOHA operates on 7 and 10 day cruises exclusively among the islands ofHawaii as well as 11 day cruises that include a foreign port call at Fanning Island To date NCLA has invested over $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships in furtherance ofthe policy objectives of the PVSA and the 2003 Act These ships employ over 4000 seafarers and generate hundreds ofmillions of dollars in benefits for Hawaii and the nation
(b) Significant Increase in Foreign Flag Capacity Since 2003
The most significant change in the Hawaii cruise market since 2003 has been the dramatic increase in capacity A significant portion ofthis capacity increase is directly attributable to NCLAs fulfillment ofthe Congressional mandate in the 2003 Act However foreign-flag operations in the Hawaii market as measured in passenger nights18 have skyrocketed Based on MARAn data derived from the US Customs Border Patrol Vessel Entrance and Clearance documents the passenger nights for foreign flag vessels departing from the West Coast to Hawaii on round trip cruise have increased several hundredfold during this period19 See Exhibit A
(c) NCLA Has Incurred Substantial Losses During this Period
Since 2004 NCLA has lost cumulatively more than a quarter ofa billion dollars A principal reason for these losses has been the increase in foreign capacity in this market NCLA has taken significant steps to reduce costs to address the increase in foreign competition but NCLA is at an inherent disadvantage when competing against foreign companies that are not subject to US labor laws US tax laws and other laws Ofcourse the statutory protections of the PVSA are intended to address these very issues That is why Customs immediate action to implement the proposed interpretation is critical for the US flag fleet Regrettably NCLA has already been forced to reduce overall capacity early next year with the withdrawal ofPRIDE OF HAWAlI to another
17 DOT Press Release dated June 72004 see also DOT Press Release dated August 132004 in connection with visit to PRIDE OF ALOHA by US Transportation Secretary Norman Y Mineta 11 Passenger nights (also referred to as passenger capacity days) are calculated by multiplying the number ofpassengers per vessel by the number ofcruise days in each itinerary by the number of cruises This is the unit ofmeasurement employed by MARAn In contrast passenger bed supply (also referred to as passenger capacity) data reflects only the number ofberths per vessel multiplied by the number of cruises and hence understates the market by excluding the full economic value ofthe cruise perfonned 19 In 2003 the total number ofpassenger nights for round-trip West Coast to Hawaii cruises was 303325 which jumped by 353 to 1072329 in 2006 and by 430 to 1304546 from 2003 to 2007 (The 2007 figure is based on MARAD data for six months and a1ll1ualized by published itineraries for the balance of the year)
6
market for operation under foreign flag This move alone will result in the loss ofover 1000 American seafaring jobs
5 Customs Proposed Interpretation is Necessary to Further the Important National Security and Public Policy Objectives Embodied in Federal Law
As Customs has properly noted the increase in foreign competition in the Hawaii trades in contravention of the PVSA pose[s] an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels[] As the operator of these ships NCLA has a vested interest in protecting the jobs ofthe thousands ofAmerican crewmembers and cruise ship service providers who support these vessels NCLA also has an interest in protecting the substantial economic investment it has made to revitalize the US flag passenger vessel fleet But a balancing of interests in the context of Customs enforcement ofexisting law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act requires a much broader focus
The legislative history of the 2003 Act expressly recognized the national security and public policy import ofestablishing a US flag passenger vessel fleet as a means to maintain the countrys preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool of qualified seafarers and as a means to help sustain a fleet ofUS-flag vessels to su~ort
the nations military and maritime industrial base for times ofnational emergency
Congress understood the importance ofestablishing a viable US flag cruise ship fleet as something larger than the vessels themselves These national security and public policy objectives must be weighed in the balance as Customs assesses how best to interpret its rules to give effect to the PVSA and the 2003 Act
6 Customs Should Clarify that the Proposed Interpretation is Limited to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades and Adopt Reasonable Measures to Ensure Sufficient Foreign Content
Since publication ofthe proposed interpretative rule several commenters have observed that the scope of the proposed interpretation is ambiguous because the language of Section VI referencing any cruise itinerary appears broader than the caption Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises and the entire discussion in the published notice which focuses exclusively on US-flag coastwise vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA agrees that the proposed interpretation should be clarified so that its scope is limited to vessels operating roundtrip voyages from US ports that include Hawaii port calls
NCLA supports the concept reflected in the proposed interpretive rule that round trip Hawaii itineraries from US ports on foreign ships must include a material and measurable degree ofoverall foreign port content as compared to US port content
20 149 Congo Rec S1117 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)
7
(a) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is also Consistent with Subsequent Congressional Enactments Modifying the PVSA
As discussed above it is well established that the PVSA was designed toRrotect US-flag vessels from foreign competition in the coastwise and domestic trades 1
Subsequent legislative enactments however have appropriately differentiated among distinct geographic markets and trades including Canada Alaska Puerto Rico and Hawaii based on the existence or non-existence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
In 1938 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers by Canadian passenger vessels on Lake Ontario and the St Lawrence River until such time as passenger service shall be established by vessels of the United States22 Similarly in 1961 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers on Canadian vessels within Alaska or between Alaska and other points in the United States until such time as passenger service is established by vessels ofthe United States23
In 1984 Congress modified the application ofthe PVSA to pennit the transportation ofpassengers between Puerto Rico and other United States ports on foreign-flag vessels24 As with the other statutory exceptions this provision is qualified and expires [o]n a showing that a United States passenger vessel qualified to engage in the coastwise trade is offering or advertising passenger service between a port in Puerto Rico and another port in the United States2S
Congress acted again with respect to the application of the PVSA with the 2003 Act in which it authorized three vessels that did not meet the US-build requirements of the PVSA to operate as modem US-flagged cruise ships in regular service in Hawaii26 The 2003 Act imposes a specific geographic limitation on the operation of any ship documented under this authority to operations only in regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands ofHawaii and shall not transport passengers in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico or the Caribbean Sea except in certain limited circumstances27 As above the limited nature of the 2003 Act is express it is strictly limited to the large ocean-going cruise ships and then only those operating in the regular Hawaii service where there are no US-flag operations28
21 See Act ofJune 19 1886 c 421 sec 8 24 Stat 81 Act of February 171898 c 26 sec 2 30 Stat 248 22 S] Res 174 75th Cong 52 Stat 223 (Alp 251938) codified at46 USC sect 55121(a) 23 See Pub L 87-77 75 Stat 196 (Jun 30 1961) codified at 46 USC sect 55121(b) 24 See Pub L 98-563 98 Stat 2916 (Oct 301984) codified at 46 USC sect 55104(b) 25 46 USC sect 55104(c)(l) see also 46 USC 46 USc sect 55104(cX2)(expiration of exemption upon availability ofa non-coastwise qualified US-flag vessel offering service in the relevant market) 26 149 Congo Rec SI118 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)(statementofSen Inouye) 27 Pub L 108-7 117 Stat 79 (Feb 20 2003) 28 149 Congo Rec S11l9 (dailyed Jan 17 2003Xstatement of Sen Inouye)
8
In each ofthese instances Congress fashioned a narrow exception to the PVSA that differentiated among distinct geographic markets based on the existence or nonshyexistence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
As the federal agency responsible for administering the 2003 Act MARAD requested that Customs act to protect US flag passenger vessel interests in the Hawaii trades29 Limiting the scope ofthe proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades also reflects Customs appreciation of the PVSA in the context of the subsequent Congressional action30 Viewing the Congressional modifications to the PVSA as a whole Congress has specifically and repeatedly differentiated among distinct geographic markets when it has found it necessary and appropriate to do so to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests It is well established that the proper interpretation of a statutory scheme includes consideration ofsubsequent statutes even though the underlying statute itselfhas not been expressly amended31 Accordingly Customs should likewise limit the scope ofthe proposed PVSA interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades because that is the only geographic market as mandated by the 2003 Act in which oceangoing US-flag cruise ships are operating
(b) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Consistent with Public Policy Objectives of the 1985 Rulemaking
In 1985middot Customs liberalized the regulations implementing the PVSA by eliminating certain regulatory prohibitions on foreign flag vessels In the context of the 1985 rulemaking Customs justified a relaxation ofthe regulations on the grounds that it would simplify the administration of the PVSA and would benefit the economy ofcertain American coastwise ports without eroding the statutory protection given to American vessels engaged in solely domestic trade32
Customs thus sought to reconcile US port economic interests with US-flag passenger vessel interests Both of these twin policy objectives are furthered by
29 See 72 Fed Reg 65488 (Nov 21 2007)( MARAn bas asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the ~eratiODS ofcoastwise-qualified cruise ship operators)
See generally FDA v Brown amp Williamson Tobacco Corp 529 US 120 132-133 (2000)(assessing propriety ofagency construction ofFood DIUg and Cosmetics Act and descnbing responsibility of reviewing cowt to assess statutory provisions in the context of subsequent legislative enactments) 31 See Brown amp Williamson 529 US 143 (holding that proper construction ofstatutory provision must necessarily assume that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications ofa later statute This is particularly so where the scope of the earlier statute is broad but the subsequent statutes more specifically address the topic athand) see also United States v Estate ofRomani 523 US 517 530-531 (1998)( holding that a later-enacted statute should control the construction of the federal lien priority statute a specific policy embodied in a later federal statute should control om construction of the [earlier] statute even though it ha[s] not been expressly amended) United States v Fausto 484 US 439453 (1988)(The courts frequently find Congress to have done this - whenever in fact they interpret a statutory text in the light ofsurrounding texts that happen to have been subsequently enacted This classic judicial task of reconciling many laws enacted over time and getting them to make sense in combination necessarily assumes that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications of a later statute) 32 50 Fed Reg 26982 (JuI 11985)
9
limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades
As noted earlier the 2003 Act limits the operation of the NCLA US-flag oceangoing passenger vessels to regular service in Hawaii Because there are no oceangoing US-flag vessels operating in any market other than the Hawaii trades Customs should limit the scope of the proposed interPretation to that market Such a limitation protects US flag passenger vessel interests without prejudicing US port interests In contrast an application of the proposed interpretation to any itinerary would needlessly harm US port interests unrelated to Hawaii without any countervailing benefit to US-flag passenger vessel interests Accordingly limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation is consistent with the public policy objectives of the 1985 rulemaking as well as the 2003 Act
(c) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Also Consistent with Customs Commitment to Revisit the Scope of its Rules to Protect US-Flag Interests
The relaxation ofthe PVSA regulations in 1985 was premised in large part on Customs finding that there was no regular salt water US-flag passenger fleet in operation at that time33 Acknowledging that the relaxed regulations could harm USshyflag interests Customs committed in the preamble ofthe 1985 final rule to immediately reconsider its interpretation if it is ever shown that there is a viable US flag vessel operating in competition with foreign-flag vessels34
Congress enacted the 2003 Act to stimulate the development of a US flag cruise ship industry As noted above the legislative history ofthat Act makes clear that Congress sought to revitalize the US-flag cruise industry as a means to maintain Americas preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool ofqualified seafarers help sustain a fleet of US flag vessels to support our military and a maritime industrial base create thousands of seagoing and shoreside American jobs and stimulate the development ofa US flag cruise ship tourism business with the commensurate benefits to the US tax base the US economy and US employment
Customs is now acting at MARADs request to revisit its interpretation ofthe regulations implementing the PVSA because recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwise-qualified cruise ship operations35 That is to say that the concerns articulated by Customs in the context of the 1985 rulemaking have materialized and US-flag passenger vessel interests are in fact being hanned in the Hawaii trades by foreign competitors
33 50 Fed Reg 26983 34Id
3S 72 Fed Reg 56488 (Nov 21 2007)
I
10
Because the US-flag passenger vessels are limited by statute to regular service in Hawaii limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the
Hawaii trades is consistent with Customs historical commitment to revisit its interpretation ofthe implementing regulations to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests
7 Conclusion
For the reasons stated above NCLA commends the efforts ofCustoms and MARAn to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act as applied to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA respectfully requests Customs to move ahead promptly with p~blicati~nof a final interpretive rule to advance the important national security arid public policy objectives ofthese laws
We greatly appreciate the opportunity to submit these comments
Sincerely
~~~ Alan T Yamamoto Vice President Hawaii Operations
Exhibit A
Ship Name Serenade Of The Seas Departure Port San Diego California Ports of Call San Diego California Kailua Kona Hawaii Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii Hlo Hawaii Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii Ensenada Mexico San Qigo California
2007 Date(s) Oct 05
Sailing Itinerary
Day Port H ~rrive Depart Activity
05-0ct San Diego California 500 PM
06-0ct Cruising
07-0ct Cruising
08-0ct Cruising
09-0ct Cruising
10-0ct Kailua Kona Hawaii 700 AM 900 PM Tendered
11-00t Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 1000 AM Tendered
12middot0ct Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 900 PM Tendered
13-0ct Hilo Hawaii 700 AM 600 PM Docked
14middot0ct Honoulu (Oahu) Hawaii 700 AM Docked
15-0ct Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii 200 AM Docked
6-0ct CrUising
17-0ct Cruising
18-0ct Cruising
19middot0ct Cruising
-7 20-00t
O-Oot
Ensenada ~i1exico
San Deqo California
i 00 ~r1
700 ~M
200 oM D1Jcked ~
ALASKA CRUISES
VOYAGE OF THE GLACIERS
2004 DEPARTURE DATES
CORAUISLAND PRINCESS7 SaturdllydqxtTturtS May 8 Coni 21 Dawn Aug 2 Dawn 10 Dawn 26 Islmd 7 IslandDAYS SUNDAWN PRINCESS 15 Island 28 Sun 9 SunMondaydqJaTtures 17 Sun )ul 3 Coral 14 Coral 22 Coral S Dawn 16 Dawn 24 Dawn 10 Island 21 Island 29 Island 12 Sun 23 Sun 31 Sun 17 Coni 28 Coral
Jun 5 Coral 19 Dawn 30 Dawn NORTHBOUND 7 Dawn 24 Island Sop 4 Island
12 Island 26 Sun 6 Sun 14 Sun 31 Coral 19 Coral
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Vancouver BC PM 2 Inside Passage Scenic Cruising 3 Ketchikan 4 Juneau 5 Skagway 8PM 6 Glacier Bay National Park Scenic Cruising 3PM 7 College Fjord Scenic Cruising 3PM 8 Whittler (Anchorage) DISEMBARK AM
VOYAGE OF THE GLACIERS
2004 DEPARTURE DATES
7 CORALISlAND PRINCESS Saturday departures
May 15 Coral 26 CoraDAYS SUNDAWN PRINCESS 17 Dawn 28 DawnMondllydtpartures 22 Island )uI 3 Island 24 Sun 5 Sun 29 Coral 10 Coral 31 Dawn 12 Dawn
)un S Island 17 Island 7 Sun 19 Sun
SOUTHBOUND 12 Coral 24 Coral 14 Dawn 26 Dawn 19 Island 31 Island 21 Sun Aug 2 Sun
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE 1 WhlttierIAnrhora
630AM 1030 AM 630AM 630AM 830AM
6PM
7 Coral 9 Dawn
14 Island 16 Sun 21 Coral 23 Dawn 28 Island 30 Sun
Sep 4 6
Coral Dawn
11 Island 13 Sun
DEPART EMBARK PM
~30AM 830 PM
SPM 4PM
545PM
INSIDE PASSAGE
SAPPHIRE PRINCESS 7 DAYS Sundaydtpartuns
ROUNDTRIP from
SEATTLE
2004 DEPARTURE DATES
May 16 18 23 25
Jun 30 6
Aug 1 8
13 15 20 22 27 29
Jul 4 11
Sep S 12
t Endicott Arm wy be substituted on somtYOiiCS due to~orwcatherconditlom
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE 1 Seattle 2 At Sea 3 Ketchikan 630AM 4 Tracy Arm Scenic Cruisingt 6AM 4 Juneau lPM 5 Skagway 6AM 6 At Sea 7 Victoria BC HM 8 Seattle DISEMBARK AM
DEPART EMBARK PM
5PM lOAM 10 PM 6PM
12M
INSIDE PASSAGE
7 DIAMOND PRINCESS DAYS saturday dqllu1uus
ROUNDTRIP from
SEATTLE
2004 DEPARTURE DATES
May 8 17 15 24 22 31 19 Aug 7
Jun 5 14 12 21 19 28 26 Sep 4
Jul 3 11 10
t EndkottAnn maybe substituted on some voyages due tokcQlweuherconditlom
CRUISE ITINERARY
ARRIVE DEPART
INSIDE PASSAGE
10 REGAL PRINCESS DAYS
ROUNDTRIP from
SAN FRANCISCO
2004 DEPARTURE DATES
May 6 Jul 5 16 IS 26 25
)un 5 Aug 4 15 14 15
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE
lPM 7AM 7AM 7AM
7AM
DEPART EMBARK PM
~PM 830PM
12 N 5PM
2PM
Coral Princess in College Fjord Alaska
ALASKA CRUISETOURS
HEART Of ALASKA CRUISETOUR HEART Of ALASKA CRUISETOUR
e 1312 DAYS DAYS e
CRUI5ETOUR CRUI5ETOUR 35 125
2004 DEPARTURE DATES2004 DEPARTURE DATES
Date Ship Date Ship Date Ship Date Ship
May 10 Coral Aug 2 Coral Mayll Coral Aug 3 Coral 12 Dawn 4 Dawn
13 Dawn 5 Dawn 17 Island 9 Island 18 Island 10 Island
DAY PORT 19 Sun 11 Sun
20 Sun 12 Sun 24 Coral 16 Coral 25 Coral 17 Coral 26 Dawn 18 Dawn 27 Dawn 19 Dawn 31 Island 23 Island
Jun 1 Island 24 Island Jun 2 Sun 25 Sun 3 Sun 26 Sun 7 Coral 30 Coral 8 Coral 31 Coral 9 Dawn Sep 1 Dawn
10 Dawn Sep 2 Dawn 14 Island Island6 5 DenaliAnchorage15 Island 7 Island 16 Sun 8 Sun 17 Sun 9 Sun 21 Coral 6 AnchorageWhittierEmbark22 Coral 23 Dawn 24 Dawn 28 Island 7 College Fjord Scenic Cruising 29 Island 30 Sun
)u1 1 Sun Jul 5 Coral 8 Glacier Bay National Park Scenic Cruising 6 Coral 7 Dawn 9 Skagway12 Island
13 Island 14 Sun 8 Dawn
10 Juneau15 Sun 19 Coral 20 Coral 21 Dawn 11 Ketchikan 22 Dawn 26 Island 27 Island 28 Sun 12 Inside Passage Scenic Cruising 29 Sun 13 VancouverPark Rangers are at our lodges to enrich your stay
HEART Of ALASKA CRUISETOUR ALASKA WILDERNESSKENAI CRUISETOUR ALASKA WILDERNESSCOPPER RIVER CRUISETOUR
14 1314 DAYS DAYS DAYSe e e
CRUI5ETOUR CRUI5ETOURCRUI5ETOUR
145 185165
2004 DEPARTURE DATES
2004 DEPARTURE DATESDate Ship Date Ship 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
Date Ship Date ShipMayl Dawn Aug 1 Coral 16 Island 3 Dawn Date Ship Date Ship 18 Sun 8 Island May 11 Dawn Aug 1 Coral 23 Coral 10 Sun MaylO Coral Aug 2 Coral 25 Dawn 15 Coral
16 Island 3 Dawn 12 Dawn 4 Dawn
30 Island 17 Dawn 18 Sun 8 Island
17 Island 9 Island Jun 1 Sun 22 Island
23 Coral 10 Sun 19 Sun 11 Sun
6 Coral 24 Sun 25 Dawn 15 Coral
26 Dawn 18 Dawn 8 Dawn 29 Coral
Jun 1 Sun 17 Dawn 31 Island 23 Island
13 Island 31 Dawn 6 Coral 24 Sun
Jun 2 Sun 25 Sun 15 Sun Sep 5 Island
8 Dawn 29 Coral 7 Coral Sep 1 Dawn
20 Coral 7 Sun 13 Island 31 DaWn
9 Dawn 6 Island 22 Dawn
15 Sun Sep 7 Sun 14 Island 8 Sun
27 Island 20 Coral
16 Sun 29 Sun
22 Dawn 23 Dawn
)ul 4 Coral 29 Sun
28 Island 6 Dawn
Jul 4 Coral 30 Sun
11 Island 6 Dawn
Jul 5 Coral 13 Sun
11 Island 7 Dawn
18 Coral 13 Sun
12 Island 20 Dawn
18 Coral 14 Sun
25 Island 20 Dawn
21 Dawn 27 Sun
27 Sun 26 Island 28 Sun
CRUISETOUR ITINERARY CRUISETOUR ITINERARY
DAY PORT By S~a By Land
1 fairbanks
Mt McKinleyWhittierEmabrk
College fjord ~ce~lc Cnlsi~g
Juneau
CRUISETOUR IIINERARY
DAY PORT
CRUISETOUR ITINERARY
DAY PORT
CRUISETOUR ITINERARY
PORT By Sea By Land
College Fjord Scenic Cruising Glacier Bay National Park Scenic Cruising
13 Vancouver
CANADA amp NEW ENGLAND CRUISES
CANADANEW ENGLAND CANADACOLONIAL AMERICA CANADANEW ENGLAND
10 REGAL 13 REGAL 7 GRAND DAYS PRINCESS DAYS PRINCESSDAYS PRINCESS
sail between ROUNDTRIP NEW YORK
MONTREAL fromto
CITY NEW YORKFT LAUDERDALE and CITY
MONTREAL 2004 DEPARTURE DATE
CRUISE IlINERARY CRUISE ITINERARY 2004 CRUISE IIINERARY Oct 31 DEPARTURE DATES
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 2004 Sep 12 1 1 New York City New York EMBARK PM Montreal Quebec EMBARK PMDEPARTURE DATES Sep 19 New York City New York EMBARK PM
2 Newport Rhode Island 830 AM 4PM 2 Quebec City Quebec 6AM 4PM Sep 261Sep 11 Oct 3
Sep21t 1 3 Bostoni Massachusetts 830AM SPM i3 At Sea Oct 10 2 At Sea
Olttl 4 Bar Harbor Maine 8AM 6PM 4 Halifax Nova Scotia 12 N 6PM Oct I]Octllt
Oct 24Oct 21 S Saint John New Brunswick 7AM 3PM l~ Bar Harbor Maine 8AM 6PM Halifax Nova Scotia 8AM 5 PM
6 Halifax Nova Scotia 8AM 5PM 6 Boston Massachusetts 8AM 5PM
17 At Sea 7 Newport Rhode Island 9AM 6PM 4 Saint John New Brunswick 9AM 5PM
8 Saguenay River Scenic Cruising 9 AM 2PM 8 New York City New York 8AM 5PM Bar Harbor Maine 7AM 6PMi9 ~8 Quebec City Quebec 11 PM Norfolk Virginia 12 N 10 PM
(overnight onboard ship) 10 Baltimore Maryland 8AM 5PM Boston Massachusetts 7AM 5PM 9 Quebec City Quebec 5PM 11 At Sea
Montreal Quebec 8AM10 12 Charleston South Carolina 7AM 5PM 7 Newport Rhode Island 8AM 5PM
tltneTaryoperaresinrtvtrstorder (overnight onboard ship) 13 At Sea t Itnaary opaates in revu5t order 8 New York City DISEMBARK AMPort times may vary Port times may vary11 Montreal Quebec DISEMBARK AM 14 Ft Lauderdale Florida DISEMBARK AM New York
MEXICAN RIVIERA CRUISES
MEXICAN RIVIERA MEXICAN RIVIERA MEXICAN RIVIERA
DIAMOND DAYS
107 DIAMOND PRINCESS 10 SAPPHIRE PRINCESSDAYS DAYS PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIPROUNDTRIP from fromfrom
LOS ANGELES LOS ANGELESSAN FRANCISCO
2004 DEPARTURE OATIS Sep 25 2004 DEPARTURE DATE
Oct 2 9 1623 30 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
Dec 29Sep 22Nov 6 13 20 27 Dec 4 11 22 Oct 2 12 221
Nov 1 11 2005 DEPARTURE OATIS
jan 815 22 29 Feb 5 12 19 26 MarS 12 19 26 tPortordtrllllllllmtsmaYNrApr 291623
CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 San Francisco EMBARK PM 1 Los Angeles (Long Beach) EMBARK PM
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
CRUISE ITINERARY DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
2 Catalina Island 1230 PM 630PM 2 At Sea Sat Los Angeles (Long Beach) EMBARK PM 3 Cabo San Lucas 9AM 6PM3-4 At Sea
5 Poerto Vallart 7AM 6PM 4 A~Sea
6 Mazatlan SAM 6PM 5 Acapulco SAM 11 PM 7 Cabo San Lucas SAM 6PM 6 Ixtapa (ZihaulIlnejo) 7AM 2PM
S At Sea 7 Puerto Vallarta SAM 7PM 9 San Dtego SAM 6PM 8 M~I~middot lAM -1Ft 10 At Sea 9-10 At Sea 11 San Francisco DISEMBARK AM 11 Los Angeles (Long Beach)
Sun AUea Mon AtSea Tue Poerto Vallarta Wed Mazatlan Thu Cabo San Luca( Fri At Sea Satmiddot Los Angeles (Long Beach)
CARIBBEAN CRUISES
EASTERN CARIBBEAN
7
EASTERN CARIBBEAN
7 7 DAYSDAYS DAYS
CARIBBEAN PRINCESS STAR PRINCESS GRAND PRINCESSSUN PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIP from from from
FT LAUDERDALE FT LAUDERDALE GALVESTON 2004 DEPARTIJRE DATES
CARIBBEAN PRINCESS Apr 24 2004 DEPARTURE DATES 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
CRUISE ITINERARYM~yl 1522 CRUISE I1INERARY JuI31724 DAY PORT Nov 14 28 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Dec 4 11 JunS 1226 Oct 31 Nov 13 20 27
Alii 1 1428 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Dec 12 26
Ott 2 9 162330 200S DEPARTURE DATES Sat Galveston EMBARK PMSep41825 Sat ft Lauderdale Sun ft Lauderdale EMBARK PM
Nov 6 132027 200S DEPARTURE DATESDet4 11 26middot Jan 8 15 22 29Sun At Sea Man At Sea 2005 DEPARTURE DATES ]an 9 23 Feb 5 12 19 26 Sun At Sea
CARIBBEAN PRINCESS Feb 6 20 MarS 121926 J~n 8152229 Mar 6 20 12M Apr 29 Man Belize City lPM 7PM Feb 512t 1926 MarS 121926 Apr 317 Apr2t 9 1623 Tue St Thomas 7 AM 6 PM Wed St Thomas BAM 6PM Tue Costa Maya (Mahahual) BAM 4PM
6PM Wed Grand CaYman l2N 7PM
Thu At Sea Fri At Sea Thu Cozumel lOAM 6 PM
4PM Fri At Sea
Sat Ft Lauderdale DISEMBARK AM Sun Ft Lauderdale DISEMBARK AM Sat Galveston DISEMBARK AM
CRUISE IlINERARY
ARRIVE DEPART
EMBARK PM
WESTERN CARIBBEAN
Sf Thomas US Virgin Islands Princess Cays
CARIBBEAN CRUISES
WESTERN CARIBBEAN WESTERN CARIBBEAN SOUTHERN CARIBBEAN EXPLORER
7 6 7 DAYS DAYS DAYS
CARIBBEAN PRINCESS STAR PRINCESS GRAND PRINCESS GOLDEN PRINCESS
DAWN PRINCESS
SAN JUAN ROUNDTRIPROUNDTRIP to fromfrom
GALVESTON SAN JUANFT LAUDERDALE
2004 DEPARTURE DATE2004 DEPARTURE DATES 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
CARIBB~~SflNCESS CRUISE ITINERARY Nov 7 CRUISE ITINERARY
My923 CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTJun 6 20 JUD 19
Jul lOt 31
May829t DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART )uI418 Sun San Juan EMBARK PM
Aug ll t Aug 11529
Sep 11
DAY PORT
Sep 12 26 Mon St Thomas 7AM 6PM STAR PRINCESS Princess Cays 9AM 4PM At Sea Oct 10 24
Nov 721 DecS19 Tue S Kitts 7AM 3PM
2005 DEPARTURE DATES Wed Grenada 9AM 3PM Dec 23 Coumel 7AM 5PM
Grand Cayman 7AM 4PM Jan 21630
2005 DEPARTURE DATES Feb 13 27 Thu Caracas (La Guaira) 9AM 7PM Mar 13 27STAR PRINCESS
Jan 21630 Apr 10 24 Feb 13 27 Ocho Rios 9AM 4PM Fri Aruba BAM 5PM Mar 13 27 Apr 10 24 At Sea
tMonlqQampIyrqlocrsCllhoRfm PltJrtQr-ondlimesmaywlrY Sun San Juan DISEMBARK AMFt Lauderdale DISEMBARK AM
EASTERN CARIBBEAN WESTERN CARIBBEAN CLASSIC SOUTHERN CARIBBEAN
8 7 7DAYS DAYS DAYS
CARIBBEAN GRAND PRINCESS GOLDEN PRINCESS PRINCESS
GALVESTONROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIP tofrom from
SAN JUANFT LAUDERDALE SAN JUAN
2004 DEPARTURE DATE 2004 DEPARTURE DATE 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
DeetS Apr 16CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE IflNERARY May 21630 CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE Jun 13 27DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Jul1125 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
1 Aug 8 221 Galveston EMBARK PM Sun Sanjuan EMBARK PMSep 5 19 Oct 3 17 312-3 At Sea At Sea Nov 14 28 Man At Sea Dec 12 26
st Thomas Cozumel BAM 6PM Tue Barbados 7AM 6PM 2005 DEPARTURE DATES
jan 9 23 Wed St Lucia 7 AMAntigua BAM 6PM Costa Maya (Mahahual) BAM 4PM 5PM Feb 620 Mar 6 20 Thu BAM 6PM Apr 317
At Sea Montego Bay 9AM 4PM Fri St Maarten BAM 6PM
7AM 6PM
Ft Lauderdale DISEMBARK AM Sanjuan DISEMBARK AM Sun San juan DISEMBARK AM
Oct 24 Nov 7 21 DecS19
DAWN PRINCESS
~
I
CARIBBEAN CRUISES
EASTERN CARIBBEAN ISLANDER SOUTHERN CARIBBEAN MEDLEY EASTERN CARIBBEAN
10 10 7 DAYS DAYSDAYS
GRAND PRINCESSDAWN PRINCESSSUN PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP NEW YORK CITYROUNDTRIP from from to
FT LAUDERDALE FT LAUDERDALE SAN JUAN
2004 DEPARnJRf DATE2004 DEPARTURE DATES2004 DEPARTURE DATES
Octn Oct Btl Oct 14CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE ITINERARYCRUISE ITINERARY 200s DEPARTURE DATENov 222 Nov 3t 23
Apr23tDAY PORT DEPART Dec 13 30Dee 12 ARRIVE DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Ft Lauderdale EMBARK PM 1 Ft Lauderdale EMBARK PM EMBARK PM2005 DEPARTURE DATES 2005 DEPARTURE DATES New York City 2 Princess Cays 9AM 4PM 2 At SeaJan 828 Jan 19t
Feb 17tt 3 AlSea Feb 8 28 3 At Sea 2-4 At Sea Mar919 Mar 20
4 St Thomas 7AM 6PM Apr 9 4 Cura~ao 8AM 5PM 5 St Maarten 7AM 6PM 5 Isla Margarita lOAM 4PM St Thomas 7AM 6PM
6 St Kitts 7AM 3PM 6 Barbados 9AM 6PM Dominica SAM 6PM7 8AM 5PM 7 Dominica 7 AM SPM
8 Antigua 9AM 6PM S St Thomas SAM 6PM St Maarten 7AM 6PM
9 9 At Sea
fllrtordtrlllldllmam4YYa1 10 At Sea 10 Princess Cays 9AM 4PM JlilltraryllptfatufnrfYUSfllrllcr t 11I1ll1Il1yopmltnlnrmTtronlcr t ItlntraryaptrattsIn rtVfntOrdtr San Juan DISEMBARK AM Port~rdtrQnd lilrW mil) illI) 11 Ft Lauderdale DISEMBARK AM PortlimtSlIIltlyYllry 11 Ft Lauderdale DISEMBARK AM Port ordtr lind time5 may VIlry
WESTERN CARIBBEAN ADVENTURER EASTERN CARIBBEAN VOYAGER
10 10 DAYS DAYS
SUN PRINCESS DAWN PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIPROUNDTRIP fromfrom
FT LAUDERDALEFT LAUDERDALE
2004 DEPARTURE DATES 2004 DEPARTURE DATES DAWN PRINCESS CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE IIINERARY
Oct 23 Oct 4 24 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Nov 12 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
Nov 13 Dec 2 29 Dec3tt 1 Ft Lauderdale EMBARK PM 1 Ft Lauderdale EMBARK PM
2 Princess Cays 9AM 4PM 2005 DEPARTURE DATES 2 At Sea2005 DEPARTURE DATES
DAWN PRINCESS Jan 183 At Sea 3 At Sea
Feb 7 27Jan 9 296 St Thomas 7AM 6PM Mar19 t 4 St Vincent lPM 6PM
Feb 180 Apr 8St Maarten 7 AM 5PM 5 Grenada 8AM 6PMMar 10f 301 Apr 19 At Sea 6 St Lucia 8AM 6PM
Ocho Rios 12N 6PM 7 Martinique 7AM 3PM
Grand cayman PM S St Thomas SAM 6PM
t IillUGI)lIptfQttsIn rnmtordtr Cozumel 8AM 6PM AlSea tt ~~~oI~~dtr 10 Princess Cays 9AM 4PMMOItQIl8clyrqausOclJollloJ
lwtordtrollllllllyenllllilJllIl) tltllltrlryOptrlll$In rnmtllrdtr AMOIltqollaynplactsOdlDRIos PM IortDrllralldllmallloyWl) Ft Lauderdale DISEMBARK AM
Willemstad Cura~ao
EUROPE CRUISES
GRAND MEDITERRANEAN GREEK ISLES MEDITERRANEANGREEK ISLES
12 1212 DAYS DAYSDAYS
STAR PRINCESS
STARSTAR PRINCESSPRINCESS
sail betweensail between VENICE BARCELONA VENICE to
andand BARCELONA VENICE ROME
CRUISE ITINERARY2004 DEPARTURE 2004 DEPARTURE2004 DEPARTURE CRUISE ITINERARYDATESCRUISE I I INERARY DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DATEDATES
Apr 10 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTMay 16middot DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Venice Italy (overnight onboard ship) EMBARK PM May 4 May18t Sep2St 1 Verdce Italy EMBARK PM
Jun 9 1 Barcelona Spain (overnight onboard ship) EMBARK PM 2 Venice Italy 2PM 2 At Seajune 21 t 2 Barcelona Spain 1 PM Dubrovnik Croatia 8AM 6PMJul3 3 Corfu Greece 8AM 6PM
lullS 3 Monte Carlo Monaco 7 AM 6 PM Corfu Greece 8AM 6PM 4 Katakolon Greece (for Oiympia) 7AM SPMJu127 4 FlorencePisa Italy (Livorno) 630 AM 6 PMAug 8~ Katakolon Greece (for Olympia) 7AM SPM S Athens Greece (Piraeus) 6AM 12 MAug 20deg S NaplesCapri Italy 8 AM 7 PM Sep 1t 6 Athens Greece (Piraeus) 6AM 12 M 6 Mykonos Greece 8AM 12M
6 At Sea 7 Mykonos Greece 8AM 6PM 7 Kusadasi Turkey (for Ephesus) 7 AM SPM7 Athens Greece (Piraeus) 6AM S4S PM
8 Kusadasi Turkey (for Ephesus) 7AM 1PM 8 Kusadasi Turkey (for Ephesus) 8AM 6PM 8 Santorini Greece 7 AM 4PM
9 Jstanbul Turkey 8AM 6PM 9 Rhodes Greece 8AM 6PM 9 At Sea
10 At Sea 10 Santorini Greece 7AM 6PM 10 Rome Italy (Civitavecchia) 8AM 7PM tll1ooil)opcraksinttVUSe
grduPorttlmcsmi)Y6ljI 11 At Sea 11 Cannes France (for Mont Carlo) 8AM 6PM11 At Sea tSamnlQ]latCiIUIe5inplm tltlnerlll)opmlpoundsin
NaplesCapri Italy 630 AM 12 Barcelona Spain (ovrnight onboard ship) 8AMofMo~Urlo ~odcr12 Venice Italy (overnight onboard ship) 8 AM 12 6PM O~lIlalhitRhodalnpUcc Port order md Iimes- JmyVUY Barcelona Spain DISEMBARK AM13 Venice Italy DISEMBARK AM - 13 Iome Italy (qvitavecchia) DISEMBARK AM
MEDITERRANEANAEGEAN MEDITERRANEANMOSAIC
12 12 DAYSDAYS
STAR STAR PRINCESS PRINCESS
ROME BARCELONAto
toVENICE ROME
2004 DEPARTURE DATE 2004 DEPARTURE
CRUISE I I INERARY DATE CRUISE ITINERARYApr 22 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Sep 13 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Rome Italy (Civitavhia) EMBARK pM 1 Barcelona Spaln (overnight onboard ship) EMBARK PM 2 NaplesCapri Italy 7 AM 7 PM Barcelona Spain SPM 3 Messina Italy (for Taormina) 8AM 6PM 3 At Sea 4 Valleta Malta 8AM 6 PM 4 Casablanca Morocco (for Marrakech) 7 AM 8PM
At Sea S Gibraltar 8 AM 6PM Santorini Greece 7 AM 6PM 6 At Sea
7 Kusadasi Turkey (for Ephesus) 8 AM 6PM 7 Cannesfrance (for Mont Carlo) 8 AM 6PM 8 Athens Greece (Piraeus) 6 AM S4SPM 8 At Sea 9 Katakolon Greece (for Olympia) 8 AM 6PM 9 Valleta Malta 8 AM SPM 10 Corfu Greece 8 AM 6PM 10 Messina Italy (for Taormina) 6PM 11 Dubrovnik Croatia 8 AM 6PM 11 NaplesCpri Itiily 6PM 12 Venice Italy (overnight onboard ship) 1230 PM 12 FlorencePisa Italy (Livorno) 830 AM 13 Venice Italy DISEMBARK AM 13 lomeltaly (Clvttavecchia)DISEMBAIKAM Venice Italy
EUROPE CRUISES
EUROPEAN EXPLORER CRUISE MEOffiRRANEANITRANSATLANTIC CRUISE
12 17DAYS DAYS
ROYAL STARPRINCESS PRINCESS
sail between VENICE
ROME to
and FT LAUDERDALE
LONDON
2003 DEPARTURE DATES
2004 DEPARTURE DATE CRUISE ITINERARY
May 7 CRUISE I1INfRARY Oct 7 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Jul30l
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Venice Italy (overnight onboard ship) EMBARK PMAug 11 Sep 41 1 Rome Italy (Civitavecchia) EMBARK PM 2 Vernce Italy 2 PM
2 FlorencePisa Italy (Livorno) 7 AM 7PM 3 At Sea 3 Cannes France (for Monte Carlo) 7 AM 5 PM 4 Barcelona Spain 9 AM 6 PM 5 At Sea 6 Gibraltar 8AM PM 7 Casablanca Morocco (for Marralech) 5AM 6 PM 8 Seville Spain (Cadiz) 8AM 6PM 9 LisbQn Portugal 9AM 5PM 10 Vigo Spain 830AM 4PM 11 At Sea
tllinmryope~te$ 12 ParisNormandy France (Ie Havre) 7 AMlnftYCl5eordu ~rttimesuuyYilY 13 London England (Southampton) DISEMBARK AM
Caudis Park Cuell Barcelona Spain
SCANDINAVIARUSSIA BALTIC HERITAGE WESTERN EUROPEBRITISH ISLES
ROYALGRAND10 GRAND 1210 PRINCESSDAYS PRINCESS PRINCESS DAYSDAYS
ROUNDTRIPROUNDTRIPROUNDTRIP fromframfrom
LONDONCOPENHAGENCOPENHAGEN 2004 DEPARTURE2004 DEPARTURE 2004 DEPARTUREDATESDATES DATES
May19tMay 29 May 19 jul28 JunSJun 18 Aug 231
Jul8 ju118Jul28 Aug 7 CRUISE ITINERARYAug 17
CRUISE IIINERARY ARRIVE DEPART CRUISE IrINERARY EMBARK PMDAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
DAY ARRIVE DEPART 7AM 6PM1 Copenhagen Denmark EMBARK PM EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 7AM 6PM
Stockholm Sweden (Nynilshamn) 7 AM 530PM 6AM PM Helsinki Finland 830 AM 6PM St PetersbUrg Russia (overnight onboard ship) 630 AM 9AM 9PM St Petersburg Russia 6PM
7 Tallinn Estonia 7 AM 1PM 8 Gdansk Poland (Gdynia) 9 AM 4PM 9 Warnemfinde Germany (for amprlin) 8 AM 10 PM 10 Helsing0r Denmark 9 AM 11 AM 10 Copenhagen Denmark (overnight onboard ship) 1 PM 11 Copenhagen Denmark DISEMBARK AM
middotScrvlcctillforlh=CllCIIIlicmIOptoluItllUllwWdlseJnbIDltHdlinprAfbrtour~dllmJlwktbeshJpwl1lPfllClaquodtoCopetWampen and pmenpoundm Qfl tours from HelMp will Rboird ship tPolttimes~myAninliI1ddepartu~itRosythDubJinmdFa1mauthwl)dICtotXLolconditions
tPOrtordermdtlme$maynI) ttCdlitEdinbuJlhotmdedto~mllocunionforMiliblyTltOO~on8123wi1inlmiddotUIIisitSouthQuemsfmyinstudofJosylh
BRITISH ISLES
ROYAL12 PRINCESSDAYS
ROUNDTRIP
from
LONDON
2004 DEPARTURE DATES
Jun 12 jul6
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Lqn4onmiddotpoundngland(Southampton) EMIWlIlt PM 2 Cornwall England (Falmouth) 7AM SPM
Waterford Ireland 8AM 6PM Dublin Ireland 7AM 1130 PM
t PQrtbme5 lliIyyuy Anini Illd departure at Rosytb Dublin md Filmouth ViiYdue to Iiltlal conditions
WESTERN EUROPE
ROYAL12 PRINCESSDAYS
ROUNDTRIP
from
LONDON
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
May 31
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 London England (Southampton) EMBARK PM
CRUISE ITINERARY
EUROPE CRUISES
ICELANDNORWEGIAN FJORDS
ROYAL12 PRINCESSDAYS
ROUNDTRIP
from
LONDON
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
Jun24
CRUISE IflNERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 London Englan4 (Southampton) EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 3 Berge Norway 6PM 4 Hellesylt Norway 830AM 1030 AM 4 Gciranger Norway Geiranger Fjord Sceni Cruising UN 7PM
9AM SPM5
1PM 8AM SPM
10 At Sea
middotStlviceallfof~fjonlovedmdshOR=unlDllOplion1Itourswllldi5anbarilitHelIcsyItAftcrtollrpuKllJClJdisembark
theshlpwiUprocudto~md~lampClSonlounfrwnHdaytwl1lblmd$hip
NORWEGIAN FJORDSNORTH CAPE
ROYAL12 PRINCESSDAYS
ROUNDTRIP
from
LONDON
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
JuilS
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Loridon ~gland (South~mpton) EMBARK PM 2-3 At Sea
Hellesylt Norway 830AM 1030 AM Golranger Norway Geiranger Fjord Scenic Cruising 12N 7PM
TrodheilllNorwaY 9AM SPM At Sea Cross the Ardgt Cirde
6PM 8AM lPM
8AM 130 PM 430PM 630PM
7AM 3PM
Bagpipers Edinburgh Scotland Royal Princess in Geiranger Fjord Norway
EUROPE CRUISES amp CRUISETOURS
17 DAYS
GRAND PRINCESS
FT LAUDERDALE to
COPENHAGEN
2004 DEPARTURE DATE MayZ
CRUISE IfINERARY
DAY 1 2-6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
PORT Ft Lauderdale Florida At Sea ~ores IslandsPortugal (Ponto Delgado) At Sea Lisbon Portugal Vigo Spain At Sea ParislNormandy France (Le Havre) RotterdamThe Netherlands At Sea Hamburg Germay (for Berlin) At Sea Olso Norway Oslo Fjord scnic Cruising Copenhagen Denmark
ARRIVE
N
12N 9AM
7AM
6AM
DISEMBARK AM
DEPART EMBARK PM
6PM
7PM 6PM
7PM 7PM
1UM
MEDITERRANEAN CRUISETOUR
TRANSATLANTICWESTERN EUROPE ICELAND amp GREENLANDTRANSATLANTIC
16 GRAND DAYS PRINCESS
COPENHAGEN to
NEW YORK
2004 DEPARTURE DATE Aug 27
CRUISE IIINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Copenhagen Denmark EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 3 Dover England (forLondon) 7AM 7PM 4 Cornwall England (Falmouth) 9AM 6PM 5 Dublin Ireland lOAM 9PM 6 GlasgowEdinburgh Scotland (Greenock) 8AM 12 M 7 Belfast Northern Ireland 1030 AM 530 PM 8 At Sea 9 Reykjavik Iceland 9AM 9PM 10 At Sea 11 Prins Christian Sund Scenic Cruising 12N 6PM 12 Qaqortoq Greenland 7 AM 2PM 13 At Sea 14 SI Johns Newfoundland Canada 12N 7PM 1516 At Sea 17 New York CIty New York DISEMBARK AM
SCANDINAVIARUSSIA CRUISETOUR
Church of the Savior on the Spilled Blood St Petersburg Russia
WESTERN EUROPE CRUISETOUR
CRUISEIOUR ITINERARY
CRUISETOUR lA11C CRUISETOUR ITINERARY CRUISETOUR 4A14C CRUISETOUR II INERARY
DAY PORT By Sea By Land DAY PORT By Sea By Land CRUISETOUR 7Al7C18 STAR PRINCESS 1 Rome 17 GRAND PRINCESS 1 BudapestDAYS DAYS DAY PORT By Sea By Land 22 Rome Budapest 18 ROYAL PRINCESS 1 Paris
ROMETODI 3 RomeTodi BUDAPEST VIENNA 3 BudapestVienna DAYS 2 Paris and 4 TodiFlorence and 4 Vienna 3 Paris
PARIS EUROSTAR5 Florence 5 ViennaPrague 4 ParisLondon 6 FlorenceVeniceEmbark 6 Prague and 5 London
FLORENCE PRAGUE
plus plus LONDON7 Venice Italy (overnight onboard ship) 7 PragueCopenhagenEmbark 6 LondonSouthamptonEmbark
GRAND MEDITERRANEAN SCANDINAVIARUSSIA plus 7 At Sea CRUISE 8-9 At Sea CRUISE 8 At Sea WESTERN EUROPE 8 Bilbao Spain10 Istanbul Turkey 9 Stockholm Sweden (Nyniishamn) BRITISH ISLES CRUiSE2004 DEPARTURE DATES 2004 DEPARTURE DATES 9 Bordeaux France (Le Verdon)
11 Kusadasi Turkey (for Ephesus) 10 Helsinki FinlandApr Sf 2004 DEPARTURE DATES 10 At SeaMay 131 Jul2Apr 29 12 Athens Greece (Piraeus) 11 SI Petersburg Russia (overnight onboard ship) 11 GlasgowEdinburgh Scotland (Greenock)May 23 JulUt May 141 26middot Jul tt 13~ 250
May 23 Jun 16 13 At Sea JunZt JulU 12 SI Petersburg Russia Jun n 19 Aug 18o 300 12 Dublin Ireland
]un 12 Aug l t 13 Cork IrelandJuliO 14 NaplesCapri Italy 13 Tallinn EstoniaJun 22 t Aug 11 Toun~eonlymilabkwithcruise5indi[itbtAug 3 15 FlorencelPisa Italy (Livorno) 14 Cdansk Poland 14 Cornwall England (Falmouth)
Aug 27 tBritishliksetuise aWEwupeiBritishlslesouist 15 ParisNormandy France (Le Havre)16 Monte Carlo Monaco 15 At Sea bull WestemEuropeCrube middotlcdandINorwqlmFjOllisetuise 16 Rotterdam The Netherlands
t Crulsetour lA only combinable with 12--dayGreck fst 17 Barcelona Spain (overnight onboard ship) 16 Olso NOrway Qsld Fjord Scenic Cruising bull Norwqian FjordsNorth Cipecruise 17 BrusselsBruges Belgium (Zeebrugge)tCruixtour 4A only combinable with lo-day Baltic
crulse shown on PI 11 18 Barcelona Spain Heritage cruise shawn on pg 12 OCrubctnur 7C only combinable with EwuJlWl ExplorerCrube17 Copenhagen Denmark 18 London England (Southampton)
EXOTICS CRUISES
AUSTRALIANEW ZEALAND AUSTRALIANEW ZEALAND AUSTRALIAASIA
12 14 19 DAYS DAYS DAYS
SAPPHIRE PRINCESS SAPPHIRE PRINCESS SAPPHIRE PRINCESS
saH between SYDNEYAUCKLAND SYDNEY
toand to BANGKOKSYDNEY AUCKLAND 2005 DEPARTURE DATES 2005 DEPARTURE DATE
Mar7Jan 6 2004 DEPARTURE DATEJan 1St
Dec 23 CRUISE ITINERARYJr ift Feb 23 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
CRUISE ITINERARY 1 Sydlley Austrli EMBARK PM CRUISE ITINERARY 2 At Sea
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTDAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 3 Brisbane Australia 8AM 6PM 1 Sydlley Australia EMBARK PM 4 At Sea 1 Aucklalld N~w Zealalld EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 5 Cid Harbor Austrlia (for Great Barrier Reef) 7AM 5PM2 At Sea 3 Melbourne Australia 8 AM 6 PM 6 Cirns Australia (Yorkeys) 8AM 6PM
3 WeIUllgton New Zealand 8 AM 6 PM 4 At Sea 7-8 At Sea 4 Christchurch New Zealalld (Lytlelton) 8 AM 6 PM 5 Tasmallia Australia (Hobart) 8 AM 6 PM 9 Darwin Australia lPM 8pM 5 Dunedill N~ Zealalld (Port Chalmers) 8 AM 6 PM 6-7 At Sea 10-11 At Sea 6 Fiordland Natiollal Park Scenic Cruising AM 6 PM 8 Fiordlalld Natiollal Park Scellic Cruising 7 AM 5 PM 12 Bali Illdonesi (Padang Bay) 7AM 6PM
7-8 At Sea J DUlledill New Zealalld (Port Chalmers) 8 AM 6 PM 13-14 At Se 10 Christchurch N~ Zealalld (Lytlelton) 8 AM 6 PM 15 Kuala Lumpur Mlaysia (Port KeIang) 8AM 6PM9 Tasmania Australia (Hobart) 8 AM 6 PM 11 Wellillgtoll New Zealmd 8 AM 6 PM 16 Sillgpore 8AM 6PM
10 At Sea 12 At Sea 17 At Sea 11 Melbourne Australia 8 AM 6 PM 13 Taurallga New Zealalld 8 AM 730 PM 18 Ho Chi Millh City Vietnm (Vung Tau) 7AM 730 PM 12 At S~a 19 At Sea 14 Bay of Islallds New Zealalld 8 AM 7 PM 13 SydPey Australia DISEMBARK AM 20 Bmgkok Thailalld (Laem Chabang) DISEMBARK AM15 Aucklalld New Zealalld DISEMBARK AM
t llinemy opcrnesln reverse order Port times mil1 my
CHINAFAR EAST SOUTHEAST ASIAFAR EAST
1612 DAYSDAYS
PACIFIC PRINCESS
SAPPHIRE PRINCESS PACIFIC PRINCESS
OSAKA BEIJING to
to BANGKOK OSAKA
2004 DEPARTURE DATE 2004 DEPARTURE DATEPAClFlC PRINCESS
julllt Jun 11 2005 DEPARTURE DATE
SAPPHIRE PRINCESS Apr 11
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Osaka Japall EMBARK PM
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Beijillg China (Xingang) EMBARK PM 2 Hiroshima Japall 1 PM 6PM 2 DaHan China AM 5PM 3 At Sea 3 At Sea 4 Shmghai Chilla 7 AM 6PM 4 Shallghai Chilla (overnight onboard ship) 7AM 5 At Sea 5 Shallghai China 6PM 6 Okinaw Jpll 7 AM 1 PM
7 Taipei Taiwm (KeeIung) 9 AM 7PM6 At Sea 8 At Se7 Pusan South Korea 8AM 5PM 9 HOllg KOllg Chill 8 AM 7PM 8 At Sea 10-11 At S~a J Vladivostok Russia 5AM 730 PM 12 Ho Chi MiIJh City Vietnm (Phu My) 7 AM 5PM 10 At Sea 13 At Se 11 Nagasaki Japan 7AM 6PM 14 Singpore 8 AM 6pM
15 KUlltll Mlysi 830 AM 430 PM12 At Sea 16 At Sea 13 Osaka Japan DISEMBARK AM 17 Ballgkok Thaillld DISEMBARK AM t Sailing alls i1t Hiroshima on Dl) 11 In place of Nilgilsaki Port times milY vary
CRUISE I flNERARY CRUISE I flNERARY
Ho Chi Minh City Vietnam
EXOTICS CRUISES
SOUTHEAST ASIACHINA SOUTHEAST ASIACHINA FAR EASTALASKA
PACIflC PRINCISS ROYAL PRINCESS
16 16 19 DAYS DAYS DAYS
SAPPHIRE SAPPHIRE PRINCESS
Sail between PRINCESSBANGKOK
and BANGKOK OSAKA
BEIJING to to
2004 DEPARTURE DATES BEIJING SEATTLEPAClFlC PRINCESS
Jun 27tt 200S DEPARTURE DATE200S DEPARTURE DATE ROYAL PRINCESS
Mar 26 Apr 23Oct 16 Nov lt
CRUISE I I INERARY CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
1 GsakaJpan EMBARK PM1 Bangkok Thailand (Laem Chabang) EMBARKPM 1 Bangkok Thailand (Laern Chabang) EMBARK IM 2 At Sea2 At Sea 2 AtSea bull 3 Nagasaki Japan 7 AM 6PM
9AM 7PM 3 Singapore 7PM 4 Pusan Soqth Korea 8AM 5PM 4-5 At Sea 5 At Sea gt bull
7AM 7PM 6 Da Nwg Vietn~1Il 7AM middot7PM 6 Vladivostok Russia SAM 730 PM 7 At Sea 7 AtSea
7AM 12M 8 Hong lltog ihin~ 7AM 12M 8 Sapporo japan (Muroran) 6AM 6PM 9-10 At Sea 9-10 At Sea 9-12 At Sea cross Intemational Dateline
13 DutchHarbor Alaska (Aleutian Islands) 230 PM 7PM11 ShaJlgllai Cbina (overnight onboard ship) lAM 11 Shangh~t Cllina (ovmightonJoltird $hip) 7 AM 14 At Sea shy12 Shanghai China 6PM 12 Shanghai China
7AM - - tlJf
6PM 15 Anchorage Alaska (Seward) 8AM 6PM13 At Sea 13 AtSea i 16 College Fjord Seni CruIsing 630AM 930 AM
14 Nagasaki japan 7AM 6PM 14 Nagasaki japan 6PM 17 Glacier Ilay Scenic Cruising 1030 AM 830 PM 15 Pusan South lltOrea TAM 4PM 1~ bull Pu~an SQuth iorea middot4lM 18 middotmiddot juneau Alaska 6 AM 2PM 16 At Sea 16 At Sea 19 - At Sea 17 Beijing China (Xingangy OISEMBAlUe AM 17 Beijing Cliina (Xingang) 20 SeattleWashington DISEMBARK AM
t ltinemy Operne5 in rcvmc Older ttPorttimcsmiYnl)middotShlpwilldocklnampngkoknsttadofL1cm~
POLYNESIA amp THE COOK ISLANDS POLYNESIA amp THE MARQUESAS ISLANDS
10 10 DAYS DAYS
TAHITIAN PRINCESSTAHITIAN PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIPROUNDTRIP fromfrom
PAPEETEPAPEETE 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
2004 DEPARTURE DATES Oct 4 24 Mayl 17 27 Sep4 14 24 Nov 13 Jun 6 16 26 0lt 14 00323Ju16 16 26 Nov 323 2005 DEPARTURE DATESAug 5 15 25 Dec 13 Jan 12
Feb 1 21200S DEPARTURE DATES
~~ 122 ~~Il 13 23 CRUISE ITINERARY
CRUISE II INERARY DAY PORT
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Papeete Tahiti 1 Papeete Tahiti (overnight onboard ship) EMBARK PM
2 Moorea Polynesia 2 Papeete Tahiti SPM 3 Huahil1e P9lynesia 8AM 5 PM 3 Tuamotu Atolls Senic Cruising
5 PM8-AM 4 At Sea I At Sea 5 Rarotonga Cook Islands 8AM 5 PI~ 5 Nuku Hiva Marquesas Islands 6 At Sea 6 Hiva Ga Marquesas Islands 8AM 5PM 7 Raiatea Polynesia overnight onboard Ship 6AM
7 At Sea middotai~ RaiateaPQlynesia igt gt 6AM 8 Rangiroa P~iynesia 8AM 4PM8 Tahaa scenic Cryising 630 AM 830 AM
8 BoraBoraPQlyrtesia(ovemightollboard ship) UN 9 Tahaa ~enl Cruising 8 AM middot11AM
9 Bora lora Polynesia 5iM 9 Raiatea Polynesia 12 N 11 PM 10 Moore Polynesfa 8 AM 5 PM la ~ Bora ~oraPoIYnesia 8AM bull 5PM
11 Papeete Tahiti DISEMBARK AM 11 Papeete Tahiti DISEMBARK AM Iong Kong Harbor
3 Singapore 4-5 At Sea 6 Da NangVieinam 7 At Sea 8 liong Kong China
EXOTICS CRU ISES
HAWAIITAHITI HAWAIIAN ISLANDS SOUTH PACIFIC ISLANDS
12 1515 DAYS DAYSDAYS
PACIFIC
TAHITIAN PRINCESS ISLAND PRINCESSPAClFIC PRINCESS
PRINCESS
SYDNEYROUNDTRIP sail between tofrom
PAPEETE PAPEETELOS ANGELES and
2004 DEPARnIRE DATEHONOLULU 2004 DEPARTURE DATES Apr 21
2004 DEPARTURE DATES ~~~l CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE 11 INERARY
Oet21t CRUISE ITINERARY Nov Sf
MayS PACIFIC PRINCESS DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
Nov20t DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DecSt 1 Los Angeles CalifornIa EMBARK AM 1 Sydney AustralIa EMBARK PMAug 17t
Dec20t1 Papeete Tahiti EMBARK PM 2-4 At Sea
2005 DEPARTURE DATE Jan 4 2-5 At Sea
(overnight onboard ship) Jan 19 5 Auckland New Zealand 7 AM 2PMFeb 3t 6 Iiilo Hawaii 8 AM 6 PM
TAHITIAN PRINCESS Papeete Tahiti 11 PM fb 18 6-7 At Sea Kilauea Voko ~enic CruisingApr 12 MarS t 3 Moorea Polynesia 8 AM 5 PM 8 Suva fijI 11 AM 430 PM1~i~t 7 Kona Hawaii 8AM 6PM4 Bora Bora PolYnesia 8 AM 5 PM 9 At Sea Cross International Dateline Apr 19
5-6 At Sea 8 Honolulu Hawaii 8AM 11 PM 10 Apia Western Samoa 830 AM 2PM 7 Christmas Isl~ndKiribati 1Z N 5 PM 9 Kauai Hawaii (Nawlliwlli) 8AM 6PM 11-12 At Sea 8-9 At Sea 10 Maui Hawaii (Lahaina) 6PM 13 Bora Bora Polynesia lOAM 6PM 10 HlloliaWlii 6 PM 13 Raiatea Polynesia (overnight onboard 11 PM11-14 At Sea 11 Maui Hawaii (Lahaina) 8 AM 6 PM 14 Raiatea Polynesia 11 PM
15 Ensenada Mexico (service call)KaUaiH~waii(Nawllfwtli) 8AM 6 PM 15 Moorea Polynesia 8AM 5PM
tllinemyopcr~ttsln=x QnIerPurtlimcslmYvary Honolulu Hawaii DISEMBARK AM 16 Los Angeles CalIfornia DISEMBARK AM 16 Papeete Tahiti DISEMBARK AM
ISLANDS OF THE PACIFIC THEATER SOUTH PACIFIC EXPLORER
24 24 DAYS DAYS
PAClFIC PRINCESS PAClFIC PRINCESS
sail between HONOLULU PAPEETE
and to OSAKA FT LAUDERDALE
2004 DEPARTURE DATES
Mayl 2004 DEPARTURE DATEJul2Sj
Aug 29 CRUISE ITINERARY
CRUISE ITINERARYDAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART EMBARK PM DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
1 Papeete Tahiti EMBARK PM lPM 7PM 2 8AM 11 PM
3 ~~~~~~ ~~~~Sta 8AM 5 PM 4-6 At Sea 7 Pitcairn Island Scenic Cruising 8AM 1211
8AM 12 N
7AM ZPM 8-9 At Sea 10 Easter Island Chile 8AM 2PM
9AM 11-14 At Sea 15 Callao Peru (overnight for Lima and Machu Picchu) 8AM 16 Callao Peru lPM 17 At Sea 18 Manta Ecuador (for Quito) 9fM 7PM 19 At Sea 20 Transit Panama Canal 7 AM 430 PM 21 San BIas Panama 8AM 5 PM 22 ft Sea 23 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands 7AM 4PM 24 At Sea
25 Ft Lauderdale Florida DISEMBARK AMMoorea Polynesia tllinemyoperataln~12onlerPortl1mesmiYmymiddot
EXOTICS CRUISES
HAWAIITAHITISOUTH PACIFIC AMAZONSOUTHERN CARIBBEAN CAPE HORNSTRAIT OF MAGELLAN
1430 12 DAYS DAYSDAYS
ROYAL PRINCESS ROYAL PRINCESSSAPPHIRE PRINCESS
sail betweenFT LAUDERDALE SANTIAGOLOS ANGELES to
andto MANAUS BUENOS AIRESSYDNEY 2005 DEPARTURE DATE 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
2004 DEPARTURE DATE Apr 9 Jan 10
Nov 22 Jan 241 Feb 7
FebZt
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
CRUISE ITINERARY
CRUISE ITINERARYCRUISE ITINERARY 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTDAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 2-3 At Sea 1 Santiago Chile (Valparaiso) EMBARK PM
1 Los ingeles California EMBARK PM 4 Tortola BritIsh Virgin Islands 8 AM 6 PM 2 At Sea 2 Ensenada Mexico 8AM 5PM 3 Puerto Montt Chile 7AM 6PM
3middot6 At Sea 4 At Sea 5 Dominica 9 AM 4 PM 7 Hilo Hawaii 8AM 5 At Sea Chilean Fjords Scenic Cruising6PM 6 Trinidad 9 AM 6 PM
8 Maui Hawaii (Lahaina) 8AM 6PM 6 At Sea Amalia Glacier Scentc CruiSi3f7 At Sea 7 Punta Arenas Chile (Strait of Magei an) 7AM 6PM9 Honolulu Hawaii 7AM 5PM
- 10middot13 At Sea 8 Beagle Channel Scenic Cruising 8 Ushuaia Argentina (Tierra del Fuo) 12N 8PM
8 Devils Island French Guiana (Isle Royal) 8 AM 2 PM 14 Bora Bora Polynesia 8AM 6PM 9 At Sea 9 At Sea Cape Hom Scenic Cruising
10 Santarem Brazil 9 AM 7 PM 10 Moorea Polynesia 8AM 6PM 10 Falkland Islands (Stanley) 8AM 6PM 10 Papeete Tahiti (overnight onboard ship) 9PM 11 At Sea
i 16 Papeete Tahiti 6PM 11 Boca da Valeria Brazil (Amazon River) 7 AM 2 PM 12 Puerto Madryn Argentina 6AM 5PM 17middot18 AtSea 12 Manaus Brazil (overnight onboard ship) 10 AM 13 At Sea
14 Montevideo Uruguay 9AM 6PM19 Pago Pago merlcan Samoa 8AM 6PM 13 Manaus Brazil DISEMBARK AM 15 Buenos Aires Argentina DISEMBARK AM 20 Apia Western Samoa 8AM 6PM 21 At Sea Cross International Dateline middotl1me5forallscenkouisinCile subjectlDclwIgc
tllinmryopefilteslnr=rscordttPorttlmislm)vary22 Suva Fiji 8AM 6PM l 23-24 At Sea
20 Auckland New Zealand 8AM 6PM ORINOCO RIVERSOUTHERN CARIBBEAN ANDESSOUTH AMERICA 26 Tauranga New Zealand 8AM 7PM 27 At Sea
28 Wellington Newealand 8AM 6PM 16 17 DAYS DAYS 29-30 AtSea
31 Sydney Australia DISEMBARK AM ROYAL PRINCESS ROYAL PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP SANTIAGO from to
FT LAUDERDALE FT LAUDERDALE
200S DEPARTURE DATE2005 DEPARTURE DATE
Mar 7Mar 24
CRUISE IIJNERARYCRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Santiago Chlle (Valparaiso) EMBARK PM
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM
2 La Serena Chile (Coquimbo) 8 AM 5 PM2-3 At Sea 3 At Sea Um6n Costa Rica 7AM 7PM 4 Arica Chile 7AM 6PMCristobal Panama (for Panama Canal) 8AM 5PM o At Sea
6 Cartagena Colombia 9AM 2 PM 6 San Martin Peru (for Pisco and Machu Picchu) 7AM 6PM 7 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 130 PM 7PM 7 Callao Peru (overnight for Lima) 530 AM 8-9 At sea 8 Callao Peru 1PM 10 Puerto Ordaz Venezuela (Orinoco River) 8AM 6PM 9 At Sea
i 11 At Sea 10 Manta Ecuador (overnight for Quito) 530AM 12 Greada 8AM i 11 Manta Ecuador 1lM5PMt 1~ Dolllinlca i 7N1 5 PM 12 At Sea
i 13 Transit Panama C~nal 7AM 430 PM14 St Thomas us Virgilslands 9AM 5PM 14 Cartagena Colombia 8AM 130 PMJs AtSei i 15 Aruba Netherlands intiiles 1PM 7PM 16 Princess Cays Bahamas 8AM 16-17 At Sea Tahiti Polynesia 17 FtLallardale Flillilt~ DISEMBARK AM 1ampmiddot Ft L~uderdale Florida DISEMBARK AM
AMAZON RIVERMEDITERRANEAN
21 DAYS
ROYAL PRINCESS
MANAUS
to ROME
2005 DEPARTURE DATE
Apr 21
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE M~naus Brazil (Wemight onboardship) Manaus Brazil
3 BocadaValeria Brazil (AriiazonRivet) 11 AM 4-6 At Sea 7 Recife Brazil 1 PM 8-11 AtSea 12 Dakar Senegal 8AM 13-14 At Sea 15 Agadir Morocco 7AM 16 Casablanca Morocco (for Marrakech) 8AM 17 Gibraltar lOAM 18 Allcante Spain 12 N 19 Barcelona Spain 8AM 20 Cannes France (for Monte Carlo) 8AM 21 FlorencePisa Italy (Livarno) 7AM 22 Rome Italy (Civitavecchia) DISEMBARK AM
INDIAN OCEANAUSTRALIA
28 DAYS
PACIfIC PRINCESS
CAPE TOWN
to SYDNEY
2004 DEPARTURpound DATE
Oct 20
CRUISE ITINERARY1 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Cape Town South Africa EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 3 East London South Africa 7AM 3PM 4 DurbahSouth Africa 8AM 6PM 5-7 At Sea 8 Nosy BeMadagascar 7AM 4PM 9 At Sea 10 Poilit des Galets Reunioll]slahd 11 Port Louis Mauritius 12c19 At Sea 20 Perth Australia (Fremantle) 21-23 At Sea 24 Adelaide Australla 25 At Sea 26 Melbourne Australla 7 27 Tasmania AUstralia (Burnie) 28 At Sea 29 Sydney Australia DISEMBARK AM
I
DEPART EMBARK PM
7PM 6PM
8pM
5PM
3PM 9PM 6PM 6PM 5PM 7PM 7PM
EXOTICS CRUISES
SOUIB ATIANTICANTARCfICNSOUIB AMERICA
24 DAYS
ROYAL PRINCESS
CAPE TOWN
to SANTIAGO
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
Dec 17
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Cape TownSouthAfrica (overnighfol1board ship) EMBARK PM 2 Cape Town South Africa 3PM 2 if~~t Good HopSCenic Crulsing 3-6 6 Tristan DaCunha United Kingdom 8AM 5PM 7-10 At Sea 11 Falkland Islands (Staliley) 8 AM 5PM 12 At Sea 13-16 Antarctica Peninsula ScehltmiddotCruising 14 days ihcludingmiddot Elephant
Island AntarcticSotind Deceptionlslana GerlacheStrait NaxefChannel Schollaert Channel SigJtla Island and Boyd Strait)
17 At Sea Cape Horn Scenic Cruising1amp UshuaiaArgentina (Tierra del fuego) bull middot6 AM 19 Punta Arenas Chile (Strait of Magellan) 7 AM 20 At Sea Amalia Glacier Scenic Cruising21 At Sea Chilean Fjords Scenic Cruising22 AtSea 23 Puerto Mont Chile 7AM 6PM 24 At Sea 25 Santiago Chile (Valparaiso) DISEMBARK AM
-nmes for1l scenlccruisinc are subJect to change
ASIAINDIAMEDITERRANEAN
30 ROYAL PRINCESSDAYS
ROME
to BANGKOK
2004 DEPARlURE DATE
Sep 16
CRUISE Il INERARY
WEST AFRICASOUTH AMERICA
28 DAYS
PACIFIC PRINCESS
FT LAUDERDALE
to CAPE TOWN
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
51 22
CRUISE ITINERARY
DISEMBARK AM
Aruba
EXOTICS CRU ISES amp CRU ISETOU RS
AUSTRALIANEW ZEALAND CRUISETOUR
AUSTRALIAN EXPLORER 2004 DEPARTURE DATESAPPHIRE21 plus
DAYS PRINCESS SYDNEY Dec 17 to
AUCKLAND CRUISETOUR 5P CRUiSE
CRUISETOUR ITINERARY
DAY PORT By Sea By Land DAY PORT
1 Sydney 14 Fiordland National Park 2 Sydney Scenic Cruising
3 SydneyAyers Rock 15 Dunedin New Zealand (Port Chalmers) 4 Ayers ROek
5 Ayers RockPort Douglas 16 Christchurch New Zealand 6 Port Douglas - (Lytleton)
7 Port DouglasSydneyEmbark 17 Wellilgton New Zealand 8 At Sea 18 At Sea 9 Melbourne Australia 19 Tauranga New Zealand
10 At Sea 20 Bay of Islands New Zealand 11 Tasmania Australia (Hobart) 21 Auckland New Zealand 12middot13 At Sea
Sydney Opera House Australia
AUSTRALIANEW ZEALAND CRUISETOUR SOUTHEAST ASIACHINA CRUISETOUR CAPE HORNSTRAIT OF MAGELLAN CRUISETOUR AUSTRALIAN BEIJING Be TERRA COTTA 2004 DEPARTURE DATES RIO 8t IGUAZU FALLS Post-Crulsetour1 Pre-Crulsetour 217EXPLORER 2005 DEPARTURE DATES PACIFICSAPPHIRE WARRIORS19 plw or PRINCESS jul9t loieifie
DAYS PRINCESS SYDNEY Jan 12 plus 19 ROYAL plw Feb 5 Oct 28 Royal BUENOS AIRES
AUCKLAND DAYS ROYAL PRINCESS to 21 ampto DAYS PRINCESS
BEUING CRUISE t ~~S~i BeWln~~~~e
to SANTIAGO~e~s~Ot~r~ih~fi1BANGKOK CRUiSE CRUISECRUISETOUR 3t3P landtourm~yvlty CRUISETOUR 12
DAY PORT DAY PORT
DAY PORT By Sea ltBy LaDd DAY PORT
1 Beijing 11-12 At Sea 1 Rio de janeiro 11 Cape Horn Scenic Cruising
13 Hong Kong 2 Rio de jneiro c 12 Ushuaia Argentina 14 At Sea 3 RiolgUaiu Falls 12 Beagle Channel Scenlc Cruising
15 Nha Trang Vietnam 4 IIDIilZll FaU$13u~os~re$ 13 Punta Arenas Chile
16 Phu My Vietnam 5 Buens AiresEmbark 14 At Sea 17 At Sea 6 Montevideo Uruguay 15 Seno Eyre Fjord Scenic Cruising 18 Singapore 7 At Sea 16 At Sea 19 Kualtan Malaysia 8 Puerto Madryn Argentina 17 Puerto Montt Chile 20 At Sea 9 At Sea 18 At Sea 21 Bangkok Thail3nd 10 Falkland Islands (Stanley) 19 Santiago Chile
DAY PORT DAY PORT
At Sea Pusan SouthKOrea Nagasaki japan At Sea Shanghai China
Note CnIlst route shown for Royil Princess Oct 28 only Timcsforil1lsccnkoulslngmsubjccttothange
CRUISE [OUR ITINERARY
CRUISETOUR ITINERARY
CRUISrrOlJR ITINERARY Fiordland National Park Scenic Cruising DlUedin New Zealand Christchurch New Zealand Wellington New Zealand
14
GRAND PANAMA CANAL CRUISES
ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL
10 10 11 DAYSDAYS DAYS
CORAL PRINCESS GRAND PRINCESS GRAND PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIPfrom from
fromFT LAUDERDALE GALVESTON GALVESTON
2004 DEPARTURE DATES Oct n 21 31 2004 DEPARTURE DATE
2004 DEPARTURE DATENov 10 20 30middot DeelSmiddot
DedSDec 10 28
2005 DEPARTURE DATES CRUISE ITINERARY Jan 7 17 27
CRUISE ITINERARY Feb 6 16 26 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART MarS 1828 CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Galveston Texas EMBARK PMApr 7 17 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTshy 1 Galveston Texas EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 1 ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 3 Belize City Belize 1 PM 7PM 2-3 At Sea 3 Belize City Belize lPM 7PM 4 Costa Maya Mexico (Mahahual) 8AM 4PM 4 Um6n Costa Rica 7AM rPM 4 Costa Maya Mexico (Mahahual) SAM 4 PM 5 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands 12 PM 7PM 5 Panama Canal (to Gatun Lake) 7AM 430 PM 5 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands 12 PM 7PM 6 Ocho Rios Jamaica SAM 5PM 5 Col6n Panama 5PM 8PM 6 At Sea 7 At Sea 6 At Sea Cristobal Panama 7AM 4PM 8 7AM 4PM 7 Grand Cayman Cayman IslandS 7AM 4PM (fot Panama Canal) ftrtpg~niaa~~) S Corumel Mexico SAM 6PM 8 At Sea 9 At Sea 9 Bclize City Belize 7AM 4 PM 6PM 10 Coromel Mexico lOAM 6 PM9 Cozumel Mexico lOAM 10 At Sea 10 At Sea 11 At Sea
Portordtrllndtlmtsmayvllry 11 flo Lauderdale florida DISEMBARK AM Portorntr IInltf timpoundi may vary 11 Galveston Texas DISEMBARK AM Port ordu and Nmes may vary 12 Galv_es~on Texas DISEMBARK AM
ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL
8 DAYS
CORAL PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP
from
FT LAUDERDALE
2004 DEPARTURE DATE Dec 20
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Fl Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM 2-3 At Sea 4 Lim6n Costa Rica 7AM 7PM 5 Panama Canal (to Gatun Lake) 7 AM 430 PM 5 Co16n Panama 5PM SPM 6 At Sea 7 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands SAM 5PM S At Sea 9 Flo Lauderdale Florida DISEMBARK AM Bridge of the Americas Panama
f OptIonll fOllTS inclld1lI tht AtlllnH to Pacific RlIlllfll) joumq will dlmlldrt tilt ship b) tctdtr lit Gfttlm uk AJkr tour plIssmm dlstmlrark tilt shipwin procmlllat through tilt Gatun Locb lIndjlnlllly dock in Gl6lI Hmal1p41Sl11tmmttydiumlmtheJldlo~ lflrshops IInd~llI toIIrsrrnrl CIItutl14ktlllIrtonlflrJhlp
GRAND PANAMA CANAL CRUISES
GRAND PANAMA CANAL GRAND PANAMA CANAL GRAND PANAMA CANAL
150R 18 150R 1715 DAYS DAYS DAYS
CORAL PRINCESS SUN PRINCESS
REGAL PRINCESS REGAL PRINCESS SUN PRINCESS
DAWN PRINCESS REGAL PRINCESS sail between DAWN PRINCESS
sail between FT LAUDERDALE FT LAUDERDALE sail betweenand
FT LAUDERDALEand SAN DIEGO andLOS ANGELES
SAN FRANCISCO 2004 DEPARTURE DATES 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
DAWN PRINCESS 2004 DEPARTURE DATESNov 24Sp191
CRUISE ITINERARY Dec9t CORAL PRINCESSREGAL PRINCESS 5ltp261 CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE ITINERARY
200S DEPARTURE DATES Dec 24 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
SUN PRINCESS DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARIltPM200S DEPARTURE DATES DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Sep 2StMar 24
3 Ocho Rios Jamaica lOAM 6PM 2-3 At5ea 2 At Sea 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBA8KPM
REGAL PRINCESS AprSt 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBA8KPM Jan stu 200S DEPARTURE DATES2 At Sea4 At Sea 4 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 7AM lPMJan 23 5 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 7AM lPM 3 Ocho Rios Jamaica lOAM 6PM REGAL PRINCESS 5 Cartagena Colombia 9AM 3PMFeb7t 4 At Sea Apr 239AM 3PM 6 Transit Panama Canal 7AM 430 PMFb22 ~ yenr~fte~~~~~~u 7AM 430 PM 5 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 7AM lPM At SeaMar9t CORAL PRINCESS 79AM 3PM8 At Sea Apr 27 8 Puntarenas Costa Rica 7AM 7PMSUN PRINCESS 9 Puntarenas Costa Rica 7 AM 7PM ~ yenr~fte~n~~~~~u 7AM 430 PM 9-10 At SeaApr1S 8 At Sea DAWN PRINCESS10-11 At Sea 11 Acapulco Mexico 8AM 5PM
5PM 9 Puntarenas Costa Rica 7AM 7PM Apr 29H ~ae~lcoMexico 8 AM 12 At SeatllWrryopmllzlfrarnLls~in 10-11 At Sea rmrKfIfikTiIIrttimnma1 tlliJlrraryoptJllllsfrlJflSlmFranrimlJn 13 Cabo San lucas Mexico 8AM 5PM
gt This mUJI C4Jl llfwmblnld wlth a 3 14 Cabo San Lucas Mexico 7 AM lPM H ~e~o Mexico 8AM SPM rmruordrrorttimamG)llIryCoIutar CnUK to VlWOIlllr SC Dqs ThUIltIIIflltllnlltCllIIblntdwilhaZ-day 14-15 At Sea 16lhrlllllhI9lllIbtboobdulaquoSC)lQ4k t Illncral) lIpCutcs in mrmt orm Pllrt IiIIIa CocastaICnliutoVan(ouKrBCDlIys16 16 San Francisco California 7AM 4PMcowtlIrcrllisr IIIIYlIl1Ymiddot IhrounIScankboobdlUaK)lllllluU t~A~geles California 6 AM 5PM 14 Cabo San Lucas Mexico 8AM 5PM
Thllwl1JIIICllllslltMOlIkpilllyJmtcad 17-18 At Sea middotmiddotThliIAfllIllCltlllsatMGnIqclBaylnstcadllf 15 At Sea CPlIilldCI1IIu 17 At Sea o[OdKKwsPurllilllrlmllYWlry OchoRicJsPortllmtslllllYVllfymiddot D1SEMBA8K AM19 Vancouver BC DISEMBA8K AM 16 San Die20 California DlSEMBA8K AM 18 Val1couver BC
GRAND PANAMA CANAL COASTAL CRUISING
2-4 CORAL PRINCESS ISLAND PRINCESS SUN PRINCESS18 DAWN PRINCESS DIAMOND PRINCESS STAR PRINCESSDAYSDAYS
COASTAL CRUISE SCHEDULEREGAL PRINCESS
SHIP DAYS FROM TO DEPARTURE DATE DIAMOND PRINCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 5104
SAN FRANCISCO DIAMOND PRINCES5 4 Vancouver Seattle 5404 to CORAL PRINCESS 2 San Francisco Vancouver 5604
NEW YORK DAWN PRiNCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 5704 ISLAND PRiNCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 51204
2004 DEPARTURE DATE SUN PRINCESS 3 San Francisco Vancouver 51404Aug 24 ISLAND PRiNCESS 3 Vancouver LOI Angeles 91804
DIAMOND PRINCESS 1 Seattle Vancouver 91804CRUISE ITINERARY DIAMOND PRINCESS 6 Vancouver Los Angeles 91904 SAPPHIRE PRINCESS 1 Seattle Vancouver 91904 SAPPHREPRINCESS 2 Vancouver San Francisco 92004 DIAMOND PRINCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 43005 DlAMONDPRiNCES$ 4 Vancouver Seattle 5305 SUN PRINCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 5305
ISLAND PRiNCESS 3 Los Angeles VancOllver 5405 CORAL PRiNCESS 2 San Francisco Vancouver 51205
Coral Princess in the Panama Canal
CRUISE PLUS
Extend your adventure with our Cruise Plusreg program Cruise Plusreg enables you to enhance your vacation with one- to four-night hotel
packages in cities that stand on their own as vacation destinations Add nights in Sydney before you cruise or extend your vacation with nights in the city by the
bay San Francisco Transportation and luggage handling costs from the airport to both hotel and ship plus meet and greet services are always included
Wherever you choose to explore youll enjoy properties that are carefully chosen based on service value location and the peace of mind of knowing that Princess
has arranged it all for you
Anchorage Alaska Trevi Fountain Rome Auckland Harbor New Zealand
The Cruise Plusreg Program is available in over 30 major cities including
MEDITERRANEANAEGEAN EXOTICS PANAMA CANAL Barcelona London Rome and Venice Auckland Bangkok Beijing Buenos Aires Ft Lauderdale Los Angeles New York City
Cape Town Ft Lauderdale Honolulu Los San Diego San Francisco Sanjuan Vancouver NORTHERN EUROPE Angeles Montreal Moorea New York City Copenhagen and London MEXICO CARIBBEANOsaka Papeete Rome San Francisco
Ft Lauderdale Galveston Los AngelesTRANSATLANTIC Santiago Seattle Sydney Vancouver Venice Barcelona Copenhagen Ft Lauderdale San Francisco and San Juan
London New York City and Rome ALASKA Anchorage Calgary Fairbanks Kenai San Francisco Seattle and Vancouver
For more information about options and pricing reference a destination specific brochure or contact your travel agent
TRAVEL THE WORLD WITH THE LEADER IN CRUISINGmiddot Princess
Analysis by the Hawaii Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism Comparing the Economic Impact of Foreign Flag Ships with US Flag Cruise Ships Sailing in Hawaii
This is a summary of an analysis prepared by the Hawai Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism (DBEDT) of the economic impact of the foreign flag cruise ship fleet sailing in Hawaii as compared to each of the US flag ships operating in Honolulu
The comparison is set out below
Foreign Pride Pride Pride
Fleet Of Hawaii Of Aloha Of America
Total economic output impact (spendingsales) ($mil) 155 542 4225 4958
Total earnings impact (labor earnings) ($mil) 44 155 1207 1411
Total employment impact Uobs) 1447 5059 3943 4627
This analysis demonstrates that a single US-flagged ship the Pride of America home ported in Honolulu is 32 times more economically impactful and creates 32 times as many jobs as the entire foreign flag fleet that sails into and out of Hawaii ports of call
Economic Impact of Pride of America
Assumptions 1 Annual impact though Pride of Aloha is leaving in May 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existing Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($) 4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of outputl$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job multiplier (jobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
118700 105
2706 3373
147 042
1372
4958
1417
4627
Data sourcelformula Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Line 1 x line 2 x line 31 000000
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 4 x line 5
Line 4 x line 6
Line 4 x line 7
Economic Impact of Pride of Hawaii
Assumptions
1 Annual impact though Pride of Hawaii is leaving in February 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existing Pride of Aloha and Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($) 4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job multiplier (jobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
Data sourceformula 139770 Actual 2007 figure
975 Actual 2007 figure 2706 Actual 2007 figure 3688 Line 1 x line 2 x line 31000000
147 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model 042 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
1372 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
5421 Line 4 x line 5
1549 Line 4 x line 6
5059 Line 4 x line 7
Economic Impact of Pride of Aloha
Assumptions 1 Annual impact though Pride of Aloha is leaving in May 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existlng Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($)
4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job mUltiplier Oobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
95680 111
2706 2874
147 042
1372
4225
1207
3943
Data sourcelformula Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Line 1 x line 2 x line 31000000
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 4 x line 5
Line 4 x line 6
Line 4 x line 7
lt
Methodology Used in Calculating Impact of International Cruise Ships
Cruise ship visitors 1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Came with ships 3 Flied in 4 Average length of stay (days) 5 PPPD ($) 6 Cruise visitor spending ($mil))
Cruise ship crews 7 Ratio of crew spending to cruise visitor spending 8 Cruise crew spending
Cruisline 9 Ratio of crew spending to cruise visitor spending
10 Cruiseline spending
11 Total cruise-related spending ($mil)
12 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 13 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 14 Job multiplier Uobs$ cruise -related spending)
15 Total output impact ($miJ)
16 Total earnings impact ($miJ)
17 Total employment impact (jobs)
106641 98307
8334 739 847 668
02 134
038 254
1055
147 042
1372
1551
444
1447
Data sourceformula Line 2 + line 3 DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report Line 1 x line 4 x line 5
DBEDT 2003 Cruise study Line 7 x line 6
DBEDT 2003 Cruise study Line 9 x line 6
Line 6 + line 8 + line 10
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 11 x line 12
Line 11 x line 13
Line 11 x line 14
Economic Contributions Foreign-Flag Fleet operating in Hawaii vs Three US-Flag Ships
$1500
Pride of Hawaii$1000- $542 million VIc -0-E c Pride of AlohaCo
423 million$500
Pride of America $496 million155 million$shy
Foreign-Flag US-Flag Fleet Fleet
Source State of Hawaii Department of US-Flag $1460 billion Business Economic Development and Tourism
Foreign-Flag $ 155 million 7292008
Employment Foreign-Flag Fleet operating in Hawaii vs Three US-Flag Ships
15000
10000
til c o Pride of Aloha
39435000
Pride of America 1447 4627
~---------
Foreign-Flag US-Flag Fleet Fleet
Source State of Hawaii Department of US-Flag 13629 jobs Business Economic Development and Tourism
Foreign-Flag 1447 jobs 7292008
Foreign Flag Capacity Growth Foreign flag passenger capacity has changed five-fold on roundtrip Hawaii cruises from the West Coast since enactment of the Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative
1600000
1400000
tn 1200000
J enshyZ
1000000
I shyG) en 800000 s G) tn tn
600000 as D 400000
200000
0 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Year
Source US Maritime Administration (derived from the US Customs and Border Patrol Vessel Entrance and Clearance documents - final 2007 data) 7292008
NCL America Hawaii Economic Contributions
(2004-2008)
bull (in Millions) bull $399 in wages benefits and overtime to US seafarers bull $35 in Federal and State payroll Taxes bull $64 in Government Fees and Taxes to Hawaii bull $28 in wages benefits and overtime to US other employees bull $52 in Port Charges to Hawaii Companies (Stevedores tugs pilots etc) bull $85 in Fuel to Tesoro Hawaii bull $130 for shore excursions to Hawaii tour operators bull $39 for Hawaii hotel rooms and ground transport bull $75 for food grown in Hawaii bull $57 in union fees and levies (incl $32M paid directly by employees) bull $1 in MMD fees to the United States Coast Guard bull $51 for recruitment screening processing and training crew bull $76 advertising and promoting Hawaii as a destination bull $1092
COASTWISE CRUISES INTERPRETIVE RULE RESOLUTION Adopted at the
US Conference of Mayors 76th Annual Meeting
June 20-242008 Miami
WHEREAS the Department of Homeland Securitys Customs and Border Protection (CBP) issued a proposed Interpretive Rule regulating Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises on foreign flagged vessels between US ports of call under the Passenger Vessel Services Act at the request of the United States Maritime Administration and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule would require that a foreign-flagged vessel on a coastwise cruise to call at a foreign port for at least 48 hours with that foreign stop constituting at least 50 percent of the cruise itinerary and allowing passengers to disembark the cruise vessel at the foreign port before continuing the cruise to a US port of call and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule establishes burdensome criteria that are wholly inconsistent with industry practice particularly the 48-hour call at foreign port shyinasmuch as the standard port call is six to eight hours - as well as the requirement that 50 percent of a cruise be spent at the foreign port and
WHEREAS the intent of the proposed Interpretive Rule is to protect the single remaining US flag vessel serving the Inter-Hawaiian Island cruise trade that according to the Hawaii Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism generates more than 4600 jobs and generates nearly $500 million in economic benefits for the state annually and
WHEREAS thousands of members of the International Longshore Workers Union (nWU) are employed at US ports serving cruise ships and whose jobs would be at risk if the proposed Interpretive Rule were implemented and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule is vague as to the breadth of its application ie to coastwise cruises between all United States ports or applied solely to coastwise cruises from West Coast ports to Hawaii and
WHEREAS the Cruise Lines International Association estimates the proposed Interpretive Rule would upend the $17 billion in national cruise industry spending and put at risk more than 300000 jobs generated by the international cruise industry including jobs held by nWU at US ports and the local allied industries supporting the cruise industry and
Executive Order Submissions Under Review
II Reglnfogov Where to ind Federal Regulatory Information -~
Home ] Lnitied Agenda and Regulator) Ilan pound012866 Regulator) Review Jnformalion Collection Review
EO 12866 Regulatory Rlvlw dvanced Search IJitorical RepWI Review Counh Jriter XIL
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA)
Executive Order Submissions Under Review July 25 2008 - _------------____ _shy
Department of Homeland Security
AGENCY DHS-TSA RIN 1652-AA53
TITLE Large Aircraft Security Program Other Aircraft Operator Security Programs and Airport Operator Security Program
STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT Yes RECEIVED DATE 06302008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
AGENCY DHS-USCIS RIN Llti15-AB67 TITLE Changes to Requirements Affecting H-2B Nonimmigrants and Their Employers
STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT No RECEIVED DATE 06092008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
AGENCY DHS-USCBP RIN 1651AA11 TITLE Issuance of a Visa and Authorization for Temporary Admission Into the United States for Certain Nonimmigrant Aliens Afflicted W HIV Infection
STAGE Final Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT No RECEIVED DATE 03042008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
-_RE_V-IE-W-E-X-T-EN-D-E-D---------- _
AGENCY DHS-USCBP RIN 1651-AA76 TITLE Coastwise Transportation of Passengers STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT Yes RECEIVED DATE 07142008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
Disclosure I Accessibility I Privacy Policy I Contact Us
httpwwwreginfogovpublicdoeoReviewSearch 7252008
View Rule Page 11
Shere D find Federal ReguLatory InformciiorlReglnfogov Home J Cnified Agenda al1d Regulatory Plan EO 12866 Regulatory Reyiew Information Collection Reiew
Current rnified Agenda and Regulatory Plan Historical Pnified Agenda and Regulatory Plan Search
View Rule
DHSIUSCBP RIN 1651-AA76 Publication ill Spring 2008
Title llCoastwise Transportation of Passengers
Abstract This interim rule amends the Department of Homeland Securitys (DHS) current regulations relating to the transportation of passengers by non-coastwise-qualified vessels on voyages that begin and end at a US port and stop at intervening US and foreign port(s) Under this interim final rule voyages that begin and end at a US port and stop at a foreign port(s) and at intervening US port(s) where a large USshyflag coastwise-qualified passenger vessel engages in regular service are in violation of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) unless the cumulative length of stay(s) at intervening foreign port(s) is more than 50 percent of the total amount of time spent at the intervening US port(s) and passengers are permitted to go ashore at the foreign port(s) The purpose of this amendment is to ensure that the Congressional purpose in enacting the PVSA which is to preserve the economic benefits of US coastwise trade to US-flag coastwise-qualified vessels is properly implemented
Agency Department of Homeland Security(DHS) Priority Substantive Nonsignificant
KIN Status First time published in the Unified Agenda Agenda Stage of Rulemaking Final Rule Stage
Major No Unfunded Mandates No
CFR Citation -LCER 4J~)(h)(plusmnJ
Legal Authority 5JJSS_30J12lJ-SClt16 J9_lJiCJ 431 9_L1C1plusmn3JJ2JScHJ1J2JSCJ624 L(LlLSc207LIl(gtJfHgt~ _CiQJ _46lSC 6QLQ~
Legal Deadline None
Timetable Action Date FR Cite
Interim Final Action 0510012008
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required No Government Levels Affected None
Federalism No
Included in the Regulatory Plan No
RIN Data Printed in the FR No
Agency Contact Glen E Vereb Chief Entry Procedures and Carriers Branch Department of Homeland Security US Customs and Border Protection Office of Regulations and Rulings 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington DC 20229 Phone202572-8730
Disclosure I Accessibility I Privacy Policy I Contact Us
httpwwwreginfogovpublicdoeAgendaViewRuleruleID=286751 7128120
Federal RegisterVol 72 No 224Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules 65487
SPECULATIVE POSITION LIMITS 1-Continued [In contract units)
Contract
Soybeans and Mini-Soybeans 2
Wheat and Mini-Wheat 2 bullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbull
Soybean Oil
SingleSpot month All monthsmonth
600 8600 13300 600 11100 14500 540 6600 8600
Soybean Meal 720 5500 7100
Minneapolis Grain Exchange
Hard Red Spring Wheat I 600 I 11100 I 14500
New York Board of Trade
Cotton No2 I 300 I 5300 I 7300
Kansas City Board of Trade
Hard Winter Wheat I 600 I 11100 I 14500
1 For purposes of compliance with these limits positions in a futures contract that shares ~ubstantially identical terms with a contract market enumerated herein including a futures contract that is cash-settled based on the settlement price of an enumerated contract market shall be agshygregated with positions in the enumerated contract market
2 For purposes of compliance with these limits positions in the regular-sized and mini-sized contracts shall be aggregated
Issued by the Commission this November 152007 in Washington DC David Stawick Secretary of the Commission [FR Doc E7-22681 Filed 11-20-07 845 amI BILLING CODE 6351-Q1-P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Bureau of Customs and Border Protection
19 CFR Part 4
[USCBP-2007-o098]
Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises
AGENCY Customs and Border Protection Department of Homeland Security ACTION Proposed interpretation solicitation of comments
SUMMARY This document proposes new criteria to be used by Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to determine whether non-coastwise-qualified vessels are in violation ofthe Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) when engaging in cruise itineraries in which passengers board at a US port the vessel calls at several Hawaiian ports and then the vessel proceeds to a foreign port or ports for a brief period before ultimately returning to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their cruise CBP believes these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because it appears that the primary objective of the foreign stop is evasion of the PVSA
DATES Comments must be received on or before December 212007 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT Glen E Vereb Cargo Security Carriers amp Immigration Branch Office of International Trade (202) 572-8730 ADDRESSES You may submit comments identified by docket number by one of the following methods
bull Federal eRulemaking Portal http wwwregulationsgov Follow the instructions for submitting comments
bull Mail Border Security Regulations Branch Office of International Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
I Public Participation
Interested persons are invited to participate in this proposed interpretation by submitting written data views or arguments on all aspects of the proposed interpretation Customs and Border Protection (CBP) also invites comments that relate to the economic environmental or federalism effects that might result from this proposed interpretation Comments that will provide the most assistance to CBP in developing these procedures will reference a specific portion of the proposed interpretation explain the reason for any recommended change and include data information or authority that support such recommended change
Instructions All submissions received must include the agency name and docket number for this proposed
interpretation All comments received will be posted without change to http wwwregulationsgov including any personal information provided
Docket For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received go to http wwwregulationsgov Submitted comments may also be inspected on regular business days between the hours of 9 am and 430 pm at the Office of International Trade Customs and Border Protection 799 9th Street NW 5th Floor Washington DC Arrangements to inspect submitted documents should be made in advance by calling Mr Joseph Clark at (202) 572shy8768
II Background
The maritime cabotage law governing the transportation of passengers was first established by section 8 of the Passenger Vessel Services Act of June 191886 (the PVSA) 24 Stat 81 as amended by section 2 of the Act of February 17 1898 30 Stat 248 formerly codified at 46 USC App 289 (now codified at 46 USC 55103) 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 of $200 (now $300 as promulgated in TD 03-11 pursuant to the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 199028 USC 2461 note) for each passenger so transported and landed
The intent of the maritime cabotage laws including the PVSA was to provide a legal structure that guarantees a coastwise monopoly to
65488 Federal RegisterVol 72 No 224Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules
American shipping and thereby promotes development of the American merchant marine Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 28 (DC Cir 1984) see also The Granada 35 FSupp 892 8931940 AMC 1601 (DC Pa 1940) (stating that the legislative aim of section 289 [now 55102] was the creation of a practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping business for United States ships) In other words the PVSA was enacted to advance the United States merchant marine and fleet by restricting the use of foreign-ownedflagged passenger vessels in United States territorial waters
Passenger vessel transportation between United States ports has historically been viewed to be part of the coastwise trade after the enactment of the PVSA This view is premised on the concepts of continuity of the voyage and whether its intended purpose or objective was coastwise transportation In other words the PVSA was held to be violated if the coastwise movement was continuous or if the purpose of the trip was a coastwise voyage (See 18 OAG 445 September 4 1886 28 OAG 204 February 16 1910 29 OAG 318 February 12 1912 30 OAG 44 February 1 1913 34 OAG 340 December 24 1924 and 36 OAG 352 August 13 1930)
The CBP regulations promulgated pursuant to the PVSA are found at section 480a of title 19 of the Code of Federal Regulations (19 CFR 480a) and are reflective of the above cited Office of the Attorney General decisions These regulations provide among other things that a non-coastwise-qualified vessel which embarks a passenger at a port in the United States embraced within the coastwise laws (a coastwise port) will be deemed to have landed that passenger in violation of the PVSA if the passenger disembarks at a different coastwise port on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a nearby foreign port or ports (as defined in 19 CFR 480a(a)(2) see also 19 CFR 480a(b)(2)) The terms embark and disembark are words of art which are defined as going on board a vessel for the duration of a specific voyage and leaving a vessel at the conclusion of a specific voyage respectively (See 19 CFR 480a(a)(4))
The references in section 480a to nearby foreign ports (defined in 19 CFR 480a(a)(2)) are the results of attempts by CBP to apply an Office of the Attorney Generals opinion dated February 26 1910 (28 OAG 204) In that case a foreign-flag vessel transported 615 passengers on a voyage around the world beginning in New
York and concluding in San Francisco The Attorney General opined that since the primary object of the voyage was to visit various parts of the world on a pleasure tour returning home via California and not to be transported in domestic commerce the transportation was not in violation of the PVSA
The 1910 Attorney Generals opinion was extended to voyages that included foreign ports other than nearby foreign ports (See Treasury Decision (TD) 68shy285 (33 FR 16558) November 14 1968) However voyages solely to one or more coastwise ports have always been considered predominantly coastwise Therefore non-coastwise-qualified vessels engaging in such a voyage where passengers temporarily go ashore at a coastwise port have been deemed to have violated the PVSA
m Current Law and Policy Pursuant to Public Law 109-304 120
Stat 1632 enacted on October 6 2006 Title 46 United States Code was substantially reorganized and recodified Consequently the PVSA is now codified at 46 USC 55103 and provides that no vessel shall transport passengers between ports or places in the United States either directly or by way of a foreign port under a penalty of $300 for each person so transported and landed except one that (1) Is wholly owned by citizens of the United States for purposes of engaging in the coastwise trade and (2) has been issued a certificate of documentation with a coastwise endorsement or is exempt from documentation but would otherwise be eligible for such a certificate and endorsement
In 2003 Congress enacted Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II Section 211 for the purpose of revitalizing the oceangoing US-flag cruise industry in Hawaii (the 2003 Act) Three oceangoing US-flag cruise ships PRIDE OF ALOHA PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAII were documented with coastwise privileges pursuant to the 2003 Act These vessels entered regular service in Hawaii in 2004 2005 and 2006 respectively and pursuant to the express language of the 2003 Act are limited in their operation to providing regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands of Hawaii
The CBP regulations promulgated pursuant to the PVSA are set forth in 19 CFR 480a and have remained unchanged throughout both the recodification of Title 46 of the United States Code and the enactment of the 2003 Act They provide that a violation of the PVSA occurs when passengers embark (board a vessel for the
duration of a voyage) a non-coastwiseshyqualified vessel at one US port and disembark (leave the vessel at the conclusion of a voyage) at a different US port unless they proceed with the vessel to a distant foreign port (Le any port not considered a nearby foreign port which is defined as any port located in North America Central America Bermuda or the West Indies including the Bahamas) Currently these regulations do not contain specific criteria for non-coastwise-qualified vessels on itineraries including US ports and either nearby or distant foreign ports in order for such foreign port calls to be compliant with the PVSA
To reiterate the applicable CBP regulations provide that the PVSA is violated when a non-coastwise-qualified vessel transports a passenger on a voyage solely to one or more coastwise ports and the passenger disembarks or goes ashore temporarily at a coastwise port (19 CFR 480a(b)(1)) Furthermore a violation of the PVSA also occurs when a non-coastwise-qualified vessel transports a passenger on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a nearby foreign port or ports (but no other foreign port) and the passenger disembarks at a coastwise port other than the port of embarkation (19 CFR 480a(b)(2)) However there is no violation of the PVSA when a passenger is on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a distant foreign port or ports (whether or not the voyage includes a nearby foreign port or ports) and the passenger disembarks at a coastwise port provided the passenger has proceeded with the vessel to a distant foreign port (19 CFR 480a(b)(3))
IV Request From MARAD To Provide Guidance
The US Department of Transportation Maritime Administration (MARAD) has requested that CBP take action to ensure enforcement of the PVSA MARAD has asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreignshyflag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwiseshyqualified cruise ship operators
In April of 2007 the operator of the three US-flag cruise vessels operating solely in Hawaii pursuant to the 2003 Act announced their intent to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAIl from the Hawaii market and redeploy her to Europe The operator intends to re-flag the vessel to foreign registry directly resulting in the loss of over 1100 crewmember jobs The primary reason cited for this decision is the rapid increase in foreign-flag competition entering the Hawaii market
Federal Register I Vol 72 No 224 I Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules 65489
from the West Coast This competition is evidenced in published cruise itineraries of foreign-flag carriers offering a variety of round trip cruises that depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period usually in the early morning and ultimately return to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their cruise These cruises are often marketed as Hawaii cruises and except for the brief stop in the nearby foreign port of Ensenada are purely coastwise in nature It is these cruise itineraries that pose an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels that pursuant to the 2003 Act are currently engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands
V Preliminary Notice
In response to MARADs concerns CBP sent letters to two carriers known to operate the itineraries in question as well as to the Cruise Lines International Association Inc stating that CBP believes that these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because it appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA The letters further indicated that CBP is taking steps to publish this position
VI CBPs Proposed Interpretive Rule Accordingly in this document CBP is
proposing to provide that cruise itineraries for non-qualified coastwise vessels which allow passengers to board at a US port call at several Hawaiian ports proceed to a foreign port or ports for a brief period and then ultimately return to the original US port of embarkation for disembarkation are not consistent with the PVSA and the regulations promulgated pursuant thereto Specifically CBP interprets a voyage to be solely to one or more coastwise ports even where it stops at a foreign port unless the stop at the foreign port is a legitimate object of the cruise CBP will presume that a stop at a foreign port is not a legitimate object of the cruise unless
(1) The stop lasts at least 48 hours at the foreign port
(2) The amount of time at the foreign port is more than 50 percent of the total amount of time at the US ports of call and
(3) The passengers are permitted to go ashore temporarily at the foreign port
Accordingly CBP proposes to adopt an interpretive rule under which it will presume that any cruise itinerary that does not include a foreign port call that
satisfies each of these three criteria constitutes coastwise transportation of passengers in violation of 19 CFR 480a(b)(1)
Dated November 16 2007 W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection [FR Doc E7-22788 Filed 11-20-07 845 am] BILLING CODe 9111-14-1
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau
27 CFR Part 9
[Notice No 76]
RIN 1513-AB49
Proposed Establishment of the Leona Valley Viticultural Area (2007R-281 P)
AGENCY Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau Treasury ACTION Notice of proposed rulemaking
SUMMARY The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau proposes to establish the 134 square mile Leona Valley viticultural area in the northeast part of Los Angeles County California We designate viticultural areas to allow vintners to better describe the origin of their wines and to allow consumers to better identify wines they may purchase We invite comments on this proposed addition to our regulations DATES We must receive written comments on or before January 22 2008
ADDRESSES You may send comments on this notice to one of the following addresses
bull httpwwwregulationsgov (Federal e-rulemaking portal follow the instructions for submitting comments) or
bull Director Regulations and Rulings Division Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau PO Box 14412 Washington DC 20044-4412
See the Public Participation section of this notice for specific instructions and requirements for submitting comments and for information on how to request a public hearing
You may view copies of this notice selected supporting materials and any comments we receive about this proposal at httpwwwregulationsgov under Docket No 2007-0066 You also may view copies of this notice all related petitions maps or other supporting materials and any comments we receive about this
proposal by appointment at the TTB Information Resource Center 1310 G Street NW Washington DC 20220 To make an appointment call 202-927shy2400
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT NA Sutton Regulations and Rulings Division Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau 925 Lakeville S1 No 158 Petaluma CA 94952 phone 415shy271-1254 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
Background on Viticultural Areas
TTB Authority Section 105(e) of the Federal Alcohol
Administration Act (FAA Act) 27 USC 205(e) authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to prescribe regulations for the labeling of wine distilled spirits and malt beverages The FAA Act provides that these regulations should among other things prohibit consumer deception and the use of misleading statements on labels and ensure that labels provide the consumer with adequate information as to the identity and quality of the product The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) administers the regulations promulgated under the FAA Act
Part 4 ofthe TTB regulations (27 CFR part 4) allows the establishment of definitive viticultural areas and the use of their names as appellations of origin on wine labels and in wine advertisements Part 9 of the TTB regulations (27 CFR part 9) contains the list of approved viticultural areas
Definition Section 425(e)(1)(i) ofthe TTB
regulations (27 CFR 425(e)(1)(i)) defines a viticultural area for American wine as a delimited grape-growing region distinguishable by geographical features the boundaries of which have been recognized and defined in part 9 of the regulations These designations allow vintners and consumers to attribute a given quality reputation or other characteristic of a wine made from grapes grown in an area to its geographic origin The establishment of viticultural areas allows vintners to describe more accurately the origin of their wines to consumers and helps consumers to identify wines they may purchase Establishment of a viticultural area is neither an approval nor an endorsement by TTB of the wine produced in that area
Requirements Section 425(e)(2) of the TTB
regulations outlines the procedure for proposing an American viticultural area and provides that any interested party
Us Department ofHomelaDd Secmity Washington DC 10229
bull ~
US Customs and Border Protection
AUG 15 2fXJJ
VE5-3-02-QTRRBSTCCCI - ti015502-GG-
Mr leon Sutcliffe Director Port Operations Camivai Cruise Unes Camival Place 3655 NW 87Avenue Miami Aorlda 33178
RE P~nger Vessef Services Ad Coastwise Transportation 46 USC sect 55103 19 CFR sect 480a(b)
Dear Mr Sutcliffe
As you know US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) enforces the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) codified at TItle 46 United States Code section 55103 (46 USC 55103) This statute prohibits non-coastwise-qualifled vessels (ie those vessels not US-buill owned and documented with a coastwise endorsement) from transporting passengers between porls or places within the United States The regUlations promUlgated pursuant to the PVSA are found at TrtJe 19 Code of Federal Regulations section 4808 (19 CFR 4808)
It has come to our attention that passenger vessels of your company are engaging in cruise itineraries that include ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands Two USAlagged coastwise-endorsed passenger vessefs are also currenUy engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of caD wittlin the Hawaiian Islands
As part of your cruise itineraries some of your foreign-flagged vessels depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period and ultimately rebJm to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their endse For example the MS ZAANDAM of Holand America Lines departs San Diego cruises the Hawaiian Islands stops in Ensenada from 800pm to 11 OOpmbull and returns to san Diego CBP believes these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because It appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA -- - - ~~~------
Please be advised that CBP is taking steps to publish this position Should have any questions pertaining to this matter please contact Mr Glen Vereb Chief Cargo Security Carriers and Immigration Branch at (202) 572-8724
Sincerely
F Jl E EST Y LEe A U I 5 I N Gmiddot
December 21 2007
The Honorable W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection co Border Security Regulations Branch Office ofInternational Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229
Re Hawaii Coastwise Cruises (USCBP-2007-0098) Comments in Response to Proposed Interpretation
Dear Commissioner Basham
NCL America Inc1 (NCLA) submits these comments in support ofthe efforts ofCustoms and Border Protection to enforce the Passenger Vessel Services Act and the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative as applied to Hawaii coastwise cruises
1 Introduction and Summary of Position
NCLA operates three large oceangoing US flag cruise ships in Hawaii These ships are documented under US flag and are required to operate in regular service in Hawaii pursuant to the authority of the Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative a 2003 federal statute intended to revitalize the US flag cruise industry and to maximize economic and national security benefits to the United States (the 2003 Act)
NCLA has invested $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships pursuant to the 2003 Act and in direct reliance on the protections of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) and its proper enforcement The PVSA limits the transportation ofpassengers between US ports to coastwise documented US flag ships Its statutory protections recognize that US flag ships have significantly higher operational costs in part because they are subject to more stringent US laws including US labor laws and federal
1 NCL America Inc is a US corporation incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware headquartered in Honolulu Hawaii As a US corporation it is subject to US taxes at both the federal and state level The Chief Executive Officer the Chairman of the Board and all of the Board of Directors of NCL America are US citizens The company is also subject to US labor and employment laws and is required by statute to maintain a workforce comprised primarily ofUS citizens
700 Bishop St SUite 900 I Honolulu HawMi 96813 I Tel 8085273800 Fax 8085273820 I ndcom
2
income tax among others The NCLA ships operating in Hawaii are the only large oceangoing cruise ships operating under US flag In furtherance of the policy goals of the PVSA and the 2003 Act these ships have created over 4000 seafaring jobs all subject to US minimum wage and other labor statutes
Since 2003 there has been a significant increase in capacity in the Hawaii market from foreign flag ships providing cruise service to Hawaii from the West Coast Many of these foreign flag cruises are marketed as Hawaii cruises and consist entirely ofUS ports ofcall with the sole exception of a token stop in Mexico for as little as an hour late at night under circumstances where passengers are not permitted to get offthe ship There are no reported rulings approving these particular foreign flag itineraries
Lower cost foreign competition in the Hawaii market has unfairly hurt NCLAs operations NCLA has incurred substantial losses which have contributed significantly to its decision earlier this year to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAll from US flag and reshydeploy it foreign Unfair foreign competition poses an imminent threat to the remaining US flag passenger vessels operating in the Hawaii trades pursuant to the 2003 Act
As the agency statutorily charged with implementation of the 2003 Act the US Department ofTransportation Maritime Administration (MARAn) is aware of the threat foreign flag Hawaii itineraries pose to the US flag fleet and brought the situation to the attention ofthe US Department ofHomeland Security Bureau ofCustoms and Border Protection (CBP or Customs) Customs determined that the primary object of these itineraries was coastwise and that the Ensenada stop was an evasion of the PVSA
In August 2007 Customs provided written notice to the affected foreign lines and their trade association that the existing itineraries were contrary to the PVSA None of these lines sought advance rulings even after the Customs notice with respect to their Hawaii itineraries pursuant to Customs regulations and many continued to market the itineraries as Hawaii cruises NCLA supports the efforts ofCustoms and MARAD to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act for Hawaii cruises
2 Statutory Authority for Customs Proposed Interpretation
(a) Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA)
Congress passed the PVSA in 1886 to protect the US maritime transportation industry from foreign competition2 Protection is afforded through penalty assessments on foreign vessels transporting passengers between US ports or places directly or by way ofa foreign port 3 As Congress and the courts have recognized coastwise protections for the US maritime transportation industry are only one dimension of the PVSA Operating in conjunction with other coastwise laws and with the US
2 See United States v Honduran SS GRANADA 35 F Supp 892 894 (BD Pa 1940)(citing purpose of PVSA to meet threats to the practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping which was to be preserved for US ships)
46 USc sect 55103 (originally 46 USC App 289)
3
documentation laws the PVSA also enhances military sealift in times ofnational emergency sustains a US merchant marine and supports the US shipbuilding and repair industry4
(b) Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative (the 2003 Act)
Over the past decade Congress has sought to reinforce the goals of the PVSA by providing mechanisms to revitalize the oceangoing US flag cruise fleet particularly in Hawaii The Project America legislation enacted in 1997 authorized among other things the re~flagging ofone existing cruise ship contingent on the operator contracting for the construction oftwo new oceangoing cruise shipss Following the default of the operator under the original contract Congress enacted the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative for the purpose ofrecovering economic and national security benefits to the United States bull 6 These same goals of the original PVSA were expressly referenced in the legislative history of the 2003 Act which emphasized that these ships will be assets available in time ofnational emergency and will significantly expand the pool ofqualified seafarers upon which the US Department ofDefense relies to crew non-combatant vessels
The 2003 Act authorizes the US documentation ofthree cruise ships for operation in regular service in Hawaii subject to certain conditions including a prohibition on operating in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico and the Caribbean Sea and a requirement that all vessel repair work be undertaken in the United States MARAD is charged with implementation of the 2003 Act
3 Customs Implementation of PVSA
(a) Regulations
The current regulations implementing the PVSA were published by Customs in 19858 The growth of the foreign flag cruise industry in North America and in particular the development of the Alaska cruise market led to an effort in 1984 to amend the thenshyexisting regulations to increase the ease of administration and operational flexibility The effort to change the regulation had support from US port interests who saw benefit in the potential increase in the number ofUS ports that foreign vessels could call and was opposed by proponents ofpotential US flag projects as detrimental to efforts to revitalize the US fleet 9 The preamble to the 1985 rule emphasized that it was of paramount importance to consider the primary object ofpassengers in taking a
4 See American Hawaii Cruises v Skinner 713 F Supp 452 457 (DDC 1989) (recognizing the contribution of the PVSA and the Jones Act in helping to secure national defense by maintaining a merchant marine oftbe best equipped and most suitable types ofvessels sufficient to serve in time of war or national emergency) see also Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 30 (DC Cir 1984) Wirth Ltd v SIS Acadia Forest 537 F2d 1272 1281 n32 (5th Cir 1976) S Public Law 105-56 Section 8109 (111 Stat 1203 1244) (Oct 81997 ) 6 Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II General Provisions - Department ofCommerce Section 211 (117 Stat 1179) (Feb 20 2003) 1 149 Cong Rec S1118 (dailyed Jan 17 2003(statement ofSenator Inouye) 8 19 CFR sect 480a 950 Fed Reg 26981 (July I 1985)
4
voyage10 a concept which is reinforced elsewhere in Customs regulations11 In its analysis of the comments received at the time Customs accepted the view ofport interests that the modified rule would help their business but did so recognizing the absence ofa regular salt water US flag passenger fleet Customs acknowledged the potential harm to prospective efforts to revitalize the US flag passenger fleet and expressly cautioned that if it were ever shown that coastwise qualified vessels in competition with foreign vessels were in fact hurt by the modified Customs regulation then Customs would immediately reconsider its position12
(b) Customs Rulings
Given the significant penalties associated with violating the PVSA13 Customs regulations expressly provide a mechanism for the owner or charterer of a foreign vessel or any other interested person to request an advisory ruling as to whether a contemplated voyage would be considered in violation of the PVSA14 Customs regulations provide that vessel operators can rely on these ruling letters only to the extent that the facts and circumstances are identical to those in the ruling letter IS
Notwithstanding the fact that several foreign cruise lines offer Hawaii itineraries originating in a US mainland port and calling at Hawaii ports with a token intervening stop in Mexico there are no reported rulings expressly approving such an itinerary for these foreign cruise lines 16
4 The Cruise Industry in Hawaii
(a) NCL America Returns US flag to the Oceangoing Passenger Fleet
Pursuant to the requirements ofthe 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative NCLA agreed to promote US-flag cruising enhance military sealift capacity and expand the US maritime labor base No other major cruise line had ever undertaken such a commitment to the US flag and the public policy objectives Congress sought to achieve under the PVSA or the 2003 Act Introduction ofPRIDE OF ALOHA in 2004 was a significant development in the maritime industry because it marked the restoration ofthe
10 Id at 26983 11 Customs Regulations include a provision on the effect ofruling letters and with respect to carrier rulings the applicable regulation refers to rulings setting forth a determination as to whether or not the primary object of a contemplated voyage is coastwise transportation in violation of46 USC sect 289 [pYSA codified at 46 USC sect55103] 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 12 50 Fed Reg at 26983 13 A modem cruise ship with 2400 passengers for example would be subject to a fine of$720OOO per cruise based on the statutory penalty of$300 for each passenger transported in violation of the Act 14 19 CFR sect 480a(d) IS 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 16 There is one older reported mling involving a request to drop the Ensenada port call from a Los AngeleslHawaiiLos Angeles itinerary which Customs held would violate the PYSA In dicta Customs acknowledged that the itinerary could be in compliance if the Ensenada call were not dropped but did not address the issue ofwhether a one hour service call where no passengers depart the vessel would be sufficient The carrier that obtained that ruling has since left the Hawaii market See Customs Ruling HQ 114078 re Crystal Hannony (Nov 4 1997)
5
us flag to the oceangoing cruise industry A contemporaneous press release from the Us Department ofTransportation reported that the three US-flag cruise ships to be introduced pursuant to the 2003 Act were expected to create more than 20000 US jobs generate more than $825 million ofexpenditures in the US economy and create nearly $360 million in federal tax revenue by the end of 200717 In 2005 the PRIDE OF AMERICA was introduced and in 2006 the third vessel PRIDE OF HAWAll was introduced to Hawaii Both the PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAIl offer 7shyday inter-island Hawaii itineraries whereas PRIDE OF ALOHA operates on 7 and 10 day cruises exclusively among the islands ofHawaii as well as 11 day cruises that include a foreign port call at Fanning Island To date NCLA has invested over $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships in furtherance ofthe policy objectives of the PVSA and the 2003 Act These ships employ over 4000 seafarers and generate hundreds ofmillions of dollars in benefits for Hawaii and the nation
(b) Significant Increase in Foreign Flag Capacity Since 2003
The most significant change in the Hawaii cruise market since 2003 has been the dramatic increase in capacity A significant portion ofthis capacity increase is directly attributable to NCLAs fulfillment ofthe Congressional mandate in the 2003 Act However foreign-flag operations in the Hawaii market as measured in passenger nights18 have skyrocketed Based on MARAn data derived from the US Customs Border Patrol Vessel Entrance and Clearance documents the passenger nights for foreign flag vessels departing from the West Coast to Hawaii on round trip cruise have increased several hundredfold during this period19 See Exhibit A
(c) NCLA Has Incurred Substantial Losses During this Period
Since 2004 NCLA has lost cumulatively more than a quarter ofa billion dollars A principal reason for these losses has been the increase in foreign capacity in this market NCLA has taken significant steps to reduce costs to address the increase in foreign competition but NCLA is at an inherent disadvantage when competing against foreign companies that are not subject to US labor laws US tax laws and other laws Ofcourse the statutory protections of the PVSA are intended to address these very issues That is why Customs immediate action to implement the proposed interpretation is critical for the US flag fleet Regrettably NCLA has already been forced to reduce overall capacity early next year with the withdrawal ofPRIDE OF HAWAlI to another
17 DOT Press Release dated June 72004 see also DOT Press Release dated August 132004 in connection with visit to PRIDE OF ALOHA by US Transportation Secretary Norman Y Mineta 11 Passenger nights (also referred to as passenger capacity days) are calculated by multiplying the number ofpassengers per vessel by the number ofcruise days in each itinerary by the number of cruises This is the unit ofmeasurement employed by MARAn In contrast passenger bed supply (also referred to as passenger capacity) data reflects only the number ofberths per vessel multiplied by the number of cruises and hence understates the market by excluding the full economic value ofthe cruise perfonned 19 In 2003 the total number ofpassenger nights for round-trip West Coast to Hawaii cruises was 303325 which jumped by 353 to 1072329 in 2006 and by 430 to 1304546 from 2003 to 2007 (The 2007 figure is based on MARAD data for six months and a1ll1ualized by published itineraries for the balance of the year)
6
market for operation under foreign flag This move alone will result in the loss ofover 1000 American seafaring jobs
5 Customs Proposed Interpretation is Necessary to Further the Important National Security and Public Policy Objectives Embodied in Federal Law
As Customs has properly noted the increase in foreign competition in the Hawaii trades in contravention of the PVSA pose[s] an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels[] As the operator of these ships NCLA has a vested interest in protecting the jobs ofthe thousands ofAmerican crewmembers and cruise ship service providers who support these vessels NCLA also has an interest in protecting the substantial economic investment it has made to revitalize the US flag passenger vessel fleet But a balancing of interests in the context of Customs enforcement ofexisting law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act requires a much broader focus
The legislative history of the 2003 Act expressly recognized the national security and public policy import ofestablishing a US flag passenger vessel fleet as a means to maintain the countrys preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool of qualified seafarers and as a means to help sustain a fleet ofUS-flag vessels to su~ort
the nations military and maritime industrial base for times ofnational emergency
Congress understood the importance ofestablishing a viable US flag cruise ship fleet as something larger than the vessels themselves These national security and public policy objectives must be weighed in the balance as Customs assesses how best to interpret its rules to give effect to the PVSA and the 2003 Act
6 Customs Should Clarify that the Proposed Interpretation is Limited to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades and Adopt Reasonable Measures to Ensure Sufficient Foreign Content
Since publication ofthe proposed interpretative rule several commenters have observed that the scope of the proposed interpretation is ambiguous because the language of Section VI referencing any cruise itinerary appears broader than the caption Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises and the entire discussion in the published notice which focuses exclusively on US-flag coastwise vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA agrees that the proposed interpretation should be clarified so that its scope is limited to vessels operating roundtrip voyages from US ports that include Hawaii port calls
NCLA supports the concept reflected in the proposed interpretive rule that round trip Hawaii itineraries from US ports on foreign ships must include a material and measurable degree ofoverall foreign port content as compared to US port content
20 149 Congo Rec S1117 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)
7
(a) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is also Consistent with Subsequent Congressional Enactments Modifying the PVSA
As discussed above it is well established that the PVSA was designed toRrotect US-flag vessels from foreign competition in the coastwise and domestic trades 1
Subsequent legislative enactments however have appropriately differentiated among distinct geographic markets and trades including Canada Alaska Puerto Rico and Hawaii based on the existence or non-existence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
In 1938 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers by Canadian passenger vessels on Lake Ontario and the St Lawrence River until such time as passenger service shall be established by vessels of the United States22 Similarly in 1961 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers on Canadian vessels within Alaska or between Alaska and other points in the United States until such time as passenger service is established by vessels ofthe United States23
In 1984 Congress modified the application ofthe PVSA to pennit the transportation ofpassengers between Puerto Rico and other United States ports on foreign-flag vessels24 As with the other statutory exceptions this provision is qualified and expires [o]n a showing that a United States passenger vessel qualified to engage in the coastwise trade is offering or advertising passenger service between a port in Puerto Rico and another port in the United States2S
Congress acted again with respect to the application of the PVSA with the 2003 Act in which it authorized three vessels that did not meet the US-build requirements of the PVSA to operate as modem US-flagged cruise ships in regular service in Hawaii26 The 2003 Act imposes a specific geographic limitation on the operation of any ship documented under this authority to operations only in regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands ofHawaii and shall not transport passengers in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico or the Caribbean Sea except in certain limited circumstances27 As above the limited nature of the 2003 Act is express it is strictly limited to the large ocean-going cruise ships and then only those operating in the regular Hawaii service where there are no US-flag operations28
21 See Act ofJune 19 1886 c 421 sec 8 24 Stat 81 Act of February 171898 c 26 sec 2 30 Stat 248 22 S] Res 174 75th Cong 52 Stat 223 (Alp 251938) codified at46 USC sect 55121(a) 23 See Pub L 87-77 75 Stat 196 (Jun 30 1961) codified at 46 USC sect 55121(b) 24 See Pub L 98-563 98 Stat 2916 (Oct 301984) codified at 46 USC sect 55104(b) 25 46 USC sect 55104(c)(l) see also 46 USC 46 USc sect 55104(cX2)(expiration of exemption upon availability ofa non-coastwise qualified US-flag vessel offering service in the relevant market) 26 149 Congo Rec SI118 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)(statementofSen Inouye) 27 Pub L 108-7 117 Stat 79 (Feb 20 2003) 28 149 Congo Rec S11l9 (dailyed Jan 17 2003Xstatement of Sen Inouye)
8
In each ofthese instances Congress fashioned a narrow exception to the PVSA that differentiated among distinct geographic markets based on the existence or nonshyexistence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
As the federal agency responsible for administering the 2003 Act MARAD requested that Customs act to protect US flag passenger vessel interests in the Hawaii trades29 Limiting the scope ofthe proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades also reflects Customs appreciation of the PVSA in the context of the subsequent Congressional action30 Viewing the Congressional modifications to the PVSA as a whole Congress has specifically and repeatedly differentiated among distinct geographic markets when it has found it necessary and appropriate to do so to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests It is well established that the proper interpretation of a statutory scheme includes consideration ofsubsequent statutes even though the underlying statute itselfhas not been expressly amended31 Accordingly Customs should likewise limit the scope ofthe proposed PVSA interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades because that is the only geographic market as mandated by the 2003 Act in which oceangoing US-flag cruise ships are operating
(b) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Consistent with Public Policy Objectives of the 1985 Rulemaking
In 1985middot Customs liberalized the regulations implementing the PVSA by eliminating certain regulatory prohibitions on foreign flag vessels In the context of the 1985 rulemaking Customs justified a relaxation ofthe regulations on the grounds that it would simplify the administration of the PVSA and would benefit the economy ofcertain American coastwise ports without eroding the statutory protection given to American vessels engaged in solely domestic trade32
Customs thus sought to reconcile US port economic interests with US-flag passenger vessel interests Both of these twin policy objectives are furthered by
29 See 72 Fed Reg 65488 (Nov 21 2007)( MARAn bas asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the ~eratiODS ofcoastwise-qualified cruise ship operators)
See generally FDA v Brown amp Williamson Tobacco Corp 529 US 120 132-133 (2000)(assessing propriety ofagency construction ofFood DIUg and Cosmetics Act and descnbing responsibility of reviewing cowt to assess statutory provisions in the context of subsequent legislative enactments) 31 See Brown amp Williamson 529 US 143 (holding that proper construction ofstatutory provision must necessarily assume that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications ofa later statute This is particularly so where the scope of the earlier statute is broad but the subsequent statutes more specifically address the topic athand) see also United States v Estate ofRomani 523 US 517 530-531 (1998)( holding that a later-enacted statute should control the construction of the federal lien priority statute a specific policy embodied in a later federal statute should control om construction of the [earlier] statute even though it ha[s] not been expressly amended) United States v Fausto 484 US 439453 (1988)(The courts frequently find Congress to have done this - whenever in fact they interpret a statutory text in the light ofsurrounding texts that happen to have been subsequently enacted This classic judicial task of reconciling many laws enacted over time and getting them to make sense in combination necessarily assumes that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications of a later statute) 32 50 Fed Reg 26982 (JuI 11985)
9
limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades
As noted earlier the 2003 Act limits the operation of the NCLA US-flag oceangoing passenger vessels to regular service in Hawaii Because there are no oceangoing US-flag vessels operating in any market other than the Hawaii trades Customs should limit the scope of the proposed interPretation to that market Such a limitation protects US flag passenger vessel interests without prejudicing US port interests In contrast an application of the proposed interpretation to any itinerary would needlessly harm US port interests unrelated to Hawaii without any countervailing benefit to US-flag passenger vessel interests Accordingly limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation is consistent with the public policy objectives of the 1985 rulemaking as well as the 2003 Act
(c) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Also Consistent with Customs Commitment to Revisit the Scope of its Rules to Protect US-Flag Interests
The relaxation ofthe PVSA regulations in 1985 was premised in large part on Customs finding that there was no regular salt water US-flag passenger fleet in operation at that time33 Acknowledging that the relaxed regulations could harm USshyflag interests Customs committed in the preamble ofthe 1985 final rule to immediately reconsider its interpretation if it is ever shown that there is a viable US flag vessel operating in competition with foreign-flag vessels34
Congress enacted the 2003 Act to stimulate the development of a US flag cruise ship industry As noted above the legislative history ofthat Act makes clear that Congress sought to revitalize the US-flag cruise industry as a means to maintain Americas preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool ofqualified seafarers help sustain a fleet of US flag vessels to support our military and a maritime industrial base create thousands of seagoing and shoreside American jobs and stimulate the development ofa US flag cruise ship tourism business with the commensurate benefits to the US tax base the US economy and US employment
Customs is now acting at MARADs request to revisit its interpretation ofthe regulations implementing the PVSA because recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwise-qualified cruise ship operations35 That is to say that the concerns articulated by Customs in the context of the 1985 rulemaking have materialized and US-flag passenger vessel interests are in fact being hanned in the Hawaii trades by foreign competitors
33 50 Fed Reg 26983 34Id
3S 72 Fed Reg 56488 (Nov 21 2007)
I
10
Because the US-flag passenger vessels are limited by statute to regular service in Hawaii limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the
Hawaii trades is consistent with Customs historical commitment to revisit its interpretation ofthe implementing regulations to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests
7 Conclusion
For the reasons stated above NCLA commends the efforts ofCustoms and MARAn to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act as applied to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA respectfully requests Customs to move ahead promptly with p~blicati~nof a final interpretive rule to advance the important national security arid public policy objectives ofthese laws
We greatly appreciate the opportunity to submit these comments
Sincerely
~~~ Alan T Yamamoto Vice President Hawaii Operations
Exhibit A
Ship Name Serenade Of The Seas Departure Port San Diego California Ports of Call San Diego California Kailua Kona Hawaii Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii Hlo Hawaii Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii Ensenada Mexico San Qigo California
2007 Date(s) Oct 05
Sailing Itinerary
Day Port H ~rrive Depart Activity
05-0ct San Diego California 500 PM
06-0ct Cruising
07-0ct Cruising
08-0ct Cruising
09-0ct Cruising
10-0ct Kailua Kona Hawaii 700 AM 900 PM Tendered
11-00t Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 1000 AM Tendered
12middot0ct Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 900 PM Tendered
13-0ct Hilo Hawaii 700 AM 600 PM Docked
14middot0ct Honoulu (Oahu) Hawaii 700 AM Docked
15-0ct Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii 200 AM Docked
6-0ct CrUising
17-0ct Cruising
18-0ct Cruising
19middot0ct Cruising
-7 20-00t
O-Oot
Ensenada ~i1exico
San Deqo California
i 00 ~r1
700 ~M
200 oM D1Jcked ~
ALASKA CRUISETOURS
HEART Of ALASKA CRUISETOUR HEART Of ALASKA CRUISETOUR
e 1312 DAYS DAYS e
CRUI5ETOUR CRUI5ETOUR 35 125
2004 DEPARTURE DATES2004 DEPARTURE DATES
Date Ship Date Ship Date Ship Date Ship
May 10 Coral Aug 2 Coral Mayll Coral Aug 3 Coral 12 Dawn 4 Dawn
13 Dawn 5 Dawn 17 Island 9 Island 18 Island 10 Island
DAY PORT 19 Sun 11 Sun
20 Sun 12 Sun 24 Coral 16 Coral 25 Coral 17 Coral 26 Dawn 18 Dawn 27 Dawn 19 Dawn 31 Island 23 Island
Jun 1 Island 24 Island Jun 2 Sun 25 Sun 3 Sun 26 Sun 7 Coral 30 Coral 8 Coral 31 Coral 9 Dawn Sep 1 Dawn
10 Dawn Sep 2 Dawn 14 Island Island6 5 DenaliAnchorage15 Island 7 Island 16 Sun 8 Sun 17 Sun 9 Sun 21 Coral 6 AnchorageWhittierEmbark22 Coral 23 Dawn 24 Dawn 28 Island 7 College Fjord Scenic Cruising 29 Island 30 Sun
)u1 1 Sun Jul 5 Coral 8 Glacier Bay National Park Scenic Cruising 6 Coral 7 Dawn 9 Skagway12 Island
13 Island 14 Sun 8 Dawn
10 Juneau15 Sun 19 Coral 20 Coral 21 Dawn 11 Ketchikan 22 Dawn 26 Island 27 Island 28 Sun 12 Inside Passage Scenic Cruising 29 Sun 13 VancouverPark Rangers are at our lodges to enrich your stay
HEART Of ALASKA CRUISETOUR ALASKA WILDERNESSKENAI CRUISETOUR ALASKA WILDERNESSCOPPER RIVER CRUISETOUR
14 1314 DAYS DAYS DAYSe e e
CRUI5ETOUR CRUI5ETOURCRUI5ETOUR
145 185165
2004 DEPARTURE DATES
2004 DEPARTURE DATESDate Ship Date Ship 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
Date Ship Date ShipMayl Dawn Aug 1 Coral 16 Island 3 Dawn Date Ship Date Ship 18 Sun 8 Island May 11 Dawn Aug 1 Coral 23 Coral 10 Sun MaylO Coral Aug 2 Coral 25 Dawn 15 Coral
16 Island 3 Dawn 12 Dawn 4 Dawn
30 Island 17 Dawn 18 Sun 8 Island
17 Island 9 Island Jun 1 Sun 22 Island
23 Coral 10 Sun 19 Sun 11 Sun
6 Coral 24 Sun 25 Dawn 15 Coral
26 Dawn 18 Dawn 8 Dawn 29 Coral
Jun 1 Sun 17 Dawn 31 Island 23 Island
13 Island 31 Dawn 6 Coral 24 Sun
Jun 2 Sun 25 Sun 15 Sun Sep 5 Island
8 Dawn 29 Coral 7 Coral Sep 1 Dawn
20 Coral 7 Sun 13 Island 31 DaWn
9 Dawn 6 Island 22 Dawn
15 Sun Sep 7 Sun 14 Island 8 Sun
27 Island 20 Coral
16 Sun 29 Sun
22 Dawn 23 Dawn
)ul 4 Coral 29 Sun
28 Island 6 Dawn
Jul 4 Coral 30 Sun
11 Island 6 Dawn
Jul 5 Coral 13 Sun
11 Island 7 Dawn
18 Coral 13 Sun
12 Island 20 Dawn
18 Coral 14 Sun
25 Island 20 Dawn
21 Dawn 27 Sun
27 Sun 26 Island 28 Sun
CRUISETOUR ITINERARY CRUISETOUR ITINERARY
DAY PORT By S~a By Land
1 fairbanks
Mt McKinleyWhittierEmabrk
College fjord ~ce~lc Cnlsi~g
Juneau
CRUISETOUR IIINERARY
DAY PORT
CRUISETOUR ITINERARY
DAY PORT
CRUISETOUR ITINERARY
PORT By Sea By Land
College Fjord Scenic Cruising Glacier Bay National Park Scenic Cruising
13 Vancouver
CANADA amp NEW ENGLAND CRUISES
CANADANEW ENGLAND CANADACOLONIAL AMERICA CANADANEW ENGLAND
10 REGAL 13 REGAL 7 GRAND DAYS PRINCESS DAYS PRINCESSDAYS PRINCESS
sail between ROUNDTRIP NEW YORK
MONTREAL fromto
CITY NEW YORKFT LAUDERDALE and CITY
MONTREAL 2004 DEPARTURE DATE
CRUISE IlINERARY CRUISE ITINERARY 2004 CRUISE IIINERARY Oct 31 DEPARTURE DATES
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 2004 Sep 12 1 1 New York City New York EMBARK PM Montreal Quebec EMBARK PMDEPARTURE DATES Sep 19 New York City New York EMBARK PM
2 Newport Rhode Island 830 AM 4PM 2 Quebec City Quebec 6AM 4PM Sep 261Sep 11 Oct 3
Sep21t 1 3 Bostoni Massachusetts 830AM SPM i3 At Sea Oct 10 2 At Sea
Olttl 4 Bar Harbor Maine 8AM 6PM 4 Halifax Nova Scotia 12 N 6PM Oct I]Octllt
Oct 24Oct 21 S Saint John New Brunswick 7AM 3PM l~ Bar Harbor Maine 8AM 6PM Halifax Nova Scotia 8AM 5 PM
6 Halifax Nova Scotia 8AM 5PM 6 Boston Massachusetts 8AM 5PM
17 At Sea 7 Newport Rhode Island 9AM 6PM 4 Saint John New Brunswick 9AM 5PM
8 Saguenay River Scenic Cruising 9 AM 2PM 8 New York City New York 8AM 5PM Bar Harbor Maine 7AM 6PMi9 ~8 Quebec City Quebec 11 PM Norfolk Virginia 12 N 10 PM
(overnight onboard ship) 10 Baltimore Maryland 8AM 5PM Boston Massachusetts 7AM 5PM 9 Quebec City Quebec 5PM 11 At Sea
Montreal Quebec 8AM10 12 Charleston South Carolina 7AM 5PM 7 Newport Rhode Island 8AM 5PM
tltneTaryoperaresinrtvtrstorder (overnight onboard ship) 13 At Sea t Itnaary opaates in revu5t order 8 New York City DISEMBARK AMPort times may vary Port times may vary11 Montreal Quebec DISEMBARK AM 14 Ft Lauderdale Florida DISEMBARK AM New York
MEXICAN RIVIERA CRUISES
MEXICAN RIVIERA MEXICAN RIVIERA MEXICAN RIVIERA
DIAMOND DAYS
107 DIAMOND PRINCESS 10 SAPPHIRE PRINCESSDAYS DAYS PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIPROUNDTRIP from fromfrom
LOS ANGELES LOS ANGELESSAN FRANCISCO
2004 DEPARTURE OATIS Sep 25 2004 DEPARTURE DATE
Oct 2 9 1623 30 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
Dec 29Sep 22Nov 6 13 20 27 Dec 4 11 22 Oct 2 12 221
Nov 1 11 2005 DEPARTURE OATIS
jan 815 22 29 Feb 5 12 19 26 MarS 12 19 26 tPortordtrllllllllmtsmaYNrApr 291623
CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 San Francisco EMBARK PM 1 Los Angeles (Long Beach) EMBARK PM
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
CRUISE ITINERARY DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
2 Catalina Island 1230 PM 630PM 2 At Sea Sat Los Angeles (Long Beach) EMBARK PM 3 Cabo San Lucas 9AM 6PM3-4 At Sea
5 Poerto Vallart 7AM 6PM 4 A~Sea
6 Mazatlan SAM 6PM 5 Acapulco SAM 11 PM 7 Cabo San Lucas SAM 6PM 6 Ixtapa (ZihaulIlnejo) 7AM 2PM
S At Sea 7 Puerto Vallarta SAM 7PM 9 San Dtego SAM 6PM 8 M~I~middot lAM -1Ft 10 At Sea 9-10 At Sea 11 San Francisco DISEMBARK AM 11 Los Angeles (Long Beach)
Sun AUea Mon AtSea Tue Poerto Vallarta Wed Mazatlan Thu Cabo San Luca( Fri At Sea Satmiddot Los Angeles (Long Beach)
CARIBBEAN CRUISES
EASTERN CARIBBEAN
7
EASTERN CARIBBEAN
7 7 DAYSDAYS DAYS
CARIBBEAN PRINCESS STAR PRINCESS GRAND PRINCESSSUN PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIP from from from
FT LAUDERDALE FT LAUDERDALE GALVESTON 2004 DEPARTIJRE DATES
CARIBBEAN PRINCESS Apr 24 2004 DEPARTURE DATES 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
CRUISE ITINERARYM~yl 1522 CRUISE I1INERARY JuI31724 DAY PORT Nov 14 28 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Dec 4 11 JunS 1226 Oct 31 Nov 13 20 27
Alii 1 1428 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Dec 12 26
Ott 2 9 162330 200S DEPARTURE DATES Sat Galveston EMBARK PMSep41825 Sat ft Lauderdale Sun ft Lauderdale EMBARK PM
Nov 6 132027 200S DEPARTURE DATESDet4 11 26middot Jan 8 15 22 29Sun At Sea Man At Sea 2005 DEPARTURE DATES ]an 9 23 Feb 5 12 19 26 Sun At Sea
CARIBBEAN PRINCESS Feb 6 20 MarS 121926 J~n 8152229 Mar 6 20 12M Apr 29 Man Belize City lPM 7PM Feb 512t 1926 MarS 121926 Apr 317 Apr2t 9 1623 Tue St Thomas 7 AM 6 PM Wed St Thomas BAM 6PM Tue Costa Maya (Mahahual) BAM 4PM
6PM Wed Grand CaYman l2N 7PM
Thu At Sea Fri At Sea Thu Cozumel lOAM 6 PM
4PM Fri At Sea
Sat Ft Lauderdale DISEMBARK AM Sun Ft Lauderdale DISEMBARK AM Sat Galveston DISEMBARK AM
CRUISE IlINERARY
ARRIVE DEPART
EMBARK PM
WESTERN CARIBBEAN
Sf Thomas US Virgin Islands Princess Cays
CARIBBEAN CRUISES
WESTERN CARIBBEAN WESTERN CARIBBEAN SOUTHERN CARIBBEAN EXPLORER
7 6 7 DAYS DAYS DAYS
CARIBBEAN PRINCESS STAR PRINCESS GRAND PRINCESS GOLDEN PRINCESS
DAWN PRINCESS
SAN JUAN ROUNDTRIPROUNDTRIP to fromfrom
GALVESTON SAN JUANFT LAUDERDALE
2004 DEPARTURE DATE2004 DEPARTURE DATES 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
CARIBB~~SflNCESS CRUISE ITINERARY Nov 7 CRUISE ITINERARY
My923 CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTJun 6 20 JUD 19
Jul lOt 31
May829t DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART )uI418 Sun San Juan EMBARK PM
Aug ll t Aug 11529
Sep 11
DAY PORT
Sep 12 26 Mon St Thomas 7AM 6PM STAR PRINCESS Princess Cays 9AM 4PM At Sea Oct 10 24
Nov 721 DecS19 Tue S Kitts 7AM 3PM
2005 DEPARTURE DATES Wed Grenada 9AM 3PM Dec 23 Coumel 7AM 5PM
Grand Cayman 7AM 4PM Jan 21630
2005 DEPARTURE DATES Feb 13 27 Thu Caracas (La Guaira) 9AM 7PM Mar 13 27STAR PRINCESS
Jan 21630 Apr 10 24 Feb 13 27 Ocho Rios 9AM 4PM Fri Aruba BAM 5PM Mar 13 27 Apr 10 24 At Sea
tMonlqQampIyrqlocrsCllhoRfm PltJrtQr-ondlimesmaywlrY Sun San Juan DISEMBARK AMFt Lauderdale DISEMBARK AM
EASTERN CARIBBEAN WESTERN CARIBBEAN CLASSIC SOUTHERN CARIBBEAN
8 7 7DAYS DAYS DAYS
CARIBBEAN GRAND PRINCESS GOLDEN PRINCESS PRINCESS
GALVESTONROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIP tofrom from
SAN JUANFT LAUDERDALE SAN JUAN
2004 DEPARTURE DATE 2004 DEPARTURE DATE 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
DeetS Apr 16CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE IflNERARY May 21630 CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE Jun 13 27DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Jul1125 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
1 Aug 8 221 Galveston EMBARK PM Sun Sanjuan EMBARK PMSep 5 19 Oct 3 17 312-3 At Sea At Sea Nov 14 28 Man At Sea Dec 12 26
st Thomas Cozumel BAM 6PM Tue Barbados 7AM 6PM 2005 DEPARTURE DATES
jan 9 23 Wed St Lucia 7 AMAntigua BAM 6PM Costa Maya (Mahahual) BAM 4PM 5PM Feb 620 Mar 6 20 Thu BAM 6PM Apr 317
At Sea Montego Bay 9AM 4PM Fri St Maarten BAM 6PM
7AM 6PM
Ft Lauderdale DISEMBARK AM Sanjuan DISEMBARK AM Sun San juan DISEMBARK AM
Oct 24 Nov 7 21 DecS19
DAWN PRINCESS
~
I
CARIBBEAN CRUISES
EASTERN CARIBBEAN ISLANDER SOUTHERN CARIBBEAN MEDLEY EASTERN CARIBBEAN
10 10 7 DAYS DAYSDAYS
GRAND PRINCESSDAWN PRINCESSSUN PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP NEW YORK CITYROUNDTRIP from from to
FT LAUDERDALE FT LAUDERDALE SAN JUAN
2004 DEPARnJRf DATE2004 DEPARTURE DATES2004 DEPARTURE DATES
Octn Oct Btl Oct 14CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE ITINERARYCRUISE ITINERARY 200s DEPARTURE DATENov 222 Nov 3t 23
Apr23tDAY PORT DEPART Dec 13 30Dee 12 ARRIVE DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Ft Lauderdale EMBARK PM 1 Ft Lauderdale EMBARK PM EMBARK PM2005 DEPARTURE DATES 2005 DEPARTURE DATES New York City 2 Princess Cays 9AM 4PM 2 At SeaJan 828 Jan 19t
Feb 17tt 3 AlSea Feb 8 28 3 At Sea 2-4 At Sea Mar919 Mar 20
4 St Thomas 7AM 6PM Apr 9 4 Cura~ao 8AM 5PM 5 St Maarten 7AM 6PM 5 Isla Margarita lOAM 4PM St Thomas 7AM 6PM
6 St Kitts 7AM 3PM 6 Barbados 9AM 6PM Dominica SAM 6PM7 8AM 5PM 7 Dominica 7 AM SPM
8 Antigua 9AM 6PM S St Thomas SAM 6PM St Maarten 7AM 6PM
9 9 At Sea
fllrtordtrlllldllmam4YYa1 10 At Sea 10 Princess Cays 9AM 4PM JlilltraryllptfatufnrfYUSfllrllcr t 11I1ll1Il1yopmltnlnrmTtronlcr t ItlntraryaptrattsIn rtVfntOrdtr San Juan DISEMBARK AM Port~rdtrQnd lilrW mil) illI) 11 Ft Lauderdale DISEMBARK AM PortlimtSlIIltlyYllry 11 Ft Lauderdale DISEMBARK AM Port ordtr lind time5 may VIlry
WESTERN CARIBBEAN ADVENTURER EASTERN CARIBBEAN VOYAGER
10 10 DAYS DAYS
SUN PRINCESS DAWN PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIPROUNDTRIP fromfrom
FT LAUDERDALEFT LAUDERDALE
2004 DEPARTURE DATES 2004 DEPARTURE DATES DAWN PRINCESS CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE IIINERARY
Oct 23 Oct 4 24 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Nov 12 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
Nov 13 Dec 2 29 Dec3tt 1 Ft Lauderdale EMBARK PM 1 Ft Lauderdale EMBARK PM
2 Princess Cays 9AM 4PM 2005 DEPARTURE DATES 2 At Sea2005 DEPARTURE DATES
DAWN PRINCESS Jan 183 At Sea 3 At Sea
Feb 7 27Jan 9 296 St Thomas 7AM 6PM Mar19 t 4 St Vincent lPM 6PM
Feb 180 Apr 8St Maarten 7 AM 5PM 5 Grenada 8AM 6PMMar 10f 301 Apr 19 At Sea 6 St Lucia 8AM 6PM
Ocho Rios 12N 6PM 7 Martinique 7AM 3PM
Grand cayman PM S St Thomas SAM 6PM
t IillUGI)lIptfQttsIn rnmtordtr Cozumel 8AM 6PM AlSea tt ~~~oI~~dtr 10 Princess Cays 9AM 4PMMOItQIl8clyrqausOclJollloJ
lwtordtrollllllllyenllllilJllIl) tltllltrlryOptrlll$In rnmtllrdtr AMOIltqollaynplactsOdlDRIos PM IortDrllralldllmallloyWl) Ft Lauderdale DISEMBARK AM
Willemstad Cura~ao
EUROPE CRUISES
GRAND MEDITERRANEAN GREEK ISLES MEDITERRANEANGREEK ISLES
12 1212 DAYS DAYSDAYS
STAR PRINCESS
STARSTAR PRINCESSPRINCESS
sail betweensail between VENICE BARCELONA VENICE to
andand BARCELONA VENICE ROME
CRUISE ITINERARY2004 DEPARTURE 2004 DEPARTURE2004 DEPARTURE CRUISE ITINERARYDATESCRUISE I I INERARY DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DATEDATES
Apr 10 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTMay 16middot DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Venice Italy (overnight onboard ship) EMBARK PM May 4 May18t Sep2St 1 Verdce Italy EMBARK PM
Jun 9 1 Barcelona Spain (overnight onboard ship) EMBARK PM 2 Venice Italy 2PM 2 At Seajune 21 t 2 Barcelona Spain 1 PM Dubrovnik Croatia 8AM 6PMJul3 3 Corfu Greece 8AM 6PM
lullS 3 Monte Carlo Monaco 7 AM 6 PM Corfu Greece 8AM 6PM 4 Katakolon Greece (for Oiympia) 7AM SPMJu127 4 FlorencePisa Italy (Livorno) 630 AM 6 PMAug 8~ Katakolon Greece (for Olympia) 7AM SPM S Athens Greece (Piraeus) 6AM 12 MAug 20deg S NaplesCapri Italy 8 AM 7 PM Sep 1t 6 Athens Greece (Piraeus) 6AM 12 M 6 Mykonos Greece 8AM 12M
6 At Sea 7 Mykonos Greece 8AM 6PM 7 Kusadasi Turkey (for Ephesus) 7 AM SPM7 Athens Greece (Piraeus) 6AM S4S PM
8 Kusadasi Turkey (for Ephesus) 7AM 1PM 8 Kusadasi Turkey (for Ephesus) 8AM 6PM 8 Santorini Greece 7 AM 4PM
9 Jstanbul Turkey 8AM 6PM 9 Rhodes Greece 8AM 6PM 9 At Sea
10 At Sea 10 Santorini Greece 7AM 6PM 10 Rome Italy (Civitavecchia) 8AM 7PM tll1ooil)opcraksinttVUSe
grduPorttlmcsmi)Y6ljI 11 At Sea 11 Cannes France (for Mont Carlo) 8AM 6PM11 At Sea tSamnlQ]latCiIUIe5inplm tltlnerlll)opmlpoundsin
NaplesCapri Italy 630 AM 12 Barcelona Spain (ovrnight onboard ship) 8AMofMo~Urlo ~odcr12 Venice Italy (overnight onboard ship) 8 AM 12 6PM O~lIlalhitRhodalnpUcc Port order md Iimes- JmyVUY Barcelona Spain DISEMBARK AM13 Venice Italy DISEMBARK AM - 13 Iome Italy (qvitavecchia) DISEMBARK AM
MEDITERRANEANAEGEAN MEDITERRANEANMOSAIC
12 12 DAYSDAYS
STAR STAR PRINCESS PRINCESS
ROME BARCELONAto
toVENICE ROME
2004 DEPARTURE DATE 2004 DEPARTURE
CRUISE I I INERARY DATE CRUISE ITINERARYApr 22 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Sep 13 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Rome Italy (Civitavhia) EMBARK pM 1 Barcelona Spaln (overnight onboard ship) EMBARK PM 2 NaplesCapri Italy 7 AM 7 PM Barcelona Spain SPM 3 Messina Italy (for Taormina) 8AM 6PM 3 At Sea 4 Valleta Malta 8AM 6 PM 4 Casablanca Morocco (for Marrakech) 7 AM 8PM
At Sea S Gibraltar 8 AM 6PM Santorini Greece 7 AM 6PM 6 At Sea
7 Kusadasi Turkey (for Ephesus) 8 AM 6PM 7 Cannesfrance (for Mont Carlo) 8 AM 6PM 8 Athens Greece (Piraeus) 6 AM S4SPM 8 At Sea 9 Katakolon Greece (for Olympia) 8 AM 6PM 9 Valleta Malta 8 AM SPM 10 Corfu Greece 8 AM 6PM 10 Messina Italy (for Taormina) 6PM 11 Dubrovnik Croatia 8 AM 6PM 11 NaplesCpri Itiily 6PM 12 Venice Italy (overnight onboard ship) 1230 PM 12 FlorencePisa Italy (Livorno) 830 AM 13 Venice Italy DISEMBARK AM 13 lomeltaly (Clvttavecchia)DISEMBAIKAM Venice Italy
EUROPE CRUISES
EUROPEAN EXPLORER CRUISE MEOffiRRANEANITRANSATLANTIC CRUISE
12 17DAYS DAYS
ROYAL STARPRINCESS PRINCESS
sail between VENICE
ROME to
and FT LAUDERDALE
LONDON
2003 DEPARTURE DATES
2004 DEPARTURE DATE CRUISE ITINERARY
May 7 CRUISE I1INfRARY Oct 7 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Jul30l
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Venice Italy (overnight onboard ship) EMBARK PMAug 11 Sep 41 1 Rome Italy (Civitavecchia) EMBARK PM 2 Vernce Italy 2 PM
2 FlorencePisa Italy (Livorno) 7 AM 7PM 3 At Sea 3 Cannes France (for Monte Carlo) 7 AM 5 PM 4 Barcelona Spain 9 AM 6 PM 5 At Sea 6 Gibraltar 8AM PM 7 Casablanca Morocco (for Marralech) 5AM 6 PM 8 Seville Spain (Cadiz) 8AM 6PM 9 LisbQn Portugal 9AM 5PM 10 Vigo Spain 830AM 4PM 11 At Sea
tllinmryope~te$ 12 ParisNormandy France (Ie Havre) 7 AMlnftYCl5eordu ~rttimesuuyYilY 13 London England (Southampton) DISEMBARK AM
Caudis Park Cuell Barcelona Spain
SCANDINAVIARUSSIA BALTIC HERITAGE WESTERN EUROPEBRITISH ISLES
ROYALGRAND10 GRAND 1210 PRINCESSDAYS PRINCESS PRINCESS DAYSDAYS
ROUNDTRIPROUNDTRIPROUNDTRIP fromframfrom
LONDONCOPENHAGENCOPENHAGEN 2004 DEPARTURE2004 DEPARTURE 2004 DEPARTUREDATESDATES DATES
May19tMay 29 May 19 jul28 JunSJun 18 Aug 231
Jul8 ju118Jul28 Aug 7 CRUISE ITINERARYAug 17
CRUISE IIINERARY ARRIVE DEPART CRUISE IrINERARY EMBARK PMDAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
DAY ARRIVE DEPART 7AM 6PM1 Copenhagen Denmark EMBARK PM EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 7AM 6PM
Stockholm Sweden (Nynilshamn) 7 AM 530PM 6AM PM Helsinki Finland 830 AM 6PM St PetersbUrg Russia (overnight onboard ship) 630 AM 9AM 9PM St Petersburg Russia 6PM
7 Tallinn Estonia 7 AM 1PM 8 Gdansk Poland (Gdynia) 9 AM 4PM 9 Warnemfinde Germany (for amprlin) 8 AM 10 PM 10 Helsing0r Denmark 9 AM 11 AM 10 Copenhagen Denmark (overnight onboard ship) 1 PM 11 Copenhagen Denmark DISEMBARK AM
middotScrvlcctillforlh=CllCIIIlicmIOptoluItllUllwWdlseJnbIDltHdlinprAfbrtour~dllmJlwktbeshJpwl1lPfllClaquodtoCopetWampen and pmenpoundm Qfl tours from HelMp will Rboird ship tPolttimes~myAninliI1ddepartu~itRosythDubJinmdFa1mauthwl)dICtotXLolconditions
tPOrtordermdtlme$maynI) ttCdlitEdinbuJlhotmdedto~mllocunionforMiliblyTltOO~on8123wi1inlmiddotUIIisitSouthQuemsfmyinstudofJosylh
BRITISH ISLES
ROYAL12 PRINCESSDAYS
ROUNDTRIP
from
LONDON
2004 DEPARTURE DATES
Jun 12 jul6
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Lqn4onmiddotpoundngland(Southampton) EMIWlIlt PM 2 Cornwall England (Falmouth) 7AM SPM
Waterford Ireland 8AM 6PM Dublin Ireland 7AM 1130 PM
t PQrtbme5 lliIyyuy Anini Illd departure at Rosytb Dublin md Filmouth ViiYdue to Iiltlal conditions
WESTERN EUROPE
ROYAL12 PRINCESSDAYS
ROUNDTRIP
from
LONDON
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
May 31
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 London England (Southampton) EMBARK PM
CRUISE ITINERARY
EUROPE CRUISES
ICELANDNORWEGIAN FJORDS
ROYAL12 PRINCESSDAYS
ROUNDTRIP
from
LONDON
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
Jun24
CRUISE IflNERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 London Englan4 (Southampton) EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 3 Berge Norway 6PM 4 Hellesylt Norway 830AM 1030 AM 4 Gciranger Norway Geiranger Fjord Sceni Cruising UN 7PM
9AM SPM5
1PM 8AM SPM
10 At Sea
middotStlviceallfof~fjonlovedmdshOR=unlDllOplion1Itourswllldi5anbarilitHelIcsyItAftcrtollrpuKllJClJdisembark
theshlpwiUprocudto~md~lampClSonlounfrwnHdaytwl1lblmd$hip
NORWEGIAN FJORDSNORTH CAPE
ROYAL12 PRINCESSDAYS
ROUNDTRIP
from
LONDON
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
JuilS
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Loridon ~gland (South~mpton) EMBARK PM 2-3 At Sea
Hellesylt Norway 830AM 1030 AM Golranger Norway Geiranger Fjord Scenic Cruising 12N 7PM
TrodheilllNorwaY 9AM SPM At Sea Cross the Ardgt Cirde
6PM 8AM lPM
8AM 130 PM 430PM 630PM
7AM 3PM
Bagpipers Edinburgh Scotland Royal Princess in Geiranger Fjord Norway
EUROPE CRUISES amp CRUISETOURS
17 DAYS
GRAND PRINCESS
FT LAUDERDALE to
COPENHAGEN
2004 DEPARTURE DATE MayZ
CRUISE IfINERARY
DAY 1 2-6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
PORT Ft Lauderdale Florida At Sea ~ores IslandsPortugal (Ponto Delgado) At Sea Lisbon Portugal Vigo Spain At Sea ParislNormandy France (Le Havre) RotterdamThe Netherlands At Sea Hamburg Germay (for Berlin) At Sea Olso Norway Oslo Fjord scnic Cruising Copenhagen Denmark
ARRIVE
N
12N 9AM
7AM
6AM
DISEMBARK AM
DEPART EMBARK PM
6PM
7PM 6PM
7PM 7PM
1UM
MEDITERRANEAN CRUISETOUR
TRANSATLANTICWESTERN EUROPE ICELAND amp GREENLANDTRANSATLANTIC
16 GRAND DAYS PRINCESS
COPENHAGEN to
NEW YORK
2004 DEPARTURE DATE Aug 27
CRUISE IIINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Copenhagen Denmark EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 3 Dover England (forLondon) 7AM 7PM 4 Cornwall England (Falmouth) 9AM 6PM 5 Dublin Ireland lOAM 9PM 6 GlasgowEdinburgh Scotland (Greenock) 8AM 12 M 7 Belfast Northern Ireland 1030 AM 530 PM 8 At Sea 9 Reykjavik Iceland 9AM 9PM 10 At Sea 11 Prins Christian Sund Scenic Cruising 12N 6PM 12 Qaqortoq Greenland 7 AM 2PM 13 At Sea 14 SI Johns Newfoundland Canada 12N 7PM 1516 At Sea 17 New York CIty New York DISEMBARK AM
SCANDINAVIARUSSIA CRUISETOUR
Church of the Savior on the Spilled Blood St Petersburg Russia
WESTERN EUROPE CRUISETOUR
CRUISEIOUR ITINERARY
CRUISETOUR lA11C CRUISETOUR ITINERARY CRUISETOUR 4A14C CRUISETOUR II INERARY
DAY PORT By Sea By Land DAY PORT By Sea By Land CRUISETOUR 7Al7C18 STAR PRINCESS 1 Rome 17 GRAND PRINCESS 1 BudapestDAYS DAYS DAY PORT By Sea By Land 22 Rome Budapest 18 ROYAL PRINCESS 1 Paris
ROMETODI 3 RomeTodi BUDAPEST VIENNA 3 BudapestVienna DAYS 2 Paris and 4 TodiFlorence and 4 Vienna 3 Paris
PARIS EUROSTAR5 Florence 5 ViennaPrague 4 ParisLondon 6 FlorenceVeniceEmbark 6 Prague and 5 London
FLORENCE PRAGUE
plus plus LONDON7 Venice Italy (overnight onboard ship) 7 PragueCopenhagenEmbark 6 LondonSouthamptonEmbark
GRAND MEDITERRANEAN SCANDINAVIARUSSIA plus 7 At Sea CRUISE 8-9 At Sea CRUISE 8 At Sea WESTERN EUROPE 8 Bilbao Spain10 Istanbul Turkey 9 Stockholm Sweden (Nyniishamn) BRITISH ISLES CRUiSE2004 DEPARTURE DATES 2004 DEPARTURE DATES 9 Bordeaux France (Le Verdon)
11 Kusadasi Turkey (for Ephesus) 10 Helsinki FinlandApr Sf 2004 DEPARTURE DATES 10 At SeaMay 131 Jul2Apr 29 12 Athens Greece (Piraeus) 11 SI Petersburg Russia (overnight onboard ship) 11 GlasgowEdinburgh Scotland (Greenock)May 23 JulUt May 141 26middot Jul tt 13~ 250
May 23 Jun 16 13 At Sea JunZt JulU 12 SI Petersburg Russia Jun n 19 Aug 18o 300 12 Dublin Ireland
]un 12 Aug l t 13 Cork IrelandJuliO 14 NaplesCapri Italy 13 Tallinn EstoniaJun 22 t Aug 11 Toun~eonlymilabkwithcruise5indi[itbtAug 3 15 FlorencelPisa Italy (Livorno) 14 Cdansk Poland 14 Cornwall England (Falmouth)
Aug 27 tBritishliksetuise aWEwupeiBritishlslesouist 15 ParisNormandy France (Le Havre)16 Monte Carlo Monaco 15 At Sea bull WestemEuropeCrube middotlcdandINorwqlmFjOllisetuise 16 Rotterdam The Netherlands
t Crulsetour lA only combinable with 12--dayGreck fst 17 Barcelona Spain (overnight onboard ship) 16 Olso NOrway Qsld Fjord Scenic Cruising bull Norwqian FjordsNorth Cipecruise 17 BrusselsBruges Belgium (Zeebrugge)tCruixtour 4A only combinable with lo-day Baltic
crulse shown on PI 11 18 Barcelona Spain Heritage cruise shawn on pg 12 OCrubctnur 7C only combinable with EwuJlWl ExplorerCrube17 Copenhagen Denmark 18 London England (Southampton)
EXOTICS CRUISES
AUSTRALIANEW ZEALAND AUSTRALIANEW ZEALAND AUSTRALIAASIA
12 14 19 DAYS DAYS DAYS
SAPPHIRE PRINCESS SAPPHIRE PRINCESS SAPPHIRE PRINCESS
saH between SYDNEYAUCKLAND SYDNEY
toand to BANGKOKSYDNEY AUCKLAND 2005 DEPARTURE DATES 2005 DEPARTURE DATE
Mar7Jan 6 2004 DEPARTURE DATEJan 1St
Dec 23 CRUISE ITINERARYJr ift Feb 23 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
CRUISE ITINERARY 1 Sydlley Austrli EMBARK PM CRUISE ITINERARY 2 At Sea
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTDAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 3 Brisbane Australia 8AM 6PM 1 Sydlley Australia EMBARK PM 4 At Sea 1 Aucklalld N~w Zealalld EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 5 Cid Harbor Austrlia (for Great Barrier Reef) 7AM 5PM2 At Sea 3 Melbourne Australia 8 AM 6 PM 6 Cirns Australia (Yorkeys) 8AM 6PM
3 WeIUllgton New Zealand 8 AM 6 PM 4 At Sea 7-8 At Sea 4 Christchurch New Zealalld (Lytlelton) 8 AM 6 PM 5 Tasmallia Australia (Hobart) 8 AM 6 PM 9 Darwin Australia lPM 8pM 5 Dunedill N~ Zealalld (Port Chalmers) 8 AM 6 PM 6-7 At Sea 10-11 At Sea 6 Fiordland Natiollal Park Scenic Cruising AM 6 PM 8 Fiordlalld Natiollal Park Scellic Cruising 7 AM 5 PM 12 Bali Illdonesi (Padang Bay) 7AM 6PM
7-8 At Sea J DUlledill New Zealalld (Port Chalmers) 8 AM 6 PM 13-14 At Se 10 Christchurch N~ Zealalld (Lytlelton) 8 AM 6 PM 15 Kuala Lumpur Mlaysia (Port KeIang) 8AM 6PM9 Tasmania Australia (Hobart) 8 AM 6 PM 11 Wellillgtoll New Zealmd 8 AM 6 PM 16 Sillgpore 8AM 6PM
10 At Sea 12 At Sea 17 At Sea 11 Melbourne Australia 8 AM 6 PM 13 Taurallga New Zealalld 8 AM 730 PM 18 Ho Chi Millh City Vietnm (Vung Tau) 7AM 730 PM 12 At S~a 19 At Sea 14 Bay of Islallds New Zealalld 8 AM 7 PM 13 SydPey Australia DISEMBARK AM 20 Bmgkok Thailalld (Laem Chabang) DISEMBARK AM15 Aucklalld New Zealalld DISEMBARK AM
t llinemy opcrnesln reverse order Port times mil1 my
CHINAFAR EAST SOUTHEAST ASIAFAR EAST
1612 DAYSDAYS
PACIFIC PRINCESS
SAPPHIRE PRINCESS PACIFIC PRINCESS
OSAKA BEIJING to
to BANGKOK OSAKA
2004 DEPARTURE DATE 2004 DEPARTURE DATEPAClFlC PRINCESS
julllt Jun 11 2005 DEPARTURE DATE
SAPPHIRE PRINCESS Apr 11
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Osaka Japall EMBARK PM
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Beijillg China (Xingang) EMBARK PM 2 Hiroshima Japall 1 PM 6PM 2 DaHan China AM 5PM 3 At Sea 3 At Sea 4 Shmghai Chilla 7 AM 6PM 4 Shallghai Chilla (overnight onboard ship) 7AM 5 At Sea 5 Shallghai China 6PM 6 Okinaw Jpll 7 AM 1 PM
7 Taipei Taiwm (KeeIung) 9 AM 7PM6 At Sea 8 At Se7 Pusan South Korea 8AM 5PM 9 HOllg KOllg Chill 8 AM 7PM 8 At Sea 10-11 At S~a J Vladivostok Russia 5AM 730 PM 12 Ho Chi MiIJh City Vietnm (Phu My) 7 AM 5PM 10 At Sea 13 At Se 11 Nagasaki Japan 7AM 6PM 14 Singpore 8 AM 6pM
15 KUlltll Mlysi 830 AM 430 PM12 At Sea 16 At Sea 13 Osaka Japan DISEMBARK AM 17 Ballgkok Thaillld DISEMBARK AM t Sailing alls i1t Hiroshima on Dl) 11 In place of Nilgilsaki Port times milY vary
CRUISE I flNERARY CRUISE I flNERARY
Ho Chi Minh City Vietnam
EXOTICS CRUISES
SOUTHEAST ASIACHINA SOUTHEAST ASIACHINA FAR EASTALASKA
PACIflC PRINCISS ROYAL PRINCESS
16 16 19 DAYS DAYS DAYS
SAPPHIRE SAPPHIRE PRINCESS
Sail between PRINCESSBANGKOK
and BANGKOK OSAKA
BEIJING to to
2004 DEPARTURE DATES BEIJING SEATTLEPAClFlC PRINCESS
Jun 27tt 200S DEPARTURE DATE200S DEPARTURE DATE ROYAL PRINCESS
Mar 26 Apr 23Oct 16 Nov lt
CRUISE I I INERARY CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
1 GsakaJpan EMBARK PM1 Bangkok Thailand (Laem Chabang) EMBARKPM 1 Bangkok Thailand (Laern Chabang) EMBARK IM 2 At Sea2 At Sea 2 AtSea bull 3 Nagasaki Japan 7 AM 6PM
9AM 7PM 3 Singapore 7PM 4 Pusan Soqth Korea 8AM 5PM 4-5 At Sea 5 At Sea gt bull
7AM 7PM 6 Da Nwg Vietn~1Il 7AM middot7PM 6 Vladivostok Russia SAM 730 PM 7 At Sea 7 AtSea
7AM 12M 8 Hong lltog ihin~ 7AM 12M 8 Sapporo japan (Muroran) 6AM 6PM 9-10 At Sea 9-10 At Sea 9-12 At Sea cross Intemational Dateline
13 DutchHarbor Alaska (Aleutian Islands) 230 PM 7PM11 ShaJlgllai Cbina (overnight onboard ship) lAM 11 Shangh~t Cllina (ovmightonJoltird $hip) 7 AM 14 At Sea shy12 Shanghai China 6PM 12 Shanghai China
7AM - - tlJf
6PM 15 Anchorage Alaska (Seward) 8AM 6PM13 At Sea 13 AtSea i 16 College Fjord Seni CruIsing 630AM 930 AM
14 Nagasaki japan 7AM 6PM 14 Nagasaki japan 6PM 17 Glacier Ilay Scenic Cruising 1030 AM 830 PM 15 Pusan South lltOrea TAM 4PM 1~ bull Pu~an SQuth iorea middot4lM 18 middotmiddot juneau Alaska 6 AM 2PM 16 At Sea 16 At Sea 19 - At Sea 17 Beijing China (Xingangy OISEMBAlUe AM 17 Beijing Cliina (Xingang) 20 SeattleWashington DISEMBARK AM
t ltinemy Operne5 in rcvmc Older ttPorttimcsmiYnl)middotShlpwilldocklnampngkoknsttadofL1cm~
POLYNESIA amp THE COOK ISLANDS POLYNESIA amp THE MARQUESAS ISLANDS
10 10 DAYS DAYS
TAHITIAN PRINCESSTAHITIAN PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIPROUNDTRIP fromfrom
PAPEETEPAPEETE 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
2004 DEPARTURE DATES Oct 4 24 Mayl 17 27 Sep4 14 24 Nov 13 Jun 6 16 26 0lt 14 00323Ju16 16 26 Nov 323 2005 DEPARTURE DATESAug 5 15 25 Dec 13 Jan 12
Feb 1 21200S DEPARTURE DATES
~~ 122 ~~Il 13 23 CRUISE ITINERARY
CRUISE II INERARY DAY PORT
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Papeete Tahiti 1 Papeete Tahiti (overnight onboard ship) EMBARK PM
2 Moorea Polynesia 2 Papeete Tahiti SPM 3 Huahil1e P9lynesia 8AM 5 PM 3 Tuamotu Atolls Senic Cruising
5 PM8-AM 4 At Sea I At Sea 5 Rarotonga Cook Islands 8AM 5 PI~ 5 Nuku Hiva Marquesas Islands 6 At Sea 6 Hiva Ga Marquesas Islands 8AM 5PM 7 Raiatea Polynesia overnight onboard Ship 6AM
7 At Sea middotai~ RaiateaPQlynesia igt gt 6AM 8 Rangiroa P~iynesia 8AM 4PM8 Tahaa scenic Cryising 630 AM 830 AM
8 BoraBoraPQlyrtesia(ovemightollboard ship) UN 9 Tahaa ~enl Cruising 8 AM middot11AM
9 Bora lora Polynesia 5iM 9 Raiatea Polynesia 12 N 11 PM 10 Moore Polynesfa 8 AM 5 PM la ~ Bora ~oraPoIYnesia 8AM bull 5PM
11 Papeete Tahiti DISEMBARK AM 11 Papeete Tahiti DISEMBARK AM Iong Kong Harbor
3 Singapore 4-5 At Sea 6 Da NangVieinam 7 At Sea 8 liong Kong China
EXOTICS CRU ISES
HAWAIITAHITI HAWAIIAN ISLANDS SOUTH PACIFIC ISLANDS
12 1515 DAYS DAYSDAYS
PACIFIC
TAHITIAN PRINCESS ISLAND PRINCESSPAClFIC PRINCESS
PRINCESS
SYDNEYROUNDTRIP sail between tofrom
PAPEETE PAPEETELOS ANGELES and
2004 DEPARnIRE DATEHONOLULU 2004 DEPARTURE DATES Apr 21
2004 DEPARTURE DATES ~~~l CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE 11 INERARY
Oet21t CRUISE ITINERARY Nov Sf
MayS PACIFIC PRINCESS DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
Nov20t DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DecSt 1 Los Angeles CalifornIa EMBARK AM 1 Sydney AustralIa EMBARK PMAug 17t
Dec20t1 Papeete Tahiti EMBARK PM 2-4 At Sea
2005 DEPARTURE DATE Jan 4 2-5 At Sea
(overnight onboard ship) Jan 19 5 Auckland New Zealand 7 AM 2PMFeb 3t 6 Iiilo Hawaii 8 AM 6 PM
TAHITIAN PRINCESS Papeete Tahiti 11 PM fb 18 6-7 At Sea Kilauea Voko ~enic CruisingApr 12 MarS t 3 Moorea Polynesia 8 AM 5 PM 8 Suva fijI 11 AM 430 PM1~i~t 7 Kona Hawaii 8AM 6PM4 Bora Bora PolYnesia 8 AM 5 PM 9 At Sea Cross International Dateline Apr 19
5-6 At Sea 8 Honolulu Hawaii 8AM 11 PM 10 Apia Western Samoa 830 AM 2PM 7 Christmas Isl~ndKiribati 1Z N 5 PM 9 Kauai Hawaii (Nawlliwlli) 8AM 6PM 11-12 At Sea 8-9 At Sea 10 Maui Hawaii (Lahaina) 6PM 13 Bora Bora Polynesia lOAM 6PM 10 HlloliaWlii 6 PM 13 Raiatea Polynesia (overnight onboard 11 PM11-14 At Sea 11 Maui Hawaii (Lahaina) 8 AM 6 PM 14 Raiatea Polynesia 11 PM
15 Ensenada Mexico (service call)KaUaiH~waii(Nawllfwtli) 8AM 6 PM 15 Moorea Polynesia 8AM 5PM
tllinemyopcr~ttsln=x QnIerPurtlimcslmYvary Honolulu Hawaii DISEMBARK AM 16 Los Angeles CalIfornia DISEMBARK AM 16 Papeete Tahiti DISEMBARK AM
ISLANDS OF THE PACIFIC THEATER SOUTH PACIFIC EXPLORER
24 24 DAYS DAYS
PAClFIC PRINCESS PAClFIC PRINCESS
sail between HONOLULU PAPEETE
and to OSAKA FT LAUDERDALE
2004 DEPARTURE DATES
Mayl 2004 DEPARTURE DATEJul2Sj
Aug 29 CRUISE ITINERARY
CRUISE ITINERARYDAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART EMBARK PM DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
1 Papeete Tahiti EMBARK PM lPM 7PM 2 8AM 11 PM
3 ~~~~~~ ~~~~Sta 8AM 5 PM 4-6 At Sea 7 Pitcairn Island Scenic Cruising 8AM 1211
8AM 12 N
7AM ZPM 8-9 At Sea 10 Easter Island Chile 8AM 2PM
9AM 11-14 At Sea 15 Callao Peru (overnight for Lima and Machu Picchu) 8AM 16 Callao Peru lPM 17 At Sea 18 Manta Ecuador (for Quito) 9fM 7PM 19 At Sea 20 Transit Panama Canal 7 AM 430 PM 21 San BIas Panama 8AM 5 PM 22 ft Sea 23 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands 7AM 4PM 24 At Sea
25 Ft Lauderdale Florida DISEMBARK AMMoorea Polynesia tllinemyoperataln~12onlerPortl1mesmiYmymiddot
EXOTICS CRUISES
HAWAIITAHITISOUTH PACIFIC AMAZONSOUTHERN CARIBBEAN CAPE HORNSTRAIT OF MAGELLAN
1430 12 DAYS DAYSDAYS
ROYAL PRINCESS ROYAL PRINCESSSAPPHIRE PRINCESS
sail betweenFT LAUDERDALE SANTIAGOLOS ANGELES to
andto MANAUS BUENOS AIRESSYDNEY 2005 DEPARTURE DATE 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
2004 DEPARTURE DATE Apr 9 Jan 10
Nov 22 Jan 241 Feb 7
FebZt
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
CRUISE ITINERARY
CRUISE ITINERARYCRUISE ITINERARY 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTDAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 2-3 At Sea 1 Santiago Chile (Valparaiso) EMBARK PM
1 Los ingeles California EMBARK PM 4 Tortola BritIsh Virgin Islands 8 AM 6 PM 2 At Sea 2 Ensenada Mexico 8AM 5PM 3 Puerto Montt Chile 7AM 6PM
3middot6 At Sea 4 At Sea 5 Dominica 9 AM 4 PM 7 Hilo Hawaii 8AM 5 At Sea Chilean Fjords Scenic Cruising6PM 6 Trinidad 9 AM 6 PM
8 Maui Hawaii (Lahaina) 8AM 6PM 6 At Sea Amalia Glacier Scentc CruiSi3f7 At Sea 7 Punta Arenas Chile (Strait of Magei an) 7AM 6PM9 Honolulu Hawaii 7AM 5PM
- 10middot13 At Sea 8 Beagle Channel Scenic Cruising 8 Ushuaia Argentina (Tierra del Fuo) 12N 8PM
8 Devils Island French Guiana (Isle Royal) 8 AM 2 PM 14 Bora Bora Polynesia 8AM 6PM 9 At Sea 9 At Sea Cape Hom Scenic Cruising
10 Santarem Brazil 9 AM 7 PM 10 Moorea Polynesia 8AM 6PM 10 Falkland Islands (Stanley) 8AM 6PM 10 Papeete Tahiti (overnight onboard ship) 9PM 11 At Sea
i 16 Papeete Tahiti 6PM 11 Boca da Valeria Brazil (Amazon River) 7 AM 2 PM 12 Puerto Madryn Argentina 6AM 5PM 17middot18 AtSea 12 Manaus Brazil (overnight onboard ship) 10 AM 13 At Sea
14 Montevideo Uruguay 9AM 6PM19 Pago Pago merlcan Samoa 8AM 6PM 13 Manaus Brazil DISEMBARK AM 15 Buenos Aires Argentina DISEMBARK AM 20 Apia Western Samoa 8AM 6PM 21 At Sea Cross International Dateline middotl1me5forallscenkouisinCile subjectlDclwIgc
tllinmryopefilteslnr=rscordttPorttlmislm)vary22 Suva Fiji 8AM 6PM l 23-24 At Sea
20 Auckland New Zealand 8AM 6PM ORINOCO RIVERSOUTHERN CARIBBEAN ANDESSOUTH AMERICA 26 Tauranga New Zealand 8AM 7PM 27 At Sea
28 Wellington Newealand 8AM 6PM 16 17 DAYS DAYS 29-30 AtSea
31 Sydney Australia DISEMBARK AM ROYAL PRINCESS ROYAL PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP SANTIAGO from to
FT LAUDERDALE FT LAUDERDALE
200S DEPARTURE DATE2005 DEPARTURE DATE
Mar 7Mar 24
CRUISE IIJNERARYCRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Santiago Chlle (Valparaiso) EMBARK PM
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM
2 La Serena Chile (Coquimbo) 8 AM 5 PM2-3 At Sea 3 At Sea Um6n Costa Rica 7AM 7PM 4 Arica Chile 7AM 6PMCristobal Panama (for Panama Canal) 8AM 5PM o At Sea
6 Cartagena Colombia 9AM 2 PM 6 San Martin Peru (for Pisco and Machu Picchu) 7AM 6PM 7 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 130 PM 7PM 7 Callao Peru (overnight for Lima) 530 AM 8-9 At sea 8 Callao Peru 1PM 10 Puerto Ordaz Venezuela (Orinoco River) 8AM 6PM 9 At Sea
i 11 At Sea 10 Manta Ecuador (overnight for Quito) 530AM 12 Greada 8AM i 11 Manta Ecuador 1lM5PMt 1~ Dolllinlca i 7N1 5 PM 12 At Sea
i 13 Transit Panama C~nal 7AM 430 PM14 St Thomas us Virgilslands 9AM 5PM 14 Cartagena Colombia 8AM 130 PMJs AtSei i 15 Aruba Netherlands intiiles 1PM 7PM 16 Princess Cays Bahamas 8AM 16-17 At Sea Tahiti Polynesia 17 FtLallardale Flillilt~ DISEMBARK AM 1ampmiddot Ft L~uderdale Florida DISEMBARK AM
AMAZON RIVERMEDITERRANEAN
21 DAYS
ROYAL PRINCESS
MANAUS
to ROME
2005 DEPARTURE DATE
Apr 21
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE M~naus Brazil (Wemight onboardship) Manaus Brazil
3 BocadaValeria Brazil (AriiazonRivet) 11 AM 4-6 At Sea 7 Recife Brazil 1 PM 8-11 AtSea 12 Dakar Senegal 8AM 13-14 At Sea 15 Agadir Morocco 7AM 16 Casablanca Morocco (for Marrakech) 8AM 17 Gibraltar lOAM 18 Allcante Spain 12 N 19 Barcelona Spain 8AM 20 Cannes France (for Monte Carlo) 8AM 21 FlorencePisa Italy (Livarno) 7AM 22 Rome Italy (Civitavecchia) DISEMBARK AM
INDIAN OCEANAUSTRALIA
28 DAYS
PACIfIC PRINCESS
CAPE TOWN
to SYDNEY
2004 DEPARTURpound DATE
Oct 20
CRUISE ITINERARY1 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Cape Town South Africa EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 3 East London South Africa 7AM 3PM 4 DurbahSouth Africa 8AM 6PM 5-7 At Sea 8 Nosy BeMadagascar 7AM 4PM 9 At Sea 10 Poilit des Galets Reunioll]slahd 11 Port Louis Mauritius 12c19 At Sea 20 Perth Australia (Fremantle) 21-23 At Sea 24 Adelaide Australla 25 At Sea 26 Melbourne Australla 7 27 Tasmania AUstralia (Burnie) 28 At Sea 29 Sydney Australia DISEMBARK AM
I
DEPART EMBARK PM
7PM 6PM
8pM
5PM
3PM 9PM 6PM 6PM 5PM 7PM 7PM
EXOTICS CRUISES
SOUIB ATIANTICANTARCfICNSOUIB AMERICA
24 DAYS
ROYAL PRINCESS
CAPE TOWN
to SANTIAGO
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
Dec 17
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Cape TownSouthAfrica (overnighfol1board ship) EMBARK PM 2 Cape Town South Africa 3PM 2 if~~t Good HopSCenic Crulsing 3-6 6 Tristan DaCunha United Kingdom 8AM 5PM 7-10 At Sea 11 Falkland Islands (Staliley) 8 AM 5PM 12 At Sea 13-16 Antarctica Peninsula ScehltmiddotCruising 14 days ihcludingmiddot Elephant
Island AntarcticSotind Deceptionlslana GerlacheStrait NaxefChannel Schollaert Channel SigJtla Island and Boyd Strait)
17 At Sea Cape Horn Scenic Cruising1amp UshuaiaArgentina (Tierra del fuego) bull middot6 AM 19 Punta Arenas Chile (Strait of Magellan) 7 AM 20 At Sea Amalia Glacier Scenic Cruising21 At Sea Chilean Fjords Scenic Cruising22 AtSea 23 Puerto Mont Chile 7AM 6PM 24 At Sea 25 Santiago Chile (Valparaiso) DISEMBARK AM
-nmes for1l scenlccruisinc are subJect to change
ASIAINDIAMEDITERRANEAN
30 ROYAL PRINCESSDAYS
ROME
to BANGKOK
2004 DEPARlURE DATE
Sep 16
CRUISE Il INERARY
WEST AFRICASOUTH AMERICA
28 DAYS
PACIFIC PRINCESS
FT LAUDERDALE
to CAPE TOWN
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
51 22
CRUISE ITINERARY
DISEMBARK AM
Aruba
EXOTICS CRU ISES amp CRU ISETOU RS
AUSTRALIANEW ZEALAND CRUISETOUR
AUSTRALIAN EXPLORER 2004 DEPARTURE DATESAPPHIRE21 plus
DAYS PRINCESS SYDNEY Dec 17 to
AUCKLAND CRUISETOUR 5P CRUiSE
CRUISETOUR ITINERARY
DAY PORT By Sea By Land DAY PORT
1 Sydney 14 Fiordland National Park 2 Sydney Scenic Cruising
3 SydneyAyers Rock 15 Dunedin New Zealand (Port Chalmers) 4 Ayers ROek
5 Ayers RockPort Douglas 16 Christchurch New Zealand 6 Port Douglas - (Lytleton)
7 Port DouglasSydneyEmbark 17 Wellilgton New Zealand 8 At Sea 18 At Sea 9 Melbourne Australia 19 Tauranga New Zealand
10 At Sea 20 Bay of Islands New Zealand 11 Tasmania Australia (Hobart) 21 Auckland New Zealand 12middot13 At Sea
Sydney Opera House Australia
AUSTRALIANEW ZEALAND CRUISETOUR SOUTHEAST ASIACHINA CRUISETOUR CAPE HORNSTRAIT OF MAGELLAN CRUISETOUR AUSTRALIAN BEIJING Be TERRA COTTA 2004 DEPARTURE DATES RIO 8t IGUAZU FALLS Post-Crulsetour1 Pre-Crulsetour 217EXPLORER 2005 DEPARTURE DATES PACIFICSAPPHIRE WARRIORS19 plw or PRINCESS jul9t loieifie
DAYS PRINCESS SYDNEY Jan 12 plus 19 ROYAL plw Feb 5 Oct 28 Royal BUENOS AIRES
AUCKLAND DAYS ROYAL PRINCESS to 21 ampto DAYS PRINCESS
BEUING CRUISE t ~~S~i BeWln~~~~e
to SANTIAGO~e~s~Ot~r~ih~fi1BANGKOK CRUiSE CRUISECRUISETOUR 3t3P landtourm~yvlty CRUISETOUR 12
DAY PORT DAY PORT
DAY PORT By Sea ltBy LaDd DAY PORT
1 Beijing 11-12 At Sea 1 Rio de janeiro 11 Cape Horn Scenic Cruising
13 Hong Kong 2 Rio de jneiro c 12 Ushuaia Argentina 14 At Sea 3 RiolgUaiu Falls 12 Beagle Channel Scenlc Cruising
15 Nha Trang Vietnam 4 IIDIilZll FaU$13u~os~re$ 13 Punta Arenas Chile
16 Phu My Vietnam 5 Buens AiresEmbark 14 At Sea 17 At Sea 6 Montevideo Uruguay 15 Seno Eyre Fjord Scenic Cruising 18 Singapore 7 At Sea 16 At Sea 19 Kualtan Malaysia 8 Puerto Madryn Argentina 17 Puerto Montt Chile 20 At Sea 9 At Sea 18 At Sea 21 Bangkok Thail3nd 10 Falkland Islands (Stanley) 19 Santiago Chile
DAY PORT DAY PORT
At Sea Pusan SouthKOrea Nagasaki japan At Sea Shanghai China
Note CnIlst route shown for Royil Princess Oct 28 only Timcsforil1lsccnkoulslngmsubjccttothange
CRUISE [OUR ITINERARY
CRUISETOUR ITINERARY
CRUISrrOlJR ITINERARY Fiordland National Park Scenic Cruising DlUedin New Zealand Christchurch New Zealand Wellington New Zealand
14
GRAND PANAMA CANAL CRUISES
ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL
10 10 11 DAYSDAYS DAYS
CORAL PRINCESS GRAND PRINCESS GRAND PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIPfrom from
fromFT LAUDERDALE GALVESTON GALVESTON
2004 DEPARTURE DATES Oct n 21 31 2004 DEPARTURE DATE
2004 DEPARTURE DATENov 10 20 30middot DeelSmiddot
DedSDec 10 28
2005 DEPARTURE DATES CRUISE ITINERARY Jan 7 17 27
CRUISE ITINERARY Feb 6 16 26 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART MarS 1828 CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Galveston Texas EMBARK PMApr 7 17 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTshy 1 Galveston Texas EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 1 ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 3 Belize City Belize 1 PM 7PM 2-3 At Sea 3 Belize City Belize lPM 7PM 4 Costa Maya Mexico (Mahahual) 8AM 4PM 4 Um6n Costa Rica 7AM rPM 4 Costa Maya Mexico (Mahahual) SAM 4 PM 5 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands 12 PM 7PM 5 Panama Canal (to Gatun Lake) 7AM 430 PM 5 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands 12 PM 7PM 6 Ocho Rios Jamaica SAM 5PM 5 Col6n Panama 5PM 8PM 6 At Sea 7 At Sea 6 At Sea Cristobal Panama 7AM 4PM 8 7AM 4PM 7 Grand Cayman Cayman IslandS 7AM 4PM (fot Panama Canal) ftrtpg~niaa~~) S Corumel Mexico SAM 6PM 8 At Sea 9 At Sea 9 Bclize City Belize 7AM 4 PM 6PM 10 Coromel Mexico lOAM 6 PM9 Cozumel Mexico lOAM 10 At Sea 10 At Sea 11 At Sea
Portordtrllndtlmtsmayvllry 11 flo Lauderdale florida DISEMBARK AM Portorntr IInltf timpoundi may vary 11 Galveston Texas DISEMBARK AM Port ordu and Nmes may vary 12 Galv_es~on Texas DISEMBARK AM
ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL
8 DAYS
CORAL PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP
from
FT LAUDERDALE
2004 DEPARTURE DATE Dec 20
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Fl Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM 2-3 At Sea 4 Lim6n Costa Rica 7AM 7PM 5 Panama Canal (to Gatun Lake) 7 AM 430 PM 5 Co16n Panama 5PM SPM 6 At Sea 7 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands SAM 5PM S At Sea 9 Flo Lauderdale Florida DISEMBARK AM Bridge of the Americas Panama
f OptIonll fOllTS inclld1lI tht AtlllnH to Pacific RlIlllfll) joumq will dlmlldrt tilt ship b) tctdtr lit Gfttlm uk AJkr tour plIssmm dlstmlrark tilt shipwin procmlllat through tilt Gatun Locb lIndjlnlllly dock in Gl6lI Hmal1p41Sl11tmmttydiumlmtheJldlo~ lflrshops IInd~llI toIIrsrrnrl CIItutl14ktlllIrtonlflrJhlp
GRAND PANAMA CANAL CRUISES
GRAND PANAMA CANAL GRAND PANAMA CANAL GRAND PANAMA CANAL
150R 18 150R 1715 DAYS DAYS DAYS
CORAL PRINCESS SUN PRINCESS
REGAL PRINCESS REGAL PRINCESS SUN PRINCESS
DAWN PRINCESS REGAL PRINCESS sail between DAWN PRINCESS
sail between FT LAUDERDALE FT LAUDERDALE sail betweenand
FT LAUDERDALEand SAN DIEGO andLOS ANGELES
SAN FRANCISCO 2004 DEPARTURE DATES 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
DAWN PRINCESS 2004 DEPARTURE DATESNov 24Sp191
CRUISE ITINERARY Dec9t CORAL PRINCESSREGAL PRINCESS 5ltp261 CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE ITINERARY
200S DEPARTURE DATES Dec 24 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
SUN PRINCESS DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARIltPM200S DEPARTURE DATES DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Sep 2StMar 24
3 Ocho Rios Jamaica lOAM 6PM 2-3 At5ea 2 At Sea 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBA8KPM
REGAL PRINCESS AprSt 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBA8KPM Jan stu 200S DEPARTURE DATES2 At Sea4 At Sea 4 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 7AM lPMJan 23 5 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 7AM lPM 3 Ocho Rios Jamaica lOAM 6PM REGAL PRINCESS 5 Cartagena Colombia 9AM 3PMFeb7t 4 At Sea Apr 239AM 3PM 6 Transit Panama Canal 7AM 430 PMFb22 ~ yenr~fte~~~~~~u 7AM 430 PM 5 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 7AM lPM At SeaMar9t CORAL PRINCESS 79AM 3PM8 At Sea Apr 27 8 Puntarenas Costa Rica 7AM 7PMSUN PRINCESS 9 Puntarenas Costa Rica 7 AM 7PM ~ yenr~fte~n~~~~~u 7AM 430 PM 9-10 At SeaApr1S 8 At Sea DAWN PRINCESS10-11 At Sea 11 Acapulco Mexico 8AM 5PM
5PM 9 Puntarenas Costa Rica 7AM 7PM Apr 29H ~ae~lcoMexico 8 AM 12 At SeatllWrryopmllzlfrarnLls~in 10-11 At Sea rmrKfIfikTiIIrttimnma1 tlliJlrraryoptJllllsfrlJflSlmFranrimlJn 13 Cabo San lucas Mexico 8AM 5PM
gt This mUJI C4Jl llfwmblnld wlth a 3 14 Cabo San Lucas Mexico 7 AM lPM H ~e~o Mexico 8AM SPM rmruordrrorttimamG)llIryCoIutar CnUK to VlWOIlllr SC Dqs ThUIltIIIflltllnlltCllIIblntdwilhaZ-day 14-15 At Sea 16lhrlllllhI9lllIbtboobdulaquoSC)lQ4k t Illncral) lIpCutcs in mrmt orm Pllrt IiIIIa CocastaICnliutoVan(ouKrBCDlIys16 16 San Francisco California 7AM 4PMcowtlIrcrllisr IIIIYlIl1Ymiddot IhrounIScankboobdlUaK)lllllluU t~A~geles California 6 AM 5PM 14 Cabo San Lucas Mexico 8AM 5PM
Thllwl1JIIICllllslltMOlIkpilllyJmtcad 17-18 At Sea middotmiddotThliIAfllIllCltlllsatMGnIqclBaylnstcadllf 15 At Sea CPlIilldCI1IIu 17 At Sea o[OdKKwsPurllilllrlmllYWlry OchoRicJsPortllmtslllllYVllfymiddot D1SEMBA8K AM19 Vancouver BC DISEMBA8K AM 16 San Die20 California DlSEMBA8K AM 18 Val1couver BC
GRAND PANAMA CANAL COASTAL CRUISING
2-4 CORAL PRINCESS ISLAND PRINCESS SUN PRINCESS18 DAWN PRINCESS DIAMOND PRINCESS STAR PRINCESSDAYSDAYS
COASTAL CRUISE SCHEDULEREGAL PRINCESS
SHIP DAYS FROM TO DEPARTURE DATE DIAMOND PRINCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 5104
SAN FRANCISCO DIAMOND PRINCES5 4 Vancouver Seattle 5404 to CORAL PRINCESS 2 San Francisco Vancouver 5604
NEW YORK DAWN PRiNCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 5704 ISLAND PRiNCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 51204
2004 DEPARTURE DATE SUN PRINCESS 3 San Francisco Vancouver 51404Aug 24 ISLAND PRiNCESS 3 Vancouver LOI Angeles 91804
DIAMOND PRINCESS 1 Seattle Vancouver 91804CRUISE ITINERARY DIAMOND PRINCESS 6 Vancouver Los Angeles 91904 SAPPHIRE PRINCESS 1 Seattle Vancouver 91904 SAPPHREPRINCESS 2 Vancouver San Francisco 92004 DIAMOND PRINCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 43005 DlAMONDPRiNCES$ 4 Vancouver Seattle 5305 SUN PRINCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 5305
ISLAND PRiNCESS 3 Los Angeles VancOllver 5405 CORAL PRiNCESS 2 San Francisco Vancouver 51205
Coral Princess in the Panama Canal
CRUISE PLUS
Extend your adventure with our Cruise Plusreg program Cruise Plusreg enables you to enhance your vacation with one- to four-night hotel
packages in cities that stand on their own as vacation destinations Add nights in Sydney before you cruise or extend your vacation with nights in the city by the
bay San Francisco Transportation and luggage handling costs from the airport to both hotel and ship plus meet and greet services are always included
Wherever you choose to explore youll enjoy properties that are carefully chosen based on service value location and the peace of mind of knowing that Princess
has arranged it all for you
Anchorage Alaska Trevi Fountain Rome Auckland Harbor New Zealand
The Cruise Plusreg Program is available in over 30 major cities including
MEDITERRANEANAEGEAN EXOTICS PANAMA CANAL Barcelona London Rome and Venice Auckland Bangkok Beijing Buenos Aires Ft Lauderdale Los Angeles New York City
Cape Town Ft Lauderdale Honolulu Los San Diego San Francisco Sanjuan Vancouver NORTHERN EUROPE Angeles Montreal Moorea New York City Copenhagen and London MEXICO CARIBBEANOsaka Papeete Rome San Francisco
Ft Lauderdale Galveston Los AngelesTRANSATLANTIC Santiago Seattle Sydney Vancouver Venice Barcelona Copenhagen Ft Lauderdale San Francisco and San Juan
London New York City and Rome ALASKA Anchorage Calgary Fairbanks Kenai San Francisco Seattle and Vancouver
For more information about options and pricing reference a destination specific brochure or contact your travel agent
TRAVEL THE WORLD WITH THE LEADER IN CRUISINGmiddot Princess
Analysis by the Hawaii Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism Comparing the Economic Impact of Foreign Flag Ships with US Flag Cruise Ships Sailing in Hawaii
This is a summary of an analysis prepared by the Hawai Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism (DBEDT) of the economic impact of the foreign flag cruise ship fleet sailing in Hawaii as compared to each of the US flag ships operating in Honolulu
The comparison is set out below
Foreign Pride Pride Pride
Fleet Of Hawaii Of Aloha Of America
Total economic output impact (spendingsales) ($mil) 155 542 4225 4958
Total earnings impact (labor earnings) ($mil) 44 155 1207 1411
Total employment impact Uobs) 1447 5059 3943 4627
This analysis demonstrates that a single US-flagged ship the Pride of America home ported in Honolulu is 32 times more economically impactful and creates 32 times as many jobs as the entire foreign flag fleet that sails into and out of Hawaii ports of call
Economic Impact of Pride of America
Assumptions 1 Annual impact though Pride of Aloha is leaving in May 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existing Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($) 4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of outputl$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job multiplier (jobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
118700 105
2706 3373
147 042
1372
4958
1417
4627
Data sourcelformula Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Line 1 x line 2 x line 31 000000
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 4 x line 5
Line 4 x line 6
Line 4 x line 7
Economic Impact of Pride of Hawaii
Assumptions
1 Annual impact though Pride of Hawaii is leaving in February 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existing Pride of Aloha and Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($) 4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job multiplier (jobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
Data sourceformula 139770 Actual 2007 figure
975 Actual 2007 figure 2706 Actual 2007 figure 3688 Line 1 x line 2 x line 31000000
147 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model 042 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
1372 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
5421 Line 4 x line 5
1549 Line 4 x line 6
5059 Line 4 x line 7
Economic Impact of Pride of Aloha
Assumptions 1 Annual impact though Pride of Aloha is leaving in May 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existlng Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($)
4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job mUltiplier Oobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
95680 111
2706 2874
147 042
1372
4225
1207
3943
Data sourcelformula Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Line 1 x line 2 x line 31000000
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 4 x line 5
Line 4 x line 6
Line 4 x line 7
lt
Methodology Used in Calculating Impact of International Cruise Ships
Cruise ship visitors 1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Came with ships 3 Flied in 4 Average length of stay (days) 5 PPPD ($) 6 Cruise visitor spending ($mil))
Cruise ship crews 7 Ratio of crew spending to cruise visitor spending 8 Cruise crew spending
Cruisline 9 Ratio of crew spending to cruise visitor spending
10 Cruiseline spending
11 Total cruise-related spending ($mil)
12 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 13 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 14 Job multiplier Uobs$ cruise -related spending)
15 Total output impact ($miJ)
16 Total earnings impact ($miJ)
17 Total employment impact (jobs)
106641 98307
8334 739 847 668
02 134
038 254
1055
147 042
1372
1551
444
1447
Data sourceformula Line 2 + line 3 DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report Line 1 x line 4 x line 5
DBEDT 2003 Cruise study Line 7 x line 6
DBEDT 2003 Cruise study Line 9 x line 6
Line 6 + line 8 + line 10
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 11 x line 12
Line 11 x line 13
Line 11 x line 14
Economic Contributions Foreign-Flag Fleet operating in Hawaii vs Three US-Flag Ships
$1500
Pride of Hawaii$1000- $542 million VIc -0-E c Pride of AlohaCo
423 million$500
Pride of America $496 million155 million$shy
Foreign-Flag US-Flag Fleet Fleet
Source State of Hawaii Department of US-Flag $1460 billion Business Economic Development and Tourism
Foreign-Flag $ 155 million 7292008
Employment Foreign-Flag Fleet operating in Hawaii vs Three US-Flag Ships
15000
10000
til c o Pride of Aloha
39435000
Pride of America 1447 4627
~---------
Foreign-Flag US-Flag Fleet Fleet
Source State of Hawaii Department of US-Flag 13629 jobs Business Economic Development and Tourism
Foreign-Flag 1447 jobs 7292008
Foreign Flag Capacity Growth Foreign flag passenger capacity has changed five-fold on roundtrip Hawaii cruises from the West Coast since enactment of the Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative
1600000
1400000
tn 1200000
J enshyZ
1000000
I shyG) en 800000 s G) tn tn
600000 as D 400000
200000
0 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Year
Source US Maritime Administration (derived from the US Customs and Border Patrol Vessel Entrance and Clearance documents - final 2007 data) 7292008
NCL America Hawaii Economic Contributions
(2004-2008)
bull (in Millions) bull $399 in wages benefits and overtime to US seafarers bull $35 in Federal and State payroll Taxes bull $64 in Government Fees and Taxes to Hawaii bull $28 in wages benefits and overtime to US other employees bull $52 in Port Charges to Hawaii Companies (Stevedores tugs pilots etc) bull $85 in Fuel to Tesoro Hawaii bull $130 for shore excursions to Hawaii tour operators bull $39 for Hawaii hotel rooms and ground transport bull $75 for food grown in Hawaii bull $57 in union fees and levies (incl $32M paid directly by employees) bull $1 in MMD fees to the United States Coast Guard bull $51 for recruitment screening processing and training crew bull $76 advertising and promoting Hawaii as a destination bull $1092
COASTWISE CRUISES INTERPRETIVE RULE RESOLUTION Adopted at the
US Conference of Mayors 76th Annual Meeting
June 20-242008 Miami
WHEREAS the Department of Homeland Securitys Customs and Border Protection (CBP) issued a proposed Interpretive Rule regulating Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises on foreign flagged vessels between US ports of call under the Passenger Vessel Services Act at the request of the United States Maritime Administration and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule would require that a foreign-flagged vessel on a coastwise cruise to call at a foreign port for at least 48 hours with that foreign stop constituting at least 50 percent of the cruise itinerary and allowing passengers to disembark the cruise vessel at the foreign port before continuing the cruise to a US port of call and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule establishes burdensome criteria that are wholly inconsistent with industry practice particularly the 48-hour call at foreign port shyinasmuch as the standard port call is six to eight hours - as well as the requirement that 50 percent of a cruise be spent at the foreign port and
WHEREAS the intent of the proposed Interpretive Rule is to protect the single remaining US flag vessel serving the Inter-Hawaiian Island cruise trade that according to the Hawaii Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism generates more than 4600 jobs and generates nearly $500 million in economic benefits for the state annually and
WHEREAS thousands of members of the International Longshore Workers Union (nWU) are employed at US ports serving cruise ships and whose jobs would be at risk if the proposed Interpretive Rule were implemented and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule is vague as to the breadth of its application ie to coastwise cruises between all United States ports or applied solely to coastwise cruises from West Coast ports to Hawaii and
WHEREAS the Cruise Lines International Association estimates the proposed Interpretive Rule would upend the $17 billion in national cruise industry spending and put at risk more than 300000 jobs generated by the international cruise industry including jobs held by nWU at US ports and the local allied industries supporting the cruise industry and
Executive Order Submissions Under Review
II Reglnfogov Where to ind Federal Regulatory Information -~
Home ] Lnitied Agenda and Regulator) Ilan pound012866 Regulator) Review Jnformalion Collection Review
EO 12866 Regulatory Rlvlw dvanced Search IJitorical RepWI Review Counh Jriter XIL
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA)
Executive Order Submissions Under Review July 25 2008 - _------------____ _shy
Department of Homeland Security
AGENCY DHS-TSA RIN 1652-AA53
TITLE Large Aircraft Security Program Other Aircraft Operator Security Programs and Airport Operator Security Program
STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT Yes RECEIVED DATE 06302008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
AGENCY DHS-USCIS RIN Llti15-AB67 TITLE Changes to Requirements Affecting H-2B Nonimmigrants and Their Employers
STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT No RECEIVED DATE 06092008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
AGENCY DHS-USCBP RIN 1651AA11 TITLE Issuance of a Visa and Authorization for Temporary Admission Into the United States for Certain Nonimmigrant Aliens Afflicted W HIV Infection
STAGE Final Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT No RECEIVED DATE 03042008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
-_RE_V-IE-W-E-X-T-EN-D-E-D---------- _
AGENCY DHS-USCBP RIN 1651-AA76 TITLE Coastwise Transportation of Passengers STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT Yes RECEIVED DATE 07142008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
Disclosure I Accessibility I Privacy Policy I Contact Us
httpwwwreginfogovpublicdoeoReviewSearch 7252008
View Rule Page 11
Shere D find Federal ReguLatory InformciiorlReglnfogov Home J Cnified Agenda al1d Regulatory Plan EO 12866 Regulatory Reyiew Information Collection Reiew
Current rnified Agenda and Regulatory Plan Historical Pnified Agenda and Regulatory Plan Search
View Rule
DHSIUSCBP RIN 1651-AA76 Publication ill Spring 2008
Title llCoastwise Transportation of Passengers
Abstract This interim rule amends the Department of Homeland Securitys (DHS) current regulations relating to the transportation of passengers by non-coastwise-qualified vessels on voyages that begin and end at a US port and stop at intervening US and foreign port(s) Under this interim final rule voyages that begin and end at a US port and stop at a foreign port(s) and at intervening US port(s) where a large USshyflag coastwise-qualified passenger vessel engages in regular service are in violation of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) unless the cumulative length of stay(s) at intervening foreign port(s) is more than 50 percent of the total amount of time spent at the intervening US port(s) and passengers are permitted to go ashore at the foreign port(s) The purpose of this amendment is to ensure that the Congressional purpose in enacting the PVSA which is to preserve the economic benefits of US coastwise trade to US-flag coastwise-qualified vessels is properly implemented
Agency Department of Homeland Security(DHS) Priority Substantive Nonsignificant
KIN Status First time published in the Unified Agenda Agenda Stage of Rulemaking Final Rule Stage
Major No Unfunded Mandates No
CFR Citation -LCER 4J~)(h)(plusmnJ
Legal Authority 5JJSS_30J12lJ-SClt16 J9_lJiCJ 431 9_L1C1plusmn3JJ2JScHJ1J2JSCJ624 L(LlLSc207LIl(gtJfHgt~ _CiQJ _46lSC 6QLQ~
Legal Deadline None
Timetable Action Date FR Cite
Interim Final Action 0510012008
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required No Government Levels Affected None
Federalism No
Included in the Regulatory Plan No
RIN Data Printed in the FR No
Agency Contact Glen E Vereb Chief Entry Procedures and Carriers Branch Department of Homeland Security US Customs and Border Protection Office of Regulations and Rulings 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington DC 20229 Phone202572-8730
Disclosure I Accessibility I Privacy Policy I Contact Us
httpwwwreginfogovpublicdoeAgendaViewRuleruleID=286751 7128120
Federal RegisterVol 72 No 224Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules 65487
SPECULATIVE POSITION LIMITS 1-Continued [In contract units)
Contract
Soybeans and Mini-Soybeans 2
Wheat and Mini-Wheat 2 bullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbull
Soybean Oil
SingleSpot month All monthsmonth
600 8600 13300 600 11100 14500 540 6600 8600
Soybean Meal 720 5500 7100
Minneapolis Grain Exchange
Hard Red Spring Wheat I 600 I 11100 I 14500
New York Board of Trade
Cotton No2 I 300 I 5300 I 7300
Kansas City Board of Trade
Hard Winter Wheat I 600 I 11100 I 14500
1 For purposes of compliance with these limits positions in a futures contract that shares ~ubstantially identical terms with a contract market enumerated herein including a futures contract that is cash-settled based on the settlement price of an enumerated contract market shall be agshygregated with positions in the enumerated contract market
2 For purposes of compliance with these limits positions in the regular-sized and mini-sized contracts shall be aggregated
Issued by the Commission this November 152007 in Washington DC David Stawick Secretary of the Commission [FR Doc E7-22681 Filed 11-20-07 845 amI BILLING CODE 6351-Q1-P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Bureau of Customs and Border Protection
19 CFR Part 4
[USCBP-2007-o098]
Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises
AGENCY Customs and Border Protection Department of Homeland Security ACTION Proposed interpretation solicitation of comments
SUMMARY This document proposes new criteria to be used by Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to determine whether non-coastwise-qualified vessels are in violation ofthe Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) when engaging in cruise itineraries in which passengers board at a US port the vessel calls at several Hawaiian ports and then the vessel proceeds to a foreign port or ports for a brief period before ultimately returning to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their cruise CBP believes these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because it appears that the primary objective of the foreign stop is evasion of the PVSA
DATES Comments must be received on or before December 212007 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT Glen E Vereb Cargo Security Carriers amp Immigration Branch Office of International Trade (202) 572-8730 ADDRESSES You may submit comments identified by docket number by one of the following methods
bull Federal eRulemaking Portal http wwwregulationsgov Follow the instructions for submitting comments
bull Mail Border Security Regulations Branch Office of International Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
I Public Participation
Interested persons are invited to participate in this proposed interpretation by submitting written data views or arguments on all aspects of the proposed interpretation Customs and Border Protection (CBP) also invites comments that relate to the economic environmental or federalism effects that might result from this proposed interpretation Comments that will provide the most assistance to CBP in developing these procedures will reference a specific portion of the proposed interpretation explain the reason for any recommended change and include data information or authority that support such recommended change
Instructions All submissions received must include the agency name and docket number for this proposed
interpretation All comments received will be posted without change to http wwwregulationsgov including any personal information provided
Docket For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received go to http wwwregulationsgov Submitted comments may also be inspected on regular business days between the hours of 9 am and 430 pm at the Office of International Trade Customs and Border Protection 799 9th Street NW 5th Floor Washington DC Arrangements to inspect submitted documents should be made in advance by calling Mr Joseph Clark at (202) 572shy8768
II Background
The maritime cabotage law governing the transportation of passengers was first established by section 8 of the Passenger Vessel Services Act of June 191886 (the PVSA) 24 Stat 81 as amended by section 2 of the Act of February 17 1898 30 Stat 248 formerly codified at 46 USC App 289 (now codified at 46 USC 55103) 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 of $200 (now $300 as promulgated in TD 03-11 pursuant to the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 199028 USC 2461 note) for each passenger so transported and landed
The intent of the maritime cabotage laws including the PVSA was to provide a legal structure that guarantees a coastwise monopoly to
65488 Federal RegisterVol 72 No 224Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules
American shipping and thereby promotes development of the American merchant marine Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 28 (DC Cir 1984) see also The Granada 35 FSupp 892 8931940 AMC 1601 (DC Pa 1940) (stating that the legislative aim of section 289 [now 55102] was the creation of a practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping business for United States ships) In other words the PVSA was enacted to advance the United States merchant marine and fleet by restricting the use of foreign-ownedflagged passenger vessels in United States territorial waters
Passenger vessel transportation between United States ports has historically been viewed to be part of the coastwise trade after the enactment of the PVSA This view is premised on the concepts of continuity of the voyage and whether its intended purpose or objective was coastwise transportation In other words the PVSA was held to be violated if the coastwise movement was continuous or if the purpose of the trip was a coastwise voyage (See 18 OAG 445 September 4 1886 28 OAG 204 February 16 1910 29 OAG 318 February 12 1912 30 OAG 44 February 1 1913 34 OAG 340 December 24 1924 and 36 OAG 352 August 13 1930)
The CBP regulations promulgated pursuant to the PVSA are found at section 480a of title 19 of the Code of Federal Regulations (19 CFR 480a) and are reflective of the above cited Office of the Attorney General decisions These regulations provide among other things that a non-coastwise-qualified vessel which embarks a passenger at a port in the United States embraced within the coastwise laws (a coastwise port) will be deemed to have landed that passenger in violation of the PVSA if the passenger disembarks at a different coastwise port on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a nearby foreign port or ports (as defined in 19 CFR 480a(a)(2) see also 19 CFR 480a(b)(2)) The terms embark and disembark are words of art which are defined as going on board a vessel for the duration of a specific voyage and leaving a vessel at the conclusion of a specific voyage respectively (See 19 CFR 480a(a)(4))
The references in section 480a to nearby foreign ports (defined in 19 CFR 480a(a)(2)) are the results of attempts by CBP to apply an Office of the Attorney Generals opinion dated February 26 1910 (28 OAG 204) In that case a foreign-flag vessel transported 615 passengers on a voyage around the world beginning in New
York and concluding in San Francisco The Attorney General opined that since the primary object of the voyage was to visit various parts of the world on a pleasure tour returning home via California and not to be transported in domestic commerce the transportation was not in violation of the PVSA
The 1910 Attorney Generals opinion was extended to voyages that included foreign ports other than nearby foreign ports (See Treasury Decision (TD) 68shy285 (33 FR 16558) November 14 1968) However voyages solely to one or more coastwise ports have always been considered predominantly coastwise Therefore non-coastwise-qualified vessels engaging in such a voyage where passengers temporarily go ashore at a coastwise port have been deemed to have violated the PVSA
m Current Law and Policy Pursuant to Public Law 109-304 120
Stat 1632 enacted on October 6 2006 Title 46 United States Code was substantially reorganized and recodified Consequently the PVSA is now codified at 46 USC 55103 and provides that no vessel shall transport passengers between ports or places in the United States either directly or by way of a foreign port under a penalty of $300 for each person so transported and landed except one that (1) Is wholly owned by citizens of the United States for purposes of engaging in the coastwise trade and (2) has been issued a certificate of documentation with a coastwise endorsement or is exempt from documentation but would otherwise be eligible for such a certificate and endorsement
In 2003 Congress enacted Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II Section 211 for the purpose of revitalizing the oceangoing US-flag cruise industry in Hawaii (the 2003 Act) Three oceangoing US-flag cruise ships PRIDE OF ALOHA PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAII were documented with coastwise privileges pursuant to the 2003 Act These vessels entered regular service in Hawaii in 2004 2005 and 2006 respectively and pursuant to the express language of the 2003 Act are limited in their operation to providing regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands of Hawaii
The CBP regulations promulgated pursuant to the PVSA are set forth in 19 CFR 480a and have remained unchanged throughout both the recodification of Title 46 of the United States Code and the enactment of the 2003 Act They provide that a violation of the PVSA occurs when passengers embark (board a vessel for the
duration of a voyage) a non-coastwiseshyqualified vessel at one US port and disembark (leave the vessel at the conclusion of a voyage) at a different US port unless they proceed with the vessel to a distant foreign port (Le any port not considered a nearby foreign port which is defined as any port located in North America Central America Bermuda or the West Indies including the Bahamas) Currently these regulations do not contain specific criteria for non-coastwise-qualified vessels on itineraries including US ports and either nearby or distant foreign ports in order for such foreign port calls to be compliant with the PVSA
To reiterate the applicable CBP regulations provide that the PVSA is violated when a non-coastwise-qualified vessel transports a passenger on a voyage solely to one or more coastwise ports and the passenger disembarks or goes ashore temporarily at a coastwise port (19 CFR 480a(b)(1)) Furthermore a violation of the PVSA also occurs when a non-coastwise-qualified vessel transports a passenger on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a nearby foreign port or ports (but no other foreign port) and the passenger disembarks at a coastwise port other than the port of embarkation (19 CFR 480a(b)(2)) However there is no violation of the PVSA when a passenger is on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a distant foreign port or ports (whether or not the voyage includes a nearby foreign port or ports) and the passenger disembarks at a coastwise port provided the passenger has proceeded with the vessel to a distant foreign port (19 CFR 480a(b)(3))
IV Request From MARAD To Provide Guidance
The US Department of Transportation Maritime Administration (MARAD) has requested that CBP take action to ensure enforcement of the PVSA MARAD has asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreignshyflag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwiseshyqualified cruise ship operators
In April of 2007 the operator of the three US-flag cruise vessels operating solely in Hawaii pursuant to the 2003 Act announced their intent to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAIl from the Hawaii market and redeploy her to Europe The operator intends to re-flag the vessel to foreign registry directly resulting in the loss of over 1100 crewmember jobs The primary reason cited for this decision is the rapid increase in foreign-flag competition entering the Hawaii market
Federal Register I Vol 72 No 224 I Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules 65489
from the West Coast This competition is evidenced in published cruise itineraries of foreign-flag carriers offering a variety of round trip cruises that depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period usually in the early morning and ultimately return to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their cruise These cruises are often marketed as Hawaii cruises and except for the brief stop in the nearby foreign port of Ensenada are purely coastwise in nature It is these cruise itineraries that pose an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels that pursuant to the 2003 Act are currently engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands
V Preliminary Notice
In response to MARADs concerns CBP sent letters to two carriers known to operate the itineraries in question as well as to the Cruise Lines International Association Inc stating that CBP believes that these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because it appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA The letters further indicated that CBP is taking steps to publish this position
VI CBPs Proposed Interpretive Rule Accordingly in this document CBP is
proposing to provide that cruise itineraries for non-qualified coastwise vessels which allow passengers to board at a US port call at several Hawaiian ports proceed to a foreign port or ports for a brief period and then ultimately return to the original US port of embarkation for disembarkation are not consistent with the PVSA and the regulations promulgated pursuant thereto Specifically CBP interprets a voyage to be solely to one or more coastwise ports even where it stops at a foreign port unless the stop at the foreign port is a legitimate object of the cruise CBP will presume that a stop at a foreign port is not a legitimate object of the cruise unless
(1) The stop lasts at least 48 hours at the foreign port
(2) The amount of time at the foreign port is more than 50 percent of the total amount of time at the US ports of call and
(3) The passengers are permitted to go ashore temporarily at the foreign port
Accordingly CBP proposes to adopt an interpretive rule under which it will presume that any cruise itinerary that does not include a foreign port call that
satisfies each of these three criteria constitutes coastwise transportation of passengers in violation of 19 CFR 480a(b)(1)
Dated November 16 2007 W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection [FR Doc E7-22788 Filed 11-20-07 845 am] BILLING CODe 9111-14-1
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau
27 CFR Part 9
[Notice No 76]
RIN 1513-AB49
Proposed Establishment of the Leona Valley Viticultural Area (2007R-281 P)
AGENCY Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau Treasury ACTION Notice of proposed rulemaking
SUMMARY The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau proposes to establish the 134 square mile Leona Valley viticultural area in the northeast part of Los Angeles County California We designate viticultural areas to allow vintners to better describe the origin of their wines and to allow consumers to better identify wines they may purchase We invite comments on this proposed addition to our regulations DATES We must receive written comments on or before January 22 2008
ADDRESSES You may send comments on this notice to one of the following addresses
bull httpwwwregulationsgov (Federal e-rulemaking portal follow the instructions for submitting comments) or
bull Director Regulations and Rulings Division Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau PO Box 14412 Washington DC 20044-4412
See the Public Participation section of this notice for specific instructions and requirements for submitting comments and for information on how to request a public hearing
You may view copies of this notice selected supporting materials and any comments we receive about this proposal at httpwwwregulationsgov under Docket No 2007-0066 You also may view copies of this notice all related petitions maps or other supporting materials and any comments we receive about this
proposal by appointment at the TTB Information Resource Center 1310 G Street NW Washington DC 20220 To make an appointment call 202-927shy2400
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT NA Sutton Regulations and Rulings Division Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau 925 Lakeville S1 No 158 Petaluma CA 94952 phone 415shy271-1254 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
Background on Viticultural Areas
TTB Authority Section 105(e) of the Federal Alcohol
Administration Act (FAA Act) 27 USC 205(e) authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to prescribe regulations for the labeling of wine distilled spirits and malt beverages The FAA Act provides that these regulations should among other things prohibit consumer deception and the use of misleading statements on labels and ensure that labels provide the consumer with adequate information as to the identity and quality of the product The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) administers the regulations promulgated under the FAA Act
Part 4 ofthe TTB regulations (27 CFR part 4) allows the establishment of definitive viticultural areas and the use of their names as appellations of origin on wine labels and in wine advertisements Part 9 of the TTB regulations (27 CFR part 9) contains the list of approved viticultural areas
Definition Section 425(e)(1)(i) ofthe TTB
regulations (27 CFR 425(e)(1)(i)) defines a viticultural area for American wine as a delimited grape-growing region distinguishable by geographical features the boundaries of which have been recognized and defined in part 9 of the regulations These designations allow vintners and consumers to attribute a given quality reputation or other characteristic of a wine made from grapes grown in an area to its geographic origin The establishment of viticultural areas allows vintners to describe more accurately the origin of their wines to consumers and helps consumers to identify wines they may purchase Establishment of a viticultural area is neither an approval nor an endorsement by TTB of the wine produced in that area
Requirements Section 425(e)(2) of the TTB
regulations outlines the procedure for proposing an American viticultural area and provides that any interested party
Us Department ofHomelaDd Secmity Washington DC 10229
bull ~
US Customs and Border Protection
AUG 15 2fXJJ
VE5-3-02-QTRRBSTCCCI - ti015502-GG-
Mr leon Sutcliffe Director Port Operations Camivai Cruise Unes Camival Place 3655 NW 87Avenue Miami Aorlda 33178
RE P~nger Vessef Services Ad Coastwise Transportation 46 USC sect 55103 19 CFR sect 480a(b)
Dear Mr Sutcliffe
As you know US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) enforces the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) codified at TItle 46 United States Code section 55103 (46 USC 55103) This statute prohibits non-coastwise-qualifled vessels (ie those vessels not US-buill owned and documented with a coastwise endorsement) from transporting passengers between porls or places within the United States The regUlations promUlgated pursuant to the PVSA are found at TrtJe 19 Code of Federal Regulations section 4808 (19 CFR 4808)
It has come to our attention that passenger vessels of your company are engaging in cruise itineraries that include ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands Two USAlagged coastwise-endorsed passenger vessefs are also currenUy engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of caD wittlin the Hawaiian Islands
As part of your cruise itineraries some of your foreign-flagged vessels depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period and ultimately rebJm to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their endse For example the MS ZAANDAM of Holand America Lines departs San Diego cruises the Hawaiian Islands stops in Ensenada from 800pm to 11 OOpmbull and returns to san Diego CBP believes these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because It appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA -- - - ~~~------
Please be advised that CBP is taking steps to publish this position Should have any questions pertaining to this matter please contact Mr Glen Vereb Chief Cargo Security Carriers and Immigration Branch at (202) 572-8724
Sincerely
F Jl E EST Y LEe A U I 5 I N Gmiddot
December 21 2007
The Honorable W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection co Border Security Regulations Branch Office ofInternational Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229
Re Hawaii Coastwise Cruises (USCBP-2007-0098) Comments in Response to Proposed Interpretation
Dear Commissioner Basham
NCL America Inc1 (NCLA) submits these comments in support ofthe efforts ofCustoms and Border Protection to enforce the Passenger Vessel Services Act and the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative as applied to Hawaii coastwise cruises
1 Introduction and Summary of Position
NCLA operates three large oceangoing US flag cruise ships in Hawaii These ships are documented under US flag and are required to operate in regular service in Hawaii pursuant to the authority of the Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative a 2003 federal statute intended to revitalize the US flag cruise industry and to maximize economic and national security benefits to the United States (the 2003 Act)
NCLA has invested $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships pursuant to the 2003 Act and in direct reliance on the protections of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) and its proper enforcement The PVSA limits the transportation ofpassengers between US ports to coastwise documented US flag ships Its statutory protections recognize that US flag ships have significantly higher operational costs in part because they are subject to more stringent US laws including US labor laws and federal
1 NCL America Inc is a US corporation incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware headquartered in Honolulu Hawaii As a US corporation it is subject to US taxes at both the federal and state level The Chief Executive Officer the Chairman of the Board and all of the Board of Directors of NCL America are US citizens The company is also subject to US labor and employment laws and is required by statute to maintain a workforce comprised primarily ofUS citizens
700 Bishop St SUite 900 I Honolulu HawMi 96813 I Tel 8085273800 Fax 8085273820 I ndcom
2
income tax among others The NCLA ships operating in Hawaii are the only large oceangoing cruise ships operating under US flag In furtherance of the policy goals of the PVSA and the 2003 Act these ships have created over 4000 seafaring jobs all subject to US minimum wage and other labor statutes
Since 2003 there has been a significant increase in capacity in the Hawaii market from foreign flag ships providing cruise service to Hawaii from the West Coast Many of these foreign flag cruises are marketed as Hawaii cruises and consist entirely ofUS ports ofcall with the sole exception of a token stop in Mexico for as little as an hour late at night under circumstances where passengers are not permitted to get offthe ship There are no reported rulings approving these particular foreign flag itineraries
Lower cost foreign competition in the Hawaii market has unfairly hurt NCLAs operations NCLA has incurred substantial losses which have contributed significantly to its decision earlier this year to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAll from US flag and reshydeploy it foreign Unfair foreign competition poses an imminent threat to the remaining US flag passenger vessels operating in the Hawaii trades pursuant to the 2003 Act
As the agency statutorily charged with implementation of the 2003 Act the US Department ofTransportation Maritime Administration (MARAn) is aware of the threat foreign flag Hawaii itineraries pose to the US flag fleet and brought the situation to the attention ofthe US Department ofHomeland Security Bureau ofCustoms and Border Protection (CBP or Customs) Customs determined that the primary object of these itineraries was coastwise and that the Ensenada stop was an evasion of the PVSA
In August 2007 Customs provided written notice to the affected foreign lines and their trade association that the existing itineraries were contrary to the PVSA None of these lines sought advance rulings even after the Customs notice with respect to their Hawaii itineraries pursuant to Customs regulations and many continued to market the itineraries as Hawaii cruises NCLA supports the efforts ofCustoms and MARAD to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act for Hawaii cruises
2 Statutory Authority for Customs Proposed Interpretation
(a) Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA)
Congress passed the PVSA in 1886 to protect the US maritime transportation industry from foreign competition2 Protection is afforded through penalty assessments on foreign vessels transporting passengers between US ports or places directly or by way ofa foreign port 3 As Congress and the courts have recognized coastwise protections for the US maritime transportation industry are only one dimension of the PVSA Operating in conjunction with other coastwise laws and with the US
2 See United States v Honduran SS GRANADA 35 F Supp 892 894 (BD Pa 1940)(citing purpose of PVSA to meet threats to the practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping which was to be preserved for US ships)
46 USc sect 55103 (originally 46 USC App 289)
3
documentation laws the PVSA also enhances military sealift in times ofnational emergency sustains a US merchant marine and supports the US shipbuilding and repair industry4
(b) Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative (the 2003 Act)
Over the past decade Congress has sought to reinforce the goals of the PVSA by providing mechanisms to revitalize the oceangoing US flag cruise fleet particularly in Hawaii The Project America legislation enacted in 1997 authorized among other things the re~flagging ofone existing cruise ship contingent on the operator contracting for the construction oftwo new oceangoing cruise shipss Following the default of the operator under the original contract Congress enacted the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative for the purpose ofrecovering economic and national security benefits to the United States bull 6 These same goals of the original PVSA were expressly referenced in the legislative history of the 2003 Act which emphasized that these ships will be assets available in time ofnational emergency and will significantly expand the pool ofqualified seafarers upon which the US Department ofDefense relies to crew non-combatant vessels
The 2003 Act authorizes the US documentation ofthree cruise ships for operation in regular service in Hawaii subject to certain conditions including a prohibition on operating in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico and the Caribbean Sea and a requirement that all vessel repair work be undertaken in the United States MARAD is charged with implementation of the 2003 Act
3 Customs Implementation of PVSA
(a) Regulations
The current regulations implementing the PVSA were published by Customs in 19858 The growth of the foreign flag cruise industry in North America and in particular the development of the Alaska cruise market led to an effort in 1984 to amend the thenshyexisting regulations to increase the ease of administration and operational flexibility The effort to change the regulation had support from US port interests who saw benefit in the potential increase in the number ofUS ports that foreign vessels could call and was opposed by proponents ofpotential US flag projects as detrimental to efforts to revitalize the US fleet 9 The preamble to the 1985 rule emphasized that it was of paramount importance to consider the primary object ofpassengers in taking a
4 See American Hawaii Cruises v Skinner 713 F Supp 452 457 (DDC 1989) (recognizing the contribution of the PVSA and the Jones Act in helping to secure national defense by maintaining a merchant marine oftbe best equipped and most suitable types ofvessels sufficient to serve in time of war or national emergency) see also Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 30 (DC Cir 1984) Wirth Ltd v SIS Acadia Forest 537 F2d 1272 1281 n32 (5th Cir 1976) S Public Law 105-56 Section 8109 (111 Stat 1203 1244) (Oct 81997 ) 6 Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II General Provisions - Department ofCommerce Section 211 (117 Stat 1179) (Feb 20 2003) 1 149 Cong Rec S1118 (dailyed Jan 17 2003(statement ofSenator Inouye) 8 19 CFR sect 480a 950 Fed Reg 26981 (July I 1985)
4
voyage10 a concept which is reinforced elsewhere in Customs regulations11 In its analysis of the comments received at the time Customs accepted the view ofport interests that the modified rule would help their business but did so recognizing the absence ofa regular salt water US flag passenger fleet Customs acknowledged the potential harm to prospective efforts to revitalize the US flag passenger fleet and expressly cautioned that if it were ever shown that coastwise qualified vessels in competition with foreign vessels were in fact hurt by the modified Customs regulation then Customs would immediately reconsider its position12
(b) Customs Rulings
Given the significant penalties associated with violating the PVSA13 Customs regulations expressly provide a mechanism for the owner or charterer of a foreign vessel or any other interested person to request an advisory ruling as to whether a contemplated voyage would be considered in violation of the PVSA14 Customs regulations provide that vessel operators can rely on these ruling letters only to the extent that the facts and circumstances are identical to those in the ruling letter IS
Notwithstanding the fact that several foreign cruise lines offer Hawaii itineraries originating in a US mainland port and calling at Hawaii ports with a token intervening stop in Mexico there are no reported rulings expressly approving such an itinerary for these foreign cruise lines 16
4 The Cruise Industry in Hawaii
(a) NCL America Returns US flag to the Oceangoing Passenger Fleet
Pursuant to the requirements ofthe 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative NCLA agreed to promote US-flag cruising enhance military sealift capacity and expand the US maritime labor base No other major cruise line had ever undertaken such a commitment to the US flag and the public policy objectives Congress sought to achieve under the PVSA or the 2003 Act Introduction ofPRIDE OF ALOHA in 2004 was a significant development in the maritime industry because it marked the restoration ofthe
10 Id at 26983 11 Customs Regulations include a provision on the effect ofruling letters and with respect to carrier rulings the applicable regulation refers to rulings setting forth a determination as to whether or not the primary object of a contemplated voyage is coastwise transportation in violation of46 USC sect 289 [pYSA codified at 46 USC sect55103] 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 12 50 Fed Reg at 26983 13 A modem cruise ship with 2400 passengers for example would be subject to a fine of$720OOO per cruise based on the statutory penalty of$300 for each passenger transported in violation of the Act 14 19 CFR sect 480a(d) IS 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 16 There is one older reported mling involving a request to drop the Ensenada port call from a Los AngeleslHawaiiLos Angeles itinerary which Customs held would violate the PYSA In dicta Customs acknowledged that the itinerary could be in compliance if the Ensenada call were not dropped but did not address the issue ofwhether a one hour service call where no passengers depart the vessel would be sufficient The carrier that obtained that ruling has since left the Hawaii market See Customs Ruling HQ 114078 re Crystal Hannony (Nov 4 1997)
5
us flag to the oceangoing cruise industry A contemporaneous press release from the Us Department ofTransportation reported that the three US-flag cruise ships to be introduced pursuant to the 2003 Act were expected to create more than 20000 US jobs generate more than $825 million ofexpenditures in the US economy and create nearly $360 million in federal tax revenue by the end of 200717 In 2005 the PRIDE OF AMERICA was introduced and in 2006 the third vessel PRIDE OF HAWAll was introduced to Hawaii Both the PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAIl offer 7shyday inter-island Hawaii itineraries whereas PRIDE OF ALOHA operates on 7 and 10 day cruises exclusively among the islands ofHawaii as well as 11 day cruises that include a foreign port call at Fanning Island To date NCLA has invested over $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships in furtherance ofthe policy objectives of the PVSA and the 2003 Act These ships employ over 4000 seafarers and generate hundreds ofmillions of dollars in benefits for Hawaii and the nation
(b) Significant Increase in Foreign Flag Capacity Since 2003
The most significant change in the Hawaii cruise market since 2003 has been the dramatic increase in capacity A significant portion ofthis capacity increase is directly attributable to NCLAs fulfillment ofthe Congressional mandate in the 2003 Act However foreign-flag operations in the Hawaii market as measured in passenger nights18 have skyrocketed Based on MARAn data derived from the US Customs Border Patrol Vessel Entrance and Clearance documents the passenger nights for foreign flag vessels departing from the West Coast to Hawaii on round trip cruise have increased several hundredfold during this period19 See Exhibit A
(c) NCLA Has Incurred Substantial Losses During this Period
Since 2004 NCLA has lost cumulatively more than a quarter ofa billion dollars A principal reason for these losses has been the increase in foreign capacity in this market NCLA has taken significant steps to reduce costs to address the increase in foreign competition but NCLA is at an inherent disadvantage when competing against foreign companies that are not subject to US labor laws US tax laws and other laws Ofcourse the statutory protections of the PVSA are intended to address these very issues That is why Customs immediate action to implement the proposed interpretation is critical for the US flag fleet Regrettably NCLA has already been forced to reduce overall capacity early next year with the withdrawal ofPRIDE OF HAWAlI to another
17 DOT Press Release dated June 72004 see also DOT Press Release dated August 132004 in connection with visit to PRIDE OF ALOHA by US Transportation Secretary Norman Y Mineta 11 Passenger nights (also referred to as passenger capacity days) are calculated by multiplying the number ofpassengers per vessel by the number ofcruise days in each itinerary by the number of cruises This is the unit ofmeasurement employed by MARAn In contrast passenger bed supply (also referred to as passenger capacity) data reflects only the number ofberths per vessel multiplied by the number of cruises and hence understates the market by excluding the full economic value ofthe cruise perfonned 19 In 2003 the total number ofpassenger nights for round-trip West Coast to Hawaii cruises was 303325 which jumped by 353 to 1072329 in 2006 and by 430 to 1304546 from 2003 to 2007 (The 2007 figure is based on MARAD data for six months and a1ll1ualized by published itineraries for the balance of the year)
6
market for operation under foreign flag This move alone will result in the loss ofover 1000 American seafaring jobs
5 Customs Proposed Interpretation is Necessary to Further the Important National Security and Public Policy Objectives Embodied in Federal Law
As Customs has properly noted the increase in foreign competition in the Hawaii trades in contravention of the PVSA pose[s] an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels[] As the operator of these ships NCLA has a vested interest in protecting the jobs ofthe thousands ofAmerican crewmembers and cruise ship service providers who support these vessels NCLA also has an interest in protecting the substantial economic investment it has made to revitalize the US flag passenger vessel fleet But a balancing of interests in the context of Customs enforcement ofexisting law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act requires a much broader focus
The legislative history of the 2003 Act expressly recognized the national security and public policy import ofestablishing a US flag passenger vessel fleet as a means to maintain the countrys preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool of qualified seafarers and as a means to help sustain a fleet ofUS-flag vessels to su~ort
the nations military and maritime industrial base for times ofnational emergency
Congress understood the importance ofestablishing a viable US flag cruise ship fleet as something larger than the vessels themselves These national security and public policy objectives must be weighed in the balance as Customs assesses how best to interpret its rules to give effect to the PVSA and the 2003 Act
6 Customs Should Clarify that the Proposed Interpretation is Limited to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades and Adopt Reasonable Measures to Ensure Sufficient Foreign Content
Since publication ofthe proposed interpretative rule several commenters have observed that the scope of the proposed interpretation is ambiguous because the language of Section VI referencing any cruise itinerary appears broader than the caption Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises and the entire discussion in the published notice which focuses exclusively on US-flag coastwise vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA agrees that the proposed interpretation should be clarified so that its scope is limited to vessels operating roundtrip voyages from US ports that include Hawaii port calls
NCLA supports the concept reflected in the proposed interpretive rule that round trip Hawaii itineraries from US ports on foreign ships must include a material and measurable degree ofoverall foreign port content as compared to US port content
20 149 Congo Rec S1117 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)
7
(a) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is also Consistent with Subsequent Congressional Enactments Modifying the PVSA
As discussed above it is well established that the PVSA was designed toRrotect US-flag vessels from foreign competition in the coastwise and domestic trades 1
Subsequent legislative enactments however have appropriately differentiated among distinct geographic markets and trades including Canada Alaska Puerto Rico and Hawaii based on the existence or non-existence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
In 1938 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers by Canadian passenger vessels on Lake Ontario and the St Lawrence River until such time as passenger service shall be established by vessels of the United States22 Similarly in 1961 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers on Canadian vessels within Alaska or between Alaska and other points in the United States until such time as passenger service is established by vessels ofthe United States23
In 1984 Congress modified the application ofthe PVSA to pennit the transportation ofpassengers between Puerto Rico and other United States ports on foreign-flag vessels24 As with the other statutory exceptions this provision is qualified and expires [o]n a showing that a United States passenger vessel qualified to engage in the coastwise trade is offering or advertising passenger service between a port in Puerto Rico and another port in the United States2S
Congress acted again with respect to the application of the PVSA with the 2003 Act in which it authorized three vessels that did not meet the US-build requirements of the PVSA to operate as modem US-flagged cruise ships in regular service in Hawaii26 The 2003 Act imposes a specific geographic limitation on the operation of any ship documented under this authority to operations only in regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands ofHawaii and shall not transport passengers in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico or the Caribbean Sea except in certain limited circumstances27 As above the limited nature of the 2003 Act is express it is strictly limited to the large ocean-going cruise ships and then only those operating in the regular Hawaii service where there are no US-flag operations28
21 See Act ofJune 19 1886 c 421 sec 8 24 Stat 81 Act of February 171898 c 26 sec 2 30 Stat 248 22 S] Res 174 75th Cong 52 Stat 223 (Alp 251938) codified at46 USC sect 55121(a) 23 See Pub L 87-77 75 Stat 196 (Jun 30 1961) codified at 46 USC sect 55121(b) 24 See Pub L 98-563 98 Stat 2916 (Oct 301984) codified at 46 USC sect 55104(b) 25 46 USC sect 55104(c)(l) see also 46 USC 46 USc sect 55104(cX2)(expiration of exemption upon availability ofa non-coastwise qualified US-flag vessel offering service in the relevant market) 26 149 Congo Rec SI118 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)(statementofSen Inouye) 27 Pub L 108-7 117 Stat 79 (Feb 20 2003) 28 149 Congo Rec S11l9 (dailyed Jan 17 2003Xstatement of Sen Inouye)
8
In each ofthese instances Congress fashioned a narrow exception to the PVSA that differentiated among distinct geographic markets based on the existence or nonshyexistence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
As the federal agency responsible for administering the 2003 Act MARAD requested that Customs act to protect US flag passenger vessel interests in the Hawaii trades29 Limiting the scope ofthe proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades also reflects Customs appreciation of the PVSA in the context of the subsequent Congressional action30 Viewing the Congressional modifications to the PVSA as a whole Congress has specifically and repeatedly differentiated among distinct geographic markets when it has found it necessary and appropriate to do so to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests It is well established that the proper interpretation of a statutory scheme includes consideration ofsubsequent statutes even though the underlying statute itselfhas not been expressly amended31 Accordingly Customs should likewise limit the scope ofthe proposed PVSA interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades because that is the only geographic market as mandated by the 2003 Act in which oceangoing US-flag cruise ships are operating
(b) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Consistent with Public Policy Objectives of the 1985 Rulemaking
In 1985middot Customs liberalized the regulations implementing the PVSA by eliminating certain regulatory prohibitions on foreign flag vessels In the context of the 1985 rulemaking Customs justified a relaxation ofthe regulations on the grounds that it would simplify the administration of the PVSA and would benefit the economy ofcertain American coastwise ports without eroding the statutory protection given to American vessels engaged in solely domestic trade32
Customs thus sought to reconcile US port economic interests with US-flag passenger vessel interests Both of these twin policy objectives are furthered by
29 See 72 Fed Reg 65488 (Nov 21 2007)( MARAn bas asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the ~eratiODS ofcoastwise-qualified cruise ship operators)
See generally FDA v Brown amp Williamson Tobacco Corp 529 US 120 132-133 (2000)(assessing propriety ofagency construction ofFood DIUg and Cosmetics Act and descnbing responsibility of reviewing cowt to assess statutory provisions in the context of subsequent legislative enactments) 31 See Brown amp Williamson 529 US 143 (holding that proper construction ofstatutory provision must necessarily assume that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications ofa later statute This is particularly so where the scope of the earlier statute is broad but the subsequent statutes more specifically address the topic athand) see also United States v Estate ofRomani 523 US 517 530-531 (1998)( holding that a later-enacted statute should control the construction of the federal lien priority statute a specific policy embodied in a later federal statute should control om construction of the [earlier] statute even though it ha[s] not been expressly amended) United States v Fausto 484 US 439453 (1988)(The courts frequently find Congress to have done this - whenever in fact they interpret a statutory text in the light ofsurrounding texts that happen to have been subsequently enacted This classic judicial task of reconciling many laws enacted over time and getting them to make sense in combination necessarily assumes that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications of a later statute) 32 50 Fed Reg 26982 (JuI 11985)
9
limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades
As noted earlier the 2003 Act limits the operation of the NCLA US-flag oceangoing passenger vessels to regular service in Hawaii Because there are no oceangoing US-flag vessels operating in any market other than the Hawaii trades Customs should limit the scope of the proposed interPretation to that market Such a limitation protects US flag passenger vessel interests without prejudicing US port interests In contrast an application of the proposed interpretation to any itinerary would needlessly harm US port interests unrelated to Hawaii without any countervailing benefit to US-flag passenger vessel interests Accordingly limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation is consistent with the public policy objectives of the 1985 rulemaking as well as the 2003 Act
(c) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Also Consistent with Customs Commitment to Revisit the Scope of its Rules to Protect US-Flag Interests
The relaxation ofthe PVSA regulations in 1985 was premised in large part on Customs finding that there was no regular salt water US-flag passenger fleet in operation at that time33 Acknowledging that the relaxed regulations could harm USshyflag interests Customs committed in the preamble ofthe 1985 final rule to immediately reconsider its interpretation if it is ever shown that there is a viable US flag vessel operating in competition with foreign-flag vessels34
Congress enacted the 2003 Act to stimulate the development of a US flag cruise ship industry As noted above the legislative history ofthat Act makes clear that Congress sought to revitalize the US-flag cruise industry as a means to maintain Americas preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool ofqualified seafarers help sustain a fleet of US flag vessels to support our military and a maritime industrial base create thousands of seagoing and shoreside American jobs and stimulate the development ofa US flag cruise ship tourism business with the commensurate benefits to the US tax base the US economy and US employment
Customs is now acting at MARADs request to revisit its interpretation ofthe regulations implementing the PVSA because recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwise-qualified cruise ship operations35 That is to say that the concerns articulated by Customs in the context of the 1985 rulemaking have materialized and US-flag passenger vessel interests are in fact being hanned in the Hawaii trades by foreign competitors
33 50 Fed Reg 26983 34Id
3S 72 Fed Reg 56488 (Nov 21 2007)
I
10
Because the US-flag passenger vessels are limited by statute to regular service in Hawaii limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the
Hawaii trades is consistent with Customs historical commitment to revisit its interpretation ofthe implementing regulations to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests
7 Conclusion
For the reasons stated above NCLA commends the efforts ofCustoms and MARAn to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act as applied to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA respectfully requests Customs to move ahead promptly with p~blicati~nof a final interpretive rule to advance the important national security arid public policy objectives ofthese laws
We greatly appreciate the opportunity to submit these comments
Sincerely
~~~ Alan T Yamamoto Vice President Hawaii Operations
Exhibit A
Ship Name Serenade Of The Seas Departure Port San Diego California Ports of Call San Diego California Kailua Kona Hawaii Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii Hlo Hawaii Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii Ensenada Mexico San Qigo California
2007 Date(s) Oct 05
Sailing Itinerary
Day Port H ~rrive Depart Activity
05-0ct San Diego California 500 PM
06-0ct Cruising
07-0ct Cruising
08-0ct Cruising
09-0ct Cruising
10-0ct Kailua Kona Hawaii 700 AM 900 PM Tendered
11-00t Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 1000 AM Tendered
12middot0ct Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 900 PM Tendered
13-0ct Hilo Hawaii 700 AM 600 PM Docked
14middot0ct Honoulu (Oahu) Hawaii 700 AM Docked
15-0ct Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii 200 AM Docked
6-0ct CrUising
17-0ct Cruising
18-0ct Cruising
19middot0ct Cruising
-7 20-00t
O-Oot
Ensenada ~i1exico
San Deqo California
i 00 ~r1
700 ~M
200 oM D1Jcked ~
CANADA amp NEW ENGLAND CRUISES
CANADANEW ENGLAND CANADACOLONIAL AMERICA CANADANEW ENGLAND
10 REGAL 13 REGAL 7 GRAND DAYS PRINCESS DAYS PRINCESSDAYS PRINCESS
sail between ROUNDTRIP NEW YORK
MONTREAL fromto
CITY NEW YORKFT LAUDERDALE and CITY
MONTREAL 2004 DEPARTURE DATE
CRUISE IlINERARY CRUISE ITINERARY 2004 CRUISE IIINERARY Oct 31 DEPARTURE DATES
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 2004 Sep 12 1 1 New York City New York EMBARK PM Montreal Quebec EMBARK PMDEPARTURE DATES Sep 19 New York City New York EMBARK PM
2 Newport Rhode Island 830 AM 4PM 2 Quebec City Quebec 6AM 4PM Sep 261Sep 11 Oct 3
Sep21t 1 3 Bostoni Massachusetts 830AM SPM i3 At Sea Oct 10 2 At Sea
Olttl 4 Bar Harbor Maine 8AM 6PM 4 Halifax Nova Scotia 12 N 6PM Oct I]Octllt
Oct 24Oct 21 S Saint John New Brunswick 7AM 3PM l~ Bar Harbor Maine 8AM 6PM Halifax Nova Scotia 8AM 5 PM
6 Halifax Nova Scotia 8AM 5PM 6 Boston Massachusetts 8AM 5PM
17 At Sea 7 Newport Rhode Island 9AM 6PM 4 Saint John New Brunswick 9AM 5PM
8 Saguenay River Scenic Cruising 9 AM 2PM 8 New York City New York 8AM 5PM Bar Harbor Maine 7AM 6PMi9 ~8 Quebec City Quebec 11 PM Norfolk Virginia 12 N 10 PM
(overnight onboard ship) 10 Baltimore Maryland 8AM 5PM Boston Massachusetts 7AM 5PM 9 Quebec City Quebec 5PM 11 At Sea
Montreal Quebec 8AM10 12 Charleston South Carolina 7AM 5PM 7 Newport Rhode Island 8AM 5PM
tltneTaryoperaresinrtvtrstorder (overnight onboard ship) 13 At Sea t Itnaary opaates in revu5t order 8 New York City DISEMBARK AMPort times may vary Port times may vary11 Montreal Quebec DISEMBARK AM 14 Ft Lauderdale Florida DISEMBARK AM New York
MEXICAN RIVIERA CRUISES
MEXICAN RIVIERA MEXICAN RIVIERA MEXICAN RIVIERA
DIAMOND DAYS
107 DIAMOND PRINCESS 10 SAPPHIRE PRINCESSDAYS DAYS PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIPROUNDTRIP from fromfrom
LOS ANGELES LOS ANGELESSAN FRANCISCO
2004 DEPARTURE OATIS Sep 25 2004 DEPARTURE DATE
Oct 2 9 1623 30 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
Dec 29Sep 22Nov 6 13 20 27 Dec 4 11 22 Oct 2 12 221
Nov 1 11 2005 DEPARTURE OATIS
jan 815 22 29 Feb 5 12 19 26 MarS 12 19 26 tPortordtrllllllllmtsmaYNrApr 291623
CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 San Francisco EMBARK PM 1 Los Angeles (Long Beach) EMBARK PM
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
CRUISE ITINERARY DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
2 Catalina Island 1230 PM 630PM 2 At Sea Sat Los Angeles (Long Beach) EMBARK PM 3 Cabo San Lucas 9AM 6PM3-4 At Sea
5 Poerto Vallart 7AM 6PM 4 A~Sea
6 Mazatlan SAM 6PM 5 Acapulco SAM 11 PM 7 Cabo San Lucas SAM 6PM 6 Ixtapa (ZihaulIlnejo) 7AM 2PM
S At Sea 7 Puerto Vallarta SAM 7PM 9 San Dtego SAM 6PM 8 M~I~middot lAM -1Ft 10 At Sea 9-10 At Sea 11 San Francisco DISEMBARK AM 11 Los Angeles (Long Beach)
Sun AUea Mon AtSea Tue Poerto Vallarta Wed Mazatlan Thu Cabo San Luca( Fri At Sea Satmiddot Los Angeles (Long Beach)
CARIBBEAN CRUISES
EASTERN CARIBBEAN
7
EASTERN CARIBBEAN
7 7 DAYSDAYS DAYS
CARIBBEAN PRINCESS STAR PRINCESS GRAND PRINCESSSUN PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIP from from from
FT LAUDERDALE FT LAUDERDALE GALVESTON 2004 DEPARTIJRE DATES
CARIBBEAN PRINCESS Apr 24 2004 DEPARTURE DATES 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
CRUISE ITINERARYM~yl 1522 CRUISE I1INERARY JuI31724 DAY PORT Nov 14 28 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Dec 4 11 JunS 1226 Oct 31 Nov 13 20 27
Alii 1 1428 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Dec 12 26
Ott 2 9 162330 200S DEPARTURE DATES Sat Galveston EMBARK PMSep41825 Sat ft Lauderdale Sun ft Lauderdale EMBARK PM
Nov 6 132027 200S DEPARTURE DATESDet4 11 26middot Jan 8 15 22 29Sun At Sea Man At Sea 2005 DEPARTURE DATES ]an 9 23 Feb 5 12 19 26 Sun At Sea
CARIBBEAN PRINCESS Feb 6 20 MarS 121926 J~n 8152229 Mar 6 20 12M Apr 29 Man Belize City lPM 7PM Feb 512t 1926 MarS 121926 Apr 317 Apr2t 9 1623 Tue St Thomas 7 AM 6 PM Wed St Thomas BAM 6PM Tue Costa Maya (Mahahual) BAM 4PM
6PM Wed Grand CaYman l2N 7PM
Thu At Sea Fri At Sea Thu Cozumel lOAM 6 PM
4PM Fri At Sea
Sat Ft Lauderdale DISEMBARK AM Sun Ft Lauderdale DISEMBARK AM Sat Galveston DISEMBARK AM
CRUISE IlINERARY
ARRIVE DEPART
EMBARK PM
WESTERN CARIBBEAN
Sf Thomas US Virgin Islands Princess Cays
CARIBBEAN CRUISES
WESTERN CARIBBEAN WESTERN CARIBBEAN SOUTHERN CARIBBEAN EXPLORER
7 6 7 DAYS DAYS DAYS
CARIBBEAN PRINCESS STAR PRINCESS GRAND PRINCESS GOLDEN PRINCESS
DAWN PRINCESS
SAN JUAN ROUNDTRIPROUNDTRIP to fromfrom
GALVESTON SAN JUANFT LAUDERDALE
2004 DEPARTURE DATE2004 DEPARTURE DATES 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
CARIBB~~SflNCESS CRUISE ITINERARY Nov 7 CRUISE ITINERARY
My923 CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTJun 6 20 JUD 19
Jul lOt 31
May829t DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART )uI418 Sun San Juan EMBARK PM
Aug ll t Aug 11529
Sep 11
DAY PORT
Sep 12 26 Mon St Thomas 7AM 6PM STAR PRINCESS Princess Cays 9AM 4PM At Sea Oct 10 24
Nov 721 DecS19 Tue S Kitts 7AM 3PM
2005 DEPARTURE DATES Wed Grenada 9AM 3PM Dec 23 Coumel 7AM 5PM
Grand Cayman 7AM 4PM Jan 21630
2005 DEPARTURE DATES Feb 13 27 Thu Caracas (La Guaira) 9AM 7PM Mar 13 27STAR PRINCESS
Jan 21630 Apr 10 24 Feb 13 27 Ocho Rios 9AM 4PM Fri Aruba BAM 5PM Mar 13 27 Apr 10 24 At Sea
tMonlqQampIyrqlocrsCllhoRfm PltJrtQr-ondlimesmaywlrY Sun San Juan DISEMBARK AMFt Lauderdale DISEMBARK AM
EASTERN CARIBBEAN WESTERN CARIBBEAN CLASSIC SOUTHERN CARIBBEAN
8 7 7DAYS DAYS DAYS
CARIBBEAN GRAND PRINCESS GOLDEN PRINCESS PRINCESS
GALVESTONROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIP tofrom from
SAN JUANFT LAUDERDALE SAN JUAN
2004 DEPARTURE DATE 2004 DEPARTURE DATE 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
DeetS Apr 16CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE IflNERARY May 21630 CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE Jun 13 27DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Jul1125 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
1 Aug 8 221 Galveston EMBARK PM Sun Sanjuan EMBARK PMSep 5 19 Oct 3 17 312-3 At Sea At Sea Nov 14 28 Man At Sea Dec 12 26
st Thomas Cozumel BAM 6PM Tue Barbados 7AM 6PM 2005 DEPARTURE DATES
jan 9 23 Wed St Lucia 7 AMAntigua BAM 6PM Costa Maya (Mahahual) BAM 4PM 5PM Feb 620 Mar 6 20 Thu BAM 6PM Apr 317
At Sea Montego Bay 9AM 4PM Fri St Maarten BAM 6PM
7AM 6PM
Ft Lauderdale DISEMBARK AM Sanjuan DISEMBARK AM Sun San juan DISEMBARK AM
Oct 24 Nov 7 21 DecS19
DAWN PRINCESS
~
I
CARIBBEAN CRUISES
EASTERN CARIBBEAN ISLANDER SOUTHERN CARIBBEAN MEDLEY EASTERN CARIBBEAN
10 10 7 DAYS DAYSDAYS
GRAND PRINCESSDAWN PRINCESSSUN PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP NEW YORK CITYROUNDTRIP from from to
FT LAUDERDALE FT LAUDERDALE SAN JUAN
2004 DEPARnJRf DATE2004 DEPARTURE DATES2004 DEPARTURE DATES
Octn Oct Btl Oct 14CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE ITINERARYCRUISE ITINERARY 200s DEPARTURE DATENov 222 Nov 3t 23
Apr23tDAY PORT DEPART Dec 13 30Dee 12 ARRIVE DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Ft Lauderdale EMBARK PM 1 Ft Lauderdale EMBARK PM EMBARK PM2005 DEPARTURE DATES 2005 DEPARTURE DATES New York City 2 Princess Cays 9AM 4PM 2 At SeaJan 828 Jan 19t
Feb 17tt 3 AlSea Feb 8 28 3 At Sea 2-4 At Sea Mar919 Mar 20
4 St Thomas 7AM 6PM Apr 9 4 Cura~ao 8AM 5PM 5 St Maarten 7AM 6PM 5 Isla Margarita lOAM 4PM St Thomas 7AM 6PM
6 St Kitts 7AM 3PM 6 Barbados 9AM 6PM Dominica SAM 6PM7 8AM 5PM 7 Dominica 7 AM SPM
8 Antigua 9AM 6PM S St Thomas SAM 6PM St Maarten 7AM 6PM
9 9 At Sea
fllrtordtrlllldllmam4YYa1 10 At Sea 10 Princess Cays 9AM 4PM JlilltraryllptfatufnrfYUSfllrllcr t 11I1ll1Il1yopmltnlnrmTtronlcr t ItlntraryaptrattsIn rtVfntOrdtr San Juan DISEMBARK AM Port~rdtrQnd lilrW mil) illI) 11 Ft Lauderdale DISEMBARK AM PortlimtSlIIltlyYllry 11 Ft Lauderdale DISEMBARK AM Port ordtr lind time5 may VIlry
WESTERN CARIBBEAN ADVENTURER EASTERN CARIBBEAN VOYAGER
10 10 DAYS DAYS
SUN PRINCESS DAWN PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIPROUNDTRIP fromfrom
FT LAUDERDALEFT LAUDERDALE
2004 DEPARTURE DATES 2004 DEPARTURE DATES DAWN PRINCESS CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE IIINERARY
Oct 23 Oct 4 24 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Nov 12 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
Nov 13 Dec 2 29 Dec3tt 1 Ft Lauderdale EMBARK PM 1 Ft Lauderdale EMBARK PM
2 Princess Cays 9AM 4PM 2005 DEPARTURE DATES 2 At Sea2005 DEPARTURE DATES
DAWN PRINCESS Jan 183 At Sea 3 At Sea
Feb 7 27Jan 9 296 St Thomas 7AM 6PM Mar19 t 4 St Vincent lPM 6PM
Feb 180 Apr 8St Maarten 7 AM 5PM 5 Grenada 8AM 6PMMar 10f 301 Apr 19 At Sea 6 St Lucia 8AM 6PM
Ocho Rios 12N 6PM 7 Martinique 7AM 3PM
Grand cayman PM S St Thomas SAM 6PM
t IillUGI)lIptfQttsIn rnmtordtr Cozumel 8AM 6PM AlSea tt ~~~oI~~dtr 10 Princess Cays 9AM 4PMMOItQIl8clyrqausOclJollloJ
lwtordtrollllllllyenllllilJllIl) tltllltrlryOptrlll$In rnmtllrdtr AMOIltqollaynplactsOdlDRIos PM IortDrllralldllmallloyWl) Ft Lauderdale DISEMBARK AM
Willemstad Cura~ao
EUROPE CRUISES
GRAND MEDITERRANEAN GREEK ISLES MEDITERRANEANGREEK ISLES
12 1212 DAYS DAYSDAYS
STAR PRINCESS
STARSTAR PRINCESSPRINCESS
sail betweensail between VENICE BARCELONA VENICE to
andand BARCELONA VENICE ROME
CRUISE ITINERARY2004 DEPARTURE 2004 DEPARTURE2004 DEPARTURE CRUISE ITINERARYDATESCRUISE I I INERARY DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DATEDATES
Apr 10 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTMay 16middot DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Venice Italy (overnight onboard ship) EMBARK PM May 4 May18t Sep2St 1 Verdce Italy EMBARK PM
Jun 9 1 Barcelona Spain (overnight onboard ship) EMBARK PM 2 Venice Italy 2PM 2 At Seajune 21 t 2 Barcelona Spain 1 PM Dubrovnik Croatia 8AM 6PMJul3 3 Corfu Greece 8AM 6PM
lullS 3 Monte Carlo Monaco 7 AM 6 PM Corfu Greece 8AM 6PM 4 Katakolon Greece (for Oiympia) 7AM SPMJu127 4 FlorencePisa Italy (Livorno) 630 AM 6 PMAug 8~ Katakolon Greece (for Olympia) 7AM SPM S Athens Greece (Piraeus) 6AM 12 MAug 20deg S NaplesCapri Italy 8 AM 7 PM Sep 1t 6 Athens Greece (Piraeus) 6AM 12 M 6 Mykonos Greece 8AM 12M
6 At Sea 7 Mykonos Greece 8AM 6PM 7 Kusadasi Turkey (for Ephesus) 7 AM SPM7 Athens Greece (Piraeus) 6AM S4S PM
8 Kusadasi Turkey (for Ephesus) 7AM 1PM 8 Kusadasi Turkey (for Ephesus) 8AM 6PM 8 Santorini Greece 7 AM 4PM
9 Jstanbul Turkey 8AM 6PM 9 Rhodes Greece 8AM 6PM 9 At Sea
10 At Sea 10 Santorini Greece 7AM 6PM 10 Rome Italy (Civitavecchia) 8AM 7PM tll1ooil)opcraksinttVUSe
grduPorttlmcsmi)Y6ljI 11 At Sea 11 Cannes France (for Mont Carlo) 8AM 6PM11 At Sea tSamnlQ]latCiIUIe5inplm tltlnerlll)opmlpoundsin
NaplesCapri Italy 630 AM 12 Barcelona Spain (ovrnight onboard ship) 8AMofMo~Urlo ~odcr12 Venice Italy (overnight onboard ship) 8 AM 12 6PM O~lIlalhitRhodalnpUcc Port order md Iimes- JmyVUY Barcelona Spain DISEMBARK AM13 Venice Italy DISEMBARK AM - 13 Iome Italy (qvitavecchia) DISEMBARK AM
MEDITERRANEANAEGEAN MEDITERRANEANMOSAIC
12 12 DAYSDAYS
STAR STAR PRINCESS PRINCESS
ROME BARCELONAto
toVENICE ROME
2004 DEPARTURE DATE 2004 DEPARTURE
CRUISE I I INERARY DATE CRUISE ITINERARYApr 22 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Sep 13 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Rome Italy (Civitavhia) EMBARK pM 1 Barcelona Spaln (overnight onboard ship) EMBARK PM 2 NaplesCapri Italy 7 AM 7 PM Barcelona Spain SPM 3 Messina Italy (for Taormina) 8AM 6PM 3 At Sea 4 Valleta Malta 8AM 6 PM 4 Casablanca Morocco (for Marrakech) 7 AM 8PM
At Sea S Gibraltar 8 AM 6PM Santorini Greece 7 AM 6PM 6 At Sea
7 Kusadasi Turkey (for Ephesus) 8 AM 6PM 7 Cannesfrance (for Mont Carlo) 8 AM 6PM 8 Athens Greece (Piraeus) 6 AM S4SPM 8 At Sea 9 Katakolon Greece (for Olympia) 8 AM 6PM 9 Valleta Malta 8 AM SPM 10 Corfu Greece 8 AM 6PM 10 Messina Italy (for Taormina) 6PM 11 Dubrovnik Croatia 8 AM 6PM 11 NaplesCpri Itiily 6PM 12 Venice Italy (overnight onboard ship) 1230 PM 12 FlorencePisa Italy (Livorno) 830 AM 13 Venice Italy DISEMBARK AM 13 lomeltaly (Clvttavecchia)DISEMBAIKAM Venice Italy
EUROPE CRUISES
EUROPEAN EXPLORER CRUISE MEOffiRRANEANITRANSATLANTIC CRUISE
12 17DAYS DAYS
ROYAL STARPRINCESS PRINCESS
sail between VENICE
ROME to
and FT LAUDERDALE
LONDON
2003 DEPARTURE DATES
2004 DEPARTURE DATE CRUISE ITINERARY
May 7 CRUISE I1INfRARY Oct 7 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Jul30l
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Venice Italy (overnight onboard ship) EMBARK PMAug 11 Sep 41 1 Rome Italy (Civitavecchia) EMBARK PM 2 Vernce Italy 2 PM
2 FlorencePisa Italy (Livorno) 7 AM 7PM 3 At Sea 3 Cannes France (for Monte Carlo) 7 AM 5 PM 4 Barcelona Spain 9 AM 6 PM 5 At Sea 6 Gibraltar 8AM PM 7 Casablanca Morocco (for Marralech) 5AM 6 PM 8 Seville Spain (Cadiz) 8AM 6PM 9 LisbQn Portugal 9AM 5PM 10 Vigo Spain 830AM 4PM 11 At Sea
tllinmryope~te$ 12 ParisNormandy France (Ie Havre) 7 AMlnftYCl5eordu ~rttimesuuyYilY 13 London England (Southampton) DISEMBARK AM
Caudis Park Cuell Barcelona Spain
SCANDINAVIARUSSIA BALTIC HERITAGE WESTERN EUROPEBRITISH ISLES
ROYALGRAND10 GRAND 1210 PRINCESSDAYS PRINCESS PRINCESS DAYSDAYS
ROUNDTRIPROUNDTRIPROUNDTRIP fromframfrom
LONDONCOPENHAGENCOPENHAGEN 2004 DEPARTURE2004 DEPARTURE 2004 DEPARTUREDATESDATES DATES
May19tMay 29 May 19 jul28 JunSJun 18 Aug 231
Jul8 ju118Jul28 Aug 7 CRUISE ITINERARYAug 17
CRUISE IIINERARY ARRIVE DEPART CRUISE IrINERARY EMBARK PMDAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
DAY ARRIVE DEPART 7AM 6PM1 Copenhagen Denmark EMBARK PM EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 7AM 6PM
Stockholm Sweden (Nynilshamn) 7 AM 530PM 6AM PM Helsinki Finland 830 AM 6PM St PetersbUrg Russia (overnight onboard ship) 630 AM 9AM 9PM St Petersburg Russia 6PM
7 Tallinn Estonia 7 AM 1PM 8 Gdansk Poland (Gdynia) 9 AM 4PM 9 Warnemfinde Germany (for amprlin) 8 AM 10 PM 10 Helsing0r Denmark 9 AM 11 AM 10 Copenhagen Denmark (overnight onboard ship) 1 PM 11 Copenhagen Denmark DISEMBARK AM
middotScrvlcctillforlh=CllCIIIlicmIOptoluItllUllwWdlseJnbIDltHdlinprAfbrtour~dllmJlwktbeshJpwl1lPfllClaquodtoCopetWampen and pmenpoundm Qfl tours from HelMp will Rboird ship tPolttimes~myAninliI1ddepartu~itRosythDubJinmdFa1mauthwl)dICtotXLolconditions
tPOrtordermdtlme$maynI) ttCdlitEdinbuJlhotmdedto~mllocunionforMiliblyTltOO~on8123wi1inlmiddotUIIisitSouthQuemsfmyinstudofJosylh
BRITISH ISLES
ROYAL12 PRINCESSDAYS
ROUNDTRIP
from
LONDON
2004 DEPARTURE DATES
Jun 12 jul6
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Lqn4onmiddotpoundngland(Southampton) EMIWlIlt PM 2 Cornwall England (Falmouth) 7AM SPM
Waterford Ireland 8AM 6PM Dublin Ireland 7AM 1130 PM
t PQrtbme5 lliIyyuy Anini Illd departure at Rosytb Dublin md Filmouth ViiYdue to Iiltlal conditions
WESTERN EUROPE
ROYAL12 PRINCESSDAYS
ROUNDTRIP
from
LONDON
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
May 31
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 London England (Southampton) EMBARK PM
CRUISE ITINERARY
EUROPE CRUISES
ICELANDNORWEGIAN FJORDS
ROYAL12 PRINCESSDAYS
ROUNDTRIP
from
LONDON
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
Jun24
CRUISE IflNERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 London Englan4 (Southampton) EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 3 Berge Norway 6PM 4 Hellesylt Norway 830AM 1030 AM 4 Gciranger Norway Geiranger Fjord Sceni Cruising UN 7PM
9AM SPM5
1PM 8AM SPM
10 At Sea
middotStlviceallfof~fjonlovedmdshOR=unlDllOplion1Itourswllldi5anbarilitHelIcsyItAftcrtollrpuKllJClJdisembark
theshlpwiUprocudto~md~lampClSonlounfrwnHdaytwl1lblmd$hip
NORWEGIAN FJORDSNORTH CAPE
ROYAL12 PRINCESSDAYS
ROUNDTRIP
from
LONDON
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
JuilS
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Loridon ~gland (South~mpton) EMBARK PM 2-3 At Sea
Hellesylt Norway 830AM 1030 AM Golranger Norway Geiranger Fjord Scenic Cruising 12N 7PM
TrodheilllNorwaY 9AM SPM At Sea Cross the Ardgt Cirde
6PM 8AM lPM
8AM 130 PM 430PM 630PM
7AM 3PM
Bagpipers Edinburgh Scotland Royal Princess in Geiranger Fjord Norway
EUROPE CRUISES amp CRUISETOURS
17 DAYS
GRAND PRINCESS
FT LAUDERDALE to
COPENHAGEN
2004 DEPARTURE DATE MayZ
CRUISE IfINERARY
DAY 1 2-6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
PORT Ft Lauderdale Florida At Sea ~ores IslandsPortugal (Ponto Delgado) At Sea Lisbon Portugal Vigo Spain At Sea ParislNormandy France (Le Havre) RotterdamThe Netherlands At Sea Hamburg Germay (for Berlin) At Sea Olso Norway Oslo Fjord scnic Cruising Copenhagen Denmark
ARRIVE
N
12N 9AM
7AM
6AM
DISEMBARK AM
DEPART EMBARK PM
6PM
7PM 6PM
7PM 7PM
1UM
MEDITERRANEAN CRUISETOUR
TRANSATLANTICWESTERN EUROPE ICELAND amp GREENLANDTRANSATLANTIC
16 GRAND DAYS PRINCESS
COPENHAGEN to
NEW YORK
2004 DEPARTURE DATE Aug 27
CRUISE IIINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Copenhagen Denmark EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 3 Dover England (forLondon) 7AM 7PM 4 Cornwall England (Falmouth) 9AM 6PM 5 Dublin Ireland lOAM 9PM 6 GlasgowEdinburgh Scotland (Greenock) 8AM 12 M 7 Belfast Northern Ireland 1030 AM 530 PM 8 At Sea 9 Reykjavik Iceland 9AM 9PM 10 At Sea 11 Prins Christian Sund Scenic Cruising 12N 6PM 12 Qaqortoq Greenland 7 AM 2PM 13 At Sea 14 SI Johns Newfoundland Canada 12N 7PM 1516 At Sea 17 New York CIty New York DISEMBARK AM
SCANDINAVIARUSSIA CRUISETOUR
Church of the Savior on the Spilled Blood St Petersburg Russia
WESTERN EUROPE CRUISETOUR
CRUISEIOUR ITINERARY
CRUISETOUR lA11C CRUISETOUR ITINERARY CRUISETOUR 4A14C CRUISETOUR II INERARY
DAY PORT By Sea By Land DAY PORT By Sea By Land CRUISETOUR 7Al7C18 STAR PRINCESS 1 Rome 17 GRAND PRINCESS 1 BudapestDAYS DAYS DAY PORT By Sea By Land 22 Rome Budapest 18 ROYAL PRINCESS 1 Paris
ROMETODI 3 RomeTodi BUDAPEST VIENNA 3 BudapestVienna DAYS 2 Paris and 4 TodiFlorence and 4 Vienna 3 Paris
PARIS EUROSTAR5 Florence 5 ViennaPrague 4 ParisLondon 6 FlorenceVeniceEmbark 6 Prague and 5 London
FLORENCE PRAGUE
plus plus LONDON7 Venice Italy (overnight onboard ship) 7 PragueCopenhagenEmbark 6 LondonSouthamptonEmbark
GRAND MEDITERRANEAN SCANDINAVIARUSSIA plus 7 At Sea CRUISE 8-9 At Sea CRUISE 8 At Sea WESTERN EUROPE 8 Bilbao Spain10 Istanbul Turkey 9 Stockholm Sweden (Nyniishamn) BRITISH ISLES CRUiSE2004 DEPARTURE DATES 2004 DEPARTURE DATES 9 Bordeaux France (Le Verdon)
11 Kusadasi Turkey (for Ephesus) 10 Helsinki FinlandApr Sf 2004 DEPARTURE DATES 10 At SeaMay 131 Jul2Apr 29 12 Athens Greece (Piraeus) 11 SI Petersburg Russia (overnight onboard ship) 11 GlasgowEdinburgh Scotland (Greenock)May 23 JulUt May 141 26middot Jul tt 13~ 250
May 23 Jun 16 13 At Sea JunZt JulU 12 SI Petersburg Russia Jun n 19 Aug 18o 300 12 Dublin Ireland
]un 12 Aug l t 13 Cork IrelandJuliO 14 NaplesCapri Italy 13 Tallinn EstoniaJun 22 t Aug 11 Toun~eonlymilabkwithcruise5indi[itbtAug 3 15 FlorencelPisa Italy (Livorno) 14 Cdansk Poland 14 Cornwall England (Falmouth)
Aug 27 tBritishliksetuise aWEwupeiBritishlslesouist 15 ParisNormandy France (Le Havre)16 Monte Carlo Monaco 15 At Sea bull WestemEuropeCrube middotlcdandINorwqlmFjOllisetuise 16 Rotterdam The Netherlands
t Crulsetour lA only combinable with 12--dayGreck fst 17 Barcelona Spain (overnight onboard ship) 16 Olso NOrway Qsld Fjord Scenic Cruising bull Norwqian FjordsNorth Cipecruise 17 BrusselsBruges Belgium (Zeebrugge)tCruixtour 4A only combinable with lo-day Baltic
crulse shown on PI 11 18 Barcelona Spain Heritage cruise shawn on pg 12 OCrubctnur 7C only combinable with EwuJlWl ExplorerCrube17 Copenhagen Denmark 18 London England (Southampton)
EXOTICS CRUISES
AUSTRALIANEW ZEALAND AUSTRALIANEW ZEALAND AUSTRALIAASIA
12 14 19 DAYS DAYS DAYS
SAPPHIRE PRINCESS SAPPHIRE PRINCESS SAPPHIRE PRINCESS
saH between SYDNEYAUCKLAND SYDNEY
toand to BANGKOKSYDNEY AUCKLAND 2005 DEPARTURE DATES 2005 DEPARTURE DATE
Mar7Jan 6 2004 DEPARTURE DATEJan 1St
Dec 23 CRUISE ITINERARYJr ift Feb 23 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
CRUISE ITINERARY 1 Sydlley Austrli EMBARK PM CRUISE ITINERARY 2 At Sea
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTDAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 3 Brisbane Australia 8AM 6PM 1 Sydlley Australia EMBARK PM 4 At Sea 1 Aucklalld N~w Zealalld EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 5 Cid Harbor Austrlia (for Great Barrier Reef) 7AM 5PM2 At Sea 3 Melbourne Australia 8 AM 6 PM 6 Cirns Australia (Yorkeys) 8AM 6PM
3 WeIUllgton New Zealand 8 AM 6 PM 4 At Sea 7-8 At Sea 4 Christchurch New Zealalld (Lytlelton) 8 AM 6 PM 5 Tasmallia Australia (Hobart) 8 AM 6 PM 9 Darwin Australia lPM 8pM 5 Dunedill N~ Zealalld (Port Chalmers) 8 AM 6 PM 6-7 At Sea 10-11 At Sea 6 Fiordland Natiollal Park Scenic Cruising AM 6 PM 8 Fiordlalld Natiollal Park Scellic Cruising 7 AM 5 PM 12 Bali Illdonesi (Padang Bay) 7AM 6PM
7-8 At Sea J DUlledill New Zealalld (Port Chalmers) 8 AM 6 PM 13-14 At Se 10 Christchurch N~ Zealalld (Lytlelton) 8 AM 6 PM 15 Kuala Lumpur Mlaysia (Port KeIang) 8AM 6PM9 Tasmania Australia (Hobart) 8 AM 6 PM 11 Wellillgtoll New Zealmd 8 AM 6 PM 16 Sillgpore 8AM 6PM
10 At Sea 12 At Sea 17 At Sea 11 Melbourne Australia 8 AM 6 PM 13 Taurallga New Zealalld 8 AM 730 PM 18 Ho Chi Millh City Vietnm (Vung Tau) 7AM 730 PM 12 At S~a 19 At Sea 14 Bay of Islallds New Zealalld 8 AM 7 PM 13 SydPey Australia DISEMBARK AM 20 Bmgkok Thailalld (Laem Chabang) DISEMBARK AM15 Aucklalld New Zealalld DISEMBARK AM
t llinemy opcrnesln reverse order Port times mil1 my
CHINAFAR EAST SOUTHEAST ASIAFAR EAST
1612 DAYSDAYS
PACIFIC PRINCESS
SAPPHIRE PRINCESS PACIFIC PRINCESS
OSAKA BEIJING to
to BANGKOK OSAKA
2004 DEPARTURE DATE 2004 DEPARTURE DATEPAClFlC PRINCESS
julllt Jun 11 2005 DEPARTURE DATE
SAPPHIRE PRINCESS Apr 11
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Osaka Japall EMBARK PM
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Beijillg China (Xingang) EMBARK PM 2 Hiroshima Japall 1 PM 6PM 2 DaHan China AM 5PM 3 At Sea 3 At Sea 4 Shmghai Chilla 7 AM 6PM 4 Shallghai Chilla (overnight onboard ship) 7AM 5 At Sea 5 Shallghai China 6PM 6 Okinaw Jpll 7 AM 1 PM
7 Taipei Taiwm (KeeIung) 9 AM 7PM6 At Sea 8 At Se7 Pusan South Korea 8AM 5PM 9 HOllg KOllg Chill 8 AM 7PM 8 At Sea 10-11 At S~a J Vladivostok Russia 5AM 730 PM 12 Ho Chi MiIJh City Vietnm (Phu My) 7 AM 5PM 10 At Sea 13 At Se 11 Nagasaki Japan 7AM 6PM 14 Singpore 8 AM 6pM
15 KUlltll Mlysi 830 AM 430 PM12 At Sea 16 At Sea 13 Osaka Japan DISEMBARK AM 17 Ballgkok Thaillld DISEMBARK AM t Sailing alls i1t Hiroshima on Dl) 11 In place of Nilgilsaki Port times milY vary
CRUISE I flNERARY CRUISE I flNERARY
Ho Chi Minh City Vietnam
EXOTICS CRUISES
SOUTHEAST ASIACHINA SOUTHEAST ASIACHINA FAR EASTALASKA
PACIflC PRINCISS ROYAL PRINCESS
16 16 19 DAYS DAYS DAYS
SAPPHIRE SAPPHIRE PRINCESS
Sail between PRINCESSBANGKOK
and BANGKOK OSAKA
BEIJING to to
2004 DEPARTURE DATES BEIJING SEATTLEPAClFlC PRINCESS
Jun 27tt 200S DEPARTURE DATE200S DEPARTURE DATE ROYAL PRINCESS
Mar 26 Apr 23Oct 16 Nov lt
CRUISE I I INERARY CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
1 GsakaJpan EMBARK PM1 Bangkok Thailand (Laem Chabang) EMBARKPM 1 Bangkok Thailand (Laern Chabang) EMBARK IM 2 At Sea2 At Sea 2 AtSea bull 3 Nagasaki Japan 7 AM 6PM
9AM 7PM 3 Singapore 7PM 4 Pusan Soqth Korea 8AM 5PM 4-5 At Sea 5 At Sea gt bull
7AM 7PM 6 Da Nwg Vietn~1Il 7AM middot7PM 6 Vladivostok Russia SAM 730 PM 7 At Sea 7 AtSea
7AM 12M 8 Hong lltog ihin~ 7AM 12M 8 Sapporo japan (Muroran) 6AM 6PM 9-10 At Sea 9-10 At Sea 9-12 At Sea cross Intemational Dateline
13 DutchHarbor Alaska (Aleutian Islands) 230 PM 7PM11 ShaJlgllai Cbina (overnight onboard ship) lAM 11 Shangh~t Cllina (ovmightonJoltird $hip) 7 AM 14 At Sea shy12 Shanghai China 6PM 12 Shanghai China
7AM - - tlJf
6PM 15 Anchorage Alaska (Seward) 8AM 6PM13 At Sea 13 AtSea i 16 College Fjord Seni CruIsing 630AM 930 AM
14 Nagasaki japan 7AM 6PM 14 Nagasaki japan 6PM 17 Glacier Ilay Scenic Cruising 1030 AM 830 PM 15 Pusan South lltOrea TAM 4PM 1~ bull Pu~an SQuth iorea middot4lM 18 middotmiddot juneau Alaska 6 AM 2PM 16 At Sea 16 At Sea 19 - At Sea 17 Beijing China (Xingangy OISEMBAlUe AM 17 Beijing Cliina (Xingang) 20 SeattleWashington DISEMBARK AM
t ltinemy Operne5 in rcvmc Older ttPorttimcsmiYnl)middotShlpwilldocklnampngkoknsttadofL1cm~
POLYNESIA amp THE COOK ISLANDS POLYNESIA amp THE MARQUESAS ISLANDS
10 10 DAYS DAYS
TAHITIAN PRINCESSTAHITIAN PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIPROUNDTRIP fromfrom
PAPEETEPAPEETE 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
2004 DEPARTURE DATES Oct 4 24 Mayl 17 27 Sep4 14 24 Nov 13 Jun 6 16 26 0lt 14 00323Ju16 16 26 Nov 323 2005 DEPARTURE DATESAug 5 15 25 Dec 13 Jan 12
Feb 1 21200S DEPARTURE DATES
~~ 122 ~~Il 13 23 CRUISE ITINERARY
CRUISE II INERARY DAY PORT
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Papeete Tahiti 1 Papeete Tahiti (overnight onboard ship) EMBARK PM
2 Moorea Polynesia 2 Papeete Tahiti SPM 3 Huahil1e P9lynesia 8AM 5 PM 3 Tuamotu Atolls Senic Cruising
5 PM8-AM 4 At Sea I At Sea 5 Rarotonga Cook Islands 8AM 5 PI~ 5 Nuku Hiva Marquesas Islands 6 At Sea 6 Hiva Ga Marquesas Islands 8AM 5PM 7 Raiatea Polynesia overnight onboard Ship 6AM
7 At Sea middotai~ RaiateaPQlynesia igt gt 6AM 8 Rangiroa P~iynesia 8AM 4PM8 Tahaa scenic Cryising 630 AM 830 AM
8 BoraBoraPQlyrtesia(ovemightollboard ship) UN 9 Tahaa ~enl Cruising 8 AM middot11AM
9 Bora lora Polynesia 5iM 9 Raiatea Polynesia 12 N 11 PM 10 Moore Polynesfa 8 AM 5 PM la ~ Bora ~oraPoIYnesia 8AM bull 5PM
11 Papeete Tahiti DISEMBARK AM 11 Papeete Tahiti DISEMBARK AM Iong Kong Harbor
3 Singapore 4-5 At Sea 6 Da NangVieinam 7 At Sea 8 liong Kong China
EXOTICS CRU ISES
HAWAIITAHITI HAWAIIAN ISLANDS SOUTH PACIFIC ISLANDS
12 1515 DAYS DAYSDAYS
PACIFIC
TAHITIAN PRINCESS ISLAND PRINCESSPAClFIC PRINCESS
PRINCESS
SYDNEYROUNDTRIP sail between tofrom
PAPEETE PAPEETELOS ANGELES and
2004 DEPARnIRE DATEHONOLULU 2004 DEPARTURE DATES Apr 21
2004 DEPARTURE DATES ~~~l CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE 11 INERARY
Oet21t CRUISE ITINERARY Nov Sf
MayS PACIFIC PRINCESS DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
Nov20t DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DecSt 1 Los Angeles CalifornIa EMBARK AM 1 Sydney AustralIa EMBARK PMAug 17t
Dec20t1 Papeete Tahiti EMBARK PM 2-4 At Sea
2005 DEPARTURE DATE Jan 4 2-5 At Sea
(overnight onboard ship) Jan 19 5 Auckland New Zealand 7 AM 2PMFeb 3t 6 Iiilo Hawaii 8 AM 6 PM
TAHITIAN PRINCESS Papeete Tahiti 11 PM fb 18 6-7 At Sea Kilauea Voko ~enic CruisingApr 12 MarS t 3 Moorea Polynesia 8 AM 5 PM 8 Suva fijI 11 AM 430 PM1~i~t 7 Kona Hawaii 8AM 6PM4 Bora Bora PolYnesia 8 AM 5 PM 9 At Sea Cross International Dateline Apr 19
5-6 At Sea 8 Honolulu Hawaii 8AM 11 PM 10 Apia Western Samoa 830 AM 2PM 7 Christmas Isl~ndKiribati 1Z N 5 PM 9 Kauai Hawaii (Nawlliwlli) 8AM 6PM 11-12 At Sea 8-9 At Sea 10 Maui Hawaii (Lahaina) 6PM 13 Bora Bora Polynesia lOAM 6PM 10 HlloliaWlii 6 PM 13 Raiatea Polynesia (overnight onboard 11 PM11-14 At Sea 11 Maui Hawaii (Lahaina) 8 AM 6 PM 14 Raiatea Polynesia 11 PM
15 Ensenada Mexico (service call)KaUaiH~waii(Nawllfwtli) 8AM 6 PM 15 Moorea Polynesia 8AM 5PM
tllinemyopcr~ttsln=x QnIerPurtlimcslmYvary Honolulu Hawaii DISEMBARK AM 16 Los Angeles CalIfornia DISEMBARK AM 16 Papeete Tahiti DISEMBARK AM
ISLANDS OF THE PACIFIC THEATER SOUTH PACIFIC EXPLORER
24 24 DAYS DAYS
PAClFIC PRINCESS PAClFIC PRINCESS
sail between HONOLULU PAPEETE
and to OSAKA FT LAUDERDALE
2004 DEPARTURE DATES
Mayl 2004 DEPARTURE DATEJul2Sj
Aug 29 CRUISE ITINERARY
CRUISE ITINERARYDAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART EMBARK PM DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
1 Papeete Tahiti EMBARK PM lPM 7PM 2 8AM 11 PM
3 ~~~~~~ ~~~~Sta 8AM 5 PM 4-6 At Sea 7 Pitcairn Island Scenic Cruising 8AM 1211
8AM 12 N
7AM ZPM 8-9 At Sea 10 Easter Island Chile 8AM 2PM
9AM 11-14 At Sea 15 Callao Peru (overnight for Lima and Machu Picchu) 8AM 16 Callao Peru lPM 17 At Sea 18 Manta Ecuador (for Quito) 9fM 7PM 19 At Sea 20 Transit Panama Canal 7 AM 430 PM 21 San BIas Panama 8AM 5 PM 22 ft Sea 23 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands 7AM 4PM 24 At Sea
25 Ft Lauderdale Florida DISEMBARK AMMoorea Polynesia tllinemyoperataln~12onlerPortl1mesmiYmymiddot
EXOTICS CRUISES
HAWAIITAHITISOUTH PACIFIC AMAZONSOUTHERN CARIBBEAN CAPE HORNSTRAIT OF MAGELLAN
1430 12 DAYS DAYSDAYS
ROYAL PRINCESS ROYAL PRINCESSSAPPHIRE PRINCESS
sail betweenFT LAUDERDALE SANTIAGOLOS ANGELES to
andto MANAUS BUENOS AIRESSYDNEY 2005 DEPARTURE DATE 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
2004 DEPARTURE DATE Apr 9 Jan 10
Nov 22 Jan 241 Feb 7
FebZt
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
CRUISE ITINERARY
CRUISE ITINERARYCRUISE ITINERARY 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTDAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 2-3 At Sea 1 Santiago Chile (Valparaiso) EMBARK PM
1 Los ingeles California EMBARK PM 4 Tortola BritIsh Virgin Islands 8 AM 6 PM 2 At Sea 2 Ensenada Mexico 8AM 5PM 3 Puerto Montt Chile 7AM 6PM
3middot6 At Sea 4 At Sea 5 Dominica 9 AM 4 PM 7 Hilo Hawaii 8AM 5 At Sea Chilean Fjords Scenic Cruising6PM 6 Trinidad 9 AM 6 PM
8 Maui Hawaii (Lahaina) 8AM 6PM 6 At Sea Amalia Glacier Scentc CruiSi3f7 At Sea 7 Punta Arenas Chile (Strait of Magei an) 7AM 6PM9 Honolulu Hawaii 7AM 5PM
- 10middot13 At Sea 8 Beagle Channel Scenic Cruising 8 Ushuaia Argentina (Tierra del Fuo) 12N 8PM
8 Devils Island French Guiana (Isle Royal) 8 AM 2 PM 14 Bora Bora Polynesia 8AM 6PM 9 At Sea 9 At Sea Cape Hom Scenic Cruising
10 Santarem Brazil 9 AM 7 PM 10 Moorea Polynesia 8AM 6PM 10 Falkland Islands (Stanley) 8AM 6PM 10 Papeete Tahiti (overnight onboard ship) 9PM 11 At Sea
i 16 Papeete Tahiti 6PM 11 Boca da Valeria Brazil (Amazon River) 7 AM 2 PM 12 Puerto Madryn Argentina 6AM 5PM 17middot18 AtSea 12 Manaus Brazil (overnight onboard ship) 10 AM 13 At Sea
14 Montevideo Uruguay 9AM 6PM19 Pago Pago merlcan Samoa 8AM 6PM 13 Manaus Brazil DISEMBARK AM 15 Buenos Aires Argentina DISEMBARK AM 20 Apia Western Samoa 8AM 6PM 21 At Sea Cross International Dateline middotl1me5forallscenkouisinCile subjectlDclwIgc
tllinmryopefilteslnr=rscordttPorttlmislm)vary22 Suva Fiji 8AM 6PM l 23-24 At Sea
20 Auckland New Zealand 8AM 6PM ORINOCO RIVERSOUTHERN CARIBBEAN ANDESSOUTH AMERICA 26 Tauranga New Zealand 8AM 7PM 27 At Sea
28 Wellington Newealand 8AM 6PM 16 17 DAYS DAYS 29-30 AtSea
31 Sydney Australia DISEMBARK AM ROYAL PRINCESS ROYAL PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP SANTIAGO from to
FT LAUDERDALE FT LAUDERDALE
200S DEPARTURE DATE2005 DEPARTURE DATE
Mar 7Mar 24
CRUISE IIJNERARYCRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Santiago Chlle (Valparaiso) EMBARK PM
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM
2 La Serena Chile (Coquimbo) 8 AM 5 PM2-3 At Sea 3 At Sea Um6n Costa Rica 7AM 7PM 4 Arica Chile 7AM 6PMCristobal Panama (for Panama Canal) 8AM 5PM o At Sea
6 Cartagena Colombia 9AM 2 PM 6 San Martin Peru (for Pisco and Machu Picchu) 7AM 6PM 7 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 130 PM 7PM 7 Callao Peru (overnight for Lima) 530 AM 8-9 At sea 8 Callao Peru 1PM 10 Puerto Ordaz Venezuela (Orinoco River) 8AM 6PM 9 At Sea
i 11 At Sea 10 Manta Ecuador (overnight for Quito) 530AM 12 Greada 8AM i 11 Manta Ecuador 1lM5PMt 1~ Dolllinlca i 7N1 5 PM 12 At Sea
i 13 Transit Panama C~nal 7AM 430 PM14 St Thomas us Virgilslands 9AM 5PM 14 Cartagena Colombia 8AM 130 PMJs AtSei i 15 Aruba Netherlands intiiles 1PM 7PM 16 Princess Cays Bahamas 8AM 16-17 At Sea Tahiti Polynesia 17 FtLallardale Flillilt~ DISEMBARK AM 1ampmiddot Ft L~uderdale Florida DISEMBARK AM
AMAZON RIVERMEDITERRANEAN
21 DAYS
ROYAL PRINCESS
MANAUS
to ROME
2005 DEPARTURE DATE
Apr 21
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE M~naus Brazil (Wemight onboardship) Manaus Brazil
3 BocadaValeria Brazil (AriiazonRivet) 11 AM 4-6 At Sea 7 Recife Brazil 1 PM 8-11 AtSea 12 Dakar Senegal 8AM 13-14 At Sea 15 Agadir Morocco 7AM 16 Casablanca Morocco (for Marrakech) 8AM 17 Gibraltar lOAM 18 Allcante Spain 12 N 19 Barcelona Spain 8AM 20 Cannes France (for Monte Carlo) 8AM 21 FlorencePisa Italy (Livarno) 7AM 22 Rome Italy (Civitavecchia) DISEMBARK AM
INDIAN OCEANAUSTRALIA
28 DAYS
PACIfIC PRINCESS
CAPE TOWN
to SYDNEY
2004 DEPARTURpound DATE
Oct 20
CRUISE ITINERARY1 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Cape Town South Africa EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 3 East London South Africa 7AM 3PM 4 DurbahSouth Africa 8AM 6PM 5-7 At Sea 8 Nosy BeMadagascar 7AM 4PM 9 At Sea 10 Poilit des Galets Reunioll]slahd 11 Port Louis Mauritius 12c19 At Sea 20 Perth Australia (Fremantle) 21-23 At Sea 24 Adelaide Australla 25 At Sea 26 Melbourne Australla 7 27 Tasmania AUstralia (Burnie) 28 At Sea 29 Sydney Australia DISEMBARK AM
I
DEPART EMBARK PM
7PM 6PM
8pM
5PM
3PM 9PM 6PM 6PM 5PM 7PM 7PM
EXOTICS CRUISES
SOUIB ATIANTICANTARCfICNSOUIB AMERICA
24 DAYS
ROYAL PRINCESS
CAPE TOWN
to SANTIAGO
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
Dec 17
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Cape TownSouthAfrica (overnighfol1board ship) EMBARK PM 2 Cape Town South Africa 3PM 2 if~~t Good HopSCenic Crulsing 3-6 6 Tristan DaCunha United Kingdom 8AM 5PM 7-10 At Sea 11 Falkland Islands (Staliley) 8 AM 5PM 12 At Sea 13-16 Antarctica Peninsula ScehltmiddotCruising 14 days ihcludingmiddot Elephant
Island AntarcticSotind Deceptionlslana GerlacheStrait NaxefChannel Schollaert Channel SigJtla Island and Boyd Strait)
17 At Sea Cape Horn Scenic Cruising1amp UshuaiaArgentina (Tierra del fuego) bull middot6 AM 19 Punta Arenas Chile (Strait of Magellan) 7 AM 20 At Sea Amalia Glacier Scenic Cruising21 At Sea Chilean Fjords Scenic Cruising22 AtSea 23 Puerto Mont Chile 7AM 6PM 24 At Sea 25 Santiago Chile (Valparaiso) DISEMBARK AM
-nmes for1l scenlccruisinc are subJect to change
ASIAINDIAMEDITERRANEAN
30 ROYAL PRINCESSDAYS
ROME
to BANGKOK
2004 DEPARlURE DATE
Sep 16
CRUISE Il INERARY
WEST AFRICASOUTH AMERICA
28 DAYS
PACIFIC PRINCESS
FT LAUDERDALE
to CAPE TOWN
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
51 22
CRUISE ITINERARY
DISEMBARK AM
Aruba
EXOTICS CRU ISES amp CRU ISETOU RS
AUSTRALIANEW ZEALAND CRUISETOUR
AUSTRALIAN EXPLORER 2004 DEPARTURE DATESAPPHIRE21 plus
DAYS PRINCESS SYDNEY Dec 17 to
AUCKLAND CRUISETOUR 5P CRUiSE
CRUISETOUR ITINERARY
DAY PORT By Sea By Land DAY PORT
1 Sydney 14 Fiordland National Park 2 Sydney Scenic Cruising
3 SydneyAyers Rock 15 Dunedin New Zealand (Port Chalmers) 4 Ayers ROek
5 Ayers RockPort Douglas 16 Christchurch New Zealand 6 Port Douglas - (Lytleton)
7 Port DouglasSydneyEmbark 17 Wellilgton New Zealand 8 At Sea 18 At Sea 9 Melbourne Australia 19 Tauranga New Zealand
10 At Sea 20 Bay of Islands New Zealand 11 Tasmania Australia (Hobart) 21 Auckland New Zealand 12middot13 At Sea
Sydney Opera House Australia
AUSTRALIANEW ZEALAND CRUISETOUR SOUTHEAST ASIACHINA CRUISETOUR CAPE HORNSTRAIT OF MAGELLAN CRUISETOUR AUSTRALIAN BEIJING Be TERRA COTTA 2004 DEPARTURE DATES RIO 8t IGUAZU FALLS Post-Crulsetour1 Pre-Crulsetour 217EXPLORER 2005 DEPARTURE DATES PACIFICSAPPHIRE WARRIORS19 plw or PRINCESS jul9t loieifie
DAYS PRINCESS SYDNEY Jan 12 plus 19 ROYAL plw Feb 5 Oct 28 Royal BUENOS AIRES
AUCKLAND DAYS ROYAL PRINCESS to 21 ampto DAYS PRINCESS
BEUING CRUISE t ~~S~i BeWln~~~~e
to SANTIAGO~e~s~Ot~r~ih~fi1BANGKOK CRUiSE CRUISECRUISETOUR 3t3P landtourm~yvlty CRUISETOUR 12
DAY PORT DAY PORT
DAY PORT By Sea ltBy LaDd DAY PORT
1 Beijing 11-12 At Sea 1 Rio de janeiro 11 Cape Horn Scenic Cruising
13 Hong Kong 2 Rio de jneiro c 12 Ushuaia Argentina 14 At Sea 3 RiolgUaiu Falls 12 Beagle Channel Scenlc Cruising
15 Nha Trang Vietnam 4 IIDIilZll FaU$13u~os~re$ 13 Punta Arenas Chile
16 Phu My Vietnam 5 Buens AiresEmbark 14 At Sea 17 At Sea 6 Montevideo Uruguay 15 Seno Eyre Fjord Scenic Cruising 18 Singapore 7 At Sea 16 At Sea 19 Kualtan Malaysia 8 Puerto Madryn Argentina 17 Puerto Montt Chile 20 At Sea 9 At Sea 18 At Sea 21 Bangkok Thail3nd 10 Falkland Islands (Stanley) 19 Santiago Chile
DAY PORT DAY PORT
At Sea Pusan SouthKOrea Nagasaki japan At Sea Shanghai China
Note CnIlst route shown for Royil Princess Oct 28 only Timcsforil1lsccnkoulslngmsubjccttothange
CRUISE [OUR ITINERARY
CRUISETOUR ITINERARY
CRUISrrOlJR ITINERARY Fiordland National Park Scenic Cruising DlUedin New Zealand Christchurch New Zealand Wellington New Zealand
14
GRAND PANAMA CANAL CRUISES
ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL
10 10 11 DAYSDAYS DAYS
CORAL PRINCESS GRAND PRINCESS GRAND PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIPfrom from
fromFT LAUDERDALE GALVESTON GALVESTON
2004 DEPARTURE DATES Oct n 21 31 2004 DEPARTURE DATE
2004 DEPARTURE DATENov 10 20 30middot DeelSmiddot
DedSDec 10 28
2005 DEPARTURE DATES CRUISE ITINERARY Jan 7 17 27
CRUISE ITINERARY Feb 6 16 26 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART MarS 1828 CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Galveston Texas EMBARK PMApr 7 17 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTshy 1 Galveston Texas EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 1 ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 3 Belize City Belize 1 PM 7PM 2-3 At Sea 3 Belize City Belize lPM 7PM 4 Costa Maya Mexico (Mahahual) 8AM 4PM 4 Um6n Costa Rica 7AM rPM 4 Costa Maya Mexico (Mahahual) SAM 4 PM 5 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands 12 PM 7PM 5 Panama Canal (to Gatun Lake) 7AM 430 PM 5 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands 12 PM 7PM 6 Ocho Rios Jamaica SAM 5PM 5 Col6n Panama 5PM 8PM 6 At Sea 7 At Sea 6 At Sea Cristobal Panama 7AM 4PM 8 7AM 4PM 7 Grand Cayman Cayman IslandS 7AM 4PM (fot Panama Canal) ftrtpg~niaa~~) S Corumel Mexico SAM 6PM 8 At Sea 9 At Sea 9 Bclize City Belize 7AM 4 PM 6PM 10 Coromel Mexico lOAM 6 PM9 Cozumel Mexico lOAM 10 At Sea 10 At Sea 11 At Sea
Portordtrllndtlmtsmayvllry 11 flo Lauderdale florida DISEMBARK AM Portorntr IInltf timpoundi may vary 11 Galveston Texas DISEMBARK AM Port ordu and Nmes may vary 12 Galv_es~on Texas DISEMBARK AM
ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL
8 DAYS
CORAL PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP
from
FT LAUDERDALE
2004 DEPARTURE DATE Dec 20
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Fl Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM 2-3 At Sea 4 Lim6n Costa Rica 7AM 7PM 5 Panama Canal (to Gatun Lake) 7 AM 430 PM 5 Co16n Panama 5PM SPM 6 At Sea 7 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands SAM 5PM S At Sea 9 Flo Lauderdale Florida DISEMBARK AM Bridge of the Americas Panama
f OptIonll fOllTS inclld1lI tht AtlllnH to Pacific RlIlllfll) joumq will dlmlldrt tilt ship b) tctdtr lit Gfttlm uk AJkr tour plIssmm dlstmlrark tilt shipwin procmlllat through tilt Gatun Locb lIndjlnlllly dock in Gl6lI Hmal1p41Sl11tmmttydiumlmtheJldlo~ lflrshops IInd~llI toIIrsrrnrl CIItutl14ktlllIrtonlflrJhlp
GRAND PANAMA CANAL CRUISES
GRAND PANAMA CANAL GRAND PANAMA CANAL GRAND PANAMA CANAL
150R 18 150R 1715 DAYS DAYS DAYS
CORAL PRINCESS SUN PRINCESS
REGAL PRINCESS REGAL PRINCESS SUN PRINCESS
DAWN PRINCESS REGAL PRINCESS sail between DAWN PRINCESS
sail between FT LAUDERDALE FT LAUDERDALE sail betweenand
FT LAUDERDALEand SAN DIEGO andLOS ANGELES
SAN FRANCISCO 2004 DEPARTURE DATES 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
DAWN PRINCESS 2004 DEPARTURE DATESNov 24Sp191
CRUISE ITINERARY Dec9t CORAL PRINCESSREGAL PRINCESS 5ltp261 CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE ITINERARY
200S DEPARTURE DATES Dec 24 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
SUN PRINCESS DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARIltPM200S DEPARTURE DATES DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Sep 2StMar 24
3 Ocho Rios Jamaica lOAM 6PM 2-3 At5ea 2 At Sea 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBA8KPM
REGAL PRINCESS AprSt 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBA8KPM Jan stu 200S DEPARTURE DATES2 At Sea4 At Sea 4 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 7AM lPMJan 23 5 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 7AM lPM 3 Ocho Rios Jamaica lOAM 6PM REGAL PRINCESS 5 Cartagena Colombia 9AM 3PMFeb7t 4 At Sea Apr 239AM 3PM 6 Transit Panama Canal 7AM 430 PMFb22 ~ yenr~fte~~~~~~u 7AM 430 PM 5 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 7AM lPM At SeaMar9t CORAL PRINCESS 79AM 3PM8 At Sea Apr 27 8 Puntarenas Costa Rica 7AM 7PMSUN PRINCESS 9 Puntarenas Costa Rica 7 AM 7PM ~ yenr~fte~n~~~~~u 7AM 430 PM 9-10 At SeaApr1S 8 At Sea DAWN PRINCESS10-11 At Sea 11 Acapulco Mexico 8AM 5PM
5PM 9 Puntarenas Costa Rica 7AM 7PM Apr 29H ~ae~lcoMexico 8 AM 12 At SeatllWrryopmllzlfrarnLls~in 10-11 At Sea rmrKfIfikTiIIrttimnma1 tlliJlrraryoptJllllsfrlJflSlmFranrimlJn 13 Cabo San lucas Mexico 8AM 5PM
gt This mUJI C4Jl llfwmblnld wlth a 3 14 Cabo San Lucas Mexico 7 AM lPM H ~e~o Mexico 8AM SPM rmruordrrorttimamG)llIryCoIutar CnUK to VlWOIlllr SC Dqs ThUIltIIIflltllnlltCllIIblntdwilhaZ-day 14-15 At Sea 16lhrlllllhI9lllIbtboobdulaquoSC)lQ4k t Illncral) lIpCutcs in mrmt orm Pllrt IiIIIa CocastaICnliutoVan(ouKrBCDlIys16 16 San Francisco California 7AM 4PMcowtlIrcrllisr IIIIYlIl1Ymiddot IhrounIScankboobdlUaK)lllllluU t~A~geles California 6 AM 5PM 14 Cabo San Lucas Mexico 8AM 5PM
Thllwl1JIIICllllslltMOlIkpilllyJmtcad 17-18 At Sea middotmiddotThliIAfllIllCltlllsatMGnIqclBaylnstcadllf 15 At Sea CPlIilldCI1IIu 17 At Sea o[OdKKwsPurllilllrlmllYWlry OchoRicJsPortllmtslllllYVllfymiddot D1SEMBA8K AM19 Vancouver BC DISEMBA8K AM 16 San Die20 California DlSEMBA8K AM 18 Val1couver BC
GRAND PANAMA CANAL COASTAL CRUISING
2-4 CORAL PRINCESS ISLAND PRINCESS SUN PRINCESS18 DAWN PRINCESS DIAMOND PRINCESS STAR PRINCESSDAYSDAYS
COASTAL CRUISE SCHEDULEREGAL PRINCESS
SHIP DAYS FROM TO DEPARTURE DATE DIAMOND PRINCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 5104
SAN FRANCISCO DIAMOND PRINCES5 4 Vancouver Seattle 5404 to CORAL PRINCESS 2 San Francisco Vancouver 5604
NEW YORK DAWN PRiNCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 5704 ISLAND PRiNCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 51204
2004 DEPARTURE DATE SUN PRINCESS 3 San Francisco Vancouver 51404Aug 24 ISLAND PRiNCESS 3 Vancouver LOI Angeles 91804
DIAMOND PRINCESS 1 Seattle Vancouver 91804CRUISE ITINERARY DIAMOND PRINCESS 6 Vancouver Los Angeles 91904 SAPPHIRE PRINCESS 1 Seattle Vancouver 91904 SAPPHREPRINCESS 2 Vancouver San Francisco 92004 DIAMOND PRINCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 43005 DlAMONDPRiNCES$ 4 Vancouver Seattle 5305 SUN PRINCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 5305
ISLAND PRiNCESS 3 Los Angeles VancOllver 5405 CORAL PRiNCESS 2 San Francisco Vancouver 51205
Coral Princess in the Panama Canal
CRUISE PLUS
Extend your adventure with our Cruise Plusreg program Cruise Plusreg enables you to enhance your vacation with one- to four-night hotel
packages in cities that stand on their own as vacation destinations Add nights in Sydney before you cruise or extend your vacation with nights in the city by the
bay San Francisco Transportation and luggage handling costs from the airport to both hotel and ship plus meet and greet services are always included
Wherever you choose to explore youll enjoy properties that are carefully chosen based on service value location and the peace of mind of knowing that Princess
has arranged it all for you
Anchorage Alaska Trevi Fountain Rome Auckland Harbor New Zealand
The Cruise Plusreg Program is available in over 30 major cities including
MEDITERRANEANAEGEAN EXOTICS PANAMA CANAL Barcelona London Rome and Venice Auckland Bangkok Beijing Buenos Aires Ft Lauderdale Los Angeles New York City
Cape Town Ft Lauderdale Honolulu Los San Diego San Francisco Sanjuan Vancouver NORTHERN EUROPE Angeles Montreal Moorea New York City Copenhagen and London MEXICO CARIBBEANOsaka Papeete Rome San Francisco
Ft Lauderdale Galveston Los AngelesTRANSATLANTIC Santiago Seattle Sydney Vancouver Venice Barcelona Copenhagen Ft Lauderdale San Francisco and San Juan
London New York City and Rome ALASKA Anchorage Calgary Fairbanks Kenai San Francisco Seattle and Vancouver
For more information about options and pricing reference a destination specific brochure or contact your travel agent
TRAVEL THE WORLD WITH THE LEADER IN CRUISINGmiddot Princess
Analysis by the Hawaii Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism Comparing the Economic Impact of Foreign Flag Ships with US Flag Cruise Ships Sailing in Hawaii
This is a summary of an analysis prepared by the Hawai Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism (DBEDT) of the economic impact of the foreign flag cruise ship fleet sailing in Hawaii as compared to each of the US flag ships operating in Honolulu
The comparison is set out below
Foreign Pride Pride Pride
Fleet Of Hawaii Of Aloha Of America
Total economic output impact (spendingsales) ($mil) 155 542 4225 4958
Total earnings impact (labor earnings) ($mil) 44 155 1207 1411
Total employment impact Uobs) 1447 5059 3943 4627
This analysis demonstrates that a single US-flagged ship the Pride of America home ported in Honolulu is 32 times more economically impactful and creates 32 times as many jobs as the entire foreign flag fleet that sails into and out of Hawaii ports of call
Economic Impact of Pride of America
Assumptions 1 Annual impact though Pride of Aloha is leaving in May 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existing Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($) 4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of outputl$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job multiplier (jobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
118700 105
2706 3373
147 042
1372
4958
1417
4627
Data sourcelformula Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Line 1 x line 2 x line 31 000000
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 4 x line 5
Line 4 x line 6
Line 4 x line 7
Economic Impact of Pride of Hawaii
Assumptions
1 Annual impact though Pride of Hawaii is leaving in February 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existing Pride of Aloha and Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($) 4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job multiplier (jobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
Data sourceformula 139770 Actual 2007 figure
975 Actual 2007 figure 2706 Actual 2007 figure 3688 Line 1 x line 2 x line 31000000
147 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model 042 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
1372 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
5421 Line 4 x line 5
1549 Line 4 x line 6
5059 Line 4 x line 7
Economic Impact of Pride of Aloha
Assumptions 1 Annual impact though Pride of Aloha is leaving in May 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existlng Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($)
4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job mUltiplier Oobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
95680 111
2706 2874
147 042
1372
4225
1207
3943
Data sourcelformula Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Line 1 x line 2 x line 31000000
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 4 x line 5
Line 4 x line 6
Line 4 x line 7
lt
Methodology Used in Calculating Impact of International Cruise Ships
Cruise ship visitors 1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Came with ships 3 Flied in 4 Average length of stay (days) 5 PPPD ($) 6 Cruise visitor spending ($mil))
Cruise ship crews 7 Ratio of crew spending to cruise visitor spending 8 Cruise crew spending
Cruisline 9 Ratio of crew spending to cruise visitor spending
10 Cruiseline spending
11 Total cruise-related spending ($mil)
12 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 13 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 14 Job multiplier Uobs$ cruise -related spending)
15 Total output impact ($miJ)
16 Total earnings impact ($miJ)
17 Total employment impact (jobs)
106641 98307
8334 739 847 668
02 134
038 254
1055
147 042
1372
1551
444
1447
Data sourceformula Line 2 + line 3 DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report Line 1 x line 4 x line 5
DBEDT 2003 Cruise study Line 7 x line 6
DBEDT 2003 Cruise study Line 9 x line 6
Line 6 + line 8 + line 10
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 11 x line 12
Line 11 x line 13
Line 11 x line 14
Economic Contributions Foreign-Flag Fleet operating in Hawaii vs Three US-Flag Ships
$1500
Pride of Hawaii$1000- $542 million VIc -0-E c Pride of AlohaCo
423 million$500
Pride of America $496 million155 million$shy
Foreign-Flag US-Flag Fleet Fleet
Source State of Hawaii Department of US-Flag $1460 billion Business Economic Development and Tourism
Foreign-Flag $ 155 million 7292008
Employment Foreign-Flag Fleet operating in Hawaii vs Three US-Flag Ships
15000
10000
til c o Pride of Aloha
39435000
Pride of America 1447 4627
~---------
Foreign-Flag US-Flag Fleet Fleet
Source State of Hawaii Department of US-Flag 13629 jobs Business Economic Development and Tourism
Foreign-Flag 1447 jobs 7292008
Foreign Flag Capacity Growth Foreign flag passenger capacity has changed five-fold on roundtrip Hawaii cruises from the West Coast since enactment of the Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative
1600000
1400000
tn 1200000
J enshyZ
1000000
I shyG) en 800000 s G) tn tn
600000 as D 400000
200000
0 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Year
Source US Maritime Administration (derived from the US Customs and Border Patrol Vessel Entrance and Clearance documents - final 2007 data) 7292008
NCL America Hawaii Economic Contributions
(2004-2008)
bull (in Millions) bull $399 in wages benefits and overtime to US seafarers bull $35 in Federal and State payroll Taxes bull $64 in Government Fees and Taxes to Hawaii bull $28 in wages benefits and overtime to US other employees bull $52 in Port Charges to Hawaii Companies (Stevedores tugs pilots etc) bull $85 in Fuel to Tesoro Hawaii bull $130 for shore excursions to Hawaii tour operators bull $39 for Hawaii hotel rooms and ground transport bull $75 for food grown in Hawaii bull $57 in union fees and levies (incl $32M paid directly by employees) bull $1 in MMD fees to the United States Coast Guard bull $51 for recruitment screening processing and training crew bull $76 advertising and promoting Hawaii as a destination bull $1092
COASTWISE CRUISES INTERPRETIVE RULE RESOLUTION Adopted at the
US Conference of Mayors 76th Annual Meeting
June 20-242008 Miami
WHEREAS the Department of Homeland Securitys Customs and Border Protection (CBP) issued a proposed Interpretive Rule regulating Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises on foreign flagged vessels between US ports of call under the Passenger Vessel Services Act at the request of the United States Maritime Administration and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule would require that a foreign-flagged vessel on a coastwise cruise to call at a foreign port for at least 48 hours with that foreign stop constituting at least 50 percent of the cruise itinerary and allowing passengers to disembark the cruise vessel at the foreign port before continuing the cruise to a US port of call and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule establishes burdensome criteria that are wholly inconsistent with industry practice particularly the 48-hour call at foreign port shyinasmuch as the standard port call is six to eight hours - as well as the requirement that 50 percent of a cruise be spent at the foreign port and
WHEREAS the intent of the proposed Interpretive Rule is to protect the single remaining US flag vessel serving the Inter-Hawaiian Island cruise trade that according to the Hawaii Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism generates more than 4600 jobs and generates nearly $500 million in economic benefits for the state annually and
WHEREAS thousands of members of the International Longshore Workers Union (nWU) are employed at US ports serving cruise ships and whose jobs would be at risk if the proposed Interpretive Rule were implemented and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule is vague as to the breadth of its application ie to coastwise cruises between all United States ports or applied solely to coastwise cruises from West Coast ports to Hawaii and
WHEREAS the Cruise Lines International Association estimates the proposed Interpretive Rule would upend the $17 billion in national cruise industry spending and put at risk more than 300000 jobs generated by the international cruise industry including jobs held by nWU at US ports and the local allied industries supporting the cruise industry and
Executive Order Submissions Under Review
II Reglnfogov Where to ind Federal Regulatory Information -~
Home ] Lnitied Agenda and Regulator) Ilan pound012866 Regulator) Review Jnformalion Collection Review
EO 12866 Regulatory Rlvlw dvanced Search IJitorical RepWI Review Counh Jriter XIL
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA)
Executive Order Submissions Under Review July 25 2008 - _------------____ _shy
Department of Homeland Security
AGENCY DHS-TSA RIN 1652-AA53
TITLE Large Aircraft Security Program Other Aircraft Operator Security Programs and Airport Operator Security Program
STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT Yes RECEIVED DATE 06302008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
AGENCY DHS-USCIS RIN Llti15-AB67 TITLE Changes to Requirements Affecting H-2B Nonimmigrants and Their Employers
STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT No RECEIVED DATE 06092008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
AGENCY DHS-USCBP RIN 1651AA11 TITLE Issuance of a Visa and Authorization for Temporary Admission Into the United States for Certain Nonimmigrant Aliens Afflicted W HIV Infection
STAGE Final Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT No RECEIVED DATE 03042008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
-_RE_V-IE-W-E-X-T-EN-D-E-D---------- _
AGENCY DHS-USCBP RIN 1651-AA76 TITLE Coastwise Transportation of Passengers STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT Yes RECEIVED DATE 07142008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
Disclosure I Accessibility I Privacy Policy I Contact Us
httpwwwreginfogovpublicdoeoReviewSearch 7252008
View Rule Page 11
Shere D find Federal ReguLatory InformciiorlReglnfogov Home J Cnified Agenda al1d Regulatory Plan EO 12866 Regulatory Reyiew Information Collection Reiew
Current rnified Agenda and Regulatory Plan Historical Pnified Agenda and Regulatory Plan Search
View Rule
DHSIUSCBP RIN 1651-AA76 Publication ill Spring 2008
Title llCoastwise Transportation of Passengers
Abstract This interim rule amends the Department of Homeland Securitys (DHS) current regulations relating to the transportation of passengers by non-coastwise-qualified vessels on voyages that begin and end at a US port and stop at intervening US and foreign port(s) Under this interim final rule voyages that begin and end at a US port and stop at a foreign port(s) and at intervening US port(s) where a large USshyflag coastwise-qualified passenger vessel engages in regular service are in violation of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) unless the cumulative length of stay(s) at intervening foreign port(s) is more than 50 percent of the total amount of time spent at the intervening US port(s) and passengers are permitted to go ashore at the foreign port(s) The purpose of this amendment is to ensure that the Congressional purpose in enacting the PVSA which is to preserve the economic benefits of US coastwise trade to US-flag coastwise-qualified vessels is properly implemented
Agency Department of Homeland Security(DHS) Priority Substantive Nonsignificant
KIN Status First time published in the Unified Agenda Agenda Stage of Rulemaking Final Rule Stage
Major No Unfunded Mandates No
CFR Citation -LCER 4J~)(h)(plusmnJ
Legal Authority 5JJSS_30J12lJ-SClt16 J9_lJiCJ 431 9_L1C1plusmn3JJ2JScHJ1J2JSCJ624 L(LlLSc207LIl(gtJfHgt~ _CiQJ _46lSC 6QLQ~
Legal Deadline None
Timetable Action Date FR Cite
Interim Final Action 0510012008
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required No Government Levels Affected None
Federalism No
Included in the Regulatory Plan No
RIN Data Printed in the FR No
Agency Contact Glen E Vereb Chief Entry Procedures and Carriers Branch Department of Homeland Security US Customs and Border Protection Office of Regulations and Rulings 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington DC 20229 Phone202572-8730
Disclosure I Accessibility I Privacy Policy I Contact Us
httpwwwreginfogovpublicdoeAgendaViewRuleruleID=286751 7128120
Federal RegisterVol 72 No 224Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules 65487
SPECULATIVE POSITION LIMITS 1-Continued [In contract units)
Contract
Soybeans and Mini-Soybeans 2
Wheat and Mini-Wheat 2 bullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbull
Soybean Oil
SingleSpot month All monthsmonth
600 8600 13300 600 11100 14500 540 6600 8600
Soybean Meal 720 5500 7100
Minneapolis Grain Exchange
Hard Red Spring Wheat I 600 I 11100 I 14500
New York Board of Trade
Cotton No2 I 300 I 5300 I 7300
Kansas City Board of Trade
Hard Winter Wheat I 600 I 11100 I 14500
1 For purposes of compliance with these limits positions in a futures contract that shares ~ubstantially identical terms with a contract market enumerated herein including a futures contract that is cash-settled based on the settlement price of an enumerated contract market shall be agshygregated with positions in the enumerated contract market
2 For purposes of compliance with these limits positions in the regular-sized and mini-sized contracts shall be aggregated
Issued by the Commission this November 152007 in Washington DC David Stawick Secretary of the Commission [FR Doc E7-22681 Filed 11-20-07 845 amI BILLING CODE 6351-Q1-P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Bureau of Customs and Border Protection
19 CFR Part 4
[USCBP-2007-o098]
Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises
AGENCY Customs and Border Protection Department of Homeland Security ACTION Proposed interpretation solicitation of comments
SUMMARY This document proposes new criteria to be used by Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to determine whether non-coastwise-qualified vessels are in violation ofthe Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) when engaging in cruise itineraries in which passengers board at a US port the vessel calls at several Hawaiian ports and then the vessel proceeds to a foreign port or ports for a brief period before ultimately returning to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their cruise CBP believes these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because it appears that the primary objective of the foreign stop is evasion of the PVSA
DATES Comments must be received on or before December 212007 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT Glen E Vereb Cargo Security Carriers amp Immigration Branch Office of International Trade (202) 572-8730 ADDRESSES You may submit comments identified by docket number by one of the following methods
bull Federal eRulemaking Portal http wwwregulationsgov Follow the instructions for submitting comments
bull Mail Border Security Regulations Branch Office of International Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
I Public Participation
Interested persons are invited to participate in this proposed interpretation by submitting written data views or arguments on all aspects of the proposed interpretation Customs and Border Protection (CBP) also invites comments that relate to the economic environmental or federalism effects that might result from this proposed interpretation Comments that will provide the most assistance to CBP in developing these procedures will reference a specific portion of the proposed interpretation explain the reason for any recommended change and include data information or authority that support such recommended change
Instructions All submissions received must include the agency name and docket number for this proposed
interpretation All comments received will be posted without change to http wwwregulationsgov including any personal information provided
Docket For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received go to http wwwregulationsgov Submitted comments may also be inspected on regular business days between the hours of 9 am and 430 pm at the Office of International Trade Customs and Border Protection 799 9th Street NW 5th Floor Washington DC Arrangements to inspect submitted documents should be made in advance by calling Mr Joseph Clark at (202) 572shy8768
II Background
The maritime cabotage law governing the transportation of passengers was first established by section 8 of the Passenger Vessel Services Act of June 191886 (the PVSA) 24 Stat 81 as amended by section 2 of the Act of February 17 1898 30 Stat 248 formerly codified at 46 USC App 289 (now codified at 46 USC 55103) 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 of $200 (now $300 as promulgated in TD 03-11 pursuant to the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 199028 USC 2461 note) for each passenger so transported and landed
The intent of the maritime cabotage laws including the PVSA was to provide a legal structure that guarantees a coastwise monopoly to
65488 Federal RegisterVol 72 No 224Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules
American shipping and thereby promotes development of the American merchant marine Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 28 (DC Cir 1984) see also The Granada 35 FSupp 892 8931940 AMC 1601 (DC Pa 1940) (stating that the legislative aim of section 289 [now 55102] was the creation of a practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping business for United States ships) In other words the PVSA was enacted to advance the United States merchant marine and fleet by restricting the use of foreign-ownedflagged passenger vessels in United States territorial waters
Passenger vessel transportation between United States ports has historically been viewed to be part of the coastwise trade after the enactment of the PVSA This view is premised on the concepts of continuity of the voyage and whether its intended purpose or objective was coastwise transportation In other words the PVSA was held to be violated if the coastwise movement was continuous or if the purpose of the trip was a coastwise voyage (See 18 OAG 445 September 4 1886 28 OAG 204 February 16 1910 29 OAG 318 February 12 1912 30 OAG 44 February 1 1913 34 OAG 340 December 24 1924 and 36 OAG 352 August 13 1930)
The CBP regulations promulgated pursuant to the PVSA are found at section 480a of title 19 of the Code of Federal Regulations (19 CFR 480a) and are reflective of the above cited Office of the Attorney General decisions These regulations provide among other things that a non-coastwise-qualified vessel which embarks a passenger at a port in the United States embraced within the coastwise laws (a coastwise port) will be deemed to have landed that passenger in violation of the PVSA if the passenger disembarks at a different coastwise port on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a nearby foreign port or ports (as defined in 19 CFR 480a(a)(2) see also 19 CFR 480a(b)(2)) The terms embark and disembark are words of art which are defined as going on board a vessel for the duration of a specific voyage and leaving a vessel at the conclusion of a specific voyage respectively (See 19 CFR 480a(a)(4))
The references in section 480a to nearby foreign ports (defined in 19 CFR 480a(a)(2)) are the results of attempts by CBP to apply an Office of the Attorney Generals opinion dated February 26 1910 (28 OAG 204) In that case a foreign-flag vessel transported 615 passengers on a voyage around the world beginning in New
York and concluding in San Francisco The Attorney General opined that since the primary object of the voyage was to visit various parts of the world on a pleasure tour returning home via California and not to be transported in domestic commerce the transportation was not in violation of the PVSA
The 1910 Attorney Generals opinion was extended to voyages that included foreign ports other than nearby foreign ports (See Treasury Decision (TD) 68shy285 (33 FR 16558) November 14 1968) However voyages solely to one or more coastwise ports have always been considered predominantly coastwise Therefore non-coastwise-qualified vessels engaging in such a voyage where passengers temporarily go ashore at a coastwise port have been deemed to have violated the PVSA
m Current Law and Policy Pursuant to Public Law 109-304 120
Stat 1632 enacted on October 6 2006 Title 46 United States Code was substantially reorganized and recodified Consequently the PVSA is now codified at 46 USC 55103 and provides that no vessel shall transport passengers between ports or places in the United States either directly or by way of a foreign port under a penalty of $300 for each person so transported and landed except one that (1) Is wholly owned by citizens of the United States for purposes of engaging in the coastwise trade and (2) has been issued a certificate of documentation with a coastwise endorsement or is exempt from documentation but would otherwise be eligible for such a certificate and endorsement
In 2003 Congress enacted Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II Section 211 for the purpose of revitalizing the oceangoing US-flag cruise industry in Hawaii (the 2003 Act) Three oceangoing US-flag cruise ships PRIDE OF ALOHA PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAII were documented with coastwise privileges pursuant to the 2003 Act These vessels entered regular service in Hawaii in 2004 2005 and 2006 respectively and pursuant to the express language of the 2003 Act are limited in their operation to providing regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands of Hawaii
The CBP regulations promulgated pursuant to the PVSA are set forth in 19 CFR 480a and have remained unchanged throughout both the recodification of Title 46 of the United States Code and the enactment of the 2003 Act They provide that a violation of the PVSA occurs when passengers embark (board a vessel for the
duration of a voyage) a non-coastwiseshyqualified vessel at one US port and disembark (leave the vessel at the conclusion of a voyage) at a different US port unless they proceed with the vessel to a distant foreign port (Le any port not considered a nearby foreign port which is defined as any port located in North America Central America Bermuda or the West Indies including the Bahamas) Currently these regulations do not contain specific criteria for non-coastwise-qualified vessels on itineraries including US ports and either nearby or distant foreign ports in order for such foreign port calls to be compliant with the PVSA
To reiterate the applicable CBP regulations provide that the PVSA is violated when a non-coastwise-qualified vessel transports a passenger on a voyage solely to one or more coastwise ports and the passenger disembarks or goes ashore temporarily at a coastwise port (19 CFR 480a(b)(1)) Furthermore a violation of the PVSA also occurs when a non-coastwise-qualified vessel transports a passenger on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a nearby foreign port or ports (but no other foreign port) and the passenger disembarks at a coastwise port other than the port of embarkation (19 CFR 480a(b)(2)) However there is no violation of the PVSA when a passenger is on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a distant foreign port or ports (whether or not the voyage includes a nearby foreign port or ports) and the passenger disembarks at a coastwise port provided the passenger has proceeded with the vessel to a distant foreign port (19 CFR 480a(b)(3))
IV Request From MARAD To Provide Guidance
The US Department of Transportation Maritime Administration (MARAD) has requested that CBP take action to ensure enforcement of the PVSA MARAD has asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreignshyflag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwiseshyqualified cruise ship operators
In April of 2007 the operator of the three US-flag cruise vessels operating solely in Hawaii pursuant to the 2003 Act announced their intent to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAIl from the Hawaii market and redeploy her to Europe The operator intends to re-flag the vessel to foreign registry directly resulting in the loss of over 1100 crewmember jobs The primary reason cited for this decision is the rapid increase in foreign-flag competition entering the Hawaii market
Federal Register I Vol 72 No 224 I Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules 65489
from the West Coast This competition is evidenced in published cruise itineraries of foreign-flag carriers offering a variety of round trip cruises that depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period usually in the early morning and ultimately return to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their cruise These cruises are often marketed as Hawaii cruises and except for the brief stop in the nearby foreign port of Ensenada are purely coastwise in nature It is these cruise itineraries that pose an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels that pursuant to the 2003 Act are currently engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands
V Preliminary Notice
In response to MARADs concerns CBP sent letters to two carriers known to operate the itineraries in question as well as to the Cruise Lines International Association Inc stating that CBP believes that these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because it appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA The letters further indicated that CBP is taking steps to publish this position
VI CBPs Proposed Interpretive Rule Accordingly in this document CBP is
proposing to provide that cruise itineraries for non-qualified coastwise vessels which allow passengers to board at a US port call at several Hawaiian ports proceed to a foreign port or ports for a brief period and then ultimately return to the original US port of embarkation for disembarkation are not consistent with the PVSA and the regulations promulgated pursuant thereto Specifically CBP interprets a voyage to be solely to one or more coastwise ports even where it stops at a foreign port unless the stop at the foreign port is a legitimate object of the cruise CBP will presume that a stop at a foreign port is not a legitimate object of the cruise unless
(1) The stop lasts at least 48 hours at the foreign port
(2) The amount of time at the foreign port is more than 50 percent of the total amount of time at the US ports of call and
(3) The passengers are permitted to go ashore temporarily at the foreign port
Accordingly CBP proposes to adopt an interpretive rule under which it will presume that any cruise itinerary that does not include a foreign port call that
satisfies each of these three criteria constitutes coastwise transportation of passengers in violation of 19 CFR 480a(b)(1)
Dated November 16 2007 W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection [FR Doc E7-22788 Filed 11-20-07 845 am] BILLING CODe 9111-14-1
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau
27 CFR Part 9
[Notice No 76]
RIN 1513-AB49
Proposed Establishment of the Leona Valley Viticultural Area (2007R-281 P)
AGENCY Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau Treasury ACTION Notice of proposed rulemaking
SUMMARY The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau proposes to establish the 134 square mile Leona Valley viticultural area in the northeast part of Los Angeles County California We designate viticultural areas to allow vintners to better describe the origin of their wines and to allow consumers to better identify wines they may purchase We invite comments on this proposed addition to our regulations DATES We must receive written comments on or before January 22 2008
ADDRESSES You may send comments on this notice to one of the following addresses
bull httpwwwregulationsgov (Federal e-rulemaking portal follow the instructions for submitting comments) or
bull Director Regulations and Rulings Division Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau PO Box 14412 Washington DC 20044-4412
See the Public Participation section of this notice for specific instructions and requirements for submitting comments and for information on how to request a public hearing
You may view copies of this notice selected supporting materials and any comments we receive about this proposal at httpwwwregulationsgov under Docket No 2007-0066 You also may view copies of this notice all related petitions maps or other supporting materials and any comments we receive about this
proposal by appointment at the TTB Information Resource Center 1310 G Street NW Washington DC 20220 To make an appointment call 202-927shy2400
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT NA Sutton Regulations and Rulings Division Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau 925 Lakeville S1 No 158 Petaluma CA 94952 phone 415shy271-1254 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
Background on Viticultural Areas
TTB Authority Section 105(e) of the Federal Alcohol
Administration Act (FAA Act) 27 USC 205(e) authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to prescribe regulations for the labeling of wine distilled spirits and malt beverages The FAA Act provides that these regulations should among other things prohibit consumer deception and the use of misleading statements on labels and ensure that labels provide the consumer with adequate information as to the identity and quality of the product The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) administers the regulations promulgated under the FAA Act
Part 4 ofthe TTB regulations (27 CFR part 4) allows the establishment of definitive viticultural areas and the use of their names as appellations of origin on wine labels and in wine advertisements Part 9 of the TTB regulations (27 CFR part 9) contains the list of approved viticultural areas
Definition Section 425(e)(1)(i) ofthe TTB
regulations (27 CFR 425(e)(1)(i)) defines a viticultural area for American wine as a delimited grape-growing region distinguishable by geographical features the boundaries of which have been recognized and defined in part 9 of the regulations These designations allow vintners and consumers to attribute a given quality reputation or other characteristic of a wine made from grapes grown in an area to its geographic origin The establishment of viticultural areas allows vintners to describe more accurately the origin of their wines to consumers and helps consumers to identify wines they may purchase Establishment of a viticultural area is neither an approval nor an endorsement by TTB of the wine produced in that area
Requirements Section 425(e)(2) of the TTB
regulations outlines the procedure for proposing an American viticultural area and provides that any interested party
Us Department ofHomelaDd Secmity Washington DC 10229
bull ~
US Customs and Border Protection
AUG 15 2fXJJ
VE5-3-02-QTRRBSTCCCI - ti015502-GG-
Mr leon Sutcliffe Director Port Operations Camivai Cruise Unes Camival Place 3655 NW 87Avenue Miami Aorlda 33178
RE P~nger Vessef Services Ad Coastwise Transportation 46 USC sect 55103 19 CFR sect 480a(b)
Dear Mr Sutcliffe
As you know US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) enforces the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) codified at TItle 46 United States Code section 55103 (46 USC 55103) This statute prohibits non-coastwise-qualifled vessels (ie those vessels not US-buill owned and documented with a coastwise endorsement) from transporting passengers between porls or places within the United States The regUlations promUlgated pursuant to the PVSA are found at TrtJe 19 Code of Federal Regulations section 4808 (19 CFR 4808)
It has come to our attention that passenger vessels of your company are engaging in cruise itineraries that include ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands Two USAlagged coastwise-endorsed passenger vessefs are also currenUy engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of caD wittlin the Hawaiian Islands
As part of your cruise itineraries some of your foreign-flagged vessels depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period and ultimately rebJm to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their endse For example the MS ZAANDAM of Holand America Lines departs San Diego cruises the Hawaiian Islands stops in Ensenada from 800pm to 11 OOpmbull and returns to san Diego CBP believes these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because It appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA -- - - ~~~------
Please be advised that CBP is taking steps to publish this position Should have any questions pertaining to this matter please contact Mr Glen Vereb Chief Cargo Security Carriers and Immigration Branch at (202) 572-8724
Sincerely
F Jl E EST Y LEe A U I 5 I N Gmiddot
December 21 2007
The Honorable W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection co Border Security Regulations Branch Office ofInternational Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229
Re Hawaii Coastwise Cruises (USCBP-2007-0098) Comments in Response to Proposed Interpretation
Dear Commissioner Basham
NCL America Inc1 (NCLA) submits these comments in support ofthe efforts ofCustoms and Border Protection to enforce the Passenger Vessel Services Act and the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative as applied to Hawaii coastwise cruises
1 Introduction and Summary of Position
NCLA operates three large oceangoing US flag cruise ships in Hawaii These ships are documented under US flag and are required to operate in regular service in Hawaii pursuant to the authority of the Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative a 2003 federal statute intended to revitalize the US flag cruise industry and to maximize economic and national security benefits to the United States (the 2003 Act)
NCLA has invested $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships pursuant to the 2003 Act and in direct reliance on the protections of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) and its proper enforcement The PVSA limits the transportation ofpassengers between US ports to coastwise documented US flag ships Its statutory protections recognize that US flag ships have significantly higher operational costs in part because they are subject to more stringent US laws including US labor laws and federal
1 NCL America Inc is a US corporation incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware headquartered in Honolulu Hawaii As a US corporation it is subject to US taxes at both the federal and state level The Chief Executive Officer the Chairman of the Board and all of the Board of Directors of NCL America are US citizens The company is also subject to US labor and employment laws and is required by statute to maintain a workforce comprised primarily ofUS citizens
700 Bishop St SUite 900 I Honolulu HawMi 96813 I Tel 8085273800 Fax 8085273820 I ndcom
2
income tax among others The NCLA ships operating in Hawaii are the only large oceangoing cruise ships operating under US flag In furtherance of the policy goals of the PVSA and the 2003 Act these ships have created over 4000 seafaring jobs all subject to US minimum wage and other labor statutes
Since 2003 there has been a significant increase in capacity in the Hawaii market from foreign flag ships providing cruise service to Hawaii from the West Coast Many of these foreign flag cruises are marketed as Hawaii cruises and consist entirely ofUS ports ofcall with the sole exception of a token stop in Mexico for as little as an hour late at night under circumstances where passengers are not permitted to get offthe ship There are no reported rulings approving these particular foreign flag itineraries
Lower cost foreign competition in the Hawaii market has unfairly hurt NCLAs operations NCLA has incurred substantial losses which have contributed significantly to its decision earlier this year to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAll from US flag and reshydeploy it foreign Unfair foreign competition poses an imminent threat to the remaining US flag passenger vessels operating in the Hawaii trades pursuant to the 2003 Act
As the agency statutorily charged with implementation of the 2003 Act the US Department ofTransportation Maritime Administration (MARAn) is aware of the threat foreign flag Hawaii itineraries pose to the US flag fleet and brought the situation to the attention ofthe US Department ofHomeland Security Bureau ofCustoms and Border Protection (CBP or Customs) Customs determined that the primary object of these itineraries was coastwise and that the Ensenada stop was an evasion of the PVSA
In August 2007 Customs provided written notice to the affected foreign lines and their trade association that the existing itineraries were contrary to the PVSA None of these lines sought advance rulings even after the Customs notice with respect to their Hawaii itineraries pursuant to Customs regulations and many continued to market the itineraries as Hawaii cruises NCLA supports the efforts ofCustoms and MARAD to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act for Hawaii cruises
2 Statutory Authority for Customs Proposed Interpretation
(a) Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA)
Congress passed the PVSA in 1886 to protect the US maritime transportation industry from foreign competition2 Protection is afforded through penalty assessments on foreign vessels transporting passengers between US ports or places directly or by way ofa foreign port 3 As Congress and the courts have recognized coastwise protections for the US maritime transportation industry are only one dimension of the PVSA Operating in conjunction with other coastwise laws and with the US
2 See United States v Honduran SS GRANADA 35 F Supp 892 894 (BD Pa 1940)(citing purpose of PVSA to meet threats to the practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping which was to be preserved for US ships)
46 USc sect 55103 (originally 46 USC App 289)
3
documentation laws the PVSA also enhances military sealift in times ofnational emergency sustains a US merchant marine and supports the US shipbuilding and repair industry4
(b) Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative (the 2003 Act)
Over the past decade Congress has sought to reinforce the goals of the PVSA by providing mechanisms to revitalize the oceangoing US flag cruise fleet particularly in Hawaii The Project America legislation enacted in 1997 authorized among other things the re~flagging ofone existing cruise ship contingent on the operator contracting for the construction oftwo new oceangoing cruise shipss Following the default of the operator under the original contract Congress enacted the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative for the purpose ofrecovering economic and national security benefits to the United States bull 6 These same goals of the original PVSA were expressly referenced in the legislative history of the 2003 Act which emphasized that these ships will be assets available in time ofnational emergency and will significantly expand the pool ofqualified seafarers upon which the US Department ofDefense relies to crew non-combatant vessels
The 2003 Act authorizes the US documentation ofthree cruise ships for operation in regular service in Hawaii subject to certain conditions including a prohibition on operating in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico and the Caribbean Sea and a requirement that all vessel repair work be undertaken in the United States MARAD is charged with implementation of the 2003 Act
3 Customs Implementation of PVSA
(a) Regulations
The current regulations implementing the PVSA were published by Customs in 19858 The growth of the foreign flag cruise industry in North America and in particular the development of the Alaska cruise market led to an effort in 1984 to amend the thenshyexisting regulations to increase the ease of administration and operational flexibility The effort to change the regulation had support from US port interests who saw benefit in the potential increase in the number ofUS ports that foreign vessels could call and was opposed by proponents ofpotential US flag projects as detrimental to efforts to revitalize the US fleet 9 The preamble to the 1985 rule emphasized that it was of paramount importance to consider the primary object ofpassengers in taking a
4 See American Hawaii Cruises v Skinner 713 F Supp 452 457 (DDC 1989) (recognizing the contribution of the PVSA and the Jones Act in helping to secure national defense by maintaining a merchant marine oftbe best equipped and most suitable types ofvessels sufficient to serve in time of war or national emergency) see also Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 30 (DC Cir 1984) Wirth Ltd v SIS Acadia Forest 537 F2d 1272 1281 n32 (5th Cir 1976) S Public Law 105-56 Section 8109 (111 Stat 1203 1244) (Oct 81997 ) 6 Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II General Provisions - Department ofCommerce Section 211 (117 Stat 1179) (Feb 20 2003) 1 149 Cong Rec S1118 (dailyed Jan 17 2003(statement ofSenator Inouye) 8 19 CFR sect 480a 950 Fed Reg 26981 (July I 1985)
4
voyage10 a concept which is reinforced elsewhere in Customs regulations11 In its analysis of the comments received at the time Customs accepted the view ofport interests that the modified rule would help their business but did so recognizing the absence ofa regular salt water US flag passenger fleet Customs acknowledged the potential harm to prospective efforts to revitalize the US flag passenger fleet and expressly cautioned that if it were ever shown that coastwise qualified vessels in competition with foreign vessels were in fact hurt by the modified Customs regulation then Customs would immediately reconsider its position12
(b) Customs Rulings
Given the significant penalties associated with violating the PVSA13 Customs regulations expressly provide a mechanism for the owner or charterer of a foreign vessel or any other interested person to request an advisory ruling as to whether a contemplated voyage would be considered in violation of the PVSA14 Customs regulations provide that vessel operators can rely on these ruling letters only to the extent that the facts and circumstances are identical to those in the ruling letter IS
Notwithstanding the fact that several foreign cruise lines offer Hawaii itineraries originating in a US mainland port and calling at Hawaii ports with a token intervening stop in Mexico there are no reported rulings expressly approving such an itinerary for these foreign cruise lines 16
4 The Cruise Industry in Hawaii
(a) NCL America Returns US flag to the Oceangoing Passenger Fleet
Pursuant to the requirements ofthe 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative NCLA agreed to promote US-flag cruising enhance military sealift capacity and expand the US maritime labor base No other major cruise line had ever undertaken such a commitment to the US flag and the public policy objectives Congress sought to achieve under the PVSA or the 2003 Act Introduction ofPRIDE OF ALOHA in 2004 was a significant development in the maritime industry because it marked the restoration ofthe
10 Id at 26983 11 Customs Regulations include a provision on the effect ofruling letters and with respect to carrier rulings the applicable regulation refers to rulings setting forth a determination as to whether or not the primary object of a contemplated voyage is coastwise transportation in violation of46 USC sect 289 [pYSA codified at 46 USC sect55103] 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 12 50 Fed Reg at 26983 13 A modem cruise ship with 2400 passengers for example would be subject to a fine of$720OOO per cruise based on the statutory penalty of$300 for each passenger transported in violation of the Act 14 19 CFR sect 480a(d) IS 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 16 There is one older reported mling involving a request to drop the Ensenada port call from a Los AngeleslHawaiiLos Angeles itinerary which Customs held would violate the PYSA In dicta Customs acknowledged that the itinerary could be in compliance if the Ensenada call were not dropped but did not address the issue ofwhether a one hour service call where no passengers depart the vessel would be sufficient The carrier that obtained that ruling has since left the Hawaii market See Customs Ruling HQ 114078 re Crystal Hannony (Nov 4 1997)
5
us flag to the oceangoing cruise industry A contemporaneous press release from the Us Department ofTransportation reported that the three US-flag cruise ships to be introduced pursuant to the 2003 Act were expected to create more than 20000 US jobs generate more than $825 million ofexpenditures in the US economy and create nearly $360 million in federal tax revenue by the end of 200717 In 2005 the PRIDE OF AMERICA was introduced and in 2006 the third vessel PRIDE OF HAWAll was introduced to Hawaii Both the PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAIl offer 7shyday inter-island Hawaii itineraries whereas PRIDE OF ALOHA operates on 7 and 10 day cruises exclusively among the islands ofHawaii as well as 11 day cruises that include a foreign port call at Fanning Island To date NCLA has invested over $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships in furtherance ofthe policy objectives of the PVSA and the 2003 Act These ships employ over 4000 seafarers and generate hundreds ofmillions of dollars in benefits for Hawaii and the nation
(b) Significant Increase in Foreign Flag Capacity Since 2003
The most significant change in the Hawaii cruise market since 2003 has been the dramatic increase in capacity A significant portion ofthis capacity increase is directly attributable to NCLAs fulfillment ofthe Congressional mandate in the 2003 Act However foreign-flag operations in the Hawaii market as measured in passenger nights18 have skyrocketed Based on MARAn data derived from the US Customs Border Patrol Vessel Entrance and Clearance documents the passenger nights for foreign flag vessels departing from the West Coast to Hawaii on round trip cruise have increased several hundredfold during this period19 See Exhibit A
(c) NCLA Has Incurred Substantial Losses During this Period
Since 2004 NCLA has lost cumulatively more than a quarter ofa billion dollars A principal reason for these losses has been the increase in foreign capacity in this market NCLA has taken significant steps to reduce costs to address the increase in foreign competition but NCLA is at an inherent disadvantage when competing against foreign companies that are not subject to US labor laws US tax laws and other laws Ofcourse the statutory protections of the PVSA are intended to address these very issues That is why Customs immediate action to implement the proposed interpretation is critical for the US flag fleet Regrettably NCLA has already been forced to reduce overall capacity early next year with the withdrawal ofPRIDE OF HAWAlI to another
17 DOT Press Release dated June 72004 see also DOT Press Release dated August 132004 in connection with visit to PRIDE OF ALOHA by US Transportation Secretary Norman Y Mineta 11 Passenger nights (also referred to as passenger capacity days) are calculated by multiplying the number ofpassengers per vessel by the number ofcruise days in each itinerary by the number of cruises This is the unit ofmeasurement employed by MARAn In contrast passenger bed supply (also referred to as passenger capacity) data reflects only the number ofberths per vessel multiplied by the number of cruises and hence understates the market by excluding the full economic value ofthe cruise perfonned 19 In 2003 the total number ofpassenger nights for round-trip West Coast to Hawaii cruises was 303325 which jumped by 353 to 1072329 in 2006 and by 430 to 1304546 from 2003 to 2007 (The 2007 figure is based on MARAD data for six months and a1ll1ualized by published itineraries for the balance of the year)
6
market for operation under foreign flag This move alone will result in the loss ofover 1000 American seafaring jobs
5 Customs Proposed Interpretation is Necessary to Further the Important National Security and Public Policy Objectives Embodied in Federal Law
As Customs has properly noted the increase in foreign competition in the Hawaii trades in contravention of the PVSA pose[s] an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels[] As the operator of these ships NCLA has a vested interest in protecting the jobs ofthe thousands ofAmerican crewmembers and cruise ship service providers who support these vessels NCLA also has an interest in protecting the substantial economic investment it has made to revitalize the US flag passenger vessel fleet But a balancing of interests in the context of Customs enforcement ofexisting law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act requires a much broader focus
The legislative history of the 2003 Act expressly recognized the national security and public policy import ofestablishing a US flag passenger vessel fleet as a means to maintain the countrys preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool of qualified seafarers and as a means to help sustain a fleet ofUS-flag vessels to su~ort
the nations military and maritime industrial base for times ofnational emergency
Congress understood the importance ofestablishing a viable US flag cruise ship fleet as something larger than the vessels themselves These national security and public policy objectives must be weighed in the balance as Customs assesses how best to interpret its rules to give effect to the PVSA and the 2003 Act
6 Customs Should Clarify that the Proposed Interpretation is Limited to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades and Adopt Reasonable Measures to Ensure Sufficient Foreign Content
Since publication ofthe proposed interpretative rule several commenters have observed that the scope of the proposed interpretation is ambiguous because the language of Section VI referencing any cruise itinerary appears broader than the caption Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises and the entire discussion in the published notice which focuses exclusively on US-flag coastwise vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA agrees that the proposed interpretation should be clarified so that its scope is limited to vessels operating roundtrip voyages from US ports that include Hawaii port calls
NCLA supports the concept reflected in the proposed interpretive rule that round trip Hawaii itineraries from US ports on foreign ships must include a material and measurable degree ofoverall foreign port content as compared to US port content
20 149 Congo Rec S1117 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)
7
(a) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is also Consistent with Subsequent Congressional Enactments Modifying the PVSA
As discussed above it is well established that the PVSA was designed toRrotect US-flag vessels from foreign competition in the coastwise and domestic trades 1
Subsequent legislative enactments however have appropriately differentiated among distinct geographic markets and trades including Canada Alaska Puerto Rico and Hawaii based on the existence or non-existence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
In 1938 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers by Canadian passenger vessels on Lake Ontario and the St Lawrence River until such time as passenger service shall be established by vessels of the United States22 Similarly in 1961 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers on Canadian vessels within Alaska or between Alaska and other points in the United States until such time as passenger service is established by vessels ofthe United States23
In 1984 Congress modified the application ofthe PVSA to pennit the transportation ofpassengers between Puerto Rico and other United States ports on foreign-flag vessels24 As with the other statutory exceptions this provision is qualified and expires [o]n a showing that a United States passenger vessel qualified to engage in the coastwise trade is offering or advertising passenger service between a port in Puerto Rico and another port in the United States2S
Congress acted again with respect to the application of the PVSA with the 2003 Act in which it authorized three vessels that did not meet the US-build requirements of the PVSA to operate as modem US-flagged cruise ships in regular service in Hawaii26 The 2003 Act imposes a specific geographic limitation on the operation of any ship documented under this authority to operations only in regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands ofHawaii and shall not transport passengers in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico or the Caribbean Sea except in certain limited circumstances27 As above the limited nature of the 2003 Act is express it is strictly limited to the large ocean-going cruise ships and then only those operating in the regular Hawaii service where there are no US-flag operations28
21 See Act ofJune 19 1886 c 421 sec 8 24 Stat 81 Act of February 171898 c 26 sec 2 30 Stat 248 22 S] Res 174 75th Cong 52 Stat 223 (Alp 251938) codified at46 USC sect 55121(a) 23 See Pub L 87-77 75 Stat 196 (Jun 30 1961) codified at 46 USC sect 55121(b) 24 See Pub L 98-563 98 Stat 2916 (Oct 301984) codified at 46 USC sect 55104(b) 25 46 USC sect 55104(c)(l) see also 46 USC 46 USc sect 55104(cX2)(expiration of exemption upon availability ofa non-coastwise qualified US-flag vessel offering service in the relevant market) 26 149 Congo Rec SI118 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)(statementofSen Inouye) 27 Pub L 108-7 117 Stat 79 (Feb 20 2003) 28 149 Congo Rec S11l9 (dailyed Jan 17 2003Xstatement of Sen Inouye)
8
In each ofthese instances Congress fashioned a narrow exception to the PVSA that differentiated among distinct geographic markets based on the existence or nonshyexistence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
As the federal agency responsible for administering the 2003 Act MARAD requested that Customs act to protect US flag passenger vessel interests in the Hawaii trades29 Limiting the scope ofthe proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades also reflects Customs appreciation of the PVSA in the context of the subsequent Congressional action30 Viewing the Congressional modifications to the PVSA as a whole Congress has specifically and repeatedly differentiated among distinct geographic markets when it has found it necessary and appropriate to do so to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests It is well established that the proper interpretation of a statutory scheme includes consideration ofsubsequent statutes even though the underlying statute itselfhas not been expressly amended31 Accordingly Customs should likewise limit the scope ofthe proposed PVSA interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades because that is the only geographic market as mandated by the 2003 Act in which oceangoing US-flag cruise ships are operating
(b) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Consistent with Public Policy Objectives of the 1985 Rulemaking
In 1985middot Customs liberalized the regulations implementing the PVSA by eliminating certain regulatory prohibitions on foreign flag vessels In the context of the 1985 rulemaking Customs justified a relaxation ofthe regulations on the grounds that it would simplify the administration of the PVSA and would benefit the economy ofcertain American coastwise ports without eroding the statutory protection given to American vessels engaged in solely domestic trade32
Customs thus sought to reconcile US port economic interests with US-flag passenger vessel interests Both of these twin policy objectives are furthered by
29 See 72 Fed Reg 65488 (Nov 21 2007)( MARAn bas asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the ~eratiODS ofcoastwise-qualified cruise ship operators)
See generally FDA v Brown amp Williamson Tobacco Corp 529 US 120 132-133 (2000)(assessing propriety ofagency construction ofFood DIUg and Cosmetics Act and descnbing responsibility of reviewing cowt to assess statutory provisions in the context of subsequent legislative enactments) 31 See Brown amp Williamson 529 US 143 (holding that proper construction ofstatutory provision must necessarily assume that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications ofa later statute This is particularly so where the scope of the earlier statute is broad but the subsequent statutes more specifically address the topic athand) see also United States v Estate ofRomani 523 US 517 530-531 (1998)( holding that a later-enacted statute should control the construction of the federal lien priority statute a specific policy embodied in a later federal statute should control om construction of the [earlier] statute even though it ha[s] not been expressly amended) United States v Fausto 484 US 439453 (1988)(The courts frequently find Congress to have done this - whenever in fact they interpret a statutory text in the light ofsurrounding texts that happen to have been subsequently enacted This classic judicial task of reconciling many laws enacted over time and getting them to make sense in combination necessarily assumes that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications of a later statute) 32 50 Fed Reg 26982 (JuI 11985)
9
limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades
As noted earlier the 2003 Act limits the operation of the NCLA US-flag oceangoing passenger vessels to regular service in Hawaii Because there are no oceangoing US-flag vessels operating in any market other than the Hawaii trades Customs should limit the scope of the proposed interPretation to that market Such a limitation protects US flag passenger vessel interests without prejudicing US port interests In contrast an application of the proposed interpretation to any itinerary would needlessly harm US port interests unrelated to Hawaii without any countervailing benefit to US-flag passenger vessel interests Accordingly limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation is consistent with the public policy objectives of the 1985 rulemaking as well as the 2003 Act
(c) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Also Consistent with Customs Commitment to Revisit the Scope of its Rules to Protect US-Flag Interests
The relaxation ofthe PVSA regulations in 1985 was premised in large part on Customs finding that there was no regular salt water US-flag passenger fleet in operation at that time33 Acknowledging that the relaxed regulations could harm USshyflag interests Customs committed in the preamble ofthe 1985 final rule to immediately reconsider its interpretation if it is ever shown that there is a viable US flag vessel operating in competition with foreign-flag vessels34
Congress enacted the 2003 Act to stimulate the development of a US flag cruise ship industry As noted above the legislative history ofthat Act makes clear that Congress sought to revitalize the US-flag cruise industry as a means to maintain Americas preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool ofqualified seafarers help sustain a fleet of US flag vessels to support our military and a maritime industrial base create thousands of seagoing and shoreside American jobs and stimulate the development ofa US flag cruise ship tourism business with the commensurate benefits to the US tax base the US economy and US employment
Customs is now acting at MARADs request to revisit its interpretation ofthe regulations implementing the PVSA because recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwise-qualified cruise ship operations35 That is to say that the concerns articulated by Customs in the context of the 1985 rulemaking have materialized and US-flag passenger vessel interests are in fact being hanned in the Hawaii trades by foreign competitors
33 50 Fed Reg 26983 34Id
3S 72 Fed Reg 56488 (Nov 21 2007)
I
10
Because the US-flag passenger vessels are limited by statute to regular service in Hawaii limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the
Hawaii trades is consistent with Customs historical commitment to revisit its interpretation ofthe implementing regulations to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests
7 Conclusion
For the reasons stated above NCLA commends the efforts ofCustoms and MARAn to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act as applied to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA respectfully requests Customs to move ahead promptly with p~blicati~nof a final interpretive rule to advance the important national security arid public policy objectives ofthese laws
We greatly appreciate the opportunity to submit these comments
Sincerely
~~~ Alan T Yamamoto Vice President Hawaii Operations
Exhibit A
Ship Name Serenade Of The Seas Departure Port San Diego California Ports of Call San Diego California Kailua Kona Hawaii Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii Hlo Hawaii Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii Ensenada Mexico San Qigo California
2007 Date(s) Oct 05
Sailing Itinerary
Day Port H ~rrive Depart Activity
05-0ct San Diego California 500 PM
06-0ct Cruising
07-0ct Cruising
08-0ct Cruising
09-0ct Cruising
10-0ct Kailua Kona Hawaii 700 AM 900 PM Tendered
11-00t Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 1000 AM Tendered
12middot0ct Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 900 PM Tendered
13-0ct Hilo Hawaii 700 AM 600 PM Docked
14middot0ct Honoulu (Oahu) Hawaii 700 AM Docked
15-0ct Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii 200 AM Docked
6-0ct CrUising
17-0ct Cruising
18-0ct Cruising
19middot0ct Cruising
-7 20-00t
O-Oot
Ensenada ~i1exico
San Deqo California
i 00 ~r1
700 ~M
200 oM D1Jcked ~
CARIBBEAN CRUISES
EASTERN CARIBBEAN
7
EASTERN CARIBBEAN
7 7 DAYSDAYS DAYS
CARIBBEAN PRINCESS STAR PRINCESS GRAND PRINCESSSUN PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIP from from from
FT LAUDERDALE FT LAUDERDALE GALVESTON 2004 DEPARTIJRE DATES
CARIBBEAN PRINCESS Apr 24 2004 DEPARTURE DATES 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
CRUISE ITINERARYM~yl 1522 CRUISE I1INERARY JuI31724 DAY PORT Nov 14 28 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Dec 4 11 JunS 1226 Oct 31 Nov 13 20 27
Alii 1 1428 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Dec 12 26
Ott 2 9 162330 200S DEPARTURE DATES Sat Galveston EMBARK PMSep41825 Sat ft Lauderdale Sun ft Lauderdale EMBARK PM
Nov 6 132027 200S DEPARTURE DATESDet4 11 26middot Jan 8 15 22 29Sun At Sea Man At Sea 2005 DEPARTURE DATES ]an 9 23 Feb 5 12 19 26 Sun At Sea
CARIBBEAN PRINCESS Feb 6 20 MarS 121926 J~n 8152229 Mar 6 20 12M Apr 29 Man Belize City lPM 7PM Feb 512t 1926 MarS 121926 Apr 317 Apr2t 9 1623 Tue St Thomas 7 AM 6 PM Wed St Thomas BAM 6PM Tue Costa Maya (Mahahual) BAM 4PM
6PM Wed Grand CaYman l2N 7PM
Thu At Sea Fri At Sea Thu Cozumel lOAM 6 PM
4PM Fri At Sea
Sat Ft Lauderdale DISEMBARK AM Sun Ft Lauderdale DISEMBARK AM Sat Galveston DISEMBARK AM
CRUISE IlINERARY
ARRIVE DEPART
EMBARK PM
WESTERN CARIBBEAN
Sf Thomas US Virgin Islands Princess Cays
CARIBBEAN CRUISES
WESTERN CARIBBEAN WESTERN CARIBBEAN SOUTHERN CARIBBEAN EXPLORER
7 6 7 DAYS DAYS DAYS
CARIBBEAN PRINCESS STAR PRINCESS GRAND PRINCESS GOLDEN PRINCESS
DAWN PRINCESS
SAN JUAN ROUNDTRIPROUNDTRIP to fromfrom
GALVESTON SAN JUANFT LAUDERDALE
2004 DEPARTURE DATE2004 DEPARTURE DATES 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
CARIBB~~SflNCESS CRUISE ITINERARY Nov 7 CRUISE ITINERARY
My923 CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTJun 6 20 JUD 19
Jul lOt 31
May829t DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART )uI418 Sun San Juan EMBARK PM
Aug ll t Aug 11529
Sep 11
DAY PORT
Sep 12 26 Mon St Thomas 7AM 6PM STAR PRINCESS Princess Cays 9AM 4PM At Sea Oct 10 24
Nov 721 DecS19 Tue S Kitts 7AM 3PM
2005 DEPARTURE DATES Wed Grenada 9AM 3PM Dec 23 Coumel 7AM 5PM
Grand Cayman 7AM 4PM Jan 21630
2005 DEPARTURE DATES Feb 13 27 Thu Caracas (La Guaira) 9AM 7PM Mar 13 27STAR PRINCESS
Jan 21630 Apr 10 24 Feb 13 27 Ocho Rios 9AM 4PM Fri Aruba BAM 5PM Mar 13 27 Apr 10 24 At Sea
tMonlqQampIyrqlocrsCllhoRfm PltJrtQr-ondlimesmaywlrY Sun San Juan DISEMBARK AMFt Lauderdale DISEMBARK AM
EASTERN CARIBBEAN WESTERN CARIBBEAN CLASSIC SOUTHERN CARIBBEAN
8 7 7DAYS DAYS DAYS
CARIBBEAN GRAND PRINCESS GOLDEN PRINCESS PRINCESS
GALVESTONROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIP tofrom from
SAN JUANFT LAUDERDALE SAN JUAN
2004 DEPARTURE DATE 2004 DEPARTURE DATE 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
DeetS Apr 16CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE IflNERARY May 21630 CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE Jun 13 27DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Jul1125 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
1 Aug 8 221 Galveston EMBARK PM Sun Sanjuan EMBARK PMSep 5 19 Oct 3 17 312-3 At Sea At Sea Nov 14 28 Man At Sea Dec 12 26
st Thomas Cozumel BAM 6PM Tue Barbados 7AM 6PM 2005 DEPARTURE DATES
jan 9 23 Wed St Lucia 7 AMAntigua BAM 6PM Costa Maya (Mahahual) BAM 4PM 5PM Feb 620 Mar 6 20 Thu BAM 6PM Apr 317
At Sea Montego Bay 9AM 4PM Fri St Maarten BAM 6PM
7AM 6PM
Ft Lauderdale DISEMBARK AM Sanjuan DISEMBARK AM Sun San juan DISEMBARK AM
Oct 24 Nov 7 21 DecS19
DAWN PRINCESS
~
I
CARIBBEAN CRUISES
EASTERN CARIBBEAN ISLANDER SOUTHERN CARIBBEAN MEDLEY EASTERN CARIBBEAN
10 10 7 DAYS DAYSDAYS
GRAND PRINCESSDAWN PRINCESSSUN PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP NEW YORK CITYROUNDTRIP from from to
FT LAUDERDALE FT LAUDERDALE SAN JUAN
2004 DEPARnJRf DATE2004 DEPARTURE DATES2004 DEPARTURE DATES
Octn Oct Btl Oct 14CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE ITINERARYCRUISE ITINERARY 200s DEPARTURE DATENov 222 Nov 3t 23
Apr23tDAY PORT DEPART Dec 13 30Dee 12 ARRIVE DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Ft Lauderdale EMBARK PM 1 Ft Lauderdale EMBARK PM EMBARK PM2005 DEPARTURE DATES 2005 DEPARTURE DATES New York City 2 Princess Cays 9AM 4PM 2 At SeaJan 828 Jan 19t
Feb 17tt 3 AlSea Feb 8 28 3 At Sea 2-4 At Sea Mar919 Mar 20
4 St Thomas 7AM 6PM Apr 9 4 Cura~ao 8AM 5PM 5 St Maarten 7AM 6PM 5 Isla Margarita lOAM 4PM St Thomas 7AM 6PM
6 St Kitts 7AM 3PM 6 Barbados 9AM 6PM Dominica SAM 6PM7 8AM 5PM 7 Dominica 7 AM SPM
8 Antigua 9AM 6PM S St Thomas SAM 6PM St Maarten 7AM 6PM
9 9 At Sea
fllrtordtrlllldllmam4YYa1 10 At Sea 10 Princess Cays 9AM 4PM JlilltraryllptfatufnrfYUSfllrllcr t 11I1ll1Il1yopmltnlnrmTtronlcr t ItlntraryaptrattsIn rtVfntOrdtr San Juan DISEMBARK AM Port~rdtrQnd lilrW mil) illI) 11 Ft Lauderdale DISEMBARK AM PortlimtSlIIltlyYllry 11 Ft Lauderdale DISEMBARK AM Port ordtr lind time5 may VIlry
WESTERN CARIBBEAN ADVENTURER EASTERN CARIBBEAN VOYAGER
10 10 DAYS DAYS
SUN PRINCESS DAWN PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIPROUNDTRIP fromfrom
FT LAUDERDALEFT LAUDERDALE
2004 DEPARTURE DATES 2004 DEPARTURE DATES DAWN PRINCESS CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE IIINERARY
Oct 23 Oct 4 24 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Nov 12 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
Nov 13 Dec 2 29 Dec3tt 1 Ft Lauderdale EMBARK PM 1 Ft Lauderdale EMBARK PM
2 Princess Cays 9AM 4PM 2005 DEPARTURE DATES 2 At Sea2005 DEPARTURE DATES
DAWN PRINCESS Jan 183 At Sea 3 At Sea
Feb 7 27Jan 9 296 St Thomas 7AM 6PM Mar19 t 4 St Vincent lPM 6PM
Feb 180 Apr 8St Maarten 7 AM 5PM 5 Grenada 8AM 6PMMar 10f 301 Apr 19 At Sea 6 St Lucia 8AM 6PM
Ocho Rios 12N 6PM 7 Martinique 7AM 3PM
Grand cayman PM S St Thomas SAM 6PM
t IillUGI)lIptfQttsIn rnmtordtr Cozumel 8AM 6PM AlSea tt ~~~oI~~dtr 10 Princess Cays 9AM 4PMMOItQIl8clyrqausOclJollloJ
lwtordtrollllllllyenllllilJllIl) tltllltrlryOptrlll$In rnmtllrdtr AMOIltqollaynplactsOdlDRIos PM IortDrllralldllmallloyWl) Ft Lauderdale DISEMBARK AM
Willemstad Cura~ao
EUROPE CRUISES
GRAND MEDITERRANEAN GREEK ISLES MEDITERRANEANGREEK ISLES
12 1212 DAYS DAYSDAYS
STAR PRINCESS
STARSTAR PRINCESSPRINCESS
sail betweensail between VENICE BARCELONA VENICE to
andand BARCELONA VENICE ROME
CRUISE ITINERARY2004 DEPARTURE 2004 DEPARTURE2004 DEPARTURE CRUISE ITINERARYDATESCRUISE I I INERARY DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DATEDATES
Apr 10 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTMay 16middot DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Venice Italy (overnight onboard ship) EMBARK PM May 4 May18t Sep2St 1 Verdce Italy EMBARK PM
Jun 9 1 Barcelona Spain (overnight onboard ship) EMBARK PM 2 Venice Italy 2PM 2 At Seajune 21 t 2 Barcelona Spain 1 PM Dubrovnik Croatia 8AM 6PMJul3 3 Corfu Greece 8AM 6PM
lullS 3 Monte Carlo Monaco 7 AM 6 PM Corfu Greece 8AM 6PM 4 Katakolon Greece (for Oiympia) 7AM SPMJu127 4 FlorencePisa Italy (Livorno) 630 AM 6 PMAug 8~ Katakolon Greece (for Olympia) 7AM SPM S Athens Greece (Piraeus) 6AM 12 MAug 20deg S NaplesCapri Italy 8 AM 7 PM Sep 1t 6 Athens Greece (Piraeus) 6AM 12 M 6 Mykonos Greece 8AM 12M
6 At Sea 7 Mykonos Greece 8AM 6PM 7 Kusadasi Turkey (for Ephesus) 7 AM SPM7 Athens Greece (Piraeus) 6AM S4S PM
8 Kusadasi Turkey (for Ephesus) 7AM 1PM 8 Kusadasi Turkey (for Ephesus) 8AM 6PM 8 Santorini Greece 7 AM 4PM
9 Jstanbul Turkey 8AM 6PM 9 Rhodes Greece 8AM 6PM 9 At Sea
10 At Sea 10 Santorini Greece 7AM 6PM 10 Rome Italy (Civitavecchia) 8AM 7PM tll1ooil)opcraksinttVUSe
grduPorttlmcsmi)Y6ljI 11 At Sea 11 Cannes France (for Mont Carlo) 8AM 6PM11 At Sea tSamnlQ]latCiIUIe5inplm tltlnerlll)opmlpoundsin
NaplesCapri Italy 630 AM 12 Barcelona Spain (ovrnight onboard ship) 8AMofMo~Urlo ~odcr12 Venice Italy (overnight onboard ship) 8 AM 12 6PM O~lIlalhitRhodalnpUcc Port order md Iimes- JmyVUY Barcelona Spain DISEMBARK AM13 Venice Italy DISEMBARK AM - 13 Iome Italy (qvitavecchia) DISEMBARK AM
MEDITERRANEANAEGEAN MEDITERRANEANMOSAIC
12 12 DAYSDAYS
STAR STAR PRINCESS PRINCESS
ROME BARCELONAto
toVENICE ROME
2004 DEPARTURE DATE 2004 DEPARTURE
CRUISE I I INERARY DATE CRUISE ITINERARYApr 22 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Sep 13 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Rome Italy (Civitavhia) EMBARK pM 1 Barcelona Spaln (overnight onboard ship) EMBARK PM 2 NaplesCapri Italy 7 AM 7 PM Barcelona Spain SPM 3 Messina Italy (for Taormina) 8AM 6PM 3 At Sea 4 Valleta Malta 8AM 6 PM 4 Casablanca Morocco (for Marrakech) 7 AM 8PM
At Sea S Gibraltar 8 AM 6PM Santorini Greece 7 AM 6PM 6 At Sea
7 Kusadasi Turkey (for Ephesus) 8 AM 6PM 7 Cannesfrance (for Mont Carlo) 8 AM 6PM 8 Athens Greece (Piraeus) 6 AM S4SPM 8 At Sea 9 Katakolon Greece (for Olympia) 8 AM 6PM 9 Valleta Malta 8 AM SPM 10 Corfu Greece 8 AM 6PM 10 Messina Italy (for Taormina) 6PM 11 Dubrovnik Croatia 8 AM 6PM 11 NaplesCpri Itiily 6PM 12 Venice Italy (overnight onboard ship) 1230 PM 12 FlorencePisa Italy (Livorno) 830 AM 13 Venice Italy DISEMBARK AM 13 lomeltaly (Clvttavecchia)DISEMBAIKAM Venice Italy
EUROPE CRUISES
EUROPEAN EXPLORER CRUISE MEOffiRRANEANITRANSATLANTIC CRUISE
12 17DAYS DAYS
ROYAL STARPRINCESS PRINCESS
sail between VENICE
ROME to
and FT LAUDERDALE
LONDON
2003 DEPARTURE DATES
2004 DEPARTURE DATE CRUISE ITINERARY
May 7 CRUISE I1INfRARY Oct 7 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Jul30l
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Venice Italy (overnight onboard ship) EMBARK PMAug 11 Sep 41 1 Rome Italy (Civitavecchia) EMBARK PM 2 Vernce Italy 2 PM
2 FlorencePisa Italy (Livorno) 7 AM 7PM 3 At Sea 3 Cannes France (for Monte Carlo) 7 AM 5 PM 4 Barcelona Spain 9 AM 6 PM 5 At Sea 6 Gibraltar 8AM PM 7 Casablanca Morocco (for Marralech) 5AM 6 PM 8 Seville Spain (Cadiz) 8AM 6PM 9 LisbQn Portugal 9AM 5PM 10 Vigo Spain 830AM 4PM 11 At Sea
tllinmryope~te$ 12 ParisNormandy France (Ie Havre) 7 AMlnftYCl5eordu ~rttimesuuyYilY 13 London England (Southampton) DISEMBARK AM
Caudis Park Cuell Barcelona Spain
SCANDINAVIARUSSIA BALTIC HERITAGE WESTERN EUROPEBRITISH ISLES
ROYALGRAND10 GRAND 1210 PRINCESSDAYS PRINCESS PRINCESS DAYSDAYS
ROUNDTRIPROUNDTRIPROUNDTRIP fromframfrom
LONDONCOPENHAGENCOPENHAGEN 2004 DEPARTURE2004 DEPARTURE 2004 DEPARTUREDATESDATES DATES
May19tMay 29 May 19 jul28 JunSJun 18 Aug 231
Jul8 ju118Jul28 Aug 7 CRUISE ITINERARYAug 17
CRUISE IIINERARY ARRIVE DEPART CRUISE IrINERARY EMBARK PMDAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
DAY ARRIVE DEPART 7AM 6PM1 Copenhagen Denmark EMBARK PM EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 7AM 6PM
Stockholm Sweden (Nynilshamn) 7 AM 530PM 6AM PM Helsinki Finland 830 AM 6PM St PetersbUrg Russia (overnight onboard ship) 630 AM 9AM 9PM St Petersburg Russia 6PM
7 Tallinn Estonia 7 AM 1PM 8 Gdansk Poland (Gdynia) 9 AM 4PM 9 Warnemfinde Germany (for amprlin) 8 AM 10 PM 10 Helsing0r Denmark 9 AM 11 AM 10 Copenhagen Denmark (overnight onboard ship) 1 PM 11 Copenhagen Denmark DISEMBARK AM
middotScrvlcctillforlh=CllCIIIlicmIOptoluItllUllwWdlseJnbIDltHdlinprAfbrtour~dllmJlwktbeshJpwl1lPfllClaquodtoCopetWampen and pmenpoundm Qfl tours from HelMp will Rboird ship tPolttimes~myAninliI1ddepartu~itRosythDubJinmdFa1mauthwl)dICtotXLolconditions
tPOrtordermdtlme$maynI) ttCdlitEdinbuJlhotmdedto~mllocunionforMiliblyTltOO~on8123wi1inlmiddotUIIisitSouthQuemsfmyinstudofJosylh
BRITISH ISLES
ROYAL12 PRINCESSDAYS
ROUNDTRIP
from
LONDON
2004 DEPARTURE DATES
Jun 12 jul6
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Lqn4onmiddotpoundngland(Southampton) EMIWlIlt PM 2 Cornwall England (Falmouth) 7AM SPM
Waterford Ireland 8AM 6PM Dublin Ireland 7AM 1130 PM
t PQrtbme5 lliIyyuy Anini Illd departure at Rosytb Dublin md Filmouth ViiYdue to Iiltlal conditions
WESTERN EUROPE
ROYAL12 PRINCESSDAYS
ROUNDTRIP
from
LONDON
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
May 31
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 London England (Southampton) EMBARK PM
CRUISE ITINERARY
EUROPE CRUISES
ICELANDNORWEGIAN FJORDS
ROYAL12 PRINCESSDAYS
ROUNDTRIP
from
LONDON
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
Jun24
CRUISE IflNERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 London Englan4 (Southampton) EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 3 Berge Norway 6PM 4 Hellesylt Norway 830AM 1030 AM 4 Gciranger Norway Geiranger Fjord Sceni Cruising UN 7PM
9AM SPM5
1PM 8AM SPM
10 At Sea
middotStlviceallfof~fjonlovedmdshOR=unlDllOplion1Itourswllldi5anbarilitHelIcsyItAftcrtollrpuKllJClJdisembark
theshlpwiUprocudto~md~lampClSonlounfrwnHdaytwl1lblmd$hip
NORWEGIAN FJORDSNORTH CAPE
ROYAL12 PRINCESSDAYS
ROUNDTRIP
from
LONDON
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
JuilS
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Loridon ~gland (South~mpton) EMBARK PM 2-3 At Sea
Hellesylt Norway 830AM 1030 AM Golranger Norway Geiranger Fjord Scenic Cruising 12N 7PM
TrodheilllNorwaY 9AM SPM At Sea Cross the Ardgt Cirde
6PM 8AM lPM
8AM 130 PM 430PM 630PM
7AM 3PM
Bagpipers Edinburgh Scotland Royal Princess in Geiranger Fjord Norway
EUROPE CRUISES amp CRUISETOURS
17 DAYS
GRAND PRINCESS
FT LAUDERDALE to
COPENHAGEN
2004 DEPARTURE DATE MayZ
CRUISE IfINERARY
DAY 1 2-6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
PORT Ft Lauderdale Florida At Sea ~ores IslandsPortugal (Ponto Delgado) At Sea Lisbon Portugal Vigo Spain At Sea ParislNormandy France (Le Havre) RotterdamThe Netherlands At Sea Hamburg Germay (for Berlin) At Sea Olso Norway Oslo Fjord scnic Cruising Copenhagen Denmark
ARRIVE
N
12N 9AM
7AM
6AM
DISEMBARK AM
DEPART EMBARK PM
6PM
7PM 6PM
7PM 7PM
1UM
MEDITERRANEAN CRUISETOUR
TRANSATLANTICWESTERN EUROPE ICELAND amp GREENLANDTRANSATLANTIC
16 GRAND DAYS PRINCESS
COPENHAGEN to
NEW YORK
2004 DEPARTURE DATE Aug 27
CRUISE IIINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Copenhagen Denmark EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 3 Dover England (forLondon) 7AM 7PM 4 Cornwall England (Falmouth) 9AM 6PM 5 Dublin Ireland lOAM 9PM 6 GlasgowEdinburgh Scotland (Greenock) 8AM 12 M 7 Belfast Northern Ireland 1030 AM 530 PM 8 At Sea 9 Reykjavik Iceland 9AM 9PM 10 At Sea 11 Prins Christian Sund Scenic Cruising 12N 6PM 12 Qaqortoq Greenland 7 AM 2PM 13 At Sea 14 SI Johns Newfoundland Canada 12N 7PM 1516 At Sea 17 New York CIty New York DISEMBARK AM
SCANDINAVIARUSSIA CRUISETOUR
Church of the Savior on the Spilled Blood St Petersburg Russia
WESTERN EUROPE CRUISETOUR
CRUISEIOUR ITINERARY
CRUISETOUR lA11C CRUISETOUR ITINERARY CRUISETOUR 4A14C CRUISETOUR II INERARY
DAY PORT By Sea By Land DAY PORT By Sea By Land CRUISETOUR 7Al7C18 STAR PRINCESS 1 Rome 17 GRAND PRINCESS 1 BudapestDAYS DAYS DAY PORT By Sea By Land 22 Rome Budapest 18 ROYAL PRINCESS 1 Paris
ROMETODI 3 RomeTodi BUDAPEST VIENNA 3 BudapestVienna DAYS 2 Paris and 4 TodiFlorence and 4 Vienna 3 Paris
PARIS EUROSTAR5 Florence 5 ViennaPrague 4 ParisLondon 6 FlorenceVeniceEmbark 6 Prague and 5 London
FLORENCE PRAGUE
plus plus LONDON7 Venice Italy (overnight onboard ship) 7 PragueCopenhagenEmbark 6 LondonSouthamptonEmbark
GRAND MEDITERRANEAN SCANDINAVIARUSSIA plus 7 At Sea CRUISE 8-9 At Sea CRUISE 8 At Sea WESTERN EUROPE 8 Bilbao Spain10 Istanbul Turkey 9 Stockholm Sweden (Nyniishamn) BRITISH ISLES CRUiSE2004 DEPARTURE DATES 2004 DEPARTURE DATES 9 Bordeaux France (Le Verdon)
11 Kusadasi Turkey (for Ephesus) 10 Helsinki FinlandApr Sf 2004 DEPARTURE DATES 10 At SeaMay 131 Jul2Apr 29 12 Athens Greece (Piraeus) 11 SI Petersburg Russia (overnight onboard ship) 11 GlasgowEdinburgh Scotland (Greenock)May 23 JulUt May 141 26middot Jul tt 13~ 250
May 23 Jun 16 13 At Sea JunZt JulU 12 SI Petersburg Russia Jun n 19 Aug 18o 300 12 Dublin Ireland
]un 12 Aug l t 13 Cork IrelandJuliO 14 NaplesCapri Italy 13 Tallinn EstoniaJun 22 t Aug 11 Toun~eonlymilabkwithcruise5indi[itbtAug 3 15 FlorencelPisa Italy (Livorno) 14 Cdansk Poland 14 Cornwall England (Falmouth)
Aug 27 tBritishliksetuise aWEwupeiBritishlslesouist 15 ParisNormandy France (Le Havre)16 Monte Carlo Monaco 15 At Sea bull WestemEuropeCrube middotlcdandINorwqlmFjOllisetuise 16 Rotterdam The Netherlands
t Crulsetour lA only combinable with 12--dayGreck fst 17 Barcelona Spain (overnight onboard ship) 16 Olso NOrway Qsld Fjord Scenic Cruising bull Norwqian FjordsNorth Cipecruise 17 BrusselsBruges Belgium (Zeebrugge)tCruixtour 4A only combinable with lo-day Baltic
crulse shown on PI 11 18 Barcelona Spain Heritage cruise shawn on pg 12 OCrubctnur 7C only combinable with EwuJlWl ExplorerCrube17 Copenhagen Denmark 18 London England (Southampton)
EXOTICS CRUISES
AUSTRALIANEW ZEALAND AUSTRALIANEW ZEALAND AUSTRALIAASIA
12 14 19 DAYS DAYS DAYS
SAPPHIRE PRINCESS SAPPHIRE PRINCESS SAPPHIRE PRINCESS
saH between SYDNEYAUCKLAND SYDNEY
toand to BANGKOKSYDNEY AUCKLAND 2005 DEPARTURE DATES 2005 DEPARTURE DATE
Mar7Jan 6 2004 DEPARTURE DATEJan 1St
Dec 23 CRUISE ITINERARYJr ift Feb 23 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
CRUISE ITINERARY 1 Sydlley Austrli EMBARK PM CRUISE ITINERARY 2 At Sea
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTDAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 3 Brisbane Australia 8AM 6PM 1 Sydlley Australia EMBARK PM 4 At Sea 1 Aucklalld N~w Zealalld EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 5 Cid Harbor Austrlia (for Great Barrier Reef) 7AM 5PM2 At Sea 3 Melbourne Australia 8 AM 6 PM 6 Cirns Australia (Yorkeys) 8AM 6PM
3 WeIUllgton New Zealand 8 AM 6 PM 4 At Sea 7-8 At Sea 4 Christchurch New Zealalld (Lytlelton) 8 AM 6 PM 5 Tasmallia Australia (Hobart) 8 AM 6 PM 9 Darwin Australia lPM 8pM 5 Dunedill N~ Zealalld (Port Chalmers) 8 AM 6 PM 6-7 At Sea 10-11 At Sea 6 Fiordland Natiollal Park Scenic Cruising AM 6 PM 8 Fiordlalld Natiollal Park Scellic Cruising 7 AM 5 PM 12 Bali Illdonesi (Padang Bay) 7AM 6PM
7-8 At Sea J DUlledill New Zealalld (Port Chalmers) 8 AM 6 PM 13-14 At Se 10 Christchurch N~ Zealalld (Lytlelton) 8 AM 6 PM 15 Kuala Lumpur Mlaysia (Port KeIang) 8AM 6PM9 Tasmania Australia (Hobart) 8 AM 6 PM 11 Wellillgtoll New Zealmd 8 AM 6 PM 16 Sillgpore 8AM 6PM
10 At Sea 12 At Sea 17 At Sea 11 Melbourne Australia 8 AM 6 PM 13 Taurallga New Zealalld 8 AM 730 PM 18 Ho Chi Millh City Vietnm (Vung Tau) 7AM 730 PM 12 At S~a 19 At Sea 14 Bay of Islallds New Zealalld 8 AM 7 PM 13 SydPey Australia DISEMBARK AM 20 Bmgkok Thailalld (Laem Chabang) DISEMBARK AM15 Aucklalld New Zealalld DISEMBARK AM
t llinemy opcrnesln reverse order Port times mil1 my
CHINAFAR EAST SOUTHEAST ASIAFAR EAST
1612 DAYSDAYS
PACIFIC PRINCESS
SAPPHIRE PRINCESS PACIFIC PRINCESS
OSAKA BEIJING to
to BANGKOK OSAKA
2004 DEPARTURE DATE 2004 DEPARTURE DATEPAClFlC PRINCESS
julllt Jun 11 2005 DEPARTURE DATE
SAPPHIRE PRINCESS Apr 11
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Osaka Japall EMBARK PM
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Beijillg China (Xingang) EMBARK PM 2 Hiroshima Japall 1 PM 6PM 2 DaHan China AM 5PM 3 At Sea 3 At Sea 4 Shmghai Chilla 7 AM 6PM 4 Shallghai Chilla (overnight onboard ship) 7AM 5 At Sea 5 Shallghai China 6PM 6 Okinaw Jpll 7 AM 1 PM
7 Taipei Taiwm (KeeIung) 9 AM 7PM6 At Sea 8 At Se7 Pusan South Korea 8AM 5PM 9 HOllg KOllg Chill 8 AM 7PM 8 At Sea 10-11 At S~a J Vladivostok Russia 5AM 730 PM 12 Ho Chi MiIJh City Vietnm (Phu My) 7 AM 5PM 10 At Sea 13 At Se 11 Nagasaki Japan 7AM 6PM 14 Singpore 8 AM 6pM
15 KUlltll Mlysi 830 AM 430 PM12 At Sea 16 At Sea 13 Osaka Japan DISEMBARK AM 17 Ballgkok Thaillld DISEMBARK AM t Sailing alls i1t Hiroshima on Dl) 11 In place of Nilgilsaki Port times milY vary
CRUISE I flNERARY CRUISE I flNERARY
Ho Chi Minh City Vietnam
EXOTICS CRUISES
SOUTHEAST ASIACHINA SOUTHEAST ASIACHINA FAR EASTALASKA
PACIflC PRINCISS ROYAL PRINCESS
16 16 19 DAYS DAYS DAYS
SAPPHIRE SAPPHIRE PRINCESS
Sail between PRINCESSBANGKOK
and BANGKOK OSAKA
BEIJING to to
2004 DEPARTURE DATES BEIJING SEATTLEPAClFlC PRINCESS
Jun 27tt 200S DEPARTURE DATE200S DEPARTURE DATE ROYAL PRINCESS
Mar 26 Apr 23Oct 16 Nov lt
CRUISE I I INERARY CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
1 GsakaJpan EMBARK PM1 Bangkok Thailand (Laem Chabang) EMBARKPM 1 Bangkok Thailand (Laern Chabang) EMBARK IM 2 At Sea2 At Sea 2 AtSea bull 3 Nagasaki Japan 7 AM 6PM
9AM 7PM 3 Singapore 7PM 4 Pusan Soqth Korea 8AM 5PM 4-5 At Sea 5 At Sea gt bull
7AM 7PM 6 Da Nwg Vietn~1Il 7AM middot7PM 6 Vladivostok Russia SAM 730 PM 7 At Sea 7 AtSea
7AM 12M 8 Hong lltog ihin~ 7AM 12M 8 Sapporo japan (Muroran) 6AM 6PM 9-10 At Sea 9-10 At Sea 9-12 At Sea cross Intemational Dateline
13 DutchHarbor Alaska (Aleutian Islands) 230 PM 7PM11 ShaJlgllai Cbina (overnight onboard ship) lAM 11 Shangh~t Cllina (ovmightonJoltird $hip) 7 AM 14 At Sea shy12 Shanghai China 6PM 12 Shanghai China
7AM - - tlJf
6PM 15 Anchorage Alaska (Seward) 8AM 6PM13 At Sea 13 AtSea i 16 College Fjord Seni CruIsing 630AM 930 AM
14 Nagasaki japan 7AM 6PM 14 Nagasaki japan 6PM 17 Glacier Ilay Scenic Cruising 1030 AM 830 PM 15 Pusan South lltOrea TAM 4PM 1~ bull Pu~an SQuth iorea middot4lM 18 middotmiddot juneau Alaska 6 AM 2PM 16 At Sea 16 At Sea 19 - At Sea 17 Beijing China (Xingangy OISEMBAlUe AM 17 Beijing Cliina (Xingang) 20 SeattleWashington DISEMBARK AM
t ltinemy Operne5 in rcvmc Older ttPorttimcsmiYnl)middotShlpwilldocklnampngkoknsttadofL1cm~
POLYNESIA amp THE COOK ISLANDS POLYNESIA amp THE MARQUESAS ISLANDS
10 10 DAYS DAYS
TAHITIAN PRINCESSTAHITIAN PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIPROUNDTRIP fromfrom
PAPEETEPAPEETE 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
2004 DEPARTURE DATES Oct 4 24 Mayl 17 27 Sep4 14 24 Nov 13 Jun 6 16 26 0lt 14 00323Ju16 16 26 Nov 323 2005 DEPARTURE DATESAug 5 15 25 Dec 13 Jan 12
Feb 1 21200S DEPARTURE DATES
~~ 122 ~~Il 13 23 CRUISE ITINERARY
CRUISE II INERARY DAY PORT
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Papeete Tahiti 1 Papeete Tahiti (overnight onboard ship) EMBARK PM
2 Moorea Polynesia 2 Papeete Tahiti SPM 3 Huahil1e P9lynesia 8AM 5 PM 3 Tuamotu Atolls Senic Cruising
5 PM8-AM 4 At Sea I At Sea 5 Rarotonga Cook Islands 8AM 5 PI~ 5 Nuku Hiva Marquesas Islands 6 At Sea 6 Hiva Ga Marquesas Islands 8AM 5PM 7 Raiatea Polynesia overnight onboard Ship 6AM
7 At Sea middotai~ RaiateaPQlynesia igt gt 6AM 8 Rangiroa P~iynesia 8AM 4PM8 Tahaa scenic Cryising 630 AM 830 AM
8 BoraBoraPQlyrtesia(ovemightollboard ship) UN 9 Tahaa ~enl Cruising 8 AM middot11AM
9 Bora lora Polynesia 5iM 9 Raiatea Polynesia 12 N 11 PM 10 Moore Polynesfa 8 AM 5 PM la ~ Bora ~oraPoIYnesia 8AM bull 5PM
11 Papeete Tahiti DISEMBARK AM 11 Papeete Tahiti DISEMBARK AM Iong Kong Harbor
3 Singapore 4-5 At Sea 6 Da NangVieinam 7 At Sea 8 liong Kong China
EXOTICS CRU ISES
HAWAIITAHITI HAWAIIAN ISLANDS SOUTH PACIFIC ISLANDS
12 1515 DAYS DAYSDAYS
PACIFIC
TAHITIAN PRINCESS ISLAND PRINCESSPAClFIC PRINCESS
PRINCESS
SYDNEYROUNDTRIP sail between tofrom
PAPEETE PAPEETELOS ANGELES and
2004 DEPARnIRE DATEHONOLULU 2004 DEPARTURE DATES Apr 21
2004 DEPARTURE DATES ~~~l CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE 11 INERARY
Oet21t CRUISE ITINERARY Nov Sf
MayS PACIFIC PRINCESS DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
Nov20t DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DecSt 1 Los Angeles CalifornIa EMBARK AM 1 Sydney AustralIa EMBARK PMAug 17t
Dec20t1 Papeete Tahiti EMBARK PM 2-4 At Sea
2005 DEPARTURE DATE Jan 4 2-5 At Sea
(overnight onboard ship) Jan 19 5 Auckland New Zealand 7 AM 2PMFeb 3t 6 Iiilo Hawaii 8 AM 6 PM
TAHITIAN PRINCESS Papeete Tahiti 11 PM fb 18 6-7 At Sea Kilauea Voko ~enic CruisingApr 12 MarS t 3 Moorea Polynesia 8 AM 5 PM 8 Suva fijI 11 AM 430 PM1~i~t 7 Kona Hawaii 8AM 6PM4 Bora Bora PolYnesia 8 AM 5 PM 9 At Sea Cross International Dateline Apr 19
5-6 At Sea 8 Honolulu Hawaii 8AM 11 PM 10 Apia Western Samoa 830 AM 2PM 7 Christmas Isl~ndKiribati 1Z N 5 PM 9 Kauai Hawaii (Nawlliwlli) 8AM 6PM 11-12 At Sea 8-9 At Sea 10 Maui Hawaii (Lahaina) 6PM 13 Bora Bora Polynesia lOAM 6PM 10 HlloliaWlii 6 PM 13 Raiatea Polynesia (overnight onboard 11 PM11-14 At Sea 11 Maui Hawaii (Lahaina) 8 AM 6 PM 14 Raiatea Polynesia 11 PM
15 Ensenada Mexico (service call)KaUaiH~waii(Nawllfwtli) 8AM 6 PM 15 Moorea Polynesia 8AM 5PM
tllinemyopcr~ttsln=x QnIerPurtlimcslmYvary Honolulu Hawaii DISEMBARK AM 16 Los Angeles CalIfornia DISEMBARK AM 16 Papeete Tahiti DISEMBARK AM
ISLANDS OF THE PACIFIC THEATER SOUTH PACIFIC EXPLORER
24 24 DAYS DAYS
PAClFIC PRINCESS PAClFIC PRINCESS
sail between HONOLULU PAPEETE
and to OSAKA FT LAUDERDALE
2004 DEPARTURE DATES
Mayl 2004 DEPARTURE DATEJul2Sj
Aug 29 CRUISE ITINERARY
CRUISE ITINERARYDAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART EMBARK PM DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
1 Papeete Tahiti EMBARK PM lPM 7PM 2 8AM 11 PM
3 ~~~~~~ ~~~~Sta 8AM 5 PM 4-6 At Sea 7 Pitcairn Island Scenic Cruising 8AM 1211
8AM 12 N
7AM ZPM 8-9 At Sea 10 Easter Island Chile 8AM 2PM
9AM 11-14 At Sea 15 Callao Peru (overnight for Lima and Machu Picchu) 8AM 16 Callao Peru lPM 17 At Sea 18 Manta Ecuador (for Quito) 9fM 7PM 19 At Sea 20 Transit Panama Canal 7 AM 430 PM 21 San BIas Panama 8AM 5 PM 22 ft Sea 23 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands 7AM 4PM 24 At Sea
25 Ft Lauderdale Florida DISEMBARK AMMoorea Polynesia tllinemyoperataln~12onlerPortl1mesmiYmymiddot
EXOTICS CRUISES
HAWAIITAHITISOUTH PACIFIC AMAZONSOUTHERN CARIBBEAN CAPE HORNSTRAIT OF MAGELLAN
1430 12 DAYS DAYSDAYS
ROYAL PRINCESS ROYAL PRINCESSSAPPHIRE PRINCESS
sail betweenFT LAUDERDALE SANTIAGOLOS ANGELES to
andto MANAUS BUENOS AIRESSYDNEY 2005 DEPARTURE DATE 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
2004 DEPARTURE DATE Apr 9 Jan 10
Nov 22 Jan 241 Feb 7
FebZt
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
CRUISE ITINERARY
CRUISE ITINERARYCRUISE ITINERARY 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTDAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 2-3 At Sea 1 Santiago Chile (Valparaiso) EMBARK PM
1 Los ingeles California EMBARK PM 4 Tortola BritIsh Virgin Islands 8 AM 6 PM 2 At Sea 2 Ensenada Mexico 8AM 5PM 3 Puerto Montt Chile 7AM 6PM
3middot6 At Sea 4 At Sea 5 Dominica 9 AM 4 PM 7 Hilo Hawaii 8AM 5 At Sea Chilean Fjords Scenic Cruising6PM 6 Trinidad 9 AM 6 PM
8 Maui Hawaii (Lahaina) 8AM 6PM 6 At Sea Amalia Glacier Scentc CruiSi3f7 At Sea 7 Punta Arenas Chile (Strait of Magei an) 7AM 6PM9 Honolulu Hawaii 7AM 5PM
- 10middot13 At Sea 8 Beagle Channel Scenic Cruising 8 Ushuaia Argentina (Tierra del Fuo) 12N 8PM
8 Devils Island French Guiana (Isle Royal) 8 AM 2 PM 14 Bora Bora Polynesia 8AM 6PM 9 At Sea 9 At Sea Cape Hom Scenic Cruising
10 Santarem Brazil 9 AM 7 PM 10 Moorea Polynesia 8AM 6PM 10 Falkland Islands (Stanley) 8AM 6PM 10 Papeete Tahiti (overnight onboard ship) 9PM 11 At Sea
i 16 Papeete Tahiti 6PM 11 Boca da Valeria Brazil (Amazon River) 7 AM 2 PM 12 Puerto Madryn Argentina 6AM 5PM 17middot18 AtSea 12 Manaus Brazil (overnight onboard ship) 10 AM 13 At Sea
14 Montevideo Uruguay 9AM 6PM19 Pago Pago merlcan Samoa 8AM 6PM 13 Manaus Brazil DISEMBARK AM 15 Buenos Aires Argentina DISEMBARK AM 20 Apia Western Samoa 8AM 6PM 21 At Sea Cross International Dateline middotl1me5forallscenkouisinCile subjectlDclwIgc
tllinmryopefilteslnr=rscordttPorttlmislm)vary22 Suva Fiji 8AM 6PM l 23-24 At Sea
20 Auckland New Zealand 8AM 6PM ORINOCO RIVERSOUTHERN CARIBBEAN ANDESSOUTH AMERICA 26 Tauranga New Zealand 8AM 7PM 27 At Sea
28 Wellington Newealand 8AM 6PM 16 17 DAYS DAYS 29-30 AtSea
31 Sydney Australia DISEMBARK AM ROYAL PRINCESS ROYAL PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP SANTIAGO from to
FT LAUDERDALE FT LAUDERDALE
200S DEPARTURE DATE2005 DEPARTURE DATE
Mar 7Mar 24
CRUISE IIJNERARYCRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Santiago Chlle (Valparaiso) EMBARK PM
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM
2 La Serena Chile (Coquimbo) 8 AM 5 PM2-3 At Sea 3 At Sea Um6n Costa Rica 7AM 7PM 4 Arica Chile 7AM 6PMCristobal Panama (for Panama Canal) 8AM 5PM o At Sea
6 Cartagena Colombia 9AM 2 PM 6 San Martin Peru (for Pisco and Machu Picchu) 7AM 6PM 7 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 130 PM 7PM 7 Callao Peru (overnight for Lima) 530 AM 8-9 At sea 8 Callao Peru 1PM 10 Puerto Ordaz Venezuela (Orinoco River) 8AM 6PM 9 At Sea
i 11 At Sea 10 Manta Ecuador (overnight for Quito) 530AM 12 Greada 8AM i 11 Manta Ecuador 1lM5PMt 1~ Dolllinlca i 7N1 5 PM 12 At Sea
i 13 Transit Panama C~nal 7AM 430 PM14 St Thomas us Virgilslands 9AM 5PM 14 Cartagena Colombia 8AM 130 PMJs AtSei i 15 Aruba Netherlands intiiles 1PM 7PM 16 Princess Cays Bahamas 8AM 16-17 At Sea Tahiti Polynesia 17 FtLallardale Flillilt~ DISEMBARK AM 1ampmiddot Ft L~uderdale Florida DISEMBARK AM
AMAZON RIVERMEDITERRANEAN
21 DAYS
ROYAL PRINCESS
MANAUS
to ROME
2005 DEPARTURE DATE
Apr 21
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE M~naus Brazil (Wemight onboardship) Manaus Brazil
3 BocadaValeria Brazil (AriiazonRivet) 11 AM 4-6 At Sea 7 Recife Brazil 1 PM 8-11 AtSea 12 Dakar Senegal 8AM 13-14 At Sea 15 Agadir Morocco 7AM 16 Casablanca Morocco (for Marrakech) 8AM 17 Gibraltar lOAM 18 Allcante Spain 12 N 19 Barcelona Spain 8AM 20 Cannes France (for Monte Carlo) 8AM 21 FlorencePisa Italy (Livarno) 7AM 22 Rome Italy (Civitavecchia) DISEMBARK AM
INDIAN OCEANAUSTRALIA
28 DAYS
PACIfIC PRINCESS
CAPE TOWN
to SYDNEY
2004 DEPARTURpound DATE
Oct 20
CRUISE ITINERARY1 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Cape Town South Africa EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 3 East London South Africa 7AM 3PM 4 DurbahSouth Africa 8AM 6PM 5-7 At Sea 8 Nosy BeMadagascar 7AM 4PM 9 At Sea 10 Poilit des Galets Reunioll]slahd 11 Port Louis Mauritius 12c19 At Sea 20 Perth Australia (Fremantle) 21-23 At Sea 24 Adelaide Australla 25 At Sea 26 Melbourne Australla 7 27 Tasmania AUstralia (Burnie) 28 At Sea 29 Sydney Australia DISEMBARK AM
I
DEPART EMBARK PM
7PM 6PM
8pM
5PM
3PM 9PM 6PM 6PM 5PM 7PM 7PM
EXOTICS CRUISES
SOUIB ATIANTICANTARCfICNSOUIB AMERICA
24 DAYS
ROYAL PRINCESS
CAPE TOWN
to SANTIAGO
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
Dec 17
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Cape TownSouthAfrica (overnighfol1board ship) EMBARK PM 2 Cape Town South Africa 3PM 2 if~~t Good HopSCenic Crulsing 3-6 6 Tristan DaCunha United Kingdom 8AM 5PM 7-10 At Sea 11 Falkland Islands (Staliley) 8 AM 5PM 12 At Sea 13-16 Antarctica Peninsula ScehltmiddotCruising 14 days ihcludingmiddot Elephant
Island AntarcticSotind Deceptionlslana GerlacheStrait NaxefChannel Schollaert Channel SigJtla Island and Boyd Strait)
17 At Sea Cape Horn Scenic Cruising1amp UshuaiaArgentina (Tierra del fuego) bull middot6 AM 19 Punta Arenas Chile (Strait of Magellan) 7 AM 20 At Sea Amalia Glacier Scenic Cruising21 At Sea Chilean Fjords Scenic Cruising22 AtSea 23 Puerto Mont Chile 7AM 6PM 24 At Sea 25 Santiago Chile (Valparaiso) DISEMBARK AM
-nmes for1l scenlccruisinc are subJect to change
ASIAINDIAMEDITERRANEAN
30 ROYAL PRINCESSDAYS
ROME
to BANGKOK
2004 DEPARlURE DATE
Sep 16
CRUISE Il INERARY
WEST AFRICASOUTH AMERICA
28 DAYS
PACIFIC PRINCESS
FT LAUDERDALE
to CAPE TOWN
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
51 22
CRUISE ITINERARY
DISEMBARK AM
Aruba
EXOTICS CRU ISES amp CRU ISETOU RS
AUSTRALIANEW ZEALAND CRUISETOUR
AUSTRALIAN EXPLORER 2004 DEPARTURE DATESAPPHIRE21 plus
DAYS PRINCESS SYDNEY Dec 17 to
AUCKLAND CRUISETOUR 5P CRUiSE
CRUISETOUR ITINERARY
DAY PORT By Sea By Land DAY PORT
1 Sydney 14 Fiordland National Park 2 Sydney Scenic Cruising
3 SydneyAyers Rock 15 Dunedin New Zealand (Port Chalmers) 4 Ayers ROek
5 Ayers RockPort Douglas 16 Christchurch New Zealand 6 Port Douglas - (Lytleton)
7 Port DouglasSydneyEmbark 17 Wellilgton New Zealand 8 At Sea 18 At Sea 9 Melbourne Australia 19 Tauranga New Zealand
10 At Sea 20 Bay of Islands New Zealand 11 Tasmania Australia (Hobart) 21 Auckland New Zealand 12middot13 At Sea
Sydney Opera House Australia
AUSTRALIANEW ZEALAND CRUISETOUR SOUTHEAST ASIACHINA CRUISETOUR CAPE HORNSTRAIT OF MAGELLAN CRUISETOUR AUSTRALIAN BEIJING Be TERRA COTTA 2004 DEPARTURE DATES RIO 8t IGUAZU FALLS Post-Crulsetour1 Pre-Crulsetour 217EXPLORER 2005 DEPARTURE DATES PACIFICSAPPHIRE WARRIORS19 plw or PRINCESS jul9t loieifie
DAYS PRINCESS SYDNEY Jan 12 plus 19 ROYAL plw Feb 5 Oct 28 Royal BUENOS AIRES
AUCKLAND DAYS ROYAL PRINCESS to 21 ampto DAYS PRINCESS
BEUING CRUISE t ~~S~i BeWln~~~~e
to SANTIAGO~e~s~Ot~r~ih~fi1BANGKOK CRUiSE CRUISECRUISETOUR 3t3P landtourm~yvlty CRUISETOUR 12
DAY PORT DAY PORT
DAY PORT By Sea ltBy LaDd DAY PORT
1 Beijing 11-12 At Sea 1 Rio de janeiro 11 Cape Horn Scenic Cruising
13 Hong Kong 2 Rio de jneiro c 12 Ushuaia Argentina 14 At Sea 3 RiolgUaiu Falls 12 Beagle Channel Scenlc Cruising
15 Nha Trang Vietnam 4 IIDIilZll FaU$13u~os~re$ 13 Punta Arenas Chile
16 Phu My Vietnam 5 Buens AiresEmbark 14 At Sea 17 At Sea 6 Montevideo Uruguay 15 Seno Eyre Fjord Scenic Cruising 18 Singapore 7 At Sea 16 At Sea 19 Kualtan Malaysia 8 Puerto Madryn Argentina 17 Puerto Montt Chile 20 At Sea 9 At Sea 18 At Sea 21 Bangkok Thail3nd 10 Falkland Islands (Stanley) 19 Santiago Chile
DAY PORT DAY PORT
At Sea Pusan SouthKOrea Nagasaki japan At Sea Shanghai China
Note CnIlst route shown for Royil Princess Oct 28 only Timcsforil1lsccnkoulslngmsubjccttothange
CRUISE [OUR ITINERARY
CRUISETOUR ITINERARY
CRUISrrOlJR ITINERARY Fiordland National Park Scenic Cruising DlUedin New Zealand Christchurch New Zealand Wellington New Zealand
14
GRAND PANAMA CANAL CRUISES
ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL
10 10 11 DAYSDAYS DAYS
CORAL PRINCESS GRAND PRINCESS GRAND PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIPfrom from
fromFT LAUDERDALE GALVESTON GALVESTON
2004 DEPARTURE DATES Oct n 21 31 2004 DEPARTURE DATE
2004 DEPARTURE DATENov 10 20 30middot DeelSmiddot
DedSDec 10 28
2005 DEPARTURE DATES CRUISE ITINERARY Jan 7 17 27
CRUISE ITINERARY Feb 6 16 26 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART MarS 1828 CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Galveston Texas EMBARK PMApr 7 17 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTshy 1 Galveston Texas EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 1 ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 3 Belize City Belize 1 PM 7PM 2-3 At Sea 3 Belize City Belize lPM 7PM 4 Costa Maya Mexico (Mahahual) 8AM 4PM 4 Um6n Costa Rica 7AM rPM 4 Costa Maya Mexico (Mahahual) SAM 4 PM 5 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands 12 PM 7PM 5 Panama Canal (to Gatun Lake) 7AM 430 PM 5 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands 12 PM 7PM 6 Ocho Rios Jamaica SAM 5PM 5 Col6n Panama 5PM 8PM 6 At Sea 7 At Sea 6 At Sea Cristobal Panama 7AM 4PM 8 7AM 4PM 7 Grand Cayman Cayman IslandS 7AM 4PM (fot Panama Canal) ftrtpg~niaa~~) S Corumel Mexico SAM 6PM 8 At Sea 9 At Sea 9 Bclize City Belize 7AM 4 PM 6PM 10 Coromel Mexico lOAM 6 PM9 Cozumel Mexico lOAM 10 At Sea 10 At Sea 11 At Sea
Portordtrllndtlmtsmayvllry 11 flo Lauderdale florida DISEMBARK AM Portorntr IInltf timpoundi may vary 11 Galveston Texas DISEMBARK AM Port ordu and Nmes may vary 12 Galv_es~on Texas DISEMBARK AM
ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL
8 DAYS
CORAL PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP
from
FT LAUDERDALE
2004 DEPARTURE DATE Dec 20
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Fl Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM 2-3 At Sea 4 Lim6n Costa Rica 7AM 7PM 5 Panama Canal (to Gatun Lake) 7 AM 430 PM 5 Co16n Panama 5PM SPM 6 At Sea 7 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands SAM 5PM S At Sea 9 Flo Lauderdale Florida DISEMBARK AM Bridge of the Americas Panama
f OptIonll fOllTS inclld1lI tht AtlllnH to Pacific RlIlllfll) joumq will dlmlldrt tilt ship b) tctdtr lit Gfttlm uk AJkr tour plIssmm dlstmlrark tilt shipwin procmlllat through tilt Gatun Locb lIndjlnlllly dock in Gl6lI Hmal1p41Sl11tmmttydiumlmtheJldlo~ lflrshops IInd~llI toIIrsrrnrl CIItutl14ktlllIrtonlflrJhlp
GRAND PANAMA CANAL CRUISES
GRAND PANAMA CANAL GRAND PANAMA CANAL GRAND PANAMA CANAL
150R 18 150R 1715 DAYS DAYS DAYS
CORAL PRINCESS SUN PRINCESS
REGAL PRINCESS REGAL PRINCESS SUN PRINCESS
DAWN PRINCESS REGAL PRINCESS sail between DAWN PRINCESS
sail between FT LAUDERDALE FT LAUDERDALE sail betweenand
FT LAUDERDALEand SAN DIEGO andLOS ANGELES
SAN FRANCISCO 2004 DEPARTURE DATES 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
DAWN PRINCESS 2004 DEPARTURE DATESNov 24Sp191
CRUISE ITINERARY Dec9t CORAL PRINCESSREGAL PRINCESS 5ltp261 CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE ITINERARY
200S DEPARTURE DATES Dec 24 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
SUN PRINCESS DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARIltPM200S DEPARTURE DATES DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Sep 2StMar 24
3 Ocho Rios Jamaica lOAM 6PM 2-3 At5ea 2 At Sea 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBA8KPM
REGAL PRINCESS AprSt 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBA8KPM Jan stu 200S DEPARTURE DATES2 At Sea4 At Sea 4 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 7AM lPMJan 23 5 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 7AM lPM 3 Ocho Rios Jamaica lOAM 6PM REGAL PRINCESS 5 Cartagena Colombia 9AM 3PMFeb7t 4 At Sea Apr 239AM 3PM 6 Transit Panama Canal 7AM 430 PMFb22 ~ yenr~fte~~~~~~u 7AM 430 PM 5 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 7AM lPM At SeaMar9t CORAL PRINCESS 79AM 3PM8 At Sea Apr 27 8 Puntarenas Costa Rica 7AM 7PMSUN PRINCESS 9 Puntarenas Costa Rica 7 AM 7PM ~ yenr~fte~n~~~~~u 7AM 430 PM 9-10 At SeaApr1S 8 At Sea DAWN PRINCESS10-11 At Sea 11 Acapulco Mexico 8AM 5PM
5PM 9 Puntarenas Costa Rica 7AM 7PM Apr 29H ~ae~lcoMexico 8 AM 12 At SeatllWrryopmllzlfrarnLls~in 10-11 At Sea rmrKfIfikTiIIrttimnma1 tlliJlrraryoptJllllsfrlJflSlmFranrimlJn 13 Cabo San lucas Mexico 8AM 5PM
gt This mUJI C4Jl llfwmblnld wlth a 3 14 Cabo San Lucas Mexico 7 AM lPM H ~e~o Mexico 8AM SPM rmruordrrorttimamG)llIryCoIutar CnUK to VlWOIlllr SC Dqs ThUIltIIIflltllnlltCllIIblntdwilhaZ-day 14-15 At Sea 16lhrlllllhI9lllIbtboobdulaquoSC)lQ4k t Illncral) lIpCutcs in mrmt orm Pllrt IiIIIa CocastaICnliutoVan(ouKrBCDlIys16 16 San Francisco California 7AM 4PMcowtlIrcrllisr IIIIYlIl1Ymiddot IhrounIScankboobdlUaK)lllllluU t~A~geles California 6 AM 5PM 14 Cabo San Lucas Mexico 8AM 5PM
Thllwl1JIIICllllslltMOlIkpilllyJmtcad 17-18 At Sea middotmiddotThliIAfllIllCltlllsatMGnIqclBaylnstcadllf 15 At Sea CPlIilldCI1IIu 17 At Sea o[OdKKwsPurllilllrlmllYWlry OchoRicJsPortllmtslllllYVllfymiddot D1SEMBA8K AM19 Vancouver BC DISEMBA8K AM 16 San Die20 California DlSEMBA8K AM 18 Val1couver BC
GRAND PANAMA CANAL COASTAL CRUISING
2-4 CORAL PRINCESS ISLAND PRINCESS SUN PRINCESS18 DAWN PRINCESS DIAMOND PRINCESS STAR PRINCESSDAYSDAYS
COASTAL CRUISE SCHEDULEREGAL PRINCESS
SHIP DAYS FROM TO DEPARTURE DATE DIAMOND PRINCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 5104
SAN FRANCISCO DIAMOND PRINCES5 4 Vancouver Seattle 5404 to CORAL PRINCESS 2 San Francisco Vancouver 5604
NEW YORK DAWN PRiNCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 5704 ISLAND PRiNCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 51204
2004 DEPARTURE DATE SUN PRINCESS 3 San Francisco Vancouver 51404Aug 24 ISLAND PRiNCESS 3 Vancouver LOI Angeles 91804
DIAMOND PRINCESS 1 Seattle Vancouver 91804CRUISE ITINERARY DIAMOND PRINCESS 6 Vancouver Los Angeles 91904 SAPPHIRE PRINCESS 1 Seattle Vancouver 91904 SAPPHREPRINCESS 2 Vancouver San Francisco 92004 DIAMOND PRINCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 43005 DlAMONDPRiNCES$ 4 Vancouver Seattle 5305 SUN PRINCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 5305
ISLAND PRiNCESS 3 Los Angeles VancOllver 5405 CORAL PRiNCESS 2 San Francisco Vancouver 51205
Coral Princess in the Panama Canal
CRUISE PLUS
Extend your adventure with our Cruise Plusreg program Cruise Plusreg enables you to enhance your vacation with one- to four-night hotel
packages in cities that stand on their own as vacation destinations Add nights in Sydney before you cruise or extend your vacation with nights in the city by the
bay San Francisco Transportation and luggage handling costs from the airport to both hotel and ship plus meet and greet services are always included
Wherever you choose to explore youll enjoy properties that are carefully chosen based on service value location and the peace of mind of knowing that Princess
has arranged it all for you
Anchorage Alaska Trevi Fountain Rome Auckland Harbor New Zealand
The Cruise Plusreg Program is available in over 30 major cities including
MEDITERRANEANAEGEAN EXOTICS PANAMA CANAL Barcelona London Rome and Venice Auckland Bangkok Beijing Buenos Aires Ft Lauderdale Los Angeles New York City
Cape Town Ft Lauderdale Honolulu Los San Diego San Francisco Sanjuan Vancouver NORTHERN EUROPE Angeles Montreal Moorea New York City Copenhagen and London MEXICO CARIBBEANOsaka Papeete Rome San Francisco
Ft Lauderdale Galveston Los AngelesTRANSATLANTIC Santiago Seattle Sydney Vancouver Venice Barcelona Copenhagen Ft Lauderdale San Francisco and San Juan
London New York City and Rome ALASKA Anchorage Calgary Fairbanks Kenai San Francisco Seattle and Vancouver
For more information about options and pricing reference a destination specific brochure or contact your travel agent
TRAVEL THE WORLD WITH THE LEADER IN CRUISINGmiddot Princess
Analysis by the Hawaii Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism Comparing the Economic Impact of Foreign Flag Ships with US Flag Cruise Ships Sailing in Hawaii
This is a summary of an analysis prepared by the Hawai Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism (DBEDT) of the economic impact of the foreign flag cruise ship fleet sailing in Hawaii as compared to each of the US flag ships operating in Honolulu
The comparison is set out below
Foreign Pride Pride Pride
Fleet Of Hawaii Of Aloha Of America
Total economic output impact (spendingsales) ($mil) 155 542 4225 4958
Total earnings impact (labor earnings) ($mil) 44 155 1207 1411
Total employment impact Uobs) 1447 5059 3943 4627
This analysis demonstrates that a single US-flagged ship the Pride of America home ported in Honolulu is 32 times more economically impactful and creates 32 times as many jobs as the entire foreign flag fleet that sails into and out of Hawaii ports of call
Economic Impact of Pride of America
Assumptions 1 Annual impact though Pride of Aloha is leaving in May 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existing Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($) 4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of outputl$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job multiplier (jobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
118700 105
2706 3373
147 042
1372
4958
1417
4627
Data sourcelformula Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Line 1 x line 2 x line 31 000000
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 4 x line 5
Line 4 x line 6
Line 4 x line 7
Economic Impact of Pride of Hawaii
Assumptions
1 Annual impact though Pride of Hawaii is leaving in February 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existing Pride of Aloha and Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($) 4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job multiplier (jobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
Data sourceformula 139770 Actual 2007 figure
975 Actual 2007 figure 2706 Actual 2007 figure 3688 Line 1 x line 2 x line 31000000
147 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model 042 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
1372 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
5421 Line 4 x line 5
1549 Line 4 x line 6
5059 Line 4 x line 7
Economic Impact of Pride of Aloha
Assumptions 1 Annual impact though Pride of Aloha is leaving in May 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existlng Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($)
4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job mUltiplier Oobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
95680 111
2706 2874
147 042
1372
4225
1207
3943
Data sourcelformula Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Line 1 x line 2 x line 31000000
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 4 x line 5
Line 4 x line 6
Line 4 x line 7
lt
Methodology Used in Calculating Impact of International Cruise Ships
Cruise ship visitors 1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Came with ships 3 Flied in 4 Average length of stay (days) 5 PPPD ($) 6 Cruise visitor spending ($mil))
Cruise ship crews 7 Ratio of crew spending to cruise visitor spending 8 Cruise crew spending
Cruisline 9 Ratio of crew spending to cruise visitor spending
10 Cruiseline spending
11 Total cruise-related spending ($mil)
12 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 13 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 14 Job multiplier Uobs$ cruise -related spending)
15 Total output impact ($miJ)
16 Total earnings impact ($miJ)
17 Total employment impact (jobs)
106641 98307
8334 739 847 668
02 134
038 254
1055
147 042
1372
1551
444
1447
Data sourceformula Line 2 + line 3 DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report Line 1 x line 4 x line 5
DBEDT 2003 Cruise study Line 7 x line 6
DBEDT 2003 Cruise study Line 9 x line 6
Line 6 + line 8 + line 10
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 11 x line 12
Line 11 x line 13
Line 11 x line 14
Economic Contributions Foreign-Flag Fleet operating in Hawaii vs Three US-Flag Ships
$1500
Pride of Hawaii$1000- $542 million VIc -0-E c Pride of AlohaCo
423 million$500
Pride of America $496 million155 million$shy
Foreign-Flag US-Flag Fleet Fleet
Source State of Hawaii Department of US-Flag $1460 billion Business Economic Development and Tourism
Foreign-Flag $ 155 million 7292008
Employment Foreign-Flag Fleet operating in Hawaii vs Three US-Flag Ships
15000
10000
til c o Pride of Aloha
39435000
Pride of America 1447 4627
~---------
Foreign-Flag US-Flag Fleet Fleet
Source State of Hawaii Department of US-Flag 13629 jobs Business Economic Development and Tourism
Foreign-Flag 1447 jobs 7292008
Foreign Flag Capacity Growth Foreign flag passenger capacity has changed five-fold on roundtrip Hawaii cruises from the West Coast since enactment of the Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative
1600000
1400000
tn 1200000
J enshyZ
1000000
I shyG) en 800000 s G) tn tn
600000 as D 400000
200000
0 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Year
Source US Maritime Administration (derived from the US Customs and Border Patrol Vessel Entrance and Clearance documents - final 2007 data) 7292008
NCL America Hawaii Economic Contributions
(2004-2008)
bull (in Millions) bull $399 in wages benefits and overtime to US seafarers bull $35 in Federal and State payroll Taxes bull $64 in Government Fees and Taxes to Hawaii bull $28 in wages benefits and overtime to US other employees bull $52 in Port Charges to Hawaii Companies (Stevedores tugs pilots etc) bull $85 in Fuel to Tesoro Hawaii bull $130 for shore excursions to Hawaii tour operators bull $39 for Hawaii hotel rooms and ground transport bull $75 for food grown in Hawaii bull $57 in union fees and levies (incl $32M paid directly by employees) bull $1 in MMD fees to the United States Coast Guard bull $51 for recruitment screening processing and training crew bull $76 advertising and promoting Hawaii as a destination bull $1092
COASTWISE CRUISES INTERPRETIVE RULE RESOLUTION Adopted at the
US Conference of Mayors 76th Annual Meeting
June 20-242008 Miami
WHEREAS the Department of Homeland Securitys Customs and Border Protection (CBP) issued a proposed Interpretive Rule regulating Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises on foreign flagged vessels between US ports of call under the Passenger Vessel Services Act at the request of the United States Maritime Administration and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule would require that a foreign-flagged vessel on a coastwise cruise to call at a foreign port for at least 48 hours with that foreign stop constituting at least 50 percent of the cruise itinerary and allowing passengers to disembark the cruise vessel at the foreign port before continuing the cruise to a US port of call and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule establishes burdensome criteria that are wholly inconsistent with industry practice particularly the 48-hour call at foreign port shyinasmuch as the standard port call is six to eight hours - as well as the requirement that 50 percent of a cruise be spent at the foreign port and
WHEREAS the intent of the proposed Interpretive Rule is to protect the single remaining US flag vessel serving the Inter-Hawaiian Island cruise trade that according to the Hawaii Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism generates more than 4600 jobs and generates nearly $500 million in economic benefits for the state annually and
WHEREAS thousands of members of the International Longshore Workers Union (nWU) are employed at US ports serving cruise ships and whose jobs would be at risk if the proposed Interpretive Rule were implemented and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule is vague as to the breadth of its application ie to coastwise cruises between all United States ports or applied solely to coastwise cruises from West Coast ports to Hawaii and
WHEREAS the Cruise Lines International Association estimates the proposed Interpretive Rule would upend the $17 billion in national cruise industry spending and put at risk more than 300000 jobs generated by the international cruise industry including jobs held by nWU at US ports and the local allied industries supporting the cruise industry and
Executive Order Submissions Under Review
II Reglnfogov Where to ind Federal Regulatory Information -~
Home ] Lnitied Agenda and Regulator) Ilan pound012866 Regulator) Review Jnformalion Collection Review
EO 12866 Regulatory Rlvlw dvanced Search IJitorical RepWI Review Counh Jriter XIL
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA)
Executive Order Submissions Under Review July 25 2008 - _------------____ _shy
Department of Homeland Security
AGENCY DHS-TSA RIN 1652-AA53
TITLE Large Aircraft Security Program Other Aircraft Operator Security Programs and Airport Operator Security Program
STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT Yes RECEIVED DATE 06302008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
AGENCY DHS-USCIS RIN Llti15-AB67 TITLE Changes to Requirements Affecting H-2B Nonimmigrants and Their Employers
STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT No RECEIVED DATE 06092008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
AGENCY DHS-USCBP RIN 1651AA11 TITLE Issuance of a Visa and Authorization for Temporary Admission Into the United States for Certain Nonimmigrant Aliens Afflicted W HIV Infection
STAGE Final Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT No RECEIVED DATE 03042008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
-_RE_V-IE-W-E-X-T-EN-D-E-D---------- _
AGENCY DHS-USCBP RIN 1651-AA76 TITLE Coastwise Transportation of Passengers STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT Yes RECEIVED DATE 07142008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
Disclosure I Accessibility I Privacy Policy I Contact Us
httpwwwreginfogovpublicdoeoReviewSearch 7252008
View Rule Page 11
Shere D find Federal ReguLatory InformciiorlReglnfogov Home J Cnified Agenda al1d Regulatory Plan EO 12866 Regulatory Reyiew Information Collection Reiew
Current rnified Agenda and Regulatory Plan Historical Pnified Agenda and Regulatory Plan Search
View Rule
DHSIUSCBP RIN 1651-AA76 Publication ill Spring 2008
Title llCoastwise Transportation of Passengers
Abstract This interim rule amends the Department of Homeland Securitys (DHS) current regulations relating to the transportation of passengers by non-coastwise-qualified vessels on voyages that begin and end at a US port and stop at intervening US and foreign port(s) Under this interim final rule voyages that begin and end at a US port and stop at a foreign port(s) and at intervening US port(s) where a large USshyflag coastwise-qualified passenger vessel engages in regular service are in violation of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) unless the cumulative length of stay(s) at intervening foreign port(s) is more than 50 percent of the total amount of time spent at the intervening US port(s) and passengers are permitted to go ashore at the foreign port(s) The purpose of this amendment is to ensure that the Congressional purpose in enacting the PVSA which is to preserve the economic benefits of US coastwise trade to US-flag coastwise-qualified vessels is properly implemented
Agency Department of Homeland Security(DHS) Priority Substantive Nonsignificant
KIN Status First time published in the Unified Agenda Agenda Stage of Rulemaking Final Rule Stage
Major No Unfunded Mandates No
CFR Citation -LCER 4J~)(h)(plusmnJ
Legal Authority 5JJSS_30J12lJ-SClt16 J9_lJiCJ 431 9_L1C1plusmn3JJ2JScHJ1J2JSCJ624 L(LlLSc207LIl(gtJfHgt~ _CiQJ _46lSC 6QLQ~
Legal Deadline None
Timetable Action Date FR Cite
Interim Final Action 0510012008
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required No Government Levels Affected None
Federalism No
Included in the Regulatory Plan No
RIN Data Printed in the FR No
Agency Contact Glen E Vereb Chief Entry Procedures and Carriers Branch Department of Homeland Security US Customs and Border Protection Office of Regulations and Rulings 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington DC 20229 Phone202572-8730
Disclosure I Accessibility I Privacy Policy I Contact Us
httpwwwreginfogovpublicdoeAgendaViewRuleruleID=286751 7128120
Federal RegisterVol 72 No 224Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules 65487
SPECULATIVE POSITION LIMITS 1-Continued [In contract units)
Contract
Soybeans and Mini-Soybeans 2
Wheat and Mini-Wheat 2 bullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbull
Soybean Oil
SingleSpot month All monthsmonth
600 8600 13300 600 11100 14500 540 6600 8600
Soybean Meal 720 5500 7100
Minneapolis Grain Exchange
Hard Red Spring Wheat I 600 I 11100 I 14500
New York Board of Trade
Cotton No2 I 300 I 5300 I 7300
Kansas City Board of Trade
Hard Winter Wheat I 600 I 11100 I 14500
1 For purposes of compliance with these limits positions in a futures contract that shares ~ubstantially identical terms with a contract market enumerated herein including a futures contract that is cash-settled based on the settlement price of an enumerated contract market shall be agshygregated with positions in the enumerated contract market
2 For purposes of compliance with these limits positions in the regular-sized and mini-sized contracts shall be aggregated
Issued by the Commission this November 152007 in Washington DC David Stawick Secretary of the Commission [FR Doc E7-22681 Filed 11-20-07 845 amI BILLING CODE 6351-Q1-P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Bureau of Customs and Border Protection
19 CFR Part 4
[USCBP-2007-o098]
Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises
AGENCY Customs and Border Protection Department of Homeland Security ACTION Proposed interpretation solicitation of comments
SUMMARY This document proposes new criteria to be used by Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to determine whether non-coastwise-qualified vessels are in violation ofthe Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) when engaging in cruise itineraries in which passengers board at a US port the vessel calls at several Hawaiian ports and then the vessel proceeds to a foreign port or ports for a brief period before ultimately returning to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their cruise CBP believes these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because it appears that the primary objective of the foreign stop is evasion of the PVSA
DATES Comments must be received on or before December 212007 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT Glen E Vereb Cargo Security Carriers amp Immigration Branch Office of International Trade (202) 572-8730 ADDRESSES You may submit comments identified by docket number by one of the following methods
bull Federal eRulemaking Portal http wwwregulationsgov Follow the instructions for submitting comments
bull Mail Border Security Regulations Branch Office of International Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
I Public Participation
Interested persons are invited to participate in this proposed interpretation by submitting written data views or arguments on all aspects of the proposed interpretation Customs and Border Protection (CBP) also invites comments that relate to the economic environmental or federalism effects that might result from this proposed interpretation Comments that will provide the most assistance to CBP in developing these procedures will reference a specific portion of the proposed interpretation explain the reason for any recommended change and include data information or authority that support such recommended change
Instructions All submissions received must include the agency name and docket number for this proposed
interpretation All comments received will be posted without change to http wwwregulationsgov including any personal information provided
Docket For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received go to http wwwregulationsgov Submitted comments may also be inspected on regular business days between the hours of 9 am and 430 pm at the Office of International Trade Customs and Border Protection 799 9th Street NW 5th Floor Washington DC Arrangements to inspect submitted documents should be made in advance by calling Mr Joseph Clark at (202) 572shy8768
II Background
The maritime cabotage law governing the transportation of passengers was first established by section 8 of the Passenger Vessel Services Act of June 191886 (the PVSA) 24 Stat 81 as amended by section 2 of the Act of February 17 1898 30 Stat 248 formerly codified at 46 USC App 289 (now codified at 46 USC 55103) 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 of $200 (now $300 as promulgated in TD 03-11 pursuant to the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 199028 USC 2461 note) for each passenger so transported and landed
The intent of the maritime cabotage laws including the PVSA was to provide a legal structure that guarantees a coastwise monopoly to
65488 Federal RegisterVol 72 No 224Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules
American shipping and thereby promotes development of the American merchant marine Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 28 (DC Cir 1984) see also The Granada 35 FSupp 892 8931940 AMC 1601 (DC Pa 1940) (stating that the legislative aim of section 289 [now 55102] was the creation of a practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping business for United States ships) In other words the PVSA was enacted to advance the United States merchant marine and fleet by restricting the use of foreign-ownedflagged passenger vessels in United States territorial waters
Passenger vessel transportation between United States ports has historically been viewed to be part of the coastwise trade after the enactment of the PVSA This view is premised on the concepts of continuity of the voyage and whether its intended purpose or objective was coastwise transportation In other words the PVSA was held to be violated if the coastwise movement was continuous or if the purpose of the trip was a coastwise voyage (See 18 OAG 445 September 4 1886 28 OAG 204 February 16 1910 29 OAG 318 February 12 1912 30 OAG 44 February 1 1913 34 OAG 340 December 24 1924 and 36 OAG 352 August 13 1930)
The CBP regulations promulgated pursuant to the PVSA are found at section 480a of title 19 of the Code of Federal Regulations (19 CFR 480a) and are reflective of the above cited Office of the Attorney General decisions These regulations provide among other things that a non-coastwise-qualified vessel which embarks a passenger at a port in the United States embraced within the coastwise laws (a coastwise port) will be deemed to have landed that passenger in violation of the PVSA if the passenger disembarks at a different coastwise port on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a nearby foreign port or ports (as defined in 19 CFR 480a(a)(2) see also 19 CFR 480a(b)(2)) The terms embark and disembark are words of art which are defined as going on board a vessel for the duration of a specific voyage and leaving a vessel at the conclusion of a specific voyage respectively (See 19 CFR 480a(a)(4))
The references in section 480a to nearby foreign ports (defined in 19 CFR 480a(a)(2)) are the results of attempts by CBP to apply an Office of the Attorney Generals opinion dated February 26 1910 (28 OAG 204) In that case a foreign-flag vessel transported 615 passengers on a voyage around the world beginning in New
York and concluding in San Francisco The Attorney General opined that since the primary object of the voyage was to visit various parts of the world on a pleasure tour returning home via California and not to be transported in domestic commerce the transportation was not in violation of the PVSA
The 1910 Attorney Generals opinion was extended to voyages that included foreign ports other than nearby foreign ports (See Treasury Decision (TD) 68shy285 (33 FR 16558) November 14 1968) However voyages solely to one or more coastwise ports have always been considered predominantly coastwise Therefore non-coastwise-qualified vessels engaging in such a voyage where passengers temporarily go ashore at a coastwise port have been deemed to have violated the PVSA
m Current Law and Policy Pursuant to Public Law 109-304 120
Stat 1632 enacted on October 6 2006 Title 46 United States Code was substantially reorganized and recodified Consequently the PVSA is now codified at 46 USC 55103 and provides that no vessel shall transport passengers between ports or places in the United States either directly or by way of a foreign port under a penalty of $300 for each person so transported and landed except one that (1) Is wholly owned by citizens of the United States for purposes of engaging in the coastwise trade and (2) has been issued a certificate of documentation with a coastwise endorsement or is exempt from documentation but would otherwise be eligible for such a certificate and endorsement
In 2003 Congress enacted Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II Section 211 for the purpose of revitalizing the oceangoing US-flag cruise industry in Hawaii (the 2003 Act) Three oceangoing US-flag cruise ships PRIDE OF ALOHA PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAII were documented with coastwise privileges pursuant to the 2003 Act These vessels entered regular service in Hawaii in 2004 2005 and 2006 respectively and pursuant to the express language of the 2003 Act are limited in their operation to providing regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands of Hawaii
The CBP regulations promulgated pursuant to the PVSA are set forth in 19 CFR 480a and have remained unchanged throughout both the recodification of Title 46 of the United States Code and the enactment of the 2003 Act They provide that a violation of the PVSA occurs when passengers embark (board a vessel for the
duration of a voyage) a non-coastwiseshyqualified vessel at one US port and disembark (leave the vessel at the conclusion of a voyage) at a different US port unless they proceed with the vessel to a distant foreign port (Le any port not considered a nearby foreign port which is defined as any port located in North America Central America Bermuda or the West Indies including the Bahamas) Currently these regulations do not contain specific criteria for non-coastwise-qualified vessels on itineraries including US ports and either nearby or distant foreign ports in order for such foreign port calls to be compliant with the PVSA
To reiterate the applicable CBP regulations provide that the PVSA is violated when a non-coastwise-qualified vessel transports a passenger on a voyage solely to one or more coastwise ports and the passenger disembarks or goes ashore temporarily at a coastwise port (19 CFR 480a(b)(1)) Furthermore a violation of the PVSA also occurs when a non-coastwise-qualified vessel transports a passenger on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a nearby foreign port or ports (but no other foreign port) and the passenger disembarks at a coastwise port other than the port of embarkation (19 CFR 480a(b)(2)) However there is no violation of the PVSA when a passenger is on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a distant foreign port or ports (whether or not the voyage includes a nearby foreign port or ports) and the passenger disembarks at a coastwise port provided the passenger has proceeded with the vessel to a distant foreign port (19 CFR 480a(b)(3))
IV Request From MARAD To Provide Guidance
The US Department of Transportation Maritime Administration (MARAD) has requested that CBP take action to ensure enforcement of the PVSA MARAD has asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreignshyflag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwiseshyqualified cruise ship operators
In April of 2007 the operator of the three US-flag cruise vessels operating solely in Hawaii pursuant to the 2003 Act announced their intent to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAIl from the Hawaii market and redeploy her to Europe The operator intends to re-flag the vessel to foreign registry directly resulting in the loss of over 1100 crewmember jobs The primary reason cited for this decision is the rapid increase in foreign-flag competition entering the Hawaii market
Federal Register I Vol 72 No 224 I Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules 65489
from the West Coast This competition is evidenced in published cruise itineraries of foreign-flag carriers offering a variety of round trip cruises that depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period usually in the early morning and ultimately return to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their cruise These cruises are often marketed as Hawaii cruises and except for the brief stop in the nearby foreign port of Ensenada are purely coastwise in nature It is these cruise itineraries that pose an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels that pursuant to the 2003 Act are currently engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands
V Preliminary Notice
In response to MARADs concerns CBP sent letters to two carriers known to operate the itineraries in question as well as to the Cruise Lines International Association Inc stating that CBP believes that these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because it appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA The letters further indicated that CBP is taking steps to publish this position
VI CBPs Proposed Interpretive Rule Accordingly in this document CBP is
proposing to provide that cruise itineraries for non-qualified coastwise vessels which allow passengers to board at a US port call at several Hawaiian ports proceed to a foreign port or ports for a brief period and then ultimately return to the original US port of embarkation for disembarkation are not consistent with the PVSA and the regulations promulgated pursuant thereto Specifically CBP interprets a voyage to be solely to one or more coastwise ports even where it stops at a foreign port unless the stop at the foreign port is a legitimate object of the cruise CBP will presume that a stop at a foreign port is not a legitimate object of the cruise unless
(1) The stop lasts at least 48 hours at the foreign port
(2) The amount of time at the foreign port is more than 50 percent of the total amount of time at the US ports of call and
(3) The passengers are permitted to go ashore temporarily at the foreign port
Accordingly CBP proposes to adopt an interpretive rule under which it will presume that any cruise itinerary that does not include a foreign port call that
satisfies each of these three criteria constitutes coastwise transportation of passengers in violation of 19 CFR 480a(b)(1)
Dated November 16 2007 W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection [FR Doc E7-22788 Filed 11-20-07 845 am] BILLING CODe 9111-14-1
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau
27 CFR Part 9
[Notice No 76]
RIN 1513-AB49
Proposed Establishment of the Leona Valley Viticultural Area (2007R-281 P)
AGENCY Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau Treasury ACTION Notice of proposed rulemaking
SUMMARY The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau proposes to establish the 134 square mile Leona Valley viticultural area in the northeast part of Los Angeles County California We designate viticultural areas to allow vintners to better describe the origin of their wines and to allow consumers to better identify wines they may purchase We invite comments on this proposed addition to our regulations DATES We must receive written comments on or before January 22 2008
ADDRESSES You may send comments on this notice to one of the following addresses
bull httpwwwregulationsgov (Federal e-rulemaking portal follow the instructions for submitting comments) or
bull Director Regulations and Rulings Division Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau PO Box 14412 Washington DC 20044-4412
See the Public Participation section of this notice for specific instructions and requirements for submitting comments and for information on how to request a public hearing
You may view copies of this notice selected supporting materials and any comments we receive about this proposal at httpwwwregulationsgov under Docket No 2007-0066 You also may view copies of this notice all related petitions maps or other supporting materials and any comments we receive about this
proposal by appointment at the TTB Information Resource Center 1310 G Street NW Washington DC 20220 To make an appointment call 202-927shy2400
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT NA Sutton Regulations and Rulings Division Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau 925 Lakeville S1 No 158 Petaluma CA 94952 phone 415shy271-1254 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
Background on Viticultural Areas
TTB Authority Section 105(e) of the Federal Alcohol
Administration Act (FAA Act) 27 USC 205(e) authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to prescribe regulations for the labeling of wine distilled spirits and malt beverages The FAA Act provides that these regulations should among other things prohibit consumer deception and the use of misleading statements on labels and ensure that labels provide the consumer with adequate information as to the identity and quality of the product The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) administers the regulations promulgated under the FAA Act
Part 4 ofthe TTB regulations (27 CFR part 4) allows the establishment of definitive viticultural areas and the use of their names as appellations of origin on wine labels and in wine advertisements Part 9 of the TTB regulations (27 CFR part 9) contains the list of approved viticultural areas
Definition Section 425(e)(1)(i) ofthe TTB
regulations (27 CFR 425(e)(1)(i)) defines a viticultural area for American wine as a delimited grape-growing region distinguishable by geographical features the boundaries of which have been recognized and defined in part 9 of the regulations These designations allow vintners and consumers to attribute a given quality reputation or other characteristic of a wine made from grapes grown in an area to its geographic origin The establishment of viticultural areas allows vintners to describe more accurately the origin of their wines to consumers and helps consumers to identify wines they may purchase Establishment of a viticultural area is neither an approval nor an endorsement by TTB of the wine produced in that area
Requirements Section 425(e)(2) of the TTB
regulations outlines the procedure for proposing an American viticultural area and provides that any interested party
Us Department ofHomelaDd Secmity Washington DC 10229
bull ~
US Customs and Border Protection
AUG 15 2fXJJ
VE5-3-02-QTRRBSTCCCI - ti015502-GG-
Mr leon Sutcliffe Director Port Operations Camivai Cruise Unes Camival Place 3655 NW 87Avenue Miami Aorlda 33178
RE P~nger Vessef Services Ad Coastwise Transportation 46 USC sect 55103 19 CFR sect 480a(b)
Dear Mr Sutcliffe
As you know US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) enforces the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) codified at TItle 46 United States Code section 55103 (46 USC 55103) This statute prohibits non-coastwise-qualifled vessels (ie those vessels not US-buill owned and documented with a coastwise endorsement) from transporting passengers between porls or places within the United States The regUlations promUlgated pursuant to the PVSA are found at TrtJe 19 Code of Federal Regulations section 4808 (19 CFR 4808)
It has come to our attention that passenger vessels of your company are engaging in cruise itineraries that include ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands Two USAlagged coastwise-endorsed passenger vessefs are also currenUy engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of caD wittlin the Hawaiian Islands
As part of your cruise itineraries some of your foreign-flagged vessels depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period and ultimately rebJm to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their endse For example the MS ZAANDAM of Holand America Lines departs San Diego cruises the Hawaiian Islands stops in Ensenada from 800pm to 11 OOpmbull and returns to san Diego CBP believes these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because It appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA -- - - ~~~------
Please be advised that CBP is taking steps to publish this position Should have any questions pertaining to this matter please contact Mr Glen Vereb Chief Cargo Security Carriers and Immigration Branch at (202) 572-8724
Sincerely
F Jl E EST Y LEe A U I 5 I N Gmiddot
December 21 2007
The Honorable W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection co Border Security Regulations Branch Office ofInternational Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229
Re Hawaii Coastwise Cruises (USCBP-2007-0098) Comments in Response to Proposed Interpretation
Dear Commissioner Basham
NCL America Inc1 (NCLA) submits these comments in support ofthe efforts ofCustoms and Border Protection to enforce the Passenger Vessel Services Act and the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative as applied to Hawaii coastwise cruises
1 Introduction and Summary of Position
NCLA operates three large oceangoing US flag cruise ships in Hawaii These ships are documented under US flag and are required to operate in regular service in Hawaii pursuant to the authority of the Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative a 2003 federal statute intended to revitalize the US flag cruise industry and to maximize economic and national security benefits to the United States (the 2003 Act)
NCLA has invested $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships pursuant to the 2003 Act and in direct reliance on the protections of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) and its proper enforcement The PVSA limits the transportation ofpassengers between US ports to coastwise documented US flag ships Its statutory protections recognize that US flag ships have significantly higher operational costs in part because they are subject to more stringent US laws including US labor laws and federal
1 NCL America Inc is a US corporation incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware headquartered in Honolulu Hawaii As a US corporation it is subject to US taxes at both the federal and state level The Chief Executive Officer the Chairman of the Board and all of the Board of Directors of NCL America are US citizens The company is also subject to US labor and employment laws and is required by statute to maintain a workforce comprised primarily ofUS citizens
700 Bishop St SUite 900 I Honolulu HawMi 96813 I Tel 8085273800 Fax 8085273820 I ndcom
2
income tax among others The NCLA ships operating in Hawaii are the only large oceangoing cruise ships operating under US flag In furtherance of the policy goals of the PVSA and the 2003 Act these ships have created over 4000 seafaring jobs all subject to US minimum wage and other labor statutes
Since 2003 there has been a significant increase in capacity in the Hawaii market from foreign flag ships providing cruise service to Hawaii from the West Coast Many of these foreign flag cruises are marketed as Hawaii cruises and consist entirely ofUS ports ofcall with the sole exception of a token stop in Mexico for as little as an hour late at night under circumstances where passengers are not permitted to get offthe ship There are no reported rulings approving these particular foreign flag itineraries
Lower cost foreign competition in the Hawaii market has unfairly hurt NCLAs operations NCLA has incurred substantial losses which have contributed significantly to its decision earlier this year to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAll from US flag and reshydeploy it foreign Unfair foreign competition poses an imminent threat to the remaining US flag passenger vessels operating in the Hawaii trades pursuant to the 2003 Act
As the agency statutorily charged with implementation of the 2003 Act the US Department ofTransportation Maritime Administration (MARAn) is aware of the threat foreign flag Hawaii itineraries pose to the US flag fleet and brought the situation to the attention ofthe US Department ofHomeland Security Bureau ofCustoms and Border Protection (CBP or Customs) Customs determined that the primary object of these itineraries was coastwise and that the Ensenada stop was an evasion of the PVSA
In August 2007 Customs provided written notice to the affected foreign lines and their trade association that the existing itineraries were contrary to the PVSA None of these lines sought advance rulings even after the Customs notice with respect to their Hawaii itineraries pursuant to Customs regulations and many continued to market the itineraries as Hawaii cruises NCLA supports the efforts ofCustoms and MARAD to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act for Hawaii cruises
2 Statutory Authority for Customs Proposed Interpretation
(a) Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA)
Congress passed the PVSA in 1886 to protect the US maritime transportation industry from foreign competition2 Protection is afforded through penalty assessments on foreign vessels transporting passengers between US ports or places directly or by way ofa foreign port 3 As Congress and the courts have recognized coastwise protections for the US maritime transportation industry are only one dimension of the PVSA Operating in conjunction with other coastwise laws and with the US
2 See United States v Honduran SS GRANADA 35 F Supp 892 894 (BD Pa 1940)(citing purpose of PVSA to meet threats to the practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping which was to be preserved for US ships)
46 USc sect 55103 (originally 46 USC App 289)
3
documentation laws the PVSA also enhances military sealift in times ofnational emergency sustains a US merchant marine and supports the US shipbuilding and repair industry4
(b) Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative (the 2003 Act)
Over the past decade Congress has sought to reinforce the goals of the PVSA by providing mechanisms to revitalize the oceangoing US flag cruise fleet particularly in Hawaii The Project America legislation enacted in 1997 authorized among other things the re~flagging ofone existing cruise ship contingent on the operator contracting for the construction oftwo new oceangoing cruise shipss Following the default of the operator under the original contract Congress enacted the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative for the purpose ofrecovering economic and national security benefits to the United States bull 6 These same goals of the original PVSA were expressly referenced in the legislative history of the 2003 Act which emphasized that these ships will be assets available in time ofnational emergency and will significantly expand the pool ofqualified seafarers upon which the US Department ofDefense relies to crew non-combatant vessels
The 2003 Act authorizes the US documentation ofthree cruise ships for operation in regular service in Hawaii subject to certain conditions including a prohibition on operating in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico and the Caribbean Sea and a requirement that all vessel repair work be undertaken in the United States MARAD is charged with implementation of the 2003 Act
3 Customs Implementation of PVSA
(a) Regulations
The current regulations implementing the PVSA were published by Customs in 19858 The growth of the foreign flag cruise industry in North America and in particular the development of the Alaska cruise market led to an effort in 1984 to amend the thenshyexisting regulations to increase the ease of administration and operational flexibility The effort to change the regulation had support from US port interests who saw benefit in the potential increase in the number ofUS ports that foreign vessels could call and was opposed by proponents ofpotential US flag projects as detrimental to efforts to revitalize the US fleet 9 The preamble to the 1985 rule emphasized that it was of paramount importance to consider the primary object ofpassengers in taking a
4 See American Hawaii Cruises v Skinner 713 F Supp 452 457 (DDC 1989) (recognizing the contribution of the PVSA and the Jones Act in helping to secure national defense by maintaining a merchant marine oftbe best equipped and most suitable types ofvessels sufficient to serve in time of war or national emergency) see also Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 30 (DC Cir 1984) Wirth Ltd v SIS Acadia Forest 537 F2d 1272 1281 n32 (5th Cir 1976) S Public Law 105-56 Section 8109 (111 Stat 1203 1244) (Oct 81997 ) 6 Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II General Provisions - Department ofCommerce Section 211 (117 Stat 1179) (Feb 20 2003) 1 149 Cong Rec S1118 (dailyed Jan 17 2003(statement ofSenator Inouye) 8 19 CFR sect 480a 950 Fed Reg 26981 (July I 1985)
4
voyage10 a concept which is reinforced elsewhere in Customs regulations11 In its analysis of the comments received at the time Customs accepted the view ofport interests that the modified rule would help their business but did so recognizing the absence ofa regular salt water US flag passenger fleet Customs acknowledged the potential harm to prospective efforts to revitalize the US flag passenger fleet and expressly cautioned that if it were ever shown that coastwise qualified vessels in competition with foreign vessels were in fact hurt by the modified Customs regulation then Customs would immediately reconsider its position12
(b) Customs Rulings
Given the significant penalties associated with violating the PVSA13 Customs regulations expressly provide a mechanism for the owner or charterer of a foreign vessel or any other interested person to request an advisory ruling as to whether a contemplated voyage would be considered in violation of the PVSA14 Customs regulations provide that vessel operators can rely on these ruling letters only to the extent that the facts and circumstances are identical to those in the ruling letter IS
Notwithstanding the fact that several foreign cruise lines offer Hawaii itineraries originating in a US mainland port and calling at Hawaii ports with a token intervening stop in Mexico there are no reported rulings expressly approving such an itinerary for these foreign cruise lines 16
4 The Cruise Industry in Hawaii
(a) NCL America Returns US flag to the Oceangoing Passenger Fleet
Pursuant to the requirements ofthe 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative NCLA agreed to promote US-flag cruising enhance military sealift capacity and expand the US maritime labor base No other major cruise line had ever undertaken such a commitment to the US flag and the public policy objectives Congress sought to achieve under the PVSA or the 2003 Act Introduction ofPRIDE OF ALOHA in 2004 was a significant development in the maritime industry because it marked the restoration ofthe
10 Id at 26983 11 Customs Regulations include a provision on the effect ofruling letters and with respect to carrier rulings the applicable regulation refers to rulings setting forth a determination as to whether or not the primary object of a contemplated voyage is coastwise transportation in violation of46 USC sect 289 [pYSA codified at 46 USC sect55103] 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 12 50 Fed Reg at 26983 13 A modem cruise ship with 2400 passengers for example would be subject to a fine of$720OOO per cruise based on the statutory penalty of$300 for each passenger transported in violation of the Act 14 19 CFR sect 480a(d) IS 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 16 There is one older reported mling involving a request to drop the Ensenada port call from a Los AngeleslHawaiiLos Angeles itinerary which Customs held would violate the PYSA In dicta Customs acknowledged that the itinerary could be in compliance if the Ensenada call were not dropped but did not address the issue ofwhether a one hour service call where no passengers depart the vessel would be sufficient The carrier that obtained that ruling has since left the Hawaii market See Customs Ruling HQ 114078 re Crystal Hannony (Nov 4 1997)
5
us flag to the oceangoing cruise industry A contemporaneous press release from the Us Department ofTransportation reported that the three US-flag cruise ships to be introduced pursuant to the 2003 Act were expected to create more than 20000 US jobs generate more than $825 million ofexpenditures in the US economy and create nearly $360 million in federal tax revenue by the end of 200717 In 2005 the PRIDE OF AMERICA was introduced and in 2006 the third vessel PRIDE OF HAWAll was introduced to Hawaii Both the PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAIl offer 7shyday inter-island Hawaii itineraries whereas PRIDE OF ALOHA operates on 7 and 10 day cruises exclusively among the islands ofHawaii as well as 11 day cruises that include a foreign port call at Fanning Island To date NCLA has invested over $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships in furtherance ofthe policy objectives of the PVSA and the 2003 Act These ships employ over 4000 seafarers and generate hundreds ofmillions of dollars in benefits for Hawaii and the nation
(b) Significant Increase in Foreign Flag Capacity Since 2003
The most significant change in the Hawaii cruise market since 2003 has been the dramatic increase in capacity A significant portion ofthis capacity increase is directly attributable to NCLAs fulfillment ofthe Congressional mandate in the 2003 Act However foreign-flag operations in the Hawaii market as measured in passenger nights18 have skyrocketed Based on MARAn data derived from the US Customs Border Patrol Vessel Entrance and Clearance documents the passenger nights for foreign flag vessels departing from the West Coast to Hawaii on round trip cruise have increased several hundredfold during this period19 See Exhibit A
(c) NCLA Has Incurred Substantial Losses During this Period
Since 2004 NCLA has lost cumulatively more than a quarter ofa billion dollars A principal reason for these losses has been the increase in foreign capacity in this market NCLA has taken significant steps to reduce costs to address the increase in foreign competition but NCLA is at an inherent disadvantage when competing against foreign companies that are not subject to US labor laws US tax laws and other laws Ofcourse the statutory protections of the PVSA are intended to address these very issues That is why Customs immediate action to implement the proposed interpretation is critical for the US flag fleet Regrettably NCLA has already been forced to reduce overall capacity early next year with the withdrawal ofPRIDE OF HAWAlI to another
17 DOT Press Release dated June 72004 see also DOT Press Release dated August 132004 in connection with visit to PRIDE OF ALOHA by US Transportation Secretary Norman Y Mineta 11 Passenger nights (also referred to as passenger capacity days) are calculated by multiplying the number ofpassengers per vessel by the number ofcruise days in each itinerary by the number of cruises This is the unit ofmeasurement employed by MARAn In contrast passenger bed supply (also referred to as passenger capacity) data reflects only the number ofberths per vessel multiplied by the number of cruises and hence understates the market by excluding the full economic value ofthe cruise perfonned 19 In 2003 the total number ofpassenger nights for round-trip West Coast to Hawaii cruises was 303325 which jumped by 353 to 1072329 in 2006 and by 430 to 1304546 from 2003 to 2007 (The 2007 figure is based on MARAD data for six months and a1ll1ualized by published itineraries for the balance of the year)
6
market for operation under foreign flag This move alone will result in the loss ofover 1000 American seafaring jobs
5 Customs Proposed Interpretation is Necessary to Further the Important National Security and Public Policy Objectives Embodied in Federal Law
As Customs has properly noted the increase in foreign competition in the Hawaii trades in contravention of the PVSA pose[s] an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels[] As the operator of these ships NCLA has a vested interest in protecting the jobs ofthe thousands ofAmerican crewmembers and cruise ship service providers who support these vessels NCLA also has an interest in protecting the substantial economic investment it has made to revitalize the US flag passenger vessel fleet But a balancing of interests in the context of Customs enforcement ofexisting law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act requires a much broader focus
The legislative history of the 2003 Act expressly recognized the national security and public policy import ofestablishing a US flag passenger vessel fleet as a means to maintain the countrys preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool of qualified seafarers and as a means to help sustain a fleet ofUS-flag vessels to su~ort
the nations military and maritime industrial base for times ofnational emergency
Congress understood the importance ofestablishing a viable US flag cruise ship fleet as something larger than the vessels themselves These national security and public policy objectives must be weighed in the balance as Customs assesses how best to interpret its rules to give effect to the PVSA and the 2003 Act
6 Customs Should Clarify that the Proposed Interpretation is Limited to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades and Adopt Reasonable Measures to Ensure Sufficient Foreign Content
Since publication ofthe proposed interpretative rule several commenters have observed that the scope of the proposed interpretation is ambiguous because the language of Section VI referencing any cruise itinerary appears broader than the caption Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises and the entire discussion in the published notice which focuses exclusively on US-flag coastwise vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA agrees that the proposed interpretation should be clarified so that its scope is limited to vessels operating roundtrip voyages from US ports that include Hawaii port calls
NCLA supports the concept reflected in the proposed interpretive rule that round trip Hawaii itineraries from US ports on foreign ships must include a material and measurable degree ofoverall foreign port content as compared to US port content
20 149 Congo Rec S1117 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)
7
(a) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is also Consistent with Subsequent Congressional Enactments Modifying the PVSA
As discussed above it is well established that the PVSA was designed toRrotect US-flag vessels from foreign competition in the coastwise and domestic trades 1
Subsequent legislative enactments however have appropriately differentiated among distinct geographic markets and trades including Canada Alaska Puerto Rico and Hawaii based on the existence or non-existence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
In 1938 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers by Canadian passenger vessels on Lake Ontario and the St Lawrence River until such time as passenger service shall be established by vessels of the United States22 Similarly in 1961 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers on Canadian vessels within Alaska or between Alaska and other points in the United States until such time as passenger service is established by vessels ofthe United States23
In 1984 Congress modified the application ofthe PVSA to pennit the transportation ofpassengers between Puerto Rico and other United States ports on foreign-flag vessels24 As with the other statutory exceptions this provision is qualified and expires [o]n a showing that a United States passenger vessel qualified to engage in the coastwise trade is offering or advertising passenger service between a port in Puerto Rico and another port in the United States2S
Congress acted again with respect to the application of the PVSA with the 2003 Act in which it authorized three vessels that did not meet the US-build requirements of the PVSA to operate as modem US-flagged cruise ships in regular service in Hawaii26 The 2003 Act imposes a specific geographic limitation on the operation of any ship documented under this authority to operations only in regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands ofHawaii and shall not transport passengers in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico or the Caribbean Sea except in certain limited circumstances27 As above the limited nature of the 2003 Act is express it is strictly limited to the large ocean-going cruise ships and then only those operating in the regular Hawaii service where there are no US-flag operations28
21 See Act ofJune 19 1886 c 421 sec 8 24 Stat 81 Act of February 171898 c 26 sec 2 30 Stat 248 22 S] Res 174 75th Cong 52 Stat 223 (Alp 251938) codified at46 USC sect 55121(a) 23 See Pub L 87-77 75 Stat 196 (Jun 30 1961) codified at 46 USC sect 55121(b) 24 See Pub L 98-563 98 Stat 2916 (Oct 301984) codified at 46 USC sect 55104(b) 25 46 USC sect 55104(c)(l) see also 46 USC 46 USc sect 55104(cX2)(expiration of exemption upon availability ofa non-coastwise qualified US-flag vessel offering service in the relevant market) 26 149 Congo Rec SI118 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)(statementofSen Inouye) 27 Pub L 108-7 117 Stat 79 (Feb 20 2003) 28 149 Congo Rec S11l9 (dailyed Jan 17 2003Xstatement of Sen Inouye)
8
In each ofthese instances Congress fashioned a narrow exception to the PVSA that differentiated among distinct geographic markets based on the existence or nonshyexistence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
As the federal agency responsible for administering the 2003 Act MARAD requested that Customs act to protect US flag passenger vessel interests in the Hawaii trades29 Limiting the scope ofthe proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades also reflects Customs appreciation of the PVSA in the context of the subsequent Congressional action30 Viewing the Congressional modifications to the PVSA as a whole Congress has specifically and repeatedly differentiated among distinct geographic markets when it has found it necessary and appropriate to do so to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests It is well established that the proper interpretation of a statutory scheme includes consideration ofsubsequent statutes even though the underlying statute itselfhas not been expressly amended31 Accordingly Customs should likewise limit the scope ofthe proposed PVSA interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades because that is the only geographic market as mandated by the 2003 Act in which oceangoing US-flag cruise ships are operating
(b) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Consistent with Public Policy Objectives of the 1985 Rulemaking
In 1985middot Customs liberalized the regulations implementing the PVSA by eliminating certain regulatory prohibitions on foreign flag vessels In the context of the 1985 rulemaking Customs justified a relaxation ofthe regulations on the grounds that it would simplify the administration of the PVSA and would benefit the economy ofcertain American coastwise ports without eroding the statutory protection given to American vessels engaged in solely domestic trade32
Customs thus sought to reconcile US port economic interests with US-flag passenger vessel interests Both of these twin policy objectives are furthered by
29 See 72 Fed Reg 65488 (Nov 21 2007)( MARAn bas asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the ~eratiODS ofcoastwise-qualified cruise ship operators)
See generally FDA v Brown amp Williamson Tobacco Corp 529 US 120 132-133 (2000)(assessing propriety ofagency construction ofFood DIUg and Cosmetics Act and descnbing responsibility of reviewing cowt to assess statutory provisions in the context of subsequent legislative enactments) 31 See Brown amp Williamson 529 US 143 (holding that proper construction ofstatutory provision must necessarily assume that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications ofa later statute This is particularly so where the scope of the earlier statute is broad but the subsequent statutes more specifically address the topic athand) see also United States v Estate ofRomani 523 US 517 530-531 (1998)( holding that a later-enacted statute should control the construction of the federal lien priority statute a specific policy embodied in a later federal statute should control om construction of the [earlier] statute even though it ha[s] not been expressly amended) United States v Fausto 484 US 439453 (1988)(The courts frequently find Congress to have done this - whenever in fact they interpret a statutory text in the light ofsurrounding texts that happen to have been subsequently enacted This classic judicial task of reconciling many laws enacted over time and getting them to make sense in combination necessarily assumes that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications of a later statute) 32 50 Fed Reg 26982 (JuI 11985)
9
limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades
As noted earlier the 2003 Act limits the operation of the NCLA US-flag oceangoing passenger vessels to regular service in Hawaii Because there are no oceangoing US-flag vessels operating in any market other than the Hawaii trades Customs should limit the scope of the proposed interPretation to that market Such a limitation protects US flag passenger vessel interests without prejudicing US port interests In contrast an application of the proposed interpretation to any itinerary would needlessly harm US port interests unrelated to Hawaii without any countervailing benefit to US-flag passenger vessel interests Accordingly limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation is consistent with the public policy objectives of the 1985 rulemaking as well as the 2003 Act
(c) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Also Consistent with Customs Commitment to Revisit the Scope of its Rules to Protect US-Flag Interests
The relaxation ofthe PVSA regulations in 1985 was premised in large part on Customs finding that there was no regular salt water US-flag passenger fleet in operation at that time33 Acknowledging that the relaxed regulations could harm USshyflag interests Customs committed in the preamble ofthe 1985 final rule to immediately reconsider its interpretation if it is ever shown that there is a viable US flag vessel operating in competition with foreign-flag vessels34
Congress enacted the 2003 Act to stimulate the development of a US flag cruise ship industry As noted above the legislative history ofthat Act makes clear that Congress sought to revitalize the US-flag cruise industry as a means to maintain Americas preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool ofqualified seafarers help sustain a fleet of US flag vessels to support our military and a maritime industrial base create thousands of seagoing and shoreside American jobs and stimulate the development ofa US flag cruise ship tourism business with the commensurate benefits to the US tax base the US economy and US employment
Customs is now acting at MARADs request to revisit its interpretation ofthe regulations implementing the PVSA because recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwise-qualified cruise ship operations35 That is to say that the concerns articulated by Customs in the context of the 1985 rulemaking have materialized and US-flag passenger vessel interests are in fact being hanned in the Hawaii trades by foreign competitors
33 50 Fed Reg 26983 34Id
3S 72 Fed Reg 56488 (Nov 21 2007)
I
10
Because the US-flag passenger vessels are limited by statute to regular service in Hawaii limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the
Hawaii trades is consistent with Customs historical commitment to revisit its interpretation ofthe implementing regulations to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests
7 Conclusion
For the reasons stated above NCLA commends the efforts ofCustoms and MARAn to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act as applied to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA respectfully requests Customs to move ahead promptly with p~blicati~nof a final interpretive rule to advance the important national security arid public policy objectives ofthese laws
We greatly appreciate the opportunity to submit these comments
Sincerely
~~~ Alan T Yamamoto Vice President Hawaii Operations
Exhibit A
Ship Name Serenade Of The Seas Departure Port San Diego California Ports of Call San Diego California Kailua Kona Hawaii Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii Hlo Hawaii Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii Ensenada Mexico San Qigo California
2007 Date(s) Oct 05
Sailing Itinerary
Day Port H ~rrive Depart Activity
05-0ct San Diego California 500 PM
06-0ct Cruising
07-0ct Cruising
08-0ct Cruising
09-0ct Cruising
10-0ct Kailua Kona Hawaii 700 AM 900 PM Tendered
11-00t Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 1000 AM Tendered
12middot0ct Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 900 PM Tendered
13-0ct Hilo Hawaii 700 AM 600 PM Docked
14middot0ct Honoulu (Oahu) Hawaii 700 AM Docked
15-0ct Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii 200 AM Docked
6-0ct CrUising
17-0ct Cruising
18-0ct Cruising
19middot0ct Cruising
-7 20-00t
O-Oot
Ensenada ~i1exico
San Deqo California
i 00 ~r1
700 ~M
200 oM D1Jcked ~
CARIBBEAN CRUISES
WESTERN CARIBBEAN WESTERN CARIBBEAN SOUTHERN CARIBBEAN EXPLORER
7 6 7 DAYS DAYS DAYS
CARIBBEAN PRINCESS STAR PRINCESS GRAND PRINCESS GOLDEN PRINCESS
DAWN PRINCESS
SAN JUAN ROUNDTRIPROUNDTRIP to fromfrom
GALVESTON SAN JUANFT LAUDERDALE
2004 DEPARTURE DATE2004 DEPARTURE DATES 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
CARIBB~~SflNCESS CRUISE ITINERARY Nov 7 CRUISE ITINERARY
My923 CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTJun 6 20 JUD 19
Jul lOt 31
May829t DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART )uI418 Sun San Juan EMBARK PM
Aug ll t Aug 11529
Sep 11
DAY PORT
Sep 12 26 Mon St Thomas 7AM 6PM STAR PRINCESS Princess Cays 9AM 4PM At Sea Oct 10 24
Nov 721 DecS19 Tue S Kitts 7AM 3PM
2005 DEPARTURE DATES Wed Grenada 9AM 3PM Dec 23 Coumel 7AM 5PM
Grand Cayman 7AM 4PM Jan 21630
2005 DEPARTURE DATES Feb 13 27 Thu Caracas (La Guaira) 9AM 7PM Mar 13 27STAR PRINCESS
Jan 21630 Apr 10 24 Feb 13 27 Ocho Rios 9AM 4PM Fri Aruba BAM 5PM Mar 13 27 Apr 10 24 At Sea
tMonlqQampIyrqlocrsCllhoRfm PltJrtQr-ondlimesmaywlrY Sun San Juan DISEMBARK AMFt Lauderdale DISEMBARK AM
EASTERN CARIBBEAN WESTERN CARIBBEAN CLASSIC SOUTHERN CARIBBEAN
8 7 7DAYS DAYS DAYS
CARIBBEAN GRAND PRINCESS GOLDEN PRINCESS PRINCESS
GALVESTONROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIP tofrom from
SAN JUANFT LAUDERDALE SAN JUAN
2004 DEPARTURE DATE 2004 DEPARTURE DATE 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
DeetS Apr 16CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE IflNERARY May 21630 CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE Jun 13 27DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Jul1125 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
1 Aug 8 221 Galveston EMBARK PM Sun Sanjuan EMBARK PMSep 5 19 Oct 3 17 312-3 At Sea At Sea Nov 14 28 Man At Sea Dec 12 26
st Thomas Cozumel BAM 6PM Tue Barbados 7AM 6PM 2005 DEPARTURE DATES
jan 9 23 Wed St Lucia 7 AMAntigua BAM 6PM Costa Maya (Mahahual) BAM 4PM 5PM Feb 620 Mar 6 20 Thu BAM 6PM Apr 317
At Sea Montego Bay 9AM 4PM Fri St Maarten BAM 6PM
7AM 6PM
Ft Lauderdale DISEMBARK AM Sanjuan DISEMBARK AM Sun San juan DISEMBARK AM
Oct 24 Nov 7 21 DecS19
DAWN PRINCESS
~
I
CARIBBEAN CRUISES
EASTERN CARIBBEAN ISLANDER SOUTHERN CARIBBEAN MEDLEY EASTERN CARIBBEAN
10 10 7 DAYS DAYSDAYS
GRAND PRINCESSDAWN PRINCESSSUN PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP NEW YORK CITYROUNDTRIP from from to
FT LAUDERDALE FT LAUDERDALE SAN JUAN
2004 DEPARnJRf DATE2004 DEPARTURE DATES2004 DEPARTURE DATES
Octn Oct Btl Oct 14CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE ITINERARYCRUISE ITINERARY 200s DEPARTURE DATENov 222 Nov 3t 23
Apr23tDAY PORT DEPART Dec 13 30Dee 12 ARRIVE DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Ft Lauderdale EMBARK PM 1 Ft Lauderdale EMBARK PM EMBARK PM2005 DEPARTURE DATES 2005 DEPARTURE DATES New York City 2 Princess Cays 9AM 4PM 2 At SeaJan 828 Jan 19t
Feb 17tt 3 AlSea Feb 8 28 3 At Sea 2-4 At Sea Mar919 Mar 20
4 St Thomas 7AM 6PM Apr 9 4 Cura~ao 8AM 5PM 5 St Maarten 7AM 6PM 5 Isla Margarita lOAM 4PM St Thomas 7AM 6PM
6 St Kitts 7AM 3PM 6 Barbados 9AM 6PM Dominica SAM 6PM7 8AM 5PM 7 Dominica 7 AM SPM
8 Antigua 9AM 6PM S St Thomas SAM 6PM St Maarten 7AM 6PM
9 9 At Sea
fllrtordtrlllldllmam4YYa1 10 At Sea 10 Princess Cays 9AM 4PM JlilltraryllptfatufnrfYUSfllrllcr t 11I1ll1Il1yopmltnlnrmTtronlcr t ItlntraryaptrattsIn rtVfntOrdtr San Juan DISEMBARK AM Port~rdtrQnd lilrW mil) illI) 11 Ft Lauderdale DISEMBARK AM PortlimtSlIIltlyYllry 11 Ft Lauderdale DISEMBARK AM Port ordtr lind time5 may VIlry
WESTERN CARIBBEAN ADVENTURER EASTERN CARIBBEAN VOYAGER
10 10 DAYS DAYS
SUN PRINCESS DAWN PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIPROUNDTRIP fromfrom
FT LAUDERDALEFT LAUDERDALE
2004 DEPARTURE DATES 2004 DEPARTURE DATES DAWN PRINCESS CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE IIINERARY
Oct 23 Oct 4 24 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Nov 12 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
Nov 13 Dec 2 29 Dec3tt 1 Ft Lauderdale EMBARK PM 1 Ft Lauderdale EMBARK PM
2 Princess Cays 9AM 4PM 2005 DEPARTURE DATES 2 At Sea2005 DEPARTURE DATES
DAWN PRINCESS Jan 183 At Sea 3 At Sea
Feb 7 27Jan 9 296 St Thomas 7AM 6PM Mar19 t 4 St Vincent lPM 6PM
Feb 180 Apr 8St Maarten 7 AM 5PM 5 Grenada 8AM 6PMMar 10f 301 Apr 19 At Sea 6 St Lucia 8AM 6PM
Ocho Rios 12N 6PM 7 Martinique 7AM 3PM
Grand cayman PM S St Thomas SAM 6PM
t IillUGI)lIptfQttsIn rnmtordtr Cozumel 8AM 6PM AlSea tt ~~~oI~~dtr 10 Princess Cays 9AM 4PMMOItQIl8clyrqausOclJollloJ
lwtordtrollllllllyenllllilJllIl) tltllltrlryOptrlll$In rnmtllrdtr AMOIltqollaynplactsOdlDRIos PM IortDrllralldllmallloyWl) Ft Lauderdale DISEMBARK AM
Willemstad Cura~ao
EUROPE CRUISES
GRAND MEDITERRANEAN GREEK ISLES MEDITERRANEANGREEK ISLES
12 1212 DAYS DAYSDAYS
STAR PRINCESS
STARSTAR PRINCESSPRINCESS
sail betweensail between VENICE BARCELONA VENICE to
andand BARCELONA VENICE ROME
CRUISE ITINERARY2004 DEPARTURE 2004 DEPARTURE2004 DEPARTURE CRUISE ITINERARYDATESCRUISE I I INERARY DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DATEDATES
Apr 10 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTMay 16middot DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Venice Italy (overnight onboard ship) EMBARK PM May 4 May18t Sep2St 1 Verdce Italy EMBARK PM
Jun 9 1 Barcelona Spain (overnight onboard ship) EMBARK PM 2 Venice Italy 2PM 2 At Seajune 21 t 2 Barcelona Spain 1 PM Dubrovnik Croatia 8AM 6PMJul3 3 Corfu Greece 8AM 6PM
lullS 3 Monte Carlo Monaco 7 AM 6 PM Corfu Greece 8AM 6PM 4 Katakolon Greece (for Oiympia) 7AM SPMJu127 4 FlorencePisa Italy (Livorno) 630 AM 6 PMAug 8~ Katakolon Greece (for Olympia) 7AM SPM S Athens Greece (Piraeus) 6AM 12 MAug 20deg S NaplesCapri Italy 8 AM 7 PM Sep 1t 6 Athens Greece (Piraeus) 6AM 12 M 6 Mykonos Greece 8AM 12M
6 At Sea 7 Mykonos Greece 8AM 6PM 7 Kusadasi Turkey (for Ephesus) 7 AM SPM7 Athens Greece (Piraeus) 6AM S4S PM
8 Kusadasi Turkey (for Ephesus) 7AM 1PM 8 Kusadasi Turkey (for Ephesus) 8AM 6PM 8 Santorini Greece 7 AM 4PM
9 Jstanbul Turkey 8AM 6PM 9 Rhodes Greece 8AM 6PM 9 At Sea
10 At Sea 10 Santorini Greece 7AM 6PM 10 Rome Italy (Civitavecchia) 8AM 7PM tll1ooil)opcraksinttVUSe
grduPorttlmcsmi)Y6ljI 11 At Sea 11 Cannes France (for Mont Carlo) 8AM 6PM11 At Sea tSamnlQ]latCiIUIe5inplm tltlnerlll)opmlpoundsin
NaplesCapri Italy 630 AM 12 Barcelona Spain (ovrnight onboard ship) 8AMofMo~Urlo ~odcr12 Venice Italy (overnight onboard ship) 8 AM 12 6PM O~lIlalhitRhodalnpUcc Port order md Iimes- JmyVUY Barcelona Spain DISEMBARK AM13 Venice Italy DISEMBARK AM - 13 Iome Italy (qvitavecchia) DISEMBARK AM
MEDITERRANEANAEGEAN MEDITERRANEANMOSAIC
12 12 DAYSDAYS
STAR STAR PRINCESS PRINCESS
ROME BARCELONAto
toVENICE ROME
2004 DEPARTURE DATE 2004 DEPARTURE
CRUISE I I INERARY DATE CRUISE ITINERARYApr 22 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Sep 13 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Rome Italy (Civitavhia) EMBARK pM 1 Barcelona Spaln (overnight onboard ship) EMBARK PM 2 NaplesCapri Italy 7 AM 7 PM Barcelona Spain SPM 3 Messina Italy (for Taormina) 8AM 6PM 3 At Sea 4 Valleta Malta 8AM 6 PM 4 Casablanca Morocco (for Marrakech) 7 AM 8PM
At Sea S Gibraltar 8 AM 6PM Santorini Greece 7 AM 6PM 6 At Sea
7 Kusadasi Turkey (for Ephesus) 8 AM 6PM 7 Cannesfrance (for Mont Carlo) 8 AM 6PM 8 Athens Greece (Piraeus) 6 AM S4SPM 8 At Sea 9 Katakolon Greece (for Olympia) 8 AM 6PM 9 Valleta Malta 8 AM SPM 10 Corfu Greece 8 AM 6PM 10 Messina Italy (for Taormina) 6PM 11 Dubrovnik Croatia 8 AM 6PM 11 NaplesCpri Itiily 6PM 12 Venice Italy (overnight onboard ship) 1230 PM 12 FlorencePisa Italy (Livorno) 830 AM 13 Venice Italy DISEMBARK AM 13 lomeltaly (Clvttavecchia)DISEMBAIKAM Venice Italy
EUROPE CRUISES
EUROPEAN EXPLORER CRUISE MEOffiRRANEANITRANSATLANTIC CRUISE
12 17DAYS DAYS
ROYAL STARPRINCESS PRINCESS
sail between VENICE
ROME to
and FT LAUDERDALE
LONDON
2003 DEPARTURE DATES
2004 DEPARTURE DATE CRUISE ITINERARY
May 7 CRUISE I1INfRARY Oct 7 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Jul30l
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Venice Italy (overnight onboard ship) EMBARK PMAug 11 Sep 41 1 Rome Italy (Civitavecchia) EMBARK PM 2 Vernce Italy 2 PM
2 FlorencePisa Italy (Livorno) 7 AM 7PM 3 At Sea 3 Cannes France (for Monte Carlo) 7 AM 5 PM 4 Barcelona Spain 9 AM 6 PM 5 At Sea 6 Gibraltar 8AM PM 7 Casablanca Morocco (for Marralech) 5AM 6 PM 8 Seville Spain (Cadiz) 8AM 6PM 9 LisbQn Portugal 9AM 5PM 10 Vigo Spain 830AM 4PM 11 At Sea
tllinmryope~te$ 12 ParisNormandy France (Ie Havre) 7 AMlnftYCl5eordu ~rttimesuuyYilY 13 London England (Southampton) DISEMBARK AM
Caudis Park Cuell Barcelona Spain
SCANDINAVIARUSSIA BALTIC HERITAGE WESTERN EUROPEBRITISH ISLES
ROYALGRAND10 GRAND 1210 PRINCESSDAYS PRINCESS PRINCESS DAYSDAYS
ROUNDTRIPROUNDTRIPROUNDTRIP fromframfrom
LONDONCOPENHAGENCOPENHAGEN 2004 DEPARTURE2004 DEPARTURE 2004 DEPARTUREDATESDATES DATES
May19tMay 29 May 19 jul28 JunSJun 18 Aug 231
Jul8 ju118Jul28 Aug 7 CRUISE ITINERARYAug 17
CRUISE IIINERARY ARRIVE DEPART CRUISE IrINERARY EMBARK PMDAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
DAY ARRIVE DEPART 7AM 6PM1 Copenhagen Denmark EMBARK PM EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 7AM 6PM
Stockholm Sweden (Nynilshamn) 7 AM 530PM 6AM PM Helsinki Finland 830 AM 6PM St PetersbUrg Russia (overnight onboard ship) 630 AM 9AM 9PM St Petersburg Russia 6PM
7 Tallinn Estonia 7 AM 1PM 8 Gdansk Poland (Gdynia) 9 AM 4PM 9 Warnemfinde Germany (for amprlin) 8 AM 10 PM 10 Helsing0r Denmark 9 AM 11 AM 10 Copenhagen Denmark (overnight onboard ship) 1 PM 11 Copenhagen Denmark DISEMBARK AM
middotScrvlcctillforlh=CllCIIIlicmIOptoluItllUllwWdlseJnbIDltHdlinprAfbrtour~dllmJlwktbeshJpwl1lPfllClaquodtoCopetWampen and pmenpoundm Qfl tours from HelMp will Rboird ship tPolttimes~myAninliI1ddepartu~itRosythDubJinmdFa1mauthwl)dICtotXLolconditions
tPOrtordermdtlme$maynI) ttCdlitEdinbuJlhotmdedto~mllocunionforMiliblyTltOO~on8123wi1inlmiddotUIIisitSouthQuemsfmyinstudofJosylh
BRITISH ISLES
ROYAL12 PRINCESSDAYS
ROUNDTRIP
from
LONDON
2004 DEPARTURE DATES
Jun 12 jul6
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Lqn4onmiddotpoundngland(Southampton) EMIWlIlt PM 2 Cornwall England (Falmouth) 7AM SPM
Waterford Ireland 8AM 6PM Dublin Ireland 7AM 1130 PM
t PQrtbme5 lliIyyuy Anini Illd departure at Rosytb Dublin md Filmouth ViiYdue to Iiltlal conditions
WESTERN EUROPE
ROYAL12 PRINCESSDAYS
ROUNDTRIP
from
LONDON
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
May 31
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 London England (Southampton) EMBARK PM
CRUISE ITINERARY
EUROPE CRUISES
ICELANDNORWEGIAN FJORDS
ROYAL12 PRINCESSDAYS
ROUNDTRIP
from
LONDON
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
Jun24
CRUISE IflNERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 London Englan4 (Southampton) EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 3 Berge Norway 6PM 4 Hellesylt Norway 830AM 1030 AM 4 Gciranger Norway Geiranger Fjord Sceni Cruising UN 7PM
9AM SPM5
1PM 8AM SPM
10 At Sea
middotStlviceallfof~fjonlovedmdshOR=unlDllOplion1Itourswllldi5anbarilitHelIcsyItAftcrtollrpuKllJClJdisembark
theshlpwiUprocudto~md~lampClSonlounfrwnHdaytwl1lblmd$hip
NORWEGIAN FJORDSNORTH CAPE
ROYAL12 PRINCESSDAYS
ROUNDTRIP
from
LONDON
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
JuilS
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Loridon ~gland (South~mpton) EMBARK PM 2-3 At Sea
Hellesylt Norway 830AM 1030 AM Golranger Norway Geiranger Fjord Scenic Cruising 12N 7PM
TrodheilllNorwaY 9AM SPM At Sea Cross the Ardgt Cirde
6PM 8AM lPM
8AM 130 PM 430PM 630PM
7AM 3PM
Bagpipers Edinburgh Scotland Royal Princess in Geiranger Fjord Norway
EUROPE CRUISES amp CRUISETOURS
17 DAYS
GRAND PRINCESS
FT LAUDERDALE to
COPENHAGEN
2004 DEPARTURE DATE MayZ
CRUISE IfINERARY
DAY 1 2-6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
PORT Ft Lauderdale Florida At Sea ~ores IslandsPortugal (Ponto Delgado) At Sea Lisbon Portugal Vigo Spain At Sea ParislNormandy France (Le Havre) RotterdamThe Netherlands At Sea Hamburg Germay (for Berlin) At Sea Olso Norway Oslo Fjord scnic Cruising Copenhagen Denmark
ARRIVE
N
12N 9AM
7AM
6AM
DISEMBARK AM
DEPART EMBARK PM
6PM
7PM 6PM
7PM 7PM
1UM
MEDITERRANEAN CRUISETOUR
TRANSATLANTICWESTERN EUROPE ICELAND amp GREENLANDTRANSATLANTIC
16 GRAND DAYS PRINCESS
COPENHAGEN to
NEW YORK
2004 DEPARTURE DATE Aug 27
CRUISE IIINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Copenhagen Denmark EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 3 Dover England (forLondon) 7AM 7PM 4 Cornwall England (Falmouth) 9AM 6PM 5 Dublin Ireland lOAM 9PM 6 GlasgowEdinburgh Scotland (Greenock) 8AM 12 M 7 Belfast Northern Ireland 1030 AM 530 PM 8 At Sea 9 Reykjavik Iceland 9AM 9PM 10 At Sea 11 Prins Christian Sund Scenic Cruising 12N 6PM 12 Qaqortoq Greenland 7 AM 2PM 13 At Sea 14 SI Johns Newfoundland Canada 12N 7PM 1516 At Sea 17 New York CIty New York DISEMBARK AM
SCANDINAVIARUSSIA CRUISETOUR
Church of the Savior on the Spilled Blood St Petersburg Russia
WESTERN EUROPE CRUISETOUR
CRUISEIOUR ITINERARY
CRUISETOUR lA11C CRUISETOUR ITINERARY CRUISETOUR 4A14C CRUISETOUR II INERARY
DAY PORT By Sea By Land DAY PORT By Sea By Land CRUISETOUR 7Al7C18 STAR PRINCESS 1 Rome 17 GRAND PRINCESS 1 BudapestDAYS DAYS DAY PORT By Sea By Land 22 Rome Budapest 18 ROYAL PRINCESS 1 Paris
ROMETODI 3 RomeTodi BUDAPEST VIENNA 3 BudapestVienna DAYS 2 Paris and 4 TodiFlorence and 4 Vienna 3 Paris
PARIS EUROSTAR5 Florence 5 ViennaPrague 4 ParisLondon 6 FlorenceVeniceEmbark 6 Prague and 5 London
FLORENCE PRAGUE
plus plus LONDON7 Venice Italy (overnight onboard ship) 7 PragueCopenhagenEmbark 6 LondonSouthamptonEmbark
GRAND MEDITERRANEAN SCANDINAVIARUSSIA plus 7 At Sea CRUISE 8-9 At Sea CRUISE 8 At Sea WESTERN EUROPE 8 Bilbao Spain10 Istanbul Turkey 9 Stockholm Sweden (Nyniishamn) BRITISH ISLES CRUiSE2004 DEPARTURE DATES 2004 DEPARTURE DATES 9 Bordeaux France (Le Verdon)
11 Kusadasi Turkey (for Ephesus) 10 Helsinki FinlandApr Sf 2004 DEPARTURE DATES 10 At SeaMay 131 Jul2Apr 29 12 Athens Greece (Piraeus) 11 SI Petersburg Russia (overnight onboard ship) 11 GlasgowEdinburgh Scotland (Greenock)May 23 JulUt May 141 26middot Jul tt 13~ 250
May 23 Jun 16 13 At Sea JunZt JulU 12 SI Petersburg Russia Jun n 19 Aug 18o 300 12 Dublin Ireland
]un 12 Aug l t 13 Cork IrelandJuliO 14 NaplesCapri Italy 13 Tallinn EstoniaJun 22 t Aug 11 Toun~eonlymilabkwithcruise5indi[itbtAug 3 15 FlorencelPisa Italy (Livorno) 14 Cdansk Poland 14 Cornwall England (Falmouth)
Aug 27 tBritishliksetuise aWEwupeiBritishlslesouist 15 ParisNormandy France (Le Havre)16 Monte Carlo Monaco 15 At Sea bull WestemEuropeCrube middotlcdandINorwqlmFjOllisetuise 16 Rotterdam The Netherlands
t Crulsetour lA only combinable with 12--dayGreck fst 17 Barcelona Spain (overnight onboard ship) 16 Olso NOrway Qsld Fjord Scenic Cruising bull Norwqian FjordsNorth Cipecruise 17 BrusselsBruges Belgium (Zeebrugge)tCruixtour 4A only combinable with lo-day Baltic
crulse shown on PI 11 18 Barcelona Spain Heritage cruise shawn on pg 12 OCrubctnur 7C only combinable with EwuJlWl ExplorerCrube17 Copenhagen Denmark 18 London England (Southampton)
EXOTICS CRUISES
AUSTRALIANEW ZEALAND AUSTRALIANEW ZEALAND AUSTRALIAASIA
12 14 19 DAYS DAYS DAYS
SAPPHIRE PRINCESS SAPPHIRE PRINCESS SAPPHIRE PRINCESS
saH between SYDNEYAUCKLAND SYDNEY
toand to BANGKOKSYDNEY AUCKLAND 2005 DEPARTURE DATES 2005 DEPARTURE DATE
Mar7Jan 6 2004 DEPARTURE DATEJan 1St
Dec 23 CRUISE ITINERARYJr ift Feb 23 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
CRUISE ITINERARY 1 Sydlley Austrli EMBARK PM CRUISE ITINERARY 2 At Sea
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTDAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 3 Brisbane Australia 8AM 6PM 1 Sydlley Australia EMBARK PM 4 At Sea 1 Aucklalld N~w Zealalld EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 5 Cid Harbor Austrlia (for Great Barrier Reef) 7AM 5PM2 At Sea 3 Melbourne Australia 8 AM 6 PM 6 Cirns Australia (Yorkeys) 8AM 6PM
3 WeIUllgton New Zealand 8 AM 6 PM 4 At Sea 7-8 At Sea 4 Christchurch New Zealalld (Lytlelton) 8 AM 6 PM 5 Tasmallia Australia (Hobart) 8 AM 6 PM 9 Darwin Australia lPM 8pM 5 Dunedill N~ Zealalld (Port Chalmers) 8 AM 6 PM 6-7 At Sea 10-11 At Sea 6 Fiordland Natiollal Park Scenic Cruising AM 6 PM 8 Fiordlalld Natiollal Park Scellic Cruising 7 AM 5 PM 12 Bali Illdonesi (Padang Bay) 7AM 6PM
7-8 At Sea J DUlledill New Zealalld (Port Chalmers) 8 AM 6 PM 13-14 At Se 10 Christchurch N~ Zealalld (Lytlelton) 8 AM 6 PM 15 Kuala Lumpur Mlaysia (Port KeIang) 8AM 6PM9 Tasmania Australia (Hobart) 8 AM 6 PM 11 Wellillgtoll New Zealmd 8 AM 6 PM 16 Sillgpore 8AM 6PM
10 At Sea 12 At Sea 17 At Sea 11 Melbourne Australia 8 AM 6 PM 13 Taurallga New Zealalld 8 AM 730 PM 18 Ho Chi Millh City Vietnm (Vung Tau) 7AM 730 PM 12 At S~a 19 At Sea 14 Bay of Islallds New Zealalld 8 AM 7 PM 13 SydPey Australia DISEMBARK AM 20 Bmgkok Thailalld (Laem Chabang) DISEMBARK AM15 Aucklalld New Zealalld DISEMBARK AM
t llinemy opcrnesln reverse order Port times mil1 my
CHINAFAR EAST SOUTHEAST ASIAFAR EAST
1612 DAYSDAYS
PACIFIC PRINCESS
SAPPHIRE PRINCESS PACIFIC PRINCESS
OSAKA BEIJING to
to BANGKOK OSAKA
2004 DEPARTURE DATE 2004 DEPARTURE DATEPAClFlC PRINCESS
julllt Jun 11 2005 DEPARTURE DATE
SAPPHIRE PRINCESS Apr 11
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Osaka Japall EMBARK PM
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Beijillg China (Xingang) EMBARK PM 2 Hiroshima Japall 1 PM 6PM 2 DaHan China AM 5PM 3 At Sea 3 At Sea 4 Shmghai Chilla 7 AM 6PM 4 Shallghai Chilla (overnight onboard ship) 7AM 5 At Sea 5 Shallghai China 6PM 6 Okinaw Jpll 7 AM 1 PM
7 Taipei Taiwm (KeeIung) 9 AM 7PM6 At Sea 8 At Se7 Pusan South Korea 8AM 5PM 9 HOllg KOllg Chill 8 AM 7PM 8 At Sea 10-11 At S~a J Vladivostok Russia 5AM 730 PM 12 Ho Chi MiIJh City Vietnm (Phu My) 7 AM 5PM 10 At Sea 13 At Se 11 Nagasaki Japan 7AM 6PM 14 Singpore 8 AM 6pM
15 KUlltll Mlysi 830 AM 430 PM12 At Sea 16 At Sea 13 Osaka Japan DISEMBARK AM 17 Ballgkok Thaillld DISEMBARK AM t Sailing alls i1t Hiroshima on Dl) 11 In place of Nilgilsaki Port times milY vary
CRUISE I flNERARY CRUISE I flNERARY
Ho Chi Minh City Vietnam
EXOTICS CRUISES
SOUTHEAST ASIACHINA SOUTHEAST ASIACHINA FAR EASTALASKA
PACIflC PRINCISS ROYAL PRINCESS
16 16 19 DAYS DAYS DAYS
SAPPHIRE SAPPHIRE PRINCESS
Sail between PRINCESSBANGKOK
and BANGKOK OSAKA
BEIJING to to
2004 DEPARTURE DATES BEIJING SEATTLEPAClFlC PRINCESS
Jun 27tt 200S DEPARTURE DATE200S DEPARTURE DATE ROYAL PRINCESS
Mar 26 Apr 23Oct 16 Nov lt
CRUISE I I INERARY CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
1 GsakaJpan EMBARK PM1 Bangkok Thailand (Laem Chabang) EMBARKPM 1 Bangkok Thailand (Laern Chabang) EMBARK IM 2 At Sea2 At Sea 2 AtSea bull 3 Nagasaki Japan 7 AM 6PM
9AM 7PM 3 Singapore 7PM 4 Pusan Soqth Korea 8AM 5PM 4-5 At Sea 5 At Sea gt bull
7AM 7PM 6 Da Nwg Vietn~1Il 7AM middot7PM 6 Vladivostok Russia SAM 730 PM 7 At Sea 7 AtSea
7AM 12M 8 Hong lltog ihin~ 7AM 12M 8 Sapporo japan (Muroran) 6AM 6PM 9-10 At Sea 9-10 At Sea 9-12 At Sea cross Intemational Dateline
13 DutchHarbor Alaska (Aleutian Islands) 230 PM 7PM11 ShaJlgllai Cbina (overnight onboard ship) lAM 11 Shangh~t Cllina (ovmightonJoltird $hip) 7 AM 14 At Sea shy12 Shanghai China 6PM 12 Shanghai China
7AM - - tlJf
6PM 15 Anchorage Alaska (Seward) 8AM 6PM13 At Sea 13 AtSea i 16 College Fjord Seni CruIsing 630AM 930 AM
14 Nagasaki japan 7AM 6PM 14 Nagasaki japan 6PM 17 Glacier Ilay Scenic Cruising 1030 AM 830 PM 15 Pusan South lltOrea TAM 4PM 1~ bull Pu~an SQuth iorea middot4lM 18 middotmiddot juneau Alaska 6 AM 2PM 16 At Sea 16 At Sea 19 - At Sea 17 Beijing China (Xingangy OISEMBAlUe AM 17 Beijing Cliina (Xingang) 20 SeattleWashington DISEMBARK AM
t ltinemy Operne5 in rcvmc Older ttPorttimcsmiYnl)middotShlpwilldocklnampngkoknsttadofL1cm~
POLYNESIA amp THE COOK ISLANDS POLYNESIA amp THE MARQUESAS ISLANDS
10 10 DAYS DAYS
TAHITIAN PRINCESSTAHITIAN PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIPROUNDTRIP fromfrom
PAPEETEPAPEETE 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
2004 DEPARTURE DATES Oct 4 24 Mayl 17 27 Sep4 14 24 Nov 13 Jun 6 16 26 0lt 14 00323Ju16 16 26 Nov 323 2005 DEPARTURE DATESAug 5 15 25 Dec 13 Jan 12
Feb 1 21200S DEPARTURE DATES
~~ 122 ~~Il 13 23 CRUISE ITINERARY
CRUISE II INERARY DAY PORT
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Papeete Tahiti 1 Papeete Tahiti (overnight onboard ship) EMBARK PM
2 Moorea Polynesia 2 Papeete Tahiti SPM 3 Huahil1e P9lynesia 8AM 5 PM 3 Tuamotu Atolls Senic Cruising
5 PM8-AM 4 At Sea I At Sea 5 Rarotonga Cook Islands 8AM 5 PI~ 5 Nuku Hiva Marquesas Islands 6 At Sea 6 Hiva Ga Marquesas Islands 8AM 5PM 7 Raiatea Polynesia overnight onboard Ship 6AM
7 At Sea middotai~ RaiateaPQlynesia igt gt 6AM 8 Rangiroa P~iynesia 8AM 4PM8 Tahaa scenic Cryising 630 AM 830 AM
8 BoraBoraPQlyrtesia(ovemightollboard ship) UN 9 Tahaa ~enl Cruising 8 AM middot11AM
9 Bora lora Polynesia 5iM 9 Raiatea Polynesia 12 N 11 PM 10 Moore Polynesfa 8 AM 5 PM la ~ Bora ~oraPoIYnesia 8AM bull 5PM
11 Papeete Tahiti DISEMBARK AM 11 Papeete Tahiti DISEMBARK AM Iong Kong Harbor
3 Singapore 4-5 At Sea 6 Da NangVieinam 7 At Sea 8 liong Kong China
EXOTICS CRU ISES
HAWAIITAHITI HAWAIIAN ISLANDS SOUTH PACIFIC ISLANDS
12 1515 DAYS DAYSDAYS
PACIFIC
TAHITIAN PRINCESS ISLAND PRINCESSPAClFIC PRINCESS
PRINCESS
SYDNEYROUNDTRIP sail between tofrom
PAPEETE PAPEETELOS ANGELES and
2004 DEPARnIRE DATEHONOLULU 2004 DEPARTURE DATES Apr 21
2004 DEPARTURE DATES ~~~l CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE 11 INERARY
Oet21t CRUISE ITINERARY Nov Sf
MayS PACIFIC PRINCESS DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
Nov20t DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DecSt 1 Los Angeles CalifornIa EMBARK AM 1 Sydney AustralIa EMBARK PMAug 17t
Dec20t1 Papeete Tahiti EMBARK PM 2-4 At Sea
2005 DEPARTURE DATE Jan 4 2-5 At Sea
(overnight onboard ship) Jan 19 5 Auckland New Zealand 7 AM 2PMFeb 3t 6 Iiilo Hawaii 8 AM 6 PM
TAHITIAN PRINCESS Papeete Tahiti 11 PM fb 18 6-7 At Sea Kilauea Voko ~enic CruisingApr 12 MarS t 3 Moorea Polynesia 8 AM 5 PM 8 Suva fijI 11 AM 430 PM1~i~t 7 Kona Hawaii 8AM 6PM4 Bora Bora PolYnesia 8 AM 5 PM 9 At Sea Cross International Dateline Apr 19
5-6 At Sea 8 Honolulu Hawaii 8AM 11 PM 10 Apia Western Samoa 830 AM 2PM 7 Christmas Isl~ndKiribati 1Z N 5 PM 9 Kauai Hawaii (Nawlliwlli) 8AM 6PM 11-12 At Sea 8-9 At Sea 10 Maui Hawaii (Lahaina) 6PM 13 Bora Bora Polynesia lOAM 6PM 10 HlloliaWlii 6 PM 13 Raiatea Polynesia (overnight onboard 11 PM11-14 At Sea 11 Maui Hawaii (Lahaina) 8 AM 6 PM 14 Raiatea Polynesia 11 PM
15 Ensenada Mexico (service call)KaUaiH~waii(Nawllfwtli) 8AM 6 PM 15 Moorea Polynesia 8AM 5PM
tllinemyopcr~ttsln=x QnIerPurtlimcslmYvary Honolulu Hawaii DISEMBARK AM 16 Los Angeles CalIfornia DISEMBARK AM 16 Papeete Tahiti DISEMBARK AM
ISLANDS OF THE PACIFIC THEATER SOUTH PACIFIC EXPLORER
24 24 DAYS DAYS
PAClFIC PRINCESS PAClFIC PRINCESS
sail between HONOLULU PAPEETE
and to OSAKA FT LAUDERDALE
2004 DEPARTURE DATES
Mayl 2004 DEPARTURE DATEJul2Sj
Aug 29 CRUISE ITINERARY
CRUISE ITINERARYDAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART EMBARK PM DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
1 Papeete Tahiti EMBARK PM lPM 7PM 2 8AM 11 PM
3 ~~~~~~ ~~~~Sta 8AM 5 PM 4-6 At Sea 7 Pitcairn Island Scenic Cruising 8AM 1211
8AM 12 N
7AM ZPM 8-9 At Sea 10 Easter Island Chile 8AM 2PM
9AM 11-14 At Sea 15 Callao Peru (overnight for Lima and Machu Picchu) 8AM 16 Callao Peru lPM 17 At Sea 18 Manta Ecuador (for Quito) 9fM 7PM 19 At Sea 20 Transit Panama Canal 7 AM 430 PM 21 San BIas Panama 8AM 5 PM 22 ft Sea 23 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands 7AM 4PM 24 At Sea
25 Ft Lauderdale Florida DISEMBARK AMMoorea Polynesia tllinemyoperataln~12onlerPortl1mesmiYmymiddot
EXOTICS CRUISES
HAWAIITAHITISOUTH PACIFIC AMAZONSOUTHERN CARIBBEAN CAPE HORNSTRAIT OF MAGELLAN
1430 12 DAYS DAYSDAYS
ROYAL PRINCESS ROYAL PRINCESSSAPPHIRE PRINCESS
sail betweenFT LAUDERDALE SANTIAGOLOS ANGELES to
andto MANAUS BUENOS AIRESSYDNEY 2005 DEPARTURE DATE 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
2004 DEPARTURE DATE Apr 9 Jan 10
Nov 22 Jan 241 Feb 7
FebZt
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
CRUISE ITINERARY
CRUISE ITINERARYCRUISE ITINERARY 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTDAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 2-3 At Sea 1 Santiago Chile (Valparaiso) EMBARK PM
1 Los ingeles California EMBARK PM 4 Tortola BritIsh Virgin Islands 8 AM 6 PM 2 At Sea 2 Ensenada Mexico 8AM 5PM 3 Puerto Montt Chile 7AM 6PM
3middot6 At Sea 4 At Sea 5 Dominica 9 AM 4 PM 7 Hilo Hawaii 8AM 5 At Sea Chilean Fjords Scenic Cruising6PM 6 Trinidad 9 AM 6 PM
8 Maui Hawaii (Lahaina) 8AM 6PM 6 At Sea Amalia Glacier Scentc CruiSi3f7 At Sea 7 Punta Arenas Chile (Strait of Magei an) 7AM 6PM9 Honolulu Hawaii 7AM 5PM
- 10middot13 At Sea 8 Beagle Channel Scenic Cruising 8 Ushuaia Argentina (Tierra del Fuo) 12N 8PM
8 Devils Island French Guiana (Isle Royal) 8 AM 2 PM 14 Bora Bora Polynesia 8AM 6PM 9 At Sea 9 At Sea Cape Hom Scenic Cruising
10 Santarem Brazil 9 AM 7 PM 10 Moorea Polynesia 8AM 6PM 10 Falkland Islands (Stanley) 8AM 6PM 10 Papeete Tahiti (overnight onboard ship) 9PM 11 At Sea
i 16 Papeete Tahiti 6PM 11 Boca da Valeria Brazil (Amazon River) 7 AM 2 PM 12 Puerto Madryn Argentina 6AM 5PM 17middot18 AtSea 12 Manaus Brazil (overnight onboard ship) 10 AM 13 At Sea
14 Montevideo Uruguay 9AM 6PM19 Pago Pago merlcan Samoa 8AM 6PM 13 Manaus Brazil DISEMBARK AM 15 Buenos Aires Argentina DISEMBARK AM 20 Apia Western Samoa 8AM 6PM 21 At Sea Cross International Dateline middotl1me5forallscenkouisinCile subjectlDclwIgc
tllinmryopefilteslnr=rscordttPorttlmislm)vary22 Suva Fiji 8AM 6PM l 23-24 At Sea
20 Auckland New Zealand 8AM 6PM ORINOCO RIVERSOUTHERN CARIBBEAN ANDESSOUTH AMERICA 26 Tauranga New Zealand 8AM 7PM 27 At Sea
28 Wellington Newealand 8AM 6PM 16 17 DAYS DAYS 29-30 AtSea
31 Sydney Australia DISEMBARK AM ROYAL PRINCESS ROYAL PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP SANTIAGO from to
FT LAUDERDALE FT LAUDERDALE
200S DEPARTURE DATE2005 DEPARTURE DATE
Mar 7Mar 24
CRUISE IIJNERARYCRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Santiago Chlle (Valparaiso) EMBARK PM
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM
2 La Serena Chile (Coquimbo) 8 AM 5 PM2-3 At Sea 3 At Sea Um6n Costa Rica 7AM 7PM 4 Arica Chile 7AM 6PMCristobal Panama (for Panama Canal) 8AM 5PM o At Sea
6 Cartagena Colombia 9AM 2 PM 6 San Martin Peru (for Pisco and Machu Picchu) 7AM 6PM 7 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 130 PM 7PM 7 Callao Peru (overnight for Lima) 530 AM 8-9 At sea 8 Callao Peru 1PM 10 Puerto Ordaz Venezuela (Orinoco River) 8AM 6PM 9 At Sea
i 11 At Sea 10 Manta Ecuador (overnight for Quito) 530AM 12 Greada 8AM i 11 Manta Ecuador 1lM5PMt 1~ Dolllinlca i 7N1 5 PM 12 At Sea
i 13 Transit Panama C~nal 7AM 430 PM14 St Thomas us Virgilslands 9AM 5PM 14 Cartagena Colombia 8AM 130 PMJs AtSei i 15 Aruba Netherlands intiiles 1PM 7PM 16 Princess Cays Bahamas 8AM 16-17 At Sea Tahiti Polynesia 17 FtLallardale Flillilt~ DISEMBARK AM 1ampmiddot Ft L~uderdale Florida DISEMBARK AM
AMAZON RIVERMEDITERRANEAN
21 DAYS
ROYAL PRINCESS
MANAUS
to ROME
2005 DEPARTURE DATE
Apr 21
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE M~naus Brazil (Wemight onboardship) Manaus Brazil
3 BocadaValeria Brazil (AriiazonRivet) 11 AM 4-6 At Sea 7 Recife Brazil 1 PM 8-11 AtSea 12 Dakar Senegal 8AM 13-14 At Sea 15 Agadir Morocco 7AM 16 Casablanca Morocco (for Marrakech) 8AM 17 Gibraltar lOAM 18 Allcante Spain 12 N 19 Barcelona Spain 8AM 20 Cannes France (for Monte Carlo) 8AM 21 FlorencePisa Italy (Livarno) 7AM 22 Rome Italy (Civitavecchia) DISEMBARK AM
INDIAN OCEANAUSTRALIA
28 DAYS
PACIfIC PRINCESS
CAPE TOWN
to SYDNEY
2004 DEPARTURpound DATE
Oct 20
CRUISE ITINERARY1 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Cape Town South Africa EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 3 East London South Africa 7AM 3PM 4 DurbahSouth Africa 8AM 6PM 5-7 At Sea 8 Nosy BeMadagascar 7AM 4PM 9 At Sea 10 Poilit des Galets Reunioll]slahd 11 Port Louis Mauritius 12c19 At Sea 20 Perth Australia (Fremantle) 21-23 At Sea 24 Adelaide Australla 25 At Sea 26 Melbourne Australla 7 27 Tasmania AUstralia (Burnie) 28 At Sea 29 Sydney Australia DISEMBARK AM
I
DEPART EMBARK PM
7PM 6PM
8pM
5PM
3PM 9PM 6PM 6PM 5PM 7PM 7PM
EXOTICS CRUISES
SOUIB ATIANTICANTARCfICNSOUIB AMERICA
24 DAYS
ROYAL PRINCESS
CAPE TOWN
to SANTIAGO
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
Dec 17
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Cape TownSouthAfrica (overnighfol1board ship) EMBARK PM 2 Cape Town South Africa 3PM 2 if~~t Good HopSCenic Crulsing 3-6 6 Tristan DaCunha United Kingdom 8AM 5PM 7-10 At Sea 11 Falkland Islands (Staliley) 8 AM 5PM 12 At Sea 13-16 Antarctica Peninsula ScehltmiddotCruising 14 days ihcludingmiddot Elephant
Island AntarcticSotind Deceptionlslana GerlacheStrait NaxefChannel Schollaert Channel SigJtla Island and Boyd Strait)
17 At Sea Cape Horn Scenic Cruising1amp UshuaiaArgentina (Tierra del fuego) bull middot6 AM 19 Punta Arenas Chile (Strait of Magellan) 7 AM 20 At Sea Amalia Glacier Scenic Cruising21 At Sea Chilean Fjords Scenic Cruising22 AtSea 23 Puerto Mont Chile 7AM 6PM 24 At Sea 25 Santiago Chile (Valparaiso) DISEMBARK AM
-nmes for1l scenlccruisinc are subJect to change
ASIAINDIAMEDITERRANEAN
30 ROYAL PRINCESSDAYS
ROME
to BANGKOK
2004 DEPARlURE DATE
Sep 16
CRUISE Il INERARY
WEST AFRICASOUTH AMERICA
28 DAYS
PACIFIC PRINCESS
FT LAUDERDALE
to CAPE TOWN
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
51 22
CRUISE ITINERARY
DISEMBARK AM
Aruba
EXOTICS CRU ISES amp CRU ISETOU RS
AUSTRALIANEW ZEALAND CRUISETOUR
AUSTRALIAN EXPLORER 2004 DEPARTURE DATESAPPHIRE21 plus
DAYS PRINCESS SYDNEY Dec 17 to
AUCKLAND CRUISETOUR 5P CRUiSE
CRUISETOUR ITINERARY
DAY PORT By Sea By Land DAY PORT
1 Sydney 14 Fiordland National Park 2 Sydney Scenic Cruising
3 SydneyAyers Rock 15 Dunedin New Zealand (Port Chalmers) 4 Ayers ROek
5 Ayers RockPort Douglas 16 Christchurch New Zealand 6 Port Douglas - (Lytleton)
7 Port DouglasSydneyEmbark 17 Wellilgton New Zealand 8 At Sea 18 At Sea 9 Melbourne Australia 19 Tauranga New Zealand
10 At Sea 20 Bay of Islands New Zealand 11 Tasmania Australia (Hobart) 21 Auckland New Zealand 12middot13 At Sea
Sydney Opera House Australia
AUSTRALIANEW ZEALAND CRUISETOUR SOUTHEAST ASIACHINA CRUISETOUR CAPE HORNSTRAIT OF MAGELLAN CRUISETOUR AUSTRALIAN BEIJING Be TERRA COTTA 2004 DEPARTURE DATES RIO 8t IGUAZU FALLS Post-Crulsetour1 Pre-Crulsetour 217EXPLORER 2005 DEPARTURE DATES PACIFICSAPPHIRE WARRIORS19 plw or PRINCESS jul9t loieifie
DAYS PRINCESS SYDNEY Jan 12 plus 19 ROYAL plw Feb 5 Oct 28 Royal BUENOS AIRES
AUCKLAND DAYS ROYAL PRINCESS to 21 ampto DAYS PRINCESS
BEUING CRUISE t ~~S~i BeWln~~~~e
to SANTIAGO~e~s~Ot~r~ih~fi1BANGKOK CRUiSE CRUISECRUISETOUR 3t3P landtourm~yvlty CRUISETOUR 12
DAY PORT DAY PORT
DAY PORT By Sea ltBy LaDd DAY PORT
1 Beijing 11-12 At Sea 1 Rio de janeiro 11 Cape Horn Scenic Cruising
13 Hong Kong 2 Rio de jneiro c 12 Ushuaia Argentina 14 At Sea 3 RiolgUaiu Falls 12 Beagle Channel Scenlc Cruising
15 Nha Trang Vietnam 4 IIDIilZll FaU$13u~os~re$ 13 Punta Arenas Chile
16 Phu My Vietnam 5 Buens AiresEmbark 14 At Sea 17 At Sea 6 Montevideo Uruguay 15 Seno Eyre Fjord Scenic Cruising 18 Singapore 7 At Sea 16 At Sea 19 Kualtan Malaysia 8 Puerto Madryn Argentina 17 Puerto Montt Chile 20 At Sea 9 At Sea 18 At Sea 21 Bangkok Thail3nd 10 Falkland Islands (Stanley) 19 Santiago Chile
DAY PORT DAY PORT
At Sea Pusan SouthKOrea Nagasaki japan At Sea Shanghai China
Note CnIlst route shown for Royil Princess Oct 28 only Timcsforil1lsccnkoulslngmsubjccttothange
CRUISE [OUR ITINERARY
CRUISETOUR ITINERARY
CRUISrrOlJR ITINERARY Fiordland National Park Scenic Cruising DlUedin New Zealand Christchurch New Zealand Wellington New Zealand
14
GRAND PANAMA CANAL CRUISES
ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL
10 10 11 DAYSDAYS DAYS
CORAL PRINCESS GRAND PRINCESS GRAND PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIPfrom from
fromFT LAUDERDALE GALVESTON GALVESTON
2004 DEPARTURE DATES Oct n 21 31 2004 DEPARTURE DATE
2004 DEPARTURE DATENov 10 20 30middot DeelSmiddot
DedSDec 10 28
2005 DEPARTURE DATES CRUISE ITINERARY Jan 7 17 27
CRUISE ITINERARY Feb 6 16 26 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART MarS 1828 CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Galveston Texas EMBARK PMApr 7 17 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTshy 1 Galveston Texas EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 1 ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 3 Belize City Belize 1 PM 7PM 2-3 At Sea 3 Belize City Belize lPM 7PM 4 Costa Maya Mexico (Mahahual) 8AM 4PM 4 Um6n Costa Rica 7AM rPM 4 Costa Maya Mexico (Mahahual) SAM 4 PM 5 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands 12 PM 7PM 5 Panama Canal (to Gatun Lake) 7AM 430 PM 5 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands 12 PM 7PM 6 Ocho Rios Jamaica SAM 5PM 5 Col6n Panama 5PM 8PM 6 At Sea 7 At Sea 6 At Sea Cristobal Panama 7AM 4PM 8 7AM 4PM 7 Grand Cayman Cayman IslandS 7AM 4PM (fot Panama Canal) ftrtpg~niaa~~) S Corumel Mexico SAM 6PM 8 At Sea 9 At Sea 9 Bclize City Belize 7AM 4 PM 6PM 10 Coromel Mexico lOAM 6 PM9 Cozumel Mexico lOAM 10 At Sea 10 At Sea 11 At Sea
Portordtrllndtlmtsmayvllry 11 flo Lauderdale florida DISEMBARK AM Portorntr IInltf timpoundi may vary 11 Galveston Texas DISEMBARK AM Port ordu and Nmes may vary 12 Galv_es~on Texas DISEMBARK AM
ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL
8 DAYS
CORAL PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP
from
FT LAUDERDALE
2004 DEPARTURE DATE Dec 20
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Fl Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM 2-3 At Sea 4 Lim6n Costa Rica 7AM 7PM 5 Panama Canal (to Gatun Lake) 7 AM 430 PM 5 Co16n Panama 5PM SPM 6 At Sea 7 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands SAM 5PM S At Sea 9 Flo Lauderdale Florida DISEMBARK AM Bridge of the Americas Panama
f OptIonll fOllTS inclld1lI tht AtlllnH to Pacific RlIlllfll) joumq will dlmlldrt tilt ship b) tctdtr lit Gfttlm uk AJkr tour plIssmm dlstmlrark tilt shipwin procmlllat through tilt Gatun Locb lIndjlnlllly dock in Gl6lI Hmal1p41Sl11tmmttydiumlmtheJldlo~ lflrshops IInd~llI toIIrsrrnrl CIItutl14ktlllIrtonlflrJhlp
GRAND PANAMA CANAL CRUISES
GRAND PANAMA CANAL GRAND PANAMA CANAL GRAND PANAMA CANAL
150R 18 150R 1715 DAYS DAYS DAYS
CORAL PRINCESS SUN PRINCESS
REGAL PRINCESS REGAL PRINCESS SUN PRINCESS
DAWN PRINCESS REGAL PRINCESS sail between DAWN PRINCESS
sail between FT LAUDERDALE FT LAUDERDALE sail betweenand
FT LAUDERDALEand SAN DIEGO andLOS ANGELES
SAN FRANCISCO 2004 DEPARTURE DATES 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
DAWN PRINCESS 2004 DEPARTURE DATESNov 24Sp191
CRUISE ITINERARY Dec9t CORAL PRINCESSREGAL PRINCESS 5ltp261 CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE ITINERARY
200S DEPARTURE DATES Dec 24 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
SUN PRINCESS DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARIltPM200S DEPARTURE DATES DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Sep 2StMar 24
3 Ocho Rios Jamaica lOAM 6PM 2-3 At5ea 2 At Sea 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBA8KPM
REGAL PRINCESS AprSt 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBA8KPM Jan stu 200S DEPARTURE DATES2 At Sea4 At Sea 4 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 7AM lPMJan 23 5 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 7AM lPM 3 Ocho Rios Jamaica lOAM 6PM REGAL PRINCESS 5 Cartagena Colombia 9AM 3PMFeb7t 4 At Sea Apr 239AM 3PM 6 Transit Panama Canal 7AM 430 PMFb22 ~ yenr~fte~~~~~~u 7AM 430 PM 5 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 7AM lPM At SeaMar9t CORAL PRINCESS 79AM 3PM8 At Sea Apr 27 8 Puntarenas Costa Rica 7AM 7PMSUN PRINCESS 9 Puntarenas Costa Rica 7 AM 7PM ~ yenr~fte~n~~~~~u 7AM 430 PM 9-10 At SeaApr1S 8 At Sea DAWN PRINCESS10-11 At Sea 11 Acapulco Mexico 8AM 5PM
5PM 9 Puntarenas Costa Rica 7AM 7PM Apr 29H ~ae~lcoMexico 8 AM 12 At SeatllWrryopmllzlfrarnLls~in 10-11 At Sea rmrKfIfikTiIIrttimnma1 tlliJlrraryoptJllllsfrlJflSlmFranrimlJn 13 Cabo San lucas Mexico 8AM 5PM
gt This mUJI C4Jl llfwmblnld wlth a 3 14 Cabo San Lucas Mexico 7 AM lPM H ~e~o Mexico 8AM SPM rmruordrrorttimamG)llIryCoIutar CnUK to VlWOIlllr SC Dqs ThUIltIIIflltllnlltCllIIblntdwilhaZ-day 14-15 At Sea 16lhrlllllhI9lllIbtboobdulaquoSC)lQ4k t Illncral) lIpCutcs in mrmt orm Pllrt IiIIIa CocastaICnliutoVan(ouKrBCDlIys16 16 San Francisco California 7AM 4PMcowtlIrcrllisr IIIIYlIl1Ymiddot IhrounIScankboobdlUaK)lllllluU t~A~geles California 6 AM 5PM 14 Cabo San Lucas Mexico 8AM 5PM
Thllwl1JIIICllllslltMOlIkpilllyJmtcad 17-18 At Sea middotmiddotThliIAfllIllCltlllsatMGnIqclBaylnstcadllf 15 At Sea CPlIilldCI1IIu 17 At Sea o[OdKKwsPurllilllrlmllYWlry OchoRicJsPortllmtslllllYVllfymiddot D1SEMBA8K AM19 Vancouver BC DISEMBA8K AM 16 San Die20 California DlSEMBA8K AM 18 Val1couver BC
GRAND PANAMA CANAL COASTAL CRUISING
2-4 CORAL PRINCESS ISLAND PRINCESS SUN PRINCESS18 DAWN PRINCESS DIAMOND PRINCESS STAR PRINCESSDAYSDAYS
COASTAL CRUISE SCHEDULEREGAL PRINCESS
SHIP DAYS FROM TO DEPARTURE DATE DIAMOND PRINCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 5104
SAN FRANCISCO DIAMOND PRINCES5 4 Vancouver Seattle 5404 to CORAL PRINCESS 2 San Francisco Vancouver 5604
NEW YORK DAWN PRiNCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 5704 ISLAND PRiNCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 51204
2004 DEPARTURE DATE SUN PRINCESS 3 San Francisco Vancouver 51404Aug 24 ISLAND PRiNCESS 3 Vancouver LOI Angeles 91804
DIAMOND PRINCESS 1 Seattle Vancouver 91804CRUISE ITINERARY DIAMOND PRINCESS 6 Vancouver Los Angeles 91904 SAPPHIRE PRINCESS 1 Seattle Vancouver 91904 SAPPHREPRINCESS 2 Vancouver San Francisco 92004 DIAMOND PRINCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 43005 DlAMONDPRiNCES$ 4 Vancouver Seattle 5305 SUN PRINCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 5305
ISLAND PRiNCESS 3 Los Angeles VancOllver 5405 CORAL PRiNCESS 2 San Francisco Vancouver 51205
Coral Princess in the Panama Canal
CRUISE PLUS
Extend your adventure with our Cruise Plusreg program Cruise Plusreg enables you to enhance your vacation with one- to four-night hotel
packages in cities that stand on their own as vacation destinations Add nights in Sydney before you cruise or extend your vacation with nights in the city by the
bay San Francisco Transportation and luggage handling costs from the airport to both hotel and ship plus meet and greet services are always included
Wherever you choose to explore youll enjoy properties that are carefully chosen based on service value location and the peace of mind of knowing that Princess
has arranged it all for you
Anchorage Alaska Trevi Fountain Rome Auckland Harbor New Zealand
The Cruise Plusreg Program is available in over 30 major cities including
MEDITERRANEANAEGEAN EXOTICS PANAMA CANAL Barcelona London Rome and Venice Auckland Bangkok Beijing Buenos Aires Ft Lauderdale Los Angeles New York City
Cape Town Ft Lauderdale Honolulu Los San Diego San Francisco Sanjuan Vancouver NORTHERN EUROPE Angeles Montreal Moorea New York City Copenhagen and London MEXICO CARIBBEANOsaka Papeete Rome San Francisco
Ft Lauderdale Galveston Los AngelesTRANSATLANTIC Santiago Seattle Sydney Vancouver Venice Barcelona Copenhagen Ft Lauderdale San Francisco and San Juan
London New York City and Rome ALASKA Anchorage Calgary Fairbanks Kenai San Francisco Seattle and Vancouver
For more information about options and pricing reference a destination specific brochure or contact your travel agent
TRAVEL THE WORLD WITH THE LEADER IN CRUISINGmiddot Princess
Analysis by the Hawaii Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism Comparing the Economic Impact of Foreign Flag Ships with US Flag Cruise Ships Sailing in Hawaii
This is a summary of an analysis prepared by the Hawai Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism (DBEDT) of the economic impact of the foreign flag cruise ship fleet sailing in Hawaii as compared to each of the US flag ships operating in Honolulu
The comparison is set out below
Foreign Pride Pride Pride
Fleet Of Hawaii Of Aloha Of America
Total economic output impact (spendingsales) ($mil) 155 542 4225 4958
Total earnings impact (labor earnings) ($mil) 44 155 1207 1411
Total employment impact Uobs) 1447 5059 3943 4627
This analysis demonstrates that a single US-flagged ship the Pride of America home ported in Honolulu is 32 times more economically impactful and creates 32 times as many jobs as the entire foreign flag fleet that sails into and out of Hawaii ports of call
Economic Impact of Pride of America
Assumptions 1 Annual impact though Pride of Aloha is leaving in May 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existing Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($) 4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of outputl$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job multiplier (jobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
118700 105
2706 3373
147 042
1372
4958
1417
4627
Data sourcelformula Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Line 1 x line 2 x line 31 000000
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 4 x line 5
Line 4 x line 6
Line 4 x line 7
Economic Impact of Pride of Hawaii
Assumptions
1 Annual impact though Pride of Hawaii is leaving in February 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existing Pride of Aloha and Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($) 4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job multiplier (jobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
Data sourceformula 139770 Actual 2007 figure
975 Actual 2007 figure 2706 Actual 2007 figure 3688 Line 1 x line 2 x line 31000000
147 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model 042 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
1372 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
5421 Line 4 x line 5
1549 Line 4 x line 6
5059 Line 4 x line 7
Economic Impact of Pride of Aloha
Assumptions 1 Annual impact though Pride of Aloha is leaving in May 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existlng Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($)
4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job mUltiplier Oobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
95680 111
2706 2874
147 042
1372
4225
1207
3943
Data sourcelformula Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Line 1 x line 2 x line 31000000
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 4 x line 5
Line 4 x line 6
Line 4 x line 7
lt
Methodology Used in Calculating Impact of International Cruise Ships
Cruise ship visitors 1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Came with ships 3 Flied in 4 Average length of stay (days) 5 PPPD ($) 6 Cruise visitor spending ($mil))
Cruise ship crews 7 Ratio of crew spending to cruise visitor spending 8 Cruise crew spending
Cruisline 9 Ratio of crew spending to cruise visitor spending
10 Cruiseline spending
11 Total cruise-related spending ($mil)
12 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 13 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 14 Job multiplier Uobs$ cruise -related spending)
15 Total output impact ($miJ)
16 Total earnings impact ($miJ)
17 Total employment impact (jobs)
106641 98307
8334 739 847 668
02 134
038 254
1055
147 042
1372
1551
444
1447
Data sourceformula Line 2 + line 3 DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report Line 1 x line 4 x line 5
DBEDT 2003 Cruise study Line 7 x line 6
DBEDT 2003 Cruise study Line 9 x line 6
Line 6 + line 8 + line 10
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 11 x line 12
Line 11 x line 13
Line 11 x line 14
Economic Contributions Foreign-Flag Fleet operating in Hawaii vs Three US-Flag Ships
$1500
Pride of Hawaii$1000- $542 million VIc -0-E c Pride of AlohaCo
423 million$500
Pride of America $496 million155 million$shy
Foreign-Flag US-Flag Fleet Fleet
Source State of Hawaii Department of US-Flag $1460 billion Business Economic Development and Tourism
Foreign-Flag $ 155 million 7292008
Employment Foreign-Flag Fleet operating in Hawaii vs Three US-Flag Ships
15000
10000
til c o Pride of Aloha
39435000
Pride of America 1447 4627
~---------
Foreign-Flag US-Flag Fleet Fleet
Source State of Hawaii Department of US-Flag 13629 jobs Business Economic Development and Tourism
Foreign-Flag 1447 jobs 7292008
Foreign Flag Capacity Growth Foreign flag passenger capacity has changed five-fold on roundtrip Hawaii cruises from the West Coast since enactment of the Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative
1600000
1400000
tn 1200000
J enshyZ
1000000
I shyG) en 800000 s G) tn tn
600000 as D 400000
200000
0 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Year
Source US Maritime Administration (derived from the US Customs and Border Patrol Vessel Entrance and Clearance documents - final 2007 data) 7292008
NCL America Hawaii Economic Contributions
(2004-2008)
bull (in Millions) bull $399 in wages benefits and overtime to US seafarers bull $35 in Federal and State payroll Taxes bull $64 in Government Fees and Taxes to Hawaii bull $28 in wages benefits and overtime to US other employees bull $52 in Port Charges to Hawaii Companies (Stevedores tugs pilots etc) bull $85 in Fuel to Tesoro Hawaii bull $130 for shore excursions to Hawaii tour operators bull $39 for Hawaii hotel rooms and ground transport bull $75 for food grown in Hawaii bull $57 in union fees and levies (incl $32M paid directly by employees) bull $1 in MMD fees to the United States Coast Guard bull $51 for recruitment screening processing and training crew bull $76 advertising and promoting Hawaii as a destination bull $1092
COASTWISE CRUISES INTERPRETIVE RULE RESOLUTION Adopted at the
US Conference of Mayors 76th Annual Meeting
June 20-242008 Miami
WHEREAS the Department of Homeland Securitys Customs and Border Protection (CBP) issued a proposed Interpretive Rule regulating Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises on foreign flagged vessels between US ports of call under the Passenger Vessel Services Act at the request of the United States Maritime Administration and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule would require that a foreign-flagged vessel on a coastwise cruise to call at a foreign port for at least 48 hours with that foreign stop constituting at least 50 percent of the cruise itinerary and allowing passengers to disembark the cruise vessel at the foreign port before continuing the cruise to a US port of call and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule establishes burdensome criteria that are wholly inconsistent with industry practice particularly the 48-hour call at foreign port shyinasmuch as the standard port call is six to eight hours - as well as the requirement that 50 percent of a cruise be spent at the foreign port and
WHEREAS the intent of the proposed Interpretive Rule is to protect the single remaining US flag vessel serving the Inter-Hawaiian Island cruise trade that according to the Hawaii Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism generates more than 4600 jobs and generates nearly $500 million in economic benefits for the state annually and
WHEREAS thousands of members of the International Longshore Workers Union (nWU) are employed at US ports serving cruise ships and whose jobs would be at risk if the proposed Interpretive Rule were implemented and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule is vague as to the breadth of its application ie to coastwise cruises between all United States ports or applied solely to coastwise cruises from West Coast ports to Hawaii and
WHEREAS the Cruise Lines International Association estimates the proposed Interpretive Rule would upend the $17 billion in national cruise industry spending and put at risk more than 300000 jobs generated by the international cruise industry including jobs held by nWU at US ports and the local allied industries supporting the cruise industry and
Executive Order Submissions Under Review
II Reglnfogov Where to ind Federal Regulatory Information -~
Home ] Lnitied Agenda and Regulator) Ilan pound012866 Regulator) Review Jnformalion Collection Review
EO 12866 Regulatory Rlvlw dvanced Search IJitorical RepWI Review Counh Jriter XIL
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA)
Executive Order Submissions Under Review July 25 2008 - _------------____ _shy
Department of Homeland Security
AGENCY DHS-TSA RIN 1652-AA53
TITLE Large Aircraft Security Program Other Aircraft Operator Security Programs and Airport Operator Security Program
STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT Yes RECEIVED DATE 06302008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
AGENCY DHS-USCIS RIN Llti15-AB67 TITLE Changes to Requirements Affecting H-2B Nonimmigrants and Their Employers
STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT No RECEIVED DATE 06092008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
AGENCY DHS-USCBP RIN 1651AA11 TITLE Issuance of a Visa and Authorization for Temporary Admission Into the United States for Certain Nonimmigrant Aliens Afflicted W HIV Infection
STAGE Final Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT No RECEIVED DATE 03042008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
-_RE_V-IE-W-E-X-T-EN-D-E-D---------- _
AGENCY DHS-USCBP RIN 1651-AA76 TITLE Coastwise Transportation of Passengers STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT Yes RECEIVED DATE 07142008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
Disclosure I Accessibility I Privacy Policy I Contact Us
httpwwwreginfogovpublicdoeoReviewSearch 7252008
View Rule Page 11
Shere D find Federal ReguLatory InformciiorlReglnfogov Home J Cnified Agenda al1d Regulatory Plan EO 12866 Regulatory Reyiew Information Collection Reiew
Current rnified Agenda and Regulatory Plan Historical Pnified Agenda and Regulatory Plan Search
View Rule
DHSIUSCBP RIN 1651-AA76 Publication ill Spring 2008
Title llCoastwise Transportation of Passengers
Abstract This interim rule amends the Department of Homeland Securitys (DHS) current regulations relating to the transportation of passengers by non-coastwise-qualified vessels on voyages that begin and end at a US port and stop at intervening US and foreign port(s) Under this interim final rule voyages that begin and end at a US port and stop at a foreign port(s) and at intervening US port(s) where a large USshyflag coastwise-qualified passenger vessel engages in regular service are in violation of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) unless the cumulative length of stay(s) at intervening foreign port(s) is more than 50 percent of the total amount of time spent at the intervening US port(s) and passengers are permitted to go ashore at the foreign port(s) The purpose of this amendment is to ensure that the Congressional purpose in enacting the PVSA which is to preserve the economic benefits of US coastwise trade to US-flag coastwise-qualified vessels is properly implemented
Agency Department of Homeland Security(DHS) Priority Substantive Nonsignificant
KIN Status First time published in the Unified Agenda Agenda Stage of Rulemaking Final Rule Stage
Major No Unfunded Mandates No
CFR Citation -LCER 4J~)(h)(plusmnJ
Legal Authority 5JJSS_30J12lJ-SClt16 J9_lJiCJ 431 9_L1C1plusmn3JJ2JScHJ1J2JSCJ624 L(LlLSc207LIl(gtJfHgt~ _CiQJ _46lSC 6QLQ~
Legal Deadline None
Timetable Action Date FR Cite
Interim Final Action 0510012008
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required No Government Levels Affected None
Federalism No
Included in the Regulatory Plan No
RIN Data Printed in the FR No
Agency Contact Glen E Vereb Chief Entry Procedures and Carriers Branch Department of Homeland Security US Customs and Border Protection Office of Regulations and Rulings 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington DC 20229 Phone202572-8730
Disclosure I Accessibility I Privacy Policy I Contact Us
httpwwwreginfogovpublicdoeAgendaViewRuleruleID=286751 7128120
Federal RegisterVol 72 No 224Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules 65487
SPECULATIVE POSITION LIMITS 1-Continued [In contract units)
Contract
Soybeans and Mini-Soybeans 2
Wheat and Mini-Wheat 2 bullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbull
Soybean Oil
SingleSpot month All monthsmonth
600 8600 13300 600 11100 14500 540 6600 8600
Soybean Meal 720 5500 7100
Minneapolis Grain Exchange
Hard Red Spring Wheat I 600 I 11100 I 14500
New York Board of Trade
Cotton No2 I 300 I 5300 I 7300
Kansas City Board of Trade
Hard Winter Wheat I 600 I 11100 I 14500
1 For purposes of compliance with these limits positions in a futures contract that shares ~ubstantially identical terms with a contract market enumerated herein including a futures contract that is cash-settled based on the settlement price of an enumerated contract market shall be agshygregated with positions in the enumerated contract market
2 For purposes of compliance with these limits positions in the regular-sized and mini-sized contracts shall be aggregated
Issued by the Commission this November 152007 in Washington DC David Stawick Secretary of the Commission [FR Doc E7-22681 Filed 11-20-07 845 amI BILLING CODE 6351-Q1-P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Bureau of Customs and Border Protection
19 CFR Part 4
[USCBP-2007-o098]
Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises
AGENCY Customs and Border Protection Department of Homeland Security ACTION Proposed interpretation solicitation of comments
SUMMARY This document proposes new criteria to be used by Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to determine whether non-coastwise-qualified vessels are in violation ofthe Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) when engaging in cruise itineraries in which passengers board at a US port the vessel calls at several Hawaiian ports and then the vessel proceeds to a foreign port or ports for a brief period before ultimately returning to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their cruise CBP believes these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because it appears that the primary objective of the foreign stop is evasion of the PVSA
DATES Comments must be received on or before December 212007 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT Glen E Vereb Cargo Security Carriers amp Immigration Branch Office of International Trade (202) 572-8730 ADDRESSES You may submit comments identified by docket number by one of the following methods
bull Federal eRulemaking Portal http wwwregulationsgov Follow the instructions for submitting comments
bull Mail Border Security Regulations Branch Office of International Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
I Public Participation
Interested persons are invited to participate in this proposed interpretation by submitting written data views or arguments on all aspects of the proposed interpretation Customs and Border Protection (CBP) also invites comments that relate to the economic environmental or federalism effects that might result from this proposed interpretation Comments that will provide the most assistance to CBP in developing these procedures will reference a specific portion of the proposed interpretation explain the reason for any recommended change and include data information or authority that support such recommended change
Instructions All submissions received must include the agency name and docket number for this proposed
interpretation All comments received will be posted without change to http wwwregulationsgov including any personal information provided
Docket For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received go to http wwwregulationsgov Submitted comments may also be inspected on regular business days between the hours of 9 am and 430 pm at the Office of International Trade Customs and Border Protection 799 9th Street NW 5th Floor Washington DC Arrangements to inspect submitted documents should be made in advance by calling Mr Joseph Clark at (202) 572shy8768
II Background
The maritime cabotage law governing the transportation of passengers was first established by section 8 of the Passenger Vessel Services Act of June 191886 (the PVSA) 24 Stat 81 as amended by section 2 of the Act of February 17 1898 30 Stat 248 formerly codified at 46 USC App 289 (now codified at 46 USC 55103) 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 of $200 (now $300 as promulgated in TD 03-11 pursuant to the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 199028 USC 2461 note) for each passenger so transported and landed
The intent of the maritime cabotage laws including the PVSA was to provide a legal structure that guarantees a coastwise monopoly to
65488 Federal RegisterVol 72 No 224Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules
American shipping and thereby promotes development of the American merchant marine Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 28 (DC Cir 1984) see also The Granada 35 FSupp 892 8931940 AMC 1601 (DC Pa 1940) (stating that the legislative aim of section 289 [now 55102] was the creation of a practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping business for United States ships) In other words the PVSA was enacted to advance the United States merchant marine and fleet by restricting the use of foreign-ownedflagged passenger vessels in United States territorial waters
Passenger vessel transportation between United States ports has historically been viewed to be part of the coastwise trade after the enactment of the PVSA This view is premised on the concepts of continuity of the voyage and whether its intended purpose or objective was coastwise transportation In other words the PVSA was held to be violated if the coastwise movement was continuous or if the purpose of the trip was a coastwise voyage (See 18 OAG 445 September 4 1886 28 OAG 204 February 16 1910 29 OAG 318 February 12 1912 30 OAG 44 February 1 1913 34 OAG 340 December 24 1924 and 36 OAG 352 August 13 1930)
The CBP regulations promulgated pursuant to the PVSA are found at section 480a of title 19 of the Code of Federal Regulations (19 CFR 480a) and are reflective of the above cited Office of the Attorney General decisions These regulations provide among other things that a non-coastwise-qualified vessel which embarks a passenger at a port in the United States embraced within the coastwise laws (a coastwise port) will be deemed to have landed that passenger in violation of the PVSA if the passenger disembarks at a different coastwise port on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a nearby foreign port or ports (as defined in 19 CFR 480a(a)(2) see also 19 CFR 480a(b)(2)) The terms embark and disembark are words of art which are defined as going on board a vessel for the duration of a specific voyage and leaving a vessel at the conclusion of a specific voyage respectively (See 19 CFR 480a(a)(4))
The references in section 480a to nearby foreign ports (defined in 19 CFR 480a(a)(2)) are the results of attempts by CBP to apply an Office of the Attorney Generals opinion dated February 26 1910 (28 OAG 204) In that case a foreign-flag vessel transported 615 passengers on a voyage around the world beginning in New
York and concluding in San Francisco The Attorney General opined that since the primary object of the voyage was to visit various parts of the world on a pleasure tour returning home via California and not to be transported in domestic commerce the transportation was not in violation of the PVSA
The 1910 Attorney Generals opinion was extended to voyages that included foreign ports other than nearby foreign ports (See Treasury Decision (TD) 68shy285 (33 FR 16558) November 14 1968) However voyages solely to one or more coastwise ports have always been considered predominantly coastwise Therefore non-coastwise-qualified vessels engaging in such a voyage where passengers temporarily go ashore at a coastwise port have been deemed to have violated the PVSA
m Current Law and Policy Pursuant to Public Law 109-304 120
Stat 1632 enacted on October 6 2006 Title 46 United States Code was substantially reorganized and recodified Consequently the PVSA is now codified at 46 USC 55103 and provides that no vessel shall transport passengers between ports or places in the United States either directly or by way of a foreign port under a penalty of $300 for each person so transported and landed except one that (1) Is wholly owned by citizens of the United States for purposes of engaging in the coastwise trade and (2) has been issued a certificate of documentation with a coastwise endorsement or is exempt from documentation but would otherwise be eligible for such a certificate and endorsement
In 2003 Congress enacted Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II Section 211 for the purpose of revitalizing the oceangoing US-flag cruise industry in Hawaii (the 2003 Act) Three oceangoing US-flag cruise ships PRIDE OF ALOHA PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAII were documented with coastwise privileges pursuant to the 2003 Act These vessels entered regular service in Hawaii in 2004 2005 and 2006 respectively and pursuant to the express language of the 2003 Act are limited in their operation to providing regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands of Hawaii
The CBP regulations promulgated pursuant to the PVSA are set forth in 19 CFR 480a and have remained unchanged throughout both the recodification of Title 46 of the United States Code and the enactment of the 2003 Act They provide that a violation of the PVSA occurs when passengers embark (board a vessel for the
duration of a voyage) a non-coastwiseshyqualified vessel at one US port and disembark (leave the vessel at the conclusion of a voyage) at a different US port unless they proceed with the vessel to a distant foreign port (Le any port not considered a nearby foreign port which is defined as any port located in North America Central America Bermuda or the West Indies including the Bahamas) Currently these regulations do not contain specific criteria for non-coastwise-qualified vessels on itineraries including US ports and either nearby or distant foreign ports in order for such foreign port calls to be compliant with the PVSA
To reiterate the applicable CBP regulations provide that the PVSA is violated when a non-coastwise-qualified vessel transports a passenger on a voyage solely to one or more coastwise ports and the passenger disembarks or goes ashore temporarily at a coastwise port (19 CFR 480a(b)(1)) Furthermore a violation of the PVSA also occurs when a non-coastwise-qualified vessel transports a passenger on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a nearby foreign port or ports (but no other foreign port) and the passenger disembarks at a coastwise port other than the port of embarkation (19 CFR 480a(b)(2)) However there is no violation of the PVSA when a passenger is on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a distant foreign port or ports (whether or not the voyage includes a nearby foreign port or ports) and the passenger disembarks at a coastwise port provided the passenger has proceeded with the vessel to a distant foreign port (19 CFR 480a(b)(3))
IV Request From MARAD To Provide Guidance
The US Department of Transportation Maritime Administration (MARAD) has requested that CBP take action to ensure enforcement of the PVSA MARAD has asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreignshyflag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwiseshyqualified cruise ship operators
In April of 2007 the operator of the three US-flag cruise vessels operating solely in Hawaii pursuant to the 2003 Act announced their intent to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAIl from the Hawaii market and redeploy her to Europe The operator intends to re-flag the vessel to foreign registry directly resulting in the loss of over 1100 crewmember jobs The primary reason cited for this decision is the rapid increase in foreign-flag competition entering the Hawaii market
Federal Register I Vol 72 No 224 I Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules 65489
from the West Coast This competition is evidenced in published cruise itineraries of foreign-flag carriers offering a variety of round trip cruises that depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period usually in the early morning and ultimately return to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their cruise These cruises are often marketed as Hawaii cruises and except for the brief stop in the nearby foreign port of Ensenada are purely coastwise in nature It is these cruise itineraries that pose an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels that pursuant to the 2003 Act are currently engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands
V Preliminary Notice
In response to MARADs concerns CBP sent letters to two carriers known to operate the itineraries in question as well as to the Cruise Lines International Association Inc stating that CBP believes that these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because it appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA The letters further indicated that CBP is taking steps to publish this position
VI CBPs Proposed Interpretive Rule Accordingly in this document CBP is
proposing to provide that cruise itineraries for non-qualified coastwise vessels which allow passengers to board at a US port call at several Hawaiian ports proceed to a foreign port or ports for a brief period and then ultimately return to the original US port of embarkation for disembarkation are not consistent with the PVSA and the regulations promulgated pursuant thereto Specifically CBP interprets a voyage to be solely to one or more coastwise ports even where it stops at a foreign port unless the stop at the foreign port is a legitimate object of the cruise CBP will presume that a stop at a foreign port is not a legitimate object of the cruise unless
(1) The stop lasts at least 48 hours at the foreign port
(2) The amount of time at the foreign port is more than 50 percent of the total amount of time at the US ports of call and
(3) The passengers are permitted to go ashore temporarily at the foreign port
Accordingly CBP proposes to adopt an interpretive rule under which it will presume that any cruise itinerary that does not include a foreign port call that
satisfies each of these three criteria constitutes coastwise transportation of passengers in violation of 19 CFR 480a(b)(1)
Dated November 16 2007 W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection [FR Doc E7-22788 Filed 11-20-07 845 am] BILLING CODe 9111-14-1
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau
27 CFR Part 9
[Notice No 76]
RIN 1513-AB49
Proposed Establishment of the Leona Valley Viticultural Area (2007R-281 P)
AGENCY Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau Treasury ACTION Notice of proposed rulemaking
SUMMARY The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau proposes to establish the 134 square mile Leona Valley viticultural area in the northeast part of Los Angeles County California We designate viticultural areas to allow vintners to better describe the origin of their wines and to allow consumers to better identify wines they may purchase We invite comments on this proposed addition to our regulations DATES We must receive written comments on or before January 22 2008
ADDRESSES You may send comments on this notice to one of the following addresses
bull httpwwwregulationsgov (Federal e-rulemaking portal follow the instructions for submitting comments) or
bull Director Regulations and Rulings Division Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau PO Box 14412 Washington DC 20044-4412
See the Public Participation section of this notice for specific instructions and requirements for submitting comments and for information on how to request a public hearing
You may view copies of this notice selected supporting materials and any comments we receive about this proposal at httpwwwregulationsgov under Docket No 2007-0066 You also may view copies of this notice all related petitions maps or other supporting materials and any comments we receive about this
proposal by appointment at the TTB Information Resource Center 1310 G Street NW Washington DC 20220 To make an appointment call 202-927shy2400
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT NA Sutton Regulations and Rulings Division Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau 925 Lakeville S1 No 158 Petaluma CA 94952 phone 415shy271-1254 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
Background on Viticultural Areas
TTB Authority Section 105(e) of the Federal Alcohol
Administration Act (FAA Act) 27 USC 205(e) authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to prescribe regulations for the labeling of wine distilled spirits and malt beverages The FAA Act provides that these regulations should among other things prohibit consumer deception and the use of misleading statements on labels and ensure that labels provide the consumer with adequate information as to the identity and quality of the product The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) administers the regulations promulgated under the FAA Act
Part 4 ofthe TTB regulations (27 CFR part 4) allows the establishment of definitive viticultural areas and the use of their names as appellations of origin on wine labels and in wine advertisements Part 9 of the TTB regulations (27 CFR part 9) contains the list of approved viticultural areas
Definition Section 425(e)(1)(i) ofthe TTB
regulations (27 CFR 425(e)(1)(i)) defines a viticultural area for American wine as a delimited grape-growing region distinguishable by geographical features the boundaries of which have been recognized and defined in part 9 of the regulations These designations allow vintners and consumers to attribute a given quality reputation or other characteristic of a wine made from grapes grown in an area to its geographic origin The establishment of viticultural areas allows vintners to describe more accurately the origin of their wines to consumers and helps consumers to identify wines they may purchase Establishment of a viticultural area is neither an approval nor an endorsement by TTB of the wine produced in that area
Requirements Section 425(e)(2) of the TTB
regulations outlines the procedure for proposing an American viticultural area and provides that any interested party
Us Department ofHomelaDd Secmity Washington DC 10229
bull ~
US Customs and Border Protection
AUG 15 2fXJJ
VE5-3-02-QTRRBSTCCCI - ti015502-GG-
Mr leon Sutcliffe Director Port Operations Camivai Cruise Unes Camival Place 3655 NW 87Avenue Miami Aorlda 33178
RE P~nger Vessef Services Ad Coastwise Transportation 46 USC sect 55103 19 CFR sect 480a(b)
Dear Mr Sutcliffe
As you know US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) enforces the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) codified at TItle 46 United States Code section 55103 (46 USC 55103) This statute prohibits non-coastwise-qualifled vessels (ie those vessels not US-buill owned and documented with a coastwise endorsement) from transporting passengers between porls or places within the United States The regUlations promUlgated pursuant to the PVSA are found at TrtJe 19 Code of Federal Regulations section 4808 (19 CFR 4808)
It has come to our attention that passenger vessels of your company are engaging in cruise itineraries that include ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands Two USAlagged coastwise-endorsed passenger vessefs are also currenUy engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of caD wittlin the Hawaiian Islands
As part of your cruise itineraries some of your foreign-flagged vessels depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period and ultimately rebJm to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their endse For example the MS ZAANDAM of Holand America Lines departs San Diego cruises the Hawaiian Islands stops in Ensenada from 800pm to 11 OOpmbull and returns to san Diego CBP believes these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because It appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA -- - - ~~~------
Please be advised that CBP is taking steps to publish this position Should have any questions pertaining to this matter please contact Mr Glen Vereb Chief Cargo Security Carriers and Immigration Branch at (202) 572-8724
Sincerely
F Jl E EST Y LEe A U I 5 I N Gmiddot
December 21 2007
The Honorable W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection co Border Security Regulations Branch Office ofInternational Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229
Re Hawaii Coastwise Cruises (USCBP-2007-0098) Comments in Response to Proposed Interpretation
Dear Commissioner Basham
NCL America Inc1 (NCLA) submits these comments in support ofthe efforts ofCustoms and Border Protection to enforce the Passenger Vessel Services Act and the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative as applied to Hawaii coastwise cruises
1 Introduction and Summary of Position
NCLA operates three large oceangoing US flag cruise ships in Hawaii These ships are documented under US flag and are required to operate in regular service in Hawaii pursuant to the authority of the Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative a 2003 federal statute intended to revitalize the US flag cruise industry and to maximize economic and national security benefits to the United States (the 2003 Act)
NCLA has invested $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships pursuant to the 2003 Act and in direct reliance on the protections of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) and its proper enforcement The PVSA limits the transportation ofpassengers between US ports to coastwise documented US flag ships Its statutory protections recognize that US flag ships have significantly higher operational costs in part because they are subject to more stringent US laws including US labor laws and federal
1 NCL America Inc is a US corporation incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware headquartered in Honolulu Hawaii As a US corporation it is subject to US taxes at both the federal and state level The Chief Executive Officer the Chairman of the Board and all of the Board of Directors of NCL America are US citizens The company is also subject to US labor and employment laws and is required by statute to maintain a workforce comprised primarily ofUS citizens
700 Bishop St SUite 900 I Honolulu HawMi 96813 I Tel 8085273800 Fax 8085273820 I ndcom
2
income tax among others The NCLA ships operating in Hawaii are the only large oceangoing cruise ships operating under US flag In furtherance of the policy goals of the PVSA and the 2003 Act these ships have created over 4000 seafaring jobs all subject to US minimum wage and other labor statutes
Since 2003 there has been a significant increase in capacity in the Hawaii market from foreign flag ships providing cruise service to Hawaii from the West Coast Many of these foreign flag cruises are marketed as Hawaii cruises and consist entirely ofUS ports ofcall with the sole exception of a token stop in Mexico for as little as an hour late at night under circumstances where passengers are not permitted to get offthe ship There are no reported rulings approving these particular foreign flag itineraries
Lower cost foreign competition in the Hawaii market has unfairly hurt NCLAs operations NCLA has incurred substantial losses which have contributed significantly to its decision earlier this year to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAll from US flag and reshydeploy it foreign Unfair foreign competition poses an imminent threat to the remaining US flag passenger vessels operating in the Hawaii trades pursuant to the 2003 Act
As the agency statutorily charged with implementation of the 2003 Act the US Department ofTransportation Maritime Administration (MARAn) is aware of the threat foreign flag Hawaii itineraries pose to the US flag fleet and brought the situation to the attention ofthe US Department ofHomeland Security Bureau ofCustoms and Border Protection (CBP or Customs) Customs determined that the primary object of these itineraries was coastwise and that the Ensenada stop was an evasion of the PVSA
In August 2007 Customs provided written notice to the affected foreign lines and their trade association that the existing itineraries were contrary to the PVSA None of these lines sought advance rulings even after the Customs notice with respect to their Hawaii itineraries pursuant to Customs regulations and many continued to market the itineraries as Hawaii cruises NCLA supports the efforts ofCustoms and MARAD to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act for Hawaii cruises
2 Statutory Authority for Customs Proposed Interpretation
(a) Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA)
Congress passed the PVSA in 1886 to protect the US maritime transportation industry from foreign competition2 Protection is afforded through penalty assessments on foreign vessels transporting passengers between US ports or places directly or by way ofa foreign port 3 As Congress and the courts have recognized coastwise protections for the US maritime transportation industry are only one dimension of the PVSA Operating in conjunction with other coastwise laws and with the US
2 See United States v Honduran SS GRANADA 35 F Supp 892 894 (BD Pa 1940)(citing purpose of PVSA to meet threats to the practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping which was to be preserved for US ships)
46 USc sect 55103 (originally 46 USC App 289)
3
documentation laws the PVSA also enhances military sealift in times ofnational emergency sustains a US merchant marine and supports the US shipbuilding and repair industry4
(b) Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative (the 2003 Act)
Over the past decade Congress has sought to reinforce the goals of the PVSA by providing mechanisms to revitalize the oceangoing US flag cruise fleet particularly in Hawaii The Project America legislation enacted in 1997 authorized among other things the re~flagging ofone existing cruise ship contingent on the operator contracting for the construction oftwo new oceangoing cruise shipss Following the default of the operator under the original contract Congress enacted the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative for the purpose ofrecovering economic and national security benefits to the United States bull 6 These same goals of the original PVSA were expressly referenced in the legislative history of the 2003 Act which emphasized that these ships will be assets available in time ofnational emergency and will significantly expand the pool ofqualified seafarers upon which the US Department ofDefense relies to crew non-combatant vessels
The 2003 Act authorizes the US documentation ofthree cruise ships for operation in regular service in Hawaii subject to certain conditions including a prohibition on operating in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico and the Caribbean Sea and a requirement that all vessel repair work be undertaken in the United States MARAD is charged with implementation of the 2003 Act
3 Customs Implementation of PVSA
(a) Regulations
The current regulations implementing the PVSA were published by Customs in 19858 The growth of the foreign flag cruise industry in North America and in particular the development of the Alaska cruise market led to an effort in 1984 to amend the thenshyexisting regulations to increase the ease of administration and operational flexibility The effort to change the regulation had support from US port interests who saw benefit in the potential increase in the number ofUS ports that foreign vessels could call and was opposed by proponents ofpotential US flag projects as detrimental to efforts to revitalize the US fleet 9 The preamble to the 1985 rule emphasized that it was of paramount importance to consider the primary object ofpassengers in taking a
4 See American Hawaii Cruises v Skinner 713 F Supp 452 457 (DDC 1989) (recognizing the contribution of the PVSA and the Jones Act in helping to secure national defense by maintaining a merchant marine oftbe best equipped and most suitable types ofvessels sufficient to serve in time of war or national emergency) see also Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 30 (DC Cir 1984) Wirth Ltd v SIS Acadia Forest 537 F2d 1272 1281 n32 (5th Cir 1976) S Public Law 105-56 Section 8109 (111 Stat 1203 1244) (Oct 81997 ) 6 Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II General Provisions - Department ofCommerce Section 211 (117 Stat 1179) (Feb 20 2003) 1 149 Cong Rec S1118 (dailyed Jan 17 2003(statement ofSenator Inouye) 8 19 CFR sect 480a 950 Fed Reg 26981 (July I 1985)
4
voyage10 a concept which is reinforced elsewhere in Customs regulations11 In its analysis of the comments received at the time Customs accepted the view ofport interests that the modified rule would help their business but did so recognizing the absence ofa regular salt water US flag passenger fleet Customs acknowledged the potential harm to prospective efforts to revitalize the US flag passenger fleet and expressly cautioned that if it were ever shown that coastwise qualified vessels in competition with foreign vessels were in fact hurt by the modified Customs regulation then Customs would immediately reconsider its position12
(b) Customs Rulings
Given the significant penalties associated with violating the PVSA13 Customs regulations expressly provide a mechanism for the owner or charterer of a foreign vessel or any other interested person to request an advisory ruling as to whether a contemplated voyage would be considered in violation of the PVSA14 Customs regulations provide that vessel operators can rely on these ruling letters only to the extent that the facts and circumstances are identical to those in the ruling letter IS
Notwithstanding the fact that several foreign cruise lines offer Hawaii itineraries originating in a US mainland port and calling at Hawaii ports with a token intervening stop in Mexico there are no reported rulings expressly approving such an itinerary for these foreign cruise lines 16
4 The Cruise Industry in Hawaii
(a) NCL America Returns US flag to the Oceangoing Passenger Fleet
Pursuant to the requirements ofthe 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative NCLA agreed to promote US-flag cruising enhance military sealift capacity and expand the US maritime labor base No other major cruise line had ever undertaken such a commitment to the US flag and the public policy objectives Congress sought to achieve under the PVSA or the 2003 Act Introduction ofPRIDE OF ALOHA in 2004 was a significant development in the maritime industry because it marked the restoration ofthe
10 Id at 26983 11 Customs Regulations include a provision on the effect ofruling letters and with respect to carrier rulings the applicable regulation refers to rulings setting forth a determination as to whether or not the primary object of a contemplated voyage is coastwise transportation in violation of46 USC sect 289 [pYSA codified at 46 USC sect55103] 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 12 50 Fed Reg at 26983 13 A modem cruise ship with 2400 passengers for example would be subject to a fine of$720OOO per cruise based on the statutory penalty of$300 for each passenger transported in violation of the Act 14 19 CFR sect 480a(d) IS 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 16 There is one older reported mling involving a request to drop the Ensenada port call from a Los AngeleslHawaiiLos Angeles itinerary which Customs held would violate the PYSA In dicta Customs acknowledged that the itinerary could be in compliance if the Ensenada call were not dropped but did not address the issue ofwhether a one hour service call where no passengers depart the vessel would be sufficient The carrier that obtained that ruling has since left the Hawaii market See Customs Ruling HQ 114078 re Crystal Hannony (Nov 4 1997)
5
us flag to the oceangoing cruise industry A contemporaneous press release from the Us Department ofTransportation reported that the three US-flag cruise ships to be introduced pursuant to the 2003 Act were expected to create more than 20000 US jobs generate more than $825 million ofexpenditures in the US economy and create nearly $360 million in federal tax revenue by the end of 200717 In 2005 the PRIDE OF AMERICA was introduced and in 2006 the third vessel PRIDE OF HAWAll was introduced to Hawaii Both the PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAIl offer 7shyday inter-island Hawaii itineraries whereas PRIDE OF ALOHA operates on 7 and 10 day cruises exclusively among the islands ofHawaii as well as 11 day cruises that include a foreign port call at Fanning Island To date NCLA has invested over $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships in furtherance ofthe policy objectives of the PVSA and the 2003 Act These ships employ over 4000 seafarers and generate hundreds ofmillions of dollars in benefits for Hawaii and the nation
(b) Significant Increase in Foreign Flag Capacity Since 2003
The most significant change in the Hawaii cruise market since 2003 has been the dramatic increase in capacity A significant portion ofthis capacity increase is directly attributable to NCLAs fulfillment ofthe Congressional mandate in the 2003 Act However foreign-flag operations in the Hawaii market as measured in passenger nights18 have skyrocketed Based on MARAn data derived from the US Customs Border Patrol Vessel Entrance and Clearance documents the passenger nights for foreign flag vessels departing from the West Coast to Hawaii on round trip cruise have increased several hundredfold during this period19 See Exhibit A
(c) NCLA Has Incurred Substantial Losses During this Period
Since 2004 NCLA has lost cumulatively more than a quarter ofa billion dollars A principal reason for these losses has been the increase in foreign capacity in this market NCLA has taken significant steps to reduce costs to address the increase in foreign competition but NCLA is at an inherent disadvantage when competing against foreign companies that are not subject to US labor laws US tax laws and other laws Ofcourse the statutory protections of the PVSA are intended to address these very issues That is why Customs immediate action to implement the proposed interpretation is critical for the US flag fleet Regrettably NCLA has already been forced to reduce overall capacity early next year with the withdrawal ofPRIDE OF HAWAlI to another
17 DOT Press Release dated June 72004 see also DOT Press Release dated August 132004 in connection with visit to PRIDE OF ALOHA by US Transportation Secretary Norman Y Mineta 11 Passenger nights (also referred to as passenger capacity days) are calculated by multiplying the number ofpassengers per vessel by the number ofcruise days in each itinerary by the number of cruises This is the unit ofmeasurement employed by MARAn In contrast passenger bed supply (also referred to as passenger capacity) data reflects only the number ofberths per vessel multiplied by the number of cruises and hence understates the market by excluding the full economic value ofthe cruise perfonned 19 In 2003 the total number ofpassenger nights for round-trip West Coast to Hawaii cruises was 303325 which jumped by 353 to 1072329 in 2006 and by 430 to 1304546 from 2003 to 2007 (The 2007 figure is based on MARAD data for six months and a1ll1ualized by published itineraries for the balance of the year)
6
market for operation under foreign flag This move alone will result in the loss ofover 1000 American seafaring jobs
5 Customs Proposed Interpretation is Necessary to Further the Important National Security and Public Policy Objectives Embodied in Federal Law
As Customs has properly noted the increase in foreign competition in the Hawaii trades in contravention of the PVSA pose[s] an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels[] As the operator of these ships NCLA has a vested interest in protecting the jobs ofthe thousands ofAmerican crewmembers and cruise ship service providers who support these vessels NCLA also has an interest in protecting the substantial economic investment it has made to revitalize the US flag passenger vessel fleet But a balancing of interests in the context of Customs enforcement ofexisting law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act requires a much broader focus
The legislative history of the 2003 Act expressly recognized the national security and public policy import ofestablishing a US flag passenger vessel fleet as a means to maintain the countrys preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool of qualified seafarers and as a means to help sustain a fleet ofUS-flag vessels to su~ort
the nations military and maritime industrial base for times ofnational emergency
Congress understood the importance ofestablishing a viable US flag cruise ship fleet as something larger than the vessels themselves These national security and public policy objectives must be weighed in the balance as Customs assesses how best to interpret its rules to give effect to the PVSA and the 2003 Act
6 Customs Should Clarify that the Proposed Interpretation is Limited to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades and Adopt Reasonable Measures to Ensure Sufficient Foreign Content
Since publication ofthe proposed interpretative rule several commenters have observed that the scope of the proposed interpretation is ambiguous because the language of Section VI referencing any cruise itinerary appears broader than the caption Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises and the entire discussion in the published notice which focuses exclusively on US-flag coastwise vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA agrees that the proposed interpretation should be clarified so that its scope is limited to vessels operating roundtrip voyages from US ports that include Hawaii port calls
NCLA supports the concept reflected in the proposed interpretive rule that round trip Hawaii itineraries from US ports on foreign ships must include a material and measurable degree ofoverall foreign port content as compared to US port content
20 149 Congo Rec S1117 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)
7
(a) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is also Consistent with Subsequent Congressional Enactments Modifying the PVSA
As discussed above it is well established that the PVSA was designed toRrotect US-flag vessels from foreign competition in the coastwise and domestic trades 1
Subsequent legislative enactments however have appropriately differentiated among distinct geographic markets and trades including Canada Alaska Puerto Rico and Hawaii based on the existence or non-existence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
In 1938 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers by Canadian passenger vessels on Lake Ontario and the St Lawrence River until such time as passenger service shall be established by vessels of the United States22 Similarly in 1961 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers on Canadian vessels within Alaska or between Alaska and other points in the United States until such time as passenger service is established by vessels ofthe United States23
In 1984 Congress modified the application ofthe PVSA to pennit the transportation ofpassengers between Puerto Rico and other United States ports on foreign-flag vessels24 As with the other statutory exceptions this provision is qualified and expires [o]n a showing that a United States passenger vessel qualified to engage in the coastwise trade is offering or advertising passenger service between a port in Puerto Rico and another port in the United States2S
Congress acted again with respect to the application of the PVSA with the 2003 Act in which it authorized three vessels that did not meet the US-build requirements of the PVSA to operate as modem US-flagged cruise ships in regular service in Hawaii26 The 2003 Act imposes a specific geographic limitation on the operation of any ship documented under this authority to operations only in regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands ofHawaii and shall not transport passengers in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico or the Caribbean Sea except in certain limited circumstances27 As above the limited nature of the 2003 Act is express it is strictly limited to the large ocean-going cruise ships and then only those operating in the regular Hawaii service where there are no US-flag operations28
21 See Act ofJune 19 1886 c 421 sec 8 24 Stat 81 Act of February 171898 c 26 sec 2 30 Stat 248 22 S] Res 174 75th Cong 52 Stat 223 (Alp 251938) codified at46 USC sect 55121(a) 23 See Pub L 87-77 75 Stat 196 (Jun 30 1961) codified at 46 USC sect 55121(b) 24 See Pub L 98-563 98 Stat 2916 (Oct 301984) codified at 46 USC sect 55104(b) 25 46 USC sect 55104(c)(l) see also 46 USC 46 USc sect 55104(cX2)(expiration of exemption upon availability ofa non-coastwise qualified US-flag vessel offering service in the relevant market) 26 149 Congo Rec SI118 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)(statementofSen Inouye) 27 Pub L 108-7 117 Stat 79 (Feb 20 2003) 28 149 Congo Rec S11l9 (dailyed Jan 17 2003Xstatement of Sen Inouye)
8
In each ofthese instances Congress fashioned a narrow exception to the PVSA that differentiated among distinct geographic markets based on the existence or nonshyexistence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
As the federal agency responsible for administering the 2003 Act MARAD requested that Customs act to protect US flag passenger vessel interests in the Hawaii trades29 Limiting the scope ofthe proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades also reflects Customs appreciation of the PVSA in the context of the subsequent Congressional action30 Viewing the Congressional modifications to the PVSA as a whole Congress has specifically and repeatedly differentiated among distinct geographic markets when it has found it necessary and appropriate to do so to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests It is well established that the proper interpretation of a statutory scheme includes consideration ofsubsequent statutes even though the underlying statute itselfhas not been expressly amended31 Accordingly Customs should likewise limit the scope ofthe proposed PVSA interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades because that is the only geographic market as mandated by the 2003 Act in which oceangoing US-flag cruise ships are operating
(b) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Consistent with Public Policy Objectives of the 1985 Rulemaking
In 1985middot Customs liberalized the regulations implementing the PVSA by eliminating certain regulatory prohibitions on foreign flag vessels In the context of the 1985 rulemaking Customs justified a relaxation ofthe regulations on the grounds that it would simplify the administration of the PVSA and would benefit the economy ofcertain American coastwise ports without eroding the statutory protection given to American vessels engaged in solely domestic trade32
Customs thus sought to reconcile US port economic interests with US-flag passenger vessel interests Both of these twin policy objectives are furthered by
29 See 72 Fed Reg 65488 (Nov 21 2007)( MARAn bas asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the ~eratiODS ofcoastwise-qualified cruise ship operators)
See generally FDA v Brown amp Williamson Tobacco Corp 529 US 120 132-133 (2000)(assessing propriety ofagency construction ofFood DIUg and Cosmetics Act and descnbing responsibility of reviewing cowt to assess statutory provisions in the context of subsequent legislative enactments) 31 See Brown amp Williamson 529 US 143 (holding that proper construction ofstatutory provision must necessarily assume that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications ofa later statute This is particularly so where the scope of the earlier statute is broad but the subsequent statutes more specifically address the topic athand) see also United States v Estate ofRomani 523 US 517 530-531 (1998)( holding that a later-enacted statute should control the construction of the federal lien priority statute a specific policy embodied in a later federal statute should control om construction of the [earlier] statute even though it ha[s] not been expressly amended) United States v Fausto 484 US 439453 (1988)(The courts frequently find Congress to have done this - whenever in fact they interpret a statutory text in the light ofsurrounding texts that happen to have been subsequently enacted This classic judicial task of reconciling many laws enacted over time and getting them to make sense in combination necessarily assumes that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications of a later statute) 32 50 Fed Reg 26982 (JuI 11985)
9
limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades
As noted earlier the 2003 Act limits the operation of the NCLA US-flag oceangoing passenger vessels to regular service in Hawaii Because there are no oceangoing US-flag vessels operating in any market other than the Hawaii trades Customs should limit the scope of the proposed interPretation to that market Such a limitation protects US flag passenger vessel interests without prejudicing US port interests In contrast an application of the proposed interpretation to any itinerary would needlessly harm US port interests unrelated to Hawaii without any countervailing benefit to US-flag passenger vessel interests Accordingly limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation is consistent with the public policy objectives of the 1985 rulemaking as well as the 2003 Act
(c) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Also Consistent with Customs Commitment to Revisit the Scope of its Rules to Protect US-Flag Interests
The relaxation ofthe PVSA regulations in 1985 was premised in large part on Customs finding that there was no regular salt water US-flag passenger fleet in operation at that time33 Acknowledging that the relaxed regulations could harm USshyflag interests Customs committed in the preamble ofthe 1985 final rule to immediately reconsider its interpretation if it is ever shown that there is a viable US flag vessel operating in competition with foreign-flag vessels34
Congress enacted the 2003 Act to stimulate the development of a US flag cruise ship industry As noted above the legislative history ofthat Act makes clear that Congress sought to revitalize the US-flag cruise industry as a means to maintain Americas preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool ofqualified seafarers help sustain a fleet of US flag vessels to support our military and a maritime industrial base create thousands of seagoing and shoreside American jobs and stimulate the development ofa US flag cruise ship tourism business with the commensurate benefits to the US tax base the US economy and US employment
Customs is now acting at MARADs request to revisit its interpretation ofthe regulations implementing the PVSA because recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwise-qualified cruise ship operations35 That is to say that the concerns articulated by Customs in the context of the 1985 rulemaking have materialized and US-flag passenger vessel interests are in fact being hanned in the Hawaii trades by foreign competitors
33 50 Fed Reg 26983 34Id
3S 72 Fed Reg 56488 (Nov 21 2007)
I
10
Because the US-flag passenger vessels are limited by statute to regular service in Hawaii limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the
Hawaii trades is consistent with Customs historical commitment to revisit its interpretation ofthe implementing regulations to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests
7 Conclusion
For the reasons stated above NCLA commends the efforts ofCustoms and MARAn to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act as applied to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA respectfully requests Customs to move ahead promptly with p~blicati~nof a final interpretive rule to advance the important national security arid public policy objectives ofthese laws
We greatly appreciate the opportunity to submit these comments
Sincerely
~~~ Alan T Yamamoto Vice President Hawaii Operations
Exhibit A
Ship Name Serenade Of The Seas Departure Port San Diego California Ports of Call San Diego California Kailua Kona Hawaii Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii Hlo Hawaii Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii Ensenada Mexico San Qigo California
2007 Date(s) Oct 05
Sailing Itinerary
Day Port H ~rrive Depart Activity
05-0ct San Diego California 500 PM
06-0ct Cruising
07-0ct Cruising
08-0ct Cruising
09-0ct Cruising
10-0ct Kailua Kona Hawaii 700 AM 900 PM Tendered
11-00t Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 1000 AM Tendered
12middot0ct Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 900 PM Tendered
13-0ct Hilo Hawaii 700 AM 600 PM Docked
14middot0ct Honoulu (Oahu) Hawaii 700 AM Docked
15-0ct Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii 200 AM Docked
6-0ct CrUising
17-0ct Cruising
18-0ct Cruising
19middot0ct Cruising
-7 20-00t
O-Oot
Ensenada ~i1exico
San Deqo California
i 00 ~r1
700 ~M
200 oM D1Jcked ~
I
CARIBBEAN CRUISES
EASTERN CARIBBEAN ISLANDER SOUTHERN CARIBBEAN MEDLEY EASTERN CARIBBEAN
10 10 7 DAYS DAYSDAYS
GRAND PRINCESSDAWN PRINCESSSUN PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP NEW YORK CITYROUNDTRIP from from to
FT LAUDERDALE FT LAUDERDALE SAN JUAN
2004 DEPARnJRf DATE2004 DEPARTURE DATES2004 DEPARTURE DATES
Octn Oct Btl Oct 14CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE ITINERARYCRUISE ITINERARY 200s DEPARTURE DATENov 222 Nov 3t 23
Apr23tDAY PORT DEPART Dec 13 30Dee 12 ARRIVE DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Ft Lauderdale EMBARK PM 1 Ft Lauderdale EMBARK PM EMBARK PM2005 DEPARTURE DATES 2005 DEPARTURE DATES New York City 2 Princess Cays 9AM 4PM 2 At SeaJan 828 Jan 19t
Feb 17tt 3 AlSea Feb 8 28 3 At Sea 2-4 At Sea Mar919 Mar 20
4 St Thomas 7AM 6PM Apr 9 4 Cura~ao 8AM 5PM 5 St Maarten 7AM 6PM 5 Isla Margarita lOAM 4PM St Thomas 7AM 6PM
6 St Kitts 7AM 3PM 6 Barbados 9AM 6PM Dominica SAM 6PM7 8AM 5PM 7 Dominica 7 AM SPM
8 Antigua 9AM 6PM S St Thomas SAM 6PM St Maarten 7AM 6PM
9 9 At Sea
fllrtordtrlllldllmam4YYa1 10 At Sea 10 Princess Cays 9AM 4PM JlilltraryllptfatufnrfYUSfllrllcr t 11I1ll1Il1yopmltnlnrmTtronlcr t ItlntraryaptrattsIn rtVfntOrdtr San Juan DISEMBARK AM Port~rdtrQnd lilrW mil) illI) 11 Ft Lauderdale DISEMBARK AM PortlimtSlIIltlyYllry 11 Ft Lauderdale DISEMBARK AM Port ordtr lind time5 may VIlry
WESTERN CARIBBEAN ADVENTURER EASTERN CARIBBEAN VOYAGER
10 10 DAYS DAYS
SUN PRINCESS DAWN PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIPROUNDTRIP fromfrom
FT LAUDERDALEFT LAUDERDALE
2004 DEPARTURE DATES 2004 DEPARTURE DATES DAWN PRINCESS CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE IIINERARY
Oct 23 Oct 4 24 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Nov 12 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
Nov 13 Dec 2 29 Dec3tt 1 Ft Lauderdale EMBARK PM 1 Ft Lauderdale EMBARK PM
2 Princess Cays 9AM 4PM 2005 DEPARTURE DATES 2 At Sea2005 DEPARTURE DATES
DAWN PRINCESS Jan 183 At Sea 3 At Sea
Feb 7 27Jan 9 296 St Thomas 7AM 6PM Mar19 t 4 St Vincent lPM 6PM
Feb 180 Apr 8St Maarten 7 AM 5PM 5 Grenada 8AM 6PMMar 10f 301 Apr 19 At Sea 6 St Lucia 8AM 6PM
Ocho Rios 12N 6PM 7 Martinique 7AM 3PM
Grand cayman PM S St Thomas SAM 6PM
t IillUGI)lIptfQttsIn rnmtordtr Cozumel 8AM 6PM AlSea tt ~~~oI~~dtr 10 Princess Cays 9AM 4PMMOItQIl8clyrqausOclJollloJ
lwtordtrollllllllyenllllilJllIl) tltllltrlryOptrlll$In rnmtllrdtr AMOIltqollaynplactsOdlDRIos PM IortDrllralldllmallloyWl) Ft Lauderdale DISEMBARK AM
Willemstad Cura~ao
EUROPE CRUISES
GRAND MEDITERRANEAN GREEK ISLES MEDITERRANEANGREEK ISLES
12 1212 DAYS DAYSDAYS
STAR PRINCESS
STARSTAR PRINCESSPRINCESS
sail betweensail between VENICE BARCELONA VENICE to
andand BARCELONA VENICE ROME
CRUISE ITINERARY2004 DEPARTURE 2004 DEPARTURE2004 DEPARTURE CRUISE ITINERARYDATESCRUISE I I INERARY DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DATEDATES
Apr 10 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTMay 16middot DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Venice Italy (overnight onboard ship) EMBARK PM May 4 May18t Sep2St 1 Verdce Italy EMBARK PM
Jun 9 1 Barcelona Spain (overnight onboard ship) EMBARK PM 2 Venice Italy 2PM 2 At Seajune 21 t 2 Barcelona Spain 1 PM Dubrovnik Croatia 8AM 6PMJul3 3 Corfu Greece 8AM 6PM
lullS 3 Monte Carlo Monaco 7 AM 6 PM Corfu Greece 8AM 6PM 4 Katakolon Greece (for Oiympia) 7AM SPMJu127 4 FlorencePisa Italy (Livorno) 630 AM 6 PMAug 8~ Katakolon Greece (for Olympia) 7AM SPM S Athens Greece (Piraeus) 6AM 12 MAug 20deg S NaplesCapri Italy 8 AM 7 PM Sep 1t 6 Athens Greece (Piraeus) 6AM 12 M 6 Mykonos Greece 8AM 12M
6 At Sea 7 Mykonos Greece 8AM 6PM 7 Kusadasi Turkey (for Ephesus) 7 AM SPM7 Athens Greece (Piraeus) 6AM S4S PM
8 Kusadasi Turkey (for Ephesus) 7AM 1PM 8 Kusadasi Turkey (for Ephesus) 8AM 6PM 8 Santorini Greece 7 AM 4PM
9 Jstanbul Turkey 8AM 6PM 9 Rhodes Greece 8AM 6PM 9 At Sea
10 At Sea 10 Santorini Greece 7AM 6PM 10 Rome Italy (Civitavecchia) 8AM 7PM tll1ooil)opcraksinttVUSe
grduPorttlmcsmi)Y6ljI 11 At Sea 11 Cannes France (for Mont Carlo) 8AM 6PM11 At Sea tSamnlQ]latCiIUIe5inplm tltlnerlll)opmlpoundsin
NaplesCapri Italy 630 AM 12 Barcelona Spain (ovrnight onboard ship) 8AMofMo~Urlo ~odcr12 Venice Italy (overnight onboard ship) 8 AM 12 6PM O~lIlalhitRhodalnpUcc Port order md Iimes- JmyVUY Barcelona Spain DISEMBARK AM13 Venice Italy DISEMBARK AM - 13 Iome Italy (qvitavecchia) DISEMBARK AM
MEDITERRANEANAEGEAN MEDITERRANEANMOSAIC
12 12 DAYSDAYS
STAR STAR PRINCESS PRINCESS
ROME BARCELONAto
toVENICE ROME
2004 DEPARTURE DATE 2004 DEPARTURE
CRUISE I I INERARY DATE CRUISE ITINERARYApr 22 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Sep 13 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Rome Italy (Civitavhia) EMBARK pM 1 Barcelona Spaln (overnight onboard ship) EMBARK PM 2 NaplesCapri Italy 7 AM 7 PM Barcelona Spain SPM 3 Messina Italy (for Taormina) 8AM 6PM 3 At Sea 4 Valleta Malta 8AM 6 PM 4 Casablanca Morocco (for Marrakech) 7 AM 8PM
At Sea S Gibraltar 8 AM 6PM Santorini Greece 7 AM 6PM 6 At Sea
7 Kusadasi Turkey (for Ephesus) 8 AM 6PM 7 Cannesfrance (for Mont Carlo) 8 AM 6PM 8 Athens Greece (Piraeus) 6 AM S4SPM 8 At Sea 9 Katakolon Greece (for Olympia) 8 AM 6PM 9 Valleta Malta 8 AM SPM 10 Corfu Greece 8 AM 6PM 10 Messina Italy (for Taormina) 6PM 11 Dubrovnik Croatia 8 AM 6PM 11 NaplesCpri Itiily 6PM 12 Venice Italy (overnight onboard ship) 1230 PM 12 FlorencePisa Italy (Livorno) 830 AM 13 Venice Italy DISEMBARK AM 13 lomeltaly (Clvttavecchia)DISEMBAIKAM Venice Italy
EUROPE CRUISES
EUROPEAN EXPLORER CRUISE MEOffiRRANEANITRANSATLANTIC CRUISE
12 17DAYS DAYS
ROYAL STARPRINCESS PRINCESS
sail between VENICE
ROME to
and FT LAUDERDALE
LONDON
2003 DEPARTURE DATES
2004 DEPARTURE DATE CRUISE ITINERARY
May 7 CRUISE I1INfRARY Oct 7 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Jul30l
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Venice Italy (overnight onboard ship) EMBARK PMAug 11 Sep 41 1 Rome Italy (Civitavecchia) EMBARK PM 2 Vernce Italy 2 PM
2 FlorencePisa Italy (Livorno) 7 AM 7PM 3 At Sea 3 Cannes France (for Monte Carlo) 7 AM 5 PM 4 Barcelona Spain 9 AM 6 PM 5 At Sea 6 Gibraltar 8AM PM 7 Casablanca Morocco (for Marralech) 5AM 6 PM 8 Seville Spain (Cadiz) 8AM 6PM 9 LisbQn Portugal 9AM 5PM 10 Vigo Spain 830AM 4PM 11 At Sea
tllinmryope~te$ 12 ParisNormandy France (Ie Havre) 7 AMlnftYCl5eordu ~rttimesuuyYilY 13 London England (Southampton) DISEMBARK AM
Caudis Park Cuell Barcelona Spain
SCANDINAVIARUSSIA BALTIC HERITAGE WESTERN EUROPEBRITISH ISLES
ROYALGRAND10 GRAND 1210 PRINCESSDAYS PRINCESS PRINCESS DAYSDAYS
ROUNDTRIPROUNDTRIPROUNDTRIP fromframfrom
LONDONCOPENHAGENCOPENHAGEN 2004 DEPARTURE2004 DEPARTURE 2004 DEPARTUREDATESDATES DATES
May19tMay 29 May 19 jul28 JunSJun 18 Aug 231
Jul8 ju118Jul28 Aug 7 CRUISE ITINERARYAug 17
CRUISE IIINERARY ARRIVE DEPART CRUISE IrINERARY EMBARK PMDAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
DAY ARRIVE DEPART 7AM 6PM1 Copenhagen Denmark EMBARK PM EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 7AM 6PM
Stockholm Sweden (Nynilshamn) 7 AM 530PM 6AM PM Helsinki Finland 830 AM 6PM St PetersbUrg Russia (overnight onboard ship) 630 AM 9AM 9PM St Petersburg Russia 6PM
7 Tallinn Estonia 7 AM 1PM 8 Gdansk Poland (Gdynia) 9 AM 4PM 9 Warnemfinde Germany (for amprlin) 8 AM 10 PM 10 Helsing0r Denmark 9 AM 11 AM 10 Copenhagen Denmark (overnight onboard ship) 1 PM 11 Copenhagen Denmark DISEMBARK AM
middotScrvlcctillforlh=CllCIIIlicmIOptoluItllUllwWdlseJnbIDltHdlinprAfbrtour~dllmJlwktbeshJpwl1lPfllClaquodtoCopetWampen and pmenpoundm Qfl tours from HelMp will Rboird ship tPolttimes~myAninliI1ddepartu~itRosythDubJinmdFa1mauthwl)dICtotXLolconditions
tPOrtordermdtlme$maynI) ttCdlitEdinbuJlhotmdedto~mllocunionforMiliblyTltOO~on8123wi1inlmiddotUIIisitSouthQuemsfmyinstudofJosylh
BRITISH ISLES
ROYAL12 PRINCESSDAYS
ROUNDTRIP
from
LONDON
2004 DEPARTURE DATES
Jun 12 jul6
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Lqn4onmiddotpoundngland(Southampton) EMIWlIlt PM 2 Cornwall England (Falmouth) 7AM SPM
Waterford Ireland 8AM 6PM Dublin Ireland 7AM 1130 PM
t PQrtbme5 lliIyyuy Anini Illd departure at Rosytb Dublin md Filmouth ViiYdue to Iiltlal conditions
WESTERN EUROPE
ROYAL12 PRINCESSDAYS
ROUNDTRIP
from
LONDON
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
May 31
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 London England (Southampton) EMBARK PM
CRUISE ITINERARY
EUROPE CRUISES
ICELANDNORWEGIAN FJORDS
ROYAL12 PRINCESSDAYS
ROUNDTRIP
from
LONDON
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
Jun24
CRUISE IflNERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 London Englan4 (Southampton) EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 3 Berge Norway 6PM 4 Hellesylt Norway 830AM 1030 AM 4 Gciranger Norway Geiranger Fjord Sceni Cruising UN 7PM
9AM SPM5
1PM 8AM SPM
10 At Sea
middotStlviceallfof~fjonlovedmdshOR=unlDllOplion1Itourswllldi5anbarilitHelIcsyItAftcrtollrpuKllJClJdisembark
theshlpwiUprocudto~md~lampClSonlounfrwnHdaytwl1lblmd$hip
NORWEGIAN FJORDSNORTH CAPE
ROYAL12 PRINCESSDAYS
ROUNDTRIP
from
LONDON
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
JuilS
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Loridon ~gland (South~mpton) EMBARK PM 2-3 At Sea
Hellesylt Norway 830AM 1030 AM Golranger Norway Geiranger Fjord Scenic Cruising 12N 7PM
TrodheilllNorwaY 9AM SPM At Sea Cross the Ardgt Cirde
6PM 8AM lPM
8AM 130 PM 430PM 630PM
7AM 3PM
Bagpipers Edinburgh Scotland Royal Princess in Geiranger Fjord Norway
EUROPE CRUISES amp CRUISETOURS
17 DAYS
GRAND PRINCESS
FT LAUDERDALE to
COPENHAGEN
2004 DEPARTURE DATE MayZ
CRUISE IfINERARY
DAY 1 2-6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
PORT Ft Lauderdale Florida At Sea ~ores IslandsPortugal (Ponto Delgado) At Sea Lisbon Portugal Vigo Spain At Sea ParislNormandy France (Le Havre) RotterdamThe Netherlands At Sea Hamburg Germay (for Berlin) At Sea Olso Norway Oslo Fjord scnic Cruising Copenhagen Denmark
ARRIVE
N
12N 9AM
7AM
6AM
DISEMBARK AM
DEPART EMBARK PM
6PM
7PM 6PM
7PM 7PM
1UM
MEDITERRANEAN CRUISETOUR
TRANSATLANTICWESTERN EUROPE ICELAND amp GREENLANDTRANSATLANTIC
16 GRAND DAYS PRINCESS
COPENHAGEN to
NEW YORK
2004 DEPARTURE DATE Aug 27
CRUISE IIINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Copenhagen Denmark EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 3 Dover England (forLondon) 7AM 7PM 4 Cornwall England (Falmouth) 9AM 6PM 5 Dublin Ireland lOAM 9PM 6 GlasgowEdinburgh Scotland (Greenock) 8AM 12 M 7 Belfast Northern Ireland 1030 AM 530 PM 8 At Sea 9 Reykjavik Iceland 9AM 9PM 10 At Sea 11 Prins Christian Sund Scenic Cruising 12N 6PM 12 Qaqortoq Greenland 7 AM 2PM 13 At Sea 14 SI Johns Newfoundland Canada 12N 7PM 1516 At Sea 17 New York CIty New York DISEMBARK AM
SCANDINAVIARUSSIA CRUISETOUR
Church of the Savior on the Spilled Blood St Petersburg Russia
WESTERN EUROPE CRUISETOUR
CRUISEIOUR ITINERARY
CRUISETOUR lA11C CRUISETOUR ITINERARY CRUISETOUR 4A14C CRUISETOUR II INERARY
DAY PORT By Sea By Land DAY PORT By Sea By Land CRUISETOUR 7Al7C18 STAR PRINCESS 1 Rome 17 GRAND PRINCESS 1 BudapestDAYS DAYS DAY PORT By Sea By Land 22 Rome Budapest 18 ROYAL PRINCESS 1 Paris
ROMETODI 3 RomeTodi BUDAPEST VIENNA 3 BudapestVienna DAYS 2 Paris and 4 TodiFlorence and 4 Vienna 3 Paris
PARIS EUROSTAR5 Florence 5 ViennaPrague 4 ParisLondon 6 FlorenceVeniceEmbark 6 Prague and 5 London
FLORENCE PRAGUE
plus plus LONDON7 Venice Italy (overnight onboard ship) 7 PragueCopenhagenEmbark 6 LondonSouthamptonEmbark
GRAND MEDITERRANEAN SCANDINAVIARUSSIA plus 7 At Sea CRUISE 8-9 At Sea CRUISE 8 At Sea WESTERN EUROPE 8 Bilbao Spain10 Istanbul Turkey 9 Stockholm Sweden (Nyniishamn) BRITISH ISLES CRUiSE2004 DEPARTURE DATES 2004 DEPARTURE DATES 9 Bordeaux France (Le Verdon)
11 Kusadasi Turkey (for Ephesus) 10 Helsinki FinlandApr Sf 2004 DEPARTURE DATES 10 At SeaMay 131 Jul2Apr 29 12 Athens Greece (Piraeus) 11 SI Petersburg Russia (overnight onboard ship) 11 GlasgowEdinburgh Scotland (Greenock)May 23 JulUt May 141 26middot Jul tt 13~ 250
May 23 Jun 16 13 At Sea JunZt JulU 12 SI Petersburg Russia Jun n 19 Aug 18o 300 12 Dublin Ireland
]un 12 Aug l t 13 Cork IrelandJuliO 14 NaplesCapri Italy 13 Tallinn EstoniaJun 22 t Aug 11 Toun~eonlymilabkwithcruise5indi[itbtAug 3 15 FlorencelPisa Italy (Livorno) 14 Cdansk Poland 14 Cornwall England (Falmouth)
Aug 27 tBritishliksetuise aWEwupeiBritishlslesouist 15 ParisNormandy France (Le Havre)16 Monte Carlo Monaco 15 At Sea bull WestemEuropeCrube middotlcdandINorwqlmFjOllisetuise 16 Rotterdam The Netherlands
t Crulsetour lA only combinable with 12--dayGreck fst 17 Barcelona Spain (overnight onboard ship) 16 Olso NOrway Qsld Fjord Scenic Cruising bull Norwqian FjordsNorth Cipecruise 17 BrusselsBruges Belgium (Zeebrugge)tCruixtour 4A only combinable with lo-day Baltic
crulse shown on PI 11 18 Barcelona Spain Heritage cruise shawn on pg 12 OCrubctnur 7C only combinable with EwuJlWl ExplorerCrube17 Copenhagen Denmark 18 London England (Southampton)
EXOTICS CRUISES
AUSTRALIANEW ZEALAND AUSTRALIANEW ZEALAND AUSTRALIAASIA
12 14 19 DAYS DAYS DAYS
SAPPHIRE PRINCESS SAPPHIRE PRINCESS SAPPHIRE PRINCESS
saH between SYDNEYAUCKLAND SYDNEY
toand to BANGKOKSYDNEY AUCKLAND 2005 DEPARTURE DATES 2005 DEPARTURE DATE
Mar7Jan 6 2004 DEPARTURE DATEJan 1St
Dec 23 CRUISE ITINERARYJr ift Feb 23 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
CRUISE ITINERARY 1 Sydlley Austrli EMBARK PM CRUISE ITINERARY 2 At Sea
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTDAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 3 Brisbane Australia 8AM 6PM 1 Sydlley Australia EMBARK PM 4 At Sea 1 Aucklalld N~w Zealalld EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 5 Cid Harbor Austrlia (for Great Barrier Reef) 7AM 5PM2 At Sea 3 Melbourne Australia 8 AM 6 PM 6 Cirns Australia (Yorkeys) 8AM 6PM
3 WeIUllgton New Zealand 8 AM 6 PM 4 At Sea 7-8 At Sea 4 Christchurch New Zealalld (Lytlelton) 8 AM 6 PM 5 Tasmallia Australia (Hobart) 8 AM 6 PM 9 Darwin Australia lPM 8pM 5 Dunedill N~ Zealalld (Port Chalmers) 8 AM 6 PM 6-7 At Sea 10-11 At Sea 6 Fiordland Natiollal Park Scenic Cruising AM 6 PM 8 Fiordlalld Natiollal Park Scellic Cruising 7 AM 5 PM 12 Bali Illdonesi (Padang Bay) 7AM 6PM
7-8 At Sea J DUlledill New Zealalld (Port Chalmers) 8 AM 6 PM 13-14 At Se 10 Christchurch N~ Zealalld (Lytlelton) 8 AM 6 PM 15 Kuala Lumpur Mlaysia (Port KeIang) 8AM 6PM9 Tasmania Australia (Hobart) 8 AM 6 PM 11 Wellillgtoll New Zealmd 8 AM 6 PM 16 Sillgpore 8AM 6PM
10 At Sea 12 At Sea 17 At Sea 11 Melbourne Australia 8 AM 6 PM 13 Taurallga New Zealalld 8 AM 730 PM 18 Ho Chi Millh City Vietnm (Vung Tau) 7AM 730 PM 12 At S~a 19 At Sea 14 Bay of Islallds New Zealalld 8 AM 7 PM 13 SydPey Australia DISEMBARK AM 20 Bmgkok Thailalld (Laem Chabang) DISEMBARK AM15 Aucklalld New Zealalld DISEMBARK AM
t llinemy opcrnesln reverse order Port times mil1 my
CHINAFAR EAST SOUTHEAST ASIAFAR EAST
1612 DAYSDAYS
PACIFIC PRINCESS
SAPPHIRE PRINCESS PACIFIC PRINCESS
OSAKA BEIJING to
to BANGKOK OSAKA
2004 DEPARTURE DATE 2004 DEPARTURE DATEPAClFlC PRINCESS
julllt Jun 11 2005 DEPARTURE DATE
SAPPHIRE PRINCESS Apr 11
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Osaka Japall EMBARK PM
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Beijillg China (Xingang) EMBARK PM 2 Hiroshima Japall 1 PM 6PM 2 DaHan China AM 5PM 3 At Sea 3 At Sea 4 Shmghai Chilla 7 AM 6PM 4 Shallghai Chilla (overnight onboard ship) 7AM 5 At Sea 5 Shallghai China 6PM 6 Okinaw Jpll 7 AM 1 PM
7 Taipei Taiwm (KeeIung) 9 AM 7PM6 At Sea 8 At Se7 Pusan South Korea 8AM 5PM 9 HOllg KOllg Chill 8 AM 7PM 8 At Sea 10-11 At S~a J Vladivostok Russia 5AM 730 PM 12 Ho Chi MiIJh City Vietnm (Phu My) 7 AM 5PM 10 At Sea 13 At Se 11 Nagasaki Japan 7AM 6PM 14 Singpore 8 AM 6pM
15 KUlltll Mlysi 830 AM 430 PM12 At Sea 16 At Sea 13 Osaka Japan DISEMBARK AM 17 Ballgkok Thaillld DISEMBARK AM t Sailing alls i1t Hiroshima on Dl) 11 In place of Nilgilsaki Port times milY vary
CRUISE I flNERARY CRUISE I flNERARY
Ho Chi Minh City Vietnam
EXOTICS CRUISES
SOUTHEAST ASIACHINA SOUTHEAST ASIACHINA FAR EASTALASKA
PACIflC PRINCISS ROYAL PRINCESS
16 16 19 DAYS DAYS DAYS
SAPPHIRE SAPPHIRE PRINCESS
Sail between PRINCESSBANGKOK
and BANGKOK OSAKA
BEIJING to to
2004 DEPARTURE DATES BEIJING SEATTLEPAClFlC PRINCESS
Jun 27tt 200S DEPARTURE DATE200S DEPARTURE DATE ROYAL PRINCESS
Mar 26 Apr 23Oct 16 Nov lt
CRUISE I I INERARY CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
1 GsakaJpan EMBARK PM1 Bangkok Thailand (Laem Chabang) EMBARKPM 1 Bangkok Thailand (Laern Chabang) EMBARK IM 2 At Sea2 At Sea 2 AtSea bull 3 Nagasaki Japan 7 AM 6PM
9AM 7PM 3 Singapore 7PM 4 Pusan Soqth Korea 8AM 5PM 4-5 At Sea 5 At Sea gt bull
7AM 7PM 6 Da Nwg Vietn~1Il 7AM middot7PM 6 Vladivostok Russia SAM 730 PM 7 At Sea 7 AtSea
7AM 12M 8 Hong lltog ihin~ 7AM 12M 8 Sapporo japan (Muroran) 6AM 6PM 9-10 At Sea 9-10 At Sea 9-12 At Sea cross Intemational Dateline
13 DutchHarbor Alaska (Aleutian Islands) 230 PM 7PM11 ShaJlgllai Cbina (overnight onboard ship) lAM 11 Shangh~t Cllina (ovmightonJoltird $hip) 7 AM 14 At Sea shy12 Shanghai China 6PM 12 Shanghai China
7AM - - tlJf
6PM 15 Anchorage Alaska (Seward) 8AM 6PM13 At Sea 13 AtSea i 16 College Fjord Seni CruIsing 630AM 930 AM
14 Nagasaki japan 7AM 6PM 14 Nagasaki japan 6PM 17 Glacier Ilay Scenic Cruising 1030 AM 830 PM 15 Pusan South lltOrea TAM 4PM 1~ bull Pu~an SQuth iorea middot4lM 18 middotmiddot juneau Alaska 6 AM 2PM 16 At Sea 16 At Sea 19 - At Sea 17 Beijing China (Xingangy OISEMBAlUe AM 17 Beijing Cliina (Xingang) 20 SeattleWashington DISEMBARK AM
t ltinemy Operne5 in rcvmc Older ttPorttimcsmiYnl)middotShlpwilldocklnampngkoknsttadofL1cm~
POLYNESIA amp THE COOK ISLANDS POLYNESIA amp THE MARQUESAS ISLANDS
10 10 DAYS DAYS
TAHITIAN PRINCESSTAHITIAN PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIPROUNDTRIP fromfrom
PAPEETEPAPEETE 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
2004 DEPARTURE DATES Oct 4 24 Mayl 17 27 Sep4 14 24 Nov 13 Jun 6 16 26 0lt 14 00323Ju16 16 26 Nov 323 2005 DEPARTURE DATESAug 5 15 25 Dec 13 Jan 12
Feb 1 21200S DEPARTURE DATES
~~ 122 ~~Il 13 23 CRUISE ITINERARY
CRUISE II INERARY DAY PORT
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Papeete Tahiti 1 Papeete Tahiti (overnight onboard ship) EMBARK PM
2 Moorea Polynesia 2 Papeete Tahiti SPM 3 Huahil1e P9lynesia 8AM 5 PM 3 Tuamotu Atolls Senic Cruising
5 PM8-AM 4 At Sea I At Sea 5 Rarotonga Cook Islands 8AM 5 PI~ 5 Nuku Hiva Marquesas Islands 6 At Sea 6 Hiva Ga Marquesas Islands 8AM 5PM 7 Raiatea Polynesia overnight onboard Ship 6AM
7 At Sea middotai~ RaiateaPQlynesia igt gt 6AM 8 Rangiroa P~iynesia 8AM 4PM8 Tahaa scenic Cryising 630 AM 830 AM
8 BoraBoraPQlyrtesia(ovemightollboard ship) UN 9 Tahaa ~enl Cruising 8 AM middot11AM
9 Bora lora Polynesia 5iM 9 Raiatea Polynesia 12 N 11 PM 10 Moore Polynesfa 8 AM 5 PM la ~ Bora ~oraPoIYnesia 8AM bull 5PM
11 Papeete Tahiti DISEMBARK AM 11 Papeete Tahiti DISEMBARK AM Iong Kong Harbor
3 Singapore 4-5 At Sea 6 Da NangVieinam 7 At Sea 8 liong Kong China
EXOTICS CRU ISES
HAWAIITAHITI HAWAIIAN ISLANDS SOUTH PACIFIC ISLANDS
12 1515 DAYS DAYSDAYS
PACIFIC
TAHITIAN PRINCESS ISLAND PRINCESSPAClFIC PRINCESS
PRINCESS
SYDNEYROUNDTRIP sail between tofrom
PAPEETE PAPEETELOS ANGELES and
2004 DEPARnIRE DATEHONOLULU 2004 DEPARTURE DATES Apr 21
2004 DEPARTURE DATES ~~~l CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE 11 INERARY
Oet21t CRUISE ITINERARY Nov Sf
MayS PACIFIC PRINCESS DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
Nov20t DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DecSt 1 Los Angeles CalifornIa EMBARK AM 1 Sydney AustralIa EMBARK PMAug 17t
Dec20t1 Papeete Tahiti EMBARK PM 2-4 At Sea
2005 DEPARTURE DATE Jan 4 2-5 At Sea
(overnight onboard ship) Jan 19 5 Auckland New Zealand 7 AM 2PMFeb 3t 6 Iiilo Hawaii 8 AM 6 PM
TAHITIAN PRINCESS Papeete Tahiti 11 PM fb 18 6-7 At Sea Kilauea Voko ~enic CruisingApr 12 MarS t 3 Moorea Polynesia 8 AM 5 PM 8 Suva fijI 11 AM 430 PM1~i~t 7 Kona Hawaii 8AM 6PM4 Bora Bora PolYnesia 8 AM 5 PM 9 At Sea Cross International Dateline Apr 19
5-6 At Sea 8 Honolulu Hawaii 8AM 11 PM 10 Apia Western Samoa 830 AM 2PM 7 Christmas Isl~ndKiribati 1Z N 5 PM 9 Kauai Hawaii (Nawlliwlli) 8AM 6PM 11-12 At Sea 8-9 At Sea 10 Maui Hawaii (Lahaina) 6PM 13 Bora Bora Polynesia lOAM 6PM 10 HlloliaWlii 6 PM 13 Raiatea Polynesia (overnight onboard 11 PM11-14 At Sea 11 Maui Hawaii (Lahaina) 8 AM 6 PM 14 Raiatea Polynesia 11 PM
15 Ensenada Mexico (service call)KaUaiH~waii(Nawllfwtli) 8AM 6 PM 15 Moorea Polynesia 8AM 5PM
tllinemyopcr~ttsln=x QnIerPurtlimcslmYvary Honolulu Hawaii DISEMBARK AM 16 Los Angeles CalIfornia DISEMBARK AM 16 Papeete Tahiti DISEMBARK AM
ISLANDS OF THE PACIFIC THEATER SOUTH PACIFIC EXPLORER
24 24 DAYS DAYS
PAClFIC PRINCESS PAClFIC PRINCESS
sail between HONOLULU PAPEETE
and to OSAKA FT LAUDERDALE
2004 DEPARTURE DATES
Mayl 2004 DEPARTURE DATEJul2Sj
Aug 29 CRUISE ITINERARY
CRUISE ITINERARYDAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART EMBARK PM DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
1 Papeete Tahiti EMBARK PM lPM 7PM 2 8AM 11 PM
3 ~~~~~~ ~~~~Sta 8AM 5 PM 4-6 At Sea 7 Pitcairn Island Scenic Cruising 8AM 1211
8AM 12 N
7AM ZPM 8-9 At Sea 10 Easter Island Chile 8AM 2PM
9AM 11-14 At Sea 15 Callao Peru (overnight for Lima and Machu Picchu) 8AM 16 Callao Peru lPM 17 At Sea 18 Manta Ecuador (for Quito) 9fM 7PM 19 At Sea 20 Transit Panama Canal 7 AM 430 PM 21 San BIas Panama 8AM 5 PM 22 ft Sea 23 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands 7AM 4PM 24 At Sea
25 Ft Lauderdale Florida DISEMBARK AMMoorea Polynesia tllinemyoperataln~12onlerPortl1mesmiYmymiddot
EXOTICS CRUISES
HAWAIITAHITISOUTH PACIFIC AMAZONSOUTHERN CARIBBEAN CAPE HORNSTRAIT OF MAGELLAN
1430 12 DAYS DAYSDAYS
ROYAL PRINCESS ROYAL PRINCESSSAPPHIRE PRINCESS
sail betweenFT LAUDERDALE SANTIAGOLOS ANGELES to
andto MANAUS BUENOS AIRESSYDNEY 2005 DEPARTURE DATE 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
2004 DEPARTURE DATE Apr 9 Jan 10
Nov 22 Jan 241 Feb 7
FebZt
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
CRUISE ITINERARY
CRUISE ITINERARYCRUISE ITINERARY 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTDAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 2-3 At Sea 1 Santiago Chile (Valparaiso) EMBARK PM
1 Los ingeles California EMBARK PM 4 Tortola BritIsh Virgin Islands 8 AM 6 PM 2 At Sea 2 Ensenada Mexico 8AM 5PM 3 Puerto Montt Chile 7AM 6PM
3middot6 At Sea 4 At Sea 5 Dominica 9 AM 4 PM 7 Hilo Hawaii 8AM 5 At Sea Chilean Fjords Scenic Cruising6PM 6 Trinidad 9 AM 6 PM
8 Maui Hawaii (Lahaina) 8AM 6PM 6 At Sea Amalia Glacier Scentc CruiSi3f7 At Sea 7 Punta Arenas Chile (Strait of Magei an) 7AM 6PM9 Honolulu Hawaii 7AM 5PM
- 10middot13 At Sea 8 Beagle Channel Scenic Cruising 8 Ushuaia Argentina (Tierra del Fuo) 12N 8PM
8 Devils Island French Guiana (Isle Royal) 8 AM 2 PM 14 Bora Bora Polynesia 8AM 6PM 9 At Sea 9 At Sea Cape Hom Scenic Cruising
10 Santarem Brazil 9 AM 7 PM 10 Moorea Polynesia 8AM 6PM 10 Falkland Islands (Stanley) 8AM 6PM 10 Papeete Tahiti (overnight onboard ship) 9PM 11 At Sea
i 16 Papeete Tahiti 6PM 11 Boca da Valeria Brazil (Amazon River) 7 AM 2 PM 12 Puerto Madryn Argentina 6AM 5PM 17middot18 AtSea 12 Manaus Brazil (overnight onboard ship) 10 AM 13 At Sea
14 Montevideo Uruguay 9AM 6PM19 Pago Pago merlcan Samoa 8AM 6PM 13 Manaus Brazil DISEMBARK AM 15 Buenos Aires Argentina DISEMBARK AM 20 Apia Western Samoa 8AM 6PM 21 At Sea Cross International Dateline middotl1me5forallscenkouisinCile subjectlDclwIgc
tllinmryopefilteslnr=rscordttPorttlmislm)vary22 Suva Fiji 8AM 6PM l 23-24 At Sea
20 Auckland New Zealand 8AM 6PM ORINOCO RIVERSOUTHERN CARIBBEAN ANDESSOUTH AMERICA 26 Tauranga New Zealand 8AM 7PM 27 At Sea
28 Wellington Newealand 8AM 6PM 16 17 DAYS DAYS 29-30 AtSea
31 Sydney Australia DISEMBARK AM ROYAL PRINCESS ROYAL PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP SANTIAGO from to
FT LAUDERDALE FT LAUDERDALE
200S DEPARTURE DATE2005 DEPARTURE DATE
Mar 7Mar 24
CRUISE IIJNERARYCRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Santiago Chlle (Valparaiso) EMBARK PM
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM
2 La Serena Chile (Coquimbo) 8 AM 5 PM2-3 At Sea 3 At Sea Um6n Costa Rica 7AM 7PM 4 Arica Chile 7AM 6PMCristobal Panama (for Panama Canal) 8AM 5PM o At Sea
6 Cartagena Colombia 9AM 2 PM 6 San Martin Peru (for Pisco and Machu Picchu) 7AM 6PM 7 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 130 PM 7PM 7 Callao Peru (overnight for Lima) 530 AM 8-9 At sea 8 Callao Peru 1PM 10 Puerto Ordaz Venezuela (Orinoco River) 8AM 6PM 9 At Sea
i 11 At Sea 10 Manta Ecuador (overnight for Quito) 530AM 12 Greada 8AM i 11 Manta Ecuador 1lM5PMt 1~ Dolllinlca i 7N1 5 PM 12 At Sea
i 13 Transit Panama C~nal 7AM 430 PM14 St Thomas us Virgilslands 9AM 5PM 14 Cartagena Colombia 8AM 130 PMJs AtSei i 15 Aruba Netherlands intiiles 1PM 7PM 16 Princess Cays Bahamas 8AM 16-17 At Sea Tahiti Polynesia 17 FtLallardale Flillilt~ DISEMBARK AM 1ampmiddot Ft L~uderdale Florida DISEMBARK AM
AMAZON RIVERMEDITERRANEAN
21 DAYS
ROYAL PRINCESS
MANAUS
to ROME
2005 DEPARTURE DATE
Apr 21
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE M~naus Brazil (Wemight onboardship) Manaus Brazil
3 BocadaValeria Brazil (AriiazonRivet) 11 AM 4-6 At Sea 7 Recife Brazil 1 PM 8-11 AtSea 12 Dakar Senegal 8AM 13-14 At Sea 15 Agadir Morocco 7AM 16 Casablanca Morocco (for Marrakech) 8AM 17 Gibraltar lOAM 18 Allcante Spain 12 N 19 Barcelona Spain 8AM 20 Cannes France (for Monte Carlo) 8AM 21 FlorencePisa Italy (Livarno) 7AM 22 Rome Italy (Civitavecchia) DISEMBARK AM
INDIAN OCEANAUSTRALIA
28 DAYS
PACIfIC PRINCESS
CAPE TOWN
to SYDNEY
2004 DEPARTURpound DATE
Oct 20
CRUISE ITINERARY1 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Cape Town South Africa EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 3 East London South Africa 7AM 3PM 4 DurbahSouth Africa 8AM 6PM 5-7 At Sea 8 Nosy BeMadagascar 7AM 4PM 9 At Sea 10 Poilit des Galets Reunioll]slahd 11 Port Louis Mauritius 12c19 At Sea 20 Perth Australia (Fremantle) 21-23 At Sea 24 Adelaide Australla 25 At Sea 26 Melbourne Australla 7 27 Tasmania AUstralia (Burnie) 28 At Sea 29 Sydney Australia DISEMBARK AM
I
DEPART EMBARK PM
7PM 6PM
8pM
5PM
3PM 9PM 6PM 6PM 5PM 7PM 7PM
EXOTICS CRUISES
SOUIB ATIANTICANTARCfICNSOUIB AMERICA
24 DAYS
ROYAL PRINCESS
CAPE TOWN
to SANTIAGO
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
Dec 17
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Cape TownSouthAfrica (overnighfol1board ship) EMBARK PM 2 Cape Town South Africa 3PM 2 if~~t Good HopSCenic Crulsing 3-6 6 Tristan DaCunha United Kingdom 8AM 5PM 7-10 At Sea 11 Falkland Islands (Staliley) 8 AM 5PM 12 At Sea 13-16 Antarctica Peninsula ScehltmiddotCruising 14 days ihcludingmiddot Elephant
Island AntarcticSotind Deceptionlslana GerlacheStrait NaxefChannel Schollaert Channel SigJtla Island and Boyd Strait)
17 At Sea Cape Horn Scenic Cruising1amp UshuaiaArgentina (Tierra del fuego) bull middot6 AM 19 Punta Arenas Chile (Strait of Magellan) 7 AM 20 At Sea Amalia Glacier Scenic Cruising21 At Sea Chilean Fjords Scenic Cruising22 AtSea 23 Puerto Mont Chile 7AM 6PM 24 At Sea 25 Santiago Chile (Valparaiso) DISEMBARK AM
-nmes for1l scenlccruisinc are subJect to change
ASIAINDIAMEDITERRANEAN
30 ROYAL PRINCESSDAYS
ROME
to BANGKOK
2004 DEPARlURE DATE
Sep 16
CRUISE Il INERARY
WEST AFRICASOUTH AMERICA
28 DAYS
PACIFIC PRINCESS
FT LAUDERDALE
to CAPE TOWN
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
51 22
CRUISE ITINERARY
DISEMBARK AM
Aruba
EXOTICS CRU ISES amp CRU ISETOU RS
AUSTRALIANEW ZEALAND CRUISETOUR
AUSTRALIAN EXPLORER 2004 DEPARTURE DATESAPPHIRE21 plus
DAYS PRINCESS SYDNEY Dec 17 to
AUCKLAND CRUISETOUR 5P CRUiSE
CRUISETOUR ITINERARY
DAY PORT By Sea By Land DAY PORT
1 Sydney 14 Fiordland National Park 2 Sydney Scenic Cruising
3 SydneyAyers Rock 15 Dunedin New Zealand (Port Chalmers) 4 Ayers ROek
5 Ayers RockPort Douglas 16 Christchurch New Zealand 6 Port Douglas - (Lytleton)
7 Port DouglasSydneyEmbark 17 Wellilgton New Zealand 8 At Sea 18 At Sea 9 Melbourne Australia 19 Tauranga New Zealand
10 At Sea 20 Bay of Islands New Zealand 11 Tasmania Australia (Hobart) 21 Auckland New Zealand 12middot13 At Sea
Sydney Opera House Australia
AUSTRALIANEW ZEALAND CRUISETOUR SOUTHEAST ASIACHINA CRUISETOUR CAPE HORNSTRAIT OF MAGELLAN CRUISETOUR AUSTRALIAN BEIJING Be TERRA COTTA 2004 DEPARTURE DATES RIO 8t IGUAZU FALLS Post-Crulsetour1 Pre-Crulsetour 217EXPLORER 2005 DEPARTURE DATES PACIFICSAPPHIRE WARRIORS19 plw or PRINCESS jul9t loieifie
DAYS PRINCESS SYDNEY Jan 12 plus 19 ROYAL plw Feb 5 Oct 28 Royal BUENOS AIRES
AUCKLAND DAYS ROYAL PRINCESS to 21 ampto DAYS PRINCESS
BEUING CRUISE t ~~S~i BeWln~~~~e
to SANTIAGO~e~s~Ot~r~ih~fi1BANGKOK CRUiSE CRUISECRUISETOUR 3t3P landtourm~yvlty CRUISETOUR 12
DAY PORT DAY PORT
DAY PORT By Sea ltBy LaDd DAY PORT
1 Beijing 11-12 At Sea 1 Rio de janeiro 11 Cape Horn Scenic Cruising
13 Hong Kong 2 Rio de jneiro c 12 Ushuaia Argentina 14 At Sea 3 RiolgUaiu Falls 12 Beagle Channel Scenlc Cruising
15 Nha Trang Vietnam 4 IIDIilZll FaU$13u~os~re$ 13 Punta Arenas Chile
16 Phu My Vietnam 5 Buens AiresEmbark 14 At Sea 17 At Sea 6 Montevideo Uruguay 15 Seno Eyre Fjord Scenic Cruising 18 Singapore 7 At Sea 16 At Sea 19 Kualtan Malaysia 8 Puerto Madryn Argentina 17 Puerto Montt Chile 20 At Sea 9 At Sea 18 At Sea 21 Bangkok Thail3nd 10 Falkland Islands (Stanley) 19 Santiago Chile
DAY PORT DAY PORT
At Sea Pusan SouthKOrea Nagasaki japan At Sea Shanghai China
Note CnIlst route shown for Royil Princess Oct 28 only Timcsforil1lsccnkoulslngmsubjccttothange
CRUISE [OUR ITINERARY
CRUISETOUR ITINERARY
CRUISrrOlJR ITINERARY Fiordland National Park Scenic Cruising DlUedin New Zealand Christchurch New Zealand Wellington New Zealand
14
GRAND PANAMA CANAL CRUISES
ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL
10 10 11 DAYSDAYS DAYS
CORAL PRINCESS GRAND PRINCESS GRAND PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIPfrom from
fromFT LAUDERDALE GALVESTON GALVESTON
2004 DEPARTURE DATES Oct n 21 31 2004 DEPARTURE DATE
2004 DEPARTURE DATENov 10 20 30middot DeelSmiddot
DedSDec 10 28
2005 DEPARTURE DATES CRUISE ITINERARY Jan 7 17 27
CRUISE ITINERARY Feb 6 16 26 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART MarS 1828 CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Galveston Texas EMBARK PMApr 7 17 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTshy 1 Galveston Texas EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 1 ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 3 Belize City Belize 1 PM 7PM 2-3 At Sea 3 Belize City Belize lPM 7PM 4 Costa Maya Mexico (Mahahual) 8AM 4PM 4 Um6n Costa Rica 7AM rPM 4 Costa Maya Mexico (Mahahual) SAM 4 PM 5 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands 12 PM 7PM 5 Panama Canal (to Gatun Lake) 7AM 430 PM 5 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands 12 PM 7PM 6 Ocho Rios Jamaica SAM 5PM 5 Col6n Panama 5PM 8PM 6 At Sea 7 At Sea 6 At Sea Cristobal Panama 7AM 4PM 8 7AM 4PM 7 Grand Cayman Cayman IslandS 7AM 4PM (fot Panama Canal) ftrtpg~niaa~~) S Corumel Mexico SAM 6PM 8 At Sea 9 At Sea 9 Bclize City Belize 7AM 4 PM 6PM 10 Coromel Mexico lOAM 6 PM9 Cozumel Mexico lOAM 10 At Sea 10 At Sea 11 At Sea
Portordtrllndtlmtsmayvllry 11 flo Lauderdale florida DISEMBARK AM Portorntr IInltf timpoundi may vary 11 Galveston Texas DISEMBARK AM Port ordu and Nmes may vary 12 Galv_es~on Texas DISEMBARK AM
ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL
8 DAYS
CORAL PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP
from
FT LAUDERDALE
2004 DEPARTURE DATE Dec 20
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Fl Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM 2-3 At Sea 4 Lim6n Costa Rica 7AM 7PM 5 Panama Canal (to Gatun Lake) 7 AM 430 PM 5 Co16n Panama 5PM SPM 6 At Sea 7 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands SAM 5PM S At Sea 9 Flo Lauderdale Florida DISEMBARK AM Bridge of the Americas Panama
f OptIonll fOllTS inclld1lI tht AtlllnH to Pacific RlIlllfll) joumq will dlmlldrt tilt ship b) tctdtr lit Gfttlm uk AJkr tour plIssmm dlstmlrark tilt shipwin procmlllat through tilt Gatun Locb lIndjlnlllly dock in Gl6lI Hmal1p41Sl11tmmttydiumlmtheJldlo~ lflrshops IInd~llI toIIrsrrnrl CIItutl14ktlllIrtonlflrJhlp
GRAND PANAMA CANAL CRUISES
GRAND PANAMA CANAL GRAND PANAMA CANAL GRAND PANAMA CANAL
150R 18 150R 1715 DAYS DAYS DAYS
CORAL PRINCESS SUN PRINCESS
REGAL PRINCESS REGAL PRINCESS SUN PRINCESS
DAWN PRINCESS REGAL PRINCESS sail between DAWN PRINCESS
sail between FT LAUDERDALE FT LAUDERDALE sail betweenand
FT LAUDERDALEand SAN DIEGO andLOS ANGELES
SAN FRANCISCO 2004 DEPARTURE DATES 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
DAWN PRINCESS 2004 DEPARTURE DATESNov 24Sp191
CRUISE ITINERARY Dec9t CORAL PRINCESSREGAL PRINCESS 5ltp261 CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE ITINERARY
200S DEPARTURE DATES Dec 24 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
SUN PRINCESS DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARIltPM200S DEPARTURE DATES DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Sep 2StMar 24
3 Ocho Rios Jamaica lOAM 6PM 2-3 At5ea 2 At Sea 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBA8KPM
REGAL PRINCESS AprSt 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBA8KPM Jan stu 200S DEPARTURE DATES2 At Sea4 At Sea 4 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 7AM lPMJan 23 5 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 7AM lPM 3 Ocho Rios Jamaica lOAM 6PM REGAL PRINCESS 5 Cartagena Colombia 9AM 3PMFeb7t 4 At Sea Apr 239AM 3PM 6 Transit Panama Canal 7AM 430 PMFb22 ~ yenr~fte~~~~~~u 7AM 430 PM 5 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 7AM lPM At SeaMar9t CORAL PRINCESS 79AM 3PM8 At Sea Apr 27 8 Puntarenas Costa Rica 7AM 7PMSUN PRINCESS 9 Puntarenas Costa Rica 7 AM 7PM ~ yenr~fte~n~~~~~u 7AM 430 PM 9-10 At SeaApr1S 8 At Sea DAWN PRINCESS10-11 At Sea 11 Acapulco Mexico 8AM 5PM
5PM 9 Puntarenas Costa Rica 7AM 7PM Apr 29H ~ae~lcoMexico 8 AM 12 At SeatllWrryopmllzlfrarnLls~in 10-11 At Sea rmrKfIfikTiIIrttimnma1 tlliJlrraryoptJllllsfrlJflSlmFranrimlJn 13 Cabo San lucas Mexico 8AM 5PM
gt This mUJI C4Jl llfwmblnld wlth a 3 14 Cabo San Lucas Mexico 7 AM lPM H ~e~o Mexico 8AM SPM rmruordrrorttimamG)llIryCoIutar CnUK to VlWOIlllr SC Dqs ThUIltIIIflltllnlltCllIIblntdwilhaZ-day 14-15 At Sea 16lhrlllllhI9lllIbtboobdulaquoSC)lQ4k t Illncral) lIpCutcs in mrmt orm Pllrt IiIIIa CocastaICnliutoVan(ouKrBCDlIys16 16 San Francisco California 7AM 4PMcowtlIrcrllisr IIIIYlIl1Ymiddot IhrounIScankboobdlUaK)lllllluU t~A~geles California 6 AM 5PM 14 Cabo San Lucas Mexico 8AM 5PM
Thllwl1JIIICllllslltMOlIkpilllyJmtcad 17-18 At Sea middotmiddotThliIAfllIllCltlllsatMGnIqclBaylnstcadllf 15 At Sea CPlIilldCI1IIu 17 At Sea o[OdKKwsPurllilllrlmllYWlry OchoRicJsPortllmtslllllYVllfymiddot D1SEMBA8K AM19 Vancouver BC DISEMBA8K AM 16 San Die20 California DlSEMBA8K AM 18 Val1couver BC
GRAND PANAMA CANAL COASTAL CRUISING
2-4 CORAL PRINCESS ISLAND PRINCESS SUN PRINCESS18 DAWN PRINCESS DIAMOND PRINCESS STAR PRINCESSDAYSDAYS
COASTAL CRUISE SCHEDULEREGAL PRINCESS
SHIP DAYS FROM TO DEPARTURE DATE DIAMOND PRINCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 5104
SAN FRANCISCO DIAMOND PRINCES5 4 Vancouver Seattle 5404 to CORAL PRINCESS 2 San Francisco Vancouver 5604
NEW YORK DAWN PRiNCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 5704 ISLAND PRiNCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 51204
2004 DEPARTURE DATE SUN PRINCESS 3 San Francisco Vancouver 51404Aug 24 ISLAND PRiNCESS 3 Vancouver LOI Angeles 91804
DIAMOND PRINCESS 1 Seattle Vancouver 91804CRUISE ITINERARY DIAMOND PRINCESS 6 Vancouver Los Angeles 91904 SAPPHIRE PRINCESS 1 Seattle Vancouver 91904 SAPPHREPRINCESS 2 Vancouver San Francisco 92004 DIAMOND PRINCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 43005 DlAMONDPRiNCES$ 4 Vancouver Seattle 5305 SUN PRINCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 5305
ISLAND PRiNCESS 3 Los Angeles VancOllver 5405 CORAL PRiNCESS 2 San Francisco Vancouver 51205
Coral Princess in the Panama Canal
CRUISE PLUS
Extend your adventure with our Cruise Plusreg program Cruise Plusreg enables you to enhance your vacation with one- to four-night hotel
packages in cities that stand on their own as vacation destinations Add nights in Sydney before you cruise or extend your vacation with nights in the city by the
bay San Francisco Transportation and luggage handling costs from the airport to both hotel and ship plus meet and greet services are always included
Wherever you choose to explore youll enjoy properties that are carefully chosen based on service value location and the peace of mind of knowing that Princess
has arranged it all for you
Anchorage Alaska Trevi Fountain Rome Auckland Harbor New Zealand
The Cruise Plusreg Program is available in over 30 major cities including
MEDITERRANEANAEGEAN EXOTICS PANAMA CANAL Barcelona London Rome and Venice Auckland Bangkok Beijing Buenos Aires Ft Lauderdale Los Angeles New York City
Cape Town Ft Lauderdale Honolulu Los San Diego San Francisco Sanjuan Vancouver NORTHERN EUROPE Angeles Montreal Moorea New York City Copenhagen and London MEXICO CARIBBEANOsaka Papeete Rome San Francisco
Ft Lauderdale Galveston Los AngelesTRANSATLANTIC Santiago Seattle Sydney Vancouver Venice Barcelona Copenhagen Ft Lauderdale San Francisco and San Juan
London New York City and Rome ALASKA Anchorage Calgary Fairbanks Kenai San Francisco Seattle and Vancouver
For more information about options and pricing reference a destination specific brochure or contact your travel agent
TRAVEL THE WORLD WITH THE LEADER IN CRUISINGmiddot Princess
Analysis by the Hawaii Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism Comparing the Economic Impact of Foreign Flag Ships with US Flag Cruise Ships Sailing in Hawaii
This is a summary of an analysis prepared by the Hawai Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism (DBEDT) of the economic impact of the foreign flag cruise ship fleet sailing in Hawaii as compared to each of the US flag ships operating in Honolulu
The comparison is set out below
Foreign Pride Pride Pride
Fleet Of Hawaii Of Aloha Of America
Total economic output impact (spendingsales) ($mil) 155 542 4225 4958
Total earnings impact (labor earnings) ($mil) 44 155 1207 1411
Total employment impact Uobs) 1447 5059 3943 4627
This analysis demonstrates that a single US-flagged ship the Pride of America home ported in Honolulu is 32 times more economically impactful and creates 32 times as many jobs as the entire foreign flag fleet that sails into and out of Hawaii ports of call
Economic Impact of Pride of America
Assumptions 1 Annual impact though Pride of Aloha is leaving in May 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existing Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($) 4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of outputl$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job multiplier (jobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
118700 105
2706 3373
147 042
1372
4958
1417
4627
Data sourcelformula Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Line 1 x line 2 x line 31 000000
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 4 x line 5
Line 4 x line 6
Line 4 x line 7
Economic Impact of Pride of Hawaii
Assumptions
1 Annual impact though Pride of Hawaii is leaving in February 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existing Pride of Aloha and Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($) 4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job multiplier (jobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
Data sourceformula 139770 Actual 2007 figure
975 Actual 2007 figure 2706 Actual 2007 figure 3688 Line 1 x line 2 x line 31000000
147 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model 042 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
1372 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
5421 Line 4 x line 5
1549 Line 4 x line 6
5059 Line 4 x line 7
Economic Impact of Pride of Aloha
Assumptions 1 Annual impact though Pride of Aloha is leaving in May 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existlng Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($)
4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job mUltiplier Oobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
95680 111
2706 2874
147 042
1372
4225
1207
3943
Data sourcelformula Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Line 1 x line 2 x line 31000000
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 4 x line 5
Line 4 x line 6
Line 4 x line 7
lt
Methodology Used in Calculating Impact of International Cruise Ships
Cruise ship visitors 1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Came with ships 3 Flied in 4 Average length of stay (days) 5 PPPD ($) 6 Cruise visitor spending ($mil))
Cruise ship crews 7 Ratio of crew spending to cruise visitor spending 8 Cruise crew spending
Cruisline 9 Ratio of crew spending to cruise visitor spending
10 Cruiseline spending
11 Total cruise-related spending ($mil)
12 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 13 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 14 Job multiplier Uobs$ cruise -related spending)
15 Total output impact ($miJ)
16 Total earnings impact ($miJ)
17 Total employment impact (jobs)
106641 98307
8334 739 847 668
02 134
038 254
1055
147 042
1372
1551
444
1447
Data sourceformula Line 2 + line 3 DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report Line 1 x line 4 x line 5
DBEDT 2003 Cruise study Line 7 x line 6
DBEDT 2003 Cruise study Line 9 x line 6
Line 6 + line 8 + line 10
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 11 x line 12
Line 11 x line 13
Line 11 x line 14
Economic Contributions Foreign-Flag Fleet operating in Hawaii vs Three US-Flag Ships
$1500
Pride of Hawaii$1000- $542 million VIc -0-E c Pride of AlohaCo
423 million$500
Pride of America $496 million155 million$shy
Foreign-Flag US-Flag Fleet Fleet
Source State of Hawaii Department of US-Flag $1460 billion Business Economic Development and Tourism
Foreign-Flag $ 155 million 7292008
Employment Foreign-Flag Fleet operating in Hawaii vs Three US-Flag Ships
15000
10000
til c o Pride of Aloha
39435000
Pride of America 1447 4627
~---------
Foreign-Flag US-Flag Fleet Fleet
Source State of Hawaii Department of US-Flag 13629 jobs Business Economic Development and Tourism
Foreign-Flag 1447 jobs 7292008
Foreign Flag Capacity Growth Foreign flag passenger capacity has changed five-fold on roundtrip Hawaii cruises from the West Coast since enactment of the Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative
1600000
1400000
tn 1200000
J enshyZ
1000000
I shyG) en 800000 s G) tn tn
600000 as D 400000
200000
0 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Year
Source US Maritime Administration (derived from the US Customs and Border Patrol Vessel Entrance and Clearance documents - final 2007 data) 7292008
NCL America Hawaii Economic Contributions
(2004-2008)
bull (in Millions) bull $399 in wages benefits and overtime to US seafarers bull $35 in Federal and State payroll Taxes bull $64 in Government Fees and Taxes to Hawaii bull $28 in wages benefits and overtime to US other employees bull $52 in Port Charges to Hawaii Companies (Stevedores tugs pilots etc) bull $85 in Fuel to Tesoro Hawaii bull $130 for shore excursions to Hawaii tour operators bull $39 for Hawaii hotel rooms and ground transport bull $75 for food grown in Hawaii bull $57 in union fees and levies (incl $32M paid directly by employees) bull $1 in MMD fees to the United States Coast Guard bull $51 for recruitment screening processing and training crew bull $76 advertising and promoting Hawaii as a destination bull $1092
COASTWISE CRUISES INTERPRETIVE RULE RESOLUTION Adopted at the
US Conference of Mayors 76th Annual Meeting
June 20-242008 Miami
WHEREAS the Department of Homeland Securitys Customs and Border Protection (CBP) issued a proposed Interpretive Rule regulating Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises on foreign flagged vessels between US ports of call under the Passenger Vessel Services Act at the request of the United States Maritime Administration and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule would require that a foreign-flagged vessel on a coastwise cruise to call at a foreign port for at least 48 hours with that foreign stop constituting at least 50 percent of the cruise itinerary and allowing passengers to disembark the cruise vessel at the foreign port before continuing the cruise to a US port of call and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule establishes burdensome criteria that are wholly inconsistent with industry practice particularly the 48-hour call at foreign port shyinasmuch as the standard port call is six to eight hours - as well as the requirement that 50 percent of a cruise be spent at the foreign port and
WHEREAS the intent of the proposed Interpretive Rule is to protect the single remaining US flag vessel serving the Inter-Hawaiian Island cruise trade that according to the Hawaii Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism generates more than 4600 jobs and generates nearly $500 million in economic benefits for the state annually and
WHEREAS thousands of members of the International Longshore Workers Union (nWU) are employed at US ports serving cruise ships and whose jobs would be at risk if the proposed Interpretive Rule were implemented and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule is vague as to the breadth of its application ie to coastwise cruises between all United States ports or applied solely to coastwise cruises from West Coast ports to Hawaii and
WHEREAS the Cruise Lines International Association estimates the proposed Interpretive Rule would upend the $17 billion in national cruise industry spending and put at risk more than 300000 jobs generated by the international cruise industry including jobs held by nWU at US ports and the local allied industries supporting the cruise industry and
Executive Order Submissions Under Review
II Reglnfogov Where to ind Federal Regulatory Information -~
Home ] Lnitied Agenda and Regulator) Ilan pound012866 Regulator) Review Jnformalion Collection Review
EO 12866 Regulatory Rlvlw dvanced Search IJitorical RepWI Review Counh Jriter XIL
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA)
Executive Order Submissions Under Review July 25 2008 - _------------____ _shy
Department of Homeland Security
AGENCY DHS-TSA RIN 1652-AA53
TITLE Large Aircraft Security Program Other Aircraft Operator Security Programs and Airport Operator Security Program
STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT Yes RECEIVED DATE 06302008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
AGENCY DHS-USCIS RIN Llti15-AB67 TITLE Changes to Requirements Affecting H-2B Nonimmigrants and Their Employers
STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT No RECEIVED DATE 06092008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
AGENCY DHS-USCBP RIN 1651AA11 TITLE Issuance of a Visa and Authorization for Temporary Admission Into the United States for Certain Nonimmigrant Aliens Afflicted W HIV Infection
STAGE Final Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT No RECEIVED DATE 03042008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
-_RE_V-IE-W-E-X-T-EN-D-E-D---------- _
AGENCY DHS-USCBP RIN 1651-AA76 TITLE Coastwise Transportation of Passengers STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT Yes RECEIVED DATE 07142008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
Disclosure I Accessibility I Privacy Policy I Contact Us
httpwwwreginfogovpublicdoeoReviewSearch 7252008
View Rule Page 11
Shere D find Federal ReguLatory InformciiorlReglnfogov Home J Cnified Agenda al1d Regulatory Plan EO 12866 Regulatory Reyiew Information Collection Reiew
Current rnified Agenda and Regulatory Plan Historical Pnified Agenda and Regulatory Plan Search
View Rule
DHSIUSCBP RIN 1651-AA76 Publication ill Spring 2008
Title llCoastwise Transportation of Passengers
Abstract This interim rule amends the Department of Homeland Securitys (DHS) current regulations relating to the transportation of passengers by non-coastwise-qualified vessels on voyages that begin and end at a US port and stop at intervening US and foreign port(s) Under this interim final rule voyages that begin and end at a US port and stop at a foreign port(s) and at intervening US port(s) where a large USshyflag coastwise-qualified passenger vessel engages in regular service are in violation of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) unless the cumulative length of stay(s) at intervening foreign port(s) is more than 50 percent of the total amount of time spent at the intervening US port(s) and passengers are permitted to go ashore at the foreign port(s) The purpose of this amendment is to ensure that the Congressional purpose in enacting the PVSA which is to preserve the economic benefits of US coastwise trade to US-flag coastwise-qualified vessels is properly implemented
Agency Department of Homeland Security(DHS) Priority Substantive Nonsignificant
KIN Status First time published in the Unified Agenda Agenda Stage of Rulemaking Final Rule Stage
Major No Unfunded Mandates No
CFR Citation -LCER 4J~)(h)(plusmnJ
Legal Authority 5JJSS_30J12lJ-SClt16 J9_lJiCJ 431 9_L1C1plusmn3JJ2JScHJ1J2JSCJ624 L(LlLSc207LIl(gtJfHgt~ _CiQJ _46lSC 6QLQ~
Legal Deadline None
Timetable Action Date FR Cite
Interim Final Action 0510012008
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required No Government Levels Affected None
Federalism No
Included in the Regulatory Plan No
RIN Data Printed in the FR No
Agency Contact Glen E Vereb Chief Entry Procedures and Carriers Branch Department of Homeland Security US Customs and Border Protection Office of Regulations and Rulings 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington DC 20229 Phone202572-8730
Disclosure I Accessibility I Privacy Policy I Contact Us
httpwwwreginfogovpublicdoeAgendaViewRuleruleID=286751 7128120
Federal RegisterVol 72 No 224Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules 65487
SPECULATIVE POSITION LIMITS 1-Continued [In contract units)
Contract
Soybeans and Mini-Soybeans 2
Wheat and Mini-Wheat 2 bullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbull
Soybean Oil
SingleSpot month All monthsmonth
600 8600 13300 600 11100 14500 540 6600 8600
Soybean Meal 720 5500 7100
Minneapolis Grain Exchange
Hard Red Spring Wheat I 600 I 11100 I 14500
New York Board of Trade
Cotton No2 I 300 I 5300 I 7300
Kansas City Board of Trade
Hard Winter Wheat I 600 I 11100 I 14500
1 For purposes of compliance with these limits positions in a futures contract that shares ~ubstantially identical terms with a contract market enumerated herein including a futures contract that is cash-settled based on the settlement price of an enumerated contract market shall be agshygregated with positions in the enumerated contract market
2 For purposes of compliance with these limits positions in the regular-sized and mini-sized contracts shall be aggregated
Issued by the Commission this November 152007 in Washington DC David Stawick Secretary of the Commission [FR Doc E7-22681 Filed 11-20-07 845 amI BILLING CODE 6351-Q1-P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Bureau of Customs and Border Protection
19 CFR Part 4
[USCBP-2007-o098]
Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises
AGENCY Customs and Border Protection Department of Homeland Security ACTION Proposed interpretation solicitation of comments
SUMMARY This document proposes new criteria to be used by Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to determine whether non-coastwise-qualified vessels are in violation ofthe Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) when engaging in cruise itineraries in which passengers board at a US port the vessel calls at several Hawaiian ports and then the vessel proceeds to a foreign port or ports for a brief period before ultimately returning to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their cruise CBP believes these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because it appears that the primary objective of the foreign stop is evasion of the PVSA
DATES Comments must be received on or before December 212007 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT Glen E Vereb Cargo Security Carriers amp Immigration Branch Office of International Trade (202) 572-8730 ADDRESSES You may submit comments identified by docket number by one of the following methods
bull Federal eRulemaking Portal http wwwregulationsgov Follow the instructions for submitting comments
bull Mail Border Security Regulations Branch Office of International Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
I Public Participation
Interested persons are invited to participate in this proposed interpretation by submitting written data views or arguments on all aspects of the proposed interpretation Customs and Border Protection (CBP) also invites comments that relate to the economic environmental or federalism effects that might result from this proposed interpretation Comments that will provide the most assistance to CBP in developing these procedures will reference a specific portion of the proposed interpretation explain the reason for any recommended change and include data information or authority that support such recommended change
Instructions All submissions received must include the agency name and docket number for this proposed
interpretation All comments received will be posted without change to http wwwregulationsgov including any personal information provided
Docket For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received go to http wwwregulationsgov Submitted comments may also be inspected on regular business days between the hours of 9 am and 430 pm at the Office of International Trade Customs and Border Protection 799 9th Street NW 5th Floor Washington DC Arrangements to inspect submitted documents should be made in advance by calling Mr Joseph Clark at (202) 572shy8768
II Background
The maritime cabotage law governing the transportation of passengers was first established by section 8 of the Passenger Vessel Services Act of June 191886 (the PVSA) 24 Stat 81 as amended by section 2 of the Act of February 17 1898 30 Stat 248 formerly codified at 46 USC App 289 (now codified at 46 USC 55103) 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 of $200 (now $300 as promulgated in TD 03-11 pursuant to the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 199028 USC 2461 note) for each passenger so transported and landed
The intent of the maritime cabotage laws including the PVSA was to provide a legal structure that guarantees a coastwise monopoly to
65488 Federal RegisterVol 72 No 224Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules
American shipping and thereby promotes development of the American merchant marine Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 28 (DC Cir 1984) see also The Granada 35 FSupp 892 8931940 AMC 1601 (DC Pa 1940) (stating that the legislative aim of section 289 [now 55102] was the creation of a practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping business for United States ships) In other words the PVSA was enacted to advance the United States merchant marine and fleet by restricting the use of foreign-ownedflagged passenger vessels in United States territorial waters
Passenger vessel transportation between United States ports has historically been viewed to be part of the coastwise trade after the enactment of the PVSA This view is premised on the concepts of continuity of the voyage and whether its intended purpose or objective was coastwise transportation In other words the PVSA was held to be violated if the coastwise movement was continuous or if the purpose of the trip was a coastwise voyage (See 18 OAG 445 September 4 1886 28 OAG 204 February 16 1910 29 OAG 318 February 12 1912 30 OAG 44 February 1 1913 34 OAG 340 December 24 1924 and 36 OAG 352 August 13 1930)
The CBP regulations promulgated pursuant to the PVSA are found at section 480a of title 19 of the Code of Federal Regulations (19 CFR 480a) and are reflective of the above cited Office of the Attorney General decisions These regulations provide among other things that a non-coastwise-qualified vessel which embarks a passenger at a port in the United States embraced within the coastwise laws (a coastwise port) will be deemed to have landed that passenger in violation of the PVSA if the passenger disembarks at a different coastwise port on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a nearby foreign port or ports (as defined in 19 CFR 480a(a)(2) see also 19 CFR 480a(b)(2)) The terms embark and disembark are words of art which are defined as going on board a vessel for the duration of a specific voyage and leaving a vessel at the conclusion of a specific voyage respectively (See 19 CFR 480a(a)(4))
The references in section 480a to nearby foreign ports (defined in 19 CFR 480a(a)(2)) are the results of attempts by CBP to apply an Office of the Attorney Generals opinion dated February 26 1910 (28 OAG 204) In that case a foreign-flag vessel transported 615 passengers on a voyage around the world beginning in New
York and concluding in San Francisco The Attorney General opined that since the primary object of the voyage was to visit various parts of the world on a pleasure tour returning home via California and not to be transported in domestic commerce the transportation was not in violation of the PVSA
The 1910 Attorney Generals opinion was extended to voyages that included foreign ports other than nearby foreign ports (See Treasury Decision (TD) 68shy285 (33 FR 16558) November 14 1968) However voyages solely to one or more coastwise ports have always been considered predominantly coastwise Therefore non-coastwise-qualified vessels engaging in such a voyage where passengers temporarily go ashore at a coastwise port have been deemed to have violated the PVSA
m Current Law and Policy Pursuant to Public Law 109-304 120
Stat 1632 enacted on October 6 2006 Title 46 United States Code was substantially reorganized and recodified Consequently the PVSA is now codified at 46 USC 55103 and provides that no vessel shall transport passengers between ports or places in the United States either directly or by way of a foreign port under a penalty of $300 for each person so transported and landed except one that (1) Is wholly owned by citizens of the United States for purposes of engaging in the coastwise trade and (2) has been issued a certificate of documentation with a coastwise endorsement or is exempt from documentation but would otherwise be eligible for such a certificate and endorsement
In 2003 Congress enacted Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II Section 211 for the purpose of revitalizing the oceangoing US-flag cruise industry in Hawaii (the 2003 Act) Three oceangoing US-flag cruise ships PRIDE OF ALOHA PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAII were documented with coastwise privileges pursuant to the 2003 Act These vessels entered regular service in Hawaii in 2004 2005 and 2006 respectively and pursuant to the express language of the 2003 Act are limited in their operation to providing regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands of Hawaii
The CBP regulations promulgated pursuant to the PVSA are set forth in 19 CFR 480a and have remained unchanged throughout both the recodification of Title 46 of the United States Code and the enactment of the 2003 Act They provide that a violation of the PVSA occurs when passengers embark (board a vessel for the
duration of a voyage) a non-coastwiseshyqualified vessel at one US port and disembark (leave the vessel at the conclusion of a voyage) at a different US port unless they proceed with the vessel to a distant foreign port (Le any port not considered a nearby foreign port which is defined as any port located in North America Central America Bermuda or the West Indies including the Bahamas) Currently these regulations do not contain specific criteria for non-coastwise-qualified vessels on itineraries including US ports and either nearby or distant foreign ports in order for such foreign port calls to be compliant with the PVSA
To reiterate the applicable CBP regulations provide that the PVSA is violated when a non-coastwise-qualified vessel transports a passenger on a voyage solely to one or more coastwise ports and the passenger disembarks or goes ashore temporarily at a coastwise port (19 CFR 480a(b)(1)) Furthermore a violation of the PVSA also occurs when a non-coastwise-qualified vessel transports a passenger on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a nearby foreign port or ports (but no other foreign port) and the passenger disembarks at a coastwise port other than the port of embarkation (19 CFR 480a(b)(2)) However there is no violation of the PVSA when a passenger is on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a distant foreign port or ports (whether or not the voyage includes a nearby foreign port or ports) and the passenger disembarks at a coastwise port provided the passenger has proceeded with the vessel to a distant foreign port (19 CFR 480a(b)(3))
IV Request From MARAD To Provide Guidance
The US Department of Transportation Maritime Administration (MARAD) has requested that CBP take action to ensure enforcement of the PVSA MARAD has asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreignshyflag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwiseshyqualified cruise ship operators
In April of 2007 the operator of the three US-flag cruise vessels operating solely in Hawaii pursuant to the 2003 Act announced their intent to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAIl from the Hawaii market and redeploy her to Europe The operator intends to re-flag the vessel to foreign registry directly resulting in the loss of over 1100 crewmember jobs The primary reason cited for this decision is the rapid increase in foreign-flag competition entering the Hawaii market
Federal Register I Vol 72 No 224 I Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules 65489
from the West Coast This competition is evidenced in published cruise itineraries of foreign-flag carriers offering a variety of round trip cruises that depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period usually in the early morning and ultimately return to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their cruise These cruises are often marketed as Hawaii cruises and except for the brief stop in the nearby foreign port of Ensenada are purely coastwise in nature It is these cruise itineraries that pose an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels that pursuant to the 2003 Act are currently engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands
V Preliminary Notice
In response to MARADs concerns CBP sent letters to two carriers known to operate the itineraries in question as well as to the Cruise Lines International Association Inc stating that CBP believes that these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because it appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA The letters further indicated that CBP is taking steps to publish this position
VI CBPs Proposed Interpretive Rule Accordingly in this document CBP is
proposing to provide that cruise itineraries for non-qualified coastwise vessels which allow passengers to board at a US port call at several Hawaiian ports proceed to a foreign port or ports for a brief period and then ultimately return to the original US port of embarkation for disembarkation are not consistent with the PVSA and the regulations promulgated pursuant thereto Specifically CBP interprets a voyage to be solely to one or more coastwise ports even where it stops at a foreign port unless the stop at the foreign port is a legitimate object of the cruise CBP will presume that a stop at a foreign port is not a legitimate object of the cruise unless
(1) The stop lasts at least 48 hours at the foreign port
(2) The amount of time at the foreign port is more than 50 percent of the total amount of time at the US ports of call and
(3) The passengers are permitted to go ashore temporarily at the foreign port
Accordingly CBP proposes to adopt an interpretive rule under which it will presume that any cruise itinerary that does not include a foreign port call that
satisfies each of these three criteria constitutes coastwise transportation of passengers in violation of 19 CFR 480a(b)(1)
Dated November 16 2007 W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection [FR Doc E7-22788 Filed 11-20-07 845 am] BILLING CODe 9111-14-1
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau
27 CFR Part 9
[Notice No 76]
RIN 1513-AB49
Proposed Establishment of the Leona Valley Viticultural Area (2007R-281 P)
AGENCY Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau Treasury ACTION Notice of proposed rulemaking
SUMMARY The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau proposes to establish the 134 square mile Leona Valley viticultural area in the northeast part of Los Angeles County California We designate viticultural areas to allow vintners to better describe the origin of their wines and to allow consumers to better identify wines they may purchase We invite comments on this proposed addition to our regulations DATES We must receive written comments on or before January 22 2008
ADDRESSES You may send comments on this notice to one of the following addresses
bull httpwwwregulationsgov (Federal e-rulemaking portal follow the instructions for submitting comments) or
bull Director Regulations and Rulings Division Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau PO Box 14412 Washington DC 20044-4412
See the Public Participation section of this notice for specific instructions and requirements for submitting comments and for information on how to request a public hearing
You may view copies of this notice selected supporting materials and any comments we receive about this proposal at httpwwwregulationsgov under Docket No 2007-0066 You also may view copies of this notice all related petitions maps or other supporting materials and any comments we receive about this
proposal by appointment at the TTB Information Resource Center 1310 G Street NW Washington DC 20220 To make an appointment call 202-927shy2400
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT NA Sutton Regulations and Rulings Division Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau 925 Lakeville S1 No 158 Petaluma CA 94952 phone 415shy271-1254 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
Background on Viticultural Areas
TTB Authority Section 105(e) of the Federal Alcohol
Administration Act (FAA Act) 27 USC 205(e) authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to prescribe regulations for the labeling of wine distilled spirits and malt beverages The FAA Act provides that these regulations should among other things prohibit consumer deception and the use of misleading statements on labels and ensure that labels provide the consumer with adequate information as to the identity and quality of the product The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) administers the regulations promulgated under the FAA Act
Part 4 ofthe TTB regulations (27 CFR part 4) allows the establishment of definitive viticultural areas and the use of their names as appellations of origin on wine labels and in wine advertisements Part 9 of the TTB regulations (27 CFR part 9) contains the list of approved viticultural areas
Definition Section 425(e)(1)(i) ofthe TTB
regulations (27 CFR 425(e)(1)(i)) defines a viticultural area for American wine as a delimited grape-growing region distinguishable by geographical features the boundaries of which have been recognized and defined in part 9 of the regulations These designations allow vintners and consumers to attribute a given quality reputation or other characteristic of a wine made from grapes grown in an area to its geographic origin The establishment of viticultural areas allows vintners to describe more accurately the origin of their wines to consumers and helps consumers to identify wines they may purchase Establishment of a viticultural area is neither an approval nor an endorsement by TTB of the wine produced in that area
Requirements Section 425(e)(2) of the TTB
regulations outlines the procedure for proposing an American viticultural area and provides that any interested party
Us Department ofHomelaDd Secmity Washington DC 10229
bull ~
US Customs and Border Protection
AUG 15 2fXJJ
VE5-3-02-QTRRBSTCCCI - ti015502-GG-
Mr leon Sutcliffe Director Port Operations Camivai Cruise Unes Camival Place 3655 NW 87Avenue Miami Aorlda 33178
RE P~nger Vessef Services Ad Coastwise Transportation 46 USC sect 55103 19 CFR sect 480a(b)
Dear Mr Sutcliffe
As you know US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) enforces the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) codified at TItle 46 United States Code section 55103 (46 USC 55103) This statute prohibits non-coastwise-qualifled vessels (ie those vessels not US-buill owned and documented with a coastwise endorsement) from transporting passengers between porls or places within the United States The regUlations promUlgated pursuant to the PVSA are found at TrtJe 19 Code of Federal Regulations section 4808 (19 CFR 4808)
It has come to our attention that passenger vessels of your company are engaging in cruise itineraries that include ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands Two USAlagged coastwise-endorsed passenger vessefs are also currenUy engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of caD wittlin the Hawaiian Islands
As part of your cruise itineraries some of your foreign-flagged vessels depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period and ultimately rebJm to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their endse For example the MS ZAANDAM of Holand America Lines departs San Diego cruises the Hawaiian Islands stops in Ensenada from 800pm to 11 OOpmbull and returns to san Diego CBP believes these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because It appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA -- - - ~~~------
Please be advised that CBP is taking steps to publish this position Should have any questions pertaining to this matter please contact Mr Glen Vereb Chief Cargo Security Carriers and Immigration Branch at (202) 572-8724
Sincerely
F Jl E EST Y LEe A U I 5 I N Gmiddot
December 21 2007
The Honorable W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection co Border Security Regulations Branch Office ofInternational Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229
Re Hawaii Coastwise Cruises (USCBP-2007-0098) Comments in Response to Proposed Interpretation
Dear Commissioner Basham
NCL America Inc1 (NCLA) submits these comments in support ofthe efforts ofCustoms and Border Protection to enforce the Passenger Vessel Services Act and the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative as applied to Hawaii coastwise cruises
1 Introduction and Summary of Position
NCLA operates three large oceangoing US flag cruise ships in Hawaii These ships are documented under US flag and are required to operate in regular service in Hawaii pursuant to the authority of the Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative a 2003 federal statute intended to revitalize the US flag cruise industry and to maximize economic and national security benefits to the United States (the 2003 Act)
NCLA has invested $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships pursuant to the 2003 Act and in direct reliance on the protections of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) and its proper enforcement The PVSA limits the transportation ofpassengers between US ports to coastwise documented US flag ships Its statutory protections recognize that US flag ships have significantly higher operational costs in part because they are subject to more stringent US laws including US labor laws and federal
1 NCL America Inc is a US corporation incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware headquartered in Honolulu Hawaii As a US corporation it is subject to US taxes at both the federal and state level The Chief Executive Officer the Chairman of the Board and all of the Board of Directors of NCL America are US citizens The company is also subject to US labor and employment laws and is required by statute to maintain a workforce comprised primarily ofUS citizens
700 Bishop St SUite 900 I Honolulu HawMi 96813 I Tel 8085273800 Fax 8085273820 I ndcom
2
income tax among others The NCLA ships operating in Hawaii are the only large oceangoing cruise ships operating under US flag In furtherance of the policy goals of the PVSA and the 2003 Act these ships have created over 4000 seafaring jobs all subject to US minimum wage and other labor statutes
Since 2003 there has been a significant increase in capacity in the Hawaii market from foreign flag ships providing cruise service to Hawaii from the West Coast Many of these foreign flag cruises are marketed as Hawaii cruises and consist entirely ofUS ports ofcall with the sole exception of a token stop in Mexico for as little as an hour late at night under circumstances where passengers are not permitted to get offthe ship There are no reported rulings approving these particular foreign flag itineraries
Lower cost foreign competition in the Hawaii market has unfairly hurt NCLAs operations NCLA has incurred substantial losses which have contributed significantly to its decision earlier this year to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAll from US flag and reshydeploy it foreign Unfair foreign competition poses an imminent threat to the remaining US flag passenger vessels operating in the Hawaii trades pursuant to the 2003 Act
As the agency statutorily charged with implementation of the 2003 Act the US Department ofTransportation Maritime Administration (MARAn) is aware of the threat foreign flag Hawaii itineraries pose to the US flag fleet and brought the situation to the attention ofthe US Department ofHomeland Security Bureau ofCustoms and Border Protection (CBP or Customs) Customs determined that the primary object of these itineraries was coastwise and that the Ensenada stop was an evasion of the PVSA
In August 2007 Customs provided written notice to the affected foreign lines and their trade association that the existing itineraries were contrary to the PVSA None of these lines sought advance rulings even after the Customs notice with respect to their Hawaii itineraries pursuant to Customs regulations and many continued to market the itineraries as Hawaii cruises NCLA supports the efforts ofCustoms and MARAD to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act for Hawaii cruises
2 Statutory Authority for Customs Proposed Interpretation
(a) Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA)
Congress passed the PVSA in 1886 to protect the US maritime transportation industry from foreign competition2 Protection is afforded through penalty assessments on foreign vessels transporting passengers between US ports or places directly or by way ofa foreign port 3 As Congress and the courts have recognized coastwise protections for the US maritime transportation industry are only one dimension of the PVSA Operating in conjunction with other coastwise laws and with the US
2 See United States v Honduran SS GRANADA 35 F Supp 892 894 (BD Pa 1940)(citing purpose of PVSA to meet threats to the practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping which was to be preserved for US ships)
46 USc sect 55103 (originally 46 USC App 289)
3
documentation laws the PVSA also enhances military sealift in times ofnational emergency sustains a US merchant marine and supports the US shipbuilding and repair industry4
(b) Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative (the 2003 Act)
Over the past decade Congress has sought to reinforce the goals of the PVSA by providing mechanisms to revitalize the oceangoing US flag cruise fleet particularly in Hawaii The Project America legislation enacted in 1997 authorized among other things the re~flagging ofone existing cruise ship contingent on the operator contracting for the construction oftwo new oceangoing cruise shipss Following the default of the operator under the original contract Congress enacted the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative for the purpose ofrecovering economic and national security benefits to the United States bull 6 These same goals of the original PVSA were expressly referenced in the legislative history of the 2003 Act which emphasized that these ships will be assets available in time ofnational emergency and will significantly expand the pool ofqualified seafarers upon which the US Department ofDefense relies to crew non-combatant vessels
The 2003 Act authorizes the US documentation ofthree cruise ships for operation in regular service in Hawaii subject to certain conditions including a prohibition on operating in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico and the Caribbean Sea and a requirement that all vessel repair work be undertaken in the United States MARAD is charged with implementation of the 2003 Act
3 Customs Implementation of PVSA
(a) Regulations
The current regulations implementing the PVSA were published by Customs in 19858 The growth of the foreign flag cruise industry in North America and in particular the development of the Alaska cruise market led to an effort in 1984 to amend the thenshyexisting regulations to increase the ease of administration and operational flexibility The effort to change the regulation had support from US port interests who saw benefit in the potential increase in the number ofUS ports that foreign vessels could call and was opposed by proponents ofpotential US flag projects as detrimental to efforts to revitalize the US fleet 9 The preamble to the 1985 rule emphasized that it was of paramount importance to consider the primary object ofpassengers in taking a
4 See American Hawaii Cruises v Skinner 713 F Supp 452 457 (DDC 1989) (recognizing the contribution of the PVSA and the Jones Act in helping to secure national defense by maintaining a merchant marine oftbe best equipped and most suitable types ofvessels sufficient to serve in time of war or national emergency) see also Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 30 (DC Cir 1984) Wirth Ltd v SIS Acadia Forest 537 F2d 1272 1281 n32 (5th Cir 1976) S Public Law 105-56 Section 8109 (111 Stat 1203 1244) (Oct 81997 ) 6 Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II General Provisions - Department ofCommerce Section 211 (117 Stat 1179) (Feb 20 2003) 1 149 Cong Rec S1118 (dailyed Jan 17 2003(statement ofSenator Inouye) 8 19 CFR sect 480a 950 Fed Reg 26981 (July I 1985)
4
voyage10 a concept which is reinforced elsewhere in Customs regulations11 In its analysis of the comments received at the time Customs accepted the view ofport interests that the modified rule would help their business but did so recognizing the absence ofa regular salt water US flag passenger fleet Customs acknowledged the potential harm to prospective efforts to revitalize the US flag passenger fleet and expressly cautioned that if it were ever shown that coastwise qualified vessels in competition with foreign vessels were in fact hurt by the modified Customs regulation then Customs would immediately reconsider its position12
(b) Customs Rulings
Given the significant penalties associated with violating the PVSA13 Customs regulations expressly provide a mechanism for the owner or charterer of a foreign vessel or any other interested person to request an advisory ruling as to whether a contemplated voyage would be considered in violation of the PVSA14 Customs regulations provide that vessel operators can rely on these ruling letters only to the extent that the facts and circumstances are identical to those in the ruling letter IS
Notwithstanding the fact that several foreign cruise lines offer Hawaii itineraries originating in a US mainland port and calling at Hawaii ports with a token intervening stop in Mexico there are no reported rulings expressly approving such an itinerary for these foreign cruise lines 16
4 The Cruise Industry in Hawaii
(a) NCL America Returns US flag to the Oceangoing Passenger Fleet
Pursuant to the requirements ofthe 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative NCLA agreed to promote US-flag cruising enhance military sealift capacity and expand the US maritime labor base No other major cruise line had ever undertaken such a commitment to the US flag and the public policy objectives Congress sought to achieve under the PVSA or the 2003 Act Introduction ofPRIDE OF ALOHA in 2004 was a significant development in the maritime industry because it marked the restoration ofthe
10 Id at 26983 11 Customs Regulations include a provision on the effect ofruling letters and with respect to carrier rulings the applicable regulation refers to rulings setting forth a determination as to whether or not the primary object of a contemplated voyage is coastwise transportation in violation of46 USC sect 289 [pYSA codified at 46 USC sect55103] 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 12 50 Fed Reg at 26983 13 A modem cruise ship with 2400 passengers for example would be subject to a fine of$720OOO per cruise based on the statutory penalty of$300 for each passenger transported in violation of the Act 14 19 CFR sect 480a(d) IS 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 16 There is one older reported mling involving a request to drop the Ensenada port call from a Los AngeleslHawaiiLos Angeles itinerary which Customs held would violate the PYSA In dicta Customs acknowledged that the itinerary could be in compliance if the Ensenada call were not dropped but did not address the issue ofwhether a one hour service call where no passengers depart the vessel would be sufficient The carrier that obtained that ruling has since left the Hawaii market See Customs Ruling HQ 114078 re Crystal Hannony (Nov 4 1997)
5
us flag to the oceangoing cruise industry A contemporaneous press release from the Us Department ofTransportation reported that the three US-flag cruise ships to be introduced pursuant to the 2003 Act were expected to create more than 20000 US jobs generate more than $825 million ofexpenditures in the US economy and create nearly $360 million in federal tax revenue by the end of 200717 In 2005 the PRIDE OF AMERICA was introduced and in 2006 the third vessel PRIDE OF HAWAll was introduced to Hawaii Both the PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAIl offer 7shyday inter-island Hawaii itineraries whereas PRIDE OF ALOHA operates on 7 and 10 day cruises exclusively among the islands ofHawaii as well as 11 day cruises that include a foreign port call at Fanning Island To date NCLA has invested over $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships in furtherance ofthe policy objectives of the PVSA and the 2003 Act These ships employ over 4000 seafarers and generate hundreds ofmillions of dollars in benefits for Hawaii and the nation
(b) Significant Increase in Foreign Flag Capacity Since 2003
The most significant change in the Hawaii cruise market since 2003 has been the dramatic increase in capacity A significant portion ofthis capacity increase is directly attributable to NCLAs fulfillment ofthe Congressional mandate in the 2003 Act However foreign-flag operations in the Hawaii market as measured in passenger nights18 have skyrocketed Based on MARAn data derived from the US Customs Border Patrol Vessel Entrance and Clearance documents the passenger nights for foreign flag vessels departing from the West Coast to Hawaii on round trip cruise have increased several hundredfold during this period19 See Exhibit A
(c) NCLA Has Incurred Substantial Losses During this Period
Since 2004 NCLA has lost cumulatively more than a quarter ofa billion dollars A principal reason for these losses has been the increase in foreign capacity in this market NCLA has taken significant steps to reduce costs to address the increase in foreign competition but NCLA is at an inherent disadvantage when competing against foreign companies that are not subject to US labor laws US tax laws and other laws Ofcourse the statutory protections of the PVSA are intended to address these very issues That is why Customs immediate action to implement the proposed interpretation is critical for the US flag fleet Regrettably NCLA has already been forced to reduce overall capacity early next year with the withdrawal ofPRIDE OF HAWAlI to another
17 DOT Press Release dated June 72004 see also DOT Press Release dated August 132004 in connection with visit to PRIDE OF ALOHA by US Transportation Secretary Norman Y Mineta 11 Passenger nights (also referred to as passenger capacity days) are calculated by multiplying the number ofpassengers per vessel by the number ofcruise days in each itinerary by the number of cruises This is the unit ofmeasurement employed by MARAn In contrast passenger bed supply (also referred to as passenger capacity) data reflects only the number ofberths per vessel multiplied by the number of cruises and hence understates the market by excluding the full economic value ofthe cruise perfonned 19 In 2003 the total number ofpassenger nights for round-trip West Coast to Hawaii cruises was 303325 which jumped by 353 to 1072329 in 2006 and by 430 to 1304546 from 2003 to 2007 (The 2007 figure is based on MARAD data for six months and a1ll1ualized by published itineraries for the balance of the year)
6
market for operation under foreign flag This move alone will result in the loss ofover 1000 American seafaring jobs
5 Customs Proposed Interpretation is Necessary to Further the Important National Security and Public Policy Objectives Embodied in Federal Law
As Customs has properly noted the increase in foreign competition in the Hawaii trades in contravention of the PVSA pose[s] an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels[] As the operator of these ships NCLA has a vested interest in protecting the jobs ofthe thousands ofAmerican crewmembers and cruise ship service providers who support these vessels NCLA also has an interest in protecting the substantial economic investment it has made to revitalize the US flag passenger vessel fleet But a balancing of interests in the context of Customs enforcement ofexisting law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act requires a much broader focus
The legislative history of the 2003 Act expressly recognized the national security and public policy import ofestablishing a US flag passenger vessel fleet as a means to maintain the countrys preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool of qualified seafarers and as a means to help sustain a fleet ofUS-flag vessels to su~ort
the nations military and maritime industrial base for times ofnational emergency
Congress understood the importance ofestablishing a viable US flag cruise ship fleet as something larger than the vessels themselves These national security and public policy objectives must be weighed in the balance as Customs assesses how best to interpret its rules to give effect to the PVSA and the 2003 Act
6 Customs Should Clarify that the Proposed Interpretation is Limited to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades and Adopt Reasonable Measures to Ensure Sufficient Foreign Content
Since publication ofthe proposed interpretative rule several commenters have observed that the scope of the proposed interpretation is ambiguous because the language of Section VI referencing any cruise itinerary appears broader than the caption Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises and the entire discussion in the published notice which focuses exclusively on US-flag coastwise vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA agrees that the proposed interpretation should be clarified so that its scope is limited to vessels operating roundtrip voyages from US ports that include Hawaii port calls
NCLA supports the concept reflected in the proposed interpretive rule that round trip Hawaii itineraries from US ports on foreign ships must include a material and measurable degree ofoverall foreign port content as compared to US port content
20 149 Congo Rec S1117 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)
7
(a) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is also Consistent with Subsequent Congressional Enactments Modifying the PVSA
As discussed above it is well established that the PVSA was designed toRrotect US-flag vessels from foreign competition in the coastwise and domestic trades 1
Subsequent legislative enactments however have appropriately differentiated among distinct geographic markets and trades including Canada Alaska Puerto Rico and Hawaii based on the existence or non-existence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
In 1938 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers by Canadian passenger vessels on Lake Ontario and the St Lawrence River until such time as passenger service shall be established by vessels of the United States22 Similarly in 1961 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers on Canadian vessels within Alaska or between Alaska and other points in the United States until such time as passenger service is established by vessels ofthe United States23
In 1984 Congress modified the application ofthe PVSA to pennit the transportation ofpassengers between Puerto Rico and other United States ports on foreign-flag vessels24 As with the other statutory exceptions this provision is qualified and expires [o]n a showing that a United States passenger vessel qualified to engage in the coastwise trade is offering or advertising passenger service between a port in Puerto Rico and another port in the United States2S
Congress acted again with respect to the application of the PVSA with the 2003 Act in which it authorized three vessels that did not meet the US-build requirements of the PVSA to operate as modem US-flagged cruise ships in regular service in Hawaii26 The 2003 Act imposes a specific geographic limitation on the operation of any ship documented under this authority to operations only in regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands ofHawaii and shall not transport passengers in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico or the Caribbean Sea except in certain limited circumstances27 As above the limited nature of the 2003 Act is express it is strictly limited to the large ocean-going cruise ships and then only those operating in the regular Hawaii service where there are no US-flag operations28
21 See Act ofJune 19 1886 c 421 sec 8 24 Stat 81 Act of February 171898 c 26 sec 2 30 Stat 248 22 S] Res 174 75th Cong 52 Stat 223 (Alp 251938) codified at46 USC sect 55121(a) 23 See Pub L 87-77 75 Stat 196 (Jun 30 1961) codified at 46 USC sect 55121(b) 24 See Pub L 98-563 98 Stat 2916 (Oct 301984) codified at 46 USC sect 55104(b) 25 46 USC sect 55104(c)(l) see also 46 USC 46 USc sect 55104(cX2)(expiration of exemption upon availability ofa non-coastwise qualified US-flag vessel offering service in the relevant market) 26 149 Congo Rec SI118 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)(statementofSen Inouye) 27 Pub L 108-7 117 Stat 79 (Feb 20 2003) 28 149 Congo Rec S11l9 (dailyed Jan 17 2003Xstatement of Sen Inouye)
8
In each ofthese instances Congress fashioned a narrow exception to the PVSA that differentiated among distinct geographic markets based on the existence or nonshyexistence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
As the federal agency responsible for administering the 2003 Act MARAD requested that Customs act to protect US flag passenger vessel interests in the Hawaii trades29 Limiting the scope ofthe proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades also reflects Customs appreciation of the PVSA in the context of the subsequent Congressional action30 Viewing the Congressional modifications to the PVSA as a whole Congress has specifically and repeatedly differentiated among distinct geographic markets when it has found it necessary and appropriate to do so to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests It is well established that the proper interpretation of a statutory scheme includes consideration ofsubsequent statutes even though the underlying statute itselfhas not been expressly amended31 Accordingly Customs should likewise limit the scope ofthe proposed PVSA interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades because that is the only geographic market as mandated by the 2003 Act in which oceangoing US-flag cruise ships are operating
(b) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Consistent with Public Policy Objectives of the 1985 Rulemaking
In 1985middot Customs liberalized the regulations implementing the PVSA by eliminating certain regulatory prohibitions on foreign flag vessels In the context of the 1985 rulemaking Customs justified a relaxation ofthe regulations on the grounds that it would simplify the administration of the PVSA and would benefit the economy ofcertain American coastwise ports without eroding the statutory protection given to American vessels engaged in solely domestic trade32
Customs thus sought to reconcile US port economic interests with US-flag passenger vessel interests Both of these twin policy objectives are furthered by
29 See 72 Fed Reg 65488 (Nov 21 2007)( MARAn bas asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the ~eratiODS ofcoastwise-qualified cruise ship operators)
See generally FDA v Brown amp Williamson Tobacco Corp 529 US 120 132-133 (2000)(assessing propriety ofagency construction ofFood DIUg and Cosmetics Act and descnbing responsibility of reviewing cowt to assess statutory provisions in the context of subsequent legislative enactments) 31 See Brown amp Williamson 529 US 143 (holding that proper construction ofstatutory provision must necessarily assume that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications ofa later statute This is particularly so where the scope of the earlier statute is broad but the subsequent statutes more specifically address the topic athand) see also United States v Estate ofRomani 523 US 517 530-531 (1998)( holding that a later-enacted statute should control the construction of the federal lien priority statute a specific policy embodied in a later federal statute should control om construction of the [earlier] statute even though it ha[s] not been expressly amended) United States v Fausto 484 US 439453 (1988)(The courts frequently find Congress to have done this - whenever in fact they interpret a statutory text in the light ofsurrounding texts that happen to have been subsequently enacted This classic judicial task of reconciling many laws enacted over time and getting them to make sense in combination necessarily assumes that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications of a later statute) 32 50 Fed Reg 26982 (JuI 11985)
9
limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades
As noted earlier the 2003 Act limits the operation of the NCLA US-flag oceangoing passenger vessels to regular service in Hawaii Because there are no oceangoing US-flag vessels operating in any market other than the Hawaii trades Customs should limit the scope of the proposed interPretation to that market Such a limitation protects US flag passenger vessel interests without prejudicing US port interests In contrast an application of the proposed interpretation to any itinerary would needlessly harm US port interests unrelated to Hawaii without any countervailing benefit to US-flag passenger vessel interests Accordingly limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation is consistent with the public policy objectives of the 1985 rulemaking as well as the 2003 Act
(c) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Also Consistent with Customs Commitment to Revisit the Scope of its Rules to Protect US-Flag Interests
The relaxation ofthe PVSA regulations in 1985 was premised in large part on Customs finding that there was no regular salt water US-flag passenger fleet in operation at that time33 Acknowledging that the relaxed regulations could harm USshyflag interests Customs committed in the preamble ofthe 1985 final rule to immediately reconsider its interpretation if it is ever shown that there is a viable US flag vessel operating in competition with foreign-flag vessels34
Congress enacted the 2003 Act to stimulate the development of a US flag cruise ship industry As noted above the legislative history ofthat Act makes clear that Congress sought to revitalize the US-flag cruise industry as a means to maintain Americas preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool ofqualified seafarers help sustain a fleet of US flag vessels to support our military and a maritime industrial base create thousands of seagoing and shoreside American jobs and stimulate the development ofa US flag cruise ship tourism business with the commensurate benefits to the US tax base the US economy and US employment
Customs is now acting at MARADs request to revisit its interpretation ofthe regulations implementing the PVSA because recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwise-qualified cruise ship operations35 That is to say that the concerns articulated by Customs in the context of the 1985 rulemaking have materialized and US-flag passenger vessel interests are in fact being hanned in the Hawaii trades by foreign competitors
33 50 Fed Reg 26983 34Id
3S 72 Fed Reg 56488 (Nov 21 2007)
I
10
Because the US-flag passenger vessels are limited by statute to regular service in Hawaii limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the
Hawaii trades is consistent with Customs historical commitment to revisit its interpretation ofthe implementing regulations to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests
7 Conclusion
For the reasons stated above NCLA commends the efforts ofCustoms and MARAn to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act as applied to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA respectfully requests Customs to move ahead promptly with p~blicati~nof a final interpretive rule to advance the important national security arid public policy objectives ofthese laws
We greatly appreciate the opportunity to submit these comments
Sincerely
~~~ Alan T Yamamoto Vice President Hawaii Operations
Exhibit A
Ship Name Serenade Of The Seas Departure Port San Diego California Ports of Call San Diego California Kailua Kona Hawaii Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii Hlo Hawaii Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii Ensenada Mexico San Qigo California
2007 Date(s) Oct 05
Sailing Itinerary
Day Port H ~rrive Depart Activity
05-0ct San Diego California 500 PM
06-0ct Cruising
07-0ct Cruising
08-0ct Cruising
09-0ct Cruising
10-0ct Kailua Kona Hawaii 700 AM 900 PM Tendered
11-00t Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 1000 AM Tendered
12middot0ct Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 900 PM Tendered
13-0ct Hilo Hawaii 700 AM 600 PM Docked
14middot0ct Honoulu (Oahu) Hawaii 700 AM Docked
15-0ct Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii 200 AM Docked
6-0ct CrUising
17-0ct Cruising
18-0ct Cruising
19middot0ct Cruising
-7 20-00t
O-Oot
Ensenada ~i1exico
San Deqo California
i 00 ~r1
700 ~M
200 oM D1Jcked ~
EUROPE CRUISES
GRAND MEDITERRANEAN GREEK ISLES MEDITERRANEANGREEK ISLES
12 1212 DAYS DAYSDAYS
STAR PRINCESS
STARSTAR PRINCESSPRINCESS
sail betweensail between VENICE BARCELONA VENICE to
andand BARCELONA VENICE ROME
CRUISE ITINERARY2004 DEPARTURE 2004 DEPARTURE2004 DEPARTURE CRUISE ITINERARYDATESCRUISE I I INERARY DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DATEDATES
Apr 10 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTMay 16middot DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Venice Italy (overnight onboard ship) EMBARK PM May 4 May18t Sep2St 1 Verdce Italy EMBARK PM
Jun 9 1 Barcelona Spain (overnight onboard ship) EMBARK PM 2 Venice Italy 2PM 2 At Seajune 21 t 2 Barcelona Spain 1 PM Dubrovnik Croatia 8AM 6PMJul3 3 Corfu Greece 8AM 6PM
lullS 3 Monte Carlo Monaco 7 AM 6 PM Corfu Greece 8AM 6PM 4 Katakolon Greece (for Oiympia) 7AM SPMJu127 4 FlorencePisa Italy (Livorno) 630 AM 6 PMAug 8~ Katakolon Greece (for Olympia) 7AM SPM S Athens Greece (Piraeus) 6AM 12 MAug 20deg S NaplesCapri Italy 8 AM 7 PM Sep 1t 6 Athens Greece (Piraeus) 6AM 12 M 6 Mykonos Greece 8AM 12M
6 At Sea 7 Mykonos Greece 8AM 6PM 7 Kusadasi Turkey (for Ephesus) 7 AM SPM7 Athens Greece (Piraeus) 6AM S4S PM
8 Kusadasi Turkey (for Ephesus) 7AM 1PM 8 Kusadasi Turkey (for Ephesus) 8AM 6PM 8 Santorini Greece 7 AM 4PM
9 Jstanbul Turkey 8AM 6PM 9 Rhodes Greece 8AM 6PM 9 At Sea
10 At Sea 10 Santorini Greece 7AM 6PM 10 Rome Italy (Civitavecchia) 8AM 7PM tll1ooil)opcraksinttVUSe
grduPorttlmcsmi)Y6ljI 11 At Sea 11 Cannes France (for Mont Carlo) 8AM 6PM11 At Sea tSamnlQ]latCiIUIe5inplm tltlnerlll)opmlpoundsin
NaplesCapri Italy 630 AM 12 Barcelona Spain (ovrnight onboard ship) 8AMofMo~Urlo ~odcr12 Venice Italy (overnight onboard ship) 8 AM 12 6PM O~lIlalhitRhodalnpUcc Port order md Iimes- JmyVUY Barcelona Spain DISEMBARK AM13 Venice Italy DISEMBARK AM - 13 Iome Italy (qvitavecchia) DISEMBARK AM
MEDITERRANEANAEGEAN MEDITERRANEANMOSAIC
12 12 DAYSDAYS
STAR STAR PRINCESS PRINCESS
ROME BARCELONAto
toVENICE ROME
2004 DEPARTURE DATE 2004 DEPARTURE
CRUISE I I INERARY DATE CRUISE ITINERARYApr 22 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Sep 13 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Rome Italy (Civitavhia) EMBARK pM 1 Barcelona Spaln (overnight onboard ship) EMBARK PM 2 NaplesCapri Italy 7 AM 7 PM Barcelona Spain SPM 3 Messina Italy (for Taormina) 8AM 6PM 3 At Sea 4 Valleta Malta 8AM 6 PM 4 Casablanca Morocco (for Marrakech) 7 AM 8PM
At Sea S Gibraltar 8 AM 6PM Santorini Greece 7 AM 6PM 6 At Sea
7 Kusadasi Turkey (for Ephesus) 8 AM 6PM 7 Cannesfrance (for Mont Carlo) 8 AM 6PM 8 Athens Greece (Piraeus) 6 AM S4SPM 8 At Sea 9 Katakolon Greece (for Olympia) 8 AM 6PM 9 Valleta Malta 8 AM SPM 10 Corfu Greece 8 AM 6PM 10 Messina Italy (for Taormina) 6PM 11 Dubrovnik Croatia 8 AM 6PM 11 NaplesCpri Itiily 6PM 12 Venice Italy (overnight onboard ship) 1230 PM 12 FlorencePisa Italy (Livorno) 830 AM 13 Venice Italy DISEMBARK AM 13 lomeltaly (Clvttavecchia)DISEMBAIKAM Venice Italy
EUROPE CRUISES
EUROPEAN EXPLORER CRUISE MEOffiRRANEANITRANSATLANTIC CRUISE
12 17DAYS DAYS
ROYAL STARPRINCESS PRINCESS
sail between VENICE
ROME to
and FT LAUDERDALE
LONDON
2003 DEPARTURE DATES
2004 DEPARTURE DATE CRUISE ITINERARY
May 7 CRUISE I1INfRARY Oct 7 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Jul30l
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Venice Italy (overnight onboard ship) EMBARK PMAug 11 Sep 41 1 Rome Italy (Civitavecchia) EMBARK PM 2 Vernce Italy 2 PM
2 FlorencePisa Italy (Livorno) 7 AM 7PM 3 At Sea 3 Cannes France (for Monte Carlo) 7 AM 5 PM 4 Barcelona Spain 9 AM 6 PM 5 At Sea 6 Gibraltar 8AM PM 7 Casablanca Morocco (for Marralech) 5AM 6 PM 8 Seville Spain (Cadiz) 8AM 6PM 9 LisbQn Portugal 9AM 5PM 10 Vigo Spain 830AM 4PM 11 At Sea
tllinmryope~te$ 12 ParisNormandy France (Ie Havre) 7 AMlnftYCl5eordu ~rttimesuuyYilY 13 London England (Southampton) DISEMBARK AM
Caudis Park Cuell Barcelona Spain
SCANDINAVIARUSSIA BALTIC HERITAGE WESTERN EUROPEBRITISH ISLES
ROYALGRAND10 GRAND 1210 PRINCESSDAYS PRINCESS PRINCESS DAYSDAYS
ROUNDTRIPROUNDTRIPROUNDTRIP fromframfrom
LONDONCOPENHAGENCOPENHAGEN 2004 DEPARTURE2004 DEPARTURE 2004 DEPARTUREDATESDATES DATES
May19tMay 29 May 19 jul28 JunSJun 18 Aug 231
Jul8 ju118Jul28 Aug 7 CRUISE ITINERARYAug 17
CRUISE IIINERARY ARRIVE DEPART CRUISE IrINERARY EMBARK PMDAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
DAY ARRIVE DEPART 7AM 6PM1 Copenhagen Denmark EMBARK PM EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 7AM 6PM
Stockholm Sweden (Nynilshamn) 7 AM 530PM 6AM PM Helsinki Finland 830 AM 6PM St PetersbUrg Russia (overnight onboard ship) 630 AM 9AM 9PM St Petersburg Russia 6PM
7 Tallinn Estonia 7 AM 1PM 8 Gdansk Poland (Gdynia) 9 AM 4PM 9 Warnemfinde Germany (for amprlin) 8 AM 10 PM 10 Helsing0r Denmark 9 AM 11 AM 10 Copenhagen Denmark (overnight onboard ship) 1 PM 11 Copenhagen Denmark DISEMBARK AM
middotScrvlcctillforlh=CllCIIIlicmIOptoluItllUllwWdlseJnbIDltHdlinprAfbrtour~dllmJlwktbeshJpwl1lPfllClaquodtoCopetWampen and pmenpoundm Qfl tours from HelMp will Rboird ship tPolttimes~myAninliI1ddepartu~itRosythDubJinmdFa1mauthwl)dICtotXLolconditions
tPOrtordermdtlme$maynI) ttCdlitEdinbuJlhotmdedto~mllocunionforMiliblyTltOO~on8123wi1inlmiddotUIIisitSouthQuemsfmyinstudofJosylh
BRITISH ISLES
ROYAL12 PRINCESSDAYS
ROUNDTRIP
from
LONDON
2004 DEPARTURE DATES
Jun 12 jul6
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Lqn4onmiddotpoundngland(Southampton) EMIWlIlt PM 2 Cornwall England (Falmouth) 7AM SPM
Waterford Ireland 8AM 6PM Dublin Ireland 7AM 1130 PM
t PQrtbme5 lliIyyuy Anini Illd departure at Rosytb Dublin md Filmouth ViiYdue to Iiltlal conditions
WESTERN EUROPE
ROYAL12 PRINCESSDAYS
ROUNDTRIP
from
LONDON
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
May 31
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 London England (Southampton) EMBARK PM
CRUISE ITINERARY
EUROPE CRUISES
ICELANDNORWEGIAN FJORDS
ROYAL12 PRINCESSDAYS
ROUNDTRIP
from
LONDON
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
Jun24
CRUISE IflNERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 London Englan4 (Southampton) EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 3 Berge Norway 6PM 4 Hellesylt Norway 830AM 1030 AM 4 Gciranger Norway Geiranger Fjord Sceni Cruising UN 7PM
9AM SPM5
1PM 8AM SPM
10 At Sea
middotStlviceallfof~fjonlovedmdshOR=unlDllOplion1Itourswllldi5anbarilitHelIcsyItAftcrtollrpuKllJClJdisembark
theshlpwiUprocudto~md~lampClSonlounfrwnHdaytwl1lblmd$hip
NORWEGIAN FJORDSNORTH CAPE
ROYAL12 PRINCESSDAYS
ROUNDTRIP
from
LONDON
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
JuilS
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Loridon ~gland (South~mpton) EMBARK PM 2-3 At Sea
Hellesylt Norway 830AM 1030 AM Golranger Norway Geiranger Fjord Scenic Cruising 12N 7PM
TrodheilllNorwaY 9AM SPM At Sea Cross the Ardgt Cirde
6PM 8AM lPM
8AM 130 PM 430PM 630PM
7AM 3PM
Bagpipers Edinburgh Scotland Royal Princess in Geiranger Fjord Norway
EUROPE CRUISES amp CRUISETOURS
17 DAYS
GRAND PRINCESS
FT LAUDERDALE to
COPENHAGEN
2004 DEPARTURE DATE MayZ
CRUISE IfINERARY
DAY 1 2-6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
PORT Ft Lauderdale Florida At Sea ~ores IslandsPortugal (Ponto Delgado) At Sea Lisbon Portugal Vigo Spain At Sea ParislNormandy France (Le Havre) RotterdamThe Netherlands At Sea Hamburg Germay (for Berlin) At Sea Olso Norway Oslo Fjord scnic Cruising Copenhagen Denmark
ARRIVE
N
12N 9AM
7AM
6AM
DISEMBARK AM
DEPART EMBARK PM
6PM
7PM 6PM
7PM 7PM
1UM
MEDITERRANEAN CRUISETOUR
TRANSATLANTICWESTERN EUROPE ICELAND amp GREENLANDTRANSATLANTIC
16 GRAND DAYS PRINCESS
COPENHAGEN to
NEW YORK
2004 DEPARTURE DATE Aug 27
CRUISE IIINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Copenhagen Denmark EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 3 Dover England (forLondon) 7AM 7PM 4 Cornwall England (Falmouth) 9AM 6PM 5 Dublin Ireland lOAM 9PM 6 GlasgowEdinburgh Scotland (Greenock) 8AM 12 M 7 Belfast Northern Ireland 1030 AM 530 PM 8 At Sea 9 Reykjavik Iceland 9AM 9PM 10 At Sea 11 Prins Christian Sund Scenic Cruising 12N 6PM 12 Qaqortoq Greenland 7 AM 2PM 13 At Sea 14 SI Johns Newfoundland Canada 12N 7PM 1516 At Sea 17 New York CIty New York DISEMBARK AM
SCANDINAVIARUSSIA CRUISETOUR
Church of the Savior on the Spilled Blood St Petersburg Russia
WESTERN EUROPE CRUISETOUR
CRUISEIOUR ITINERARY
CRUISETOUR lA11C CRUISETOUR ITINERARY CRUISETOUR 4A14C CRUISETOUR II INERARY
DAY PORT By Sea By Land DAY PORT By Sea By Land CRUISETOUR 7Al7C18 STAR PRINCESS 1 Rome 17 GRAND PRINCESS 1 BudapestDAYS DAYS DAY PORT By Sea By Land 22 Rome Budapest 18 ROYAL PRINCESS 1 Paris
ROMETODI 3 RomeTodi BUDAPEST VIENNA 3 BudapestVienna DAYS 2 Paris and 4 TodiFlorence and 4 Vienna 3 Paris
PARIS EUROSTAR5 Florence 5 ViennaPrague 4 ParisLondon 6 FlorenceVeniceEmbark 6 Prague and 5 London
FLORENCE PRAGUE
plus plus LONDON7 Venice Italy (overnight onboard ship) 7 PragueCopenhagenEmbark 6 LondonSouthamptonEmbark
GRAND MEDITERRANEAN SCANDINAVIARUSSIA plus 7 At Sea CRUISE 8-9 At Sea CRUISE 8 At Sea WESTERN EUROPE 8 Bilbao Spain10 Istanbul Turkey 9 Stockholm Sweden (Nyniishamn) BRITISH ISLES CRUiSE2004 DEPARTURE DATES 2004 DEPARTURE DATES 9 Bordeaux France (Le Verdon)
11 Kusadasi Turkey (for Ephesus) 10 Helsinki FinlandApr Sf 2004 DEPARTURE DATES 10 At SeaMay 131 Jul2Apr 29 12 Athens Greece (Piraeus) 11 SI Petersburg Russia (overnight onboard ship) 11 GlasgowEdinburgh Scotland (Greenock)May 23 JulUt May 141 26middot Jul tt 13~ 250
May 23 Jun 16 13 At Sea JunZt JulU 12 SI Petersburg Russia Jun n 19 Aug 18o 300 12 Dublin Ireland
]un 12 Aug l t 13 Cork IrelandJuliO 14 NaplesCapri Italy 13 Tallinn EstoniaJun 22 t Aug 11 Toun~eonlymilabkwithcruise5indi[itbtAug 3 15 FlorencelPisa Italy (Livorno) 14 Cdansk Poland 14 Cornwall England (Falmouth)
Aug 27 tBritishliksetuise aWEwupeiBritishlslesouist 15 ParisNormandy France (Le Havre)16 Monte Carlo Monaco 15 At Sea bull WestemEuropeCrube middotlcdandINorwqlmFjOllisetuise 16 Rotterdam The Netherlands
t Crulsetour lA only combinable with 12--dayGreck fst 17 Barcelona Spain (overnight onboard ship) 16 Olso NOrway Qsld Fjord Scenic Cruising bull Norwqian FjordsNorth Cipecruise 17 BrusselsBruges Belgium (Zeebrugge)tCruixtour 4A only combinable with lo-day Baltic
crulse shown on PI 11 18 Barcelona Spain Heritage cruise shawn on pg 12 OCrubctnur 7C only combinable with EwuJlWl ExplorerCrube17 Copenhagen Denmark 18 London England (Southampton)
EXOTICS CRUISES
AUSTRALIANEW ZEALAND AUSTRALIANEW ZEALAND AUSTRALIAASIA
12 14 19 DAYS DAYS DAYS
SAPPHIRE PRINCESS SAPPHIRE PRINCESS SAPPHIRE PRINCESS
saH between SYDNEYAUCKLAND SYDNEY
toand to BANGKOKSYDNEY AUCKLAND 2005 DEPARTURE DATES 2005 DEPARTURE DATE
Mar7Jan 6 2004 DEPARTURE DATEJan 1St
Dec 23 CRUISE ITINERARYJr ift Feb 23 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
CRUISE ITINERARY 1 Sydlley Austrli EMBARK PM CRUISE ITINERARY 2 At Sea
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTDAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 3 Brisbane Australia 8AM 6PM 1 Sydlley Australia EMBARK PM 4 At Sea 1 Aucklalld N~w Zealalld EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 5 Cid Harbor Austrlia (for Great Barrier Reef) 7AM 5PM2 At Sea 3 Melbourne Australia 8 AM 6 PM 6 Cirns Australia (Yorkeys) 8AM 6PM
3 WeIUllgton New Zealand 8 AM 6 PM 4 At Sea 7-8 At Sea 4 Christchurch New Zealalld (Lytlelton) 8 AM 6 PM 5 Tasmallia Australia (Hobart) 8 AM 6 PM 9 Darwin Australia lPM 8pM 5 Dunedill N~ Zealalld (Port Chalmers) 8 AM 6 PM 6-7 At Sea 10-11 At Sea 6 Fiordland Natiollal Park Scenic Cruising AM 6 PM 8 Fiordlalld Natiollal Park Scellic Cruising 7 AM 5 PM 12 Bali Illdonesi (Padang Bay) 7AM 6PM
7-8 At Sea J DUlledill New Zealalld (Port Chalmers) 8 AM 6 PM 13-14 At Se 10 Christchurch N~ Zealalld (Lytlelton) 8 AM 6 PM 15 Kuala Lumpur Mlaysia (Port KeIang) 8AM 6PM9 Tasmania Australia (Hobart) 8 AM 6 PM 11 Wellillgtoll New Zealmd 8 AM 6 PM 16 Sillgpore 8AM 6PM
10 At Sea 12 At Sea 17 At Sea 11 Melbourne Australia 8 AM 6 PM 13 Taurallga New Zealalld 8 AM 730 PM 18 Ho Chi Millh City Vietnm (Vung Tau) 7AM 730 PM 12 At S~a 19 At Sea 14 Bay of Islallds New Zealalld 8 AM 7 PM 13 SydPey Australia DISEMBARK AM 20 Bmgkok Thailalld (Laem Chabang) DISEMBARK AM15 Aucklalld New Zealalld DISEMBARK AM
t llinemy opcrnesln reverse order Port times mil1 my
CHINAFAR EAST SOUTHEAST ASIAFAR EAST
1612 DAYSDAYS
PACIFIC PRINCESS
SAPPHIRE PRINCESS PACIFIC PRINCESS
OSAKA BEIJING to
to BANGKOK OSAKA
2004 DEPARTURE DATE 2004 DEPARTURE DATEPAClFlC PRINCESS
julllt Jun 11 2005 DEPARTURE DATE
SAPPHIRE PRINCESS Apr 11
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Osaka Japall EMBARK PM
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Beijillg China (Xingang) EMBARK PM 2 Hiroshima Japall 1 PM 6PM 2 DaHan China AM 5PM 3 At Sea 3 At Sea 4 Shmghai Chilla 7 AM 6PM 4 Shallghai Chilla (overnight onboard ship) 7AM 5 At Sea 5 Shallghai China 6PM 6 Okinaw Jpll 7 AM 1 PM
7 Taipei Taiwm (KeeIung) 9 AM 7PM6 At Sea 8 At Se7 Pusan South Korea 8AM 5PM 9 HOllg KOllg Chill 8 AM 7PM 8 At Sea 10-11 At S~a J Vladivostok Russia 5AM 730 PM 12 Ho Chi MiIJh City Vietnm (Phu My) 7 AM 5PM 10 At Sea 13 At Se 11 Nagasaki Japan 7AM 6PM 14 Singpore 8 AM 6pM
15 KUlltll Mlysi 830 AM 430 PM12 At Sea 16 At Sea 13 Osaka Japan DISEMBARK AM 17 Ballgkok Thaillld DISEMBARK AM t Sailing alls i1t Hiroshima on Dl) 11 In place of Nilgilsaki Port times milY vary
CRUISE I flNERARY CRUISE I flNERARY
Ho Chi Minh City Vietnam
EXOTICS CRUISES
SOUTHEAST ASIACHINA SOUTHEAST ASIACHINA FAR EASTALASKA
PACIflC PRINCISS ROYAL PRINCESS
16 16 19 DAYS DAYS DAYS
SAPPHIRE SAPPHIRE PRINCESS
Sail between PRINCESSBANGKOK
and BANGKOK OSAKA
BEIJING to to
2004 DEPARTURE DATES BEIJING SEATTLEPAClFlC PRINCESS
Jun 27tt 200S DEPARTURE DATE200S DEPARTURE DATE ROYAL PRINCESS
Mar 26 Apr 23Oct 16 Nov lt
CRUISE I I INERARY CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
1 GsakaJpan EMBARK PM1 Bangkok Thailand (Laem Chabang) EMBARKPM 1 Bangkok Thailand (Laern Chabang) EMBARK IM 2 At Sea2 At Sea 2 AtSea bull 3 Nagasaki Japan 7 AM 6PM
9AM 7PM 3 Singapore 7PM 4 Pusan Soqth Korea 8AM 5PM 4-5 At Sea 5 At Sea gt bull
7AM 7PM 6 Da Nwg Vietn~1Il 7AM middot7PM 6 Vladivostok Russia SAM 730 PM 7 At Sea 7 AtSea
7AM 12M 8 Hong lltog ihin~ 7AM 12M 8 Sapporo japan (Muroran) 6AM 6PM 9-10 At Sea 9-10 At Sea 9-12 At Sea cross Intemational Dateline
13 DutchHarbor Alaska (Aleutian Islands) 230 PM 7PM11 ShaJlgllai Cbina (overnight onboard ship) lAM 11 Shangh~t Cllina (ovmightonJoltird $hip) 7 AM 14 At Sea shy12 Shanghai China 6PM 12 Shanghai China
7AM - - tlJf
6PM 15 Anchorage Alaska (Seward) 8AM 6PM13 At Sea 13 AtSea i 16 College Fjord Seni CruIsing 630AM 930 AM
14 Nagasaki japan 7AM 6PM 14 Nagasaki japan 6PM 17 Glacier Ilay Scenic Cruising 1030 AM 830 PM 15 Pusan South lltOrea TAM 4PM 1~ bull Pu~an SQuth iorea middot4lM 18 middotmiddot juneau Alaska 6 AM 2PM 16 At Sea 16 At Sea 19 - At Sea 17 Beijing China (Xingangy OISEMBAlUe AM 17 Beijing Cliina (Xingang) 20 SeattleWashington DISEMBARK AM
t ltinemy Operne5 in rcvmc Older ttPorttimcsmiYnl)middotShlpwilldocklnampngkoknsttadofL1cm~
POLYNESIA amp THE COOK ISLANDS POLYNESIA amp THE MARQUESAS ISLANDS
10 10 DAYS DAYS
TAHITIAN PRINCESSTAHITIAN PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIPROUNDTRIP fromfrom
PAPEETEPAPEETE 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
2004 DEPARTURE DATES Oct 4 24 Mayl 17 27 Sep4 14 24 Nov 13 Jun 6 16 26 0lt 14 00323Ju16 16 26 Nov 323 2005 DEPARTURE DATESAug 5 15 25 Dec 13 Jan 12
Feb 1 21200S DEPARTURE DATES
~~ 122 ~~Il 13 23 CRUISE ITINERARY
CRUISE II INERARY DAY PORT
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Papeete Tahiti 1 Papeete Tahiti (overnight onboard ship) EMBARK PM
2 Moorea Polynesia 2 Papeete Tahiti SPM 3 Huahil1e P9lynesia 8AM 5 PM 3 Tuamotu Atolls Senic Cruising
5 PM8-AM 4 At Sea I At Sea 5 Rarotonga Cook Islands 8AM 5 PI~ 5 Nuku Hiva Marquesas Islands 6 At Sea 6 Hiva Ga Marquesas Islands 8AM 5PM 7 Raiatea Polynesia overnight onboard Ship 6AM
7 At Sea middotai~ RaiateaPQlynesia igt gt 6AM 8 Rangiroa P~iynesia 8AM 4PM8 Tahaa scenic Cryising 630 AM 830 AM
8 BoraBoraPQlyrtesia(ovemightollboard ship) UN 9 Tahaa ~enl Cruising 8 AM middot11AM
9 Bora lora Polynesia 5iM 9 Raiatea Polynesia 12 N 11 PM 10 Moore Polynesfa 8 AM 5 PM la ~ Bora ~oraPoIYnesia 8AM bull 5PM
11 Papeete Tahiti DISEMBARK AM 11 Papeete Tahiti DISEMBARK AM Iong Kong Harbor
3 Singapore 4-5 At Sea 6 Da NangVieinam 7 At Sea 8 liong Kong China
EXOTICS CRU ISES
HAWAIITAHITI HAWAIIAN ISLANDS SOUTH PACIFIC ISLANDS
12 1515 DAYS DAYSDAYS
PACIFIC
TAHITIAN PRINCESS ISLAND PRINCESSPAClFIC PRINCESS
PRINCESS
SYDNEYROUNDTRIP sail between tofrom
PAPEETE PAPEETELOS ANGELES and
2004 DEPARnIRE DATEHONOLULU 2004 DEPARTURE DATES Apr 21
2004 DEPARTURE DATES ~~~l CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE 11 INERARY
Oet21t CRUISE ITINERARY Nov Sf
MayS PACIFIC PRINCESS DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
Nov20t DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DecSt 1 Los Angeles CalifornIa EMBARK AM 1 Sydney AustralIa EMBARK PMAug 17t
Dec20t1 Papeete Tahiti EMBARK PM 2-4 At Sea
2005 DEPARTURE DATE Jan 4 2-5 At Sea
(overnight onboard ship) Jan 19 5 Auckland New Zealand 7 AM 2PMFeb 3t 6 Iiilo Hawaii 8 AM 6 PM
TAHITIAN PRINCESS Papeete Tahiti 11 PM fb 18 6-7 At Sea Kilauea Voko ~enic CruisingApr 12 MarS t 3 Moorea Polynesia 8 AM 5 PM 8 Suva fijI 11 AM 430 PM1~i~t 7 Kona Hawaii 8AM 6PM4 Bora Bora PolYnesia 8 AM 5 PM 9 At Sea Cross International Dateline Apr 19
5-6 At Sea 8 Honolulu Hawaii 8AM 11 PM 10 Apia Western Samoa 830 AM 2PM 7 Christmas Isl~ndKiribati 1Z N 5 PM 9 Kauai Hawaii (Nawlliwlli) 8AM 6PM 11-12 At Sea 8-9 At Sea 10 Maui Hawaii (Lahaina) 6PM 13 Bora Bora Polynesia lOAM 6PM 10 HlloliaWlii 6 PM 13 Raiatea Polynesia (overnight onboard 11 PM11-14 At Sea 11 Maui Hawaii (Lahaina) 8 AM 6 PM 14 Raiatea Polynesia 11 PM
15 Ensenada Mexico (service call)KaUaiH~waii(Nawllfwtli) 8AM 6 PM 15 Moorea Polynesia 8AM 5PM
tllinemyopcr~ttsln=x QnIerPurtlimcslmYvary Honolulu Hawaii DISEMBARK AM 16 Los Angeles CalIfornia DISEMBARK AM 16 Papeete Tahiti DISEMBARK AM
ISLANDS OF THE PACIFIC THEATER SOUTH PACIFIC EXPLORER
24 24 DAYS DAYS
PAClFIC PRINCESS PAClFIC PRINCESS
sail between HONOLULU PAPEETE
and to OSAKA FT LAUDERDALE
2004 DEPARTURE DATES
Mayl 2004 DEPARTURE DATEJul2Sj
Aug 29 CRUISE ITINERARY
CRUISE ITINERARYDAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART EMBARK PM DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
1 Papeete Tahiti EMBARK PM lPM 7PM 2 8AM 11 PM
3 ~~~~~~ ~~~~Sta 8AM 5 PM 4-6 At Sea 7 Pitcairn Island Scenic Cruising 8AM 1211
8AM 12 N
7AM ZPM 8-9 At Sea 10 Easter Island Chile 8AM 2PM
9AM 11-14 At Sea 15 Callao Peru (overnight for Lima and Machu Picchu) 8AM 16 Callao Peru lPM 17 At Sea 18 Manta Ecuador (for Quito) 9fM 7PM 19 At Sea 20 Transit Panama Canal 7 AM 430 PM 21 San BIas Panama 8AM 5 PM 22 ft Sea 23 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands 7AM 4PM 24 At Sea
25 Ft Lauderdale Florida DISEMBARK AMMoorea Polynesia tllinemyoperataln~12onlerPortl1mesmiYmymiddot
EXOTICS CRUISES
HAWAIITAHITISOUTH PACIFIC AMAZONSOUTHERN CARIBBEAN CAPE HORNSTRAIT OF MAGELLAN
1430 12 DAYS DAYSDAYS
ROYAL PRINCESS ROYAL PRINCESSSAPPHIRE PRINCESS
sail betweenFT LAUDERDALE SANTIAGOLOS ANGELES to
andto MANAUS BUENOS AIRESSYDNEY 2005 DEPARTURE DATE 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
2004 DEPARTURE DATE Apr 9 Jan 10
Nov 22 Jan 241 Feb 7
FebZt
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
CRUISE ITINERARY
CRUISE ITINERARYCRUISE ITINERARY 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTDAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 2-3 At Sea 1 Santiago Chile (Valparaiso) EMBARK PM
1 Los ingeles California EMBARK PM 4 Tortola BritIsh Virgin Islands 8 AM 6 PM 2 At Sea 2 Ensenada Mexico 8AM 5PM 3 Puerto Montt Chile 7AM 6PM
3middot6 At Sea 4 At Sea 5 Dominica 9 AM 4 PM 7 Hilo Hawaii 8AM 5 At Sea Chilean Fjords Scenic Cruising6PM 6 Trinidad 9 AM 6 PM
8 Maui Hawaii (Lahaina) 8AM 6PM 6 At Sea Amalia Glacier Scentc CruiSi3f7 At Sea 7 Punta Arenas Chile (Strait of Magei an) 7AM 6PM9 Honolulu Hawaii 7AM 5PM
- 10middot13 At Sea 8 Beagle Channel Scenic Cruising 8 Ushuaia Argentina (Tierra del Fuo) 12N 8PM
8 Devils Island French Guiana (Isle Royal) 8 AM 2 PM 14 Bora Bora Polynesia 8AM 6PM 9 At Sea 9 At Sea Cape Hom Scenic Cruising
10 Santarem Brazil 9 AM 7 PM 10 Moorea Polynesia 8AM 6PM 10 Falkland Islands (Stanley) 8AM 6PM 10 Papeete Tahiti (overnight onboard ship) 9PM 11 At Sea
i 16 Papeete Tahiti 6PM 11 Boca da Valeria Brazil (Amazon River) 7 AM 2 PM 12 Puerto Madryn Argentina 6AM 5PM 17middot18 AtSea 12 Manaus Brazil (overnight onboard ship) 10 AM 13 At Sea
14 Montevideo Uruguay 9AM 6PM19 Pago Pago merlcan Samoa 8AM 6PM 13 Manaus Brazil DISEMBARK AM 15 Buenos Aires Argentina DISEMBARK AM 20 Apia Western Samoa 8AM 6PM 21 At Sea Cross International Dateline middotl1me5forallscenkouisinCile subjectlDclwIgc
tllinmryopefilteslnr=rscordttPorttlmislm)vary22 Suva Fiji 8AM 6PM l 23-24 At Sea
20 Auckland New Zealand 8AM 6PM ORINOCO RIVERSOUTHERN CARIBBEAN ANDESSOUTH AMERICA 26 Tauranga New Zealand 8AM 7PM 27 At Sea
28 Wellington Newealand 8AM 6PM 16 17 DAYS DAYS 29-30 AtSea
31 Sydney Australia DISEMBARK AM ROYAL PRINCESS ROYAL PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP SANTIAGO from to
FT LAUDERDALE FT LAUDERDALE
200S DEPARTURE DATE2005 DEPARTURE DATE
Mar 7Mar 24
CRUISE IIJNERARYCRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Santiago Chlle (Valparaiso) EMBARK PM
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM
2 La Serena Chile (Coquimbo) 8 AM 5 PM2-3 At Sea 3 At Sea Um6n Costa Rica 7AM 7PM 4 Arica Chile 7AM 6PMCristobal Panama (for Panama Canal) 8AM 5PM o At Sea
6 Cartagena Colombia 9AM 2 PM 6 San Martin Peru (for Pisco and Machu Picchu) 7AM 6PM 7 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 130 PM 7PM 7 Callao Peru (overnight for Lima) 530 AM 8-9 At sea 8 Callao Peru 1PM 10 Puerto Ordaz Venezuela (Orinoco River) 8AM 6PM 9 At Sea
i 11 At Sea 10 Manta Ecuador (overnight for Quito) 530AM 12 Greada 8AM i 11 Manta Ecuador 1lM5PMt 1~ Dolllinlca i 7N1 5 PM 12 At Sea
i 13 Transit Panama C~nal 7AM 430 PM14 St Thomas us Virgilslands 9AM 5PM 14 Cartagena Colombia 8AM 130 PMJs AtSei i 15 Aruba Netherlands intiiles 1PM 7PM 16 Princess Cays Bahamas 8AM 16-17 At Sea Tahiti Polynesia 17 FtLallardale Flillilt~ DISEMBARK AM 1ampmiddot Ft L~uderdale Florida DISEMBARK AM
AMAZON RIVERMEDITERRANEAN
21 DAYS
ROYAL PRINCESS
MANAUS
to ROME
2005 DEPARTURE DATE
Apr 21
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE M~naus Brazil (Wemight onboardship) Manaus Brazil
3 BocadaValeria Brazil (AriiazonRivet) 11 AM 4-6 At Sea 7 Recife Brazil 1 PM 8-11 AtSea 12 Dakar Senegal 8AM 13-14 At Sea 15 Agadir Morocco 7AM 16 Casablanca Morocco (for Marrakech) 8AM 17 Gibraltar lOAM 18 Allcante Spain 12 N 19 Barcelona Spain 8AM 20 Cannes France (for Monte Carlo) 8AM 21 FlorencePisa Italy (Livarno) 7AM 22 Rome Italy (Civitavecchia) DISEMBARK AM
INDIAN OCEANAUSTRALIA
28 DAYS
PACIfIC PRINCESS
CAPE TOWN
to SYDNEY
2004 DEPARTURpound DATE
Oct 20
CRUISE ITINERARY1 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Cape Town South Africa EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 3 East London South Africa 7AM 3PM 4 DurbahSouth Africa 8AM 6PM 5-7 At Sea 8 Nosy BeMadagascar 7AM 4PM 9 At Sea 10 Poilit des Galets Reunioll]slahd 11 Port Louis Mauritius 12c19 At Sea 20 Perth Australia (Fremantle) 21-23 At Sea 24 Adelaide Australla 25 At Sea 26 Melbourne Australla 7 27 Tasmania AUstralia (Burnie) 28 At Sea 29 Sydney Australia DISEMBARK AM
I
DEPART EMBARK PM
7PM 6PM
8pM
5PM
3PM 9PM 6PM 6PM 5PM 7PM 7PM
EXOTICS CRUISES
SOUIB ATIANTICANTARCfICNSOUIB AMERICA
24 DAYS
ROYAL PRINCESS
CAPE TOWN
to SANTIAGO
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
Dec 17
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Cape TownSouthAfrica (overnighfol1board ship) EMBARK PM 2 Cape Town South Africa 3PM 2 if~~t Good HopSCenic Crulsing 3-6 6 Tristan DaCunha United Kingdom 8AM 5PM 7-10 At Sea 11 Falkland Islands (Staliley) 8 AM 5PM 12 At Sea 13-16 Antarctica Peninsula ScehltmiddotCruising 14 days ihcludingmiddot Elephant
Island AntarcticSotind Deceptionlslana GerlacheStrait NaxefChannel Schollaert Channel SigJtla Island and Boyd Strait)
17 At Sea Cape Horn Scenic Cruising1amp UshuaiaArgentina (Tierra del fuego) bull middot6 AM 19 Punta Arenas Chile (Strait of Magellan) 7 AM 20 At Sea Amalia Glacier Scenic Cruising21 At Sea Chilean Fjords Scenic Cruising22 AtSea 23 Puerto Mont Chile 7AM 6PM 24 At Sea 25 Santiago Chile (Valparaiso) DISEMBARK AM
-nmes for1l scenlccruisinc are subJect to change
ASIAINDIAMEDITERRANEAN
30 ROYAL PRINCESSDAYS
ROME
to BANGKOK
2004 DEPARlURE DATE
Sep 16
CRUISE Il INERARY
WEST AFRICASOUTH AMERICA
28 DAYS
PACIFIC PRINCESS
FT LAUDERDALE
to CAPE TOWN
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
51 22
CRUISE ITINERARY
DISEMBARK AM
Aruba
EXOTICS CRU ISES amp CRU ISETOU RS
AUSTRALIANEW ZEALAND CRUISETOUR
AUSTRALIAN EXPLORER 2004 DEPARTURE DATESAPPHIRE21 plus
DAYS PRINCESS SYDNEY Dec 17 to
AUCKLAND CRUISETOUR 5P CRUiSE
CRUISETOUR ITINERARY
DAY PORT By Sea By Land DAY PORT
1 Sydney 14 Fiordland National Park 2 Sydney Scenic Cruising
3 SydneyAyers Rock 15 Dunedin New Zealand (Port Chalmers) 4 Ayers ROek
5 Ayers RockPort Douglas 16 Christchurch New Zealand 6 Port Douglas - (Lytleton)
7 Port DouglasSydneyEmbark 17 Wellilgton New Zealand 8 At Sea 18 At Sea 9 Melbourne Australia 19 Tauranga New Zealand
10 At Sea 20 Bay of Islands New Zealand 11 Tasmania Australia (Hobart) 21 Auckland New Zealand 12middot13 At Sea
Sydney Opera House Australia
AUSTRALIANEW ZEALAND CRUISETOUR SOUTHEAST ASIACHINA CRUISETOUR CAPE HORNSTRAIT OF MAGELLAN CRUISETOUR AUSTRALIAN BEIJING Be TERRA COTTA 2004 DEPARTURE DATES RIO 8t IGUAZU FALLS Post-Crulsetour1 Pre-Crulsetour 217EXPLORER 2005 DEPARTURE DATES PACIFICSAPPHIRE WARRIORS19 plw or PRINCESS jul9t loieifie
DAYS PRINCESS SYDNEY Jan 12 plus 19 ROYAL plw Feb 5 Oct 28 Royal BUENOS AIRES
AUCKLAND DAYS ROYAL PRINCESS to 21 ampto DAYS PRINCESS
BEUING CRUISE t ~~S~i BeWln~~~~e
to SANTIAGO~e~s~Ot~r~ih~fi1BANGKOK CRUiSE CRUISECRUISETOUR 3t3P landtourm~yvlty CRUISETOUR 12
DAY PORT DAY PORT
DAY PORT By Sea ltBy LaDd DAY PORT
1 Beijing 11-12 At Sea 1 Rio de janeiro 11 Cape Horn Scenic Cruising
13 Hong Kong 2 Rio de jneiro c 12 Ushuaia Argentina 14 At Sea 3 RiolgUaiu Falls 12 Beagle Channel Scenlc Cruising
15 Nha Trang Vietnam 4 IIDIilZll FaU$13u~os~re$ 13 Punta Arenas Chile
16 Phu My Vietnam 5 Buens AiresEmbark 14 At Sea 17 At Sea 6 Montevideo Uruguay 15 Seno Eyre Fjord Scenic Cruising 18 Singapore 7 At Sea 16 At Sea 19 Kualtan Malaysia 8 Puerto Madryn Argentina 17 Puerto Montt Chile 20 At Sea 9 At Sea 18 At Sea 21 Bangkok Thail3nd 10 Falkland Islands (Stanley) 19 Santiago Chile
DAY PORT DAY PORT
At Sea Pusan SouthKOrea Nagasaki japan At Sea Shanghai China
Note CnIlst route shown for Royil Princess Oct 28 only Timcsforil1lsccnkoulslngmsubjccttothange
CRUISE [OUR ITINERARY
CRUISETOUR ITINERARY
CRUISrrOlJR ITINERARY Fiordland National Park Scenic Cruising DlUedin New Zealand Christchurch New Zealand Wellington New Zealand
14
GRAND PANAMA CANAL CRUISES
ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL
10 10 11 DAYSDAYS DAYS
CORAL PRINCESS GRAND PRINCESS GRAND PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIPfrom from
fromFT LAUDERDALE GALVESTON GALVESTON
2004 DEPARTURE DATES Oct n 21 31 2004 DEPARTURE DATE
2004 DEPARTURE DATENov 10 20 30middot DeelSmiddot
DedSDec 10 28
2005 DEPARTURE DATES CRUISE ITINERARY Jan 7 17 27
CRUISE ITINERARY Feb 6 16 26 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART MarS 1828 CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Galveston Texas EMBARK PMApr 7 17 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTshy 1 Galveston Texas EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 1 ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 3 Belize City Belize 1 PM 7PM 2-3 At Sea 3 Belize City Belize lPM 7PM 4 Costa Maya Mexico (Mahahual) 8AM 4PM 4 Um6n Costa Rica 7AM rPM 4 Costa Maya Mexico (Mahahual) SAM 4 PM 5 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands 12 PM 7PM 5 Panama Canal (to Gatun Lake) 7AM 430 PM 5 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands 12 PM 7PM 6 Ocho Rios Jamaica SAM 5PM 5 Col6n Panama 5PM 8PM 6 At Sea 7 At Sea 6 At Sea Cristobal Panama 7AM 4PM 8 7AM 4PM 7 Grand Cayman Cayman IslandS 7AM 4PM (fot Panama Canal) ftrtpg~niaa~~) S Corumel Mexico SAM 6PM 8 At Sea 9 At Sea 9 Bclize City Belize 7AM 4 PM 6PM 10 Coromel Mexico lOAM 6 PM9 Cozumel Mexico lOAM 10 At Sea 10 At Sea 11 At Sea
Portordtrllndtlmtsmayvllry 11 flo Lauderdale florida DISEMBARK AM Portorntr IInltf timpoundi may vary 11 Galveston Texas DISEMBARK AM Port ordu and Nmes may vary 12 Galv_es~on Texas DISEMBARK AM
ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL
8 DAYS
CORAL PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP
from
FT LAUDERDALE
2004 DEPARTURE DATE Dec 20
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Fl Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM 2-3 At Sea 4 Lim6n Costa Rica 7AM 7PM 5 Panama Canal (to Gatun Lake) 7 AM 430 PM 5 Co16n Panama 5PM SPM 6 At Sea 7 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands SAM 5PM S At Sea 9 Flo Lauderdale Florida DISEMBARK AM Bridge of the Americas Panama
f OptIonll fOllTS inclld1lI tht AtlllnH to Pacific RlIlllfll) joumq will dlmlldrt tilt ship b) tctdtr lit Gfttlm uk AJkr tour plIssmm dlstmlrark tilt shipwin procmlllat through tilt Gatun Locb lIndjlnlllly dock in Gl6lI Hmal1p41Sl11tmmttydiumlmtheJldlo~ lflrshops IInd~llI toIIrsrrnrl CIItutl14ktlllIrtonlflrJhlp
GRAND PANAMA CANAL CRUISES
GRAND PANAMA CANAL GRAND PANAMA CANAL GRAND PANAMA CANAL
150R 18 150R 1715 DAYS DAYS DAYS
CORAL PRINCESS SUN PRINCESS
REGAL PRINCESS REGAL PRINCESS SUN PRINCESS
DAWN PRINCESS REGAL PRINCESS sail between DAWN PRINCESS
sail between FT LAUDERDALE FT LAUDERDALE sail betweenand
FT LAUDERDALEand SAN DIEGO andLOS ANGELES
SAN FRANCISCO 2004 DEPARTURE DATES 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
DAWN PRINCESS 2004 DEPARTURE DATESNov 24Sp191
CRUISE ITINERARY Dec9t CORAL PRINCESSREGAL PRINCESS 5ltp261 CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE ITINERARY
200S DEPARTURE DATES Dec 24 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
SUN PRINCESS DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARIltPM200S DEPARTURE DATES DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Sep 2StMar 24
3 Ocho Rios Jamaica lOAM 6PM 2-3 At5ea 2 At Sea 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBA8KPM
REGAL PRINCESS AprSt 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBA8KPM Jan stu 200S DEPARTURE DATES2 At Sea4 At Sea 4 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 7AM lPMJan 23 5 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 7AM lPM 3 Ocho Rios Jamaica lOAM 6PM REGAL PRINCESS 5 Cartagena Colombia 9AM 3PMFeb7t 4 At Sea Apr 239AM 3PM 6 Transit Panama Canal 7AM 430 PMFb22 ~ yenr~fte~~~~~~u 7AM 430 PM 5 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 7AM lPM At SeaMar9t CORAL PRINCESS 79AM 3PM8 At Sea Apr 27 8 Puntarenas Costa Rica 7AM 7PMSUN PRINCESS 9 Puntarenas Costa Rica 7 AM 7PM ~ yenr~fte~n~~~~~u 7AM 430 PM 9-10 At SeaApr1S 8 At Sea DAWN PRINCESS10-11 At Sea 11 Acapulco Mexico 8AM 5PM
5PM 9 Puntarenas Costa Rica 7AM 7PM Apr 29H ~ae~lcoMexico 8 AM 12 At SeatllWrryopmllzlfrarnLls~in 10-11 At Sea rmrKfIfikTiIIrttimnma1 tlliJlrraryoptJllllsfrlJflSlmFranrimlJn 13 Cabo San lucas Mexico 8AM 5PM
gt This mUJI C4Jl llfwmblnld wlth a 3 14 Cabo San Lucas Mexico 7 AM lPM H ~e~o Mexico 8AM SPM rmruordrrorttimamG)llIryCoIutar CnUK to VlWOIlllr SC Dqs ThUIltIIIflltllnlltCllIIblntdwilhaZ-day 14-15 At Sea 16lhrlllllhI9lllIbtboobdulaquoSC)lQ4k t Illncral) lIpCutcs in mrmt orm Pllrt IiIIIa CocastaICnliutoVan(ouKrBCDlIys16 16 San Francisco California 7AM 4PMcowtlIrcrllisr IIIIYlIl1Ymiddot IhrounIScankboobdlUaK)lllllluU t~A~geles California 6 AM 5PM 14 Cabo San Lucas Mexico 8AM 5PM
Thllwl1JIIICllllslltMOlIkpilllyJmtcad 17-18 At Sea middotmiddotThliIAfllIllCltlllsatMGnIqclBaylnstcadllf 15 At Sea CPlIilldCI1IIu 17 At Sea o[OdKKwsPurllilllrlmllYWlry OchoRicJsPortllmtslllllYVllfymiddot D1SEMBA8K AM19 Vancouver BC DISEMBA8K AM 16 San Die20 California DlSEMBA8K AM 18 Val1couver BC
GRAND PANAMA CANAL COASTAL CRUISING
2-4 CORAL PRINCESS ISLAND PRINCESS SUN PRINCESS18 DAWN PRINCESS DIAMOND PRINCESS STAR PRINCESSDAYSDAYS
COASTAL CRUISE SCHEDULEREGAL PRINCESS
SHIP DAYS FROM TO DEPARTURE DATE DIAMOND PRINCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 5104
SAN FRANCISCO DIAMOND PRINCES5 4 Vancouver Seattle 5404 to CORAL PRINCESS 2 San Francisco Vancouver 5604
NEW YORK DAWN PRiNCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 5704 ISLAND PRiNCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 51204
2004 DEPARTURE DATE SUN PRINCESS 3 San Francisco Vancouver 51404Aug 24 ISLAND PRiNCESS 3 Vancouver LOI Angeles 91804
DIAMOND PRINCESS 1 Seattle Vancouver 91804CRUISE ITINERARY DIAMOND PRINCESS 6 Vancouver Los Angeles 91904 SAPPHIRE PRINCESS 1 Seattle Vancouver 91904 SAPPHREPRINCESS 2 Vancouver San Francisco 92004 DIAMOND PRINCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 43005 DlAMONDPRiNCES$ 4 Vancouver Seattle 5305 SUN PRINCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 5305
ISLAND PRiNCESS 3 Los Angeles VancOllver 5405 CORAL PRiNCESS 2 San Francisco Vancouver 51205
Coral Princess in the Panama Canal
CRUISE PLUS
Extend your adventure with our Cruise Plusreg program Cruise Plusreg enables you to enhance your vacation with one- to four-night hotel
packages in cities that stand on their own as vacation destinations Add nights in Sydney before you cruise or extend your vacation with nights in the city by the
bay San Francisco Transportation and luggage handling costs from the airport to both hotel and ship plus meet and greet services are always included
Wherever you choose to explore youll enjoy properties that are carefully chosen based on service value location and the peace of mind of knowing that Princess
has arranged it all for you
Anchorage Alaska Trevi Fountain Rome Auckland Harbor New Zealand
The Cruise Plusreg Program is available in over 30 major cities including
MEDITERRANEANAEGEAN EXOTICS PANAMA CANAL Barcelona London Rome and Venice Auckland Bangkok Beijing Buenos Aires Ft Lauderdale Los Angeles New York City
Cape Town Ft Lauderdale Honolulu Los San Diego San Francisco Sanjuan Vancouver NORTHERN EUROPE Angeles Montreal Moorea New York City Copenhagen and London MEXICO CARIBBEANOsaka Papeete Rome San Francisco
Ft Lauderdale Galveston Los AngelesTRANSATLANTIC Santiago Seattle Sydney Vancouver Venice Barcelona Copenhagen Ft Lauderdale San Francisco and San Juan
London New York City and Rome ALASKA Anchorage Calgary Fairbanks Kenai San Francisco Seattle and Vancouver
For more information about options and pricing reference a destination specific brochure or contact your travel agent
TRAVEL THE WORLD WITH THE LEADER IN CRUISINGmiddot Princess
Analysis by the Hawaii Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism Comparing the Economic Impact of Foreign Flag Ships with US Flag Cruise Ships Sailing in Hawaii
This is a summary of an analysis prepared by the Hawai Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism (DBEDT) of the economic impact of the foreign flag cruise ship fleet sailing in Hawaii as compared to each of the US flag ships operating in Honolulu
The comparison is set out below
Foreign Pride Pride Pride
Fleet Of Hawaii Of Aloha Of America
Total economic output impact (spendingsales) ($mil) 155 542 4225 4958
Total earnings impact (labor earnings) ($mil) 44 155 1207 1411
Total employment impact Uobs) 1447 5059 3943 4627
This analysis demonstrates that a single US-flagged ship the Pride of America home ported in Honolulu is 32 times more economically impactful and creates 32 times as many jobs as the entire foreign flag fleet that sails into and out of Hawaii ports of call
Economic Impact of Pride of America
Assumptions 1 Annual impact though Pride of Aloha is leaving in May 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existing Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($) 4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of outputl$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job multiplier (jobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
118700 105
2706 3373
147 042
1372
4958
1417
4627
Data sourcelformula Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Line 1 x line 2 x line 31 000000
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 4 x line 5
Line 4 x line 6
Line 4 x line 7
Economic Impact of Pride of Hawaii
Assumptions
1 Annual impact though Pride of Hawaii is leaving in February 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existing Pride of Aloha and Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($) 4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job multiplier (jobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
Data sourceformula 139770 Actual 2007 figure
975 Actual 2007 figure 2706 Actual 2007 figure 3688 Line 1 x line 2 x line 31000000
147 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model 042 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
1372 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
5421 Line 4 x line 5
1549 Line 4 x line 6
5059 Line 4 x line 7
Economic Impact of Pride of Aloha
Assumptions 1 Annual impact though Pride of Aloha is leaving in May 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existlng Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($)
4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job mUltiplier Oobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
95680 111
2706 2874
147 042
1372
4225
1207
3943
Data sourcelformula Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Line 1 x line 2 x line 31000000
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 4 x line 5
Line 4 x line 6
Line 4 x line 7
lt
Methodology Used in Calculating Impact of International Cruise Ships
Cruise ship visitors 1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Came with ships 3 Flied in 4 Average length of stay (days) 5 PPPD ($) 6 Cruise visitor spending ($mil))
Cruise ship crews 7 Ratio of crew spending to cruise visitor spending 8 Cruise crew spending
Cruisline 9 Ratio of crew spending to cruise visitor spending
10 Cruiseline spending
11 Total cruise-related spending ($mil)
12 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 13 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 14 Job multiplier Uobs$ cruise -related spending)
15 Total output impact ($miJ)
16 Total earnings impact ($miJ)
17 Total employment impact (jobs)
106641 98307
8334 739 847 668
02 134
038 254
1055
147 042
1372
1551
444
1447
Data sourceformula Line 2 + line 3 DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report Line 1 x line 4 x line 5
DBEDT 2003 Cruise study Line 7 x line 6
DBEDT 2003 Cruise study Line 9 x line 6
Line 6 + line 8 + line 10
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 11 x line 12
Line 11 x line 13
Line 11 x line 14
Economic Contributions Foreign-Flag Fleet operating in Hawaii vs Three US-Flag Ships
$1500
Pride of Hawaii$1000- $542 million VIc -0-E c Pride of AlohaCo
423 million$500
Pride of America $496 million155 million$shy
Foreign-Flag US-Flag Fleet Fleet
Source State of Hawaii Department of US-Flag $1460 billion Business Economic Development and Tourism
Foreign-Flag $ 155 million 7292008
Employment Foreign-Flag Fleet operating in Hawaii vs Three US-Flag Ships
15000
10000
til c o Pride of Aloha
39435000
Pride of America 1447 4627
~---------
Foreign-Flag US-Flag Fleet Fleet
Source State of Hawaii Department of US-Flag 13629 jobs Business Economic Development and Tourism
Foreign-Flag 1447 jobs 7292008
Foreign Flag Capacity Growth Foreign flag passenger capacity has changed five-fold on roundtrip Hawaii cruises from the West Coast since enactment of the Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative
1600000
1400000
tn 1200000
J enshyZ
1000000
I shyG) en 800000 s G) tn tn
600000 as D 400000
200000
0 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Year
Source US Maritime Administration (derived from the US Customs and Border Patrol Vessel Entrance and Clearance documents - final 2007 data) 7292008
NCL America Hawaii Economic Contributions
(2004-2008)
bull (in Millions) bull $399 in wages benefits and overtime to US seafarers bull $35 in Federal and State payroll Taxes bull $64 in Government Fees and Taxes to Hawaii bull $28 in wages benefits and overtime to US other employees bull $52 in Port Charges to Hawaii Companies (Stevedores tugs pilots etc) bull $85 in Fuel to Tesoro Hawaii bull $130 for shore excursions to Hawaii tour operators bull $39 for Hawaii hotel rooms and ground transport bull $75 for food grown in Hawaii bull $57 in union fees and levies (incl $32M paid directly by employees) bull $1 in MMD fees to the United States Coast Guard bull $51 for recruitment screening processing and training crew bull $76 advertising and promoting Hawaii as a destination bull $1092
COASTWISE CRUISES INTERPRETIVE RULE RESOLUTION Adopted at the
US Conference of Mayors 76th Annual Meeting
June 20-242008 Miami
WHEREAS the Department of Homeland Securitys Customs and Border Protection (CBP) issued a proposed Interpretive Rule regulating Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises on foreign flagged vessels between US ports of call under the Passenger Vessel Services Act at the request of the United States Maritime Administration and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule would require that a foreign-flagged vessel on a coastwise cruise to call at a foreign port for at least 48 hours with that foreign stop constituting at least 50 percent of the cruise itinerary and allowing passengers to disembark the cruise vessel at the foreign port before continuing the cruise to a US port of call and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule establishes burdensome criteria that are wholly inconsistent with industry practice particularly the 48-hour call at foreign port shyinasmuch as the standard port call is six to eight hours - as well as the requirement that 50 percent of a cruise be spent at the foreign port and
WHEREAS the intent of the proposed Interpretive Rule is to protect the single remaining US flag vessel serving the Inter-Hawaiian Island cruise trade that according to the Hawaii Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism generates more than 4600 jobs and generates nearly $500 million in economic benefits for the state annually and
WHEREAS thousands of members of the International Longshore Workers Union (nWU) are employed at US ports serving cruise ships and whose jobs would be at risk if the proposed Interpretive Rule were implemented and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule is vague as to the breadth of its application ie to coastwise cruises between all United States ports or applied solely to coastwise cruises from West Coast ports to Hawaii and
WHEREAS the Cruise Lines International Association estimates the proposed Interpretive Rule would upend the $17 billion in national cruise industry spending and put at risk more than 300000 jobs generated by the international cruise industry including jobs held by nWU at US ports and the local allied industries supporting the cruise industry and
Executive Order Submissions Under Review
II Reglnfogov Where to ind Federal Regulatory Information -~
Home ] Lnitied Agenda and Regulator) Ilan pound012866 Regulator) Review Jnformalion Collection Review
EO 12866 Regulatory Rlvlw dvanced Search IJitorical RepWI Review Counh Jriter XIL
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA)
Executive Order Submissions Under Review July 25 2008 - _------------____ _shy
Department of Homeland Security
AGENCY DHS-TSA RIN 1652-AA53
TITLE Large Aircraft Security Program Other Aircraft Operator Security Programs and Airport Operator Security Program
STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT Yes RECEIVED DATE 06302008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
AGENCY DHS-USCIS RIN Llti15-AB67 TITLE Changes to Requirements Affecting H-2B Nonimmigrants and Their Employers
STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT No RECEIVED DATE 06092008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
AGENCY DHS-USCBP RIN 1651AA11 TITLE Issuance of a Visa and Authorization for Temporary Admission Into the United States for Certain Nonimmigrant Aliens Afflicted W HIV Infection
STAGE Final Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT No RECEIVED DATE 03042008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
-_RE_V-IE-W-E-X-T-EN-D-E-D---------- _
AGENCY DHS-USCBP RIN 1651-AA76 TITLE Coastwise Transportation of Passengers STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT Yes RECEIVED DATE 07142008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
Disclosure I Accessibility I Privacy Policy I Contact Us
httpwwwreginfogovpublicdoeoReviewSearch 7252008
View Rule Page 11
Shere D find Federal ReguLatory InformciiorlReglnfogov Home J Cnified Agenda al1d Regulatory Plan EO 12866 Regulatory Reyiew Information Collection Reiew
Current rnified Agenda and Regulatory Plan Historical Pnified Agenda and Regulatory Plan Search
View Rule
DHSIUSCBP RIN 1651-AA76 Publication ill Spring 2008
Title llCoastwise Transportation of Passengers
Abstract This interim rule amends the Department of Homeland Securitys (DHS) current regulations relating to the transportation of passengers by non-coastwise-qualified vessels on voyages that begin and end at a US port and stop at intervening US and foreign port(s) Under this interim final rule voyages that begin and end at a US port and stop at a foreign port(s) and at intervening US port(s) where a large USshyflag coastwise-qualified passenger vessel engages in regular service are in violation of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) unless the cumulative length of stay(s) at intervening foreign port(s) is more than 50 percent of the total amount of time spent at the intervening US port(s) and passengers are permitted to go ashore at the foreign port(s) The purpose of this amendment is to ensure that the Congressional purpose in enacting the PVSA which is to preserve the economic benefits of US coastwise trade to US-flag coastwise-qualified vessels is properly implemented
Agency Department of Homeland Security(DHS) Priority Substantive Nonsignificant
KIN Status First time published in the Unified Agenda Agenda Stage of Rulemaking Final Rule Stage
Major No Unfunded Mandates No
CFR Citation -LCER 4J~)(h)(plusmnJ
Legal Authority 5JJSS_30J12lJ-SClt16 J9_lJiCJ 431 9_L1C1plusmn3JJ2JScHJ1J2JSCJ624 L(LlLSc207LIl(gtJfHgt~ _CiQJ _46lSC 6QLQ~
Legal Deadline None
Timetable Action Date FR Cite
Interim Final Action 0510012008
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required No Government Levels Affected None
Federalism No
Included in the Regulatory Plan No
RIN Data Printed in the FR No
Agency Contact Glen E Vereb Chief Entry Procedures and Carriers Branch Department of Homeland Security US Customs and Border Protection Office of Regulations and Rulings 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington DC 20229 Phone202572-8730
Disclosure I Accessibility I Privacy Policy I Contact Us
httpwwwreginfogovpublicdoeAgendaViewRuleruleID=286751 7128120
Federal RegisterVol 72 No 224Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules 65487
SPECULATIVE POSITION LIMITS 1-Continued [In contract units)
Contract
Soybeans and Mini-Soybeans 2
Wheat and Mini-Wheat 2 bullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbull
Soybean Oil
SingleSpot month All monthsmonth
600 8600 13300 600 11100 14500 540 6600 8600
Soybean Meal 720 5500 7100
Minneapolis Grain Exchange
Hard Red Spring Wheat I 600 I 11100 I 14500
New York Board of Trade
Cotton No2 I 300 I 5300 I 7300
Kansas City Board of Trade
Hard Winter Wheat I 600 I 11100 I 14500
1 For purposes of compliance with these limits positions in a futures contract that shares ~ubstantially identical terms with a contract market enumerated herein including a futures contract that is cash-settled based on the settlement price of an enumerated contract market shall be agshygregated with positions in the enumerated contract market
2 For purposes of compliance with these limits positions in the regular-sized and mini-sized contracts shall be aggregated
Issued by the Commission this November 152007 in Washington DC David Stawick Secretary of the Commission [FR Doc E7-22681 Filed 11-20-07 845 amI BILLING CODE 6351-Q1-P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Bureau of Customs and Border Protection
19 CFR Part 4
[USCBP-2007-o098]
Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises
AGENCY Customs and Border Protection Department of Homeland Security ACTION Proposed interpretation solicitation of comments
SUMMARY This document proposes new criteria to be used by Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to determine whether non-coastwise-qualified vessels are in violation ofthe Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) when engaging in cruise itineraries in which passengers board at a US port the vessel calls at several Hawaiian ports and then the vessel proceeds to a foreign port or ports for a brief period before ultimately returning to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their cruise CBP believes these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because it appears that the primary objective of the foreign stop is evasion of the PVSA
DATES Comments must be received on or before December 212007 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT Glen E Vereb Cargo Security Carriers amp Immigration Branch Office of International Trade (202) 572-8730 ADDRESSES You may submit comments identified by docket number by one of the following methods
bull Federal eRulemaking Portal http wwwregulationsgov Follow the instructions for submitting comments
bull Mail Border Security Regulations Branch Office of International Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
I Public Participation
Interested persons are invited to participate in this proposed interpretation by submitting written data views or arguments on all aspects of the proposed interpretation Customs and Border Protection (CBP) also invites comments that relate to the economic environmental or federalism effects that might result from this proposed interpretation Comments that will provide the most assistance to CBP in developing these procedures will reference a specific portion of the proposed interpretation explain the reason for any recommended change and include data information or authority that support such recommended change
Instructions All submissions received must include the agency name and docket number for this proposed
interpretation All comments received will be posted without change to http wwwregulationsgov including any personal information provided
Docket For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received go to http wwwregulationsgov Submitted comments may also be inspected on regular business days between the hours of 9 am and 430 pm at the Office of International Trade Customs and Border Protection 799 9th Street NW 5th Floor Washington DC Arrangements to inspect submitted documents should be made in advance by calling Mr Joseph Clark at (202) 572shy8768
II Background
The maritime cabotage law governing the transportation of passengers was first established by section 8 of the Passenger Vessel Services Act of June 191886 (the PVSA) 24 Stat 81 as amended by section 2 of the Act of February 17 1898 30 Stat 248 formerly codified at 46 USC App 289 (now codified at 46 USC 55103) 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 of $200 (now $300 as promulgated in TD 03-11 pursuant to the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 199028 USC 2461 note) for each passenger so transported and landed
The intent of the maritime cabotage laws including the PVSA was to provide a legal structure that guarantees a coastwise monopoly to
65488 Federal RegisterVol 72 No 224Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules
American shipping and thereby promotes development of the American merchant marine Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 28 (DC Cir 1984) see also The Granada 35 FSupp 892 8931940 AMC 1601 (DC Pa 1940) (stating that the legislative aim of section 289 [now 55102] was the creation of a practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping business for United States ships) In other words the PVSA was enacted to advance the United States merchant marine and fleet by restricting the use of foreign-ownedflagged passenger vessels in United States territorial waters
Passenger vessel transportation between United States ports has historically been viewed to be part of the coastwise trade after the enactment of the PVSA This view is premised on the concepts of continuity of the voyage and whether its intended purpose or objective was coastwise transportation In other words the PVSA was held to be violated if the coastwise movement was continuous or if the purpose of the trip was a coastwise voyage (See 18 OAG 445 September 4 1886 28 OAG 204 February 16 1910 29 OAG 318 February 12 1912 30 OAG 44 February 1 1913 34 OAG 340 December 24 1924 and 36 OAG 352 August 13 1930)
The CBP regulations promulgated pursuant to the PVSA are found at section 480a of title 19 of the Code of Federal Regulations (19 CFR 480a) and are reflective of the above cited Office of the Attorney General decisions These regulations provide among other things that a non-coastwise-qualified vessel which embarks a passenger at a port in the United States embraced within the coastwise laws (a coastwise port) will be deemed to have landed that passenger in violation of the PVSA if the passenger disembarks at a different coastwise port on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a nearby foreign port or ports (as defined in 19 CFR 480a(a)(2) see also 19 CFR 480a(b)(2)) The terms embark and disembark are words of art which are defined as going on board a vessel for the duration of a specific voyage and leaving a vessel at the conclusion of a specific voyage respectively (See 19 CFR 480a(a)(4))
The references in section 480a to nearby foreign ports (defined in 19 CFR 480a(a)(2)) are the results of attempts by CBP to apply an Office of the Attorney Generals opinion dated February 26 1910 (28 OAG 204) In that case a foreign-flag vessel transported 615 passengers on a voyage around the world beginning in New
York and concluding in San Francisco The Attorney General opined that since the primary object of the voyage was to visit various parts of the world on a pleasure tour returning home via California and not to be transported in domestic commerce the transportation was not in violation of the PVSA
The 1910 Attorney Generals opinion was extended to voyages that included foreign ports other than nearby foreign ports (See Treasury Decision (TD) 68shy285 (33 FR 16558) November 14 1968) However voyages solely to one or more coastwise ports have always been considered predominantly coastwise Therefore non-coastwise-qualified vessels engaging in such a voyage where passengers temporarily go ashore at a coastwise port have been deemed to have violated the PVSA
m Current Law and Policy Pursuant to Public Law 109-304 120
Stat 1632 enacted on October 6 2006 Title 46 United States Code was substantially reorganized and recodified Consequently the PVSA is now codified at 46 USC 55103 and provides that no vessel shall transport passengers between ports or places in the United States either directly or by way of a foreign port under a penalty of $300 for each person so transported and landed except one that (1) Is wholly owned by citizens of the United States for purposes of engaging in the coastwise trade and (2) has been issued a certificate of documentation with a coastwise endorsement or is exempt from documentation but would otherwise be eligible for such a certificate and endorsement
In 2003 Congress enacted Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II Section 211 for the purpose of revitalizing the oceangoing US-flag cruise industry in Hawaii (the 2003 Act) Three oceangoing US-flag cruise ships PRIDE OF ALOHA PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAII were documented with coastwise privileges pursuant to the 2003 Act These vessels entered regular service in Hawaii in 2004 2005 and 2006 respectively and pursuant to the express language of the 2003 Act are limited in their operation to providing regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands of Hawaii
The CBP regulations promulgated pursuant to the PVSA are set forth in 19 CFR 480a and have remained unchanged throughout both the recodification of Title 46 of the United States Code and the enactment of the 2003 Act They provide that a violation of the PVSA occurs when passengers embark (board a vessel for the
duration of a voyage) a non-coastwiseshyqualified vessel at one US port and disembark (leave the vessel at the conclusion of a voyage) at a different US port unless they proceed with the vessel to a distant foreign port (Le any port not considered a nearby foreign port which is defined as any port located in North America Central America Bermuda or the West Indies including the Bahamas) Currently these regulations do not contain specific criteria for non-coastwise-qualified vessels on itineraries including US ports and either nearby or distant foreign ports in order for such foreign port calls to be compliant with the PVSA
To reiterate the applicable CBP regulations provide that the PVSA is violated when a non-coastwise-qualified vessel transports a passenger on a voyage solely to one or more coastwise ports and the passenger disembarks or goes ashore temporarily at a coastwise port (19 CFR 480a(b)(1)) Furthermore a violation of the PVSA also occurs when a non-coastwise-qualified vessel transports a passenger on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a nearby foreign port or ports (but no other foreign port) and the passenger disembarks at a coastwise port other than the port of embarkation (19 CFR 480a(b)(2)) However there is no violation of the PVSA when a passenger is on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a distant foreign port or ports (whether or not the voyage includes a nearby foreign port or ports) and the passenger disembarks at a coastwise port provided the passenger has proceeded with the vessel to a distant foreign port (19 CFR 480a(b)(3))
IV Request From MARAD To Provide Guidance
The US Department of Transportation Maritime Administration (MARAD) has requested that CBP take action to ensure enforcement of the PVSA MARAD has asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreignshyflag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwiseshyqualified cruise ship operators
In April of 2007 the operator of the three US-flag cruise vessels operating solely in Hawaii pursuant to the 2003 Act announced their intent to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAIl from the Hawaii market and redeploy her to Europe The operator intends to re-flag the vessel to foreign registry directly resulting in the loss of over 1100 crewmember jobs The primary reason cited for this decision is the rapid increase in foreign-flag competition entering the Hawaii market
Federal Register I Vol 72 No 224 I Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules 65489
from the West Coast This competition is evidenced in published cruise itineraries of foreign-flag carriers offering a variety of round trip cruises that depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period usually in the early morning and ultimately return to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their cruise These cruises are often marketed as Hawaii cruises and except for the brief stop in the nearby foreign port of Ensenada are purely coastwise in nature It is these cruise itineraries that pose an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels that pursuant to the 2003 Act are currently engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands
V Preliminary Notice
In response to MARADs concerns CBP sent letters to two carriers known to operate the itineraries in question as well as to the Cruise Lines International Association Inc stating that CBP believes that these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because it appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA The letters further indicated that CBP is taking steps to publish this position
VI CBPs Proposed Interpretive Rule Accordingly in this document CBP is
proposing to provide that cruise itineraries for non-qualified coastwise vessels which allow passengers to board at a US port call at several Hawaiian ports proceed to a foreign port or ports for a brief period and then ultimately return to the original US port of embarkation for disembarkation are not consistent with the PVSA and the regulations promulgated pursuant thereto Specifically CBP interprets a voyage to be solely to one or more coastwise ports even where it stops at a foreign port unless the stop at the foreign port is a legitimate object of the cruise CBP will presume that a stop at a foreign port is not a legitimate object of the cruise unless
(1) The stop lasts at least 48 hours at the foreign port
(2) The amount of time at the foreign port is more than 50 percent of the total amount of time at the US ports of call and
(3) The passengers are permitted to go ashore temporarily at the foreign port
Accordingly CBP proposes to adopt an interpretive rule under which it will presume that any cruise itinerary that does not include a foreign port call that
satisfies each of these three criteria constitutes coastwise transportation of passengers in violation of 19 CFR 480a(b)(1)
Dated November 16 2007 W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection [FR Doc E7-22788 Filed 11-20-07 845 am] BILLING CODe 9111-14-1
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau
27 CFR Part 9
[Notice No 76]
RIN 1513-AB49
Proposed Establishment of the Leona Valley Viticultural Area (2007R-281 P)
AGENCY Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau Treasury ACTION Notice of proposed rulemaking
SUMMARY The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau proposes to establish the 134 square mile Leona Valley viticultural area in the northeast part of Los Angeles County California We designate viticultural areas to allow vintners to better describe the origin of their wines and to allow consumers to better identify wines they may purchase We invite comments on this proposed addition to our regulations DATES We must receive written comments on or before January 22 2008
ADDRESSES You may send comments on this notice to one of the following addresses
bull httpwwwregulationsgov (Federal e-rulemaking portal follow the instructions for submitting comments) or
bull Director Regulations and Rulings Division Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau PO Box 14412 Washington DC 20044-4412
See the Public Participation section of this notice for specific instructions and requirements for submitting comments and for information on how to request a public hearing
You may view copies of this notice selected supporting materials and any comments we receive about this proposal at httpwwwregulationsgov under Docket No 2007-0066 You also may view copies of this notice all related petitions maps or other supporting materials and any comments we receive about this
proposal by appointment at the TTB Information Resource Center 1310 G Street NW Washington DC 20220 To make an appointment call 202-927shy2400
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT NA Sutton Regulations and Rulings Division Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau 925 Lakeville S1 No 158 Petaluma CA 94952 phone 415shy271-1254 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
Background on Viticultural Areas
TTB Authority Section 105(e) of the Federal Alcohol
Administration Act (FAA Act) 27 USC 205(e) authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to prescribe regulations for the labeling of wine distilled spirits and malt beverages The FAA Act provides that these regulations should among other things prohibit consumer deception and the use of misleading statements on labels and ensure that labels provide the consumer with adequate information as to the identity and quality of the product The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) administers the regulations promulgated under the FAA Act
Part 4 ofthe TTB regulations (27 CFR part 4) allows the establishment of definitive viticultural areas and the use of their names as appellations of origin on wine labels and in wine advertisements Part 9 of the TTB regulations (27 CFR part 9) contains the list of approved viticultural areas
Definition Section 425(e)(1)(i) ofthe TTB
regulations (27 CFR 425(e)(1)(i)) defines a viticultural area for American wine as a delimited grape-growing region distinguishable by geographical features the boundaries of which have been recognized and defined in part 9 of the regulations These designations allow vintners and consumers to attribute a given quality reputation or other characteristic of a wine made from grapes grown in an area to its geographic origin The establishment of viticultural areas allows vintners to describe more accurately the origin of their wines to consumers and helps consumers to identify wines they may purchase Establishment of a viticultural area is neither an approval nor an endorsement by TTB of the wine produced in that area
Requirements Section 425(e)(2) of the TTB
regulations outlines the procedure for proposing an American viticultural area and provides that any interested party
Us Department ofHomelaDd Secmity Washington DC 10229
bull ~
US Customs and Border Protection
AUG 15 2fXJJ
VE5-3-02-QTRRBSTCCCI - ti015502-GG-
Mr leon Sutcliffe Director Port Operations Camivai Cruise Unes Camival Place 3655 NW 87Avenue Miami Aorlda 33178
RE P~nger Vessef Services Ad Coastwise Transportation 46 USC sect 55103 19 CFR sect 480a(b)
Dear Mr Sutcliffe
As you know US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) enforces the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) codified at TItle 46 United States Code section 55103 (46 USC 55103) This statute prohibits non-coastwise-qualifled vessels (ie those vessels not US-buill owned and documented with a coastwise endorsement) from transporting passengers between porls or places within the United States The regUlations promUlgated pursuant to the PVSA are found at TrtJe 19 Code of Federal Regulations section 4808 (19 CFR 4808)
It has come to our attention that passenger vessels of your company are engaging in cruise itineraries that include ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands Two USAlagged coastwise-endorsed passenger vessefs are also currenUy engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of caD wittlin the Hawaiian Islands
As part of your cruise itineraries some of your foreign-flagged vessels depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period and ultimately rebJm to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their endse For example the MS ZAANDAM of Holand America Lines departs San Diego cruises the Hawaiian Islands stops in Ensenada from 800pm to 11 OOpmbull and returns to san Diego CBP believes these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because It appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA -- - - ~~~------
Please be advised that CBP is taking steps to publish this position Should have any questions pertaining to this matter please contact Mr Glen Vereb Chief Cargo Security Carriers and Immigration Branch at (202) 572-8724
Sincerely
F Jl E EST Y LEe A U I 5 I N Gmiddot
December 21 2007
The Honorable W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection co Border Security Regulations Branch Office ofInternational Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229
Re Hawaii Coastwise Cruises (USCBP-2007-0098) Comments in Response to Proposed Interpretation
Dear Commissioner Basham
NCL America Inc1 (NCLA) submits these comments in support ofthe efforts ofCustoms and Border Protection to enforce the Passenger Vessel Services Act and the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative as applied to Hawaii coastwise cruises
1 Introduction and Summary of Position
NCLA operates three large oceangoing US flag cruise ships in Hawaii These ships are documented under US flag and are required to operate in regular service in Hawaii pursuant to the authority of the Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative a 2003 federal statute intended to revitalize the US flag cruise industry and to maximize economic and national security benefits to the United States (the 2003 Act)
NCLA has invested $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships pursuant to the 2003 Act and in direct reliance on the protections of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) and its proper enforcement The PVSA limits the transportation ofpassengers between US ports to coastwise documented US flag ships Its statutory protections recognize that US flag ships have significantly higher operational costs in part because they are subject to more stringent US laws including US labor laws and federal
1 NCL America Inc is a US corporation incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware headquartered in Honolulu Hawaii As a US corporation it is subject to US taxes at both the federal and state level The Chief Executive Officer the Chairman of the Board and all of the Board of Directors of NCL America are US citizens The company is also subject to US labor and employment laws and is required by statute to maintain a workforce comprised primarily ofUS citizens
700 Bishop St SUite 900 I Honolulu HawMi 96813 I Tel 8085273800 Fax 8085273820 I ndcom
2
income tax among others The NCLA ships operating in Hawaii are the only large oceangoing cruise ships operating under US flag In furtherance of the policy goals of the PVSA and the 2003 Act these ships have created over 4000 seafaring jobs all subject to US minimum wage and other labor statutes
Since 2003 there has been a significant increase in capacity in the Hawaii market from foreign flag ships providing cruise service to Hawaii from the West Coast Many of these foreign flag cruises are marketed as Hawaii cruises and consist entirely ofUS ports ofcall with the sole exception of a token stop in Mexico for as little as an hour late at night under circumstances where passengers are not permitted to get offthe ship There are no reported rulings approving these particular foreign flag itineraries
Lower cost foreign competition in the Hawaii market has unfairly hurt NCLAs operations NCLA has incurred substantial losses which have contributed significantly to its decision earlier this year to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAll from US flag and reshydeploy it foreign Unfair foreign competition poses an imminent threat to the remaining US flag passenger vessels operating in the Hawaii trades pursuant to the 2003 Act
As the agency statutorily charged with implementation of the 2003 Act the US Department ofTransportation Maritime Administration (MARAn) is aware of the threat foreign flag Hawaii itineraries pose to the US flag fleet and brought the situation to the attention ofthe US Department ofHomeland Security Bureau ofCustoms and Border Protection (CBP or Customs) Customs determined that the primary object of these itineraries was coastwise and that the Ensenada stop was an evasion of the PVSA
In August 2007 Customs provided written notice to the affected foreign lines and their trade association that the existing itineraries were contrary to the PVSA None of these lines sought advance rulings even after the Customs notice with respect to their Hawaii itineraries pursuant to Customs regulations and many continued to market the itineraries as Hawaii cruises NCLA supports the efforts ofCustoms and MARAD to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act for Hawaii cruises
2 Statutory Authority for Customs Proposed Interpretation
(a) Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA)
Congress passed the PVSA in 1886 to protect the US maritime transportation industry from foreign competition2 Protection is afforded through penalty assessments on foreign vessels transporting passengers between US ports or places directly or by way ofa foreign port 3 As Congress and the courts have recognized coastwise protections for the US maritime transportation industry are only one dimension of the PVSA Operating in conjunction with other coastwise laws and with the US
2 See United States v Honduran SS GRANADA 35 F Supp 892 894 (BD Pa 1940)(citing purpose of PVSA to meet threats to the practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping which was to be preserved for US ships)
46 USc sect 55103 (originally 46 USC App 289)
3
documentation laws the PVSA also enhances military sealift in times ofnational emergency sustains a US merchant marine and supports the US shipbuilding and repair industry4
(b) Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative (the 2003 Act)
Over the past decade Congress has sought to reinforce the goals of the PVSA by providing mechanisms to revitalize the oceangoing US flag cruise fleet particularly in Hawaii The Project America legislation enacted in 1997 authorized among other things the re~flagging ofone existing cruise ship contingent on the operator contracting for the construction oftwo new oceangoing cruise shipss Following the default of the operator under the original contract Congress enacted the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative for the purpose ofrecovering economic and national security benefits to the United States bull 6 These same goals of the original PVSA were expressly referenced in the legislative history of the 2003 Act which emphasized that these ships will be assets available in time ofnational emergency and will significantly expand the pool ofqualified seafarers upon which the US Department ofDefense relies to crew non-combatant vessels
The 2003 Act authorizes the US documentation ofthree cruise ships for operation in regular service in Hawaii subject to certain conditions including a prohibition on operating in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico and the Caribbean Sea and a requirement that all vessel repair work be undertaken in the United States MARAD is charged with implementation of the 2003 Act
3 Customs Implementation of PVSA
(a) Regulations
The current regulations implementing the PVSA were published by Customs in 19858 The growth of the foreign flag cruise industry in North America and in particular the development of the Alaska cruise market led to an effort in 1984 to amend the thenshyexisting regulations to increase the ease of administration and operational flexibility The effort to change the regulation had support from US port interests who saw benefit in the potential increase in the number ofUS ports that foreign vessels could call and was opposed by proponents ofpotential US flag projects as detrimental to efforts to revitalize the US fleet 9 The preamble to the 1985 rule emphasized that it was of paramount importance to consider the primary object ofpassengers in taking a
4 See American Hawaii Cruises v Skinner 713 F Supp 452 457 (DDC 1989) (recognizing the contribution of the PVSA and the Jones Act in helping to secure national defense by maintaining a merchant marine oftbe best equipped and most suitable types ofvessels sufficient to serve in time of war or national emergency) see also Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 30 (DC Cir 1984) Wirth Ltd v SIS Acadia Forest 537 F2d 1272 1281 n32 (5th Cir 1976) S Public Law 105-56 Section 8109 (111 Stat 1203 1244) (Oct 81997 ) 6 Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II General Provisions - Department ofCommerce Section 211 (117 Stat 1179) (Feb 20 2003) 1 149 Cong Rec S1118 (dailyed Jan 17 2003(statement ofSenator Inouye) 8 19 CFR sect 480a 950 Fed Reg 26981 (July I 1985)
4
voyage10 a concept which is reinforced elsewhere in Customs regulations11 In its analysis of the comments received at the time Customs accepted the view ofport interests that the modified rule would help their business but did so recognizing the absence ofa regular salt water US flag passenger fleet Customs acknowledged the potential harm to prospective efforts to revitalize the US flag passenger fleet and expressly cautioned that if it were ever shown that coastwise qualified vessels in competition with foreign vessels were in fact hurt by the modified Customs regulation then Customs would immediately reconsider its position12
(b) Customs Rulings
Given the significant penalties associated with violating the PVSA13 Customs regulations expressly provide a mechanism for the owner or charterer of a foreign vessel or any other interested person to request an advisory ruling as to whether a contemplated voyage would be considered in violation of the PVSA14 Customs regulations provide that vessel operators can rely on these ruling letters only to the extent that the facts and circumstances are identical to those in the ruling letter IS
Notwithstanding the fact that several foreign cruise lines offer Hawaii itineraries originating in a US mainland port and calling at Hawaii ports with a token intervening stop in Mexico there are no reported rulings expressly approving such an itinerary for these foreign cruise lines 16
4 The Cruise Industry in Hawaii
(a) NCL America Returns US flag to the Oceangoing Passenger Fleet
Pursuant to the requirements ofthe 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative NCLA agreed to promote US-flag cruising enhance military sealift capacity and expand the US maritime labor base No other major cruise line had ever undertaken such a commitment to the US flag and the public policy objectives Congress sought to achieve under the PVSA or the 2003 Act Introduction ofPRIDE OF ALOHA in 2004 was a significant development in the maritime industry because it marked the restoration ofthe
10 Id at 26983 11 Customs Regulations include a provision on the effect ofruling letters and with respect to carrier rulings the applicable regulation refers to rulings setting forth a determination as to whether or not the primary object of a contemplated voyage is coastwise transportation in violation of46 USC sect 289 [pYSA codified at 46 USC sect55103] 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 12 50 Fed Reg at 26983 13 A modem cruise ship with 2400 passengers for example would be subject to a fine of$720OOO per cruise based on the statutory penalty of$300 for each passenger transported in violation of the Act 14 19 CFR sect 480a(d) IS 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 16 There is one older reported mling involving a request to drop the Ensenada port call from a Los AngeleslHawaiiLos Angeles itinerary which Customs held would violate the PYSA In dicta Customs acknowledged that the itinerary could be in compliance if the Ensenada call were not dropped but did not address the issue ofwhether a one hour service call where no passengers depart the vessel would be sufficient The carrier that obtained that ruling has since left the Hawaii market See Customs Ruling HQ 114078 re Crystal Hannony (Nov 4 1997)
5
us flag to the oceangoing cruise industry A contemporaneous press release from the Us Department ofTransportation reported that the three US-flag cruise ships to be introduced pursuant to the 2003 Act were expected to create more than 20000 US jobs generate more than $825 million ofexpenditures in the US economy and create nearly $360 million in federal tax revenue by the end of 200717 In 2005 the PRIDE OF AMERICA was introduced and in 2006 the third vessel PRIDE OF HAWAll was introduced to Hawaii Both the PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAIl offer 7shyday inter-island Hawaii itineraries whereas PRIDE OF ALOHA operates on 7 and 10 day cruises exclusively among the islands ofHawaii as well as 11 day cruises that include a foreign port call at Fanning Island To date NCLA has invested over $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships in furtherance ofthe policy objectives of the PVSA and the 2003 Act These ships employ over 4000 seafarers and generate hundreds ofmillions of dollars in benefits for Hawaii and the nation
(b) Significant Increase in Foreign Flag Capacity Since 2003
The most significant change in the Hawaii cruise market since 2003 has been the dramatic increase in capacity A significant portion ofthis capacity increase is directly attributable to NCLAs fulfillment ofthe Congressional mandate in the 2003 Act However foreign-flag operations in the Hawaii market as measured in passenger nights18 have skyrocketed Based on MARAn data derived from the US Customs Border Patrol Vessel Entrance and Clearance documents the passenger nights for foreign flag vessels departing from the West Coast to Hawaii on round trip cruise have increased several hundredfold during this period19 See Exhibit A
(c) NCLA Has Incurred Substantial Losses During this Period
Since 2004 NCLA has lost cumulatively more than a quarter ofa billion dollars A principal reason for these losses has been the increase in foreign capacity in this market NCLA has taken significant steps to reduce costs to address the increase in foreign competition but NCLA is at an inherent disadvantage when competing against foreign companies that are not subject to US labor laws US tax laws and other laws Ofcourse the statutory protections of the PVSA are intended to address these very issues That is why Customs immediate action to implement the proposed interpretation is critical for the US flag fleet Regrettably NCLA has already been forced to reduce overall capacity early next year with the withdrawal ofPRIDE OF HAWAlI to another
17 DOT Press Release dated June 72004 see also DOT Press Release dated August 132004 in connection with visit to PRIDE OF ALOHA by US Transportation Secretary Norman Y Mineta 11 Passenger nights (also referred to as passenger capacity days) are calculated by multiplying the number ofpassengers per vessel by the number ofcruise days in each itinerary by the number of cruises This is the unit ofmeasurement employed by MARAn In contrast passenger bed supply (also referred to as passenger capacity) data reflects only the number ofberths per vessel multiplied by the number of cruises and hence understates the market by excluding the full economic value ofthe cruise perfonned 19 In 2003 the total number ofpassenger nights for round-trip West Coast to Hawaii cruises was 303325 which jumped by 353 to 1072329 in 2006 and by 430 to 1304546 from 2003 to 2007 (The 2007 figure is based on MARAD data for six months and a1ll1ualized by published itineraries for the balance of the year)
6
market for operation under foreign flag This move alone will result in the loss ofover 1000 American seafaring jobs
5 Customs Proposed Interpretation is Necessary to Further the Important National Security and Public Policy Objectives Embodied in Federal Law
As Customs has properly noted the increase in foreign competition in the Hawaii trades in contravention of the PVSA pose[s] an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels[] As the operator of these ships NCLA has a vested interest in protecting the jobs ofthe thousands ofAmerican crewmembers and cruise ship service providers who support these vessels NCLA also has an interest in protecting the substantial economic investment it has made to revitalize the US flag passenger vessel fleet But a balancing of interests in the context of Customs enforcement ofexisting law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act requires a much broader focus
The legislative history of the 2003 Act expressly recognized the national security and public policy import ofestablishing a US flag passenger vessel fleet as a means to maintain the countrys preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool of qualified seafarers and as a means to help sustain a fleet ofUS-flag vessels to su~ort
the nations military and maritime industrial base for times ofnational emergency
Congress understood the importance ofestablishing a viable US flag cruise ship fleet as something larger than the vessels themselves These national security and public policy objectives must be weighed in the balance as Customs assesses how best to interpret its rules to give effect to the PVSA and the 2003 Act
6 Customs Should Clarify that the Proposed Interpretation is Limited to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades and Adopt Reasonable Measures to Ensure Sufficient Foreign Content
Since publication ofthe proposed interpretative rule several commenters have observed that the scope of the proposed interpretation is ambiguous because the language of Section VI referencing any cruise itinerary appears broader than the caption Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises and the entire discussion in the published notice which focuses exclusively on US-flag coastwise vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA agrees that the proposed interpretation should be clarified so that its scope is limited to vessels operating roundtrip voyages from US ports that include Hawaii port calls
NCLA supports the concept reflected in the proposed interpretive rule that round trip Hawaii itineraries from US ports on foreign ships must include a material and measurable degree ofoverall foreign port content as compared to US port content
20 149 Congo Rec S1117 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)
7
(a) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is also Consistent with Subsequent Congressional Enactments Modifying the PVSA
As discussed above it is well established that the PVSA was designed toRrotect US-flag vessels from foreign competition in the coastwise and domestic trades 1
Subsequent legislative enactments however have appropriately differentiated among distinct geographic markets and trades including Canada Alaska Puerto Rico and Hawaii based on the existence or non-existence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
In 1938 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers by Canadian passenger vessels on Lake Ontario and the St Lawrence River until such time as passenger service shall be established by vessels of the United States22 Similarly in 1961 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers on Canadian vessels within Alaska or between Alaska and other points in the United States until such time as passenger service is established by vessels ofthe United States23
In 1984 Congress modified the application ofthe PVSA to pennit the transportation ofpassengers between Puerto Rico and other United States ports on foreign-flag vessels24 As with the other statutory exceptions this provision is qualified and expires [o]n a showing that a United States passenger vessel qualified to engage in the coastwise trade is offering or advertising passenger service between a port in Puerto Rico and another port in the United States2S
Congress acted again with respect to the application of the PVSA with the 2003 Act in which it authorized three vessels that did not meet the US-build requirements of the PVSA to operate as modem US-flagged cruise ships in regular service in Hawaii26 The 2003 Act imposes a specific geographic limitation on the operation of any ship documented under this authority to operations only in regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands ofHawaii and shall not transport passengers in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico or the Caribbean Sea except in certain limited circumstances27 As above the limited nature of the 2003 Act is express it is strictly limited to the large ocean-going cruise ships and then only those operating in the regular Hawaii service where there are no US-flag operations28
21 See Act ofJune 19 1886 c 421 sec 8 24 Stat 81 Act of February 171898 c 26 sec 2 30 Stat 248 22 S] Res 174 75th Cong 52 Stat 223 (Alp 251938) codified at46 USC sect 55121(a) 23 See Pub L 87-77 75 Stat 196 (Jun 30 1961) codified at 46 USC sect 55121(b) 24 See Pub L 98-563 98 Stat 2916 (Oct 301984) codified at 46 USC sect 55104(b) 25 46 USC sect 55104(c)(l) see also 46 USC 46 USc sect 55104(cX2)(expiration of exemption upon availability ofa non-coastwise qualified US-flag vessel offering service in the relevant market) 26 149 Congo Rec SI118 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)(statementofSen Inouye) 27 Pub L 108-7 117 Stat 79 (Feb 20 2003) 28 149 Congo Rec S11l9 (dailyed Jan 17 2003Xstatement of Sen Inouye)
8
In each ofthese instances Congress fashioned a narrow exception to the PVSA that differentiated among distinct geographic markets based on the existence or nonshyexistence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
As the federal agency responsible for administering the 2003 Act MARAD requested that Customs act to protect US flag passenger vessel interests in the Hawaii trades29 Limiting the scope ofthe proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades also reflects Customs appreciation of the PVSA in the context of the subsequent Congressional action30 Viewing the Congressional modifications to the PVSA as a whole Congress has specifically and repeatedly differentiated among distinct geographic markets when it has found it necessary and appropriate to do so to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests It is well established that the proper interpretation of a statutory scheme includes consideration ofsubsequent statutes even though the underlying statute itselfhas not been expressly amended31 Accordingly Customs should likewise limit the scope ofthe proposed PVSA interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades because that is the only geographic market as mandated by the 2003 Act in which oceangoing US-flag cruise ships are operating
(b) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Consistent with Public Policy Objectives of the 1985 Rulemaking
In 1985middot Customs liberalized the regulations implementing the PVSA by eliminating certain regulatory prohibitions on foreign flag vessels In the context of the 1985 rulemaking Customs justified a relaxation ofthe regulations on the grounds that it would simplify the administration of the PVSA and would benefit the economy ofcertain American coastwise ports without eroding the statutory protection given to American vessels engaged in solely domestic trade32
Customs thus sought to reconcile US port economic interests with US-flag passenger vessel interests Both of these twin policy objectives are furthered by
29 See 72 Fed Reg 65488 (Nov 21 2007)( MARAn bas asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the ~eratiODS ofcoastwise-qualified cruise ship operators)
See generally FDA v Brown amp Williamson Tobacco Corp 529 US 120 132-133 (2000)(assessing propriety ofagency construction ofFood DIUg and Cosmetics Act and descnbing responsibility of reviewing cowt to assess statutory provisions in the context of subsequent legislative enactments) 31 See Brown amp Williamson 529 US 143 (holding that proper construction ofstatutory provision must necessarily assume that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications ofa later statute This is particularly so where the scope of the earlier statute is broad but the subsequent statutes more specifically address the topic athand) see also United States v Estate ofRomani 523 US 517 530-531 (1998)( holding that a later-enacted statute should control the construction of the federal lien priority statute a specific policy embodied in a later federal statute should control om construction of the [earlier] statute even though it ha[s] not been expressly amended) United States v Fausto 484 US 439453 (1988)(The courts frequently find Congress to have done this - whenever in fact they interpret a statutory text in the light ofsurrounding texts that happen to have been subsequently enacted This classic judicial task of reconciling many laws enacted over time and getting them to make sense in combination necessarily assumes that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications of a later statute) 32 50 Fed Reg 26982 (JuI 11985)
9
limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades
As noted earlier the 2003 Act limits the operation of the NCLA US-flag oceangoing passenger vessels to regular service in Hawaii Because there are no oceangoing US-flag vessels operating in any market other than the Hawaii trades Customs should limit the scope of the proposed interPretation to that market Such a limitation protects US flag passenger vessel interests without prejudicing US port interests In contrast an application of the proposed interpretation to any itinerary would needlessly harm US port interests unrelated to Hawaii without any countervailing benefit to US-flag passenger vessel interests Accordingly limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation is consistent with the public policy objectives of the 1985 rulemaking as well as the 2003 Act
(c) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Also Consistent with Customs Commitment to Revisit the Scope of its Rules to Protect US-Flag Interests
The relaxation ofthe PVSA regulations in 1985 was premised in large part on Customs finding that there was no regular salt water US-flag passenger fleet in operation at that time33 Acknowledging that the relaxed regulations could harm USshyflag interests Customs committed in the preamble ofthe 1985 final rule to immediately reconsider its interpretation if it is ever shown that there is a viable US flag vessel operating in competition with foreign-flag vessels34
Congress enacted the 2003 Act to stimulate the development of a US flag cruise ship industry As noted above the legislative history ofthat Act makes clear that Congress sought to revitalize the US-flag cruise industry as a means to maintain Americas preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool ofqualified seafarers help sustain a fleet of US flag vessels to support our military and a maritime industrial base create thousands of seagoing and shoreside American jobs and stimulate the development ofa US flag cruise ship tourism business with the commensurate benefits to the US tax base the US economy and US employment
Customs is now acting at MARADs request to revisit its interpretation ofthe regulations implementing the PVSA because recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwise-qualified cruise ship operations35 That is to say that the concerns articulated by Customs in the context of the 1985 rulemaking have materialized and US-flag passenger vessel interests are in fact being hanned in the Hawaii trades by foreign competitors
33 50 Fed Reg 26983 34Id
3S 72 Fed Reg 56488 (Nov 21 2007)
I
10
Because the US-flag passenger vessels are limited by statute to regular service in Hawaii limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the
Hawaii trades is consistent with Customs historical commitment to revisit its interpretation ofthe implementing regulations to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests
7 Conclusion
For the reasons stated above NCLA commends the efforts ofCustoms and MARAn to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act as applied to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA respectfully requests Customs to move ahead promptly with p~blicati~nof a final interpretive rule to advance the important national security arid public policy objectives ofthese laws
We greatly appreciate the opportunity to submit these comments
Sincerely
~~~ Alan T Yamamoto Vice President Hawaii Operations
Exhibit A
Ship Name Serenade Of The Seas Departure Port San Diego California Ports of Call San Diego California Kailua Kona Hawaii Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii Hlo Hawaii Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii Ensenada Mexico San Qigo California
2007 Date(s) Oct 05
Sailing Itinerary
Day Port H ~rrive Depart Activity
05-0ct San Diego California 500 PM
06-0ct Cruising
07-0ct Cruising
08-0ct Cruising
09-0ct Cruising
10-0ct Kailua Kona Hawaii 700 AM 900 PM Tendered
11-00t Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 1000 AM Tendered
12middot0ct Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 900 PM Tendered
13-0ct Hilo Hawaii 700 AM 600 PM Docked
14middot0ct Honoulu (Oahu) Hawaii 700 AM Docked
15-0ct Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii 200 AM Docked
6-0ct CrUising
17-0ct Cruising
18-0ct Cruising
19middot0ct Cruising
-7 20-00t
O-Oot
Ensenada ~i1exico
San Deqo California
i 00 ~r1
700 ~M
200 oM D1Jcked ~
EUROPE CRUISES
EUROPEAN EXPLORER CRUISE MEOffiRRANEANITRANSATLANTIC CRUISE
12 17DAYS DAYS
ROYAL STARPRINCESS PRINCESS
sail between VENICE
ROME to
and FT LAUDERDALE
LONDON
2003 DEPARTURE DATES
2004 DEPARTURE DATE CRUISE ITINERARY
May 7 CRUISE I1INfRARY Oct 7 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Jul30l
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Venice Italy (overnight onboard ship) EMBARK PMAug 11 Sep 41 1 Rome Italy (Civitavecchia) EMBARK PM 2 Vernce Italy 2 PM
2 FlorencePisa Italy (Livorno) 7 AM 7PM 3 At Sea 3 Cannes France (for Monte Carlo) 7 AM 5 PM 4 Barcelona Spain 9 AM 6 PM 5 At Sea 6 Gibraltar 8AM PM 7 Casablanca Morocco (for Marralech) 5AM 6 PM 8 Seville Spain (Cadiz) 8AM 6PM 9 LisbQn Portugal 9AM 5PM 10 Vigo Spain 830AM 4PM 11 At Sea
tllinmryope~te$ 12 ParisNormandy France (Ie Havre) 7 AMlnftYCl5eordu ~rttimesuuyYilY 13 London England (Southampton) DISEMBARK AM
Caudis Park Cuell Barcelona Spain
SCANDINAVIARUSSIA BALTIC HERITAGE WESTERN EUROPEBRITISH ISLES
ROYALGRAND10 GRAND 1210 PRINCESSDAYS PRINCESS PRINCESS DAYSDAYS
ROUNDTRIPROUNDTRIPROUNDTRIP fromframfrom
LONDONCOPENHAGENCOPENHAGEN 2004 DEPARTURE2004 DEPARTURE 2004 DEPARTUREDATESDATES DATES
May19tMay 29 May 19 jul28 JunSJun 18 Aug 231
Jul8 ju118Jul28 Aug 7 CRUISE ITINERARYAug 17
CRUISE IIINERARY ARRIVE DEPART CRUISE IrINERARY EMBARK PMDAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
DAY ARRIVE DEPART 7AM 6PM1 Copenhagen Denmark EMBARK PM EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 7AM 6PM
Stockholm Sweden (Nynilshamn) 7 AM 530PM 6AM PM Helsinki Finland 830 AM 6PM St PetersbUrg Russia (overnight onboard ship) 630 AM 9AM 9PM St Petersburg Russia 6PM
7 Tallinn Estonia 7 AM 1PM 8 Gdansk Poland (Gdynia) 9 AM 4PM 9 Warnemfinde Germany (for amprlin) 8 AM 10 PM 10 Helsing0r Denmark 9 AM 11 AM 10 Copenhagen Denmark (overnight onboard ship) 1 PM 11 Copenhagen Denmark DISEMBARK AM
middotScrvlcctillforlh=CllCIIIlicmIOptoluItllUllwWdlseJnbIDltHdlinprAfbrtour~dllmJlwktbeshJpwl1lPfllClaquodtoCopetWampen and pmenpoundm Qfl tours from HelMp will Rboird ship tPolttimes~myAninliI1ddepartu~itRosythDubJinmdFa1mauthwl)dICtotXLolconditions
tPOrtordermdtlme$maynI) ttCdlitEdinbuJlhotmdedto~mllocunionforMiliblyTltOO~on8123wi1inlmiddotUIIisitSouthQuemsfmyinstudofJosylh
BRITISH ISLES
ROYAL12 PRINCESSDAYS
ROUNDTRIP
from
LONDON
2004 DEPARTURE DATES
Jun 12 jul6
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Lqn4onmiddotpoundngland(Southampton) EMIWlIlt PM 2 Cornwall England (Falmouth) 7AM SPM
Waterford Ireland 8AM 6PM Dublin Ireland 7AM 1130 PM
t PQrtbme5 lliIyyuy Anini Illd departure at Rosytb Dublin md Filmouth ViiYdue to Iiltlal conditions
WESTERN EUROPE
ROYAL12 PRINCESSDAYS
ROUNDTRIP
from
LONDON
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
May 31
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 London England (Southampton) EMBARK PM
CRUISE ITINERARY
EUROPE CRUISES
ICELANDNORWEGIAN FJORDS
ROYAL12 PRINCESSDAYS
ROUNDTRIP
from
LONDON
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
Jun24
CRUISE IflNERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 London Englan4 (Southampton) EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 3 Berge Norway 6PM 4 Hellesylt Norway 830AM 1030 AM 4 Gciranger Norway Geiranger Fjord Sceni Cruising UN 7PM
9AM SPM5
1PM 8AM SPM
10 At Sea
middotStlviceallfof~fjonlovedmdshOR=unlDllOplion1Itourswllldi5anbarilitHelIcsyItAftcrtollrpuKllJClJdisembark
theshlpwiUprocudto~md~lampClSonlounfrwnHdaytwl1lblmd$hip
NORWEGIAN FJORDSNORTH CAPE
ROYAL12 PRINCESSDAYS
ROUNDTRIP
from
LONDON
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
JuilS
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Loridon ~gland (South~mpton) EMBARK PM 2-3 At Sea
Hellesylt Norway 830AM 1030 AM Golranger Norway Geiranger Fjord Scenic Cruising 12N 7PM
TrodheilllNorwaY 9AM SPM At Sea Cross the Ardgt Cirde
6PM 8AM lPM
8AM 130 PM 430PM 630PM
7AM 3PM
Bagpipers Edinburgh Scotland Royal Princess in Geiranger Fjord Norway
EUROPE CRUISES amp CRUISETOURS
17 DAYS
GRAND PRINCESS
FT LAUDERDALE to
COPENHAGEN
2004 DEPARTURE DATE MayZ
CRUISE IfINERARY
DAY 1 2-6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
PORT Ft Lauderdale Florida At Sea ~ores IslandsPortugal (Ponto Delgado) At Sea Lisbon Portugal Vigo Spain At Sea ParislNormandy France (Le Havre) RotterdamThe Netherlands At Sea Hamburg Germay (for Berlin) At Sea Olso Norway Oslo Fjord scnic Cruising Copenhagen Denmark
ARRIVE
N
12N 9AM
7AM
6AM
DISEMBARK AM
DEPART EMBARK PM
6PM
7PM 6PM
7PM 7PM
1UM
MEDITERRANEAN CRUISETOUR
TRANSATLANTICWESTERN EUROPE ICELAND amp GREENLANDTRANSATLANTIC
16 GRAND DAYS PRINCESS
COPENHAGEN to
NEW YORK
2004 DEPARTURE DATE Aug 27
CRUISE IIINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Copenhagen Denmark EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 3 Dover England (forLondon) 7AM 7PM 4 Cornwall England (Falmouth) 9AM 6PM 5 Dublin Ireland lOAM 9PM 6 GlasgowEdinburgh Scotland (Greenock) 8AM 12 M 7 Belfast Northern Ireland 1030 AM 530 PM 8 At Sea 9 Reykjavik Iceland 9AM 9PM 10 At Sea 11 Prins Christian Sund Scenic Cruising 12N 6PM 12 Qaqortoq Greenland 7 AM 2PM 13 At Sea 14 SI Johns Newfoundland Canada 12N 7PM 1516 At Sea 17 New York CIty New York DISEMBARK AM
SCANDINAVIARUSSIA CRUISETOUR
Church of the Savior on the Spilled Blood St Petersburg Russia
WESTERN EUROPE CRUISETOUR
CRUISEIOUR ITINERARY
CRUISETOUR lA11C CRUISETOUR ITINERARY CRUISETOUR 4A14C CRUISETOUR II INERARY
DAY PORT By Sea By Land DAY PORT By Sea By Land CRUISETOUR 7Al7C18 STAR PRINCESS 1 Rome 17 GRAND PRINCESS 1 BudapestDAYS DAYS DAY PORT By Sea By Land 22 Rome Budapest 18 ROYAL PRINCESS 1 Paris
ROMETODI 3 RomeTodi BUDAPEST VIENNA 3 BudapestVienna DAYS 2 Paris and 4 TodiFlorence and 4 Vienna 3 Paris
PARIS EUROSTAR5 Florence 5 ViennaPrague 4 ParisLondon 6 FlorenceVeniceEmbark 6 Prague and 5 London
FLORENCE PRAGUE
plus plus LONDON7 Venice Italy (overnight onboard ship) 7 PragueCopenhagenEmbark 6 LondonSouthamptonEmbark
GRAND MEDITERRANEAN SCANDINAVIARUSSIA plus 7 At Sea CRUISE 8-9 At Sea CRUISE 8 At Sea WESTERN EUROPE 8 Bilbao Spain10 Istanbul Turkey 9 Stockholm Sweden (Nyniishamn) BRITISH ISLES CRUiSE2004 DEPARTURE DATES 2004 DEPARTURE DATES 9 Bordeaux France (Le Verdon)
11 Kusadasi Turkey (for Ephesus) 10 Helsinki FinlandApr Sf 2004 DEPARTURE DATES 10 At SeaMay 131 Jul2Apr 29 12 Athens Greece (Piraeus) 11 SI Petersburg Russia (overnight onboard ship) 11 GlasgowEdinburgh Scotland (Greenock)May 23 JulUt May 141 26middot Jul tt 13~ 250
May 23 Jun 16 13 At Sea JunZt JulU 12 SI Petersburg Russia Jun n 19 Aug 18o 300 12 Dublin Ireland
]un 12 Aug l t 13 Cork IrelandJuliO 14 NaplesCapri Italy 13 Tallinn EstoniaJun 22 t Aug 11 Toun~eonlymilabkwithcruise5indi[itbtAug 3 15 FlorencelPisa Italy (Livorno) 14 Cdansk Poland 14 Cornwall England (Falmouth)
Aug 27 tBritishliksetuise aWEwupeiBritishlslesouist 15 ParisNormandy France (Le Havre)16 Monte Carlo Monaco 15 At Sea bull WestemEuropeCrube middotlcdandINorwqlmFjOllisetuise 16 Rotterdam The Netherlands
t Crulsetour lA only combinable with 12--dayGreck fst 17 Barcelona Spain (overnight onboard ship) 16 Olso NOrway Qsld Fjord Scenic Cruising bull Norwqian FjordsNorth Cipecruise 17 BrusselsBruges Belgium (Zeebrugge)tCruixtour 4A only combinable with lo-day Baltic
crulse shown on PI 11 18 Barcelona Spain Heritage cruise shawn on pg 12 OCrubctnur 7C only combinable with EwuJlWl ExplorerCrube17 Copenhagen Denmark 18 London England (Southampton)
EXOTICS CRUISES
AUSTRALIANEW ZEALAND AUSTRALIANEW ZEALAND AUSTRALIAASIA
12 14 19 DAYS DAYS DAYS
SAPPHIRE PRINCESS SAPPHIRE PRINCESS SAPPHIRE PRINCESS
saH between SYDNEYAUCKLAND SYDNEY
toand to BANGKOKSYDNEY AUCKLAND 2005 DEPARTURE DATES 2005 DEPARTURE DATE
Mar7Jan 6 2004 DEPARTURE DATEJan 1St
Dec 23 CRUISE ITINERARYJr ift Feb 23 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
CRUISE ITINERARY 1 Sydlley Austrli EMBARK PM CRUISE ITINERARY 2 At Sea
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTDAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 3 Brisbane Australia 8AM 6PM 1 Sydlley Australia EMBARK PM 4 At Sea 1 Aucklalld N~w Zealalld EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 5 Cid Harbor Austrlia (for Great Barrier Reef) 7AM 5PM2 At Sea 3 Melbourne Australia 8 AM 6 PM 6 Cirns Australia (Yorkeys) 8AM 6PM
3 WeIUllgton New Zealand 8 AM 6 PM 4 At Sea 7-8 At Sea 4 Christchurch New Zealalld (Lytlelton) 8 AM 6 PM 5 Tasmallia Australia (Hobart) 8 AM 6 PM 9 Darwin Australia lPM 8pM 5 Dunedill N~ Zealalld (Port Chalmers) 8 AM 6 PM 6-7 At Sea 10-11 At Sea 6 Fiordland Natiollal Park Scenic Cruising AM 6 PM 8 Fiordlalld Natiollal Park Scellic Cruising 7 AM 5 PM 12 Bali Illdonesi (Padang Bay) 7AM 6PM
7-8 At Sea J DUlledill New Zealalld (Port Chalmers) 8 AM 6 PM 13-14 At Se 10 Christchurch N~ Zealalld (Lytlelton) 8 AM 6 PM 15 Kuala Lumpur Mlaysia (Port KeIang) 8AM 6PM9 Tasmania Australia (Hobart) 8 AM 6 PM 11 Wellillgtoll New Zealmd 8 AM 6 PM 16 Sillgpore 8AM 6PM
10 At Sea 12 At Sea 17 At Sea 11 Melbourne Australia 8 AM 6 PM 13 Taurallga New Zealalld 8 AM 730 PM 18 Ho Chi Millh City Vietnm (Vung Tau) 7AM 730 PM 12 At S~a 19 At Sea 14 Bay of Islallds New Zealalld 8 AM 7 PM 13 SydPey Australia DISEMBARK AM 20 Bmgkok Thailalld (Laem Chabang) DISEMBARK AM15 Aucklalld New Zealalld DISEMBARK AM
t llinemy opcrnesln reverse order Port times mil1 my
CHINAFAR EAST SOUTHEAST ASIAFAR EAST
1612 DAYSDAYS
PACIFIC PRINCESS
SAPPHIRE PRINCESS PACIFIC PRINCESS
OSAKA BEIJING to
to BANGKOK OSAKA
2004 DEPARTURE DATE 2004 DEPARTURE DATEPAClFlC PRINCESS
julllt Jun 11 2005 DEPARTURE DATE
SAPPHIRE PRINCESS Apr 11
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Osaka Japall EMBARK PM
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Beijillg China (Xingang) EMBARK PM 2 Hiroshima Japall 1 PM 6PM 2 DaHan China AM 5PM 3 At Sea 3 At Sea 4 Shmghai Chilla 7 AM 6PM 4 Shallghai Chilla (overnight onboard ship) 7AM 5 At Sea 5 Shallghai China 6PM 6 Okinaw Jpll 7 AM 1 PM
7 Taipei Taiwm (KeeIung) 9 AM 7PM6 At Sea 8 At Se7 Pusan South Korea 8AM 5PM 9 HOllg KOllg Chill 8 AM 7PM 8 At Sea 10-11 At S~a J Vladivostok Russia 5AM 730 PM 12 Ho Chi MiIJh City Vietnm (Phu My) 7 AM 5PM 10 At Sea 13 At Se 11 Nagasaki Japan 7AM 6PM 14 Singpore 8 AM 6pM
15 KUlltll Mlysi 830 AM 430 PM12 At Sea 16 At Sea 13 Osaka Japan DISEMBARK AM 17 Ballgkok Thaillld DISEMBARK AM t Sailing alls i1t Hiroshima on Dl) 11 In place of Nilgilsaki Port times milY vary
CRUISE I flNERARY CRUISE I flNERARY
Ho Chi Minh City Vietnam
EXOTICS CRUISES
SOUTHEAST ASIACHINA SOUTHEAST ASIACHINA FAR EASTALASKA
PACIflC PRINCISS ROYAL PRINCESS
16 16 19 DAYS DAYS DAYS
SAPPHIRE SAPPHIRE PRINCESS
Sail between PRINCESSBANGKOK
and BANGKOK OSAKA
BEIJING to to
2004 DEPARTURE DATES BEIJING SEATTLEPAClFlC PRINCESS
Jun 27tt 200S DEPARTURE DATE200S DEPARTURE DATE ROYAL PRINCESS
Mar 26 Apr 23Oct 16 Nov lt
CRUISE I I INERARY CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
1 GsakaJpan EMBARK PM1 Bangkok Thailand (Laem Chabang) EMBARKPM 1 Bangkok Thailand (Laern Chabang) EMBARK IM 2 At Sea2 At Sea 2 AtSea bull 3 Nagasaki Japan 7 AM 6PM
9AM 7PM 3 Singapore 7PM 4 Pusan Soqth Korea 8AM 5PM 4-5 At Sea 5 At Sea gt bull
7AM 7PM 6 Da Nwg Vietn~1Il 7AM middot7PM 6 Vladivostok Russia SAM 730 PM 7 At Sea 7 AtSea
7AM 12M 8 Hong lltog ihin~ 7AM 12M 8 Sapporo japan (Muroran) 6AM 6PM 9-10 At Sea 9-10 At Sea 9-12 At Sea cross Intemational Dateline
13 DutchHarbor Alaska (Aleutian Islands) 230 PM 7PM11 ShaJlgllai Cbina (overnight onboard ship) lAM 11 Shangh~t Cllina (ovmightonJoltird $hip) 7 AM 14 At Sea shy12 Shanghai China 6PM 12 Shanghai China
7AM - - tlJf
6PM 15 Anchorage Alaska (Seward) 8AM 6PM13 At Sea 13 AtSea i 16 College Fjord Seni CruIsing 630AM 930 AM
14 Nagasaki japan 7AM 6PM 14 Nagasaki japan 6PM 17 Glacier Ilay Scenic Cruising 1030 AM 830 PM 15 Pusan South lltOrea TAM 4PM 1~ bull Pu~an SQuth iorea middot4lM 18 middotmiddot juneau Alaska 6 AM 2PM 16 At Sea 16 At Sea 19 - At Sea 17 Beijing China (Xingangy OISEMBAlUe AM 17 Beijing Cliina (Xingang) 20 SeattleWashington DISEMBARK AM
t ltinemy Operne5 in rcvmc Older ttPorttimcsmiYnl)middotShlpwilldocklnampngkoknsttadofL1cm~
POLYNESIA amp THE COOK ISLANDS POLYNESIA amp THE MARQUESAS ISLANDS
10 10 DAYS DAYS
TAHITIAN PRINCESSTAHITIAN PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIPROUNDTRIP fromfrom
PAPEETEPAPEETE 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
2004 DEPARTURE DATES Oct 4 24 Mayl 17 27 Sep4 14 24 Nov 13 Jun 6 16 26 0lt 14 00323Ju16 16 26 Nov 323 2005 DEPARTURE DATESAug 5 15 25 Dec 13 Jan 12
Feb 1 21200S DEPARTURE DATES
~~ 122 ~~Il 13 23 CRUISE ITINERARY
CRUISE II INERARY DAY PORT
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Papeete Tahiti 1 Papeete Tahiti (overnight onboard ship) EMBARK PM
2 Moorea Polynesia 2 Papeete Tahiti SPM 3 Huahil1e P9lynesia 8AM 5 PM 3 Tuamotu Atolls Senic Cruising
5 PM8-AM 4 At Sea I At Sea 5 Rarotonga Cook Islands 8AM 5 PI~ 5 Nuku Hiva Marquesas Islands 6 At Sea 6 Hiva Ga Marquesas Islands 8AM 5PM 7 Raiatea Polynesia overnight onboard Ship 6AM
7 At Sea middotai~ RaiateaPQlynesia igt gt 6AM 8 Rangiroa P~iynesia 8AM 4PM8 Tahaa scenic Cryising 630 AM 830 AM
8 BoraBoraPQlyrtesia(ovemightollboard ship) UN 9 Tahaa ~enl Cruising 8 AM middot11AM
9 Bora lora Polynesia 5iM 9 Raiatea Polynesia 12 N 11 PM 10 Moore Polynesfa 8 AM 5 PM la ~ Bora ~oraPoIYnesia 8AM bull 5PM
11 Papeete Tahiti DISEMBARK AM 11 Papeete Tahiti DISEMBARK AM Iong Kong Harbor
3 Singapore 4-5 At Sea 6 Da NangVieinam 7 At Sea 8 liong Kong China
EXOTICS CRU ISES
HAWAIITAHITI HAWAIIAN ISLANDS SOUTH PACIFIC ISLANDS
12 1515 DAYS DAYSDAYS
PACIFIC
TAHITIAN PRINCESS ISLAND PRINCESSPAClFIC PRINCESS
PRINCESS
SYDNEYROUNDTRIP sail between tofrom
PAPEETE PAPEETELOS ANGELES and
2004 DEPARnIRE DATEHONOLULU 2004 DEPARTURE DATES Apr 21
2004 DEPARTURE DATES ~~~l CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE 11 INERARY
Oet21t CRUISE ITINERARY Nov Sf
MayS PACIFIC PRINCESS DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
Nov20t DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DecSt 1 Los Angeles CalifornIa EMBARK AM 1 Sydney AustralIa EMBARK PMAug 17t
Dec20t1 Papeete Tahiti EMBARK PM 2-4 At Sea
2005 DEPARTURE DATE Jan 4 2-5 At Sea
(overnight onboard ship) Jan 19 5 Auckland New Zealand 7 AM 2PMFeb 3t 6 Iiilo Hawaii 8 AM 6 PM
TAHITIAN PRINCESS Papeete Tahiti 11 PM fb 18 6-7 At Sea Kilauea Voko ~enic CruisingApr 12 MarS t 3 Moorea Polynesia 8 AM 5 PM 8 Suva fijI 11 AM 430 PM1~i~t 7 Kona Hawaii 8AM 6PM4 Bora Bora PolYnesia 8 AM 5 PM 9 At Sea Cross International Dateline Apr 19
5-6 At Sea 8 Honolulu Hawaii 8AM 11 PM 10 Apia Western Samoa 830 AM 2PM 7 Christmas Isl~ndKiribati 1Z N 5 PM 9 Kauai Hawaii (Nawlliwlli) 8AM 6PM 11-12 At Sea 8-9 At Sea 10 Maui Hawaii (Lahaina) 6PM 13 Bora Bora Polynesia lOAM 6PM 10 HlloliaWlii 6 PM 13 Raiatea Polynesia (overnight onboard 11 PM11-14 At Sea 11 Maui Hawaii (Lahaina) 8 AM 6 PM 14 Raiatea Polynesia 11 PM
15 Ensenada Mexico (service call)KaUaiH~waii(Nawllfwtli) 8AM 6 PM 15 Moorea Polynesia 8AM 5PM
tllinemyopcr~ttsln=x QnIerPurtlimcslmYvary Honolulu Hawaii DISEMBARK AM 16 Los Angeles CalIfornia DISEMBARK AM 16 Papeete Tahiti DISEMBARK AM
ISLANDS OF THE PACIFIC THEATER SOUTH PACIFIC EXPLORER
24 24 DAYS DAYS
PAClFIC PRINCESS PAClFIC PRINCESS
sail between HONOLULU PAPEETE
and to OSAKA FT LAUDERDALE
2004 DEPARTURE DATES
Mayl 2004 DEPARTURE DATEJul2Sj
Aug 29 CRUISE ITINERARY
CRUISE ITINERARYDAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART EMBARK PM DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
1 Papeete Tahiti EMBARK PM lPM 7PM 2 8AM 11 PM
3 ~~~~~~ ~~~~Sta 8AM 5 PM 4-6 At Sea 7 Pitcairn Island Scenic Cruising 8AM 1211
8AM 12 N
7AM ZPM 8-9 At Sea 10 Easter Island Chile 8AM 2PM
9AM 11-14 At Sea 15 Callao Peru (overnight for Lima and Machu Picchu) 8AM 16 Callao Peru lPM 17 At Sea 18 Manta Ecuador (for Quito) 9fM 7PM 19 At Sea 20 Transit Panama Canal 7 AM 430 PM 21 San BIas Panama 8AM 5 PM 22 ft Sea 23 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands 7AM 4PM 24 At Sea
25 Ft Lauderdale Florida DISEMBARK AMMoorea Polynesia tllinemyoperataln~12onlerPortl1mesmiYmymiddot
EXOTICS CRUISES
HAWAIITAHITISOUTH PACIFIC AMAZONSOUTHERN CARIBBEAN CAPE HORNSTRAIT OF MAGELLAN
1430 12 DAYS DAYSDAYS
ROYAL PRINCESS ROYAL PRINCESSSAPPHIRE PRINCESS
sail betweenFT LAUDERDALE SANTIAGOLOS ANGELES to
andto MANAUS BUENOS AIRESSYDNEY 2005 DEPARTURE DATE 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
2004 DEPARTURE DATE Apr 9 Jan 10
Nov 22 Jan 241 Feb 7
FebZt
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
CRUISE ITINERARY
CRUISE ITINERARYCRUISE ITINERARY 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTDAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 2-3 At Sea 1 Santiago Chile (Valparaiso) EMBARK PM
1 Los ingeles California EMBARK PM 4 Tortola BritIsh Virgin Islands 8 AM 6 PM 2 At Sea 2 Ensenada Mexico 8AM 5PM 3 Puerto Montt Chile 7AM 6PM
3middot6 At Sea 4 At Sea 5 Dominica 9 AM 4 PM 7 Hilo Hawaii 8AM 5 At Sea Chilean Fjords Scenic Cruising6PM 6 Trinidad 9 AM 6 PM
8 Maui Hawaii (Lahaina) 8AM 6PM 6 At Sea Amalia Glacier Scentc CruiSi3f7 At Sea 7 Punta Arenas Chile (Strait of Magei an) 7AM 6PM9 Honolulu Hawaii 7AM 5PM
- 10middot13 At Sea 8 Beagle Channel Scenic Cruising 8 Ushuaia Argentina (Tierra del Fuo) 12N 8PM
8 Devils Island French Guiana (Isle Royal) 8 AM 2 PM 14 Bora Bora Polynesia 8AM 6PM 9 At Sea 9 At Sea Cape Hom Scenic Cruising
10 Santarem Brazil 9 AM 7 PM 10 Moorea Polynesia 8AM 6PM 10 Falkland Islands (Stanley) 8AM 6PM 10 Papeete Tahiti (overnight onboard ship) 9PM 11 At Sea
i 16 Papeete Tahiti 6PM 11 Boca da Valeria Brazil (Amazon River) 7 AM 2 PM 12 Puerto Madryn Argentina 6AM 5PM 17middot18 AtSea 12 Manaus Brazil (overnight onboard ship) 10 AM 13 At Sea
14 Montevideo Uruguay 9AM 6PM19 Pago Pago merlcan Samoa 8AM 6PM 13 Manaus Brazil DISEMBARK AM 15 Buenos Aires Argentina DISEMBARK AM 20 Apia Western Samoa 8AM 6PM 21 At Sea Cross International Dateline middotl1me5forallscenkouisinCile subjectlDclwIgc
tllinmryopefilteslnr=rscordttPorttlmislm)vary22 Suva Fiji 8AM 6PM l 23-24 At Sea
20 Auckland New Zealand 8AM 6PM ORINOCO RIVERSOUTHERN CARIBBEAN ANDESSOUTH AMERICA 26 Tauranga New Zealand 8AM 7PM 27 At Sea
28 Wellington Newealand 8AM 6PM 16 17 DAYS DAYS 29-30 AtSea
31 Sydney Australia DISEMBARK AM ROYAL PRINCESS ROYAL PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP SANTIAGO from to
FT LAUDERDALE FT LAUDERDALE
200S DEPARTURE DATE2005 DEPARTURE DATE
Mar 7Mar 24
CRUISE IIJNERARYCRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Santiago Chlle (Valparaiso) EMBARK PM
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM
2 La Serena Chile (Coquimbo) 8 AM 5 PM2-3 At Sea 3 At Sea Um6n Costa Rica 7AM 7PM 4 Arica Chile 7AM 6PMCristobal Panama (for Panama Canal) 8AM 5PM o At Sea
6 Cartagena Colombia 9AM 2 PM 6 San Martin Peru (for Pisco and Machu Picchu) 7AM 6PM 7 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 130 PM 7PM 7 Callao Peru (overnight for Lima) 530 AM 8-9 At sea 8 Callao Peru 1PM 10 Puerto Ordaz Venezuela (Orinoco River) 8AM 6PM 9 At Sea
i 11 At Sea 10 Manta Ecuador (overnight for Quito) 530AM 12 Greada 8AM i 11 Manta Ecuador 1lM5PMt 1~ Dolllinlca i 7N1 5 PM 12 At Sea
i 13 Transit Panama C~nal 7AM 430 PM14 St Thomas us Virgilslands 9AM 5PM 14 Cartagena Colombia 8AM 130 PMJs AtSei i 15 Aruba Netherlands intiiles 1PM 7PM 16 Princess Cays Bahamas 8AM 16-17 At Sea Tahiti Polynesia 17 FtLallardale Flillilt~ DISEMBARK AM 1ampmiddot Ft L~uderdale Florida DISEMBARK AM
AMAZON RIVERMEDITERRANEAN
21 DAYS
ROYAL PRINCESS
MANAUS
to ROME
2005 DEPARTURE DATE
Apr 21
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE M~naus Brazil (Wemight onboardship) Manaus Brazil
3 BocadaValeria Brazil (AriiazonRivet) 11 AM 4-6 At Sea 7 Recife Brazil 1 PM 8-11 AtSea 12 Dakar Senegal 8AM 13-14 At Sea 15 Agadir Morocco 7AM 16 Casablanca Morocco (for Marrakech) 8AM 17 Gibraltar lOAM 18 Allcante Spain 12 N 19 Barcelona Spain 8AM 20 Cannes France (for Monte Carlo) 8AM 21 FlorencePisa Italy (Livarno) 7AM 22 Rome Italy (Civitavecchia) DISEMBARK AM
INDIAN OCEANAUSTRALIA
28 DAYS
PACIfIC PRINCESS
CAPE TOWN
to SYDNEY
2004 DEPARTURpound DATE
Oct 20
CRUISE ITINERARY1 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Cape Town South Africa EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 3 East London South Africa 7AM 3PM 4 DurbahSouth Africa 8AM 6PM 5-7 At Sea 8 Nosy BeMadagascar 7AM 4PM 9 At Sea 10 Poilit des Galets Reunioll]slahd 11 Port Louis Mauritius 12c19 At Sea 20 Perth Australia (Fremantle) 21-23 At Sea 24 Adelaide Australla 25 At Sea 26 Melbourne Australla 7 27 Tasmania AUstralia (Burnie) 28 At Sea 29 Sydney Australia DISEMBARK AM
I
DEPART EMBARK PM
7PM 6PM
8pM
5PM
3PM 9PM 6PM 6PM 5PM 7PM 7PM
EXOTICS CRUISES
SOUIB ATIANTICANTARCfICNSOUIB AMERICA
24 DAYS
ROYAL PRINCESS
CAPE TOWN
to SANTIAGO
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
Dec 17
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Cape TownSouthAfrica (overnighfol1board ship) EMBARK PM 2 Cape Town South Africa 3PM 2 if~~t Good HopSCenic Crulsing 3-6 6 Tristan DaCunha United Kingdom 8AM 5PM 7-10 At Sea 11 Falkland Islands (Staliley) 8 AM 5PM 12 At Sea 13-16 Antarctica Peninsula ScehltmiddotCruising 14 days ihcludingmiddot Elephant
Island AntarcticSotind Deceptionlslana GerlacheStrait NaxefChannel Schollaert Channel SigJtla Island and Boyd Strait)
17 At Sea Cape Horn Scenic Cruising1amp UshuaiaArgentina (Tierra del fuego) bull middot6 AM 19 Punta Arenas Chile (Strait of Magellan) 7 AM 20 At Sea Amalia Glacier Scenic Cruising21 At Sea Chilean Fjords Scenic Cruising22 AtSea 23 Puerto Mont Chile 7AM 6PM 24 At Sea 25 Santiago Chile (Valparaiso) DISEMBARK AM
-nmes for1l scenlccruisinc are subJect to change
ASIAINDIAMEDITERRANEAN
30 ROYAL PRINCESSDAYS
ROME
to BANGKOK
2004 DEPARlURE DATE
Sep 16
CRUISE Il INERARY
WEST AFRICASOUTH AMERICA
28 DAYS
PACIFIC PRINCESS
FT LAUDERDALE
to CAPE TOWN
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
51 22
CRUISE ITINERARY
DISEMBARK AM
Aruba
EXOTICS CRU ISES amp CRU ISETOU RS
AUSTRALIANEW ZEALAND CRUISETOUR
AUSTRALIAN EXPLORER 2004 DEPARTURE DATESAPPHIRE21 plus
DAYS PRINCESS SYDNEY Dec 17 to
AUCKLAND CRUISETOUR 5P CRUiSE
CRUISETOUR ITINERARY
DAY PORT By Sea By Land DAY PORT
1 Sydney 14 Fiordland National Park 2 Sydney Scenic Cruising
3 SydneyAyers Rock 15 Dunedin New Zealand (Port Chalmers) 4 Ayers ROek
5 Ayers RockPort Douglas 16 Christchurch New Zealand 6 Port Douglas - (Lytleton)
7 Port DouglasSydneyEmbark 17 Wellilgton New Zealand 8 At Sea 18 At Sea 9 Melbourne Australia 19 Tauranga New Zealand
10 At Sea 20 Bay of Islands New Zealand 11 Tasmania Australia (Hobart) 21 Auckland New Zealand 12middot13 At Sea
Sydney Opera House Australia
AUSTRALIANEW ZEALAND CRUISETOUR SOUTHEAST ASIACHINA CRUISETOUR CAPE HORNSTRAIT OF MAGELLAN CRUISETOUR AUSTRALIAN BEIJING Be TERRA COTTA 2004 DEPARTURE DATES RIO 8t IGUAZU FALLS Post-Crulsetour1 Pre-Crulsetour 217EXPLORER 2005 DEPARTURE DATES PACIFICSAPPHIRE WARRIORS19 plw or PRINCESS jul9t loieifie
DAYS PRINCESS SYDNEY Jan 12 plus 19 ROYAL plw Feb 5 Oct 28 Royal BUENOS AIRES
AUCKLAND DAYS ROYAL PRINCESS to 21 ampto DAYS PRINCESS
BEUING CRUISE t ~~S~i BeWln~~~~e
to SANTIAGO~e~s~Ot~r~ih~fi1BANGKOK CRUiSE CRUISECRUISETOUR 3t3P landtourm~yvlty CRUISETOUR 12
DAY PORT DAY PORT
DAY PORT By Sea ltBy LaDd DAY PORT
1 Beijing 11-12 At Sea 1 Rio de janeiro 11 Cape Horn Scenic Cruising
13 Hong Kong 2 Rio de jneiro c 12 Ushuaia Argentina 14 At Sea 3 RiolgUaiu Falls 12 Beagle Channel Scenlc Cruising
15 Nha Trang Vietnam 4 IIDIilZll FaU$13u~os~re$ 13 Punta Arenas Chile
16 Phu My Vietnam 5 Buens AiresEmbark 14 At Sea 17 At Sea 6 Montevideo Uruguay 15 Seno Eyre Fjord Scenic Cruising 18 Singapore 7 At Sea 16 At Sea 19 Kualtan Malaysia 8 Puerto Madryn Argentina 17 Puerto Montt Chile 20 At Sea 9 At Sea 18 At Sea 21 Bangkok Thail3nd 10 Falkland Islands (Stanley) 19 Santiago Chile
DAY PORT DAY PORT
At Sea Pusan SouthKOrea Nagasaki japan At Sea Shanghai China
Note CnIlst route shown for Royil Princess Oct 28 only Timcsforil1lsccnkoulslngmsubjccttothange
CRUISE [OUR ITINERARY
CRUISETOUR ITINERARY
CRUISrrOlJR ITINERARY Fiordland National Park Scenic Cruising DlUedin New Zealand Christchurch New Zealand Wellington New Zealand
14
GRAND PANAMA CANAL CRUISES
ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL
10 10 11 DAYSDAYS DAYS
CORAL PRINCESS GRAND PRINCESS GRAND PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIPfrom from
fromFT LAUDERDALE GALVESTON GALVESTON
2004 DEPARTURE DATES Oct n 21 31 2004 DEPARTURE DATE
2004 DEPARTURE DATENov 10 20 30middot DeelSmiddot
DedSDec 10 28
2005 DEPARTURE DATES CRUISE ITINERARY Jan 7 17 27
CRUISE ITINERARY Feb 6 16 26 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART MarS 1828 CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Galveston Texas EMBARK PMApr 7 17 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTshy 1 Galveston Texas EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 1 ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 3 Belize City Belize 1 PM 7PM 2-3 At Sea 3 Belize City Belize lPM 7PM 4 Costa Maya Mexico (Mahahual) 8AM 4PM 4 Um6n Costa Rica 7AM rPM 4 Costa Maya Mexico (Mahahual) SAM 4 PM 5 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands 12 PM 7PM 5 Panama Canal (to Gatun Lake) 7AM 430 PM 5 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands 12 PM 7PM 6 Ocho Rios Jamaica SAM 5PM 5 Col6n Panama 5PM 8PM 6 At Sea 7 At Sea 6 At Sea Cristobal Panama 7AM 4PM 8 7AM 4PM 7 Grand Cayman Cayman IslandS 7AM 4PM (fot Panama Canal) ftrtpg~niaa~~) S Corumel Mexico SAM 6PM 8 At Sea 9 At Sea 9 Bclize City Belize 7AM 4 PM 6PM 10 Coromel Mexico lOAM 6 PM9 Cozumel Mexico lOAM 10 At Sea 10 At Sea 11 At Sea
Portordtrllndtlmtsmayvllry 11 flo Lauderdale florida DISEMBARK AM Portorntr IInltf timpoundi may vary 11 Galveston Texas DISEMBARK AM Port ordu and Nmes may vary 12 Galv_es~on Texas DISEMBARK AM
ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL
8 DAYS
CORAL PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP
from
FT LAUDERDALE
2004 DEPARTURE DATE Dec 20
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Fl Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM 2-3 At Sea 4 Lim6n Costa Rica 7AM 7PM 5 Panama Canal (to Gatun Lake) 7 AM 430 PM 5 Co16n Panama 5PM SPM 6 At Sea 7 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands SAM 5PM S At Sea 9 Flo Lauderdale Florida DISEMBARK AM Bridge of the Americas Panama
f OptIonll fOllTS inclld1lI tht AtlllnH to Pacific RlIlllfll) joumq will dlmlldrt tilt ship b) tctdtr lit Gfttlm uk AJkr tour plIssmm dlstmlrark tilt shipwin procmlllat through tilt Gatun Locb lIndjlnlllly dock in Gl6lI Hmal1p41Sl11tmmttydiumlmtheJldlo~ lflrshops IInd~llI toIIrsrrnrl CIItutl14ktlllIrtonlflrJhlp
GRAND PANAMA CANAL CRUISES
GRAND PANAMA CANAL GRAND PANAMA CANAL GRAND PANAMA CANAL
150R 18 150R 1715 DAYS DAYS DAYS
CORAL PRINCESS SUN PRINCESS
REGAL PRINCESS REGAL PRINCESS SUN PRINCESS
DAWN PRINCESS REGAL PRINCESS sail between DAWN PRINCESS
sail between FT LAUDERDALE FT LAUDERDALE sail betweenand
FT LAUDERDALEand SAN DIEGO andLOS ANGELES
SAN FRANCISCO 2004 DEPARTURE DATES 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
DAWN PRINCESS 2004 DEPARTURE DATESNov 24Sp191
CRUISE ITINERARY Dec9t CORAL PRINCESSREGAL PRINCESS 5ltp261 CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE ITINERARY
200S DEPARTURE DATES Dec 24 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
SUN PRINCESS DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARIltPM200S DEPARTURE DATES DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Sep 2StMar 24
3 Ocho Rios Jamaica lOAM 6PM 2-3 At5ea 2 At Sea 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBA8KPM
REGAL PRINCESS AprSt 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBA8KPM Jan stu 200S DEPARTURE DATES2 At Sea4 At Sea 4 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 7AM lPMJan 23 5 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 7AM lPM 3 Ocho Rios Jamaica lOAM 6PM REGAL PRINCESS 5 Cartagena Colombia 9AM 3PMFeb7t 4 At Sea Apr 239AM 3PM 6 Transit Panama Canal 7AM 430 PMFb22 ~ yenr~fte~~~~~~u 7AM 430 PM 5 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 7AM lPM At SeaMar9t CORAL PRINCESS 79AM 3PM8 At Sea Apr 27 8 Puntarenas Costa Rica 7AM 7PMSUN PRINCESS 9 Puntarenas Costa Rica 7 AM 7PM ~ yenr~fte~n~~~~~u 7AM 430 PM 9-10 At SeaApr1S 8 At Sea DAWN PRINCESS10-11 At Sea 11 Acapulco Mexico 8AM 5PM
5PM 9 Puntarenas Costa Rica 7AM 7PM Apr 29H ~ae~lcoMexico 8 AM 12 At SeatllWrryopmllzlfrarnLls~in 10-11 At Sea rmrKfIfikTiIIrttimnma1 tlliJlrraryoptJllllsfrlJflSlmFranrimlJn 13 Cabo San lucas Mexico 8AM 5PM
gt This mUJI C4Jl llfwmblnld wlth a 3 14 Cabo San Lucas Mexico 7 AM lPM H ~e~o Mexico 8AM SPM rmruordrrorttimamG)llIryCoIutar CnUK to VlWOIlllr SC Dqs ThUIltIIIflltllnlltCllIIblntdwilhaZ-day 14-15 At Sea 16lhrlllllhI9lllIbtboobdulaquoSC)lQ4k t Illncral) lIpCutcs in mrmt orm Pllrt IiIIIa CocastaICnliutoVan(ouKrBCDlIys16 16 San Francisco California 7AM 4PMcowtlIrcrllisr IIIIYlIl1Ymiddot IhrounIScankboobdlUaK)lllllluU t~A~geles California 6 AM 5PM 14 Cabo San Lucas Mexico 8AM 5PM
Thllwl1JIIICllllslltMOlIkpilllyJmtcad 17-18 At Sea middotmiddotThliIAfllIllCltlllsatMGnIqclBaylnstcadllf 15 At Sea CPlIilldCI1IIu 17 At Sea o[OdKKwsPurllilllrlmllYWlry OchoRicJsPortllmtslllllYVllfymiddot D1SEMBA8K AM19 Vancouver BC DISEMBA8K AM 16 San Die20 California DlSEMBA8K AM 18 Val1couver BC
GRAND PANAMA CANAL COASTAL CRUISING
2-4 CORAL PRINCESS ISLAND PRINCESS SUN PRINCESS18 DAWN PRINCESS DIAMOND PRINCESS STAR PRINCESSDAYSDAYS
COASTAL CRUISE SCHEDULEREGAL PRINCESS
SHIP DAYS FROM TO DEPARTURE DATE DIAMOND PRINCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 5104
SAN FRANCISCO DIAMOND PRINCES5 4 Vancouver Seattle 5404 to CORAL PRINCESS 2 San Francisco Vancouver 5604
NEW YORK DAWN PRiNCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 5704 ISLAND PRiNCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 51204
2004 DEPARTURE DATE SUN PRINCESS 3 San Francisco Vancouver 51404Aug 24 ISLAND PRiNCESS 3 Vancouver LOI Angeles 91804
DIAMOND PRINCESS 1 Seattle Vancouver 91804CRUISE ITINERARY DIAMOND PRINCESS 6 Vancouver Los Angeles 91904 SAPPHIRE PRINCESS 1 Seattle Vancouver 91904 SAPPHREPRINCESS 2 Vancouver San Francisco 92004 DIAMOND PRINCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 43005 DlAMONDPRiNCES$ 4 Vancouver Seattle 5305 SUN PRINCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 5305
ISLAND PRiNCESS 3 Los Angeles VancOllver 5405 CORAL PRiNCESS 2 San Francisco Vancouver 51205
Coral Princess in the Panama Canal
CRUISE PLUS
Extend your adventure with our Cruise Plusreg program Cruise Plusreg enables you to enhance your vacation with one- to four-night hotel
packages in cities that stand on their own as vacation destinations Add nights in Sydney before you cruise or extend your vacation with nights in the city by the
bay San Francisco Transportation and luggage handling costs from the airport to both hotel and ship plus meet and greet services are always included
Wherever you choose to explore youll enjoy properties that are carefully chosen based on service value location and the peace of mind of knowing that Princess
has arranged it all for you
Anchorage Alaska Trevi Fountain Rome Auckland Harbor New Zealand
The Cruise Plusreg Program is available in over 30 major cities including
MEDITERRANEANAEGEAN EXOTICS PANAMA CANAL Barcelona London Rome and Venice Auckland Bangkok Beijing Buenos Aires Ft Lauderdale Los Angeles New York City
Cape Town Ft Lauderdale Honolulu Los San Diego San Francisco Sanjuan Vancouver NORTHERN EUROPE Angeles Montreal Moorea New York City Copenhagen and London MEXICO CARIBBEANOsaka Papeete Rome San Francisco
Ft Lauderdale Galveston Los AngelesTRANSATLANTIC Santiago Seattle Sydney Vancouver Venice Barcelona Copenhagen Ft Lauderdale San Francisco and San Juan
London New York City and Rome ALASKA Anchorage Calgary Fairbanks Kenai San Francisco Seattle and Vancouver
For more information about options and pricing reference a destination specific brochure or contact your travel agent
TRAVEL THE WORLD WITH THE LEADER IN CRUISINGmiddot Princess
Analysis by the Hawaii Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism Comparing the Economic Impact of Foreign Flag Ships with US Flag Cruise Ships Sailing in Hawaii
This is a summary of an analysis prepared by the Hawai Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism (DBEDT) of the economic impact of the foreign flag cruise ship fleet sailing in Hawaii as compared to each of the US flag ships operating in Honolulu
The comparison is set out below
Foreign Pride Pride Pride
Fleet Of Hawaii Of Aloha Of America
Total economic output impact (spendingsales) ($mil) 155 542 4225 4958
Total earnings impact (labor earnings) ($mil) 44 155 1207 1411
Total employment impact Uobs) 1447 5059 3943 4627
This analysis demonstrates that a single US-flagged ship the Pride of America home ported in Honolulu is 32 times more economically impactful and creates 32 times as many jobs as the entire foreign flag fleet that sails into and out of Hawaii ports of call
Economic Impact of Pride of America
Assumptions 1 Annual impact though Pride of Aloha is leaving in May 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existing Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($) 4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of outputl$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job multiplier (jobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
118700 105
2706 3373
147 042
1372
4958
1417
4627
Data sourcelformula Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Line 1 x line 2 x line 31 000000
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 4 x line 5
Line 4 x line 6
Line 4 x line 7
Economic Impact of Pride of Hawaii
Assumptions
1 Annual impact though Pride of Hawaii is leaving in February 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existing Pride of Aloha and Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($) 4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job multiplier (jobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
Data sourceformula 139770 Actual 2007 figure
975 Actual 2007 figure 2706 Actual 2007 figure 3688 Line 1 x line 2 x line 31000000
147 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model 042 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
1372 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
5421 Line 4 x line 5
1549 Line 4 x line 6
5059 Line 4 x line 7
Economic Impact of Pride of Aloha
Assumptions 1 Annual impact though Pride of Aloha is leaving in May 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existlng Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($)
4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job mUltiplier Oobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
95680 111
2706 2874
147 042
1372
4225
1207
3943
Data sourcelformula Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Line 1 x line 2 x line 31000000
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 4 x line 5
Line 4 x line 6
Line 4 x line 7
lt
Methodology Used in Calculating Impact of International Cruise Ships
Cruise ship visitors 1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Came with ships 3 Flied in 4 Average length of stay (days) 5 PPPD ($) 6 Cruise visitor spending ($mil))
Cruise ship crews 7 Ratio of crew spending to cruise visitor spending 8 Cruise crew spending
Cruisline 9 Ratio of crew spending to cruise visitor spending
10 Cruiseline spending
11 Total cruise-related spending ($mil)
12 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 13 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 14 Job multiplier Uobs$ cruise -related spending)
15 Total output impact ($miJ)
16 Total earnings impact ($miJ)
17 Total employment impact (jobs)
106641 98307
8334 739 847 668
02 134
038 254
1055
147 042
1372
1551
444
1447
Data sourceformula Line 2 + line 3 DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report Line 1 x line 4 x line 5
DBEDT 2003 Cruise study Line 7 x line 6
DBEDT 2003 Cruise study Line 9 x line 6
Line 6 + line 8 + line 10
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 11 x line 12
Line 11 x line 13
Line 11 x line 14
Economic Contributions Foreign-Flag Fleet operating in Hawaii vs Three US-Flag Ships
$1500
Pride of Hawaii$1000- $542 million VIc -0-E c Pride of AlohaCo
423 million$500
Pride of America $496 million155 million$shy
Foreign-Flag US-Flag Fleet Fleet
Source State of Hawaii Department of US-Flag $1460 billion Business Economic Development and Tourism
Foreign-Flag $ 155 million 7292008
Employment Foreign-Flag Fleet operating in Hawaii vs Three US-Flag Ships
15000
10000
til c o Pride of Aloha
39435000
Pride of America 1447 4627
~---------
Foreign-Flag US-Flag Fleet Fleet
Source State of Hawaii Department of US-Flag 13629 jobs Business Economic Development and Tourism
Foreign-Flag 1447 jobs 7292008
Foreign Flag Capacity Growth Foreign flag passenger capacity has changed five-fold on roundtrip Hawaii cruises from the West Coast since enactment of the Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative
1600000
1400000
tn 1200000
J enshyZ
1000000
I shyG) en 800000 s G) tn tn
600000 as D 400000
200000
0 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Year
Source US Maritime Administration (derived from the US Customs and Border Patrol Vessel Entrance and Clearance documents - final 2007 data) 7292008
NCL America Hawaii Economic Contributions
(2004-2008)
bull (in Millions) bull $399 in wages benefits and overtime to US seafarers bull $35 in Federal and State payroll Taxes bull $64 in Government Fees and Taxes to Hawaii bull $28 in wages benefits and overtime to US other employees bull $52 in Port Charges to Hawaii Companies (Stevedores tugs pilots etc) bull $85 in Fuel to Tesoro Hawaii bull $130 for shore excursions to Hawaii tour operators bull $39 for Hawaii hotel rooms and ground transport bull $75 for food grown in Hawaii bull $57 in union fees and levies (incl $32M paid directly by employees) bull $1 in MMD fees to the United States Coast Guard bull $51 for recruitment screening processing and training crew bull $76 advertising and promoting Hawaii as a destination bull $1092
COASTWISE CRUISES INTERPRETIVE RULE RESOLUTION Adopted at the
US Conference of Mayors 76th Annual Meeting
June 20-242008 Miami
WHEREAS the Department of Homeland Securitys Customs and Border Protection (CBP) issued a proposed Interpretive Rule regulating Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises on foreign flagged vessels between US ports of call under the Passenger Vessel Services Act at the request of the United States Maritime Administration and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule would require that a foreign-flagged vessel on a coastwise cruise to call at a foreign port for at least 48 hours with that foreign stop constituting at least 50 percent of the cruise itinerary and allowing passengers to disembark the cruise vessel at the foreign port before continuing the cruise to a US port of call and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule establishes burdensome criteria that are wholly inconsistent with industry practice particularly the 48-hour call at foreign port shyinasmuch as the standard port call is six to eight hours - as well as the requirement that 50 percent of a cruise be spent at the foreign port and
WHEREAS the intent of the proposed Interpretive Rule is to protect the single remaining US flag vessel serving the Inter-Hawaiian Island cruise trade that according to the Hawaii Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism generates more than 4600 jobs and generates nearly $500 million in economic benefits for the state annually and
WHEREAS thousands of members of the International Longshore Workers Union (nWU) are employed at US ports serving cruise ships and whose jobs would be at risk if the proposed Interpretive Rule were implemented and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule is vague as to the breadth of its application ie to coastwise cruises between all United States ports or applied solely to coastwise cruises from West Coast ports to Hawaii and
WHEREAS the Cruise Lines International Association estimates the proposed Interpretive Rule would upend the $17 billion in national cruise industry spending and put at risk more than 300000 jobs generated by the international cruise industry including jobs held by nWU at US ports and the local allied industries supporting the cruise industry and
Executive Order Submissions Under Review
II Reglnfogov Where to ind Federal Regulatory Information -~
Home ] Lnitied Agenda and Regulator) Ilan pound012866 Regulator) Review Jnformalion Collection Review
EO 12866 Regulatory Rlvlw dvanced Search IJitorical RepWI Review Counh Jriter XIL
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA)
Executive Order Submissions Under Review July 25 2008 - _------------____ _shy
Department of Homeland Security
AGENCY DHS-TSA RIN 1652-AA53
TITLE Large Aircraft Security Program Other Aircraft Operator Security Programs and Airport Operator Security Program
STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT Yes RECEIVED DATE 06302008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
AGENCY DHS-USCIS RIN Llti15-AB67 TITLE Changes to Requirements Affecting H-2B Nonimmigrants and Their Employers
STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT No RECEIVED DATE 06092008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
AGENCY DHS-USCBP RIN 1651AA11 TITLE Issuance of a Visa and Authorization for Temporary Admission Into the United States for Certain Nonimmigrant Aliens Afflicted W HIV Infection
STAGE Final Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT No RECEIVED DATE 03042008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
-_RE_V-IE-W-E-X-T-EN-D-E-D---------- _
AGENCY DHS-USCBP RIN 1651-AA76 TITLE Coastwise Transportation of Passengers STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT Yes RECEIVED DATE 07142008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
Disclosure I Accessibility I Privacy Policy I Contact Us
httpwwwreginfogovpublicdoeoReviewSearch 7252008
View Rule Page 11
Shere D find Federal ReguLatory InformciiorlReglnfogov Home J Cnified Agenda al1d Regulatory Plan EO 12866 Regulatory Reyiew Information Collection Reiew
Current rnified Agenda and Regulatory Plan Historical Pnified Agenda and Regulatory Plan Search
View Rule
DHSIUSCBP RIN 1651-AA76 Publication ill Spring 2008
Title llCoastwise Transportation of Passengers
Abstract This interim rule amends the Department of Homeland Securitys (DHS) current regulations relating to the transportation of passengers by non-coastwise-qualified vessels on voyages that begin and end at a US port and stop at intervening US and foreign port(s) Under this interim final rule voyages that begin and end at a US port and stop at a foreign port(s) and at intervening US port(s) where a large USshyflag coastwise-qualified passenger vessel engages in regular service are in violation of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) unless the cumulative length of stay(s) at intervening foreign port(s) is more than 50 percent of the total amount of time spent at the intervening US port(s) and passengers are permitted to go ashore at the foreign port(s) The purpose of this amendment is to ensure that the Congressional purpose in enacting the PVSA which is to preserve the economic benefits of US coastwise trade to US-flag coastwise-qualified vessels is properly implemented
Agency Department of Homeland Security(DHS) Priority Substantive Nonsignificant
KIN Status First time published in the Unified Agenda Agenda Stage of Rulemaking Final Rule Stage
Major No Unfunded Mandates No
CFR Citation -LCER 4J~)(h)(plusmnJ
Legal Authority 5JJSS_30J12lJ-SClt16 J9_lJiCJ 431 9_L1C1plusmn3JJ2JScHJ1J2JSCJ624 L(LlLSc207LIl(gtJfHgt~ _CiQJ _46lSC 6QLQ~
Legal Deadline None
Timetable Action Date FR Cite
Interim Final Action 0510012008
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required No Government Levels Affected None
Federalism No
Included in the Regulatory Plan No
RIN Data Printed in the FR No
Agency Contact Glen E Vereb Chief Entry Procedures and Carriers Branch Department of Homeland Security US Customs and Border Protection Office of Regulations and Rulings 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington DC 20229 Phone202572-8730
Disclosure I Accessibility I Privacy Policy I Contact Us
httpwwwreginfogovpublicdoeAgendaViewRuleruleID=286751 7128120
Federal RegisterVol 72 No 224Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules 65487
SPECULATIVE POSITION LIMITS 1-Continued [In contract units)
Contract
Soybeans and Mini-Soybeans 2
Wheat and Mini-Wheat 2 bullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbull
Soybean Oil
SingleSpot month All monthsmonth
600 8600 13300 600 11100 14500 540 6600 8600
Soybean Meal 720 5500 7100
Minneapolis Grain Exchange
Hard Red Spring Wheat I 600 I 11100 I 14500
New York Board of Trade
Cotton No2 I 300 I 5300 I 7300
Kansas City Board of Trade
Hard Winter Wheat I 600 I 11100 I 14500
1 For purposes of compliance with these limits positions in a futures contract that shares ~ubstantially identical terms with a contract market enumerated herein including a futures contract that is cash-settled based on the settlement price of an enumerated contract market shall be agshygregated with positions in the enumerated contract market
2 For purposes of compliance with these limits positions in the regular-sized and mini-sized contracts shall be aggregated
Issued by the Commission this November 152007 in Washington DC David Stawick Secretary of the Commission [FR Doc E7-22681 Filed 11-20-07 845 amI BILLING CODE 6351-Q1-P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Bureau of Customs and Border Protection
19 CFR Part 4
[USCBP-2007-o098]
Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises
AGENCY Customs and Border Protection Department of Homeland Security ACTION Proposed interpretation solicitation of comments
SUMMARY This document proposes new criteria to be used by Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to determine whether non-coastwise-qualified vessels are in violation ofthe Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) when engaging in cruise itineraries in which passengers board at a US port the vessel calls at several Hawaiian ports and then the vessel proceeds to a foreign port or ports for a brief period before ultimately returning to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their cruise CBP believes these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because it appears that the primary objective of the foreign stop is evasion of the PVSA
DATES Comments must be received on or before December 212007 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT Glen E Vereb Cargo Security Carriers amp Immigration Branch Office of International Trade (202) 572-8730 ADDRESSES You may submit comments identified by docket number by one of the following methods
bull Federal eRulemaking Portal http wwwregulationsgov Follow the instructions for submitting comments
bull Mail Border Security Regulations Branch Office of International Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
I Public Participation
Interested persons are invited to participate in this proposed interpretation by submitting written data views or arguments on all aspects of the proposed interpretation Customs and Border Protection (CBP) also invites comments that relate to the economic environmental or federalism effects that might result from this proposed interpretation Comments that will provide the most assistance to CBP in developing these procedures will reference a specific portion of the proposed interpretation explain the reason for any recommended change and include data information or authority that support such recommended change
Instructions All submissions received must include the agency name and docket number for this proposed
interpretation All comments received will be posted without change to http wwwregulationsgov including any personal information provided
Docket For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received go to http wwwregulationsgov Submitted comments may also be inspected on regular business days between the hours of 9 am and 430 pm at the Office of International Trade Customs and Border Protection 799 9th Street NW 5th Floor Washington DC Arrangements to inspect submitted documents should be made in advance by calling Mr Joseph Clark at (202) 572shy8768
II Background
The maritime cabotage law governing the transportation of passengers was first established by section 8 of the Passenger Vessel Services Act of June 191886 (the PVSA) 24 Stat 81 as amended by section 2 of the Act of February 17 1898 30 Stat 248 formerly codified at 46 USC App 289 (now codified at 46 USC 55103) 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 of $200 (now $300 as promulgated in TD 03-11 pursuant to the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 199028 USC 2461 note) for each passenger so transported and landed
The intent of the maritime cabotage laws including the PVSA was to provide a legal structure that guarantees a coastwise monopoly to
65488 Federal RegisterVol 72 No 224Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules
American shipping and thereby promotes development of the American merchant marine Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 28 (DC Cir 1984) see also The Granada 35 FSupp 892 8931940 AMC 1601 (DC Pa 1940) (stating that the legislative aim of section 289 [now 55102] was the creation of a practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping business for United States ships) In other words the PVSA was enacted to advance the United States merchant marine and fleet by restricting the use of foreign-ownedflagged passenger vessels in United States territorial waters
Passenger vessel transportation between United States ports has historically been viewed to be part of the coastwise trade after the enactment of the PVSA This view is premised on the concepts of continuity of the voyage and whether its intended purpose or objective was coastwise transportation In other words the PVSA was held to be violated if the coastwise movement was continuous or if the purpose of the trip was a coastwise voyage (See 18 OAG 445 September 4 1886 28 OAG 204 February 16 1910 29 OAG 318 February 12 1912 30 OAG 44 February 1 1913 34 OAG 340 December 24 1924 and 36 OAG 352 August 13 1930)
The CBP regulations promulgated pursuant to the PVSA are found at section 480a of title 19 of the Code of Federal Regulations (19 CFR 480a) and are reflective of the above cited Office of the Attorney General decisions These regulations provide among other things that a non-coastwise-qualified vessel which embarks a passenger at a port in the United States embraced within the coastwise laws (a coastwise port) will be deemed to have landed that passenger in violation of the PVSA if the passenger disembarks at a different coastwise port on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a nearby foreign port or ports (as defined in 19 CFR 480a(a)(2) see also 19 CFR 480a(b)(2)) The terms embark and disembark are words of art which are defined as going on board a vessel for the duration of a specific voyage and leaving a vessel at the conclusion of a specific voyage respectively (See 19 CFR 480a(a)(4))
The references in section 480a to nearby foreign ports (defined in 19 CFR 480a(a)(2)) are the results of attempts by CBP to apply an Office of the Attorney Generals opinion dated February 26 1910 (28 OAG 204) In that case a foreign-flag vessel transported 615 passengers on a voyage around the world beginning in New
York and concluding in San Francisco The Attorney General opined that since the primary object of the voyage was to visit various parts of the world on a pleasure tour returning home via California and not to be transported in domestic commerce the transportation was not in violation of the PVSA
The 1910 Attorney Generals opinion was extended to voyages that included foreign ports other than nearby foreign ports (See Treasury Decision (TD) 68shy285 (33 FR 16558) November 14 1968) However voyages solely to one or more coastwise ports have always been considered predominantly coastwise Therefore non-coastwise-qualified vessels engaging in such a voyage where passengers temporarily go ashore at a coastwise port have been deemed to have violated the PVSA
m Current Law and Policy Pursuant to Public Law 109-304 120
Stat 1632 enacted on October 6 2006 Title 46 United States Code was substantially reorganized and recodified Consequently the PVSA is now codified at 46 USC 55103 and provides that no vessel shall transport passengers between ports or places in the United States either directly or by way of a foreign port under a penalty of $300 for each person so transported and landed except one that (1) Is wholly owned by citizens of the United States for purposes of engaging in the coastwise trade and (2) has been issued a certificate of documentation with a coastwise endorsement or is exempt from documentation but would otherwise be eligible for such a certificate and endorsement
In 2003 Congress enacted Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II Section 211 for the purpose of revitalizing the oceangoing US-flag cruise industry in Hawaii (the 2003 Act) Three oceangoing US-flag cruise ships PRIDE OF ALOHA PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAII were documented with coastwise privileges pursuant to the 2003 Act These vessels entered regular service in Hawaii in 2004 2005 and 2006 respectively and pursuant to the express language of the 2003 Act are limited in their operation to providing regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands of Hawaii
The CBP regulations promulgated pursuant to the PVSA are set forth in 19 CFR 480a and have remained unchanged throughout both the recodification of Title 46 of the United States Code and the enactment of the 2003 Act They provide that a violation of the PVSA occurs when passengers embark (board a vessel for the
duration of a voyage) a non-coastwiseshyqualified vessel at one US port and disembark (leave the vessel at the conclusion of a voyage) at a different US port unless they proceed with the vessel to a distant foreign port (Le any port not considered a nearby foreign port which is defined as any port located in North America Central America Bermuda or the West Indies including the Bahamas) Currently these regulations do not contain specific criteria for non-coastwise-qualified vessels on itineraries including US ports and either nearby or distant foreign ports in order for such foreign port calls to be compliant with the PVSA
To reiterate the applicable CBP regulations provide that the PVSA is violated when a non-coastwise-qualified vessel transports a passenger on a voyage solely to one or more coastwise ports and the passenger disembarks or goes ashore temporarily at a coastwise port (19 CFR 480a(b)(1)) Furthermore a violation of the PVSA also occurs when a non-coastwise-qualified vessel transports a passenger on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a nearby foreign port or ports (but no other foreign port) and the passenger disembarks at a coastwise port other than the port of embarkation (19 CFR 480a(b)(2)) However there is no violation of the PVSA when a passenger is on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a distant foreign port or ports (whether or not the voyage includes a nearby foreign port or ports) and the passenger disembarks at a coastwise port provided the passenger has proceeded with the vessel to a distant foreign port (19 CFR 480a(b)(3))
IV Request From MARAD To Provide Guidance
The US Department of Transportation Maritime Administration (MARAD) has requested that CBP take action to ensure enforcement of the PVSA MARAD has asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreignshyflag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwiseshyqualified cruise ship operators
In April of 2007 the operator of the three US-flag cruise vessels operating solely in Hawaii pursuant to the 2003 Act announced their intent to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAIl from the Hawaii market and redeploy her to Europe The operator intends to re-flag the vessel to foreign registry directly resulting in the loss of over 1100 crewmember jobs The primary reason cited for this decision is the rapid increase in foreign-flag competition entering the Hawaii market
Federal Register I Vol 72 No 224 I Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules 65489
from the West Coast This competition is evidenced in published cruise itineraries of foreign-flag carriers offering a variety of round trip cruises that depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period usually in the early morning and ultimately return to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their cruise These cruises are often marketed as Hawaii cruises and except for the brief stop in the nearby foreign port of Ensenada are purely coastwise in nature It is these cruise itineraries that pose an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels that pursuant to the 2003 Act are currently engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands
V Preliminary Notice
In response to MARADs concerns CBP sent letters to two carriers known to operate the itineraries in question as well as to the Cruise Lines International Association Inc stating that CBP believes that these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because it appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA The letters further indicated that CBP is taking steps to publish this position
VI CBPs Proposed Interpretive Rule Accordingly in this document CBP is
proposing to provide that cruise itineraries for non-qualified coastwise vessels which allow passengers to board at a US port call at several Hawaiian ports proceed to a foreign port or ports for a brief period and then ultimately return to the original US port of embarkation for disembarkation are not consistent with the PVSA and the regulations promulgated pursuant thereto Specifically CBP interprets a voyage to be solely to one or more coastwise ports even where it stops at a foreign port unless the stop at the foreign port is a legitimate object of the cruise CBP will presume that a stop at a foreign port is not a legitimate object of the cruise unless
(1) The stop lasts at least 48 hours at the foreign port
(2) The amount of time at the foreign port is more than 50 percent of the total amount of time at the US ports of call and
(3) The passengers are permitted to go ashore temporarily at the foreign port
Accordingly CBP proposes to adopt an interpretive rule under which it will presume that any cruise itinerary that does not include a foreign port call that
satisfies each of these three criteria constitutes coastwise transportation of passengers in violation of 19 CFR 480a(b)(1)
Dated November 16 2007 W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection [FR Doc E7-22788 Filed 11-20-07 845 am] BILLING CODe 9111-14-1
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau
27 CFR Part 9
[Notice No 76]
RIN 1513-AB49
Proposed Establishment of the Leona Valley Viticultural Area (2007R-281 P)
AGENCY Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau Treasury ACTION Notice of proposed rulemaking
SUMMARY The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau proposes to establish the 134 square mile Leona Valley viticultural area in the northeast part of Los Angeles County California We designate viticultural areas to allow vintners to better describe the origin of their wines and to allow consumers to better identify wines they may purchase We invite comments on this proposed addition to our regulations DATES We must receive written comments on or before January 22 2008
ADDRESSES You may send comments on this notice to one of the following addresses
bull httpwwwregulationsgov (Federal e-rulemaking portal follow the instructions for submitting comments) or
bull Director Regulations and Rulings Division Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau PO Box 14412 Washington DC 20044-4412
See the Public Participation section of this notice for specific instructions and requirements for submitting comments and for information on how to request a public hearing
You may view copies of this notice selected supporting materials and any comments we receive about this proposal at httpwwwregulationsgov under Docket No 2007-0066 You also may view copies of this notice all related petitions maps or other supporting materials and any comments we receive about this
proposal by appointment at the TTB Information Resource Center 1310 G Street NW Washington DC 20220 To make an appointment call 202-927shy2400
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT NA Sutton Regulations and Rulings Division Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau 925 Lakeville S1 No 158 Petaluma CA 94952 phone 415shy271-1254 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
Background on Viticultural Areas
TTB Authority Section 105(e) of the Federal Alcohol
Administration Act (FAA Act) 27 USC 205(e) authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to prescribe regulations for the labeling of wine distilled spirits and malt beverages The FAA Act provides that these regulations should among other things prohibit consumer deception and the use of misleading statements on labels and ensure that labels provide the consumer with adequate information as to the identity and quality of the product The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) administers the regulations promulgated under the FAA Act
Part 4 ofthe TTB regulations (27 CFR part 4) allows the establishment of definitive viticultural areas and the use of their names as appellations of origin on wine labels and in wine advertisements Part 9 of the TTB regulations (27 CFR part 9) contains the list of approved viticultural areas
Definition Section 425(e)(1)(i) ofthe TTB
regulations (27 CFR 425(e)(1)(i)) defines a viticultural area for American wine as a delimited grape-growing region distinguishable by geographical features the boundaries of which have been recognized and defined in part 9 of the regulations These designations allow vintners and consumers to attribute a given quality reputation or other characteristic of a wine made from grapes grown in an area to its geographic origin The establishment of viticultural areas allows vintners to describe more accurately the origin of their wines to consumers and helps consumers to identify wines they may purchase Establishment of a viticultural area is neither an approval nor an endorsement by TTB of the wine produced in that area
Requirements Section 425(e)(2) of the TTB
regulations outlines the procedure for proposing an American viticultural area and provides that any interested party
Us Department ofHomelaDd Secmity Washington DC 10229
bull ~
US Customs and Border Protection
AUG 15 2fXJJ
VE5-3-02-QTRRBSTCCCI - ti015502-GG-
Mr leon Sutcliffe Director Port Operations Camivai Cruise Unes Camival Place 3655 NW 87Avenue Miami Aorlda 33178
RE P~nger Vessef Services Ad Coastwise Transportation 46 USC sect 55103 19 CFR sect 480a(b)
Dear Mr Sutcliffe
As you know US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) enforces the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) codified at TItle 46 United States Code section 55103 (46 USC 55103) This statute prohibits non-coastwise-qualifled vessels (ie those vessels not US-buill owned and documented with a coastwise endorsement) from transporting passengers between porls or places within the United States The regUlations promUlgated pursuant to the PVSA are found at TrtJe 19 Code of Federal Regulations section 4808 (19 CFR 4808)
It has come to our attention that passenger vessels of your company are engaging in cruise itineraries that include ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands Two USAlagged coastwise-endorsed passenger vessefs are also currenUy engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of caD wittlin the Hawaiian Islands
As part of your cruise itineraries some of your foreign-flagged vessels depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period and ultimately rebJm to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their endse For example the MS ZAANDAM of Holand America Lines departs San Diego cruises the Hawaiian Islands stops in Ensenada from 800pm to 11 OOpmbull and returns to san Diego CBP believes these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because It appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA -- - - ~~~------
Please be advised that CBP is taking steps to publish this position Should have any questions pertaining to this matter please contact Mr Glen Vereb Chief Cargo Security Carriers and Immigration Branch at (202) 572-8724
Sincerely
F Jl E EST Y LEe A U I 5 I N Gmiddot
December 21 2007
The Honorable W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection co Border Security Regulations Branch Office ofInternational Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229
Re Hawaii Coastwise Cruises (USCBP-2007-0098) Comments in Response to Proposed Interpretation
Dear Commissioner Basham
NCL America Inc1 (NCLA) submits these comments in support ofthe efforts ofCustoms and Border Protection to enforce the Passenger Vessel Services Act and the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative as applied to Hawaii coastwise cruises
1 Introduction and Summary of Position
NCLA operates three large oceangoing US flag cruise ships in Hawaii These ships are documented under US flag and are required to operate in regular service in Hawaii pursuant to the authority of the Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative a 2003 federal statute intended to revitalize the US flag cruise industry and to maximize economic and national security benefits to the United States (the 2003 Act)
NCLA has invested $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships pursuant to the 2003 Act and in direct reliance on the protections of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) and its proper enforcement The PVSA limits the transportation ofpassengers between US ports to coastwise documented US flag ships Its statutory protections recognize that US flag ships have significantly higher operational costs in part because they are subject to more stringent US laws including US labor laws and federal
1 NCL America Inc is a US corporation incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware headquartered in Honolulu Hawaii As a US corporation it is subject to US taxes at both the federal and state level The Chief Executive Officer the Chairman of the Board and all of the Board of Directors of NCL America are US citizens The company is also subject to US labor and employment laws and is required by statute to maintain a workforce comprised primarily ofUS citizens
700 Bishop St SUite 900 I Honolulu HawMi 96813 I Tel 8085273800 Fax 8085273820 I ndcom
2
income tax among others The NCLA ships operating in Hawaii are the only large oceangoing cruise ships operating under US flag In furtherance of the policy goals of the PVSA and the 2003 Act these ships have created over 4000 seafaring jobs all subject to US minimum wage and other labor statutes
Since 2003 there has been a significant increase in capacity in the Hawaii market from foreign flag ships providing cruise service to Hawaii from the West Coast Many of these foreign flag cruises are marketed as Hawaii cruises and consist entirely ofUS ports ofcall with the sole exception of a token stop in Mexico for as little as an hour late at night under circumstances where passengers are not permitted to get offthe ship There are no reported rulings approving these particular foreign flag itineraries
Lower cost foreign competition in the Hawaii market has unfairly hurt NCLAs operations NCLA has incurred substantial losses which have contributed significantly to its decision earlier this year to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAll from US flag and reshydeploy it foreign Unfair foreign competition poses an imminent threat to the remaining US flag passenger vessels operating in the Hawaii trades pursuant to the 2003 Act
As the agency statutorily charged with implementation of the 2003 Act the US Department ofTransportation Maritime Administration (MARAn) is aware of the threat foreign flag Hawaii itineraries pose to the US flag fleet and brought the situation to the attention ofthe US Department ofHomeland Security Bureau ofCustoms and Border Protection (CBP or Customs) Customs determined that the primary object of these itineraries was coastwise and that the Ensenada stop was an evasion of the PVSA
In August 2007 Customs provided written notice to the affected foreign lines and their trade association that the existing itineraries were contrary to the PVSA None of these lines sought advance rulings even after the Customs notice with respect to their Hawaii itineraries pursuant to Customs regulations and many continued to market the itineraries as Hawaii cruises NCLA supports the efforts ofCustoms and MARAD to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act for Hawaii cruises
2 Statutory Authority for Customs Proposed Interpretation
(a) Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA)
Congress passed the PVSA in 1886 to protect the US maritime transportation industry from foreign competition2 Protection is afforded through penalty assessments on foreign vessels transporting passengers between US ports or places directly or by way ofa foreign port 3 As Congress and the courts have recognized coastwise protections for the US maritime transportation industry are only one dimension of the PVSA Operating in conjunction with other coastwise laws and with the US
2 See United States v Honduran SS GRANADA 35 F Supp 892 894 (BD Pa 1940)(citing purpose of PVSA to meet threats to the practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping which was to be preserved for US ships)
46 USc sect 55103 (originally 46 USC App 289)
3
documentation laws the PVSA also enhances military sealift in times ofnational emergency sustains a US merchant marine and supports the US shipbuilding and repair industry4
(b) Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative (the 2003 Act)
Over the past decade Congress has sought to reinforce the goals of the PVSA by providing mechanisms to revitalize the oceangoing US flag cruise fleet particularly in Hawaii The Project America legislation enacted in 1997 authorized among other things the re~flagging ofone existing cruise ship contingent on the operator contracting for the construction oftwo new oceangoing cruise shipss Following the default of the operator under the original contract Congress enacted the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative for the purpose ofrecovering economic and national security benefits to the United States bull 6 These same goals of the original PVSA were expressly referenced in the legislative history of the 2003 Act which emphasized that these ships will be assets available in time ofnational emergency and will significantly expand the pool ofqualified seafarers upon which the US Department ofDefense relies to crew non-combatant vessels
The 2003 Act authorizes the US documentation ofthree cruise ships for operation in regular service in Hawaii subject to certain conditions including a prohibition on operating in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico and the Caribbean Sea and a requirement that all vessel repair work be undertaken in the United States MARAD is charged with implementation of the 2003 Act
3 Customs Implementation of PVSA
(a) Regulations
The current regulations implementing the PVSA were published by Customs in 19858 The growth of the foreign flag cruise industry in North America and in particular the development of the Alaska cruise market led to an effort in 1984 to amend the thenshyexisting regulations to increase the ease of administration and operational flexibility The effort to change the regulation had support from US port interests who saw benefit in the potential increase in the number ofUS ports that foreign vessels could call and was opposed by proponents ofpotential US flag projects as detrimental to efforts to revitalize the US fleet 9 The preamble to the 1985 rule emphasized that it was of paramount importance to consider the primary object ofpassengers in taking a
4 See American Hawaii Cruises v Skinner 713 F Supp 452 457 (DDC 1989) (recognizing the contribution of the PVSA and the Jones Act in helping to secure national defense by maintaining a merchant marine oftbe best equipped and most suitable types ofvessels sufficient to serve in time of war or national emergency) see also Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 30 (DC Cir 1984) Wirth Ltd v SIS Acadia Forest 537 F2d 1272 1281 n32 (5th Cir 1976) S Public Law 105-56 Section 8109 (111 Stat 1203 1244) (Oct 81997 ) 6 Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II General Provisions - Department ofCommerce Section 211 (117 Stat 1179) (Feb 20 2003) 1 149 Cong Rec S1118 (dailyed Jan 17 2003(statement ofSenator Inouye) 8 19 CFR sect 480a 950 Fed Reg 26981 (July I 1985)
4
voyage10 a concept which is reinforced elsewhere in Customs regulations11 In its analysis of the comments received at the time Customs accepted the view ofport interests that the modified rule would help their business but did so recognizing the absence ofa regular salt water US flag passenger fleet Customs acknowledged the potential harm to prospective efforts to revitalize the US flag passenger fleet and expressly cautioned that if it were ever shown that coastwise qualified vessels in competition with foreign vessels were in fact hurt by the modified Customs regulation then Customs would immediately reconsider its position12
(b) Customs Rulings
Given the significant penalties associated with violating the PVSA13 Customs regulations expressly provide a mechanism for the owner or charterer of a foreign vessel or any other interested person to request an advisory ruling as to whether a contemplated voyage would be considered in violation of the PVSA14 Customs regulations provide that vessel operators can rely on these ruling letters only to the extent that the facts and circumstances are identical to those in the ruling letter IS
Notwithstanding the fact that several foreign cruise lines offer Hawaii itineraries originating in a US mainland port and calling at Hawaii ports with a token intervening stop in Mexico there are no reported rulings expressly approving such an itinerary for these foreign cruise lines 16
4 The Cruise Industry in Hawaii
(a) NCL America Returns US flag to the Oceangoing Passenger Fleet
Pursuant to the requirements ofthe 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative NCLA agreed to promote US-flag cruising enhance military sealift capacity and expand the US maritime labor base No other major cruise line had ever undertaken such a commitment to the US flag and the public policy objectives Congress sought to achieve under the PVSA or the 2003 Act Introduction ofPRIDE OF ALOHA in 2004 was a significant development in the maritime industry because it marked the restoration ofthe
10 Id at 26983 11 Customs Regulations include a provision on the effect ofruling letters and with respect to carrier rulings the applicable regulation refers to rulings setting forth a determination as to whether or not the primary object of a contemplated voyage is coastwise transportation in violation of46 USC sect 289 [pYSA codified at 46 USC sect55103] 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 12 50 Fed Reg at 26983 13 A modem cruise ship with 2400 passengers for example would be subject to a fine of$720OOO per cruise based on the statutory penalty of$300 for each passenger transported in violation of the Act 14 19 CFR sect 480a(d) IS 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 16 There is one older reported mling involving a request to drop the Ensenada port call from a Los AngeleslHawaiiLos Angeles itinerary which Customs held would violate the PYSA In dicta Customs acknowledged that the itinerary could be in compliance if the Ensenada call were not dropped but did not address the issue ofwhether a one hour service call where no passengers depart the vessel would be sufficient The carrier that obtained that ruling has since left the Hawaii market See Customs Ruling HQ 114078 re Crystal Hannony (Nov 4 1997)
5
us flag to the oceangoing cruise industry A contemporaneous press release from the Us Department ofTransportation reported that the three US-flag cruise ships to be introduced pursuant to the 2003 Act were expected to create more than 20000 US jobs generate more than $825 million ofexpenditures in the US economy and create nearly $360 million in federal tax revenue by the end of 200717 In 2005 the PRIDE OF AMERICA was introduced and in 2006 the third vessel PRIDE OF HAWAll was introduced to Hawaii Both the PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAIl offer 7shyday inter-island Hawaii itineraries whereas PRIDE OF ALOHA operates on 7 and 10 day cruises exclusively among the islands ofHawaii as well as 11 day cruises that include a foreign port call at Fanning Island To date NCLA has invested over $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships in furtherance ofthe policy objectives of the PVSA and the 2003 Act These ships employ over 4000 seafarers and generate hundreds ofmillions of dollars in benefits for Hawaii and the nation
(b) Significant Increase in Foreign Flag Capacity Since 2003
The most significant change in the Hawaii cruise market since 2003 has been the dramatic increase in capacity A significant portion ofthis capacity increase is directly attributable to NCLAs fulfillment ofthe Congressional mandate in the 2003 Act However foreign-flag operations in the Hawaii market as measured in passenger nights18 have skyrocketed Based on MARAn data derived from the US Customs Border Patrol Vessel Entrance and Clearance documents the passenger nights for foreign flag vessels departing from the West Coast to Hawaii on round trip cruise have increased several hundredfold during this period19 See Exhibit A
(c) NCLA Has Incurred Substantial Losses During this Period
Since 2004 NCLA has lost cumulatively more than a quarter ofa billion dollars A principal reason for these losses has been the increase in foreign capacity in this market NCLA has taken significant steps to reduce costs to address the increase in foreign competition but NCLA is at an inherent disadvantage when competing against foreign companies that are not subject to US labor laws US tax laws and other laws Ofcourse the statutory protections of the PVSA are intended to address these very issues That is why Customs immediate action to implement the proposed interpretation is critical for the US flag fleet Regrettably NCLA has already been forced to reduce overall capacity early next year with the withdrawal ofPRIDE OF HAWAlI to another
17 DOT Press Release dated June 72004 see also DOT Press Release dated August 132004 in connection with visit to PRIDE OF ALOHA by US Transportation Secretary Norman Y Mineta 11 Passenger nights (also referred to as passenger capacity days) are calculated by multiplying the number ofpassengers per vessel by the number ofcruise days in each itinerary by the number of cruises This is the unit ofmeasurement employed by MARAn In contrast passenger bed supply (also referred to as passenger capacity) data reflects only the number ofberths per vessel multiplied by the number of cruises and hence understates the market by excluding the full economic value ofthe cruise perfonned 19 In 2003 the total number ofpassenger nights for round-trip West Coast to Hawaii cruises was 303325 which jumped by 353 to 1072329 in 2006 and by 430 to 1304546 from 2003 to 2007 (The 2007 figure is based on MARAD data for six months and a1ll1ualized by published itineraries for the balance of the year)
6
market for operation under foreign flag This move alone will result in the loss ofover 1000 American seafaring jobs
5 Customs Proposed Interpretation is Necessary to Further the Important National Security and Public Policy Objectives Embodied in Federal Law
As Customs has properly noted the increase in foreign competition in the Hawaii trades in contravention of the PVSA pose[s] an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels[] As the operator of these ships NCLA has a vested interest in protecting the jobs ofthe thousands ofAmerican crewmembers and cruise ship service providers who support these vessels NCLA also has an interest in protecting the substantial economic investment it has made to revitalize the US flag passenger vessel fleet But a balancing of interests in the context of Customs enforcement ofexisting law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act requires a much broader focus
The legislative history of the 2003 Act expressly recognized the national security and public policy import ofestablishing a US flag passenger vessel fleet as a means to maintain the countrys preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool of qualified seafarers and as a means to help sustain a fleet ofUS-flag vessels to su~ort
the nations military and maritime industrial base for times ofnational emergency
Congress understood the importance ofestablishing a viable US flag cruise ship fleet as something larger than the vessels themselves These national security and public policy objectives must be weighed in the balance as Customs assesses how best to interpret its rules to give effect to the PVSA and the 2003 Act
6 Customs Should Clarify that the Proposed Interpretation is Limited to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades and Adopt Reasonable Measures to Ensure Sufficient Foreign Content
Since publication ofthe proposed interpretative rule several commenters have observed that the scope of the proposed interpretation is ambiguous because the language of Section VI referencing any cruise itinerary appears broader than the caption Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises and the entire discussion in the published notice which focuses exclusively on US-flag coastwise vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA agrees that the proposed interpretation should be clarified so that its scope is limited to vessels operating roundtrip voyages from US ports that include Hawaii port calls
NCLA supports the concept reflected in the proposed interpretive rule that round trip Hawaii itineraries from US ports on foreign ships must include a material and measurable degree ofoverall foreign port content as compared to US port content
20 149 Congo Rec S1117 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)
7
(a) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is also Consistent with Subsequent Congressional Enactments Modifying the PVSA
As discussed above it is well established that the PVSA was designed toRrotect US-flag vessels from foreign competition in the coastwise and domestic trades 1
Subsequent legislative enactments however have appropriately differentiated among distinct geographic markets and trades including Canada Alaska Puerto Rico and Hawaii based on the existence or non-existence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
In 1938 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers by Canadian passenger vessels on Lake Ontario and the St Lawrence River until such time as passenger service shall be established by vessels of the United States22 Similarly in 1961 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers on Canadian vessels within Alaska or between Alaska and other points in the United States until such time as passenger service is established by vessels ofthe United States23
In 1984 Congress modified the application ofthe PVSA to pennit the transportation ofpassengers between Puerto Rico and other United States ports on foreign-flag vessels24 As with the other statutory exceptions this provision is qualified and expires [o]n a showing that a United States passenger vessel qualified to engage in the coastwise trade is offering or advertising passenger service between a port in Puerto Rico and another port in the United States2S
Congress acted again with respect to the application of the PVSA with the 2003 Act in which it authorized three vessels that did not meet the US-build requirements of the PVSA to operate as modem US-flagged cruise ships in regular service in Hawaii26 The 2003 Act imposes a specific geographic limitation on the operation of any ship documented under this authority to operations only in regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands ofHawaii and shall not transport passengers in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico or the Caribbean Sea except in certain limited circumstances27 As above the limited nature of the 2003 Act is express it is strictly limited to the large ocean-going cruise ships and then only those operating in the regular Hawaii service where there are no US-flag operations28
21 See Act ofJune 19 1886 c 421 sec 8 24 Stat 81 Act of February 171898 c 26 sec 2 30 Stat 248 22 S] Res 174 75th Cong 52 Stat 223 (Alp 251938) codified at46 USC sect 55121(a) 23 See Pub L 87-77 75 Stat 196 (Jun 30 1961) codified at 46 USC sect 55121(b) 24 See Pub L 98-563 98 Stat 2916 (Oct 301984) codified at 46 USC sect 55104(b) 25 46 USC sect 55104(c)(l) see also 46 USC 46 USc sect 55104(cX2)(expiration of exemption upon availability ofa non-coastwise qualified US-flag vessel offering service in the relevant market) 26 149 Congo Rec SI118 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)(statementofSen Inouye) 27 Pub L 108-7 117 Stat 79 (Feb 20 2003) 28 149 Congo Rec S11l9 (dailyed Jan 17 2003Xstatement of Sen Inouye)
8
In each ofthese instances Congress fashioned a narrow exception to the PVSA that differentiated among distinct geographic markets based on the existence or nonshyexistence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
As the federal agency responsible for administering the 2003 Act MARAD requested that Customs act to protect US flag passenger vessel interests in the Hawaii trades29 Limiting the scope ofthe proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades also reflects Customs appreciation of the PVSA in the context of the subsequent Congressional action30 Viewing the Congressional modifications to the PVSA as a whole Congress has specifically and repeatedly differentiated among distinct geographic markets when it has found it necessary and appropriate to do so to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests It is well established that the proper interpretation of a statutory scheme includes consideration ofsubsequent statutes even though the underlying statute itselfhas not been expressly amended31 Accordingly Customs should likewise limit the scope ofthe proposed PVSA interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades because that is the only geographic market as mandated by the 2003 Act in which oceangoing US-flag cruise ships are operating
(b) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Consistent with Public Policy Objectives of the 1985 Rulemaking
In 1985middot Customs liberalized the regulations implementing the PVSA by eliminating certain regulatory prohibitions on foreign flag vessels In the context of the 1985 rulemaking Customs justified a relaxation ofthe regulations on the grounds that it would simplify the administration of the PVSA and would benefit the economy ofcertain American coastwise ports without eroding the statutory protection given to American vessels engaged in solely domestic trade32
Customs thus sought to reconcile US port economic interests with US-flag passenger vessel interests Both of these twin policy objectives are furthered by
29 See 72 Fed Reg 65488 (Nov 21 2007)( MARAn bas asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the ~eratiODS ofcoastwise-qualified cruise ship operators)
See generally FDA v Brown amp Williamson Tobacco Corp 529 US 120 132-133 (2000)(assessing propriety ofagency construction ofFood DIUg and Cosmetics Act and descnbing responsibility of reviewing cowt to assess statutory provisions in the context of subsequent legislative enactments) 31 See Brown amp Williamson 529 US 143 (holding that proper construction ofstatutory provision must necessarily assume that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications ofa later statute This is particularly so where the scope of the earlier statute is broad but the subsequent statutes more specifically address the topic athand) see also United States v Estate ofRomani 523 US 517 530-531 (1998)( holding that a later-enacted statute should control the construction of the federal lien priority statute a specific policy embodied in a later federal statute should control om construction of the [earlier] statute even though it ha[s] not been expressly amended) United States v Fausto 484 US 439453 (1988)(The courts frequently find Congress to have done this - whenever in fact they interpret a statutory text in the light ofsurrounding texts that happen to have been subsequently enacted This classic judicial task of reconciling many laws enacted over time and getting them to make sense in combination necessarily assumes that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications of a later statute) 32 50 Fed Reg 26982 (JuI 11985)
9
limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades
As noted earlier the 2003 Act limits the operation of the NCLA US-flag oceangoing passenger vessels to regular service in Hawaii Because there are no oceangoing US-flag vessels operating in any market other than the Hawaii trades Customs should limit the scope of the proposed interPretation to that market Such a limitation protects US flag passenger vessel interests without prejudicing US port interests In contrast an application of the proposed interpretation to any itinerary would needlessly harm US port interests unrelated to Hawaii without any countervailing benefit to US-flag passenger vessel interests Accordingly limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation is consistent with the public policy objectives of the 1985 rulemaking as well as the 2003 Act
(c) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Also Consistent with Customs Commitment to Revisit the Scope of its Rules to Protect US-Flag Interests
The relaxation ofthe PVSA regulations in 1985 was premised in large part on Customs finding that there was no regular salt water US-flag passenger fleet in operation at that time33 Acknowledging that the relaxed regulations could harm USshyflag interests Customs committed in the preamble ofthe 1985 final rule to immediately reconsider its interpretation if it is ever shown that there is a viable US flag vessel operating in competition with foreign-flag vessels34
Congress enacted the 2003 Act to stimulate the development of a US flag cruise ship industry As noted above the legislative history ofthat Act makes clear that Congress sought to revitalize the US-flag cruise industry as a means to maintain Americas preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool ofqualified seafarers help sustain a fleet of US flag vessels to support our military and a maritime industrial base create thousands of seagoing and shoreside American jobs and stimulate the development ofa US flag cruise ship tourism business with the commensurate benefits to the US tax base the US economy and US employment
Customs is now acting at MARADs request to revisit its interpretation ofthe regulations implementing the PVSA because recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwise-qualified cruise ship operations35 That is to say that the concerns articulated by Customs in the context of the 1985 rulemaking have materialized and US-flag passenger vessel interests are in fact being hanned in the Hawaii trades by foreign competitors
33 50 Fed Reg 26983 34Id
3S 72 Fed Reg 56488 (Nov 21 2007)
I
10
Because the US-flag passenger vessels are limited by statute to regular service in Hawaii limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the
Hawaii trades is consistent with Customs historical commitment to revisit its interpretation ofthe implementing regulations to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests
7 Conclusion
For the reasons stated above NCLA commends the efforts ofCustoms and MARAn to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act as applied to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA respectfully requests Customs to move ahead promptly with p~blicati~nof a final interpretive rule to advance the important national security arid public policy objectives ofthese laws
We greatly appreciate the opportunity to submit these comments
Sincerely
~~~ Alan T Yamamoto Vice President Hawaii Operations
Exhibit A
Ship Name Serenade Of The Seas Departure Port San Diego California Ports of Call San Diego California Kailua Kona Hawaii Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii Hlo Hawaii Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii Ensenada Mexico San Qigo California
2007 Date(s) Oct 05
Sailing Itinerary
Day Port H ~rrive Depart Activity
05-0ct San Diego California 500 PM
06-0ct Cruising
07-0ct Cruising
08-0ct Cruising
09-0ct Cruising
10-0ct Kailua Kona Hawaii 700 AM 900 PM Tendered
11-00t Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 1000 AM Tendered
12middot0ct Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 900 PM Tendered
13-0ct Hilo Hawaii 700 AM 600 PM Docked
14middot0ct Honoulu (Oahu) Hawaii 700 AM Docked
15-0ct Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii 200 AM Docked
6-0ct CrUising
17-0ct Cruising
18-0ct Cruising
19middot0ct Cruising
-7 20-00t
O-Oot
Ensenada ~i1exico
San Deqo California
i 00 ~r1
700 ~M
200 oM D1Jcked ~
BRITISH ISLES
ROYAL12 PRINCESSDAYS
ROUNDTRIP
from
LONDON
2004 DEPARTURE DATES
Jun 12 jul6
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Lqn4onmiddotpoundngland(Southampton) EMIWlIlt PM 2 Cornwall England (Falmouth) 7AM SPM
Waterford Ireland 8AM 6PM Dublin Ireland 7AM 1130 PM
t PQrtbme5 lliIyyuy Anini Illd departure at Rosytb Dublin md Filmouth ViiYdue to Iiltlal conditions
WESTERN EUROPE
ROYAL12 PRINCESSDAYS
ROUNDTRIP
from
LONDON
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
May 31
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 London England (Southampton) EMBARK PM
CRUISE ITINERARY
EUROPE CRUISES
ICELANDNORWEGIAN FJORDS
ROYAL12 PRINCESSDAYS
ROUNDTRIP
from
LONDON
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
Jun24
CRUISE IflNERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 London Englan4 (Southampton) EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 3 Berge Norway 6PM 4 Hellesylt Norway 830AM 1030 AM 4 Gciranger Norway Geiranger Fjord Sceni Cruising UN 7PM
9AM SPM5
1PM 8AM SPM
10 At Sea
middotStlviceallfof~fjonlovedmdshOR=unlDllOplion1Itourswllldi5anbarilitHelIcsyItAftcrtollrpuKllJClJdisembark
theshlpwiUprocudto~md~lampClSonlounfrwnHdaytwl1lblmd$hip
NORWEGIAN FJORDSNORTH CAPE
ROYAL12 PRINCESSDAYS
ROUNDTRIP
from
LONDON
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
JuilS
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Loridon ~gland (South~mpton) EMBARK PM 2-3 At Sea
Hellesylt Norway 830AM 1030 AM Golranger Norway Geiranger Fjord Scenic Cruising 12N 7PM
TrodheilllNorwaY 9AM SPM At Sea Cross the Ardgt Cirde
6PM 8AM lPM
8AM 130 PM 430PM 630PM
7AM 3PM
Bagpipers Edinburgh Scotland Royal Princess in Geiranger Fjord Norway
EUROPE CRUISES amp CRUISETOURS
17 DAYS
GRAND PRINCESS
FT LAUDERDALE to
COPENHAGEN
2004 DEPARTURE DATE MayZ
CRUISE IfINERARY
DAY 1 2-6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
PORT Ft Lauderdale Florida At Sea ~ores IslandsPortugal (Ponto Delgado) At Sea Lisbon Portugal Vigo Spain At Sea ParislNormandy France (Le Havre) RotterdamThe Netherlands At Sea Hamburg Germay (for Berlin) At Sea Olso Norway Oslo Fjord scnic Cruising Copenhagen Denmark
ARRIVE
N
12N 9AM
7AM
6AM
DISEMBARK AM
DEPART EMBARK PM
6PM
7PM 6PM
7PM 7PM
1UM
MEDITERRANEAN CRUISETOUR
TRANSATLANTICWESTERN EUROPE ICELAND amp GREENLANDTRANSATLANTIC
16 GRAND DAYS PRINCESS
COPENHAGEN to
NEW YORK
2004 DEPARTURE DATE Aug 27
CRUISE IIINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Copenhagen Denmark EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 3 Dover England (forLondon) 7AM 7PM 4 Cornwall England (Falmouth) 9AM 6PM 5 Dublin Ireland lOAM 9PM 6 GlasgowEdinburgh Scotland (Greenock) 8AM 12 M 7 Belfast Northern Ireland 1030 AM 530 PM 8 At Sea 9 Reykjavik Iceland 9AM 9PM 10 At Sea 11 Prins Christian Sund Scenic Cruising 12N 6PM 12 Qaqortoq Greenland 7 AM 2PM 13 At Sea 14 SI Johns Newfoundland Canada 12N 7PM 1516 At Sea 17 New York CIty New York DISEMBARK AM
SCANDINAVIARUSSIA CRUISETOUR
Church of the Savior on the Spilled Blood St Petersburg Russia
WESTERN EUROPE CRUISETOUR
CRUISEIOUR ITINERARY
CRUISETOUR lA11C CRUISETOUR ITINERARY CRUISETOUR 4A14C CRUISETOUR II INERARY
DAY PORT By Sea By Land DAY PORT By Sea By Land CRUISETOUR 7Al7C18 STAR PRINCESS 1 Rome 17 GRAND PRINCESS 1 BudapestDAYS DAYS DAY PORT By Sea By Land 22 Rome Budapest 18 ROYAL PRINCESS 1 Paris
ROMETODI 3 RomeTodi BUDAPEST VIENNA 3 BudapestVienna DAYS 2 Paris and 4 TodiFlorence and 4 Vienna 3 Paris
PARIS EUROSTAR5 Florence 5 ViennaPrague 4 ParisLondon 6 FlorenceVeniceEmbark 6 Prague and 5 London
FLORENCE PRAGUE
plus plus LONDON7 Venice Italy (overnight onboard ship) 7 PragueCopenhagenEmbark 6 LondonSouthamptonEmbark
GRAND MEDITERRANEAN SCANDINAVIARUSSIA plus 7 At Sea CRUISE 8-9 At Sea CRUISE 8 At Sea WESTERN EUROPE 8 Bilbao Spain10 Istanbul Turkey 9 Stockholm Sweden (Nyniishamn) BRITISH ISLES CRUiSE2004 DEPARTURE DATES 2004 DEPARTURE DATES 9 Bordeaux France (Le Verdon)
11 Kusadasi Turkey (for Ephesus) 10 Helsinki FinlandApr Sf 2004 DEPARTURE DATES 10 At SeaMay 131 Jul2Apr 29 12 Athens Greece (Piraeus) 11 SI Petersburg Russia (overnight onboard ship) 11 GlasgowEdinburgh Scotland (Greenock)May 23 JulUt May 141 26middot Jul tt 13~ 250
May 23 Jun 16 13 At Sea JunZt JulU 12 SI Petersburg Russia Jun n 19 Aug 18o 300 12 Dublin Ireland
]un 12 Aug l t 13 Cork IrelandJuliO 14 NaplesCapri Italy 13 Tallinn EstoniaJun 22 t Aug 11 Toun~eonlymilabkwithcruise5indi[itbtAug 3 15 FlorencelPisa Italy (Livorno) 14 Cdansk Poland 14 Cornwall England (Falmouth)
Aug 27 tBritishliksetuise aWEwupeiBritishlslesouist 15 ParisNormandy France (Le Havre)16 Monte Carlo Monaco 15 At Sea bull WestemEuropeCrube middotlcdandINorwqlmFjOllisetuise 16 Rotterdam The Netherlands
t Crulsetour lA only combinable with 12--dayGreck fst 17 Barcelona Spain (overnight onboard ship) 16 Olso NOrway Qsld Fjord Scenic Cruising bull Norwqian FjordsNorth Cipecruise 17 BrusselsBruges Belgium (Zeebrugge)tCruixtour 4A only combinable with lo-day Baltic
crulse shown on PI 11 18 Barcelona Spain Heritage cruise shawn on pg 12 OCrubctnur 7C only combinable with EwuJlWl ExplorerCrube17 Copenhagen Denmark 18 London England (Southampton)
EXOTICS CRUISES
AUSTRALIANEW ZEALAND AUSTRALIANEW ZEALAND AUSTRALIAASIA
12 14 19 DAYS DAYS DAYS
SAPPHIRE PRINCESS SAPPHIRE PRINCESS SAPPHIRE PRINCESS
saH between SYDNEYAUCKLAND SYDNEY
toand to BANGKOKSYDNEY AUCKLAND 2005 DEPARTURE DATES 2005 DEPARTURE DATE
Mar7Jan 6 2004 DEPARTURE DATEJan 1St
Dec 23 CRUISE ITINERARYJr ift Feb 23 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
CRUISE ITINERARY 1 Sydlley Austrli EMBARK PM CRUISE ITINERARY 2 At Sea
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTDAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 3 Brisbane Australia 8AM 6PM 1 Sydlley Australia EMBARK PM 4 At Sea 1 Aucklalld N~w Zealalld EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 5 Cid Harbor Austrlia (for Great Barrier Reef) 7AM 5PM2 At Sea 3 Melbourne Australia 8 AM 6 PM 6 Cirns Australia (Yorkeys) 8AM 6PM
3 WeIUllgton New Zealand 8 AM 6 PM 4 At Sea 7-8 At Sea 4 Christchurch New Zealalld (Lytlelton) 8 AM 6 PM 5 Tasmallia Australia (Hobart) 8 AM 6 PM 9 Darwin Australia lPM 8pM 5 Dunedill N~ Zealalld (Port Chalmers) 8 AM 6 PM 6-7 At Sea 10-11 At Sea 6 Fiordland Natiollal Park Scenic Cruising AM 6 PM 8 Fiordlalld Natiollal Park Scellic Cruising 7 AM 5 PM 12 Bali Illdonesi (Padang Bay) 7AM 6PM
7-8 At Sea J DUlledill New Zealalld (Port Chalmers) 8 AM 6 PM 13-14 At Se 10 Christchurch N~ Zealalld (Lytlelton) 8 AM 6 PM 15 Kuala Lumpur Mlaysia (Port KeIang) 8AM 6PM9 Tasmania Australia (Hobart) 8 AM 6 PM 11 Wellillgtoll New Zealmd 8 AM 6 PM 16 Sillgpore 8AM 6PM
10 At Sea 12 At Sea 17 At Sea 11 Melbourne Australia 8 AM 6 PM 13 Taurallga New Zealalld 8 AM 730 PM 18 Ho Chi Millh City Vietnm (Vung Tau) 7AM 730 PM 12 At S~a 19 At Sea 14 Bay of Islallds New Zealalld 8 AM 7 PM 13 SydPey Australia DISEMBARK AM 20 Bmgkok Thailalld (Laem Chabang) DISEMBARK AM15 Aucklalld New Zealalld DISEMBARK AM
t llinemy opcrnesln reverse order Port times mil1 my
CHINAFAR EAST SOUTHEAST ASIAFAR EAST
1612 DAYSDAYS
PACIFIC PRINCESS
SAPPHIRE PRINCESS PACIFIC PRINCESS
OSAKA BEIJING to
to BANGKOK OSAKA
2004 DEPARTURE DATE 2004 DEPARTURE DATEPAClFlC PRINCESS
julllt Jun 11 2005 DEPARTURE DATE
SAPPHIRE PRINCESS Apr 11
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Osaka Japall EMBARK PM
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Beijillg China (Xingang) EMBARK PM 2 Hiroshima Japall 1 PM 6PM 2 DaHan China AM 5PM 3 At Sea 3 At Sea 4 Shmghai Chilla 7 AM 6PM 4 Shallghai Chilla (overnight onboard ship) 7AM 5 At Sea 5 Shallghai China 6PM 6 Okinaw Jpll 7 AM 1 PM
7 Taipei Taiwm (KeeIung) 9 AM 7PM6 At Sea 8 At Se7 Pusan South Korea 8AM 5PM 9 HOllg KOllg Chill 8 AM 7PM 8 At Sea 10-11 At S~a J Vladivostok Russia 5AM 730 PM 12 Ho Chi MiIJh City Vietnm (Phu My) 7 AM 5PM 10 At Sea 13 At Se 11 Nagasaki Japan 7AM 6PM 14 Singpore 8 AM 6pM
15 KUlltll Mlysi 830 AM 430 PM12 At Sea 16 At Sea 13 Osaka Japan DISEMBARK AM 17 Ballgkok Thaillld DISEMBARK AM t Sailing alls i1t Hiroshima on Dl) 11 In place of Nilgilsaki Port times milY vary
CRUISE I flNERARY CRUISE I flNERARY
Ho Chi Minh City Vietnam
EXOTICS CRUISES
SOUTHEAST ASIACHINA SOUTHEAST ASIACHINA FAR EASTALASKA
PACIflC PRINCISS ROYAL PRINCESS
16 16 19 DAYS DAYS DAYS
SAPPHIRE SAPPHIRE PRINCESS
Sail between PRINCESSBANGKOK
and BANGKOK OSAKA
BEIJING to to
2004 DEPARTURE DATES BEIJING SEATTLEPAClFlC PRINCESS
Jun 27tt 200S DEPARTURE DATE200S DEPARTURE DATE ROYAL PRINCESS
Mar 26 Apr 23Oct 16 Nov lt
CRUISE I I INERARY CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
1 GsakaJpan EMBARK PM1 Bangkok Thailand (Laem Chabang) EMBARKPM 1 Bangkok Thailand (Laern Chabang) EMBARK IM 2 At Sea2 At Sea 2 AtSea bull 3 Nagasaki Japan 7 AM 6PM
9AM 7PM 3 Singapore 7PM 4 Pusan Soqth Korea 8AM 5PM 4-5 At Sea 5 At Sea gt bull
7AM 7PM 6 Da Nwg Vietn~1Il 7AM middot7PM 6 Vladivostok Russia SAM 730 PM 7 At Sea 7 AtSea
7AM 12M 8 Hong lltog ihin~ 7AM 12M 8 Sapporo japan (Muroran) 6AM 6PM 9-10 At Sea 9-10 At Sea 9-12 At Sea cross Intemational Dateline
13 DutchHarbor Alaska (Aleutian Islands) 230 PM 7PM11 ShaJlgllai Cbina (overnight onboard ship) lAM 11 Shangh~t Cllina (ovmightonJoltird $hip) 7 AM 14 At Sea shy12 Shanghai China 6PM 12 Shanghai China
7AM - - tlJf
6PM 15 Anchorage Alaska (Seward) 8AM 6PM13 At Sea 13 AtSea i 16 College Fjord Seni CruIsing 630AM 930 AM
14 Nagasaki japan 7AM 6PM 14 Nagasaki japan 6PM 17 Glacier Ilay Scenic Cruising 1030 AM 830 PM 15 Pusan South lltOrea TAM 4PM 1~ bull Pu~an SQuth iorea middot4lM 18 middotmiddot juneau Alaska 6 AM 2PM 16 At Sea 16 At Sea 19 - At Sea 17 Beijing China (Xingangy OISEMBAlUe AM 17 Beijing Cliina (Xingang) 20 SeattleWashington DISEMBARK AM
t ltinemy Operne5 in rcvmc Older ttPorttimcsmiYnl)middotShlpwilldocklnampngkoknsttadofL1cm~
POLYNESIA amp THE COOK ISLANDS POLYNESIA amp THE MARQUESAS ISLANDS
10 10 DAYS DAYS
TAHITIAN PRINCESSTAHITIAN PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIPROUNDTRIP fromfrom
PAPEETEPAPEETE 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
2004 DEPARTURE DATES Oct 4 24 Mayl 17 27 Sep4 14 24 Nov 13 Jun 6 16 26 0lt 14 00323Ju16 16 26 Nov 323 2005 DEPARTURE DATESAug 5 15 25 Dec 13 Jan 12
Feb 1 21200S DEPARTURE DATES
~~ 122 ~~Il 13 23 CRUISE ITINERARY
CRUISE II INERARY DAY PORT
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Papeete Tahiti 1 Papeete Tahiti (overnight onboard ship) EMBARK PM
2 Moorea Polynesia 2 Papeete Tahiti SPM 3 Huahil1e P9lynesia 8AM 5 PM 3 Tuamotu Atolls Senic Cruising
5 PM8-AM 4 At Sea I At Sea 5 Rarotonga Cook Islands 8AM 5 PI~ 5 Nuku Hiva Marquesas Islands 6 At Sea 6 Hiva Ga Marquesas Islands 8AM 5PM 7 Raiatea Polynesia overnight onboard Ship 6AM
7 At Sea middotai~ RaiateaPQlynesia igt gt 6AM 8 Rangiroa P~iynesia 8AM 4PM8 Tahaa scenic Cryising 630 AM 830 AM
8 BoraBoraPQlyrtesia(ovemightollboard ship) UN 9 Tahaa ~enl Cruising 8 AM middot11AM
9 Bora lora Polynesia 5iM 9 Raiatea Polynesia 12 N 11 PM 10 Moore Polynesfa 8 AM 5 PM la ~ Bora ~oraPoIYnesia 8AM bull 5PM
11 Papeete Tahiti DISEMBARK AM 11 Papeete Tahiti DISEMBARK AM Iong Kong Harbor
3 Singapore 4-5 At Sea 6 Da NangVieinam 7 At Sea 8 liong Kong China
EXOTICS CRU ISES
HAWAIITAHITI HAWAIIAN ISLANDS SOUTH PACIFIC ISLANDS
12 1515 DAYS DAYSDAYS
PACIFIC
TAHITIAN PRINCESS ISLAND PRINCESSPAClFIC PRINCESS
PRINCESS
SYDNEYROUNDTRIP sail between tofrom
PAPEETE PAPEETELOS ANGELES and
2004 DEPARnIRE DATEHONOLULU 2004 DEPARTURE DATES Apr 21
2004 DEPARTURE DATES ~~~l CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE 11 INERARY
Oet21t CRUISE ITINERARY Nov Sf
MayS PACIFIC PRINCESS DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
Nov20t DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DecSt 1 Los Angeles CalifornIa EMBARK AM 1 Sydney AustralIa EMBARK PMAug 17t
Dec20t1 Papeete Tahiti EMBARK PM 2-4 At Sea
2005 DEPARTURE DATE Jan 4 2-5 At Sea
(overnight onboard ship) Jan 19 5 Auckland New Zealand 7 AM 2PMFeb 3t 6 Iiilo Hawaii 8 AM 6 PM
TAHITIAN PRINCESS Papeete Tahiti 11 PM fb 18 6-7 At Sea Kilauea Voko ~enic CruisingApr 12 MarS t 3 Moorea Polynesia 8 AM 5 PM 8 Suva fijI 11 AM 430 PM1~i~t 7 Kona Hawaii 8AM 6PM4 Bora Bora PolYnesia 8 AM 5 PM 9 At Sea Cross International Dateline Apr 19
5-6 At Sea 8 Honolulu Hawaii 8AM 11 PM 10 Apia Western Samoa 830 AM 2PM 7 Christmas Isl~ndKiribati 1Z N 5 PM 9 Kauai Hawaii (Nawlliwlli) 8AM 6PM 11-12 At Sea 8-9 At Sea 10 Maui Hawaii (Lahaina) 6PM 13 Bora Bora Polynesia lOAM 6PM 10 HlloliaWlii 6 PM 13 Raiatea Polynesia (overnight onboard 11 PM11-14 At Sea 11 Maui Hawaii (Lahaina) 8 AM 6 PM 14 Raiatea Polynesia 11 PM
15 Ensenada Mexico (service call)KaUaiH~waii(Nawllfwtli) 8AM 6 PM 15 Moorea Polynesia 8AM 5PM
tllinemyopcr~ttsln=x QnIerPurtlimcslmYvary Honolulu Hawaii DISEMBARK AM 16 Los Angeles CalIfornia DISEMBARK AM 16 Papeete Tahiti DISEMBARK AM
ISLANDS OF THE PACIFIC THEATER SOUTH PACIFIC EXPLORER
24 24 DAYS DAYS
PAClFIC PRINCESS PAClFIC PRINCESS
sail between HONOLULU PAPEETE
and to OSAKA FT LAUDERDALE
2004 DEPARTURE DATES
Mayl 2004 DEPARTURE DATEJul2Sj
Aug 29 CRUISE ITINERARY
CRUISE ITINERARYDAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART EMBARK PM DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
1 Papeete Tahiti EMBARK PM lPM 7PM 2 8AM 11 PM
3 ~~~~~~ ~~~~Sta 8AM 5 PM 4-6 At Sea 7 Pitcairn Island Scenic Cruising 8AM 1211
8AM 12 N
7AM ZPM 8-9 At Sea 10 Easter Island Chile 8AM 2PM
9AM 11-14 At Sea 15 Callao Peru (overnight for Lima and Machu Picchu) 8AM 16 Callao Peru lPM 17 At Sea 18 Manta Ecuador (for Quito) 9fM 7PM 19 At Sea 20 Transit Panama Canal 7 AM 430 PM 21 San BIas Panama 8AM 5 PM 22 ft Sea 23 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands 7AM 4PM 24 At Sea
25 Ft Lauderdale Florida DISEMBARK AMMoorea Polynesia tllinemyoperataln~12onlerPortl1mesmiYmymiddot
EXOTICS CRUISES
HAWAIITAHITISOUTH PACIFIC AMAZONSOUTHERN CARIBBEAN CAPE HORNSTRAIT OF MAGELLAN
1430 12 DAYS DAYSDAYS
ROYAL PRINCESS ROYAL PRINCESSSAPPHIRE PRINCESS
sail betweenFT LAUDERDALE SANTIAGOLOS ANGELES to
andto MANAUS BUENOS AIRESSYDNEY 2005 DEPARTURE DATE 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
2004 DEPARTURE DATE Apr 9 Jan 10
Nov 22 Jan 241 Feb 7
FebZt
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
CRUISE ITINERARY
CRUISE ITINERARYCRUISE ITINERARY 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTDAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 2-3 At Sea 1 Santiago Chile (Valparaiso) EMBARK PM
1 Los ingeles California EMBARK PM 4 Tortola BritIsh Virgin Islands 8 AM 6 PM 2 At Sea 2 Ensenada Mexico 8AM 5PM 3 Puerto Montt Chile 7AM 6PM
3middot6 At Sea 4 At Sea 5 Dominica 9 AM 4 PM 7 Hilo Hawaii 8AM 5 At Sea Chilean Fjords Scenic Cruising6PM 6 Trinidad 9 AM 6 PM
8 Maui Hawaii (Lahaina) 8AM 6PM 6 At Sea Amalia Glacier Scentc CruiSi3f7 At Sea 7 Punta Arenas Chile (Strait of Magei an) 7AM 6PM9 Honolulu Hawaii 7AM 5PM
- 10middot13 At Sea 8 Beagle Channel Scenic Cruising 8 Ushuaia Argentina (Tierra del Fuo) 12N 8PM
8 Devils Island French Guiana (Isle Royal) 8 AM 2 PM 14 Bora Bora Polynesia 8AM 6PM 9 At Sea 9 At Sea Cape Hom Scenic Cruising
10 Santarem Brazil 9 AM 7 PM 10 Moorea Polynesia 8AM 6PM 10 Falkland Islands (Stanley) 8AM 6PM 10 Papeete Tahiti (overnight onboard ship) 9PM 11 At Sea
i 16 Papeete Tahiti 6PM 11 Boca da Valeria Brazil (Amazon River) 7 AM 2 PM 12 Puerto Madryn Argentina 6AM 5PM 17middot18 AtSea 12 Manaus Brazil (overnight onboard ship) 10 AM 13 At Sea
14 Montevideo Uruguay 9AM 6PM19 Pago Pago merlcan Samoa 8AM 6PM 13 Manaus Brazil DISEMBARK AM 15 Buenos Aires Argentina DISEMBARK AM 20 Apia Western Samoa 8AM 6PM 21 At Sea Cross International Dateline middotl1me5forallscenkouisinCile subjectlDclwIgc
tllinmryopefilteslnr=rscordttPorttlmislm)vary22 Suva Fiji 8AM 6PM l 23-24 At Sea
20 Auckland New Zealand 8AM 6PM ORINOCO RIVERSOUTHERN CARIBBEAN ANDESSOUTH AMERICA 26 Tauranga New Zealand 8AM 7PM 27 At Sea
28 Wellington Newealand 8AM 6PM 16 17 DAYS DAYS 29-30 AtSea
31 Sydney Australia DISEMBARK AM ROYAL PRINCESS ROYAL PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP SANTIAGO from to
FT LAUDERDALE FT LAUDERDALE
200S DEPARTURE DATE2005 DEPARTURE DATE
Mar 7Mar 24
CRUISE IIJNERARYCRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Santiago Chlle (Valparaiso) EMBARK PM
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM
2 La Serena Chile (Coquimbo) 8 AM 5 PM2-3 At Sea 3 At Sea Um6n Costa Rica 7AM 7PM 4 Arica Chile 7AM 6PMCristobal Panama (for Panama Canal) 8AM 5PM o At Sea
6 Cartagena Colombia 9AM 2 PM 6 San Martin Peru (for Pisco and Machu Picchu) 7AM 6PM 7 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 130 PM 7PM 7 Callao Peru (overnight for Lima) 530 AM 8-9 At sea 8 Callao Peru 1PM 10 Puerto Ordaz Venezuela (Orinoco River) 8AM 6PM 9 At Sea
i 11 At Sea 10 Manta Ecuador (overnight for Quito) 530AM 12 Greada 8AM i 11 Manta Ecuador 1lM5PMt 1~ Dolllinlca i 7N1 5 PM 12 At Sea
i 13 Transit Panama C~nal 7AM 430 PM14 St Thomas us Virgilslands 9AM 5PM 14 Cartagena Colombia 8AM 130 PMJs AtSei i 15 Aruba Netherlands intiiles 1PM 7PM 16 Princess Cays Bahamas 8AM 16-17 At Sea Tahiti Polynesia 17 FtLallardale Flillilt~ DISEMBARK AM 1ampmiddot Ft L~uderdale Florida DISEMBARK AM
AMAZON RIVERMEDITERRANEAN
21 DAYS
ROYAL PRINCESS
MANAUS
to ROME
2005 DEPARTURE DATE
Apr 21
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE M~naus Brazil (Wemight onboardship) Manaus Brazil
3 BocadaValeria Brazil (AriiazonRivet) 11 AM 4-6 At Sea 7 Recife Brazil 1 PM 8-11 AtSea 12 Dakar Senegal 8AM 13-14 At Sea 15 Agadir Morocco 7AM 16 Casablanca Morocco (for Marrakech) 8AM 17 Gibraltar lOAM 18 Allcante Spain 12 N 19 Barcelona Spain 8AM 20 Cannes France (for Monte Carlo) 8AM 21 FlorencePisa Italy (Livarno) 7AM 22 Rome Italy (Civitavecchia) DISEMBARK AM
INDIAN OCEANAUSTRALIA
28 DAYS
PACIfIC PRINCESS
CAPE TOWN
to SYDNEY
2004 DEPARTURpound DATE
Oct 20
CRUISE ITINERARY1 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Cape Town South Africa EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 3 East London South Africa 7AM 3PM 4 DurbahSouth Africa 8AM 6PM 5-7 At Sea 8 Nosy BeMadagascar 7AM 4PM 9 At Sea 10 Poilit des Galets Reunioll]slahd 11 Port Louis Mauritius 12c19 At Sea 20 Perth Australia (Fremantle) 21-23 At Sea 24 Adelaide Australla 25 At Sea 26 Melbourne Australla 7 27 Tasmania AUstralia (Burnie) 28 At Sea 29 Sydney Australia DISEMBARK AM
I
DEPART EMBARK PM
7PM 6PM
8pM
5PM
3PM 9PM 6PM 6PM 5PM 7PM 7PM
EXOTICS CRUISES
SOUIB ATIANTICANTARCfICNSOUIB AMERICA
24 DAYS
ROYAL PRINCESS
CAPE TOWN
to SANTIAGO
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
Dec 17
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Cape TownSouthAfrica (overnighfol1board ship) EMBARK PM 2 Cape Town South Africa 3PM 2 if~~t Good HopSCenic Crulsing 3-6 6 Tristan DaCunha United Kingdom 8AM 5PM 7-10 At Sea 11 Falkland Islands (Staliley) 8 AM 5PM 12 At Sea 13-16 Antarctica Peninsula ScehltmiddotCruising 14 days ihcludingmiddot Elephant
Island AntarcticSotind Deceptionlslana GerlacheStrait NaxefChannel Schollaert Channel SigJtla Island and Boyd Strait)
17 At Sea Cape Horn Scenic Cruising1amp UshuaiaArgentina (Tierra del fuego) bull middot6 AM 19 Punta Arenas Chile (Strait of Magellan) 7 AM 20 At Sea Amalia Glacier Scenic Cruising21 At Sea Chilean Fjords Scenic Cruising22 AtSea 23 Puerto Mont Chile 7AM 6PM 24 At Sea 25 Santiago Chile (Valparaiso) DISEMBARK AM
-nmes for1l scenlccruisinc are subJect to change
ASIAINDIAMEDITERRANEAN
30 ROYAL PRINCESSDAYS
ROME
to BANGKOK
2004 DEPARlURE DATE
Sep 16
CRUISE Il INERARY
WEST AFRICASOUTH AMERICA
28 DAYS
PACIFIC PRINCESS
FT LAUDERDALE
to CAPE TOWN
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
51 22
CRUISE ITINERARY
DISEMBARK AM
Aruba
EXOTICS CRU ISES amp CRU ISETOU RS
AUSTRALIANEW ZEALAND CRUISETOUR
AUSTRALIAN EXPLORER 2004 DEPARTURE DATESAPPHIRE21 plus
DAYS PRINCESS SYDNEY Dec 17 to
AUCKLAND CRUISETOUR 5P CRUiSE
CRUISETOUR ITINERARY
DAY PORT By Sea By Land DAY PORT
1 Sydney 14 Fiordland National Park 2 Sydney Scenic Cruising
3 SydneyAyers Rock 15 Dunedin New Zealand (Port Chalmers) 4 Ayers ROek
5 Ayers RockPort Douglas 16 Christchurch New Zealand 6 Port Douglas - (Lytleton)
7 Port DouglasSydneyEmbark 17 Wellilgton New Zealand 8 At Sea 18 At Sea 9 Melbourne Australia 19 Tauranga New Zealand
10 At Sea 20 Bay of Islands New Zealand 11 Tasmania Australia (Hobart) 21 Auckland New Zealand 12middot13 At Sea
Sydney Opera House Australia
AUSTRALIANEW ZEALAND CRUISETOUR SOUTHEAST ASIACHINA CRUISETOUR CAPE HORNSTRAIT OF MAGELLAN CRUISETOUR AUSTRALIAN BEIJING Be TERRA COTTA 2004 DEPARTURE DATES RIO 8t IGUAZU FALLS Post-Crulsetour1 Pre-Crulsetour 217EXPLORER 2005 DEPARTURE DATES PACIFICSAPPHIRE WARRIORS19 plw or PRINCESS jul9t loieifie
DAYS PRINCESS SYDNEY Jan 12 plus 19 ROYAL plw Feb 5 Oct 28 Royal BUENOS AIRES
AUCKLAND DAYS ROYAL PRINCESS to 21 ampto DAYS PRINCESS
BEUING CRUISE t ~~S~i BeWln~~~~e
to SANTIAGO~e~s~Ot~r~ih~fi1BANGKOK CRUiSE CRUISECRUISETOUR 3t3P landtourm~yvlty CRUISETOUR 12
DAY PORT DAY PORT
DAY PORT By Sea ltBy LaDd DAY PORT
1 Beijing 11-12 At Sea 1 Rio de janeiro 11 Cape Horn Scenic Cruising
13 Hong Kong 2 Rio de jneiro c 12 Ushuaia Argentina 14 At Sea 3 RiolgUaiu Falls 12 Beagle Channel Scenlc Cruising
15 Nha Trang Vietnam 4 IIDIilZll FaU$13u~os~re$ 13 Punta Arenas Chile
16 Phu My Vietnam 5 Buens AiresEmbark 14 At Sea 17 At Sea 6 Montevideo Uruguay 15 Seno Eyre Fjord Scenic Cruising 18 Singapore 7 At Sea 16 At Sea 19 Kualtan Malaysia 8 Puerto Madryn Argentina 17 Puerto Montt Chile 20 At Sea 9 At Sea 18 At Sea 21 Bangkok Thail3nd 10 Falkland Islands (Stanley) 19 Santiago Chile
DAY PORT DAY PORT
At Sea Pusan SouthKOrea Nagasaki japan At Sea Shanghai China
Note CnIlst route shown for Royil Princess Oct 28 only Timcsforil1lsccnkoulslngmsubjccttothange
CRUISE [OUR ITINERARY
CRUISETOUR ITINERARY
CRUISrrOlJR ITINERARY Fiordland National Park Scenic Cruising DlUedin New Zealand Christchurch New Zealand Wellington New Zealand
14
GRAND PANAMA CANAL CRUISES
ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL
10 10 11 DAYSDAYS DAYS
CORAL PRINCESS GRAND PRINCESS GRAND PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIPfrom from
fromFT LAUDERDALE GALVESTON GALVESTON
2004 DEPARTURE DATES Oct n 21 31 2004 DEPARTURE DATE
2004 DEPARTURE DATENov 10 20 30middot DeelSmiddot
DedSDec 10 28
2005 DEPARTURE DATES CRUISE ITINERARY Jan 7 17 27
CRUISE ITINERARY Feb 6 16 26 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART MarS 1828 CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Galveston Texas EMBARK PMApr 7 17 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTshy 1 Galveston Texas EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 1 ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 3 Belize City Belize 1 PM 7PM 2-3 At Sea 3 Belize City Belize lPM 7PM 4 Costa Maya Mexico (Mahahual) 8AM 4PM 4 Um6n Costa Rica 7AM rPM 4 Costa Maya Mexico (Mahahual) SAM 4 PM 5 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands 12 PM 7PM 5 Panama Canal (to Gatun Lake) 7AM 430 PM 5 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands 12 PM 7PM 6 Ocho Rios Jamaica SAM 5PM 5 Col6n Panama 5PM 8PM 6 At Sea 7 At Sea 6 At Sea Cristobal Panama 7AM 4PM 8 7AM 4PM 7 Grand Cayman Cayman IslandS 7AM 4PM (fot Panama Canal) ftrtpg~niaa~~) S Corumel Mexico SAM 6PM 8 At Sea 9 At Sea 9 Bclize City Belize 7AM 4 PM 6PM 10 Coromel Mexico lOAM 6 PM9 Cozumel Mexico lOAM 10 At Sea 10 At Sea 11 At Sea
Portordtrllndtlmtsmayvllry 11 flo Lauderdale florida DISEMBARK AM Portorntr IInltf timpoundi may vary 11 Galveston Texas DISEMBARK AM Port ordu and Nmes may vary 12 Galv_es~on Texas DISEMBARK AM
ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL
8 DAYS
CORAL PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP
from
FT LAUDERDALE
2004 DEPARTURE DATE Dec 20
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Fl Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM 2-3 At Sea 4 Lim6n Costa Rica 7AM 7PM 5 Panama Canal (to Gatun Lake) 7 AM 430 PM 5 Co16n Panama 5PM SPM 6 At Sea 7 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands SAM 5PM S At Sea 9 Flo Lauderdale Florida DISEMBARK AM Bridge of the Americas Panama
f OptIonll fOllTS inclld1lI tht AtlllnH to Pacific RlIlllfll) joumq will dlmlldrt tilt ship b) tctdtr lit Gfttlm uk AJkr tour plIssmm dlstmlrark tilt shipwin procmlllat through tilt Gatun Locb lIndjlnlllly dock in Gl6lI Hmal1p41Sl11tmmttydiumlmtheJldlo~ lflrshops IInd~llI toIIrsrrnrl CIItutl14ktlllIrtonlflrJhlp
GRAND PANAMA CANAL CRUISES
GRAND PANAMA CANAL GRAND PANAMA CANAL GRAND PANAMA CANAL
150R 18 150R 1715 DAYS DAYS DAYS
CORAL PRINCESS SUN PRINCESS
REGAL PRINCESS REGAL PRINCESS SUN PRINCESS
DAWN PRINCESS REGAL PRINCESS sail between DAWN PRINCESS
sail between FT LAUDERDALE FT LAUDERDALE sail betweenand
FT LAUDERDALEand SAN DIEGO andLOS ANGELES
SAN FRANCISCO 2004 DEPARTURE DATES 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
DAWN PRINCESS 2004 DEPARTURE DATESNov 24Sp191
CRUISE ITINERARY Dec9t CORAL PRINCESSREGAL PRINCESS 5ltp261 CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE ITINERARY
200S DEPARTURE DATES Dec 24 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
SUN PRINCESS DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARIltPM200S DEPARTURE DATES DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Sep 2StMar 24
3 Ocho Rios Jamaica lOAM 6PM 2-3 At5ea 2 At Sea 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBA8KPM
REGAL PRINCESS AprSt 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBA8KPM Jan stu 200S DEPARTURE DATES2 At Sea4 At Sea 4 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 7AM lPMJan 23 5 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 7AM lPM 3 Ocho Rios Jamaica lOAM 6PM REGAL PRINCESS 5 Cartagena Colombia 9AM 3PMFeb7t 4 At Sea Apr 239AM 3PM 6 Transit Panama Canal 7AM 430 PMFb22 ~ yenr~fte~~~~~~u 7AM 430 PM 5 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 7AM lPM At SeaMar9t CORAL PRINCESS 79AM 3PM8 At Sea Apr 27 8 Puntarenas Costa Rica 7AM 7PMSUN PRINCESS 9 Puntarenas Costa Rica 7 AM 7PM ~ yenr~fte~n~~~~~u 7AM 430 PM 9-10 At SeaApr1S 8 At Sea DAWN PRINCESS10-11 At Sea 11 Acapulco Mexico 8AM 5PM
5PM 9 Puntarenas Costa Rica 7AM 7PM Apr 29H ~ae~lcoMexico 8 AM 12 At SeatllWrryopmllzlfrarnLls~in 10-11 At Sea rmrKfIfikTiIIrttimnma1 tlliJlrraryoptJllllsfrlJflSlmFranrimlJn 13 Cabo San lucas Mexico 8AM 5PM
gt This mUJI C4Jl llfwmblnld wlth a 3 14 Cabo San Lucas Mexico 7 AM lPM H ~e~o Mexico 8AM SPM rmruordrrorttimamG)llIryCoIutar CnUK to VlWOIlllr SC Dqs ThUIltIIIflltllnlltCllIIblntdwilhaZ-day 14-15 At Sea 16lhrlllllhI9lllIbtboobdulaquoSC)lQ4k t Illncral) lIpCutcs in mrmt orm Pllrt IiIIIa CocastaICnliutoVan(ouKrBCDlIys16 16 San Francisco California 7AM 4PMcowtlIrcrllisr IIIIYlIl1Ymiddot IhrounIScankboobdlUaK)lllllluU t~A~geles California 6 AM 5PM 14 Cabo San Lucas Mexico 8AM 5PM
Thllwl1JIIICllllslltMOlIkpilllyJmtcad 17-18 At Sea middotmiddotThliIAfllIllCltlllsatMGnIqclBaylnstcadllf 15 At Sea CPlIilldCI1IIu 17 At Sea o[OdKKwsPurllilllrlmllYWlry OchoRicJsPortllmtslllllYVllfymiddot D1SEMBA8K AM19 Vancouver BC DISEMBA8K AM 16 San Die20 California DlSEMBA8K AM 18 Val1couver BC
GRAND PANAMA CANAL COASTAL CRUISING
2-4 CORAL PRINCESS ISLAND PRINCESS SUN PRINCESS18 DAWN PRINCESS DIAMOND PRINCESS STAR PRINCESSDAYSDAYS
COASTAL CRUISE SCHEDULEREGAL PRINCESS
SHIP DAYS FROM TO DEPARTURE DATE DIAMOND PRINCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 5104
SAN FRANCISCO DIAMOND PRINCES5 4 Vancouver Seattle 5404 to CORAL PRINCESS 2 San Francisco Vancouver 5604
NEW YORK DAWN PRiNCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 5704 ISLAND PRiNCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 51204
2004 DEPARTURE DATE SUN PRINCESS 3 San Francisco Vancouver 51404Aug 24 ISLAND PRiNCESS 3 Vancouver LOI Angeles 91804
DIAMOND PRINCESS 1 Seattle Vancouver 91804CRUISE ITINERARY DIAMOND PRINCESS 6 Vancouver Los Angeles 91904 SAPPHIRE PRINCESS 1 Seattle Vancouver 91904 SAPPHREPRINCESS 2 Vancouver San Francisco 92004 DIAMOND PRINCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 43005 DlAMONDPRiNCES$ 4 Vancouver Seattle 5305 SUN PRINCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 5305
ISLAND PRiNCESS 3 Los Angeles VancOllver 5405 CORAL PRiNCESS 2 San Francisco Vancouver 51205
Coral Princess in the Panama Canal
CRUISE PLUS
Extend your adventure with our Cruise Plusreg program Cruise Plusreg enables you to enhance your vacation with one- to four-night hotel
packages in cities that stand on their own as vacation destinations Add nights in Sydney before you cruise or extend your vacation with nights in the city by the
bay San Francisco Transportation and luggage handling costs from the airport to both hotel and ship plus meet and greet services are always included
Wherever you choose to explore youll enjoy properties that are carefully chosen based on service value location and the peace of mind of knowing that Princess
has arranged it all for you
Anchorage Alaska Trevi Fountain Rome Auckland Harbor New Zealand
The Cruise Plusreg Program is available in over 30 major cities including
MEDITERRANEANAEGEAN EXOTICS PANAMA CANAL Barcelona London Rome and Venice Auckland Bangkok Beijing Buenos Aires Ft Lauderdale Los Angeles New York City
Cape Town Ft Lauderdale Honolulu Los San Diego San Francisco Sanjuan Vancouver NORTHERN EUROPE Angeles Montreal Moorea New York City Copenhagen and London MEXICO CARIBBEANOsaka Papeete Rome San Francisco
Ft Lauderdale Galveston Los AngelesTRANSATLANTIC Santiago Seattle Sydney Vancouver Venice Barcelona Copenhagen Ft Lauderdale San Francisco and San Juan
London New York City and Rome ALASKA Anchorage Calgary Fairbanks Kenai San Francisco Seattle and Vancouver
For more information about options and pricing reference a destination specific brochure or contact your travel agent
TRAVEL THE WORLD WITH THE LEADER IN CRUISINGmiddot Princess
Analysis by the Hawaii Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism Comparing the Economic Impact of Foreign Flag Ships with US Flag Cruise Ships Sailing in Hawaii
This is a summary of an analysis prepared by the Hawai Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism (DBEDT) of the economic impact of the foreign flag cruise ship fleet sailing in Hawaii as compared to each of the US flag ships operating in Honolulu
The comparison is set out below
Foreign Pride Pride Pride
Fleet Of Hawaii Of Aloha Of America
Total economic output impact (spendingsales) ($mil) 155 542 4225 4958
Total earnings impact (labor earnings) ($mil) 44 155 1207 1411
Total employment impact Uobs) 1447 5059 3943 4627
This analysis demonstrates that a single US-flagged ship the Pride of America home ported in Honolulu is 32 times more economically impactful and creates 32 times as many jobs as the entire foreign flag fleet that sails into and out of Hawaii ports of call
Economic Impact of Pride of America
Assumptions 1 Annual impact though Pride of Aloha is leaving in May 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existing Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($) 4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of outputl$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job multiplier (jobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
118700 105
2706 3373
147 042
1372
4958
1417
4627
Data sourcelformula Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Line 1 x line 2 x line 31 000000
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 4 x line 5
Line 4 x line 6
Line 4 x line 7
Economic Impact of Pride of Hawaii
Assumptions
1 Annual impact though Pride of Hawaii is leaving in February 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existing Pride of Aloha and Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($) 4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job multiplier (jobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
Data sourceformula 139770 Actual 2007 figure
975 Actual 2007 figure 2706 Actual 2007 figure 3688 Line 1 x line 2 x line 31000000
147 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model 042 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
1372 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
5421 Line 4 x line 5
1549 Line 4 x line 6
5059 Line 4 x line 7
Economic Impact of Pride of Aloha
Assumptions 1 Annual impact though Pride of Aloha is leaving in May 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existlng Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($)
4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job mUltiplier Oobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
95680 111
2706 2874
147 042
1372
4225
1207
3943
Data sourcelformula Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Line 1 x line 2 x line 31000000
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 4 x line 5
Line 4 x line 6
Line 4 x line 7
lt
Methodology Used in Calculating Impact of International Cruise Ships
Cruise ship visitors 1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Came with ships 3 Flied in 4 Average length of stay (days) 5 PPPD ($) 6 Cruise visitor spending ($mil))
Cruise ship crews 7 Ratio of crew spending to cruise visitor spending 8 Cruise crew spending
Cruisline 9 Ratio of crew spending to cruise visitor spending
10 Cruiseline spending
11 Total cruise-related spending ($mil)
12 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 13 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 14 Job multiplier Uobs$ cruise -related spending)
15 Total output impact ($miJ)
16 Total earnings impact ($miJ)
17 Total employment impact (jobs)
106641 98307
8334 739 847 668
02 134
038 254
1055
147 042
1372
1551
444
1447
Data sourceformula Line 2 + line 3 DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report Line 1 x line 4 x line 5
DBEDT 2003 Cruise study Line 7 x line 6
DBEDT 2003 Cruise study Line 9 x line 6
Line 6 + line 8 + line 10
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 11 x line 12
Line 11 x line 13
Line 11 x line 14
Economic Contributions Foreign-Flag Fleet operating in Hawaii vs Three US-Flag Ships
$1500
Pride of Hawaii$1000- $542 million VIc -0-E c Pride of AlohaCo
423 million$500
Pride of America $496 million155 million$shy
Foreign-Flag US-Flag Fleet Fleet
Source State of Hawaii Department of US-Flag $1460 billion Business Economic Development and Tourism
Foreign-Flag $ 155 million 7292008
Employment Foreign-Flag Fleet operating in Hawaii vs Three US-Flag Ships
15000
10000
til c o Pride of Aloha
39435000
Pride of America 1447 4627
~---------
Foreign-Flag US-Flag Fleet Fleet
Source State of Hawaii Department of US-Flag 13629 jobs Business Economic Development and Tourism
Foreign-Flag 1447 jobs 7292008
Foreign Flag Capacity Growth Foreign flag passenger capacity has changed five-fold on roundtrip Hawaii cruises from the West Coast since enactment of the Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative
1600000
1400000
tn 1200000
J enshyZ
1000000
I shyG) en 800000 s G) tn tn
600000 as D 400000
200000
0 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Year
Source US Maritime Administration (derived from the US Customs and Border Patrol Vessel Entrance and Clearance documents - final 2007 data) 7292008
NCL America Hawaii Economic Contributions
(2004-2008)
bull (in Millions) bull $399 in wages benefits and overtime to US seafarers bull $35 in Federal and State payroll Taxes bull $64 in Government Fees and Taxes to Hawaii bull $28 in wages benefits and overtime to US other employees bull $52 in Port Charges to Hawaii Companies (Stevedores tugs pilots etc) bull $85 in Fuel to Tesoro Hawaii bull $130 for shore excursions to Hawaii tour operators bull $39 for Hawaii hotel rooms and ground transport bull $75 for food grown in Hawaii bull $57 in union fees and levies (incl $32M paid directly by employees) bull $1 in MMD fees to the United States Coast Guard bull $51 for recruitment screening processing and training crew bull $76 advertising and promoting Hawaii as a destination bull $1092
COASTWISE CRUISES INTERPRETIVE RULE RESOLUTION Adopted at the
US Conference of Mayors 76th Annual Meeting
June 20-242008 Miami
WHEREAS the Department of Homeland Securitys Customs and Border Protection (CBP) issued a proposed Interpretive Rule regulating Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises on foreign flagged vessels between US ports of call under the Passenger Vessel Services Act at the request of the United States Maritime Administration and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule would require that a foreign-flagged vessel on a coastwise cruise to call at a foreign port for at least 48 hours with that foreign stop constituting at least 50 percent of the cruise itinerary and allowing passengers to disembark the cruise vessel at the foreign port before continuing the cruise to a US port of call and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule establishes burdensome criteria that are wholly inconsistent with industry practice particularly the 48-hour call at foreign port shyinasmuch as the standard port call is six to eight hours - as well as the requirement that 50 percent of a cruise be spent at the foreign port and
WHEREAS the intent of the proposed Interpretive Rule is to protect the single remaining US flag vessel serving the Inter-Hawaiian Island cruise trade that according to the Hawaii Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism generates more than 4600 jobs and generates nearly $500 million in economic benefits for the state annually and
WHEREAS thousands of members of the International Longshore Workers Union (nWU) are employed at US ports serving cruise ships and whose jobs would be at risk if the proposed Interpretive Rule were implemented and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule is vague as to the breadth of its application ie to coastwise cruises between all United States ports or applied solely to coastwise cruises from West Coast ports to Hawaii and
WHEREAS the Cruise Lines International Association estimates the proposed Interpretive Rule would upend the $17 billion in national cruise industry spending and put at risk more than 300000 jobs generated by the international cruise industry including jobs held by nWU at US ports and the local allied industries supporting the cruise industry and
Executive Order Submissions Under Review
II Reglnfogov Where to ind Federal Regulatory Information -~
Home ] Lnitied Agenda and Regulator) Ilan pound012866 Regulator) Review Jnformalion Collection Review
EO 12866 Regulatory Rlvlw dvanced Search IJitorical RepWI Review Counh Jriter XIL
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA)
Executive Order Submissions Under Review July 25 2008 - _------------____ _shy
Department of Homeland Security
AGENCY DHS-TSA RIN 1652-AA53
TITLE Large Aircraft Security Program Other Aircraft Operator Security Programs and Airport Operator Security Program
STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT Yes RECEIVED DATE 06302008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
AGENCY DHS-USCIS RIN Llti15-AB67 TITLE Changes to Requirements Affecting H-2B Nonimmigrants and Their Employers
STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT No RECEIVED DATE 06092008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
AGENCY DHS-USCBP RIN 1651AA11 TITLE Issuance of a Visa and Authorization for Temporary Admission Into the United States for Certain Nonimmigrant Aliens Afflicted W HIV Infection
STAGE Final Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT No RECEIVED DATE 03042008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
-_RE_V-IE-W-E-X-T-EN-D-E-D---------- _
AGENCY DHS-USCBP RIN 1651-AA76 TITLE Coastwise Transportation of Passengers STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT Yes RECEIVED DATE 07142008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
Disclosure I Accessibility I Privacy Policy I Contact Us
httpwwwreginfogovpublicdoeoReviewSearch 7252008
View Rule Page 11
Shere D find Federal ReguLatory InformciiorlReglnfogov Home J Cnified Agenda al1d Regulatory Plan EO 12866 Regulatory Reyiew Information Collection Reiew
Current rnified Agenda and Regulatory Plan Historical Pnified Agenda and Regulatory Plan Search
View Rule
DHSIUSCBP RIN 1651-AA76 Publication ill Spring 2008
Title llCoastwise Transportation of Passengers
Abstract This interim rule amends the Department of Homeland Securitys (DHS) current regulations relating to the transportation of passengers by non-coastwise-qualified vessels on voyages that begin and end at a US port and stop at intervening US and foreign port(s) Under this interim final rule voyages that begin and end at a US port and stop at a foreign port(s) and at intervening US port(s) where a large USshyflag coastwise-qualified passenger vessel engages in regular service are in violation of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) unless the cumulative length of stay(s) at intervening foreign port(s) is more than 50 percent of the total amount of time spent at the intervening US port(s) and passengers are permitted to go ashore at the foreign port(s) The purpose of this amendment is to ensure that the Congressional purpose in enacting the PVSA which is to preserve the economic benefits of US coastwise trade to US-flag coastwise-qualified vessels is properly implemented
Agency Department of Homeland Security(DHS) Priority Substantive Nonsignificant
KIN Status First time published in the Unified Agenda Agenda Stage of Rulemaking Final Rule Stage
Major No Unfunded Mandates No
CFR Citation -LCER 4J~)(h)(plusmnJ
Legal Authority 5JJSS_30J12lJ-SClt16 J9_lJiCJ 431 9_L1C1plusmn3JJ2JScHJ1J2JSCJ624 L(LlLSc207LIl(gtJfHgt~ _CiQJ _46lSC 6QLQ~
Legal Deadline None
Timetable Action Date FR Cite
Interim Final Action 0510012008
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required No Government Levels Affected None
Federalism No
Included in the Regulatory Plan No
RIN Data Printed in the FR No
Agency Contact Glen E Vereb Chief Entry Procedures and Carriers Branch Department of Homeland Security US Customs and Border Protection Office of Regulations and Rulings 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington DC 20229 Phone202572-8730
Disclosure I Accessibility I Privacy Policy I Contact Us
httpwwwreginfogovpublicdoeAgendaViewRuleruleID=286751 7128120
Federal RegisterVol 72 No 224Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules 65487
SPECULATIVE POSITION LIMITS 1-Continued [In contract units)
Contract
Soybeans and Mini-Soybeans 2
Wheat and Mini-Wheat 2 bullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbull
Soybean Oil
SingleSpot month All monthsmonth
600 8600 13300 600 11100 14500 540 6600 8600
Soybean Meal 720 5500 7100
Minneapolis Grain Exchange
Hard Red Spring Wheat I 600 I 11100 I 14500
New York Board of Trade
Cotton No2 I 300 I 5300 I 7300
Kansas City Board of Trade
Hard Winter Wheat I 600 I 11100 I 14500
1 For purposes of compliance with these limits positions in a futures contract that shares ~ubstantially identical terms with a contract market enumerated herein including a futures contract that is cash-settled based on the settlement price of an enumerated contract market shall be agshygregated with positions in the enumerated contract market
2 For purposes of compliance with these limits positions in the regular-sized and mini-sized contracts shall be aggregated
Issued by the Commission this November 152007 in Washington DC David Stawick Secretary of the Commission [FR Doc E7-22681 Filed 11-20-07 845 amI BILLING CODE 6351-Q1-P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Bureau of Customs and Border Protection
19 CFR Part 4
[USCBP-2007-o098]
Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises
AGENCY Customs and Border Protection Department of Homeland Security ACTION Proposed interpretation solicitation of comments
SUMMARY This document proposes new criteria to be used by Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to determine whether non-coastwise-qualified vessels are in violation ofthe Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) when engaging in cruise itineraries in which passengers board at a US port the vessel calls at several Hawaiian ports and then the vessel proceeds to a foreign port or ports for a brief period before ultimately returning to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their cruise CBP believes these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because it appears that the primary objective of the foreign stop is evasion of the PVSA
DATES Comments must be received on or before December 212007 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT Glen E Vereb Cargo Security Carriers amp Immigration Branch Office of International Trade (202) 572-8730 ADDRESSES You may submit comments identified by docket number by one of the following methods
bull Federal eRulemaking Portal http wwwregulationsgov Follow the instructions for submitting comments
bull Mail Border Security Regulations Branch Office of International Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
I Public Participation
Interested persons are invited to participate in this proposed interpretation by submitting written data views or arguments on all aspects of the proposed interpretation Customs and Border Protection (CBP) also invites comments that relate to the economic environmental or federalism effects that might result from this proposed interpretation Comments that will provide the most assistance to CBP in developing these procedures will reference a specific portion of the proposed interpretation explain the reason for any recommended change and include data information or authority that support such recommended change
Instructions All submissions received must include the agency name and docket number for this proposed
interpretation All comments received will be posted without change to http wwwregulationsgov including any personal information provided
Docket For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received go to http wwwregulationsgov Submitted comments may also be inspected on regular business days between the hours of 9 am and 430 pm at the Office of International Trade Customs and Border Protection 799 9th Street NW 5th Floor Washington DC Arrangements to inspect submitted documents should be made in advance by calling Mr Joseph Clark at (202) 572shy8768
II Background
The maritime cabotage law governing the transportation of passengers was first established by section 8 of the Passenger Vessel Services Act of June 191886 (the PVSA) 24 Stat 81 as amended by section 2 of the Act of February 17 1898 30 Stat 248 formerly codified at 46 USC App 289 (now codified at 46 USC 55103) 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 of $200 (now $300 as promulgated in TD 03-11 pursuant to the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 199028 USC 2461 note) for each passenger so transported and landed
The intent of the maritime cabotage laws including the PVSA was to provide a legal structure that guarantees a coastwise monopoly to
65488 Federal RegisterVol 72 No 224Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules
American shipping and thereby promotes development of the American merchant marine Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 28 (DC Cir 1984) see also The Granada 35 FSupp 892 8931940 AMC 1601 (DC Pa 1940) (stating that the legislative aim of section 289 [now 55102] was the creation of a practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping business for United States ships) In other words the PVSA was enacted to advance the United States merchant marine and fleet by restricting the use of foreign-ownedflagged passenger vessels in United States territorial waters
Passenger vessel transportation between United States ports has historically been viewed to be part of the coastwise trade after the enactment of the PVSA This view is premised on the concepts of continuity of the voyage and whether its intended purpose or objective was coastwise transportation In other words the PVSA was held to be violated if the coastwise movement was continuous or if the purpose of the trip was a coastwise voyage (See 18 OAG 445 September 4 1886 28 OAG 204 February 16 1910 29 OAG 318 February 12 1912 30 OAG 44 February 1 1913 34 OAG 340 December 24 1924 and 36 OAG 352 August 13 1930)
The CBP regulations promulgated pursuant to the PVSA are found at section 480a of title 19 of the Code of Federal Regulations (19 CFR 480a) and are reflective of the above cited Office of the Attorney General decisions These regulations provide among other things that a non-coastwise-qualified vessel which embarks a passenger at a port in the United States embraced within the coastwise laws (a coastwise port) will be deemed to have landed that passenger in violation of the PVSA if the passenger disembarks at a different coastwise port on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a nearby foreign port or ports (as defined in 19 CFR 480a(a)(2) see also 19 CFR 480a(b)(2)) The terms embark and disembark are words of art which are defined as going on board a vessel for the duration of a specific voyage and leaving a vessel at the conclusion of a specific voyage respectively (See 19 CFR 480a(a)(4))
The references in section 480a to nearby foreign ports (defined in 19 CFR 480a(a)(2)) are the results of attempts by CBP to apply an Office of the Attorney Generals opinion dated February 26 1910 (28 OAG 204) In that case a foreign-flag vessel transported 615 passengers on a voyage around the world beginning in New
York and concluding in San Francisco The Attorney General opined that since the primary object of the voyage was to visit various parts of the world on a pleasure tour returning home via California and not to be transported in domestic commerce the transportation was not in violation of the PVSA
The 1910 Attorney Generals opinion was extended to voyages that included foreign ports other than nearby foreign ports (See Treasury Decision (TD) 68shy285 (33 FR 16558) November 14 1968) However voyages solely to one or more coastwise ports have always been considered predominantly coastwise Therefore non-coastwise-qualified vessels engaging in such a voyage where passengers temporarily go ashore at a coastwise port have been deemed to have violated the PVSA
m Current Law and Policy Pursuant to Public Law 109-304 120
Stat 1632 enacted on October 6 2006 Title 46 United States Code was substantially reorganized and recodified Consequently the PVSA is now codified at 46 USC 55103 and provides that no vessel shall transport passengers between ports or places in the United States either directly or by way of a foreign port under a penalty of $300 for each person so transported and landed except one that (1) Is wholly owned by citizens of the United States for purposes of engaging in the coastwise trade and (2) has been issued a certificate of documentation with a coastwise endorsement or is exempt from documentation but would otherwise be eligible for such a certificate and endorsement
In 2003 Congress enacted Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II Section 211 for the purpose of revitalizing the oceangoing US-flag cruise industry in Hawaii (the 2003 Act) Three oceangoing US-flag cruise ships PRIDE OF ALOHA PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAII were documented with coastwise privileges pursuant to the 2003 Act These vessels entered regular service in Hawaii in 2004 2005 and 2006 respectively and pursuant to the express language of the 2003 Act are limited in their operation to providing regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands of Hawaii
The CBP regulations promulgated pursuant to the PVSA are set forth in 19 CFR 480a and have remained unchanged throughout both the recodification of Title 46 of the United States Code and the enactment of the 2003 Act They provide that a violation of the PVSA occurs when passengers embark (board a vessel for the
duration of a voyage) a non-coastwiseshyqualified vessel at one US port and disembark (leave the vessel at the conclusion of a voyage) at a different US port unless they proceed with the vessel to a distant foreign port (Le any port not considered a nearby foreign port which is defined as any port located in North America Central America Bermuda or the West Indies including the Bahamas) Currently these regulations do not contain specific criteria for non-coastwise-qualified vessels on itineraries including US ports and either nearby or distant foreign ports in order for such foreign port calls to be compliant with the PVSA
To reiterate the applicable CBP regulations provide that the PVSA is violated when a non-coastwise-qualified vessel transports a passenger on a voyage solely to one or more coastwise ports and the passenger disembarks or goes ashore temporarily at a coastwise port (19 CFR 480a(b)(1)) Furthermore a violation of the PVSA also occurs when a non-coastwise-qualified vessel transports a passenger on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a nearby foreign port or ports (but no other foreign port) and the passenger disembarks at a coastwise port other than the port of embarkation (19 CFR 480a(b)(2)) However there is no violation of the PVSA when a passenger is on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a distant foreign port or ports (whether or not the voyage includes a nearby foreign port or ports) and the passenger disembarks at a coastwise port provided the passenger has proceeded with the vessel to a distant foreign port (19 CFR 480a(b)(3))
IV Request From MARAD To Provide Guidance
The US Department of Transportation Maritime Administration (MARAD) has requested that CBP take action to ensure enforcement of the PVSA MARAD has asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreignshyflag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwiseshyqualified cruise ship operators
In April of 2007 the operator of the three US-flag cruise vessels operating solely in Hawaii pursuant to the 2003 Act announced their intent to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAIl from the Hawaii market and redeploy her to Europe The operator intends to re-flag the vessel to foreign registry directly resulting in the loss of over 1100 crewmember jobs The primary reason cited for this decision is the rapid increase in foreign-flag competition entering the Hawaii market
Federal Register I Vol 72 No 224 I Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules 65489
from the West Coast This competition is evidenced in published cruise itineraries of foreign-flag carriers offering a variety of round trip cruises that depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period usually in the early morning and ultimately return to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their cruise These cruises are often marketed as Hawaii cruises and except for the brief stop in the nearby foreign port of Ensenada are purely coastwise in nature It is these cruise itineraries that pose an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels that pursuant to the 2003 Act are currently engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands
V Preliminary Notice
In response to MARADs concerns CBP sent letters to two carriers known to operate the itineraries in question as well as to the Cruise Lines International Association Inc stating that CBP believes that these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because it appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA The letters further indicated that CBP is taking steps to publish this position
VI CBPs Proposed Interpretive Rule Accordingly in this document CBP is
proposing to provide that cruise itineraries for non-qualified coastwise vessels which allow passengers to board at a US port call at several Hawaiian ports proceed to a foreign port or ports for a brief period and then ultimately return to the original US port of embarkation for disembarkation are not consistent with the PVSA and the regulations promulgated pursuant thereto Specifically CBP interprets a voyage to be solely to one or more coastwise ports even where it stops at a foreign port unless the stop at the foreign port is a legitimate object of the cruise CBP will presume that a stop at a foreign port is not a legitimate object of the cruise unless
(1) The stop lasts at least 48 hours at the foreign port
(2) The amount of time at the foreign port is more than 50 percent of the total amount of time at the US ports of call and
(3) The passengers are permitted to go ashore temporarily at the foreign port
Accordingly CBP proposes to adopt an interpretive rule under which it will presume that any cruise itinerary that does not include a foreign port call that
satisfies each of these three criteria constitutes coastwise transportation of passengers in violation of 19 CFR 480a(b)(1)
Dated November 16 2007 W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection [FR Doc E7-22788 Filed 11-20-07 845 am] BILLING CODe 9111-14-1
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau
27 CFR Part 9
[Notice No 76]
RIN 1513-AB49
Proposed Establishment of the Leona Valley Viticultural Area (2007R-281 P)
AGENCY Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau Treasury ACTION Notice of proposed rulemaking
SUMMARY The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau proposes to establish the 134 square mile Leona Valley viticultural area in the northeast part of Los Angeles County California We designate viticultural areas to allow vintners to better describe the origin of their wines and to allow consumers to better identify wines they may purchase We invite comments on this proposed addition to our regulations DATES We must receive written comments on or before January 22 2008
ADDRESSES You may send comments on this notice to one of the following addresses
bull httpwwwregulationsgov (Federal e-rulemaking portal follow the instructions for submitting comments) or
bull Director Regulations and Rulings Division Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau PO Box 14412 Washington DC 20044-4412
See the Public Participation section of this notice for specific instructions and requirements for submitting comments and for information on how to request a public hearing
You may view copies of this notice selected supporting materials and any comments we receive about this proposal at httpwwwregulationsgov under Docket No 2007-0066 You also may view copies of this notice all related petitions maps or other supporting materials and any comments we receive about this
proposal by appointment at the TTB Information Resource Center 1310 G Street NW Washington DC 20220 To make an appointment call 202-927shy2400
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT NA Sutton Regulations and Rulings Division Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau 925 Lakeville S1 No 158 Petaluma CA 94952 phone 415shy271-1254 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
Background on Viticultural Areas
TTB Authority Section 105(e) of the Federal Alcohol
Administration Act (FAA Act) 27 USC 205(e) authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to prescribe regulations for the labeling of wine distilled spirits and malt beverages The FAA Act provides that these regulations should among other things prohibit consumer deception and the use of misleading statements on labels and ensure that labels provide the consumer with adequate information as to the identity and quality of the product The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) administers the regulations promulgated under the FAA Act
Part 4 ofthe TTB regulations (27 CFR part 4) allows the establishment of definitive viticultural areas and the use of their names as appellations of origin on wine labels and in wine advertisements Part 9 of the TTB regulations (27 CFR part 9) contains the list of approved viticultural areas
Definition Section 425(e)(1)(i) ofthe TTB
regulations (27 CFR 425(e)(1)(i)) defines a viticultural area for American wine as a delimited grape-growing region distinguishable by geographical features the boundaries of which have been recognized and defined in part 9 of the regulations These designations allow vintners and consumers to attribute a given quality reputation or other characteristic of a wine made from grapes grown in an area to its geographic origin The establishment of viticultural areas allows vintners to describe more accurately the origin of their wines to consumers and helps consumers to identify wines they may purchase Establishment of a viticultural area is neither an approval nor an endorsement by TTB of the wine produced in that area
Requirements Section 425(e)(2) of the TTB
regulations outlines the procedure for proposing an American viticultural area and provides that any interested party
Us Department ofHomelaDd Secmity Washington DC 10229
bull ~
US Customs and Border Protection
AUG 15 2fXJJ
VE5-3-02-QTRRBSTCCCI - ti015502-GG-
Mr leon Sutcliffe Director Port Operations Camivai Cruise Unes Camival Place 3655 NW 87Avenue Miami Aorlda 33178
RE P~nger Vessef Services Ad Coastwise Transportation 46 USC sect 55103 19 CFR sect 480a(b)
Dear Mr Sutcliffe
As you know US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) enforces the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) codified at TItle 46 United States Code section 55103 (46 USC 55103) This statute prohibits non-coastwise-qualifled vessels (ie those vessels not US-buill owned and documented with a coastwise endorsement) from transporting passengers between porls or places within the United States The regUlations promUlgated pursuant to the PVSA are found at TrtJe 19 Code of Federal Regulations section 4808 (19 CFR 4808)
It has come to our attention that passenger vessels of your company are engaging in cruise itineraries that include ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands Two USAlagged coastwise-endorsed passenger vessefs are also currenUy engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of caD wittlin the Hawaiian Islands
As part of your cruise itineraries some of your foreign-flagged vessels depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period and ultimately rebJm to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their endse For example the MS ZAANDAM of Holand America Lines departs San Diego cruises the Hawaiian Islands stops in Ensenada from 800pm to 11 OOpmbull and returns to san Diego CBP believes these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because It appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA -- - - ~~~------
Please be advised that CBP is taking steps to publish this position Should have any questions pertaining to this matter please contact Mr Glen Vereb Chief Cargo Security Carriers and Immigration Branch at (202) 572-8724
Sincerely
F Jl E EST Y LEe A U I 5 I N Gmiddot
December 21 2007
The Honorable W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection co Border Security Regulations Branch Office ofInternational Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229
Re Hawaii Coastwise Cruises (USCBP-2007-0098) Comments in Response to Proposed Interpretation
Dear Commissioner Basham
NCL America Inc1 (NCLA) submits these comments in support ofthe efforts ofCustoms and Border Protection to enforce the Passenger Vessel Services Act and the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative as applied to Hawaii coastwise cruises
1 Introduction and Summary of Position
NCLA operates three large oceangoing US flag cruise ships in Hawaii These ships are documented under US flag and are required to operate in regular service in Hawaii pursuant to the authority of the Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative a 2003 federal statute intended to revitalize the US flag cruise industry and to maximize economic and national security benefits to the United States (the 2003 Act)
NCLA has invested $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships pursuant to the 2003 Act and in direct reliance on the protections of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) and its proper enforcement The PVSA limits the transportation ofpassengers between US ports to coastwise documented US flag ships Its statutory protections recognize that US flag ships have significantly higher operational costs in part because they are subject to more stringent US laws including US labor laws and federal
1 NCL America Inc is a US corporation incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware headquartered in Honolulu Hawaii As a US corporation it is subject to US taxes at both the federal and state level The Chief Executive Officer the Chairman of the Board and all of the Board of Directors of NCL America are US citizens The company is also subject to US labor and employment laws and is required by statute to maintain a workforce comprised primarily ofUS citizens
700 Bishop St SUite 900 I Honolulu HawMi 96813 I Tel 8085273800 Fax 8085273820 I ndcom
2
income tax among others The NCLA ships operating in Hawaii are the only large oceangoing cruise ships operating under US flag In furtherance of the policy goals of the PVSA and the 2003 Act these ships have created over 4000 seafaring jobs all subject to US minimum wage and other labor statutes
Since 2003 there has been a significant increase in capacity in the Hawaii market from foreign flag ships providing cruise service to Hawaii from the West Coast Many of these foreign flag cruises are marketed as Hawaii cruises and consist entirely ofUS ports ofcall with the sole exception of a token stop in Mexico for as little as an hour late at night under circumstances where passengers are not permitted to get offthe ship There are no reported rulings approving these particular foreign flag itineraries
Lower cost foreign competition in the Hawaii market has unfairly hurt NCLAs operations NCLA has incurred substantial losses which have contributed significantly to its decision earlier this year to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAll from US flag and reshydeploy it foreign Unfair foreign competition poses an imminent threat to the remaining US flag passenger vessels operating in the Hawaii trades pursuant to the 2003 Act
As the agency statutorily charged with implementation of the 2003 Act the US Department ofTransportation Maritime Administration (MARAn) is aware of the threat foreign flag Hawaii itineraries pose to the US flag fleet and brought the situation to the attention ofthe US Department ofHomeland Security Bureau ofCustoms and Border Protection (CBP or Customs) Customs determined that the primary object of these itineraries was coastwise and that the Ensenada stop was an evasion of the PVSA
In August 2007 Customs provided written notice to the affected foreign lines and their trade association that the existing itineraries were contrary to the PVSA None of these lines sought advance rulings even after the Customs notice with respect to their Hawaii itineraries pursuant to Customs regulations and many continued to market the itineraries as Hawaii cruises NCLA supports the efforts ofCustoms and MARAD to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act for Hawaii cruises
2 Statutory Authority for Customs Proposed Interpretation
(a) Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA)
Congress passed the PVSA in 1886 to protect the US maritime transportation industry from foreign competition2 Protection is afforded through penalty assessments on foreign vessels transporting passengers between US ports or places directly or by way ofa foreign port 3 As Congress and the courts have recognized coastwise protections for the US maritime transportation industry are only one dimension of the PVSA Operating in conjunction with other coastwise laws and with the US
2 See United States v Honduran SS GRANADA 35 F Supp 892 894 (BD Pa 1940)(citing purpose of PVSA to meet threats to the practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping which was to be preserved for US ships)
46 USc sect 55103 (originally 46 USC App 289)
3
documentation laws the PVSA also enhances military sealift in times ofnational emergency sustains a US merchant marine and supports the US shipbuilding and repair industry4
(b) Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative (the 2003 Act)
Over the past decade Congress has sought to reinforce the goals of the PVSA by providing mechanisms to revitalize the oceangoing US flag cruise fleet particularly in Hawaii The Project America legislation enacted in 1997 authorized among other things the re~flagging ofone existing cruise ship contingent on the operator contracting for the construction oftwo new oceangoing cruise shipss Following the default of the operator under the original contract Congress enacted the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative for the purpose ofrecovering economic and national security benefits to the United States bull 6 These same goals of the original PVSA were expressly referenced in the legislative history of the 2003 Act which emphasized that these ships will be assets available in time ofnational emergency and will significantly expand the pool ofqualified seafarers upon which the US Department ofDefense relies to crew non-combatant vessels
The 2003 Act authorizes the US documentation ofthree cruise ships for operation in regular service in Hawaii subject to certain conditions including a prohibition on operating in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico and the Caribbean Sea and a requirement that all vessel repair work be undertaken in the United States MARAD is charged with implementation of the 2003 Act
3 Customs Implementation of PVSA
(a) Regulations
The current regulations implementing the PVSA were published by Customs in 19858 The growth of the foreign flag cruise industry in North America and in particular the development of the Alaska cruise market led to an effort in 1984 to amend the thenshyexisting regulations to increase the ease of administration and operational flexibility The effort to change the regulation had support from US port interests who saw benefit in the potential increase in the number ofUS ports that foreign vessels could call and was opposed by proponents ofpotential US flag projects as detrimental to efforts to revitalize the US fleet 9 The preamble to the 1985 rule emphasized that it was of paramount importance to consider the primary object ofpassengers in taking a
4 See American Hawaii Cruises v Skinner 713 F Supp 452 457 (DDC 1989) (recognizing the contribution of the PVSA and the Jones Act in helping to secure national defense by maintaining a merchant marine oftbe best equipped and most suitable types ofvessels sufficient to serve in time of war or national emergency) see also Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 30 (DC Cir 1984) Wirth Ltd v SIS Acadia Forest 537 F2d 1272 1281 n32 (5th Cir 1976) S Public Law 105-56 Section 8109 (111 Stat 1203 1244) (Oct 81997 ) 6 Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II General Provisions - Department ofCommerce Section 211 (117 Stat 1179) (Feb 20 2003) 1 149 Cong Rec S1118 (dailyed Jan 17 2003(statement ofSenator Inouye) 8 19 CFR sect 480a 950 Fed Reg 26981 (July I 1985)
4
voyage10 a concept which is reinforced elsewhere in Customs regulations11 In its analysis of the comments received at the time Customs accepted the view ofport interests that the modified rule would help their business but did so recognizing the absence ofa regular salt water US flag passenger fleet Customs acknowledged the potential harm to prospective efforts to revitalize the US flag passenger fleet and expressly cautioned that if it were ever shown that coastwise qualified vessels in competition with foreign vessels were in fact hurt by the modified Customs regulation then Customs would immediately reconsider its position12
(b) Customs Rulings
Given the significant penalties associated with violating the PVSA13 Customs regulations expressly provide a mechanism for the owner or charterer of a foreign vessel or any other interested person to request an advisory ruling as to whether a contemplated voyage would be considered in violation of the PVSA14 Customs regulations provide that vessel operators can rely on these ruling letters only to the extent that the facts and circumstances are identical to those in the ruling letter IS
Notwithstanding the fact that several foreign cruise lines offer Hawaii itineraries originating in a US mainland port and calling at Hawaii ports with a token intervening stop in Mexico there are no reported rulings expressly approving such an itinerary for these foreign cruise lines 16
4 The Cruise Industry in Hawaii
(a) NCL America Returns US flag to the Oceangoing Passenger Fleet
Pursuant to the requirements ofthe 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative NCLA agreed to promote US-flag cruising enhance military sealift capacity and expand the US maritime labor base No other major cruise line had ever undertaken such a commitment to the US flag and the public policy objectives Congress sought to achieve under the PVSA or the 2003 Act Introduction ofPRIDE OF ALOHA in 2004 was a significant development in the maritime industry because it marked the restoration ofthe
10 Id at 26983 11 Customs Regulations include a provision on the effect ofruling letters and with respect to carrier rulings the applicable regulation refers to rulings setting forth a determination as to whether or not the primary object of a contemplated voyage is coastwise transportation in violation of46 USC sect 289 [pYSA codified at 46 USC sect55103] 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 12 50 Fed Reg at 26983 13 A modem cruise ship with 2400 passengers for example would be subject to a fine of$720OOO per cruise based on the statutory penalty of$300 for each passenger transported in violation of the Act 14 19 CFR sect 480a(d) IS 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 16 There is one older reported mling involving a request to drop the Ensenada port call from a Los AngeleslHawaiiLos Angeles itinerary which Customs held would violate the PYSA In dicta Customs acknowledged that the itinerary could be in compliance if the Ensenada call were not dropped but did not address the issue ofwhether a one hour service call where no passengers depart the vessel would be sufficient The carrier that obtained that ruling has since left the Hawaii market See Customs Ruling HQ 114078 re Crystal Hannony (Nov 4 1997)
5
us flag to the oceangoing cruise industry A contemporaneous press release from the Us Department ofTransportation reported that the three US-flag cruise ships to be introduced pursuant to the 2003 Act were expected to create more than 20000 US jobs generate more than $825 million ofexpenditures in the US economy and create nearly $360 million in federal tax revenue by the end of 200717 In 2005 the PRIDE OF AMERICA was introduced and in 2006 the third vessel PRIDE OF HAWAll was introduced to Hawaii Both the PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAIl offer 7shyday inter-island Hawaii itineraries whereas PRIDE OF ALOHA operates on 7 and 10 day cruises exclusively among the islands ofHawaii as well as 11 day cruises that include a foreign port call at Fanning Island To date NCLA has invested over $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships in furtherance ofthe policy objectives of the PVSA and the 2003 Act These ships employ over 4000 seafarers and generate hundreds ofmillions of dollars in benefits for Hawaii and the nation
(b) Significant Increase in Foreign Flag Capacity Since 2003
The most significant change in the Hawaii cruise market since 2003 has been the dramatic increase in capacity A significant portion ofthis capacity increase is directly attributable to NCLAs fulfillment ofthe Congressional mandate in the 2003 Act However foreign-flag operations in the Hawaii market as measured in passenger nights18 have skyrocketed Based on MARAn data derived from the US Customs Border Patrol Vessel Entrance and Clearance documents the passenger nights for foreign flag vessels departing from the West Coast to Hawaii on round trip cruise have increased several hundredfold during this period19 See Exhibit A
(c) NCLA Has Incurred Substantial Losses During this Period
Since 2004 NCLA has lost cumulatively more than a quarter ofa billion dollars A principal reason for these losses has been the increase in foreign capacity in this market NCLA has taken significant steps to reduce costs to address the increase in foreign competition but NCLA is at an inherent disadvantage when competing against foreign companies that are not subject to US labor laws US tax laws and other laws Ofcourse the statutory protections of the PVSA are intended to address these very issues That is why Customs immediate action to implement the proposed interpretation is critical for the US flag fleet Regrettably NCLA has already been forced to reduce overall capacity early next year with the withdrawal ofPRIDE OF HAWAlI to another
17 DOT Press Release dated June 72004 see also DOT Press Release dated August 132004 in connection with visit to PRIDE OF ALOHA by US Transportation Secretary Norman Y Mineta 11 Passenger nights (also referred to as passenger capacity days) are calculated by multiplying the number ofpassengers per vessel by the number ofcruise days in each itinerary by the number of cruises This is the unit ofmeasurement employed by MARAn In contrast passenger bed supply (also referred to as passenger capacity) data reflects only the number ofberths per vessel multiplied by the number of cruises and hence understates the market by excluding the full economic value ofthe cruise perfonned 19 In 2003 the total number ofpassenger nights for round-trip West Coast to Hawaii cruises was 303325 which jumped by 353 to 1072329 in 2006 and by 430 to 1304546 from 2003 to 2007 (The 2007 figure is based on MARAD data for six months and a1ll1ualized by published itineraries for the balance of the year)
6
market for operation under foreign flag This move alone will result in the loss ofover 1000 American seafaring jobs
5 Customs Proposed Interpretation is Necessary to Further the Important National Security and Public Policy Objectives Embodied in Federal Law
As Customs has properly noted the increase in foreign competition in the Hawaii trades in contravention of the PVSA pose[s] an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels[] As the operator of these ships NCLA has a vested interest in protecting the jobs ofthe thousands ofAmerican crewmembers and cruise ship service providers who support these vessels NCLA also has an interest in protecting the substantial economic investment it has made to revitalize the US flag passenger vessel fleet But a balancing of interests in the context of Customs enforcement ofexisting law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act requires a much broader focus
The legislative history of the 2003 Act expressly recognized the national security and public policy import ofestablishing a US flag passenger vessel fleet as a means to maintain the countrys preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool of qualified seafarers and as a means to help sustain a fleet ofUS-flag vessels to su~ort
the nations military and maritime industrial base for times ofnational emergency
Congress understood the importance ofestablishing a viable US flag cruise ship fleet as something larger than the vessels themselves These national security and public policy objectives must be weighed in the balance as Customs assesses how best to interpret its rules to give effect to the PVSA and the 2003 Act
6 Customs Should Clarify that the Proposed Interpretation is Limited to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades and Adopt Reasonable Measures to Ensure Sufficient Foreign Content
Since publication ofthe proposed interpretative rule several commenters have observed that the scope of the proposed interpretation is ambiguous because the language of Section VI referencing any cruise itinerary appears broader than the caption Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises and the entire discussion in the published notice which focuses exclusively on US-flag coastwise vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA agrees that the proposed interpretation should be clarified so that its scope is limited to vessels operating roundtrip voyages from US ports that include Hawaii port calls
NCLA supports the concept reflected in the proposed interpretive rule that round trip Hawaii itineraries from US ports on foreign ships must include a material and measurable degree ofoverall foreign port content as compared to US port content
20 149 Congo Rec S1117 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)
7
(a) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is also Consistent with Subsequent Congressional Enactments Modifying the PVSA
As discussed above it is well established that the PVSA was designed toRrotect US-flag vessels from foreign competition in the coastwise and domestic trades 1
Subsequent legislative enactments however have appropriately differentiated among distinct geographic markets and trades including Canada Alaska Puerto Rico and Hawaii based on the existence or non-existence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
In 1938 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers by Canadian passenger vessels on Lake Ontario and the St Lawrence River until such time as passenger service shall be established by vessels of the United States22 Similarly in 1961 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers on Canadian vessels within Alaska or between Alaska and other points in the United States until such time as passenger service is established by vessels ofthe United States23
In 1984 Congress modified the application ofthe PVSA to pennit the transportation ofpassengers between Puerto Rico and other United States ports on foreign-flag vessels24 As with the other statutory exceptions this provision is qualified and expires [o]n a showing that a United States passenger vessel qualified to engage in the coastwise trade is offering or advertising passenger service between a port in Puerto Rico and another port in the United States2S
Congress acted again with respect to the application of the PVSA with the 2003 Act in which it authorized three vessels that did not meet the US-build requirements of the PVSA to operate as modem US-flagged cruise ships in regular service in Hawaii26 The 2003 Act imposes a specific geographic limitation on the operation of any ship documented under this authority to operations only in regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands ofHawaii and shall not transport passengers in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico or the Caribbean Sea except in certain limited circumstances27 As above the limited nature of the 2003 Act is express it is strictly limited to the large ocean-going cruise ships and then only those operating in the regular Hawaii service where there are no US-flag operations28
21 See Act ofJune 19 1886 c 421 sec 8 24 Stat 81 Act of February 171898 c 26 sec 2 30 Stat 248 22 S] Res 174 75th Cong 52 Stat 223 (Alp 251938) codified at46 USC sect 55121(a) 23 See Pub L 87-77 75 Stat 196 (Jun 30 1961) codified at 46 USC sect 55121(b) 24 See Pub L 98-563 98 Stat 2916 (Oct 301984) codified at 46 USC sect 55104(b) 25 46 USC sect 55104(c)(l) see also 46 USC 46 USc sect 55104(cX2)(expiration of exemption upon availability ofa non-coastwise qualified US-flag vessel offering service in the relevant market) 26 149 Congo Rec SI118 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)(statementofSen Inouye) 27 Pub L 108-7 117 Stat 79 (Feb 20 2003) 28 149 Congo Rec S11l9 (dailyed Jan 17 2003Xstatement of Sen Inouye)
8
In each ofthese instances Congress fashioned a narrow exception to the PVSA that differentiated among distinct geographic markets based on the existence or nonshyexistence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
As the federal agency responsible for administering the 2003 Act MARAD requested that Customs act to protect US flag passenger vessel interests in the Hawaii trades29 Limiting the scope ofthe proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades also reflects Customs appreciation of the PVSA in the context of the subsequent Congressional action30 Viewing the Congressional modifications to the PVSA as a whole Congress has specifically and repeatedly differentiated among distinct geographic markets when it has found it necessary and appropriate to do so to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests It is well established that the proper interpretation of a statutory scheme includes consideration ofsubsequent statutes even though the underlying statute itselfhas not been expressly amended31 Accordingly Customs should likewise limit the scope ofthe proposed PVSA interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades because that is the only geographic market as mandated by the 2003 Act in which oceangoing US-flag cruise ships are operating
(b) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Consistent with Public Policy Objectives of the 1985 Rulemaking
In 1985middot Customs liberalized the regulations implementing the PVSA by eliminating certain regulatory prohibitions on foreign flag vessels In the context of the 1985 rulemaking Customs justified a relaxation ofthe regulations on the grounds that it would simplify the administration of the PVSA and would benefit the economy ofcertain American coastwise ports without eroding the statutory protection given to American vessels engaged in solely domestic trade32
Customs thus sought to reconcile US port economic interests with US-flag passenger vessel interests Both of these twin policy objectives are furthered by
29 See 72 Fed Reg 65488 (Nov 21 2007)( MARAn bas asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the ~eratiODS ofcoastwise-qualified cruise ship operators)
See generally FDA v Brown amp Williamson Tobacco Corp 529 US 120 132-133 (2000)(assessing propriety ofagency construction ofFood DIUg and Cosmetics Act and descnbing responsibility of reviewing cowt to assess statutory provisions in the context of subsequent legislative enactments) 31 See Brown amp Williamson 529 US 143 (holding that proper construction ofstatutory provision must necessarily assume that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications ofa later statute This is particularly so where the scope of the earlier statute is broad but the subsequent statutes more specifically address the topic athand) see also United States v Estate ofRomani 523 US 517 530-531 (1998)( holding that a later-enacted statute should control the construction of the federal lien priority statute a specific policy embodied in a later federal statute should control om construction of the [earlier] statute even though it ha[s] not been expressly amended) United States v Fausto 484 US 439453 (1988)(The courts frequently find Congress to have done this - whenever in fact they interpret a statutory text in the light ofsurrounding texts that happen to have been subsequently enacted This classic judicial task of reconciling many laws enacted over time and getting them to make sense in combination necessarily assumes that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications of a later statute) 32 50 Fed Reg 26982 (JuI 11985)
9
limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades
As noted earlier the 2003 Act limits the operation of the NCLA US-flag oceangoing passenger vessels to regular service in Hawaii Because there are no oceangoing US-flag vessels operating in any market other than the Hawaii trades Customs should limit the scope of the proposed interPretation to that market Such a limitation protects US flag passenger vessel interests without prejudicing US port interests In contrast an application of the proposed interpretation to any itinerary would needlessly harm US port interests unrelated to Hawaii without any countervailing benefit to US-flag passenger vessel interests Accordingly limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation is consistent with the public policy objectives of the 1985 rulemaking as well as the 2003 Act
(c) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Also Consistent with Customs Commitment to Revisit the Scope of its Rules to Protect US-Flag Interests
The relaxation ofthe PVSA regulations in 1985 was premised in large part on Customs finding that there was no regular salt water US-flag passenger fleet in operation at that time33 Acknowledging that the relaxed regulations could harm USshyflag interests Customs committed in the preamble ofthe 1985 final rule to immediately reconsider its interpretation if it is ever shown that there is a viable US flag vessel operating in competition with foreign-flag vessels34
Congress enacted the 2003 Act to stimulate the development of a US flag cruise ship industry As noted above the legislative history ofthat Act makes clear that Congress sought to revitalize the US-flag cruise industry as a means to maintain Americas preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool ofqualified seafarers help sustain a fleet of US flag vessels to support our military and a maritime industrial base create thousands of seagoing and shoreside American jobs and stimulate the development ofa US flag cruise ship tourism business with the commensurate benefits to the US tax base the US economy and US employment
Customs is now acting at MARADs request to revisit its interpretation ofthe regulations implementing the PVSA because recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwise-qualified cruise ship operations35 That is to say that the concerns articulated by Customs in the context of the 1985 rulemaking have materialized and US-flag passenger vessel interests are in fact being hanned in the Hawaii trades by foreign competitors
33 50 Fed Reg 26983 34Id
3S 72 Fed Reg 56488 (Nov 21 2007)
I
10
Because the US-flag passenger vessels are limited by statute to regular service in Hawaii limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the
Hawaii trades is consistent with Customs historical commitment to revisit its interpretation ofthe implementing regulations to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests
7 Conclusion
For the reasons stated above NCLA commends the efforts ofCustoms and MARAn to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act as applied to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA respectfully requests Customs to move ahead promptly with p~blicati~nof a final interpretive rule to advance the important national security arid public policy objectives ofthese laws
We greatly appreciate the opportunity to submit these comments
Sincerely
~~~ Alan T Yamamoto Vice President Hawaii Operations
Exhibit A
Ship Name Serenade Of The Seas Departure Port San Diego California Ports of Call San Diego California Kailua Kona Hawaii Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii Hlo Hawaii Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii Ensenada Mexico San Qigo California
2007 Date(s) Oct 05
Sailing Itinerary
Day Port H ~rrive Depart Activity
05-0ct San Diego California 500 PM
06-0ct Cruising
07-0ct Cruising
08-0ct Cruising
09-0ct Cruising
10-0ct Kailua Kona Hawaii 700 AM 900 PM Tendered
11-00t Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 1000 AM Tendered
12middot0ct Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 900 PM Tendered
13-0ct Hilo Hawaii 700 AM 600 PM Docked
14middot0ct Honoulu (Oahu) Hawaii 700 AM Docked
15-0ct Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii 200 AM Docked
6-0ct CrUising
17-0ct Cruising
18-0ct Cruising
19middot0ct Cruising
-7 20-00t
O-Oot
Ensenada ~i1exico
San Deqo California
i 00 ~r1
700 ~M
200 oM D1Jcked ~
EUROPE CRUISES amp CRUISETOURS
17 DAYS
GRAND PRINCESS
FT LAUDERDALE to
COPENHAGEN
2004 DEPARTURE DATE MayZ
CRUISE IfINERARY
DAY 1 2-6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
PORT Ft Lauderdale Florida At Sea ~ores IslandsPortugal (Ponto Delgado) At Sea Lisbon Portugal Vigo Spain At Sea ParislNormandy France (Le Havre) RotterdamThe Netherlands At Sea Hamburg Germay (for Berlin) At Sea Olso Norway Oslo Fjord scnic Cruising Copenhagen Denmark
ARRIVE
N
12N 9AM
7AM
6AM
DISEMBARK AM
DEPART EMBARK PM
6PM
7PM 6PM
7PM 7PM
1UM
MEDITERRANEAN CRUISETOUR
TRANSATLANTICWESTERN EUROPE ICELAND amp GREENLANDTRANSATLANTIC
16 GRAND DAYS PRINCESS
COPENHAGEN to
NEW YORK
2004 DEPARTURE DATE Aug 27
CRUISE IIINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Copenhagen Denmark EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 3 Dover England (forLondon) 7AM 7PM 4 Cornwall England (Falmouth) 9AM 6PM 5 Dublin Ireland lOAM 9PM 6 GlasgowEdinburgh Scotland (Greenock) 8AM 12 M 7 Belfast Northern Ireland 1030 AM 530 PM 8 At Sea 9 Reykjavik Iceland 9AM 9PM 10 At Sea 11 Prins Christian Sund Scenic Cruising 12N 6PM 12 Qaqortoq Greenland 7 AM 2PM 13 At Sea 14 SI Johns Newfoundland Canada 12N 7PM 1516 At Sea 17 New York CIty New York DISEMBARK AM
SCANDINAVIARUSSIA CRUISETOUR
Church of the Savior on the Spilled Blood St Petersburg Russia
WESTERN EUROPE CRUISETOUR
CRUISEIOUR ITINERARY
CRUISETOUR lA11C CRUISETOUR ITINERARY CRUISETOUR 4A14C CRUISETOUR II INERARY
DAY PORT By Sea By Land DAY PORT By Sea By Land CRUISETOUR 7Al7C18 STAR PRINCESS 1 Rome 17 GRAND PRINCESS 1 BudapestDAYS DAYS DAY PORT By Sea By Land 22 Rome Budapest 18 ROYAL PRINCESS 1 Paris
ROMETODI 3 RomeTodi BUDAPEST VIENNA 3 BudapestVienna DAYS 2 Paris and 4 TodiFlorence and 4 Vienna 3 Paris
PARIS EUROSTAR5 Florence 5 ViennaPrague 4 ParisLondon 6 FlorenceVeniceEmbark 6 Prague and 5 London
FLORENCE PRAGUE
plus plus LONDON7 Venice Italy (overnight onboard ship) 7 PragueCopenhagenEmbark 6 LondonSouthamptonEmbark
GRAND MEDITERRANEAN SCANDINAVIARUSSIA plus 7 At Sea CRUISE 8-9 At Sea CRUISE 8 At Sea WESTERN EUROPE 8 Bilbao Spain10 Istanbul Turkey 9 Stockholm Sweden (Nyniishamn) BRITISH ISLES CRUiSE2004 DEPARTURE DATES 2004 DEPARTURE DATES 9 Bordeaux France (Le Verdon)
11 Kusadasi Turkey (for Ephesus) 10 Helsinki FinlandApr Sf 2004 DEPARTURE DATES 10 At SeaMay 131 Jul2Apr 29 12 Athens Greece (Piraeus) 11 SI Petersburg Russia (overnight onboard ship) 11 GlasgowEdinburgh Scotland (Greenock)May 23 JulUt May 141 26middot Jul tt 13~ 250
May 23 Jun 16 13 At Sea JunZt JulU 12 SI Petersburg Russia Jun n 19 Aug 18o 300 12 Dublin Ireland
]un 12 Aug l t 13 Cork IrelandJuliO 14 NaplesCapri Italy 13 Tallinn EstoniaJun 22 t Aug 11 Toun~eonlymilabkwithcruise5indi[itbtAug 3 15 FlorencelPisa Italy (Livorno) 14 Cdansk Poland 14 Cornwall England (Falmouth)
Aug 27 tBritishliksetuise aWEwupeiBritishlslesouist 15 ParisNormandy France (Le Havre)16 Monte Carlo Monaco 15 At Sea bull WestemEuropeCrube middotlcdandINorwqlmFjOllisetuise 16 Rotterdam The Netherlands
t Crulsetour lA only combinable with 12--dayGreck fst 17 Barcelona Spain (overnight onboard ship) 16 Olso NOrway Qsld Fjord Scenic Cruising bull Norwqian FjordsNorth Cipecruise 17 BrusselsBruges Belgium (Zeebrugge)tCruixtour 4A only combinable with lo-day Baltic
crulse shown on PI 11 18 Barcelona Spain Heritage cruise shawn on pg 12 OCrubctnur 7C only combinable with EwuJlWl ExplorerCrube17 Copenhagen Denmark 18 London England (Southampton)
EXOTICS CRUISES
AUSTRALIANEW ZEALAND AUSTRALIANEW ZEALAND AUSTRALIAASIA
12 14 19 DAYS DAYS DAYS
SAPPHIRE PRINCESS SAPPHIRE PRINCESS SAPPHIRE PRINCESS
saH between SYDNEYAUCKLAND SYDNEY
toand to BANGKOKSYDNEY AUCKLAND 2005 DEPARTURE DATES 2005 DEPARTURE DATE
Mar7Jan 6 2004 DEPARTURE DATEJan 1St
Dec 23 CRUISE ITINERARYJr ift Feb 23 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
CRUISE ITINERARY 1 Sydlley Austrli EMBARK PM CRUISE ITINERARY 2 At Sea
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTDAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 3 Brisbane Australia 8AM 6PM 1 Sydlley Australia EMBARK PM 4 At Sea 1 Aucklalld N~w Zealalld EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 5 Cid Harbor Austrlia (for Great Barrier Reef) 7AM 5PM2 At Sea 3 Melbourne Australia 8 AM 6 PM 6 Cirns Australia (Yorkeys) 8AM 6PM
3 WeIUllgton New Zealand 8 AM 6 PM 4 At Sea 7-8 At Sea 4 Christchurch New Zealalld (Lytlelton) 8 AM 6 PM 5 Tasmallia Australia (Hobart) 8 AM 6 PM 9 Darwin Australia lPM 8pM 5 Dunedill N~ Zealalld (Port Chalmers) 8 AM 6 PM 6-7 At Sea 10-11 At Sea 6 Fiordland Natiollal Park Scenic Cruising AM 6 PM 8 Fiordlalld Natiollal Park Scellic Cruising 7 AM 5 PM 12 Bali Illdonesi (Padang Bay) 7AM 6PM
7-8 At Sea J DUlledill New Zealalld (Port Chalmers) 8 AM 6 PM 13-14 At Se 10 Christchurch N~ Zealalld (Lytlelton) 8 AM 6 PM 15 Kuala Lumpur Mlaysia (Port KeIang) 8AM 6PM9 Tasmania Australia (Hobart) 8 AM 6 PM 11 Wellillgtoll New Zealmd 8 AM 6 PM 16 Sillgpore 8AM 6PM
10 At Sea 12 At Sea 17 At Sea 11 Melbourne Australia 8 AM 6 PM 13 Taurallga New Zealalld 8 AM 730 PM 18 Ho Chi Millh City Vietnm (Vung Tau) 7AM 730 PM 12 At S~a 19 At Sea 14 Bay of Islallds New Zealalld 8 AM 7 PM 13 SydPey Australia DISEMBARK AM 20 Bmgkok Thailalld (Laem Chabang) DISEMBARK AM15 Aucklalld New Zealalld DISEMBARK AM
t llinemy opcrnesln reverse order Port times mil1 my
CHINAFAR EAST SOUTHEAST ASIAFAR EAST
1612 DAYSDAYS
PACIFIC PRINCESS
SAPPHIRE PRINCESS PACIFIC PRINCESS
OSAKA BEIJING to
to BANGKOK OSAKA
2004 DEPARTURE DATE 2004 DEPARTURE DATEPAClFlC PRINCESS
julllt Jun 11 2005 DEPARTURE DATE
SAPPHIRE PRINCESS Apr 11
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Osaka Japall EMBARK PM
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Beijillg China (Xingang) EMBARK PM 2 Hiroshima Japall 1 PM 6PM 2 DaHan China AM 5PM 3 At Sea 3 At Sea 4 Shmghai Chilla 7 AM 6PM 4 Shallghai Chilla (overnight onboard ship) 7AM 5 At Sea 5 Shallghai China 6PM 6 Okinaw Jpll 7 AM 1 PM
7 Taipei Taiwm (KeeIung) 9 AM 7PM6 At Sea 8 At Se7 Pusan South Korea 8AM 5PM 9 HOllg KOllg Chill 8 AM 7PM 8 At Sea 10-11 At S~a J Vladivostok Russia 5AM 730 PM 12 Ho Chi MiIJh City Vietnm (Phu My) 7 AM 5PM 10 At Sea 13 At Se 11 Nagasaki Japan 7AM 6PM 14 Singpore 8 AM 6pM
15 KUlltll Mlysi 830 AM 430 PM12 At Sea 16 At Sea 13 Osaka Japan DISEMBARK AM 17 Ballgkok Thaillld DISEMBARK AM t Sailing alls i1t Hiroshima on Dl) 11 In place of Nilgilsaki Port times milY vary
CRUISE I flNERARY CRUISE I flNERARY
Ho Chi Minh City Vietnam
EXOTICS CRUISES
SOUTHEAST ASIACHINA SOUTHEAST ASIACHINA FAR EASTALASKA
PACIflC PRINCISS ROYAL PRINCESS
16 16 19 DAYS DAYS DAYS
SAPPHIRE SAPPHIRE PRINCESS
Sail between PRINCESSBANGKOK
and BANGKOK OSAKA
BEIJING to to
2004 DEPARTURE DATES BEIJING SEATTLEPAClFlC PRINCESS
Jun 27tt 200S DEPARTURE DATE200S DEPARTURE DATE ROYAL PRINCESS
Mar 26 Apr 23Oct 16 Nov lt
CRUISE I I INERARY CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
1 GsakaJpan EMBARK PM1 Bangkok Thailand (Laem Chabang) EMBARKPM 1 Bangkok Thailand (Laern Chabang) EMBARK IM 2 At Sea2 At Sea 2 AtSea bull 3 Nagasaki Japan 7 AM 6PM
9AM 7PM 3 Singapore 7PM 4 Pusan Soqth Korea 8AM 5PM 4-5 At Sea 5 At Sea gt bull
7AM 7PM 6 Da Nwg Vietn~1Il 7AM middot7PM 6 Vladivostok Russia SAM 730 PM 7 At Sea 7 AtSea
7AM 12M 8 Hong lltog ihin~ 7AM 12M 8 Sapporo japan (Muroran) 6AM 6PM 9-10 At Sea 9-10 At Sea 9-12 At Sea cross Intemational Dateline
13 DutchHarbor Alaska (Aleutian Islands) 230 PM 7PM11 ShaJlgllai Cbina (overnight onboard ship) lAM 11 Shangh~t Cllina (ovmightonJoltird $hip) 7 AM 14 At Sea shy12 Shanghai China 6PM 12 Shanghai China
7AM - - tlJf
6PM 15 Anchorage Alaska (Seward) 8AM 6PM13 At Sea 13 AtSea i 16 College Fjord Seni CruIsing 630AM 930 AM
14 Nagasaki japan 7AM 6PM 14 Nagasaki japan 6PM 17 Glacier Ilay Scenic Cruising 1030 AM 830 PM 15 Pusan South lltOrea TAM 4PM 1~ bull Pu~an SQuth iorea middot4lM 18 middotmiddot juneau Alaska 6 AM 2PM 16 At Sea 16 At Sea 19 - At Sea 17 Beijing China (Xingangy OISEMBAlUe AM 17 Beijing Cliina (Xingang) 20 SeattleWashington DISEMBARK AM
t ltinemy Operne5 in rcvmc Older ttPorttimcsmiYnl)middotShlpwilldocklnampngkoknsttadofL1cm~
POLYNESIA amp THE COOK ISLANDS POLYNESIA amp THE MARQUESAS ISLANDS
10 10 DAYS DAYS
TAHITIAN PRINCESSTAHITIAN PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIPROUNDTRIP fromfrom
PAPEETEPAPEETE 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
2004 DEPARTURE DATES Oct 4 24 Mayl 17 27 Sep4 14 24 Nov 13 Jun 6 16 26 0lt 14 00323Ju16 16 26 Nov 323 2005 DEPARTURE DATESAug 5 15 25 Dec 13 Jan 12
Feb 1 21200S DEPARTURE DATES
~~ 122 ~~Il 13 23 CRUISE ITINERARY
CRUISE II INERARY DAY PORT
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Papeete Tahiti 1 Papeete Tahiti (overnight onboard ship) EMBARK PM
2 Moorea Polynesia 2 Papeete Tahiti SPM 3 Huahil1e P9lynesia 8AM 5 PM 3 Tuamotu Atolls Senic Cruising
5 PM8-AM 4 At Sea I At Sea 5 Rarotonga Cook Islands 8AM 5 PI~ 5 Nuku Hiva Marquesas Islands 6 At Sea 6 Hiva Ga Marquesas Islands 8AM 5PM 7 Raiatea Polynesia overnight onboard Ship 6AM
7 At Sea middotai~ RaiateaPQlynesia igt gt 6AM 8 Rangiroa P~iynesia 8AM 4PM8 Tahaa scenic Cryising 630 AM 830 AM
8 BoraBoraPQlyrtesia(ovemightollboard ship) UN 9 Tahaa ~enl Cruising 8 AM middot11AM
9 Bora lora Polynesia 5iM 9 Raiatea Polynesia 12 N 11 PM 10 Moore Polynesfa 8 AM 5 PM la ~ Bora ~oraPoIYnesia 8AM bull 5PM
11 Papeete Tahiti DISEMBARK AM 11 Papeete Tahiti DISEMBARK AM Iong Kong Harbor
3 Singapore 4-5 At Sea 6 Da NangVieinam 7 At Sea 8 liong Kong China
EXOTICS CRU ISES
HAWAIITAHITI HAWAIIAN ISLANDS SOUTH PACIFIC ISLANDS
12 1515 DAYS DAYSDAYS
PACIFIC
TAHITIAN PRINCESS ISLAND PRINCESSPAClFIC PRINCESS
PRINCESS
SYDNEYROUNDTRIP sail between tofrom
PAPEETE PAPEETELOS ANGELES and
2004 DEPARnIRE DATEHONOLULU 2004 DEPARTURE DATES Apr 21
2004 DEPARTURE DATES ~~~l CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE 11 INERARY
Oet21t CRUISE ITINERARY Nov Sf
MayS PACIFIC PRINCESS DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
Nov20t DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DecSt 1 Los Angeles CalifornIa EMBARK AM 1 Sydney AustralIa EMBARK PMAug 17t
Dec20t1 Papeete Tahiti EMBARK PM 2-4 At Sea
2005 DEPARTURE DATE Jan 4 2-5 At Sea
(overnight onboard ship) Jan 19 5 Auckland New Zealand 7 AM 2PMFeb 3t 6 Iiilo Hawaii 8 AM 6 PM
TAHITIAN PRINCESS Papeete Tahiti 11 PM fb 18 6-7 At Sea Kilauea Voko ~enic CruisingApr 12 MarS t 3 Moorea Polynesia 8 AM 5 PM 8 Suva fijI 11 AM 430 PM1~i~t 7 Kona Hawaii 8AM 6PM4 Bora Bora PolYnesia 8 AM 5 PM 9 At Sea Cross International Dateline Apr 19
5-6 At Sea 8 Honolulu Hawaii 8AM 11 PM 10 Apia Western Samoa 830 AM 2PM 7 Christmas Isl~ndKiribati 1Z N 5 PM 9 Kauai Hawaii (Nawlliwlli) 8AM 6PM 11-12 At Sea 8-9 At Sea 10 Maui Hawaii (Lahaina) 6PM 13 Bora Bora Polynesia lOAM 6PM 10 HlloliaWlii 6 PM 13 Raiatea Polynesia (overnight onboard 11 PM11-14 At Sea 11 Maui Hawaii (Lahaina) 8 AM 6 PM 14 Raiatea Polynesia 11 PM
15 Ensenada Mexico (service call)KaUaiH~waii(Nawllfwtli) 8AM 6 PM 15 Moorea Polynesia 8AM 5PM
tllinemyopcr~ttsln=x QnIerPurtlimcslmYvary Honolulu Hawaii DISEMBARK AM 16 Los Angeles CalIfornia DISEMBARK AM 16 Papeete Tahiti DISEMBARK AM
ISLANDS OF THE PACIFIC THEATER SOUTH PACIFIC EXPLORER
24 24 DAYS DAYS
PAClFIC PRINCESS PAClFIC PRINCESS
sail between HONOLULU PAPEETE
and to OSAKA FT LAUDERDALE
2004 DEPARTURE DATES
Mayl 2004 DEPARTURE DATEJul2Sj
Aug 29 CRUISE ITINERARY
CRUISE ITINERARYDAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART EMBARK PM DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
1 Papeete Tahiti EMBARK PM lPM 7PM 2 8AM 11 PM
3 ~~~~~~ ~~~~Sta 8AM 5 PM 4-6 At Sea 7 Pitcairn Island Scenic Cruising 8AM 1211
8AM 12 N
7AM ZPM 8-9 At Sea 10 Easter Island Chile 8AM 2PM
9AM 11-14 At Sea 15 Callao Peru (overnight for Lima and Machu Picchu) 8AM 16 Callao Peru lPM 17 At Sea 18 Manta Ecuador (for Quito) 9fM 7PM 19 At Sea 20 Transit Panama Canal 7 AM 430 PM 21 San BIas Panama 8AM 5 PM 22 ft Sea 23 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands 7AM 4PM 24 At Sea
25 Ft Lauderdale Florida DISEMBARK AMMoorea Polynesia tllinemyoperataln~12onlerPortl1mesmiYmymiddot
EXOTICS CRUISES
HAWAIITAHITISOUTH PACIFIC AMAZONSOUTHERN CARIBBEAN CAPE HORNSTRAIT OF MAGELLAN
1430 12 DAYS DAYSDAYS
ROYAL PRINCESS ROYAL PRINCESSSAPPHIRE PRINCESS
sail betweenFT LAUDERDALE SANTIAGOLOS ANGELES to
andto MANAUS BUENOS AIRESSYDNEY 2005 DEPARTURE DATE 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
2004 DEPARTURE DATE Apr 9 Jan 10
Nov 22 Jan 241 Feb 7
FebZt
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
CRUISE ITINERARY
CRUISE ITINERARYCRUISE ITINERARY 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTDAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 2-3 At Sea 1 Santiago Chile (Valparaiso) EMBARK PM
1 Los ingeles California EMBARK PM 4 Tortola BritIsh Virgin Islands 8 AM 6 PM 2 At Sea 2 Ensenada Mexico 8AM 5PM 3 Puerto Montt Chile 7AM 6PM
3middot6 At Sea 4 At Sea 5 Dominica 9 AM 4 PM 7 Hilo Hawaii 8AM 5 At Sea Chilean Fjords Scenic Cruising6PM 6 Trinidad 9 AM 6 PM
8 Maui Hawaii (Lahaina) 8AM 6PM 6 At Sea Amalia Glacier Scentc CruiSi3f7 At Sea 7 Punta Arenas Chile (Strait of Magei an) 7AM 6PM9 Honolulu Hawaii 7AM 5PM
- 10middot13 At Sea 8 Beagle Channel Scenic Cruising 8 Ushuaia Argentina (Tierra del Fuo) 12N 8PM
8 Devils Island French Guiana (Isle Royal) 8 AM 2 PM 14 Bora Bora Polynesia 8AM 6PM 9 At Sea 9 At Sea Cape Hom Scenic Cruising
10 Santarem Brazil 9 AM 7 PM 10 Moorea Polynesia 8AM 6PM 10 Falkland Islands (Stanley) 8AM 6PM 10 Papeete Tahiti (overnight onboard ship) 9PM 11 At Sea
i 16 Papeete Tahiti 6PM 11 Boca da Valeria Brazil (Amazon River) 7 AM 2 PM 12 Puerto Madryn Argentina 6AM 5PM 17middot18 AtSea 12 Manaus Brazil (overnight onboard ship) 10 AM 13 At Sea
14 Montevideo Uruguay 9AM 6PM19 Pago Pago merlcan Samoa 8AM 6PM 13 Manaus Brazil DISEMBARK AM 15 Buenos Aires Argentina DISEMBARK AM 20 Apia Western Samoa 8AM 6PM 21 At Sea Cross International Dateline middotl1me5forallscenkouisinCile subjectlDclwIgc
tllinmryopefilteslnr=rscordttPorttlmislm)vary22 Suva Fiji 8AM 6PM l 23-24 At Sea
20 Auckland New Zealand 8AM 6PM ORINOCO RIVERSOUTHERN CARIBBEAN ANDESSOUTH AMERICA 26 Tauranga New Zealand 8AM 7PM 27 At Sea
28 Wellington Newealand 8AM 6PM 16 17 DAYS DAYS 29-30 AtSea
31 Sydney Australia DISEMBARK AM ROYAL PRINCESS ROYAL PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP SANTIAGO from to
FT LAUDERDALE FT LAUDERDALE
200S DEPARTURE DATE2005 DEPARTURE DATE
Mar 7Mar 24
CRUISE IIJNERARYCRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Santiago Chlle (Valparaiso) EMBARK PM
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM
2 La Serena Chile (Coquimbo) 8 AM 5 PM2-3 At Sea 3 At Sea Um6n Costa Rica 7AM 7PM 4 Arica Chile 7AM 6PMCristobal Panama (for Panama Canal) 8AM 5PM o At Sea
6 Cartagena Colombia 9AM 2 PM 6 San Martin Peru (for Pisco and Machu Picchu) 7AM 6PM 7 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 130 PM 7PM 7 Callao Peru (overnight for Lima) 530 AM 8-9 At sea 8 Callao Peru 1PM 10 Puerto Ordaz Venezuela (Orinoco River) 8AM 6PM 9 At Sea
i 11 At Sea 10 Manta Ecuador (overnight for Quito) 530AM 12 Greada 8AM i 11 Manta Ecuador 1lM5PMt 1~ Dolllinlca i 7N1 5 PM 12 At Sea
i 13 Transit Panama C~nal 7AM 430 PM14 St Thomas us Virgilslands 9AM 5PM 14 Cartagena Colombia 8AM 130 PMJs AtSei i 15 Aruba Netherlands intiiles 1PM 7PM 16 Princess Cays Bahamas 8AM 16-17 At Sea Tahiti Polynesia 17 FtLallardale Flillilt~ DISEMBARK AM 1ampmiddot Ft L~uderdale Florida DISEMBARK AM
AMAZON RIVERMEDITERRANEAN
21 DAYS
ROYAL PRINCESS
MANAUS
to ROME
2005 DEPARTURE DATE
Apr 21
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE M~naus Brazil (Wemight onboardship) Manaus Brazil
3 BocadaValeria Brazil (AriiazonRivet) 11 AM 4-6 At Sea 7 Recife Brazil 1 PM 8-11 AtSea 12 Dakar Senegal 8AM 13-14 At Sea 15 Agadir Morocco 7AM 16 Casablanca Morocco (for Marrakech) 8AM 17 Gibraltar lOAM 18 Allcante Spain 12 N 19 Barcelona Spain 8AM 20 Cannes France (for Monte Carlo) 8AM 21 FlorencePisa Italy (Livarno) 7AM 22 Rome Italy (Civitavecchia) DISEMBARK AM
INDIAN OCEANAUSTRALIA
28 DAYS
PACIfIC PRINCESS
CAPE TOWN
to SYDNEY
2004 DEPARTURpound DATE
Oct 20
CRUISE ITINERARY1 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Cape Town South Africa EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 3 East London South Africa 7AM 3PM 4 DurbahSouth Africa 8AM 6PM 5-7 At Sea 8 Nosy BeMadagascar 7AM 4PM 9 At Sea 10 Poilit des Galets Reunioll]slahd 11 Port Louis Mauritius 12c19 At Sea 20 Perth Australia (Fremantle) 21-23 At Sea 24 Adelaide Australla 25 At Sea 26 Melbourne Australla 7 27 Tasmania AUstralia (Burnie) 28 At Sea 29 Sydney Australia DISEMBARK AM
I
DEPART EMBARK PM
7PM 6PM
8pM
5PM
3PM 9PM 6PM 6PM 5PM 7PM 7PM
EXOTICS CRUISES
SOUIB ATIANTICANTARCfICNSOUIB AMERICA
24 DAYS
ROYAL PRINCESS
CAPE TOWN
to SANTIAGO
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
Dec 17
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Cape TownSouthAfrica (overnighfol1board ship) EMBARK PM 2 Cape Town South Africa 3PM 2 if~~t Good HopSCenic Crulsing 3-6 6 Tristan DaCunha United Kingdom 8AM 5PM 7-10 At Sea 11 Falkland Islands (Staliley) 8 AM 5PM 12 At Sea 13-16 Antarctica Peninsula ScehltmiddotCruising 14 days ihcludingmiddot Elephant
Island AntarcticSotind Deceptionlslana GerlacheStrait NaxefChannel Schollaert Channel SigJtla Island and Boyd Strait)
17 At Sea Cape Horn Scenic Cruising1amp UshuaiaArgentina (Tierra del fuego) bull middot6 AM 19 Punta Arenas Chile (Strait of Magellan) 7 AM 20 At Sea Amalia Glacier Scenic Cruising21 At Sea Chilean Fjords Scenic Cruising22 AtSea 23 Puerto Mont Chile 7AM 6PM 24 At Sea 25 Santiago Chile (Valparaiso) DISEMBARK AM
-nmes for1l scenlccruisinc are subJect to change
ASIAINDIAMEDITERRANEAN
30 ROYAL PRINCESSDAYS
ROME
to BANGKOK
2004 DEPARlURE DATE
Sep 16
CRUISE Il INERARY
WEST AFRICASOUTH AMERICA
28 DAYS
PACIFIC PRINCESS
FT LAUDERDALE
to CAPE TOWN
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
51 22
CRUISE ITINERARY
DISEMBARK AM
Aruba
EXOTICS CRU ISES amp CRU ISETOU RS
AUSTRALIANEW ZEALAND CRUISETOUR
AUSTRALIAN EXPLORER 2004 DEPARTURE DATESAPPHIRE21 plus
DAYS PRINCESS SYDNEY Dec 17 to
AUCKLAND CRUISETOUR 5P CRUiSE
CRUISETOUR ITINERARY
DAY PORT By Sea By Land DAY PORT
1 Sydney 14 Fiordland National Park 2 Sydney Scenic Cruising
3 SydneyAyers Rock 15 Dunedin New Zealand (Port Chalmers) 4 Ayers ROek
5 Ayers RockPort Douglas 16 Christchurch New Zealand 6 Port Douglas - (Lytleton)
7 Port DouglasSydneyEmbark 17 Wellilgton New Zealand 8 At Sea 18 At Sea 9 Melbourne Australia 19 Tauranga New Zealand
10 At Sea 20 Bay of Islands New Zealand 11 Tasmania Australia (Hobart) 21 Auckland New Zealand 12middot13 At Sea
Sydney Opera House Australia
AUSTRALIANEW ZEALAND CRUISETOUR SOUTHEAST ASIACHINA CRUISETOUR CAPE HORNSTRAIT OF MAGELLAN CRUISETOUR AUSTRALIAN BEIJING Be TERRA COTTA 2004 DEPARTURE DATES RIO 8t IGUAZU FALLS Post-Crulsetour1 Pre-Crulsetour 217EXPLORER 2005 DEPARTURE DATES PACIFICSAPPHIRE WARRIORS19 plw or PRINCESS jul9t loieifie
DAYS PRINCESS SYDNEY Jan 12 plus 19 ROYAL plw Feb 5 Oct 28 Royal BUENOS AIRES
AUCKLAND DAYS ROYAL PRINCESS to 21 ampto DAYS PRINCESS
BEUING CRUISE t ~~S~i BeWln~~~~e
to SANTIAGO~e~s~Ot~r~ih~fi1BANGKOK CRUiSE CRUISECRUISETOUR 3t3P landtourm~yvlty CRUISETOUR 12
DAY PORT DAY PORT
DAY PORT By Sea ltBy LaDd DAY PORT
1 Beijing 11-12 At Sea 1 Rio de janeiro 11 Cape Horn Scenic Cruising
13 Hong Kong 2 Rio de jneiro c 12 Ushuaia Argentina 14 At Sea 3 RiolgUaiu Falls 12 Beagle Channel Scenlc Cruising
15 Nha Trang Vietnam 4 IIDIilZll FaU$13u~os~re$ 13 Punta Arenas Chile
16 Phu My Vietnam 5 Buens AiresEmbark 14 At Sea 17 At Sea 6 Montevideo Uruguay 15 Seno Eyre Fjord Scenic Cruising 18 Singapore 7 At Sea 16 At Sea 19 Kualtan Malaysia 8 Puerto Madryn Argentina 17 Puerto Montt Chile 20 At Sea 9 At Sea 18 At Sea 21 Bangkok Thail3nd 10 Falkland Islands (Stanley) 19 Santiago Chile
DAY PORT DAY PORT
At Sea Pusan SouthKOrea Nagasaki japan At Sea Shanghai China
Note CnIlst route shown for Royil Princess Oct 28 only Timcsforil1lsccnkoulslngmsubjccttothange
CRUISE [OUR ITINERARY
CRUISETOUR ITINERARY
CRUISrrOlJR ITINERARY Fiordland National Park Scenic Cruising DlUedin New Zealand Christchurch New Zealand Wellington New Zealand
14
GRAND PANAMA CANAL CRUISES
ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL
10 10 11 DAYSDAYS DAYS
CORAL PRINCESS GRAND PRINCESS GRAND PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIPfrom from
fromFT LAUDERDALE GALVESTON GALVESTON
2004 DEPARTURE DATES Oct n 21 31 2004 DEPARTURE DATE
2004 DEPARTURE DATENov 10 20 30middot DeelSmiddot
DedSDec 10 28
2005 DEPARTURE DATES CRUISE ITINERARY Jan 7 17 27
CRUISE ITINERARY Feb 6 16 26 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART MarS 1828 CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Galveston Texas EMBARK PMApr 7 17 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTshy 1 Galveston Texas EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 1 ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 3 Belize City Belize 1 PM 7PM 2-3 At Sea 3 Belize City Belize lPM 7PM 4 Costa Maya Mexico (Mahahual) 8AM 4PM 4 Um6n Costa Rica 7AM rPM 4 Costa Maya Mexico (Mahahual) SAM 4 PM 5 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands 12 PM 7PM 5 Panama Canal (to Gatun Lake) 7AM 430 PM 5 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands 12 PM 7PM 6 Ocho Rios Jamaica SAM 5PM 5 Col6n Panama 5PM 8PM 6 At Sea 7 At Sea 6 At Sea Cristobal Panama 7AM 4PM 8 7AM 4PM 7 Grand Cayman Cayman IslandS 7AM 4PM (fot Panama Canal) ftrtpg~niaa~~) S Corumel Mexico SAM 6PM 8 At Sea 9 At Sea 9 Bclize City Belize 7AM 4 PM 6PM 10 Coromel Mexico lOAM 6 PM9 Cozumel Mexico lOAM 10 At Sea 10 At Sea 11 At Sea
Portordtrllndtlmtsmayvllry 11 flo Lauderdale florida DISEMBARK AM Portorntr IInltf timpoundi may vary 11 Galveston Texas DISEMBARK AM Port ordu and Nmes may vary 12 Galv_es~on Texas DISEMBARK AM
ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL
8 DAYS
CORAL PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP
from
FT LAUDERDALE
2004 DEPARTURE DATE Dec 20
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Fl Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM 2-3 At Sea 4 Lim6n Costa Rica 7AM 7PM 5 Panama Canal (to Gatun Lake) 7 AM 430 PM 5 Co16n Panama 5PM SPM 6 At Sea 7 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands SAM 5PM S At Sea 9 Flo Lauderdale Florida DISEMBARK AM Bridge of the Americas Panama
f OptIonll fOllTS inclld1lI tht AtlllnH to Pacific RlIlllfll) joumq will dlmlldrt tilt ship b) tctdtr lit Gfttlm uk AJkr tour plIssmm dlstmlrark tilt shipwin procmlllat through tilt Gatun Locb lIndjlnlllly dock in Gl6lI Hmal1p41Sl11tmmttydiumlmtheJldlo~ lflrshops IInd~llI toIIrsrrnrl CIItutl14ktlllIrtonlflrJhlp
GRAND PANAMA CANAL CRUISES
GRAND PANAMA CANAL GRAND PANAMA CANAL GRAND PANAMA CANAL
150R 18 150R 1715 DAYS DAYS DAYS
CORAL PRINCESS SUN PRINCESS
REGAL PRINCESS REGAL PRINCESS SUN PRINCESS
DAWN PRINCESS REGAL PRINCESS sail between DAWN PRINCESS
sail between FT LAUDERDALE FT LAUDERDALE sail betweenand
FT LAUDERDALEand SAN DIEGO andLOS ANGELES
SAN FRANCISCO 2004 DEPARTURE DATES 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
DAWN PRINCESS 2004 DEPARTURE DATESNov 24Sp191
CRUISE ITINERARY Dec9t CORAL PRINCESSREGAL PRINCESS 5ltp261 CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE ITINERARY
200S DEPARTURE DATES Dec 24 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
SUN PRINCESS DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARIltPM200S DEPARTURE DATES DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Sep 2StMar 24
3 Ocho Rios Jamaica lOAM 6PM 2-3 At5ea 2 At Sea 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBA8KPM
REGAL PRINCESS AprSt 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBA8KPM Jan stu 200S DEPARTURE DATES2 At Sea4 At Sea 4 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 7AM lPMJan 23 5 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 7AM lPM 3 Ocho Rios Jamaica lOAM 6PM REGAL PRINCESS 5 Cartagena Colombia 9AM 3PMFeb7t 4 At Sea Apr 239AM 3PM 6 Transit Panama Canal 7AM 430 PMFb22 ~ yenr~fte~~~~~~u 7AM 430 PM 5 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 7AM lPM At SeaMar9t CORAL PRINCESS 79AM 3PM8 At Sea Apr 27 8 Puntarenas Costa Rica 7AM 7PMSUN PRINCESS 9 Puntarenas Costa Rica 7 AM 7PM ~ yenr~fte~n~~~~~u 7AM 430 PM 9-10 At SeaApr1S 8 At Sea DAWN PRINCESS10-11 At Sea 11 Acapulco Mexico 8AM 5PM
5PM 9 Puntarenas Costa Rica 7AM 7PM Apr 29H ~ae~lcoMexico 8 AM 12 At SeatllWrryopmllzlfrarnLls~in 10-11 At Sea rmrKfIfikTiIIrttimnma1 tlliJlrraryoptJllllsfrlJflSlmFranrimlJn 13 Cabo San lucas Mexico 8AM 5PM
gt This mUJI C4Jl llfwmblnld wlth a 3 14 Cabo San Lucas Mexico 7 AM lPM H ~e~o Mexico 8AM SPM rmruordrrorttimamG)llIryCoIutar CnUK to VlWOIlllr SC Dqs ThUIltIIIflltllnlltCllIIblntdwilhaZ-day 14-15 At Sea 16lhrlllllhI9lllIbtboobdulaquoSC)lQ4k t Illncral) lIpCutcs in mrmt orm Pllrt IiIIIa CocastaICnliutoVan(ouKrBCDlIys16 16 San Francisco California 7AM 4PMcowtlIrcrllisr IIIIYlIl1Ymiddot IhrounIScankboobdlUaK)lllllluU t~A~geles California 6 AM 5PM 14 Cabo San Lucas Mexico 8AM 5PM
Thllwl1JIIICllllslltMOlIkpilllyJmtcad 17-18 At Sea middotmiddotThliIAfllIllCltlllsatMGnIqclBaylnstcadllf 15 At Sea CPlIilldCI1IIu 17 At Sea o[OdKKwsPurllilllrlmllYWlry OchoRicJsPortllmtslllllYVllfymiddot D1SEMBA8K AM19 Vancouver BC DISEMBA8K AM 16 San Die20 California DlSEMBA8K AM 18 Val1couver BC
GRAND PANAMA CANAL COASTAL CRUISING
2-4 CORAL PRINCESS ISLAND PRINCESS SUN PRINCESS18 DAWN PRINCESS DIAMOND PRINCESS STAR PRINCESSDAYSDAYS
COASTAL CRUISE SCHEDULEREGAL PRINCESS
SHIP DAYS FROM TO DEPARTURE DATE DIAMOND PRINCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 5104
SAN FRANCISCO DIAMOND PRINCES5 4 Vancouver Seattle 5404 to CORAL PRINCESS 2 San Francisco Vancouver 5604
NEW YORK DAWN PRiNCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 5704 ISLAND PRiNCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 51204
2004 DEPARTURE DATE SUN PRINCESS 3 San Francisco Vancouver 51404Aug 24 ISLAND PRiNCESS 3 Vancouver LOI Angeles 91804
DIAMOND PRINCESS 1 Seattle Vancouver 91804CRUISE ITINERARY DIAMOND PRINCESS 6 Vancouver Los Angeles 91904 SAPPHIRE PRINCESS 1 Seattle Vancouver 91904 SAPPHREPRINCESS 2 Vancouver San Francisco 92004 DIAMOND PRINCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 43005 DlAMONDPRiNCES$ 4 Vancouver Seattle 5305 SUN PRINCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 5305
ISLAND PRiNCESS 3 Los Angeles VancOllver 5405 CORAL PRiNCESS 2 San Francisco Vancouver 51205
Coral Princess in the Panama Canal
CRUISE PLUS
Extend your adventure with our Cruise Plusreg program Cruise Plusreg enables you to enhance your vacation with one- to four-night hotel
packages in cities that stand on their own as vacation destinations Add nights in Sydney before you cruise or extend your vacation with nights in the city by the
bay San Francisco Transportation and luggage handling costs from the airport to both hotel and ship plus meet and greet services are always included
Wherever you choose to explore youll enjoy properties that are carefully chosen based on service value location and the peace of mind of knowing that Princess
has arranged it all for you
Anchorage Alaska Trevi Fountain Rome Auckland Harbor New Zealand
The Cruise Plusreg Program is available in over 30 major cities including
MEDITERRANEANAEGEAN EXOTICS PANAMA CANAL Barcelona London Rome and Venice Auckland Bangkok Beijing Buenos Aires Ft Lauderdale Los Angeles New York City
Cape Town Ft Lauderdale Honolulu Los San Diego San Francisco Sanjuan Vancouver NORTHERN EUROPE Angeles Montreal Moorea New York City Copenhagen and London MEXICO CARIBBEANOsaka Papeete Rome San Francisco
Ft Lauderdale Galveston Los AngelesTRANSATLANTIC Santiago Seattle Sydney Vancouver Venice Barcelona Copenhagen Ft Lauderdale San Francisco and San Juan
London New York City and Rome ALASKA Anchorage Calgary Fairbanks Kenai San Francisco Seattle and Vancouver
For more information about options and pricing reference a destination specific brochure or contact your travel agent
TRAVEL THE WORLD WITH THE LEADER IN CRUISINGmiddot Princess
Analysis by the Hawaii Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism Comparing the Economic Impact of Foreign Flag Ships with US Flag Cruise Ships Sailing in Hawaii
This is a summary of an analysis prepared by the Hawai Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism (DBEDT) of the economic impact of the foreign flag cruise ship fleet sailing in Hawaii as compared to each of the US flag ships operating in Honolulu
The comparison is set out below
Foreign Pride Pride Pride
Fleet Of Hawaii Of Aloha Of America
Total economic output impact (spendingsales) ($mil) 155 542 4225 4958
Total earnings impact (labor earnings) ($mil) 44 155 1207 1411
Total employment impact Uobs) 1447 5059 3943 4627
This analysis demonstrates that a single US-flagged ship the Pride of America home ported in Honolulu is 32 times more economically impactful and creates 32 times as many jobs as the entire foreign flag fleet that sails into and out of Hawaii ports of call
Economic Impact of Pride of America
Assumptions 1 Annual impact though Pride of Aloha is leaving in May 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existing Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($) 4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of outputl$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job multiplier (jobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
118700 105
2706 3373
147 042
1372
4958
1417
4627
Data sourcelformula Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Line 1 x line 2 x line 31 000000
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 4 x line 5
Line 4 x line 6
Line 4 x line 7
Economic Impact of Pride of Hawaii
Assumptions
1 Annual impact though Pride of Hawaii is leaving in February 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existing Pride of Aloha and Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($) 4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job multiplier (jobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
Data sourceformula 139770 Actual 2007 figure
975 Actual 2007 figure 2706 Actual 2007 figure 3688 Line 1 x line 2 x line 31000000
147 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model 042 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
1372 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
5421 Line 4 x line 5
1549 Line 4 x line 6
5059 Line 4 x line 7
Economic Impact of Pride of Aloha
Assumptions 1 Annual impact though Pride of Aloha is leaving in May 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existlng Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($)
4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job mUltiplier Oobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
95680 111
2706 2874
147 042
1372
4225
1207
3943
Data sourcelformula Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Line 1 x line 2 x line 31000000
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 4 x line 5
Line 4 x line 6
Line 4 x line 7
lt
Methodology Used in Calculating Impact of International Cruise Ships
Cruise ship visitors 1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Came with ships 3 Flied in 4 Average length of stay (days) 5 PPPD ($) 6 Cruise visitor spending ($mil))
Cruise ship crews 7 Ratio of crew spending to cruise visitor spending 8 Cruise crew spending
Cruisline 9 Ratio of crew spending to cruise visitor spending
10 Cruiseline spending
11 Total cruise-related spending ($mil)
12 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 13 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 14 Job multiplier Uobs$ cruise -related spending)
15 Total output impact ($miJ)
16 Total earnings impact ($miJ)
17 Total employment impact (jobs)
106641 98307
8334 739 847 668
02 134
038 254
1055
147 042
1372
1551
444
1447
Data sourceformula Line 2 + line 3 DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report Line 1 x line 4 x line 5
DBEDT 2003 Cruise study Line 7 x line 6
DBEDT 2003 Cruise study Line 9 x line 6
Line 6 + line 8 + line 10
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 11 x line 12
Line 11 x line 13
Line 11 x line 14
Economic Contributions Foreign-Flag Fleet operating in Hawaii vs Three US-Flag Ships
$1500
Pride of Hawaii$1000- $542 million VIc -0-E c Pride of AlohaCo
423 million$500
Pride of America $496 million155 million$shy
Foreign-Flag US-Flag Fleet Fleet
Source State of Hawaii Department of US-Flag $1460 billion Business Economic Development and Tourism
Foreign-Flag $ 155 million 7292008
Employment Foreign-Flag Fleet operating in Hawaii vs Three US-Flag Ships
15000
10000
til c o Pride of Aloha
39435000
Pride of America 1447 4627
~---------
Foreign-Flag US-Flag Fleet Fleet
Source State of Hawaii Department of US-Flag 13629 jobs Business Economic Development and Tourism
Foreign-Flag 1447 jobs 7292008
Foreign Flag Capacity Growth Foreign flag passenger capacity has changed five-fold on roundtrip Hawaii cruises from the West Coast since enactment of the Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative
1600000
1400000
tn 1200000
J enshyZ
1000000
I shyG) en 800000 s G) tn tn
600000 as D 400000
200000
0 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Year
Source US Maritime Administration (derived from the US Customs and Border Patrol Vessel Entrance and Clearance documents - final 2007 data) 7292008
NCL America Hawaii Economic Contributions
(2004-2008)
bull (in Millions) bull $399 in wages benefits and overtime to US seafarers bull $35 in Federal and State payroll Taxes bull $64 in Government Fees and Taxes to Hawaii bull $28 in wages benefits and overtime to US other employees bull $52 in Port Charges to Hawaii Companies (Stevedores tugs pilots etc) bull $85 in Fuel to Tesoro Hawaii bull $130 for shore excursions to Hawaii tour operators bull $39 for Hawaii hotel rooms and ground transport bull $75 for food grown in Hawaii bull $57 in union fees and levies (incl $32M paid directly by employees) bull $1 in MMD fees to the United States Coast Guard bull $51 for recruitment screening processing and training crew bull $76 advertising and promoting Hawaii as a destination bull $1092
COASTWISE CRUISES INTERPRETIVE RULE RESOLUTION Adopted at the
US Conference of Mayors 76th Annual Meeting
June 20-242008 Miami
WHEREAS the Department of Homeland Securitys Customs and Border Protection (CBP) issued a proposed Interpretive Rule regulating Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises on foreign flagged vessels between US ports of call under the Passenger Vessel Services Act at the request of the United States Maritime Administration and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule would require that a foreign-flagged vessel on a coastwise cruise to call at a foreign port for at least 48 hours with that foreign stop constituting at least 50 percent of the cruise itinerary and allowing passengers to disembark the cruise vessel at the foreign port before continuing the cruise to a US port of call and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule establishes burdensome criteria that are wholly inconsistent with industry practice particularly the 48-hour call at foreign port shyinasmuch as the standard port call is six to eight hours - as well as the requirement that 50 percent of a cruise be spent at the foreign port and
WHEREAS the intent of the proposed Interpretive Rule is to protect the single remaining US flag vessel serving the Inter-Hawaiian Island cruise trade that according to the Hawaii Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism generates more than 4600 jobs and generates nearly $500 million in economic benefits for the state annually and
WHEREAS thousands of members of the International Longshore Workers Union (nWU) are employed at US ports serving cruise ships and whose jobs would be at risk if the proposed Interpretive Rule were implemented and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule is vague as to the breadth of its application ie to coastwise cruises between all United States ports or applied solely to coastwise cruises from West Coast ports to Hawaii and
WHEREAS the Cruise Lines International Association estimates the proposed Interpretive Rule would upend the $17 billion in national cruise industry spending and put at risk more than 300000 jobs generated by the international cruise industry including jobs held by nWU at US ports and the local allied industries supporting the cruise industry and
Executive Order Submissions Under Review
II Reglnfogov Where to ind Federal Regulatory Information -~
Home ] Lnitied Agenda and Regulator) Ilan pound012866 Regulator) Review Jnformalion Collection Review
EO 12866 Regulatory Rlvlw dvanced Search IJitorical RepWI Review Counh Jriter XIL
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA)
Executive Order Submissions Under Review July 25 2008 - _------------____ _shy
Department of Homeland Security
AGENCY DHS-TSA RIN 1652-AA53
TITLE Large Aircraft Security Program Other Aircraft Operator Security Programs and Airport Operator Security Program
STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT Yes RECEIVED DATE 06302008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
AGENCY DHS-USCIS RIN Llti15-AB67 TITLE Changes to Requirements Affecting H-2B Nonimmigrants and Their Employers
STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT No RECEIVED DATE 06092008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
AGENCY DHS-USCBP RIN 1651AA11 TITLE Issuance of a Visa and Authorization for Temporary Admission Into the United States for Certain Nonimmigrant Aliens Afflicted W HIV Infection
STAGE Final Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT No RECEIVED DATE 03042008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
-_RE_V-IE-W-E-X-T-EN-D-E-D---------- _
AGENCY DHS-USCBP RIN 1651-AA76 TITLE Coastwise Transportation of Passengers STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT Yes RECEIVED DATE 07142008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
Disclosure I Accessibility I Privacy Policy I Contact Us
httpwwwreginfogovpublicdoeoReviewSearch 7252008
View Rule Page 11
Shere D find Federal ReguLatory InformciiorlReglnfogov Home J Cnified Agenda al1d Regulatory Plan EO 12866 Regulatory Reyiew Information Collection Reiew
Current rnified Agenda and Regulatory Plan Historical Pnified Agenda and Regulatory Plan Search
View Rule
DHSIUSCBP RIN 1651-AA76 Publication ill Spring 2008
Title llCoastwise Transportation of Passengers
Abstract This interim rule amends the Department of Homeland Securitys (DHS) current regulations relating to the transportation of passengers by non-coastwise-qualified vessels on voyages that begin and end at a US port and stop at intervening US and foreign port(s) Under this interim final rule voyages that begin and end at a US port and stop at a foreign port(s) and at intervening US port(s) where a large USshyflag coastwise-qualified passenger vessel engages in regular service are in violation of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) unless the cumulative length of stay(s) at intervening foreign port(s) is more than 50 percent of the total amount of time spent at the intervening US port(s) and passengers are permitted to go ashore at the foreign port(s) The purpose of this amendment is to ensure that the Congressional purpose in enacting the PVSA which is to preserve the economic benefits of US coastwise trade to US-flag coastwise-qualified vessels is properly implemented
Agency Department of Homeland Security(DHS) Priority Substantive Nonsignificant
KIN Status First time published in the Unified Agenda Agenda Stage of Rulemaking Final Rule Stage
Major No Unfunded Mandates No
CFR Citation -LCER 4J~)(h)(plusmnJ
Legal Authority 5JJSS_30J12lJ-SClt16 J9_lJiCJ 431 9_L1C1plusmn3JJ2JScHJ1J2JSCJ624 L(LlLSc207LIl(gtJfHgt~ _CiQJ _46lSC 6QLQ~
Legal Deadline None
Timetable Action Date FR Cite
Interim Final Action 0510012008
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required No Government Levels Affected None
Federalism No
Included in the Regulatory Plan No
RIN Data Printed in the FR No
Agency Contact Glen E Vereb Chief Entry Procedures and Carriers Branch Department of Homeland Security US Customs and Border Protection Office of Regulations and Rulings 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington DC 20229 Phone202572-8730
Disclosure I Accessibility I Privacy Policy I Contact Us
httpwwwreginfogovpublicdoeAgendaViewRuleruleID=286751 7128120
Federal RegisterVol 72 No 224Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules 65487
SPECULATIVE POSITION LIMITS 1-Continued [In contract units)
Contract
Soybeans and Mini-Soybeans 2
Wheat and Mini-Wheat 2 bullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbull
Soybean Oil
SingleSpot month All monthsmonth
600 8600 13300 600 11100 14500 540 6600 8600
Soybean Meal 720 5500 7100
Minneapolis Grain Exchange
Hard Red Spring Wheat I 600 I 11100 I 14500
New York Board of Trade
Cotton No2 I 300 I 5300 I 7300
Kansas City Board of Trade
Hard Winter Wheat I 600 I 11100 I 14500
1 For purposes of compliance with these limits positions in a futures contract that shares ~ubstantially identical terms with a contract market enumerated herein including a futures contract that is cash-settled based on the settlement price of an enumerated contract market shall be agshygregated with positions in the enumerated contract market
2 For purposes of compliance with these limits positions in the regular-sized and mini-sized contracts shall be aggregated
Issued by the Commission this November 152007 in Washington DC David Stawick Secretary of the Commission [FR Doc E7-22681 Filed 11-20-07 845 amI BILLING CODE 6351-Q1-P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Bureau of Customs and Border Protection
19 CFR Part 4
[USCBP-2007-o098]
Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises
AGENCY Customs and Border Protection Department of Homeland Security ACTION Proposed interpretation solicitation of comments
SUMMARY This document proposes new criteria to be used by Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to determine whether non-coastwise-qualified vessels are in violation ofthe Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) when engaging in cruise itineraries in which passengers board at a US port the vessel calls at several Hawaiian ports and then the vessel proceeds to a foreign port or ports for a brief period before ultimately returning to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their cruise CBP believes these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because it appears that the primary objective of the foreign stop is evasion of the PVSA
DATES Comments must be received on or before December 212007 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT Glen E Vereb Cargo Security Carriers amp Immigration Branch Office of International Trade (202) 572-8730 ADDRESSES You may submit comments identified by docket number by one of the following methods
bull Federal eRulemaking Portal http wwwregulationsgov Follow the instructions for submitting comments
bull Mail Border Security Regulations Branch Office of International Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
I Public Participation
Interested persons are invited to participate in this proposed interpretation by submitting written data views or arguments on all aspects of the proposed interpretation Customs and Border Protection (CBP) also invites comments that relate to the economic environmental or federalism effects that might result from this proposed interpretation Comments that will provide the most assistance to CBP in developing these procedures will reference a specific portion of the proposed interpretation explain the reason for any recommended change and include data information or authority that support such recommended change
Instructions All submissions received must include the agency name and docket number for this proposed
interpretation All comments received will be posted without change to http wwwregulationsgov including any personal information provided
Docket For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received go to http wwwregulationsgov Submitted comments may also be inspected on regular business days between the hours of 9 am and 430 pm at the Office of International Trade Customs and Border Protection 799 9th Street NW 5th Floor Washington DC Arrangements to inspect submitted documents should be made in advance by calling Mr Joseph Clark at (202) 572shy8768
II Background
The maritime cabotage law governing the transportation of passengers was first established by section 8 of the Passenger Vessel Services Act of June 191886 (the PVSA) 24 Stat 81 as amended by section 2 of the Act of February 17 1898 30 Stat 248 formerly codified at 46 USC App 289 (now codified at 46 USC 55103) 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 of $200 (now $300 as promulgated in TD 03-11 pursuant to the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 199028 USC 2461 note) for each passenger so transported and landed
The intent of the maritime cabotage laws including the PVSA was to provide a legal structure that guarantees a coastwise monopoly to
65488 Federal RegisterVol 72 No 224Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules
American shipping and thereby promotes development of the American merchant marine Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 28 (DC Cir 1984) see also The Granada 35 FSupp 892 8931940 AMC 1601 (DC Pa 1940) (stating that the legislative aim of section 289 [now 55102] was the creation of a practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping business for United States ships) In other words the PVSA was enacted to advance the United States merchant marine and fleet by restricting the use of foreign-ownedflagged passenger vessels in United States territorial waters
Passenger vessel transportation between United States ports has historically been viewed to be part of the coastwise trade after the enactment of the PVSA This view is premised on the concepts of continuity of the voyage and whether its intended purpose or objective was coastwise transportation In other words the PVSA was held to be violated if the coastwise movement was continuous or if the purpose of the trip was a coastwise voyage (See 18 OAG 445 September 4 1886 28 OAG 204 February 16 1910 29 OAG 318 February 12 1912 30 OAG 44 February 1 1913 34 OAG 340 December 24 1924 and 36 OAG 352 August 13 1930)
The CBP regulations promulgated pursuant to the PVSA are found at section 480a of title 19 of the Code of Federal Regulations (19 CFR 480a) and are reflective of the above cited Office of the Attorney General decisions These regulations provide among other things that a non-coastwise-qualified vessel which embarks a passenger at a port in the United States embraced within the coastwise laws (a coastwise port) will be deemed to have landed that passenger in violation of the PVSA if the passenger disembarks at a different coastwise port on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a nearby foreign port or ports (as defined in 19 CFR 480a(a)(2) see also 19 CFR 480a(b)(2)) The terms embark and disembark are words of art which are defined as going on board a vessel for the duration of a specific voyage and leaving a vessel at the conclusion of a specific voyage respectively (See 19 CFR 480a(a)(4))
The references in section 480a to nearby foreign ports (defined in 19 CFR 480a(a)(2)) are the results of attempts by CBP to apply an Office of the Attorney Generals opinion dated February 26 1910 (28 OAG 204) In that case a foreign-flag vessel transported 615 passengers on a voyage around the world beginning in New
York and concluding in San Francisco The Attorney General opined that since the primary object of the voyage was to visit various parts of the world on a pleasure tour returning home via California and not to be transported in domestic commerce the transportation was not in violation of the PVSA
The 1910 Attorney Generals opinion was extended to voyages that included foreign ports other than nearby foreign ports (See Treasury Decision (TD) 68shy285 (33 FR 16558) November 14 1968) However voyages solely to one or more coastwise ports have always been considered predominantly coastwise Therefore non-coastwise-qualified vessels engaging in such a voyage where passengers temporarily go ashore at a coastwise port have been deemed to have violated the PVSA
m Current Law and Policy Pursuant to Public Law 109-304 120
Stat 1632 enacted on October 6 2006 Title 46 United States Code was substantially reorganized and recodified Consequently the PVSA is now codified at 46 USC 55103 and provides that no vessel shall transport passengers between ports or places in the United States either directly or by way of a foreign port under a penalty of $300 for each person so transported and landed except one that (1) Is wholly owned by citizens of the United States for purposes of engaging in the coastwise trade and (2) has been issued a certificate of documentation with a coastwise endorsement or is exempt from documentation but would otherwise be eligible for such a certificate and endorsement
In 2003 Congress enacted Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II Section 211 for the purpose of revitalizing the oceangoing US-flag cruise industry in Hawaii (the 2003 Act) Three oceangoing US-flag cruise ships PRIDE OF ALOHA PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAII were documented with coastwise privileges pursuant to the 2003 Act These vessels entered regular service in Hawaii in 2004 2005 and 2006 respectively and pursuant to the express language of the 2003 Act are limited in their operation to providing regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands of Hawaii
The CBP regulations promulgated pursuant to the PVSA are set forth in 19 CFR 480a and have remained unchanged throughout both the recodification of Title 46 of the United States Code and the enactment of the 2003 Act They provide that a violation of the PVSA occurs when passengers embark (board a vessel for the
duration of a voyage) a non-coastwiseshyqualified vessel at one US port and disembark (leave the vessel at the conclusion of a voyage) at a different US port unless they proceed with the vessel to a distant foreign port (Le any port not considered a nearby foreign port which is defined as any port located in North America Central America Bermuda or the West Indies including the Bahamas) Currently these regulations do not contain specific criteria for non-coastwise-qualified vessels on itineraries including US ports and either nearby or distant foreign ports in order for such foreign port calls to be compliant with the PVSA
To reiterate the applicable CBP regulations provide that the PVSA is violated when a non-coastwise-qualified vessel transports a passenger on a voyage solely to one or more coastwise ports and the passenger disembarks or goes ashore temporarily at a coastwise port (19 CFR 480a(b)(1)) Furthermore a violation of the PVSA also occurs when a non-coastwise-qualified vessel transports a passenger on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a nearby foreign port or ports (but no other foreign port) and the passenger disembarks at a coastwise port other than the port of embarkation (19 CFR 480a(b)(2)) However there is no violation of the PVSA when a passenger is on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a distant foreign port or ports (whether or not the voyage includes a nearby foreign port or ports) and the passenger disembarks at a coastwise port provided the passenger has proceeded with the vessel to a distant foreign port (19 CFR 480a(b)(3))
IV Request From MARAD To Provide Guidance
The US Department of Transportation Maritime Administration (MARAD) has requested that CBP take action to ensure enforcement of the PVSA MARAD has asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreignshyflag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwiseshyqualified cruise ship operators
In April of 2007 the operator of the three US-flag cruise vessels operating solely in Hawaii pursuant to the 2003 Act announced their intent to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAIl from the Hawaii market and redeploy her to Europe The operator intends to re-flag the vessel to foreign registry directly resulting in the loss of over 1100 crewmember jobs The primary reason cited for this decision is the rapid increase in foreign-flag competition entering the Hawaii market
Federal Register I Vol 72 No 224 I Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules 65489
from the West Coast This competition is evidenced in published cruise itineraries of foreign-flag carriers offering a variety of round trip cruises that depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period usually in the early morning and ultimately return to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their cruise These cruises are often marketed as Hawaii cruises and except for the brief stop in the nearby foreign port of Ensenada are purely coastwise in nature It is these cruise itineraries that pose an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels that pursuant to the 2003 Act are currently engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands
V Preliminary Notice
In response to MARADs concerns CBP sent letters to two carriers known to operate the itineraries in question as well as to the Cruise Lines International Association Inc stating that CBP believes that these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because it appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA The letters further indicated that CBP is taking steps to publish this position
VI CBPs Proposed Interpretive Rule Accordingly in this document CBP is
proposing to provide that cruise itineraries for non-qualified coastwise vessels which allow passengers to board at a US port call at several Hawaiian ports proceed to a foreign port or ports for a brief period and then ultimately return to the original US port of embarkation for disembarkation are not consistent with the PVSA and the regulations promulgated pursuant thereto Specifically CBP interprets a voyage to be solely to one or more coastwise ports even where it stops at a foreign port unless the stop at the foreign port is a legitimate object of the cruise CBP will presume that a stop at a foreign port is not a legitimate object of the cruise unless
(1) The stop lasts at least 48 hours at the foreign port
(2) The amount of time at the foreign port is more than 50 percent of the total amount of time at the US ports of call and
(3) The passengers are permitted to go ashore temporarily at the foreign port
Accordingly CBP proposes to adopt an interpretive rule under which it will presume that any cruise itinerary that does not include a foreign port call that
satisfies each of these three criteria constitutes coastwise transportation of passengers in violation of 19 CFR 480a(b)(1)
Dated November 16 2007 W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection [FR Doc E7-22788 Filed 11-20-07 845 am] BILLING CODe 9111-14-1
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau
27 CFR Part 9
[Notice No 76]
RIN 1513-AB49
Proposed Establishment of the Leona Valley Viticultural Area (2007R-281 P)
AGENCY Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau Treasury ACTION Notice of proposed rulemaking
SUMMARY The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau proposes to establish the 134 square mile Leona Valley viticultural area in the northeast part of Los Angeles County California We designate viticultural areas to allow vintners to better describe the origin of their wines and to allow consumers to better identify wines they may purchase We invite comments on this proposed addition to our regulations DATES We must receive written comments on or before January 22 2008
ADDRESSES You may send comments on this notice to one of the following addresses
bull httpwwwregulationsgov (Federal e-rulemaking portal follow the instructions for submitting comments) or
bull Director Regulations and Rulings Division Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau PO Box 14412 Washington DC 20044-4412
See the Public Participation section of this notice for specific instructions and requirements for submitting comments and for information on how to request a public hearing
You may view copies of this notice selected supporting materials and any comments we receive about this proposal at httpwwwregulationsgov under Docket No 2007-0066 You also may view copies of this notice all related petitions maps or other supporting materials and any comments we receive about this
proposal by appointment at the TTB Information Resource Center 1310 G Street NW Washington DC 20220 To make an appointment call 202-927shy2400
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT NA Sutton Regulations and Rulings Division Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau 925 Lakeville S1 No 158 Petaluma CA 94952 phone 415shy271-1254 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
Background on Viticultural Areas
TTB Authority Section 105(e) of the Federal Alcohol
Administration Act (FAA Act) 27 USC 205(e) authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to prescribe regulations for the labeling of wine distilled spirits and malt beverages The FAA Act provides that these regulations should among other things prohibit consumer deception and the use of misleading statements on labels and ensure that labels provide the consumer with adequate information as to the identity and quality of the product The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) administers the regulations promulgated under the FAA Act
Part 4 ofthe TTB regulations (27 CFR part 4) allows the establishment of definitive viticultural areas and the use of their names as appellations of origin on wine labels and in wine advertisements Part 9 of the TTB regulations (27 CFR part 9) contains the list of approved viticultural areas
Definition Section 425(e)(1)(i) ofthe TTB
regulations (27 CFR 425(e)(1)(i)) defines a viticultural area for American wine as a delimited grape-growing region distinguishable by geographical features the boundaries of which have been recognized and defined in part 9 of the regulations These designations allow vintners and consumers to attribute a given quality reputation or other characteristic of a wine made from grapes grown in an area to its geographic origin The establishment of viticultural areas allows vintners to describe more accurately the origin of their wines to consumers and helps consumers to identify wines they may purchase Establishment of a viticultural area is neither an approval nor an endorsement by TTB of the wine produced in that area
Requirements Section 425(e)(2) of the TTB
regulations outlines the procedure for proposing an American viticultural area and provides that any interested party
Us Department ofHomelaDd Secmity Washington DC 10229
bull ~
US Customs and Border Protection
AUG 15 2fXJJ
VE5-3-02-QTRRBSTCCCI - ti015502-GG-
Mr leon Sutcliffe Director Port Operations Camivai Cruise Unes Camival Place 3655 NW 87Avenue Miami Aorlda 33178
RE P~nger Vessef Services Ad Coastwise Transportation 46 USC sect 55103 19 CFR sect 480a(b)
Dear Mr Sutcliffe
As you know US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) enforces the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) codified at TItle 46 United States Code section 55103 (46 USC 55103) This statute prohibits non-coastwise-qualifled vessels (ie those vessels not US-buill owned and documented with a coastwise endorsement) from transporting passengers between porls or places within the United States The regUlations promUlgated pursuant to the PVSA are found at TrtJe 19 Code of Federal Regulations section 4808 (19 CFR 4808)
It has come to our attention that passenger vessels of your company are engaging in cruise itineraries that include ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands Two USAlagged coastwise-endorsed passenger vessefs are also currenUy engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of caD wittlin the Hawaiian Islands
As part of your cruise itineraries some of your foreign-flagged vessels depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period and ultimately rebJm to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their endse For example the MS ZAANDAM of Holand America Lines departs San Diego cruises the Hawaiian Islands stops in Ensenada from 800pm to 11 OOpmbull and returns to san Diego CBP believes these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because It appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA -- - - ~~~------
Please be advised that CBP is taking steps to publish this position Should have any questions pertaining to this matter please contact Mr Glen Vereb Chief Cargo Security Carriers and Immigration Branch at (202) 572-8724
Sincerely
F Jl E EST Y LEe A U I 5 I N Gmiddot
December 21 2007
The Honorable W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection co Border Security Regulations Branch Office ofInternational Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229
Re Hawaii Coastwise Cruises (USCBP-2007-0098) Comments in Response to Proposed Interpretation
Dear Commissioner Basham
NCL America Inc1 (NCLA) submits these comments in support ofthe efforts ofCustoms and Border Protection to enforce the Passenger Vessel Services Act and the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative as applied to Hawaii coastwise cruises
1 Introduction and Summary of Position
NCLA operates three large oceangoing US flag cruise ships in Hawaii These ships are documented under US flag and are required to operate in regular service in Hawaii pursuant to the authority of the Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative a 2003 federal statute intended to revitalize the US flag cruise industry and to maximize economic and national security benefits to the United States (the 2003 Act)
NCLA has invested $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships pursuant to the 2003 Act and in direct reliance on the protections of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) and its proper enforcement The PVSA limits the transportation ofpassengers between US ports to coastwise documented US flag ships Its statutory protections recognize that US flag ships have significantly higher operational costs in part because they are subject to more stringent US laws including US labor laws and federal
1 NCL America Inc is a US corporation incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware headquartered in Honolulu Hawaii As a US corporation it is subject to US taxes at both the federal and state level The Chief Executive Officer the Chairman of the Board and all of the Board of Directors of NCL America are US citizens The company is also subject to US labor and employment laws and is required by statute to maintain a workforce comprised primarily ofUS citizens
700 Bishop St SUite 900 I Honolulu HawMi 96813 I Tel 8085273800 Fax 8085273820 I ndcom
2
income tax among others The NCLA ships operating in Hawaii are the only large oceangoing cruise ships operating under US flag In furtherance of the policy goals of the PVSA and the 2003 Act these ships have created over 4000 seafaring jobs all subject to US minimum wage and other labor statutes
Since 2003 there has been a significant increase in capacity in the Hawaii market from foreign flag ships providing cruise service to Hawaii from the West Coast Many of these foreign flag cruises are marketed as Hawaii cruises and consist entirely ofUS ports ofcall with the sole exception of a token stop in Mexico for as little as an hour late at night under circumstances where passengers are not permitted to get offthe ship There are no reported rulings approving these particular foreign flag itineraries
Lower cost foreign competition in the Hawaii market has unfairly hurt NCLAs operations NCLA has incurred substantial losses which have contributed significantly to its decision earlier this year to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAll from US flag and reshydeploy it foreign Unfair foreign competition poses an imminent threat to the remaining US flag passenger vessels operating in the Hawaii trades pursuant to the 2003 Act
As the agency statutorily charged with implementation of the 2003 Act the US Department ofTransportation Maritime Administration (MARAn) is aware of the threat foreign flag Hawaii itineraries pose to the US flag fleet and brought the situation to the attention ofthe US Department ofHomeland Security Bureau ofCustoms and Border Protection (CBP or Customs) Customs determined that the primary object of these itineraries was coastwise and that the Ensenada stop was an evasion of the PVSA
In August 2007 Customs provided written notice to the affected foreign lines and their trade association that the existing itineraries were contrary to the PVSA None of these lines sought advance rulings even after the Customs notice with respect to their Hawaii itineraries pursuant to Customs regulations and many continued to market the itineraries as Hawaii cruises NCLA supports the efforts ofCustoms and MARAD to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act for Hawaii cruises
2 Statutory Authority for Customs Proposed Interpretation
(a) Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA)
Congress passed the PVSA in 1886 to protect the US maritime transportation industry from foreign competition2 Protection is afforded through penalty assessments on foreign vessels transporting passengers between US ports or places directly or by way ofa foreign port 3 As Congress and the courts have recognized coastwise protections for the US maritime transportation industry are only one dimension of the PVSA Operating in conjunction with other coastwise laws and with the US
2 See United States v Honduran SS GRANADA 35 F Supp 892 894 (BD Pa 1940)(citing purpose of PVSA to meet threats to the practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping which was to be preserved for US ships)
46 USc sect 55103 (originally 46 USC App 289)
3
documentation laws the PVSA also enhances military sealift in times ofnational emergency sustains a US merchant marine and supports the US shipbuilding and repair industry4
(b) Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative (the 2003 Act)
Over the past decade Congress has sought to reinforce the goals of the PVSA by providing mechanisms to revitalize the oceangoing US flag cruise fleet particularly in Hawaii The Project America legislation enacted in 1997 authorized among other things the re~flagging ofone existing cruise ship contingent on the operator contracting for the construction oftwo new oceangoing cruise shipss Following the default of the operator under the original contract Congress enacted the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative for the purpose ofrecovering economic and national security benefits to the United States bull 6 These same goals of the original PVSA were expressly referenced in the legislative history of the 2003 Act which emphasized that these ships will be assets available in time ofnational emergency and will significantly expand the pool ofqualified seafarers upon which the US Department ofDefense relies to crew non-combatant vessels
The 2003 Act authorizes the US documentation ofthree cruise ships for operation in regular service in Hawaii subject to certain conditions including a prohibition on operating in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico and the Caribbean Sea and a requirement that all vessel repair work be undertaken in the United States MARAD is charged with implementation of the 2003 Act
3 Customs Implementation of PVSA
(a) Regulations
The current regulations implementing the PVSA were published by Customs in 19858 The growth of the foreign flag cruise industry in North America and in particular the development of the Alaska cruise market led to an effort in 1984 to amend the thenshyexisting regulations to increase the ease of administration and operational flexibility The effort to change the regulation had support from US port interests who saw benefit in the potential increase in the number ofUS ports that foreign vessels could call and was opposed by proponents ofpotential US flag projects as detrimental to efforts to revitalize the US fleet 9 The preamble to the 1985 rule emphasized that it was of paramount importance to consider the primary object ofpassengers in taking a
4 See American Hawaii Cruises v Skinner 713 F Supp 452 457 (DDC 1989) (recognizing the contribution of the PVSA and the Jones Act in helping to secure national defense by maintaining a merchant marine oftbe best equipped and most suitable types ofvessels sufficient to serve in time of war or national emergency) see also Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 30 (DC Cir 1984) Wirth Ltd v SIS Acadia Forest 537 F2d 1272 1281 n32 (5th Cir 1976) S Public Law 105-56 Section 8109 (111 Stat 1203 1244) (Oct 81997 ) 6 Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II General Provisions - Department ofCommerce Section 211 (117 Stat 1179) (Feb 20 2003) 1 149 Cong Rec S1118 (dailyed Jan 17 2003(statement ofSenator Inouye) 8 19 CFR sect 480a 950 Fed Reg 26981 (July I 1985)
4
voyage10 a concept which is reinforced elsewhere in Customs regulations11 In its analysis of the comments received at the time Customs accepted the view ofport interests that the modified rule would help their business but did so recognizing the absence ofa regular salt water US flag passenger fleet Customs acknowledged the potential harm to prospective efforts to revitalize the US flag passenger fleet and expressly cautioned that if it were ever shown that coastwise qualified vessels in competition with foreign vessels were in fact hurt by the modified Customs regulation then Customs would immediately reconsider its position12
(b) Customs Rulings
Given the significant penalties associated with violating the PVSA13 Customs regulations expressly provide a mechanism for the owner or charterer of a foreign vessel or any other interested person to request an advisory ruling as to whether a contemplated voyage would be considered in violation of the PVSA14 Customs regulations provide that vessel operators can rely on these ruling letters only to the extent that the facts and circumstances are identical to those in the ruling letter IS
Notwithstanding the fact that several foreign cruise lines offer Hawaii itineraries originating in a US mainland port and calling at Hawaii ports with a token intervening stop in Mexico there are no reported rulings expressly approving such an itinerary for these foreign cruise lines 16
4 The Cruise Industry in Hawaii
(a) NCL America Returns US flag to the Oceangoing Passenger Fleet
Pursuant to the requirements ofthe 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative NCLA agreed to promote US-flag cruising enhance military sealift capacity and expand the US maritime labor base No other major cruise line had ever undertaken such a commitment to the US flag and the public policy objectives Congress sought to achieve under the PVSA or the 2003 Act Introduction ofPRIDE OF ALOHA in 2004 was a significant development in the maritime industry because it marked the restoration ofthe
10 Id at 26983 11 Customs Regulations include a provision on the effect ofruling letters and with respect to carrier rulings the applicable regulation refers to rulings setting forth a determination as to whether or not the primary object of a contemplated voyage is coastwise transportation in violation of46 USC sect 289 [pYSA codified at 46 USC sect55103] 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 12 50 Fed Reg at 26983 13 A modem cruise ship with 2400 passengers for example would be subject to a fine of$720OOO per cruise based on the statutory penalty of$300 for each passenger transported in violation of the Act 14 19 CFR sect 480a(d) IS 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 16 There is one older reported mling involving a request to drop the Ensenada port call from a Los AngeleslHawaiiLos Angeles itinerary which Customs held would violate the PYSA In dicta Customs acknowledged that the itinerary could be in compliance if the Ensenada call were not dropped but did not address the issue ofwhether a one hour service call where no passengers depart the vessel would be sufficient The carrier that obtained that ruling has since left the Hawaii market See Customs Ruling HQ 114078 re Crystal Hannony (Nov 4 1997)
5
us flag to the oceangoing cruise industry A contemporaneous press release from the Us Department ofTransportation reported that the three US-flag cruise ships to be introduced pursuant to the 2003 Act were expected to create more than 20000 US jobs generate more than $825 million ofexpenditures in the US economy and create nearly $360 million in federal tax revenue by the end of 200717 In 2005 the PRIDE OF AMERICA was introduced and in 2006 the third vessel PRIDE OF HAWAll was introduced to Hawaii Both the PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAIl offer 7shyday inter-island Hawaii itineraries whereas PRIDE OF ALOHA operates on 7 and 10 day cruises exclusively among the islands ofHawaii as well as 11 day cruises that include a foreign port call at Fanning Island To date NCLA has invested over $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships in furtherance ofthe policy objectives of the PVSA and the 2003 Act These ships employ over 4000 seafarers and generate hundreds ofmillions of dollars in benefits for Hawaii and the nation
(b) Significant Increase in Foreign Flag Capacity Since 2003
The most significant change in the Hawaii cruise market since 2003 has been the dramatic increase in capacity A significant portion ofthis capacity increase is directly attributable to NCLAs fulfillment ofthe Congressional mandate in the 2003 Act However foreign-flag operations in the Hawaii market as measured in passenger nights18 have skyrocketed Based on MARAn data derived from the US Customs Border Patrol Vessel Entrance and Clearance documents the passenger nights for foreign flag vessels departing from the West Coast to Hawaii on round trip cruise have increased several hundredfold during this period19 See Exhibit A
(c) NCLA Has Incurred Substantial Losses During this Period
Since 2004 NCLA has lost cumulatively more than a quarter ofa billion dollars A principal reason for these losses has been the increase in foreign capacity in this market NCLA has taken significant steps to reduce costs to address the increase in foreign competition but NCLA is at an inherent disadvantage when competing against foreign companies that are not subject to US labor laws US tax laws and other laws Ofcourse the statutory protections of the PVSA are intended to address these very issues That is why Customs immediate action to implement the proposed interpretation is critical for the US flag fleet Regrettably NCLA has already been forced to reduce overall capacity early next year with the withdrawal ofPRIDE OF HAWAlI to another
17 DOT Press Release dated June 72004 see also DOT Press Release dated August 132004 in connection with visit to PRIDE OF ALOHA by US Transportation Secretary Norman Y Mineta 11 Passenger nights (also referred to as passenger capacity days) are calculated by multiplying the number ofpassengers per vessel by the number ofcruise days in each itinerary by the number of cruises This is the unit ofmeasurement employed by MARAn In contrast passenger bed supply (also referred to as passenger capacity) data reflects only the number ofberths per vessel multiplied by the number of cruises and hence understates the market by excluding the full economic value ofthe cruise perfonned 19 In 2003 the total number ofpassenger nights for round-trip West Coast to Hawaii cruises was 303325 which jumped by 353 to 1072329 in 2006 and by 430 to 1304546 from 2003 to 2007 (The 2007 figure is based on MARAD data for six months and a1ll1ualized by published itineraries for the balance of the year)
6
market for operation under foreign flag This move alone will result in the loss ofover 1000 American seafaring jobs
5 Customs Proposed Interpretation is Necessary to Further the Important National Security and Public Policy Objectives Embodied in Federal Law
As Customs has properly noted the increase in foreign competition in the Hawaii trades in contravention of the PVSA pose[s] an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels[] As the operator of these ships NCLA has a vested interest in protecting the jobs ofthe thousands ofAmerican crewmembers and cruise ship service providers who support these vessels NCLA also has an interest in protecting the substantial economic investment it has made to revitalize the US flag passenger vessel fleet But a balancing of interests in the context of Customs enforcement ofexisting law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act requires a much broader focus
The legislative history of the 2003 Act expressly recognized the national security and public policy import ofestablishing a US flag passenger vessel fleet as a means to maintain the countrys preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool of qualified seafarers and as a means to help sustain a fleet ofUS-flag vessels to su~ort
the nations military and maritime industrial base for times ofnational emergency
Congress understood the importance ofestablishing a viable US flag cruise ship fleet as something larger than the vessels themselves These national security and public policy objectives must be weighed in the balance as Customs assesses how best to interpret its rules to give effect to the PVSA and the 2003 Act
6 Customs Should Clarify that the Proposed Interpretation is Limited to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades and Adopt Reasonable Measures to Ensure Sufficient Foreign Content
Since publication ofthe proposed interpretative rule several commenters have observed that the scope of the proposed interpretation is ambiguous because the language of Section VI referencing any cruise itinerary appears broader than the caption Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises and the entire discussion in the published notice which focuses exclusively on US-flag coastwise vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA agrees that the proposed interpretation should be clarified so that its scope is limited to vessels operating roundtrip voyages from US ports that include Hawaii port calls
NCLA supports the concept reflected in the proposed interpretive rule that round trip Hawaii itineraries from US ports on foreign ships must include a material and measurable degree ofoverall foreign port content as compared to US port content
20 149 Congo Rec S1117 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)
7
(a) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is also Consistent with Subsequent Congressional Enactments Modifying the PVSA
As discussed above it is well established that the PVSA was designed toRrotect US-flag vessels from foreign competition in the coastwise and domestic trades 1
Subsequent legislative enactments however have appropriately differentiated among distinct geographic markets and trades including Canada Alaska Puerto Rico and Hawaii based on the existence or non-existence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
In 1938 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers by Canadian passenger vessels on Lake Ontario and the St Lawrence River until such time as passenger service shall be established by vessels of the United States22 Similarly in 1961 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers on Canadian vessels within Alaska or between Alaska and other points in the United States until such time as passenger service is established by vessels ofthe United States23
In 1984 Congress modified the application ofthe PVSA to pennit the transportation ofpassengers between Puerto Rico and other United States ports on foreign-flag vessels24 As with the other statutory exceptions this provision is qualified and expires [o]n a showing that a United States passenger vessel qualified to engage in the coastwise trade is offering or advertising passenger service between a port in Puerto Rico and another port in the United States2S
Congress acted again with respect to the application of the PVSA with the 2003 Act in which it authorized three vessels that did not meet the US-build requirements of the PVSA to operate as modem US-flagged cruise ships in regular service in Hawaii26 The 2003 Act imposes a specific geographic limitation on the operation of any ship documented under this authority to operations only in regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands ofHawaii and shall not transport passengers in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico or the Caribbean Sea except in certain limited circumstances27 As above the limited nature of the 2003 Act is express it is strictly limited to the large ocean-going cruise ships and then only those operating in the regular Hawaii service where there are no US-flag operations28
21 See Act ofJune 19 1886 c 421 sec 8 24 Stat 81 Act of February 171898 c 26 sec 2 30 Stat 248 22 S] Res 174 75th Cong 52 Stat 223 (Alp 251938) codified at46 USC sect 55121(a) 23 See Pub L 87-77 75 Stat 196 (Jun 30 1961) codified at 46 USC sect 55121(b) 24 See Pub L 98-563 98 Stat 2916 (Oct 301984) codified at 46 USC sect 55104(b) 25 46 USC sect 55104(c)(l) see also 46 USC 46 USc sect 55104(cX2)(expiration of exemption upon availability ofa non-coastwise qualified US-flag vessel offering service in the relevant market) 26 149 Congo Rec SI118 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)(statementofSen Inouye) 27 Pub L 108-7 117 Stat 79 (Feb 20 2003) 28 149 Congo Rec S11l9 (dailyed Jan 17 2003Xstatement of Sen Inouye)
8
In each ofthese instances Congress fashioned a narrow exception to the PVSA that differentiated among distinct geographic markets based on the existence or nonshyexistence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
As the federal agency responsible for administering the 2003 Act MARAD requested that Customs act to protect US flag passenger vessel interests in the Hawaii trades29 Limiting the scope ofthe proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades also reflects Customs appreciation of the PVSA in the context of the subsequent Congressional action30 Viewing the Congressional modifications to the PVSA as a whole Congress has specifically and repeatedly differentiated among distinct geographic markets when it has found it necessary and appropriate to do so to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests It is well established that the proper interpretation of a statutory scheme includes consideration ofsubsequent statutes even though the underlying statute itselfhas not been expressly amended31 Accordingly Customs should likewise limit the scope ofthe proposed PVSA interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades because that is the only geographic market as mandated by the 2003 Act in which oceangoing US-flag cruise ships are operating
(b) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Consistent with Public Policy Objectives of the 1985 Rulemaking
In 1985middot Customs liberalized the regulations implementing the PVSA by eliminating certain regulatory prohibitions on foreign flag vessels In the context of the 1985 rulemaking Customs justified a relaxation ofthe regulations on the grounds that it would simplify the administration of the PVSA and would benefit the economy ofcertain American coastwise ports without eroding the statutory protection given to American vessels engaged in solely domestic trade32
Customs thus sought to reconcile US port economic interests with US-flag passenger vessel interests Both of these twin policy objectives are furthered by
29 See 72 Fed Reg 65488 (Nov 21 2007)( MARAn bas asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the ~eratiODS ofcoastwise-qualified cruise ship operators)
See generally FDA v Brown amp Williamson Tobacco Corp 529 US 120 132-133 (2000)(assessing propriety ofagency construction ofFood DIUg and Cosmetics Act and descnbing responsibility of reviewing cowt to assess statutory provisions in the context of subsequent legislative enactments) 31 See Brown amp Williamson 529 US 143 (holding that proper construction ofstatutory provision must necessarily assume that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications ofa later statute This is particularly so where the scope of the earlier statute is broad but the subsequent statutes more specifically address the topic athand) see also United States v Estate ofRomani 523 US 517 530-531 (1998)( holding that a later-enacted statute should control the construction of the federal lien priority statute a specific policy embodied in a later federal statute should control om construction of the [earlier] statute even though it ha[s] not been expressly amended) United States v Fausto 484 US 439453 (1988)(The courts frequently find Congress to have done this - whenever in fact they interpret a statutory text in the light ofsurrounding texts that happen to have been subsequently enacted This classic judicial task of reconciling many laws enacted over time and getting them to make sense in combination necessarily assumes that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications of a later statute) 32 50 Fed Reg 26982 (JuI 11985)
9
limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades
As noted earlier the 2003 Act limits the operation of the NCLA US-flag oceangoing passenger vessels to regular service in Hawaii Because there are no oceangoing US-flag vessels operating in any market other than the Hawaii trades Customs should limit the scope of the proposed interPretation to that market Such a limitation protects US flag passenger vessel interests without prejudicing US port interests In contrast an application of the proposed interpretation to any itinerary would needlessly harm US port interests unrelated to Hawaii without any countervailing benefit to US-flag passenger vessel interests Accordingly limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation is consistent with the public policy objectives of the 1985 rulemaking as well as the 2003 Act
(c) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Also Consistent with Customs Commitment to Revisit the Scope of its Rules to Protect US-Flag Interests
The relaxation ofthe PVSA regulations in 1985 was premised in large part on Customs finding that there was no regular salt water US-flag passenger fleet in operation at that time33 Acknowledging that the relaxed regulations could harm USshyflag interests Customs committed in the preamble ofthe 1985 final rule to immediately reconsider its interpretation if it is ever shown that there is a viable US flag vessel operating in competition with foreign-flag vessels34
Congress enacted the 2003 Act to stimulate the development of a US flag cruise ship industry As noted above the legislative history ofthat Act makes clear that Congress sought to revitalize the US-flag cruise industry as a means to maintain Americas preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool ofqualified seafarers help sustain a fleet of US flag vessels to support our military and a maritime industrial base create thousands of seagoing and shoreside American jobs and stimulate the development ofa US flag cruise ship tourism business with the commensurate benefits to the US tax base the US economy and US employment
Customs is now acting at MARADs request to revisit its interpretation ofthe regulations implementing the PVSA because recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwise-qualified cruise ship operations35 That is to say that the concerns articulated by Customs in the context of the 1985 rulemaking have materialized and US-flag passenger vessel interests are in fact being hanned in the Hawaii trades by foreign competitors
33 50 Fed Reg 26983 34Id
3S 72 Fed Reg 56488 (Nov 21 2007)
I
10
Because the US-flag passenger vessels are limited by statute to regular service in Hawaii limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the
Hawaii trades is consistent with Customs historical commitment to revisit its interpretation ofthe implementing regulations to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests
7 Conclusion
For the reasons stated above NCLA commends the efforts ofCustoms and MARAn to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act as applied to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA respectfully requests Customs to move ahead promptly with p~blicati~nof a final interpretive rule to advance the important national security arid public policy objectives ofthese laws
We greatly appreciate the opportunity to submit these comments
Sincerely
~~~ Alan T Yamamoto Vice President Hawaii Operations
Exhibit A
Ship Name Serenade Of The Seas Departure Port San Diego California Ports of Call San Diego California Kailua Kona Hawaii Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii Hlo Hawaii Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii Ensenada Mexico San Qigo California
2007 Date(s) Oct 05
Sailing Itinerary
Day Port H ~rrive Depart Activity
05-0ct San Diego California 500 PM
06-0ct Cruising
07-0ct Cruising
08-0ct Cruising
09-0ct Cruising
10-0ct Kailua Kona Hawaii 700 AM 900 PM Tendered
11-00t Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 1000 AM Tendered
12middot0ct Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 900 PM Tendered
13-0ct Hilo Hawaii 700 AM 600 PM Docked
14middot0ct Honoulu (Oahu) Hawaii 700 AM Docked
15-0ct Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii 200 AM Docked
6-0ct CrUising
17-0ct Cruising
18-0ct Cruising
19middot0ct Cruising
-7 20-00t
O-Oot
Ensenada ~i1exico
San Deqo California
i 00 ~r1
700 ~M
200 oM D1Jcked ~
EXOTICS CRUISES
AUSTRALIANEW ZEALAND AUSTRALIANEW ZEALAND AUSTRALIAASIA
12 14 19 DAYS DAYS DAYS
SAPPHIRE PRINCESS SAPPHIRE PRINCESS SAPPHIRE PRINCESS
saH between SYDNEYAUCKLAND SYDNEY
toand to BANGKOKSYDNEY AUCKLAND 2005 DEPARTURE DATES 2005 DEPARTURE DATE
Mar7Jan 6 2004 DEPARTURE DATEJan 1St
Dec 23 CRUISE ITINERARYJr ift Feb 23 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
CRUISE ITINERARY 1 Sydlley Austrli EMBARK PM CRUISE ITINERARY 2 At Sea
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTDAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 3 Brisbane Australia 8AM 6PM 1 Sydlley Australia EMBARK PM 4 At Sea 1 Aucklalld N~w Zealalld EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 5 Cid Harbor Austrlia (for Great Barrier Reef) 7AM 5PM2 At Sea 3 Melbourne Australia 8 AM 6 PM 6 Cirns Australia (Yorkeys) 8AM 6PM
3 WeIUllgton New Zealand 8 AM 6 PM 4 At Sea 7-8 At Sea 4 Christchurch New Zealalld (Lytlelton) 8 AM 6 PM 5 Tasmallia Australia (Hobart) 8 AM 6 PM 9 Darwin Australia lPM 8pM 5 Dunedill N~ Zealalld (Port Chalmers) 8 AM 6 PM 6-7 At Sea 10-11 At Sea 6 Fiordland Natiollal Park Scenic Cruising AM 6 PM 8 Fiordlalld Natiollal Park Scellic Cruising 7 AM 5 PM 12 Bali Illdonesi (Padang Bay) 7AM 6PM
7-8 At Sea J DUlledill New Zealalld (Port Chalmers) 8 AM 6 PM 13-14 At Se 10 Christchurch N~ Zealalld (Lytlelton) 8 AM 6 PM 15 Kuala Lumpur Mlaysia (Port KeIang) 8AM 6PM9 Tasmania Australia (Hobart) 8 AM 6 PM 11 Wellillgtoll New Zealmd 8 AM 6 PM 16 Sillgpore 8AM 6PM
10 At Sea 12 At Sea 17 At Sea 11 Melbourne Australia 8 AM 6 PM 13 Taurallga New Zealalld 8 AM 730 PM 18 Ho Chi Millh City Vietnm (Vung Tau) 7AM 730 PM 12 At S~a 19 At Sea 14 Bay of Islallds New Zealalld 8 AM 7 PM 13 SydPey Australia DISEMBARK AM 20 Bmgkok Thailalld (Laem Chabang) DISEMBARK AM15 Aucklalld New Zealalld DISEMBARK AM
t llinemy opcrnesln reverse order Port times mil1 my
CHINAFAR EAST SOUTHEAST ASIAFAR EAST
1612 DAYSDAYS
PACIFIC PRINCESS
SAPPHIRE PRINCESS PACIFIC PRINCESS
OSAKA BEIJING to
to BANGKOK OSAKA
2004 DEPARTURE DATE 2004 DEPARTURE DATEPAClFlC PRINCESS
julllt Jun 11 2005 DEPARTURE DATE
SAPPHIRE PRINCESS Apr 11
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Osaka Japall EMBARK PM
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Beijillg China (Xingang) EMBARK PM 2 Hiroshima Japall 1 PM 6PM 2 DaHan China AM 5PM 3 At Sea 3 At Sea 4 Shmghai Chilla 7 AM 6PM 4 Shallghai Chilla (overnight onboard ship) 7AM 5 At Sea 5 Shallghai China 6PM 6 Okinaw Jpll 7 AM 1 PM
7 Taipei Taiwm (KeeIung) 9 AM 7PM6 At Sea 8 At Se7 Pusan South Korea 8AM 5PM 9 HOllg KOllg Chill 8 AM 7PM 8 At Sea 10-11 At S~a J Vladivostok Russia 5AM 730 PM 12 Ho Chi MiIJh City Vietnm (Phu My) 7 AM 5PM 10 At Sea 13 At Se 11 Nagasaki Japan 7AM 6PM 14 Singpore 8 AM 6pM
15 KUlltll Mlysi 830 AM 430 PM12 At Sea 16 At Sea 13 Osaka Japan DISEMBARK AM 17 Ballgkok Thaillld DISEMBARK AM t Sailing alls i1t Hiroshima on Dl) 11 In place of Nilgilsaki Port times milY vary
CRUISE I flNERARY CRUISE I flNERARY
Ho Chi Minh City Vietnam
EXOTICS CRUISES
SOUTHEAST ASIACHINA SOUTHEAST ASIACHINA FAR EASTALASKA
PACIflC PRINCISS ROYAL PRINCESS
16 16 19 DAYS DAYS DAYS
SAPPHIRE SAPPHIRE PRINCESS
Sail between PRINCESSBANGKOK
and BANGKOK OSAKA
BEIJING to to
2004 DEPARTURE DATES BEIJING SEATTLEPAClFlC PRINCESS
Jun 27tt 200S DEPARTURE DATE200S DEPARTURE DATE ROYAL PRINCESS
Mar 26 Apr 23Oct 16 Nov lt
CRUISE I I INERARY CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
1 GsakaJpan EMBARK PM1 Bangkok Thailand (Laem Chabang) EMBARKPM 1 Bangkok Thailand (Laern Chabang) EMBARK IM 2 At Sea2 At Sea 2 AtSea bull 3 Nagasaki Japan 7 AM 6PM
9AM 7PM 3 Singapore 7PM 4 Pusan Soqth Korea 8AM 5PM 4-5 At Sea 5 At Sea gt bull
7AM 7PM 6 Da Nwg Vietn~1Il 7AM middot7PM 6 Vladivostok Russia SAM 730 PM 7 At Sea 7 AtSea
7AM 12M 8 Hong lltog ihin~ 7AM 12M 8 Sapporo japan (Muroran) 6AM 6PM 9-10 At Sea 9-10 At Sea 9-12 At Sea cross Intemational Dateline
13 DutchHarbor Alaska (Aleutian Islands) 230 PM 7PM11 ShaJlgllai Cbina (overnight onboard ship) lAM 11 Shangh~t Cllina (ovmightonJoltird $hip) 7 AM 14 At Sea shy12 Shanghai China 6PM 12 Shanghai China
7AM - - tlJf
6PM 15 Anchorage Alaska (Seward) 8AM 6PM13 At Sea 13 AtSea i 16 College Fjord Seni CruIsing 630AM 930 AM
14 Nagasaki japan 7AM 6PM 14 Nagasaki japan 6PM 17 Glacier Ilay Scenic Cruising 1030 AM 830 PM 15 Pusan South lltOrea TAM 4PM 1~ bull Pu~an SQuth iorea middot4lM 18 middotmiddot juneau Alaska 6 AM 2PM 16 At Sea 16 At Sea 19 - At Sea 17 Beijing China (Xingangy OISEMBAlUe AM 17 Beijing Cliina (Xingang) 20 SeattleWashington DISEMBARK AM
t ltinemy Operne5 in rcvmc Older ttPorttimcsmiYnl)middotShlpwilldocklnampngkoknsttadofL1cm~
POLYNESIA amp THE COOK ISLANDS POLYNESIA amp THE MARQUESAS ISLANDS
10 10 DAYS DAYS
TAHITIAN PRINCESSTAHITIAN PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIPROUNDTRIP fromfrom
PAPEETEPAPEETE 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
2004 DEPARTURE DATES Oct 4 24 Mayl 17 27 Sep4 14 24 Nov 13 Jun 6 16 26 0lt 14 00323Ju16 16 26 Nov 323 2005 DEPARTURE DATESAug 5 15 25 Dec 13 Jan 12
Feb 1 21200S DEPARTURE DATES
~~ 122 ~~Il 13 23 CRUISE ITINERARY
CRUISE II INERARY DAY PORT
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Papeete Tahiti 1 Papeete Tahiti (overnight onboard ship) EMBARK PM
2 Moorea Polynesia 2 Papeete Tahiti SPM 3 Huahil1e P9lynesia 8AM 5 PM 3 Tuamotu Atolls Senic Cruising
5 PM8-AM 4 At Sea I At Sea 5 Rarotonga Cook Islands 8AM 5 PI~ 5 Nuku Hiva Marquesas Islands 6 At Sea 6 Hiva Ga Marquesas Islands 8AM 5PM 7 Raiatea Polynesia overnight onboard Ship 6AM
7 At Sea middotai~ RaiateaPQlynesia igt gt 6AM 8 Rangiroa P~iynesia 8AM 4PM8 Tahaa scenic Cryising 630 AM 830 AM
8 BoraBoraPQlyrtesia(ovemightollboard ship) UN 9 Tahaa ~enl Cruising 8 AM middot11AM
9 Bora lora Polynesia 5iM 9 Raiatea Polynesia 12 N 11 PM 10 Moore Polynesfa 8 AM 5 PM la ~ Bora ~oraPoIYnesia 8AM bull 5PM
11 Papeete Tahiti DISEMBARK AM 11 Papeete Tahiti DISEMBARK AM Iong Kong Harbor
3 Singapore 4-5 At Sea 6 Da NangVieinam 7 At Sea 8 liong Kong China
EXOTICS CRU ISES
HAWAIITAHITI HAWAIIAN ISLANDS SOUTH PACIFIC ISLANDS
12 1515 DAYS DAYSDAYS
PACIFIC
TAHITIAN PRINCESS ISLAND PRINCESSPAClFIC PRINCESS
PRINCESS
SYDNEYROUNDTRIP sail between tofrom
PAPEETE PAPEETELOS ANGELES and
2004 DEPARnIRE DATEHONOLULU 2004 DEPARTURE DATES Apr 21
2004 DEPARTURE DATES ~~~l CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE 11 INERARY
Oet21t CRUISE ITINERARY Nov Sf
MayS PACIFIC PRINCESS DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
Nov20t DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DecSt 1 Los Angeles CalifornIa EMBARK AM 1 Sydney AustralIa EMBARK PMAug 17t
Dec20t1 Papeete Tahiti EMBARK PM 2-4 At Sea
2005 DEPARTURE DATE Jan 4 2-5 At Sea
(overnight onboard ship) Jan 19 5 Auckland New Zealand 7 AM 2PMFeb 3t 6 Iiilo Hawaii 8 AM 6 PM
TAHITIAN PRINCESS Papeete Tahiti 11 PM fb 18 6-7 At Sea Kilauea Voko ~enic CruisingApr 12 MarS t 3 Moorea Polynesia 8 AM 5 PM 8 Suva fijI 11 AM 430 PM1~i~t 7 Kona Hawaii 8AM 6PM4 Bora Bora PolYnesia 8 AM 5 PM 9 At Sea Cross International Dateline Apr 19
5-6 At Sea 8 Honolulu Hawaii 8AM 11 PM 10 Apia Western Samoa 830 AM 2PM 7 Christmas Isl~ndKiribati 1Z N 5 PM 9 Kauai Hawaii (Nawlliwlli) 8AM 6PM 11-12 At Sea 8-9 At Sea 10 Maui Hawaii (Lahaina) 6PM 13 Bora Bora Polynesia lOAM 6PM 10 HlloliaWlii 6 PM 13 Raiatea Polynesia (overnight onboard 11 PM11-14 At Sea 11 Maui Hawaii (Lahaina) 8 AM 6 PM 14 Raiatea Polynesia 11 PM
15 Ensenada Mexico (service call)KaUaiH~waii(Nawllfwtli) 8AM 6 PM 15 Moorea Polynesia 8AM 5PM
tllinemyopcr~ttsln=x QnIerPurtlimcslmYvary Honolulu Hawaii DISEMBARK AM 16 Los Angeles CalIfornia DISEMBARK AM 16 Papeete Tahiti DISEMBARK AM
ISLANDS OF THE PACIFIC THEATER SOUTH PACIFIC EXPLORER
24 24 DAYS DAYS
PAClFIC PRINCESS PAClFIC PRINCESS
sail between HONOLULU PAPEETE
and to OSAKA FT LAUDERDALE
2004 DEPARTURE DATES
Mayl 2004 DEPARTURE DATEJul2Sj
Aug 29 CRUISE ITINERARY
CRUISE ITINERARYDAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART EMBARK PM DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
1 Papeete Tahiti EMBARK PM lPM 7PM 2 8AM 11 PM
3 ~~~~~~ ~~~~Sta 8AM 5 PM 4-6 At Sea 7 Pitcairn Island Scenic Cruising 8AM 1211
8AM 12 N
7AM ZPM 8-9 At Sea 10 Easter Island Chile 8AM 2PM
9AM 11-14 At Sea 15 Callao Peru (overnight for Lima and Machu Picchu) 8AM 16 Callao Peru lPM 17 At Sea 18 Manta Ecuador (for Quito) 9fM 7PM 19 At Sea 20 Transit Panama Canal 7 AM 430 PM 21 San BIas Panama 8AM 5 PM 22 ft Sea 23 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands 7AM 4PM 24 At Sea
25 Ft Lauderdale Florida DISEMBARK AMMoorea Polynesia tllinemyoperataln~12onlerPortl1mesmiYmymiddot
EXOTICS CRUISES
HAWAIITAHITISOUTH PACIFIC AMAZONSOUTHERN CARIBBEAN CAPE HORNSTRAIT OF MAGELLAN
1430 12 DAYS DAYSDAYS
ROYAL PRINCESS ROYAL PRINCESSSAPPHIRE PRINCESS
sail betweenFT LAUDERDALE SANTIAGOLOS ANGELES to
andto MANAUS BUENOS AIRESSYDNEY 2005 DEPARTURE DATE 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
2004 DEPARTURE DATE Apr 9 Jan 10
Nov 22 Jan 241 Feb 7
FebZt
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
CRUISE ITINERARY
CRUISE ITINERARYCRUISE ITINERARY 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTDAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 2-3 At Sea 1 Santiago Chile (Valparaiso) EMBARK PM
1 Los ingeles California EMBARK PM 4 Tortola BritIsh Virgin Islands 8 AM 6 PM 2 At Sea 2 Ensenada Mexico 8AM 5PM 3 Puerto Montt Chile 7AM 6PM
3middot6 At Sea 4 At Sea 5 Dominica 9 AM 4 PM 7 Hilo Hawaii 8AM 5 At Sea Chilean Fjords Scenic Cruising6PM 6 Trinidad 9 AM 6 PM
8 Maui Hawaii (Lahaina) 8AM 6PM 6 At Sea Amalia Glacier Scentc CruiSi3f7 At Sea 7 Punta Arenas Chile (Strait of Magei an) 7AM 6PM9 Honolulu Hawaii 7AM 5PM
- 10middot13 At Sea 8 Beagle Channel Scenic Cruising 8 Ushuaia Argentina (Tierra del Fuo) 12N 8PM
8 Devils Island French Guiana (Isle Royal) 8 AM 2 PM 14 Bora Bora Polynesia 8AM 6PM 9 At Sea 9 At Sea Cape Hom Scenic Cruising
10 Santarem Brazil 9 AM 7 PM 10 Moorea Polynesia 8AM 6PM 10 Falkland Islands (Stanley) 8AM 6PM 10 Papeete Tahiti (overnight onboard ship) 9PM 11 At Sea
i 16 Papeete Tahiti 6PM 11 Boca da Valeria Brazil (Amazon River) 7 AM 2 PM 12 Puerto Madryn Argentina 6AM 5PM 17middot18 AtSea 12 Manaus Brazil (overnight onboard ship) 10 AM 13 At Sea
14 Montevideo Uruguay 9AM 6PM19 Pago Pago merlcan Samoa 8AM 6PM 13 Manaus Brazil DISEMBARK AM 15 Buenos Aires Argentina DISEMBARK AM 20 Apia Western Samoa 8AM 6PM 21 At Sea Cross International Dateline middotl1me5forallscenkouisinCile subjectlDclwIgc
tllinmryopefilteslnr=rscordttPorttlmislm)vary22 Suva Fiji 8AM 6PM l 23-24 At Sea
20 Auckland New Zealand 8AM 6PM ORINOCO RIVERSOUTHERN CARIBBEAN ANDESSOUTH AMERICA 26 Tauranga New Zealand 8AM 7PM 27 At Sea
28 Wellington Newealand 8AM 6PM 16 17 DAYS DAYS 29-30 AtSea
31 Sydney Australia DISEMBARK AM ROYAL PRINCESS ROYAL PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP SANTIAGO from to
FT LAUDERDALE FT LAUDERDALE
200S DEPARTURE DATE2005 DEPARTURE DATE
Mar 7Mar 24
CRUISE IIJNERARYCRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Santiago Chlle (Valparaiso) EMBARK PM
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM
2 La Serena Chile (Coquimbo) 8 AM 5 PM2-3 At Sea 3 At Sea Um6n Costa Rica 7AM 7PM 4 Arica Chile 7AM 6PMCristobal Panama (for Panama Canal) 8AM 5PM o At Sea
6 Cartagena Colombia 9AM 2 PM 6 San Martin Peru (for Pisco and Machu Picchu) 7AM 6PM 7 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 130 PM 7PM 7 Callao Peru (overnight for Lima) 530 AM 8-9 At sea 8 Callao Peru 1PM 10 Puerto Ordaz Venezuela (Orinoco River) 8AM 6PM 9 At Sea
i 11 At Sea 10 Manta Ecuador (overnight for Quito) 530AM 12 Greada 8AM i 11 Manta Ecuador 1lM5PMt 1~ Dolllinlca i 7N1 5 PM 12 At Sea
i 13 Transit Panama C~nal 7AM 430 PM14 St Thomas us Virgilslands 9AM 5PM 14 Cartagena Colombia 8AM 130 PMJs AtSei i 15 Aruba Netherlands intiiles 1PM 7PM 16 Princess Cays Bahamas 8AM 16-17 At Sea Tahiti Polynesia 17 FtLallardale Flillilt~ DISEMBARK AM 1ampmiddot Ft L~uderdale Florida DISEMBARK AM
AMAZON RIVERMEDITERRANEAN
21 DAYS
ROYAL PRINCESS
MANAUS
to ROME
2005 DEPARTURE DATE
Apr 21
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE M~naus Brazil (Wemight onboardship) Manaus Brazil
3 BocadaValeria Brazil (AriiazonRivet) 11 AM 4-6 At Sea 7 Recife Brazil 1 PM 8-11 AtSea 12 Dakar Senegal 8AM 13-14 At Sea 15 Agadir Morocco 7AM 16 Casablanca Morocco (for Marrakech) 8AM 17 Gibraltar lOAM 18 Allcante Spain 12 N 19 Barcelona Spain 8AM 20 Cannes France (for Monte Carlo) 8AM 21 FlorencePisa Italy (Livarno) 7AM 22 Rome Italy (Civitavecchia) DISEMBARK AM
INDIAN OCEANAUSTRALIA
28 DAYS
PACIfIC PRINCESS
CAPE TOWN
to SYDNEY
2004 DEPARTURpound DATE
Oct 20
CRUISE ITINERARY1 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Cape Town South Africa EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 3 East London South Africa 7AM 3PM 4 DurbahSouth Africa 8AM 6PM 5-7 At Sea 8 Nosy BeMadagascar 7AM 4PM 9 At Sea 10 Poilit des Galets Reunioll]slahd 11 Port Louis Mauritius 12c19 At Sea 20 Perth Australia (Fremantle) 21-23 At Sea 24 Adelaide Australla 25 At Sea 26 Melbourne Australla 7 27 Tasmania AUstralia (Burnie) 28 At Sea 29 Sydney Australia DISEMBARK AM
I
DEPART EMBARK PM
7PM 6PM
8pM
5PM
3PM 9PM 6PM 6PM 5PM 7PM 7PM
EXOTICS CRUISES
SOUIB ATIANTICANTARCfICNSOUIB AMERICA
24 DAYS
ROYAL PRINCESS
CAPE TOWN
to SANTIAGO
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
Dec 17
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Cape TownSouthAfrica (overnighfol1board ship) EMBARK PM 2 Cape Town South Africa 3PM 2 if~~t Good HopSCenic Crulsing 3-6 6 Tristan DaCunha United Kingdom 8AM 5PM 7-10 At Sea 11 Falkland Islands (Staliley) 8 AM 5PM 12 At Sea 13-16 Antarctica Peninsula ScehltmiddotCruising 14 days ihcludingmiddot Elephant
Island AntarcticSotind Deceptionlslana GerlacheStrait NaxefChannel Schollaert Channel SigJtla Island and Boyd Strait)
17 At Sea Cape Horn Scenic Cruising1amp UshuaiaArgentina (Tierra del fuego) bull middot6 AM 19 Punta Arenas Chile (Strait of Magellan) 7 AM 20 At Sea Amalia Glacier Scenic Cruising21 At Sea Chilean Fjords Scenic Cruising22 AtSea 23 Puerto Mont Chile 7AM 6PM 24 At Sea 25 Santiago Chile (Valparaiso) DISEMBARK AM
-nmes for1l scenlccruisinc are subJect to change
ASIAINDIAMEDITERRANEAN
30 ROYAL PRINCESSDAYS
ROME
to BANGKOK
2004 DEPARlURE DATE
Sep 16
CRUISE Il INERARY
WEST AFRICASOUTH AMERICA
28 DAYS
PACIFIC PRINCESS
FT LAUDERDALE
to CAPE TOWN
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
51 22
CRUISE ITINERARY
DISEMBARK AM
Aruba
EXOTICS CRU ISES amp CRU ISETOU RS
AUSTRALIANEW ZEALAND CRUISETOUR
AUSTRALIAN EXPLORER 2004 DEPARTURE DATESAPPHIRE21 plus
DAYS PRINCESS SYDNEY Dec 17 to
AUCKLAND CRUISETOUR 5P CRUiSE
CRUISETOUR ITINERARY
DAY PORT By Sea By Land DAY PORT
1 Sydney 14 Fiordland National Park 2 Sydney Scenic Cruising
3 SydneyAyers Rock 15 Dunedin New Zealand (Port Chalmers) 4 Ayers ROek
5 Ayers RockPort Douglas 16 Christchurch New Zealand 6 Port Douglas - (Lytleton)
7 Port DouglasSydneyEmbark 17 Wellilgton New Zealand 8 At Sea 18 At Sea 9 Melbourne Australia 19 Tauranga New Zealand
10 At Sea 20 Bay of Islands New Zealand 11 Tasmania Australia (Hobart) 21 Auckland New Zealand 12middot13 At Sea
Sydney Opera House Australia
AUSTRALIANEW ZEALAND CRUISETOUR SOUTHEAST ASIACHINA CRUISETOUR CAPE HORNSTRAIT OF MAGELLAN CRUISETOUR AUSTRALIAN BEIJING Be TERRA COTTA 2004 DEPARTURE DATES RIO 8t IGUAZU FALLS Post-Crulsetour1 Pre-Crulsetour 217EXPLORER 2005 DEPARTURE DATES PACIFICSAPPHIRE WARRIORS19 plw or PRINCESS jul9t loieifie
DAYS PRINCESS SYDNEY Jan 12 plus 19 ROYAL plw Feb 5 Oct 28 Royal BUENOS AIRES
AUCKLAND DAYS ROYAL PRINCESS to 21 ampto DAYS PRINCESS
BEUING CRUISE t ~~S~i BeWln~~~~e
to SANTIAGO~e~s~Ot~r~ih~fi1BANGKOK CRUiSE CRUISECRUISETOUR 3t3P landtourm~yvlty CRUISETOUR 12
DAY PORT DAY PORT
DAY PORT By Sea ltBy LaDd DAY PORT
1 Beijing 11-12 At Sea 1 Rio de janeiro 11 Cape Horn Scenic Cruising
13 Hong Kong 2 Rio de jneiro c 12 Ushuaia Argentina 14 At Sea 3 RiolgUaiu Falls 12 Beagle Channel Scenlc Cruising
15 Nha Trang Vietnam 4 IIDIilZll FaU$13u~os~re$ 13 Punta Arenas Chile
16 Phu My Vietnam 5 Buens AiresEmbark 14 At Sea 17 At Sea 6 Montevideo Uruguay 15 Seno Eyre Fjord Scenic Cruising 18 Singapore 7 At Sea 16 At Sea 19 Kualtan Malaysia 8 Puerto Madryn Argentina 17 Puerto Montt Chile 20 At Sea 9 At Sea 18 At Sea 21 Bangkok Thail3nd 10 Falkland Islands (Stanley) 19 Santiago Chile
DAY PORT DAY PORT
At Sea Pusan SouthKOrea Nagasaki japan At Sea Shanghai China
Note CnIlst route shown for Royil Princess Oct 28 only Timcsforil1lsccnkoulslngmsubjccttothange
CRUISE [OUR ITINERARY
CRUISETOUR ITINERARY
CRUISrrOlJR ITINERARY Fiordland National Park Scenic Cruising DlUedin New Zealand Christchurch New Zealand Wellington New Zealand
14
GRAND PANAMA CANAL CRUISES
ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL
10 10 11 DAYSDAYS DAYS
CORAL PRINCESS GRAND PRINCESS GRAND PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIPfrom from
fromFT LAUDERDALE GALVESTON GALVESTON
2004 DEPARTURE DATES Oct n 21 31 2004 DEPARTURE DATE
2004 DEPARTURE DATENov 10 20 30middot DeelSmiddot
DedSDec 10 28
2005 DEPARTURE DATES CRUISE ITINERARY Jan 7 17 27
CRUISE ITINERARY Feb 6 16 26 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART MarS 1828 CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Galveston Texas EMBARK PMApr 7 17 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTshy 1 Galveston Texas EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 1 ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 3 Belize City Belize 1 PM 7PM 2-3 At Sea 3 Belize City Belize lPM 7PM 4 Costa Maya Mexico (Mahahual) 8AM 4PM 4 Um6n Costa Rica 7AM rPM 4 Costa Maya Mexico (Mahahual) SAM 4 PM 5 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands 12 PM 7PM 5 Panama Canal (to Gatun Lake) 7AM 430 PM 5 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands 12 PM 7PM 6 Ocho Rios Jamaica SAM 5PM 5 Col6n Panama 5PM 8PM 6 At Sea 7 At Sea 6 At Sea Cristobal Panama 7AM 4PM 8 7AM 4PM 7 Grand Cayman Cayman IslandS 7AM 4PM (fot Panama Canal) ftrtpg~niaa~~) S Corumel Mexico SAM 6PM 8 At Sea 9 At Sea 9 Bclize City Belize 7AM 4 PM 6PM 10 Coromel Mexico lOAM 6 PM9 Cozumel Mexico lOAM 10 At Sea 10 At Sea 11 At Sea
Portordtrllndtlmtsmayvllry 11 flo Lauderdale florida DISEMBARK AM Portorntr IInltf timpoundi may vary 11 Galveston Texas DISEMBARK AM Port ordu and Nmes may vary 12 Galv_es~on Texas DISEMBARK AM
ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL
8 DAYS
CORAL PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP
from
FT LAUDERDALE
2004 DEPARTURE DATE Dec 20
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Fl Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM 2-3 At Sea 4 Lim6n Costa Rica 7AM 7PM 5 Panama Canal (to Gatun Lake) 7 AM 430 PM 5 Co16n Panama 5PM SPM 6 At Sea 7 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands SAM 5PM S At Sea 9 Flo Lauderdale Florida DISEMBARK AM Bridge of the Americas Panama
f OptIonll fOllTS inclld1lI tht AtlllnH to Pacific RlIlllfll) joumq will dlmlldrt tilt ship b) tctdtr lit Gfttlm uk AJkr tour plIssmm dlstmlrark tilt shipwin procmlllat through tilt Gatun Locb lIndjlnlllly dock in Gl6lI Hmal1p41Sl11tmmttydiumlmtheJldlo~ lflrshops IInd~llI toIIrsrrnrl CIItutl14ktlllIrtonlflrJhlp
GRAND PANAMA CANAL CRUISES
GRAND PANAMA CANAL GRAND PANAMA CANAL GRAND PANAMA CANAL
150R 18 150R 1715 DAYS DAYS DAYS
CORAL PRINCESS SUN PRINCESS
REGAL PRINCESS REGAL PRINCESS SUN PRINCESS
DAWN PRINCESS REGAL PRINCESS sail between DAWN PRINCESS
sail between FT LAUDERDALE FT LAUDERDALE sail betweenand
FT LAUDERDALEand SAN DIEGO andLOS ANGELES
SAN FRANCISCO 2004 DEPARTURE DATES 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
DAWN PRINCESS 2004 DEPARTURE DATESNov 24Sp191
CRUISE ITINERARY Dec9t CORAL PRINCESSREGAL PRINCESS 5ltp261 CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE ITINERARY
200S DEPARTURE DATES Dec 24 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
SUN PRINCESS DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARIltPM200S DEPARTURE DATES DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Sep 2StMar 24
3 Ocho Rios Jamaica lOAM 6PM 2-3 At5ea 2 At Sea 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBA8KPM
REGAL PRINCESS AprSt 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBA8KPM Jan stu 200S DEPARTURE DATES2 At Sea4 At Sea 4 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 7AM lPMJan 23 5 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 7AM lPM 3 Ocho Rios Jamaica lOAM 6PM REGAL PRINCESS 5 Cartagena Colombia 9AM 3PMFeb7t 4 At Sea Apr 239AM 3PM 6 Transit Panama Canal 7AM 430 PMFb22 ~ yenr~fte~~~~~~u 7AM 430 PM 5 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 7AM lPM At SeaMar9t CORAL PRINCESS 79AM 3PM8 At Sea Apr 27 8 Puntarenas Costa Rica 7AM 7PMSUN PRINCESS 9 Puntarenas Costa Rica 7 AM 7PM ~ yenr~fte~n~~~~~u 7AM 430 PM 9-10 At SeaApr1S 8 At Sea DAWN PRINCESS10-11 At Sea 11 Acapulco Mexico 8AM 5PM
5PM 9 Puntarenas Costa Rica 7AM 7PM Apr 29H ~ae~lcoMexico 8 AM 12 At SeatllWrryopmllzlfrarnLls~in 10-11 At Sea rmrKfIfikTiIIrttimnma1 tlliJlrraryoptJllllsfrlJflSlmFranrimlJn 13 Cabo San lucas Mexico 8AM 5PM
gt This mUJI C4Jl llfwmblnld wlth a 3 14 Cabo San Lucas Mexico 7 AM lPM H ~e~o Mexico 8AM SPM rmruordrrorttimamG)llIryCoIutar CnUK to VlWOIlllr SC Dqs ThUIltIIIflltllnlltCllIIblntdwilhaZ-day 14-15 At Sea 16lhrlllllhI9lllIbtboobdulaquoSC)lQ4k t Illncral) lIpCutcs in mrmt orm Pllrt IiIIIa CocastaICnliutoVan(ouKrBCDlIys16 16 San Francisco California 7AM 4PMcowtlIrcrllisr IIIIYlIl1Ymiddot IhrounIScankboobdlUaK)lllllluU t~A~geles California 6 AM 5PM 14 Cabo San Lucas Mexico 8AM 5PM
Thllwl1JIIICllllslltMOlIkpilllyJmtcad 17-18 At Sea middotmiddotThliIAfllIllCltlllsatMGnIqclBaylnstcadllf 15 At Sea CPlIilldCI1IIu 17 At Sea o[OdKKwsPurllilllrlmllYWlry OchoRicJsPortllmtslllllYVllfymiddot D1SEMBA8K AM19 Vancouver BC DISEMBA8K AM 16 San Die20 California DlSEMBA8K AM 18 Val1couver BC
GRAND PANAMA CANAL COASTAL CRUISING
2-4 CORAL PRINCESS ISLAND PRINCESS SUN PRINCESS18 DAWN PRINCESS DIAMOND PRINCESS STAR PRINCESSDAYSDAYS
COASTAL CRUISE SCHEDULEREGAL PRINCESS
SHIP DAYS FROM TO DEPARTURE DATE DIAMOND PRINCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 5104
SAN FRANCISCO DIAMOND PRINCES5 4 Vancouver Seattle 5404 to CORAL PRINCESS 2 San Francisco Vancouver 5604
NEW YORK DAWN PRiNCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 5704 ISLAND PRiNCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 51204
2004 DEPARTURE DATE SUN PRINCESS 3 San Francisco Vancouver 51404Aug 24 ISLAND PRiNCESS 3 Vancouver LOI Angeles 91804
DIAMOND PRINCESS 1 Seattle Vancouver 91804CRUISE ITINERARY DIAMOND PRINCESS 6 Vancouver Los Angeles 91904 SAPPHIRE PRINCESS 1 Seattle Vancouver 91904 SAPPHREPRINCESS 2 Vancouver San Francisco 92004 DIAMOND PRINCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 43005 DlAMONDPRiNCES$ 4 Vancouver Seattle 5305 SUN PRINCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 5305
ISLAND PRiNCESS 3 Los Angeles VancOllver 5405 CORAL PRiNCESS 2 San Francisco Vancouver 51205
Coral Princess in the Panama Canal
CRUISE PLUS
Extend your adventure with our Cruise Plusreg program Cruise Plusreg enables you to enhance your vacation with one- to four-night hotel
packages in cities that stand on their own as vacation destinations Add nights in Sydney before you cruise or extend your vacation with nights in the city by the
bay San Francisco Transportation and luggage handling costs from the airport to both hotel and ship plus meet and greet services are always included
Wherever you choose to explore youll enjoy properties that are carefully chosen based on service value location and the peace of mind of knowing that Princess
has arranged it all for you
Anchorage Alaska Trevi Fountain Rome Auckland Harbor New Zealand
The Cruise Plusreg Program is available in over 30 major cities including
MEDITERRANEANAEGEAN EXOTICS PANAMA CANAL Barcelona London Rome and Venice Auckland Bangkok Beijing Buenos Aires Ft Lauderdale Los Angeles New York City
Cape Town Ft Lauderdale Honolulu Los San Diego San Francisco Sanjuan Vancouver NORTHERN EUROPE Angeles Montreal Moorea New York City Copenhagen and London MEXICO CARIBBEANOsaka Papeete Rome San Francisco
Ft Lauderdale Galveston Los AngelesTRANSATLANTIC Santiago Seattle Sydney Vancouver Venice Barcelona Copenhagen Ft Lauderdale San Francisco and San Juan
London New York City and Rome ALASKA Anchorage Calgary Fairbanks Kenai San Francisco Seattle and Vancouver
For more information about options and pricing reference a destination specific brochure or contact your travel agent
TRAVEL THE WORLD WITH THE LEADER IN CRUISINGmiddot Princess
Analysis by the Hawaii Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism Comparing the Economic Impact of Foreign Flag Ships with US Flag Cruise Ships Sailing in Hawaii
This is a summary of an analysis prepared by the Hawai Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism (DBEDT) of the economic impact of the foreign flag cruise ship fleet sailing in Hawaii as compared to each of the US flag ships operating in Honolulu
The comparison is set out below
Foreign Pride Pride Pride
Fleet Of Hawaii Of Aloha Of America
Total economic output impact (spendingsales) ($mil) 155 542 4225 4958
Total earnings impact (labor earnings) ($mil) 44 155 1207 1411
Total employment impact Uobs) 1447 5059 3943 4627
This analysis demonstrates that a single US-flagged ship the Pride of America home ported in Honolulu is 32 times more economically impactful and creates 32 times as many jobs as the entire foreign flag fleet that sails into and out of Hawaii ports of call
Economic Impact of Pride of America
Assumptions 1 Annual impact though Pride of Aloha is leaving in May 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existing Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($) 4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of outputl$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job multiplier (jobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
118700 105
2706 3373
147 042
1372
4958
1417
4627
Data sourcelformula Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Line 1 x line 2 x line 31 000000
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 4 x line 5
Line 4 x line 6
Line 4 x line 7
Economic Impact of Pride of Hawaii
Assumptions
1 Annual impact though Pride of Hawaii is leaving in February 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existing Pride of Aloha and Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($) 4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job multiplier (jobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
Data sourceformula 139770 Actual 2007 figure
975 Actual 2007 figure 2706 Actual 2007 figure 3688 Line 1 x line 2 x line 31000000
147 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model 042 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
1372 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
5421 Line 4 x line 5
1549 Line 4 x line 6
5059 Line 4 x line 7
Economic Impact of Pride of Aloha
Assumptions 1 Annual impact though Pride of Aloha is leaving in May 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existlng Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($)
4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job mUltiplier Oobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
95680 111
2706 2874
147 042
1372
4225
1207
3943
Data sourcelformula Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Line 1 x line 2 x line 31000000
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 4 x line 5
Line 4 x line 6
Line 4 x line 7
lt
Methodology Used in Calculating Impact of International Cruise Ships
Cruise ship visitors 1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Came with ships 3 Flied in 4 Average length of stay (days) 5 PPPD ($) 6 Cruise visitor spending ($mil))
Cruise ship crews 7 Ratio of crew spending to cruise visitor spending 8 Cruise crew spending
Cruisline 9 Ratio of crew spending to cruise visitor spending
10 Cruiseline spending
11 Total cruise-related spending ($mil)
12 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 13 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 14 Job multiplier Uobs$ cruise -related spending)
15 Total output impact ($miJ)
16 Total earnings impact ($miJ)
17 Total employment impact (jobs)
106641 98307
8334 739 847 668
02 134
038 254
1055
147 042
1372
1551
444
1447
Data sourceformula Line 2 + line 3 DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report Line 1 x line 4 x line 5
DBEDT 2003 Cruise study Line 7 x line 6
DBEDT 2003 Cruise study Line 9 x line 6
Line 6 + line 8 + line 10
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 11 x line 12
Line 11 x line 13
Line 11 x line 14
Economic Contributions Foreign-Flag Fleet operating in Hawaii vs Three US-Flag Ships
$1500
Pride of Hawaii$1000- $542 million VIc -0-E c Pride of AlohaCo
423 million$500
Pride of America $496 million155 million$shy
Foreign-Flag US-Flag Fleet Fleet
Source State of Hawaii Department of US-Flag $1460 billion Business Economic Development and Tourism
Foreign-Flag $ 155 million 7292008
Employment Foreign-Flag Fleet operating in Hawaii vs Three US-Flag Ships
15000
10000
til c o Pride of Aloha
39435000
Pride of America 1447 4627
~---------
Foreign-Flag US-Flag Fleet Fleet
Source State of Hawaii Department of US-Flag 13629 jobs Business Economic Development and Tourism
Foreign-Flag 1447 jobs 7292008
Foreign Flag Capacity Growth Foreign flag passenger capacity has changed five-fold on roundtrip Hawaii cruises from the West Coast since enactment of the Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative
1600000
1400000
tn 1200000
J enshyZ
1000000
I shyG) en 800000 s G) tn tn
600000 as D 400000
200000
0 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Year
Source US Maritime Administration (derived from the US Customs and Border Patrol Vessel Entrance and Clearance documents - final 2007 data) 7292008
NCL America Hawaii Economic Contributions
(2004-2008)
bull (in Millions) bull $399 in wages benefits and overtime to US seafarers bull $35 in Federal and State payroll Taxes bull $64 in Government Fees and Taxes to Hawaii bull $28 in wages benefits and overtime to US other employees bull $52 in Port Charges to Hawaii Companies (Stevedores tugs pilots etc) bull $85 in Fuel to Tesoro Hawaii bull $130 for shore excursions to Hawaii tour operators bull $39 for Hawaii hotel rooms and ground transport bull $75 for food grown in Hawaii bull $57 in union fees and levies (incl $32M paid directly by employees) bull $1 in MMD fees to the United States Coast Guard bull $51 for recruitment screening processing and training crew bull $76 advertising and promoting Hawaii as a destination bull $1092
COASTWISE CRUISES INTERPRETIVE RULE RESOLUTION Adopted at the
US Conference of Mayors 76th Annual Meeting
June 20-242008 Miami
WHEREAS the Department of Homeland Securitys Customs and Border Protection (CBP) issued a proposed Interpretive Rule regulating Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises on foreign flagged vessels between US ports of call under the Passenger Vessel Services Act at the request of the United States Maritime Administration and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule would require that a foreign-flagged vessel on a coastwise cruise to call at a foreign port for at least 48 hours with that foreign stop constituting at least 50 percent of the cruise itinerary and allowing passengers to disembark the cruise vessel at the foreign port before continuing the cruise to a US port of call and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule establishes burdensome criteria that are wholly inconsistent with industry practice particularly the 48-hour call at foreign port shyinasmuch as the standard port call is six to eight hours - as well as the requirement that 50 percent of a cruise be spent at the foreign port and
WHEREAS the intent of the proposed Interpretive Rule is to protect the single remaining US flag vessel serving the Inter-Hawaiian Island cruise trade that according to the Hawaii Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism generates more than 4600 jobs and generates nearly $500 million in economic benefits for the state annually and
WHEREAS thousands of members of the International Longshore Workers Union (nWU) are employed at US ports serving cruise ships and whose jobs would be at risk if the proposed Interpretive Rule were implemented and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule is vague as to the breadth of its application ie to coastwise cruises between all United States ports or applied solely to coastwise cruises from West Coast ports to Hawaii and
WHEREAS the Cruise Lines International Association estimates the proposed Interpretive Rule would upend the $17 billion in national cruise industry spending and put at risk more than 300000 jobs generated by the international cruise industry including jobs held by nWU at US ports and the local allied industries supporting the cruise industry and
Executive Order Submissions Under Review
II Reglnfogov Where to ind Federal Regulatory Information -~
Home ] Lnitied Agenda and Regulator) Ilan pound012866 Regulator) Review Jnformalion Collection Review
EO 12866 Regulatory Rlvlw dvanced Search IJitorical RepWI Review Counh Jriter XIL
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA)
Executive Order Submissions Under Review July 25 2008 - _------------____ _shy
Department of Homeland Security
AGENCY DHS-TSA RIN 1652-AA53
TITLE Large Aircraft Security Program Other Aircraft Operator Security Programs and Airport Operator Security Program
STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT Yes RECEIVED DATE 06302008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
AGENCY DHS-USCIS RIN Llti15-AB67 TITLE Changes to Requirements Affecting H-2B Nonimmigrants and Their Employers
STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT No RECEIVED DATE 06092008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
AGENCY DHS-USCBP RIN 1651AA11 TITLE Issuance of a Visa and Authorization for Temporary Admission Into the United States for Certain Nonimmigrant Aliens Afflicted W HIV Infection
STAGE Final Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT No RECEIVED DATE 03042008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
-_RE_V-IE-W-E-X-T-EN-D-E-D---------- _
AGENCY DHS-USCBP RIN 1651-AA76 TITLE Coastwise Transportation of Passengers STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT Yes RECEIVED DATE 07142008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
Disclosure I Accessibility I Privacy Policy I Contact Us
httpwwwreginfogovpublicdoeoReviewSearch 7252008
View Rule Page 11
Shere D find Federal ReguLatory InformciiorlReglnfogov Home J Cnified Agenda al1d Regulatory Plan EO 12866 Regulatory Reyiew Information Collection Reiew
Current rnified Agenda and Regulatory Plan Historical Pnified Agenda and Regulatory Plan Search
View Rule
DHSIUSCBP RIN 1651-AA76 Publication ill Spring 2008
Title llCoastwise Transportation of Passengers
Abstract This interim rule amends the Department of Homeland Securitys (DHS) current regulations relating to the transportation of passengers by non-coastwise-qualified vessels on voyages that begin and end at a US port and stop at intervening US and foreign port(s) Under this interim final rule voyages that begin and end at a US port and stop at a foreign port(s) and at intervening US port(s) where a large USshyflag coastwise-qualified passenger vessel engages in regular service are in violation of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) unless the cumulative length of stay(s) at intervening foreign port(s) is more than 50 percent of the total amount of time spent at the intervening US port(s) and passengers are permitted to go ashore at the foreign port(s) The purpose of this amendment is to ensure that the Congressional purpose in enacting the PVSA which is to preserve the economic benefits of US coastwise trade to US-flag coastwise-qualified vessels is properly implemented
Agency Department of Homeland Security(DHS) Priority Substantive Nonsignificant
KIN Status First time published in the Unified Agenda Agenda Stage of Rulemaking Final Rule Stage
Major No Unfunded Mandates No
CFR Citation -LCER 4J~)(h)(plusmnJ
Legal Authority 5JJSS_30J12lJ-SClt16 J9_lJiCJ 431 9_L1C1plusmn3JJ2JScHJ1J2JSCJ624 L(LlLSc207LIl(gtJfHgt~ _CiQJ _46lSC 6QLQ~
Legal Deadline None
Timetable Action Date FR Cite
Interim Final Action 0510012008
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required No Government Levels Affected None
Federalism No
Included in the Regulatory Plan No
RIN Data Printed in the FR No
Agency Contact Glen E Vereb Chief Entry Procedures and Carriers Branch Department of Homeland Security US Customs and Border Protection Office of Regulations and Rulings 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington DC 20229 Phone202572-8730
Disclosure I Accessibility I Privacy Policy I Contact Us
httpwwwreginfogovpublicdoeAgendaViewRuleruleID=286751 7128120
Federal RegisterVol 72 No 224Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules 65487
SPECULATIVE POSITION LIMITS 1-Continued [In contract units)
Contract
Soybeans and Mini-Soybeans 2
Wheat and Mini-Wheat 2 bullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbull
Soybean Oil
SingleSpot month All monthsmonth
600 8600 13300 600 11100 14500 540 6600 8600
Soybean Meal 720 5500 7100
Minneapolis Grain Exchange
Hard Red Spring Wheat I 600 I 11100 I 14500
New York Board of Trade
Cotton No2 I 300 I 5300 I 7300
Kansas City Board of Trade
Hard Winter Wheat I 600 I 11100 I 14500
1 For purposes of compliance with these limits positions in a futures contract that shares ~ubstantially identical terms with a contract market enumerated herein including a futures contract that is cash-settled based on the settlement price of an enumerated contract market shall be agshygregated with positions in the enumerated contract market
2 For purposes of compliance with these limits positions in the regular-sized and mini-sized contracts shall be aggregated
Issued by the Commission this November 152007 in Washington DC David Stawick Secretary of the Commission [FR Doc E7-22681 Filed 11-20-07 845 amI BILLING CODE 6351-Q1-P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Bureau of Customs and Border Protection
19 CFR Part 4
[USCBP-2007-o098]
Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises
AGENCY Customs and Border Protection Department of Homeland Security ACTION Proposed interpretation solicitation of comments
SUMMARY This document proposes new criteria to be used by Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to determine whether non-coastwise-qualified vessels are in violation ofthe Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) when engaging in cruise itineraries in which passengers board at a US port the vessel calls at several Hawaiian ports and then the vessel proceeds to a foreign port or ports for a brief period before ultimately returning to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their cruise CBP believes these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because it appears that the primary objective of the foreign stop is evasion of the PVSA
DATES Comments must be received on or before December 212007 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT Glen E Vereb Cargo Security Carriers amp Immigration Branch Office of International Trade (202) 572-8730 ADDRESSES You may submit comments identified by docket number by one of the following methods
bull Federal eRulemaking Portal http wwwregulationsgov Follow the instructions for submitting comments
bull Mail Border Security Regulations Branch Office of International Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
I Public Participation
Interested persons are invited to participate in this proposed interpretation by submitting written data views or arguments on all aspects of the proposed interpretation Customs and Border Protection (CBP) also invites comments that relate to the economic environmental or federalism effects that might result from this proposed interpretation Comments that will provide the most assistance to CBP in developing these procedures will reference a specific portion of the proposed interpretation explain the reason for any recommended change and include data information or authority that support such recommended change
Instructions All submissions received must include the agency name and docket number for this proposed
interpretation All comments received will be posted without change to http wwwregulationsgov including any personal information provided
Docket For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received go to http wwwregulationsgov Submitted comments may also be inspected on regular business days between the hours of 9 am and 430 pm at the Office of International Trade Customs and Border Protection 799 9th Street NW 5th Floor Washington DC Arrangements to inspect submitted documents should be made in advance by calling Mr Joseph Clark at (202) 572shy8768
II Background
The maritime cabotage law governing the transportation of passengers was first established by section 8 of the Passenger Vessel Services Act of June 191886 (the PVSA) 24 Stat 81 as amended by section 2 of the Act of February 17 1898 30 Stat 248 formerly codified at 46 USC App 289 (now codified at 46 USC 55103) 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 of $200 (now $300 as promulgated in TD 03-11 pursuant to the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 199028 USC 2461 note) for each passenger so transported and landed
The intent of the maritime cabotage laws including the PVSA was to provide a legal structure that guarantees a coastwise monopoly to
65488 Federal RegisterVol 72 No 224Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules
American shipping and thereby promotes development of the American merchant marine Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 28 (DC Cir 1984) see also The Granada 35 FSupp 892 8931940 AMC 1601 (DC Pa 1940) (stating that the legislative aim of section 289 [now 55102] was the creation of a practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping business for United States ships) In other words the PVSA was enacted to advance the United States merchant marine and fleet by restricting the use of foreign-ownedflagged passenger vessels in United States territorial waters
Passenger vessel transportation between United States ports has historically been viewed to be part of the coastwise trade after the enactment of the PVSA This view is premised on the concepts of continuity of the voyage and whether its intended purpose or objective was coastwise transportation In other words the PVSA was held to be violated if the coastwise movement was continuous or if the purpose of the trip was a coastwise voyage (See 18 OAG 445 September 4 1886 28 OAG 204 February 16 1910 29 OAG 318 February 12 1912 30 OAG 44 February 1 1913 34 OAG 340 December 24 1924 and 36 OAG 352 August 13 1930)
The CBP regulations promulgated pursuant to the PVSA are found at section 480a of title 19 of the Code of Federal Regulations (19 CFR 480a) and are reflective of the above cited Office of the Attorney General decisions These regulations provide among other things that a non-coastwise-qualified vessel which embarks a passenger at a port in the United States embraced within the coastwise laws (a coastwise port) will be deemed to have landed that passenger in violation of the PVSA if the passenger disembarks at a different coastwise port on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a nearby foreign port or ports (as defined in 19 CFR 480a(a)(2) see also 19 CFR 480a(b)(2)) The terms embark and disembark are words of art which are defined as going on board a vessel for the duration of a specific voyage and leaving a vessel at the conclusion of a specific voyage respectively (See 19 CFR 480a(a)(4))
The references in section 480a to nearby foreign ports (defined in 19 CFR 480a(a)(2)) are the results of attempts by CBP to apply an Office of the Attorney Generals opinion dated February 26 1910 (28 OAG 204) In that case a foreign-flag vessel transported 615 passengers on a voyage around the world beginning in New
York and concluding in San Francisco The Attorney General opined that since the primary object of the voyage was to visit various parts of the world on a pleasure tour returning home via California and not to be transported in domestic commerce the transportation was not in violation of the PVSA
The 1910 Attorney Generals opinion was extended to voyages that included foreign ports other than nearby foreign ports (See Treasury Decision (TD) 68shy285 (33 FR 16558) November 14 1968) However voyages solely to one or more coastwise ports have always been considered predominantly coastwise Therefore non-coastwise-qualified vessels engaging in such a voyage where passengers temporarily go ashore at a coastwise port have been deemed to have violated the PVSA
m Current Law and Policy Pursuant to Public Law 109-304 120
Stat 1632 enacted on October 6 2006 Title 46 United States Code was substantially reorganized and recodified Consequently the PVSA is now codified at 46 USC 55103 and provides that no vessel shall transport passengers between ports or places in the United States either directly or by way of a foreign port under a penalty of $300 for each person so transported and landed except one that (1) Is wholly owned by citizens of the United States for purposes of engaging in the coastwise trade and (2) has been issued a certificate of documentation with a coastwise endorsement or is exempt from documentation but would otherwise be eligible for such a certificate and endorsement
In 2003 Congress enacted Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II Section 211 for the purpose of revitalizing the oceangoing US-flag cruise industry in Hawaii (the 2003 Act) Three oceangoing US-flag cruise ships PRIDE OF ALOHA PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAII were documented with coastwise privileges pursuant to the 2003 Act These vessels entered regular service in Hawaii in 2004 2005 and 2006 respectively and pursuant to the express language of the 2003 Act are limited in their operation to providing regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands of Hawaii
The CBP regulations promulgated pursuant to the PVSA are set forth in 19 CFR 480a and have remained unchanged throughout both the recodification of Title 46 of the United States Code and the enactment of the 2003 Act They provide that a violation of the PVSA occurs when passengers embark (board a vessel for the
duration of a voyage) a non-coastwiseshyqualified vessel at one US port and disembark (leave the vessel at the conclusion of a voyage) at a different US port unless they proceed with the vessel to a distant foreign port (Le any port not considered a nearby foreign port which is defined as any port located in North America Central America Bermuda or the West Indies including the Bahamas) Currently these regulations do not contain specific criteria for non-coastwise-qualified vessels on itineraries including US ports and either nearby or distant foreign ports in order for such foreign port calls to be compliant with the PVSA
To reiterate the applicable CBP regulations provide that the PVSA is violated when a non-coastwise-qualified vessel transports a passenger on a voyage solely to one or more coastwise ports and the passenger disembarks or goes ashore temporarily at a coastwise port (19 CFR 480a(b)(1)) Furthermore a violation of the PVSA also occurs when a non-coastwise-qualified vessel transports a passenger on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a nearby foreign port or ports (but no other foreign port) and the passenger disembarks at a coastwise port other than the port of embarkation (19 CFR 480a(b)(2)) However there is no violation of the PVSA when a passenger is on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a distant foreign port or ports (whether or not the voyage includes a nearby foreign port or ports) and the passenger disembarks at a coastwise port provided the passenger has proceeded with the vessel to a distant foreign port (19 CFR 480a(b)(3))
IV Request From MARAD To Provide Guidance
The US Department of Transportation Maritime Administration (MARAD) has requested that CBP take action to ensure enforcement of the PVSA MARAD has asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreignshyflag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwiseshyqualified cruise ship operators
In April of 2007 the operator of the three US-flag cruise vessels operating solely in Hawaii pursuant to the 2003 Act announced their intent to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAIl from the Hawaii market and redeploy her to Europe The operator intends to re-flag the vessel to foreign registry directly resulting in the loss of over 1100 crewmember jobs The primary reason cited for this decision is the rapid increase in foreign-flag competition entering the Hawaii market
Federal Register I Vol 72 No 224 I Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules 65489
from the West Coast This competition is evidenced in published cruise itineraries of foreign-flag carriers offering a variety of round trip cruises that depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period usually in the early morning and ultimately return to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their cruise These cruises are often marketed as Hawaii cruises and except for the brief stop in the nearby foreign port of Ensenada are purely coastwise in nature It is these cruise itineraries that pose an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels that pursuant to the 2003 Act are currently engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands
V Preliminary Notice
In response to MARADs concerns CBP sent letters to two carriers known to operate the itineraries in question as well as to the Cruise Lines International Association Inc stating that CBP believes that these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because it appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA The letters further indicated that CBP is taking steps to publish this position
VI CBPs Proposed Interpretive Rule Accordingly in this document CBP is
proposing to provide that cruise itineraries for non-qualified coastwise vessels which allow passengers to board at a US port call at several Hawaiian ports proceed to a foreign port or ports for a brief period and then ultimately return to the original US port of embarkation for disembarkation are not consistent with the PVSA and the regulations promulgated pursuant thereto Specifically CBP interprets a voyage to be solely to one or more coastwise ports even where it stops at a foreign port unless the stop at the foreign port is a legitimate object of the cruise CBP will presume that a stop at a foreign port is not a legitimate object of the cruise unless
(1) The stop lasts at least 48 hours at the foreign port
(2) The amount of time at the foreign port is more than 50 percent of the total amount of time at the US ports of call and
(3) The passengers are permitted to go ashore temporarily at the foreign port
Accordingly CBP proposes to adopt an interpretive rule under which it will presume that any cruise itinerary that does not include a foreign port call that
satisfies each of these three criteria constitutes coastwise transportation of passengers in violation of 19 CFR 480a(b)(1)
Dated November 16 2007 W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection [FR Doc E7-22788 Filed 11-20-07 845 am] BILLING CODe 9111-14-1
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau
27 CFR Part 9
[Notice No 76]
RIN 1513-AB49
Proposed Establishment of the Leona Valley Viticultural Area (2007R-281 P)
AGENCY Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau Treasury ACTION Notice of proposed rulemaking
SUMMARY The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau proposes to establish the 134 square mile Leona Valley viticultural area in the northeast part of Los Angeles County California We designate viticultural areas to allow vintners to better describe the origin of their wines and to allow consumers to better identify wines they may purchase We invite comments on this proposed addition to our regulations DATES We must receive written comments on or before January 22 2008
ADDRESSES You may send comments on this notice to one of the following addresses
bull httpwwwregulationsgov (Federal e-rulemaking portal follow the instructions for submitting comments) or
bull Director Regulations and Rulings Division Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau PO Box 14412 Washington DC 20044-4412
See the Public Participation section of this notice for specific instructions and requirements for submitting comments and for information on how to request a public hearing
You may view copies of this notice selected supporting materials and any comments we receive about this proposal at httpwwwregulationsgov under Docket No 2007-0066 You also may view copies of this notice all related petitions maps or other supporting materials and any comments we receive about this
proposal by appointment at the TTB Information Resource Center 1310 G Street NW Washington DC 20220 To make an appointment call 202-927shy2400
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT NA Sutton Regulations and Rulings Division Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau 925 Lakeville S1 No 158 Petaluma CA 94952 phone 415shy271-1254 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
Background on Viticultural Areas
TTB Authority Section 105(e) of the Federal Alcohol
Administration Act (FAA Act) 27 USC 205(e) authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to prescribe regulations for the labeling of wine distilled spirits and malt beverages The FAA Act provides that these regulations should among other things prohibit consumer deception and the use of misleading statements on labels and ensure that labels provide the consumer with adequate information as to the identity and quality of the product The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) administers the regulations promulgated under the FAA Act
Part 4 ofthe TTB regulations (27 CFR part 4) allows the establishment of definitive viticultural areas and the use of their names as appellations of origin on wine labels and in wine advertisements Part 9 of the TTB regulations (27 CFR part 9) contains the list of approved viticultural areas
Definition Section 425(e)(1)(i) ofthe TTB
regulations (27 CFR 425(e)(1)(i)) defines a viticultural area for American wine as a delimited grape-growing region distinguishable by geographical features the boundaries of which have been recognized and defined in part 9 of the regulations These designations allow vintners and consumers to attribute a given quality reputation or other characteristic of a wine made from grapes grown in an area to its geographic origin The establishment of viticultural areas allows vintners to describe more accurately the origin of their wines to consumers and helps consumers to identify wines they may purchase Establishment of a viticultural area is neither an approval nor an endorsement by TTB of the wine produced in that area
Requirements Section 425(e)(2) of the TTB
regulations outlines the procedure for proposing an American viticultural area and provides that any interested party
Us Department ofHomelaDd Secmity Washington DC 10229
bull ~
US Customs and Border Protection
AUG 15 2fXJJ
VE5-3-02-QTRRBSTCCCI - ti015502-GG-
Mr leon Sutcliffe Director Port Operations Camivai Cruise Unes Camival Place 3655 NW 87Avenue Miami Aorlda 33178
RE P~nger Vessef Services Ad Coastwise Transportation 46 USC sect 55103 19 CFR sect 480a(b)
Dear Mr Sutcliffe
As you know US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) enforces the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) codified at TItle 46 United States Code section 55103 (46 USC 55103) This statute prohibits non-coastwise-qualifled vessels (ie those vessels not US-buill owned and documented with a coastwise endorsement) from transporting passengers between porls or places within the United States The regUlations promUlgated pursuant to the PVSA are found at TrtJe 19 Code of Federal Regulations section 4808 (19 CFR 4808)
It has come to our attention that passenger vessels of your company are engaging in cruise itineraries that include ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands Two USAlagged coastwise-endorsed passenger vessefs are also currenUy engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of caD wittlin the Hawaiian Islands
As part of your cruise itineraries some of your foreign-flagged vessels depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period and ultimately rebJm to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their endse For example the MS ZAANDAM of Holand America Lines departs San Diego cruises the Hawaiian Islands stops in Ensenada from 800pm to 11 OOpmbull and returns to san Diego CBP believes these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because It appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA -- - - ~~~------
Please be advised that CBP is taking steps to publish this position Should have any questions pertaining to this matter please contact Mr Glen Vereb Chief Cargo Security Carriers and Immigration Branch at (202) 572-8724
Sincerely
F Jl E EST Y LEe A U I 5 I N Gmiddot
December 21 2007
The Honorable W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection co Border Security Regulations Branch Office ofInternational Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229
Re Hawaii Coastwise Cruises (USCBP-2007-0098) Comments in Response to Proposed Interpretation
Dear Commissioner Basham
NCL America Inc1 (NCLA) submits these comments in support ofthe efforts ofCustoms and Border Protection to enforce the Passenger Vessel Services Act and the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative as applied to Hawaii coastwise cruises
1 Introduction and Summary of Position
NCLA operates three large oceangoing US flag cruise ships in Hawaii These ships are documented under US flag and are required to operate in regular service in Hawaii pursuant to the authority of the Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative a 2003 federal statute intended to revitalize the US flag cruise industry and to maximize economic and national security benefits to the United States (the 2003 Act)
NCLA has invested $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships pursuant to the 2003 Act and in direct reliance on the protections of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) and its proper enforcement The PVSA limits the transportation ofpassengers between US ports to coastwise documented US flag ships Its statutory protections recognize that US flag ships have significantly higher operational costs in part because they are subject to more stringent US laws including US labor laws and federal
1 NCL America Inc is a US corporation incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware headquartered in Honolulu Hawaii As a US corporation it is subject to US taxes at both the federal and state level The Chief Executive Officer the Chairman of the Board and all of the Board of Directors of NCL America are US citizens The company is also subject to US labor and employment laws and is required by statute to maintain a workforce comprised primarily ofUS citizens
700 Bishop St SUite 900 I Honolulu HawMi 96813 I Tel 8085273800 Fax 8085273820 I ndcom
2
income tax among others The NCLA ships operating in Hawaii are the only large oceangoing cruise ships operating under US flag In furtherance of the policy goals of the PVSA and the 2003 Act these ships have created over 4000 seafaring jobs all subject to US minimum wage and other labor statutes
Since 2003 there has been a significant increase in capacity in the Hawaii market from foreign flag ships providing cruise service to Hawaii from the West Coast Many of these foreign flag cruises are marketed as Hawaii cruises and consist entirely ofUS ports ofcall with the sole exception of a token stop in Mexico for as little as an hour late at night under circumstances where passengers are not permitted to get offthe ship There are no reported rulings approving these particular foreign flag itineraries
Lower cost foreign competition in the Hawaii market has unfairly hurt NCLAs operations NCLA has incurred substantial losses which have contributed significantly to its decision earlier this year to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAll from US flag and reshydeploy it foreign Unfair foreign competition poses an imminent threat to the remaining US flag passenger vessels operating in the Hawaii trades pursuant to the 2003 Act
As the agency statutorily charged with implementation of the 2003 Act the US Department ofTransportation Maritime Administration (MARAn) is aware of the threat foreign flag Hawaii itineraries pose to the US flag fleet and brought the situation to the attention ofthe US Department ofHomeland Security Bureau ofCustoms and Border Protection (CBP or Customs) Customs determined that the primary object of these itineraries was coastwise and that the Ensenada stop was an evasion of the PVSA
In August 2007 Customs provided written notice to the affected foreign lines and their trade association that the existing itineraries were contrary to the PVSA None of these lines sought advance rulings even after the Customs notice with respect to their Hawaii itineraries pursuant to Customs regulations and many continued to market the itineraries as Hawaii cruises NCLA supports the efforts ofCustoms and MARAD to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act for Hawaii cruises
2 Statutory Authority for Customs Proposed Interpretation
(a) Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA)
Congress passed the PVSA in 1886 to protect the US maritime transportation industry from foreign competition2 Protection is afforded through penalty assessments on foreign vessels transporting passengers between US ports or places directly or by way ofa foreign port 3 As Congress and the courts have recognized coastwise protections for the US maritime transportation industry are only one dimension of the PVSA Operating in conjunction with other coastwise laws and with the US
2 See United States v Honduran SS GRANADA 35 F Supp 892 894 (BD Pa 1940)(citing purpose of PVSA to meet threats to the practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping which was to be preserved for US ships)
46 USc sect 55103 (originally 46 USC App 289)
3
documentation laws the PVSA also enhances military sealift in times ofnational emergency sustains a US merchant marine and supports the US shipbuilding and repair industry4
(b) Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative (the 2003 Act)
Over the past decade Congress has sought to reinforce the goals of the PVSA by providing mechanisms to revitalize the oceangoing US flag cruise fleet particularly in Hawaii The Project America legislation enacted in 1997 authorized among other things the re~flagging ofone existing cruise ship contingent on the operator contracting for the construction oftwo new oceangoing cruise shipss Following the default of the operator under the original contract Congress enacted the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative for the purpose ofrecovering economic and national security benefits to the United States bull 6 These same goals of the original PVSA were expressly referenced in the legislative history of the 2003 Act which emphasized that these ships will be assets available in time ofnational emergency and will significantly expand the pool ofqualified seafarers upon which the US Department ofDefense relies to crew non-combatant vessels
The 2003 Act authorizes the US documentation ofthree cruise ships for operation in regular service in Hawaii subject to certain conditions including a prohibition on operating in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico and the Caribbean Sea and a requirement that all vessel repair work be undertaken in the United States MARAD is charged with implementation of the 2003 Act
3 Customs Implementation of PVSA
(a) Regulations
The current regulations implementing the PVSA were published by Customs in 19858 The growth of the foreign flag cruise industry in North America and in particular the development of the Alaska cruise market led to an effort in 1984 to amend the thenshyexisting regulations to increase the ease of administration and operational flexibility The effort to change the regulation had support from US port interests who saw benefit in the potential increase in the number ofUS ports that foreign vessels could call and was opposed by proponents ofpotential US flag projects as detrimental to efforts to revitalize the US fleet 9 The preamble to the 1985 rule emphasized that it was of paramount importance to consider the primary object ofpassengers in taking a
4 See American Hawaii Cruises v Skinner 713 F Supp 452 457 (DDC 1989) (recognizing the contribution of the PVSA and the Jones Act in helping to secure national defense by maintaining a merchant marine oftbe best equipped and most suitable types ofvessels sufficient to serve in time of war or national emergency) see also Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 30 (DC Cir 1984) Wirth Ltd v SIS Acadia Forest 537 F2d 1272 1281 n32 (5th Cir 1976) S Public Law 105-56 Section 8109 (111 Stat 1203 1244) (Oct 81997 ) 6 Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II General Provisions - Department ofCommerce Section 211 (117 Stat 1179) (Feb 20 2003) 1 149 Cong Rec S1118 (dailyed Jan 17 2003(statement ofSenator Inouye) 8 19 CFR sect 480a 950 Fed Reg 26981 (July I 1985)
4
voyage10 a concept which is reinforced elsewhere in Customs regulations11 In its analysis of the comments received at the time Customs accepted the view ofport interests that the modified rule would help their business but did so recognizing the absence ofa regular salt water US flag passenger fleet Customs acknowledged the potential harm to prospective efforts to revitalize the US flag passenger fleet and expressly cautioned that if it were ever shown that coastwise qualified vessels in competition with foreign vessels were in fact hurt by the modified Customs regulation then Customs would immediately reconsider its position12
(b) Customs Rulings
Given the significant penalties associated with violating the PVSA13 Customs regulations expressly provide a mechanism for the owner or charterer of a foreign vessel or any other interested person to request an advisory ruling as to whether a contemplated voyage would be considered in violation of the PVSA14 Customs regulations provide that vessel operators can rely on these ruling letters only to the extent that the facts and circumstances are identical to those in the ruling letter IS
Notwithstanding the fact that several foreign cruise lines offer Hawaii itineraries originating in a US mainland port and calling at Hawaii ports with a token intervening stop in Mexico there are no reported rulings expressly approving such an itinerary for these foreign cruise lines 16
4 The Cruise Industry in Hawaii
(a) NCL America Returns US flag to the Oceangoing Passenger Fleet
Pursuant to the requirements ofthe 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative NCLA agreed to promote US-flag cruising enhance military sealift capacity and expand the US maritime labor base No other major cruise line had ever undertaken such a commitment to the US flag and the public policy objectives Congress sought to achieve under the PVSA or the 2003 Act Introduction ofPRIDE OF ALOHA in 2004 was a significant development in the maritime industry because it marked the restoration ofthe
10 Id at 26983 11 Customs Regulations include a provision on the effect ofruling letters and with respect to carrier rulings the applicable regulation refers to rulings setting forth a determination as to whether or not the primary object of a contemplated voyage is coastwise transportation in violation of46 USC sect 289 [pYSA codified at 46 USC sect55103] 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 12 50 Fed Reg at 26983 13 A modem cruise ship with 2400 passengers for example would be subject to a fine of$720OOO per cruise based on the statutory penalty of$300 for each passenger transported in violation of the Act 14 19 CFR sect 480a(d) IS 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 16 There is one older reported mling involving a request to drop the Ensenada port call from a Los AngeleslHawaiiLos Angeles itinerary which Customs held would violate the PYSA In dicta Customs acknowledged that the itinerary could be in compliance if the Ensenada call were not dropped but did not address the issue ofwhether a one hour service call where no passengers depart the vessel would be sufficient The carrier that obtained that ruling has since left the Hawaii market See Customs Ruling HQ 114078 re Crystal Hannony (Nov 4 1997)
5
us flag to the oceangoing cruise industry A contemporaneous press release from the Us Department ofTransportation reported that the three US-flag cruise ships to be introduced pursuant to the 2003 Act were expected to create more than 20000 US jobs generate more than $825 million ofexpenditures in the US economy and create nearly $360 million in federal tax revenue by the end of 200717 In 2005 the PRIDE OF AMERICA was introduced and in 2006 the third vessel PRIDE OF HAWAll was introduced to Hawaii Both the PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAIl offer 7shyday inter-island Hawaii itineraries whereas PRIDE OF ALOHA operates on 7 and 10 day cruises exclusively among the islands ofHawaii as well as 11 day cruises that include a foreign port call at Fanning Island To date NCLA has invested over $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships in furtherance ofthe policy objectives of the PVSA and the 2003 Act These ships employ over 4000 seafarers and generate hundreds ofmillions of dollars in benefits for Hawaii and the nation
(b) Significant Increase in Foreign Flag Capacity Since 2003
The most significant change in the Hawaii cruise market since 2003 has been the dramatic increase in capacity A significant portion ofthis capacity increase is directly attributable to NCLAs fulfillment ofthe Congressional mandate in the 2003 Act However foreign-flag operations in the Hawaii market as measured in passenger nights18 have skyrocketed Based on MARAn data derived from the US Customs Border Patrol Vessel Entrance and Clearance documents the passenger nights for foreign flag vessels departing from the West Coast to Hawaii on round trip cruise have increased several hundredfold during this period19 See Exhibit A
(c) NCLA Has Incurred Substantial Losses During this Period
Since 2004 NCLA has lost cumulatively more than a quarter ofa billion dollars A principal reason for these losses has been the increase in foreign capacity in this market NCLA has taken significant steps to reduce costs to address the increase in foreign competition but NCLA is at an inherent disadvantage when competing against foreign companies that are not subject to US labor laws US tax laws and other laws Ofcourse the statutory protections of the PVSA are intended to address these very issues That is why Customs immediate action to implement the proposed interpretation is critical for the US flag fleet Regrettably NCLA has already been forced to reduce overall capacity early next year with the withdrawal ofPRIDE OF HAWAlI to another
17 DOT Press Release dated June 72004 see also DOT Press Release dated August 132004 in connection with visit to PRIDE OF ALOHA by US Transportation Secretary Norman Y Mineta 11 Passenger nights (also referred to as passenger capacity days) are calculated by multiplying the number ofpassengers per vessel by the number ofcruise days in each itinerary by the number of cruises This is the unit ofmeasurement employed by MARAn In contrast passenger bed supply (also referred to as passenger capacity) data reflects only the number ofberths per vessel multiplied by the number of cruises and hence understates the market by excluding the full economic value ofthe cruise perfonned 19 In 2003 the total number ofpassenger nights for round-trip West Coast to Hawaii cruises was 303325 which jumped by 353 to 1072329 in 2006 and by 430 to 1304546 from 2003 to 2007 (The 2007 figure is based on MARAD data for six months and a1ll1ualized by published itineraries for the balance of the year)
6
market for operation under foreign flag This move alone will result in the loss ofover 1000 American seafaring jobs
5 Customs Proposed Interpretation is Necessary to Further the Important National Security and Public Policy Objectives Embodied in Federal Law
As Customs has properly noted the increase in foreign competition in the Hawaii trades in contravention of the PVSA pose[s] an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels[] As the operator of these ships NCLA has a vested interest in protecting the jobs ofthe thousands ofAmerican crewmembers and cruise ship service providers who support these vessels NCLA also has an interest in protecting the substantial economic investment it has made to revitalize the US flag passenger vessel fleet But a balancing of interests in the context of Customs enforcement ofexisting law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act requires a much broader focus
The legislative history of the 2003 Act expressly recognized the national security and public policy import ofestablishing a US flag passenger vessel fleet as a means to maintain the countrys preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool of qualified seafarers and as a means to help sustain a fleet ofUS-flag vessels to su~ort
the nations military and maritime industrial base for times ofnational emergency
Congress understood the importance ofestablishing a viable US flag cruise ship fleet as something larger than the vessels themselves These national security and public policy objectives must be weighed in the balance as Customs assesses how best to interpret its rules to give effect to the PVSA and the 2003 Act
6 Customs Should Clarify that the Proposed Interpretation is Limited to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades and Adopt Reasonable Measures to Ensure Sufficient Foreign Content
Since publication ofthe proposed interpretative rule several commenters have observed that the scope of the proposed interpretation is ambiguous because the language of Section VI referencing any cruise itinerary appears broader than the caption Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises and the entire discussion in the published notice which focuses exclusively on US-flag coastwise vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA agrees that the proposed interpretation should be clarified so that its scope is limited to vessels operating roundtrip voyages from US ports that include Hawaii port calls
NCLA supports the concept reflected in the proposed interpretive rule that round trip Hawaii itineraries from US ports on foreign ships must include a material and measurable degree ofoverall foreign port content as compared to US port content
20 149 Congo Rec S1117 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)
7
(a) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is also Consistent with Subsequent Congressional Enactments Modifying the PVSA
As discussed above it is well established that the PVSA was designed toRrotect US-flag vessels from foreign competition in the coastwise and domestic trades 1
Subsequent legislative enactments however have appropriately differentiated among distinct geographic markets and trades including Canada Alaska Puerto Rico and Hawaii based on the existence or non-existence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
In 1938 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers by Canadian passenger vessels on Lake Ontario and the St Lawrence River until such time as passenger service shall be established by vessels of the United States22 Similarly in 1961 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers on Canadian vessels within Alaska or between Alaska and other points in the United States until such time as passenger service is established by vessels ofthe United States23
In 1984 Congress modified the application ofthe PVSA to pennit the transportation ofpassengers between Puerto Rico and other United States ports on foreign-flag vessels24 As with the other statutory exceptions this provision is qualified and expires [o]n a showing that a United States passenger vessel qualified to engage in the coastwise trade is offering or advertising passenger service between a port in Puerto Rico and another port in the United States2S
Congress acted again with respect to the application of the PVSA with the 2003 Act in which it authorized three vessels that did not meet the US-build requirements of the PVSA to operate as modem US-flagged cruise ships in regular service in Hawaii26 The 2003 Act imposes a specific geographic limitation on the operation of any ship documented under this authority to operations only in regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands ofHawaii and shall not transport passengers in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico or the Caribbean Sea except in certain limited circumstances27 As above the limited nature of the 2003 Act is express it is strictly limited to the large ocean-going cruise ships and then only those operating in the regular Hawaii service where there are no US-flag operations28
21 See Act ofJune 19 1886 c 421 sec 8 24 Stat 81 Act of February 171898 c 26 sec 2 30 Stat 248 22 S] Res 174 75th Cong 52 Stat 223 (Alp 251938) codified at46 USC sect 55121(a) 23 See Pub L 87-77 75 Stat 196 (Jun 30 1961) codified at 46 USC sect 55121(b) 24 See Pub L 98-563 98 Stat 2916 (Oct 301984) codified at 46 USC sect 55104(b) 25 46 USC sect 55104(c)(l) see also 46 USC 46 USc sect 55104(cX2)(expiration of exemption upon availability ofa non-coastwise qualified US-flag vessel offering service in the relevant market) 26 149 Congo Rec SI118 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)(statementofSen Inouye) 27 Pub L 108-7 117 Stat 79 (Feb 20 2003) 28 149 Congo Rec S11l9 (dailyed Jan 17 2003Xstatement of Sen Inouye)
8
In each ofthese instances Congress fashioned a narrow exception to the PVSA that differentiated among distinct geographic markets based on the existence or nonshyexistence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
As the federal agency responsible for administering the 2003 Act MARAD requested that Customs act to protect US flag passenger vessel interests in the Hawaii trades29 Limiting the scope ofthe proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades also reflects Customs appreciation of the PVSA in the context of the subsequent Congressional action30 Viewing the Congressional modifications to the PVSA as a whole Congress has specifically and repeatedly differentiated among distinct geographic markets when it has found it necessary and appropriate to do so to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests It is well established that the proper interpretation of a statutory scheme includes consideration ofsubsequent statutes even though the underlying statute itselfhas not been expressly amended31 Accordingly Customs should likewise limit the scope ofthe proposed PVSA interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades because that is the only geographic market as mandated by the 2003 Act in which oceangoing US-flag cruise ships are operating
(b) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Consistent with Public Policy Objectives of the 1985 Rulemaking
In 1985middot Customs liberalized the regulations implementing the PVSA by eliminating certain regulatory prohibitions on foreign flag vessels In the context of the 1985 rulemaking Customs justified a relaxation ofthe regulations on the grounds that it would simplify the administration of the PVSA and would benefit the economy ofcertain American coastwise ports without eroding the statutory protection given to American vessels engaged in solely domestic trade32
Customs thus sought to reconcile US port economic interests with US-flag passenger vessel interests Both of these twin policy objectives are furthered by
29 See 72 Fed Reg 65488 (Nov 21 2007)( MARAn bas asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the ~eratiODS ofcoastwise-qualified cruise ship operators)
See generally FDA v Brown amp Williamson Tobacco Corp 529 US 120 132-133 (2000)(assessing propriety ofagency construction ofFood DIUg and Cosmetics Act and descnbing responsibility of reviewing cowt to assess statutory provisions in the context of subsequent legislative enactments) 31 See Brown amp Williamson 529 US 143 (holding that proper construction ofstatutory provision must necessarily assume that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications ofa later statute This is particularly so where the scope of the earlier statute is broad but the subsequent statutes more specifically address the topic athand) see also United States v Estate ofRomani 523 US 517 530-531 (1998)( holding that a later-enacted statute should control the construction of the federal lien priority statute a specific policy embodied in a later federal statute should control om construction of the [earlier] statute even though it ha[s] not been expressly amended) United States v Fausto 484 US 439453 (1988)(The courts frequently find Congress to have done this - whenever in fact they interpret a statutory text in the light ofsurrounding texts that happen to have been subsequently enacted This classic judicial task of reconciling many laws enacted over time and getting them to make sense in combination necessarily assumes that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications of a later statute) 32 50 Fed Reg 26982 (JuI 11985)
9
limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades
As noted earlier the 2003 Act limits the operation of the NCLA US-flag oceangoing passenger vessels to regular service in Hawaii Because there are no oceangoing US-flag vessels operating in any market other than the Hawaii trades Customs should limit the scope of the proposed interPretation to that market Such a limitation protects US flag passenger vessel interests without prejudicing US port interests In contrast an application of the proposed interpretation to any itinerary would needlessly harm US port interests unrelated to Hawaii without any countervailing benefit to US-flag passenger vessel interests Accordingly limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation is consistent with the public policy objectives of the 1985 rulemaking as well as the 2003 Act
(c) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Also Consistent with Customs Commitment to Revisit the Scope of its Rules to Protect US-Flag Interests
The relaxation ofthe PVSA regulations in 1985 was premised in large part on Customs finding that there was no regular salt water US-flag passenger fleet in operation at that time33 Acknowledging that the relaxed regulations could harm USshyflag interests Customs committed in the preamble ofthe 1985 final rule to immediately reconsider its interpretation if it is ever shown that there is a viable US flag vessel operating in competition with foreign-flag vessels34
Congress enacted the 2003 Act to stimulate the development of a US flag cruise ship industry As noted above the legislative history ofthat Act makes clear that Congress sought to revitalize the US-flag cruise industry as a means to maintain Americas preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool ofqualified seafarers help sustain a fleet of US flag vessels to support our military and a maritime industrial base create thousands of seagoing and shoreside American jobs and stimulate the development ofa US flag cruise ship tourism business with the commensurate benefits to the US tax base the US economy and US employment
Customs is now acting at MARADs request to revisit its interpretation ofthe regulations implementing the PVSA because recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwise-qualified cruise ship operations35 That is to say that the concerns articulated by Customs in the context of the 1985 rulemaking have materialized and US-flag passenger vessel interests are in fact being hanned in the Hawaii trades by foreign competitors
33 50 Fed Reg 26983 34Id
3S 72 Fed Reg 56488 (Nov 21 2007)
I
10
Because the US-flag passenger vessels are limited by statute to regular service in Hawaii limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the
Hawaii trades is consistent with Customs historical commitment to revisit its interpretation ofthe implementing regulations to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests
7 Conclusion
For the reasons stated above NCLA commends the efforts ofCustoms and MARAn to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act as applied to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA respectfully requests Customs to move ahead promptly with p~blicati~nof a final interpretive rule to advance the important national security arid public policy objectives ofthese laws
We greatly appreciate the opportunity to submit these comments
Sincerely
~~~ Alan T Yamamoto Vice President Hawaii Operations
Exhibit A
Ship Name Serenade Of The Seas Departure Port San Diego California Ports of Call San Diego California Kailua Kona Hawaii Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii Hlo Hawaii Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii Ensenada Mexico San Qigo California
2007 Date(s) Oct 05
Sailing Itinerary
Day Port H ~rrive Depart Activity
05-0ct San Diego California 500 PM
06-0ct Cruising
07-0ct Cruising
08-0ct Cruising
09-0ct Cruising
10-0ct Kailua Kona Hawaii 700 AM 900 PM Tendered
11-00t Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 1000 AM Tendered
12middot0ct Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 900 PM Tendered
13-0ct Hilo Hawaii 700 AM 600 PM Docked
14middot0ct Honoulu (Oahu) Hawaii 700 AM Docked
15-0ct Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii 200 AM Docked
6-0ct CrUising
17-0ct Cruising
18-0ct Cruising
19middot0ct Cruising
-7 20-00t
O-Oot
Ensenada ~i1exico
San Deqo California
i 00 ~r1
700 ~M
200 oM D1Jcked ~
EXOTICS CRUISES
SOUTHEAST ASIACHINA SOUTHEAST ASIACHINA FAR EASTALASKA
PACIflC PRINCISS ROYAL PRINCESS
16 16 19 DAYS DAYS DAYS
SAPPHIRE SAPPHIRE PRINCESS
Sail between PRINCESSBANGKOK
and BANGKOK OSAKA
BEIJING to to
2004 DEPARTURE DATES BEIJING SEATTLEPAClFlC PRINCESS
Jun 27tt 200S DEPARTURE DATE200S DEPARTURE DATE ROYAL PRINCESS
Mar 26 Apr 23Oct 16 Nov lt
CRUISE I I INERARY CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
1 GsakaJpan EMBARK PM1 Bangkok Thailand (Laem Chabang) EMBARKPM 1 Bangkok Thailand (Laern Chabang) EMBARK IM 2 At Sea2 At Sea 2 AtSea bull 3 Nagasaki Japan 7 AM 6PM
9AM 7PM 3 Singapore 7PM 4 Pusan Soqth Korea 8AM 5PM 4-5 At Sea 5 At Sea gt bull
7AM 7PM 6 Da Nwg Vietn~1Il 7AM middot7PM 6 Vladivostok Russia SAM 730 PM 7 At Sea 7 AtSea
7AM 12M 8 Hong lltog ihin~ 7AM 12M 8 Sapporo japan (Muroran) 6AM 6PM 9-10 At Sea 9-10 At Sea 9-12 At Sea cross Intemational Dateline
13 DutchHarbor Alaska (Aleutian Islands) 230 PM 7PM11 ShaJlgllai Cbina (overnight onboard ship) lAM 11 Shangh~t Cllina (ovmightonJoltird $hip) 7 AM 14 At Sea shy12 Shanghai China 6PM 12 Shanghai China
7AM - - tlJf
6PM 15 Anchorage Alaska (Seward) 8AM 6PM13 At Sea 13 AtSea i 16 College Fjord Seni CruIsing 630AM 930 AM
14 Nagasaki japan 7AM 6PM 14 Nagasaki japan 6PM 17 Glacier Ilay Scenic Cruising 1030 AM 830 PM 15 Pusan South lltOrea TAM 4PM 1~ bull Pu~an SQuth iorea middot4lM 18 middotmiddot juneau Alaska 6 AM 2PM 16 At Sea 16 At Sea 19 - At Sea 17 Beijing China (Xingangy OISEMBAlUe AM 17 Beijing Cliina (Xingang) 20 SeattleWashington DISEMBARK AM
t ltinemy Operne5 in rcvmc Older ttPorttimcsmiYnl)middotShlpwilldocklnampngkoknsttadofL1cm~
POLYNESIA amp THE COOK ISLANDS POLYNESIA amp THE MARQUESAS ISLANDS
10 10 DAYS DAYS
TAHITIAN PRINCESSTAHITIAN PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIPROUNDTRIP fromfrom
PAPEETEPAPEETE 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
2004 DEPARTURE DATES Oct 4 24 Mayl 17 27 Sep4 14 24 Nov 13 Jun 6 16 26 0lt 14 00323Ju16 16 26 Nov 323 2005 DEPARTURE DATESAug 5 15 25 Dec 13 Jan 12
Feb 1 21200S DEPARTURE DATES
~~ 122 ~~Il 13 23 CRUISE ITINERARY
CRUISE II INERARY DAY PORT
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Papeete Tahiti 1 Papeete Tahiti (overnight onboard ship) EMBARK PM
2 Moorea Polynesia 2 Papeete Tahiti SPM 3 Huahil1e P9lynesia 8AM 5 PM 3 Tuamotu Atolls Senic Cruising
5 PM8-AM 4 At Sea I At Sea 5 Rarotonga Cook Islands 8AM 5 PI~ 5 Nuku Hiva Marquesas Islands 6 At Sea 6 Hiva Ga Marquesas Islands 8AM 5PM 7 Raiatea Polynesia overnight onboard Ship 6AM
7 At Sea middotai~ RaiateaPQlynesia igt gt 6AM 8 Rangiroa P~iynesia 8AM 4PM8 Tahaa scenic Cryising 630 AM 830 AM
8 BoraBoraPQlyrtesia(ovemightollboard ship) UN 9 Tahaa ~enl Cruising 8 AM middot11AM
9 Bora lora Polynesia 5iM 9 Raiatea Polynesia 12 N 11 PM 10 Moore Polynesfa 8 AM 5 PM la ~ Bora ~oraPoIYnesia 8AM bull 5PM
11 Papeete Tahiti DISEMBARK AM 11 Papeete Tahiti DISEMBARK AM Iong Kong Harbor
3 Singapore 4-5 At Sea 6 Da NangVieinam 7 At Sea 8 liong Kong China
EXOTICS CRU ISES
HAWAIITAHITI HAWAIIAN ISLANDS SOUTH PACIFIC ISLANDS
12 1515 DAYS DAYSDAYS
PACIFIC
TAHITIAN PRINCESS ISLAND PRINCESSPAClFIC PRINCESS
PRINCESS
SYDNEYROUNDTRIP sail between tofrom
PAPEETE PAPEETELOS ANGELES and
2004 DEPARnIRE DATEHONOLULU 2004 DEPARTURE DATES Apr 21
2004 DEPARTURE DATES ~~~l CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE 11 INERARY
Oet21t CRUISE ITINERARY Nov Sf
MayS PACIFIC PRINCESS DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
Nov20t DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DecSt 1 Los Angeles CalifornIa EMBARK AM 1 Sydney AustralIa EMBARK PMAug 17t
Dec20t1 Papeete Tahiti EMBARK PM 2-4 At Sea
2005 DEPARTURE DATE Jan 4 2-5 At Sea
(overnight onboard ship) Jan 19 5 Auckland New Zealand 7 AM 2PMFeb 3t 6 Iiilo Hawaii 8 AM 6 PM
TAHITIAN PRINCESS Papeete Tahiti 11 PM fb 18 6-7 At Sea Kilauea Voko ~enic CruisingApr 12 MarS t 3 Moorea Polynesia 8 AM 5 PM 8 Suva fijI 11 AM 430 PM1~i~t 7 Kona Hawaii 8AM 6PM4 Bora Bora PolYnesia 8 AM 5 PM 9 At Sea Cross International Dateline Apr 19
5-6 At Sea 8 Honolulu Hawaii 8AM 11 PM 10 Apia Western Samoa 830 AM 2PM 7 Christmas Isl~ndKiribati 1Z N 5 PM 9 Kauai Hawaii (Nawlliwlli) 8AM 6PM 11-12 At Sea 8-9 At Sea 10 Maui Hawaii (Lahaina) 6PM 13 Bora Bora Polynesia lOAM 6PM 10 HlloliaWlii 6 PM 13 Raiatea Polynesia (overnight onboard 11 PM11-14 At Sea 11 Maui Hawaii (Lahaina) 8 AM 6 PM 14 Raiatea Polynesia 11 PM
15 Ensenada Mexico (service call)KaUaiH~waii(Nawllfwtli) 8AM 6 PM 15 Moorea Polynesia 8AM 5PM
tllinemyopcr~ttsln=x QnIerPurtlimcslmYvary Honolulu Hawaii DISEMBARK AM 16 Los Angeles CalIfornia DISEMBARK AM 16 Papeete Tahiti DISEMBARK AM
ISLANDS OF THE PACIFIC THEATER SOUTH PACIFIC EXPLORER
24 24 DAYS DAYS
PAClFIC PRINCESS PAClFIC PRINCESS
sail between HONOLULU PAPEETE
and to OSAKA FT LAUDERDALE
2004 DEPARTURE DATES
Mayl 2004 DEPARTURE DATEJul2Sj
Aug 29 CRUISE ITINERARY
CRUISE ITINERARYDAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART EMBARK PM DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
1 Papeete Tahiti EMBARK PM lPM 7PM 2 8AM 11 PM
3 ~~~~~~ ~~~~Sta 8AM 5 PM 4-6 At Sea 7 Pitcairn Island Scenic Cruising 8AM 1211
8AM 12 N
7AM ZPM 8-9 At Sea 10 Easter Island Chile 8AM 2PM
9AM 11-14 At Sea 15 Callao Peru (overnight for Lima and Machu Picchu) 8AM 16 Callao Peru lPM 17 At Sea 18 Manta Ecuador (for Quito) 9fM 7PM 19 At Sea 20 Transit Panama Canal 7 AM 430 PM 21 San BIas Panama 8AM 5 PM 22 ft Sea 23 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands 7AM 4PM 24 At Sea
25 Ft Lauderdale Florida DISEMBARK AMMoorea Polynesia tllinemyoperataln~12onlerPortl1mesmiYmymiddot
EXOTICS CRUISES
HAWAIITAHITISOUTH PACIFIC AMAZONSOUTHERN CARIBBEAN CAPE HORNSTRAIT OF MAGELLAN
1430 12 DAYS DAYSDAYS
ROYAL PRINCESS ROYAL PRINCESSSAPPHIRE PRINCESS
sail betweenFT LAUDERDALE SANTIAGOLOS ANGELES to
andto MANAUS BUENOS AIRESSYDNEY 2005 DEPARTURE DATE 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
2004 DEPARTURE DATE Apr 9 Jan 10
Nov 22 Jan 241 Feb 7
FebZt
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
CRUISE ITINERARY
CRUISE ITINERARYCRUISE ITINERARY 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTDAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 2-3 At Sea 1 Santiago Chile (Valparaiso) EMBARK PM
1 Los ingeles California EMBARK PM 4 Tortola BritIsh Virgin Islands 8 AM 6 PM 2 At Sea 2 Ensenada Mexico 8AM 5PM 3 Puerto Montt Chile 7AM 6PM
3middot6 At Sea 4 At Sea 5 Dominica 9 AM 4 PM 7 Hilo Hawaii 8AM 5 At Sea Chilean Fjords Scenic Cruising6PM 6 Trinidad 9 AM 6 PM
8 Maui Hawaii (Lahaina) 8AM 6PM 6 At Sea Amalia Glacier Scentc CruiSi3f7 At Sea 7 Punta Arenas Chile (Strait of Magei an) 7AM 6PM9 Honolulu Hawaii 7AM 5PM
- 10middot13 At Sea 8 Beagle Channel Scenic Cruising 8 Ushuaia Argentina (Tierra del Fuo) 12N 8PM
8 Devils Island French Guiana (Isle Royal) 8 AM 2 PM 14 Bora Bora Polynesia 8AM 6PM 9 At Sea 9 At Sea Cape Hom Scenic Cruising
10 Santarem Brazil 9 AM 7 PM 10 Moorea Polynesia 8AM 6PM 10 Falkland Islands (Stanley) 8AM 6PM 10 Papeete Tahiti (overnight onboard ship) 9PM 11 At Sea
i 16 Papeete Tahiti 6PM 11 Boca da Valeria Brazil (Amazon River) 7 AM 2 PM 12 Puerto Madryn Argentina 6AM 5PM 17middot18 AtSea 12 Manaus Brazil (overnight onboard ship) 10 AM 13 At Sea
14 Montevideo Uruguay 9AM 6PM19 Pago Pago merlcan Samoa 8AM 6PM 13 Manaus Brazil DISEMBARK AM 15 Buenos Aires Argentina DISEMBARK AM 20 Apia Western Samoa 8AM 6PM 21 At Sea Cross International Dateline middotl1me5forallscenkouisinCile subjectlDclwIgc
tllinmryopefilteslnr=rscordttPorttlmislm)vary22 Suva Fiji 8AM 6PM l 23-24 At Sea
20 Auckland New Zealand 8AM 6PM ORINOCO RIVERSOUTHERN CARIBBEAN ANDESSOUTH AMERICA 26 Tauranga New Zealand 8AM 7PM 27 At Sea
28 Wellington Newealand 8AM 6PM 16 17 DAYS DAYS 29-30 AtSea
31 Sydney Australia DISEMBARK AM ROYAL PRINCESS ROYAL PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP SANTIAGO from to
FT LAUDERDALE FT LAUDERDALE
200S DEPARTURE DATE2005 DEPARTURE DATE
Mar 7Mar 24
CRUISE IIJNERARYCRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Santiago Chlle (Valparaiso) EMBARK PM
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM
2 La Serena Chile (Coquimbo) 8 AM 5 PM2-3 At Sea 3 At Sea Um6n Costa Rica 7AM 7PM 4 Arica Chile 7AM 6PMCristobal Panama (for Panama Canal) 8AM 5PM o At Sea
6 Cartagena Colombia 9AM 2 PM 6 San Martin Peru (for Pisco and Machu Picchu) 7AM 6PM 7 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 130 PM 7PM 7 Callao Peru (overnight for Lima) 530 AM 8-9 At sea 8 Callao Peru 1PM 10 Puerto Ordaz Venezuela (Orinoco River) 8AM 6PM 9 At Sea
i 11 At Sea 10 Manta Ecuador (overnight for Quito) 530AM 12 Greada 8AM i 11 Manta Ecuador 1lM5PMt 1~ Dolllinlca i 7N1 5 PM 12 At Sea
i 13 Transit Panama C~nal 7AM 430 PM14 St Thomas us Virgilslands 9AM 5PM 14 Cartagena Colombia 8AM 130 PMJs AtSei i 15 Aruba Netherlands intiiles 1PM 7PM 16 Princess Cays Bahamas 8AM 16-17 At Sea Tahiti Polynesia 17 FtLallardale Flillilt~ DISEMBARK AM 1ampmiddot Ft L~uderdale Florida DISEMBARK AM
AMAZON RIVERMEDITERRANEAN
21 DAYS
ROYAL PRINCESS
MANAUS
to ROME
2005 DEPARTURE DATE
Apr 21
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE M~naus Brazil (Wemight onboardship) Manaus Brazil
3 BocadaValeria Brazil (AriiazonRivet) 11 AM 4-6 At Sea 7 Recife Brazil 1 PM 8-11 AtSea 12 Dakar Senegal 8AM 13-14 At Sea 15 Agadir Morocco 7AM 16 Casablanca Morocco (for Marrakech) 8AM 17 Gibraltar lOAM 18 Allcante Spain 12 N 19 Barcelona Spain 8AM 20 Cannes France (for Monte Carlo) 8AM 21 FlorencePisa Italy (Livarno) 7AM 22 Rome Italy (Civitavecchia) DISEMBARK AM
INDIAN OCEANAUSTRALIA
28 DAYS
PACIfIC PRINCESS
CAPE TOWN
to SYDNEY
2004 DEPARTURpound DATE
Oct 20
CRUISE ITINERARY1 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Cape Town South Africa EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 3 East London South Africa 7AM 3PM 4 DurbahSouth Africa 8AM 6PM 5-7 At Sea 8 Nosy BeMadagascar 7AM 4PM 9 At Sea 10 Poilit des Galets Reunioll]slahd 11 Port Louis Mauritius 12c19 At Sea 20 Perth Australia (Fremantle) 21-23 At Sea 24 Adelaide Australla 25 At Sea 26 Melbourne Australla 7 27 Tasmania AUstralia (Burnie) 28 At Sea 29 Sydney Australia DISEMBARK AM
I
DEPART EMBARK PM
7PM 6PM
8pM
5PM
3PM 9PM 6PM 6PM 5PM 7PM 7PM
EXOTICS CRUISES
SOUIB ATIANTICANTARCfICNSOUIB AMERICA
24 DAYS
ROYAL PRINCESS
CAPE TOWN
to SANTIAGO
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
Dec 17
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Cape TownSouthAfrica (overnighfol1board ship) EMBARK PM 2 Cape Town South Africa 3PM 2 if~~t Good HopSCenic Crulsing 3-6 6 Tristan DaCunha United Kingdom 8AM 5PM 7-10 At Sea 11 Falkland Islands (Staliley) 8 AM 5PM 12 At Sea 13-16 Antarctica Peninsula ScehltmiddotCruising 14 days ihcludingmiddot Elephant
Island AntarcticSotind Deceptionlslana GerlacheStrait NaxefChannel Schollaert Channel SigJtla Island and Boyd Strait)
17 At Sea Cape Horn Scenic Cruising1amp UshuaiaArgentina (Tierra del fuego) bull middot6 AM 19 Punta Arenas Chile (Strait of Magellan) 7 AM 20 At Sea Amalia Glacier Scenic Cruising21 At Sea Chilean Fjords Scenic Cruising22 AtSea 23 Puerto Mont Chile 7AM 6PM 24 At Sea 25 Santiago Chile (Valparaiso) DISEMBARK AM
-nmes for1l scenlccruisinc are subJect to change
ASIAINDIAMEDITERRANEAN
30 ROYAL PRINCESSDAYS
ROME
to BANGKOK
2004 DEPARlURE DATE
Sep 16
CRUISE Il INERARY
WEST AFRICASOUTH AMERICA
28 DAYS
PACIFIC PRINCESS
FT LAUDERDALE
to CAPE TOWN
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
51 22
CRUISE ITINERARY
DISEMBARK AM
Aruba
EXOTICS CRU ISES amp CRU ISETOU RS
AUSTRALIANEW ZEALAND CRUISETOUR
AUSTRALIAN EXPLORER 2004 DEPARTURE DATESAPPHIRE21 plus
DAYS PRINCESS SYDNEY Dec 17 to
AUCKLAND CRUISETOUR 5P CRUiSE
CRUISETOUR ITINERARY
DAY PORT By Sea By Land DAY PORT
1 Sydney 14 Fiordland National Park 2 Sydney Scenic Cruising
3 SydneyAyers Rock 15 Dunedin New Zealand (Port Chalmers) 4 Ayers ROek
5 Ayers RockPort Douglas 16 Christchurch New Zealand 6 Port Douglas - (Lytleton)
7 Port DouglasSydneyEmbark 17 Wellilgton New Zealand 8 At Sea 18 At Sea 9 Melbourne Australia 19 Tauranga New Zealand
10 At Sea 20 Bay of Islands New Zealand 11 Tasmania Australia (Hobart) 21 Auckland New Zealand 12middot13 At Sea
Sydney Opera House Australia
AUSTRALIANEW ZEALAND CRUISETOUR SOUTHEAST ASIACHINA CRUISETOUR CAPE HORNSTRAIT OF MAGELLAN CRUISETOUR AUSTRALIAN BEIJING Be TERRA COTTA 2004 DEPARTURE DATES RIO 8t IGUAZU FALLS Post-Crulsetour1 Pre-Crulsetour 217EXPLORER 2005 DEPARTURE DATES PACIFICSAPPHIRE WARRIORS19 plw or PRINCESS jul9t loieifie
DAYS PRINCESS SYDNEY Jan 12 plus 19 ROYAL plw Feb 5 Oct 28 Royal BUENOS AIRES
AUCKLAND DAYS ROYAL PRINCESS to 21 ampto DAYS PRINCESS
BEUING CRUISE t ~~S~i BeWln~~~~e
to SANTIAGO~e~s~Ot~r~ih~fi1BANGKOK CRUiSE CRUISECRUISETOUR 3t3P landtourm~yvlty CRUISETOUR 12
DAY PORT DAY PORT
DAY PORT By Sea ltBy LaDd DAY PORT
1 Beijing 11-12 At Sea 1 Rio de janeiro 11 Cape Horn Scenic Cruising
13 Hong Kong 2 Rio de jneiro c 12 Ushuaia Argentina 14 At Sea 3 RiolgUaiu Falls 12 Beagle Channel Scenlc Cruising
15 Nha Trang Vietnam 4 IIDIilZll FaU$13u~os~re$ 13 Punta Arenas Chile
16 Phu My Vietnam 5 Buens AiresEmbark 14 At Sea 17 At Sea 6 Montevideo Uruguay 15 Seno Eyre Fjord Scenic Cruising 18 Singapore 7 At Sea 16 At Sea 19 Kualtan Malaysia 8 Puerto Madryn Argentina 17 Puerto Montt Chile 20 At Sea 9 At Sea 18 At Sea 21 Bangkok Thail3nd 10 Falkland Islands (Stanley) 19 Santiago Chile
DAY PORT DAY PORT
At Sea Pusan SouthKOrea Nagasaki japan At Sea Shanghai China
Note CnIlst route shown for Royil Princess Oct 28 only Timcsforil1lsccnkoulslngmsubjccttothange
CRUISE [OUR ITINERARY
CRUISETOUR ITINERARY
CRUISrrOlJR ITINERARY Fiordland National Park Scenic Cruising DlUedin New Zealand Christchurch New Zealand Wellington New Zealand
14
GRAND PANAMA CANAL CRUISES
ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL
10 10 11 DAYSDAYS DAYS
CORAL PRINCESS GRAND PRINCESS GRAND PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIPfrom from
fromFT LAUDERDALE GALVESTON GALVESTON
2004 DEPARTURE DATES Oct n 21 31 2004 DEPARTURE DATE
2004 DEPARTURE DATENov 10 20 30middot DeelSmiddot
DedSDec 10 28
2005 DEPARTURE DATES CRUISE ITINERARY Jan 7 17 27
CRUISE ITINERARY Feb 6 16 26 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART MarS 1828 CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Galveston Texas EMBARK PMApr 7 17 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTshy 1 Galveston Texas EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 1 ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 3 Belize City Belize 1 PM 7PM 2-3 At Sea 3 Belize City Belize lPM 7PM 4 Costa Maya Mexico (Mahahual) 8AM 4PM 4 Um6n Costa Rica 7AM rPM 4 Costa Maya Mexico (Mahahual) SAM 4 PM 5 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands 12 PM 7PM 5 Panama Canal (to Gatun Lake) 7AM 430 PM 5 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands 12 PM 7PM 6 Ocho Rios Jamaica SAM 5PM 5 Col6n Panama 5PM 8PM 6 At Sea 7 At Sea 6 At Sea Cristobal Panama 7AM 4PM 8 7AM 4PM 7 Grand Cayman Cayman IslandS 7AM 4PM (fot Panama Canal) ftrtpg~niaa~~) S Corumel Mexico SAM 6PM 8 At Sea 9 At Sea 9 Bclize City Belize 7AM 4 PM 6PM 10 Coromel Mexico lOAM 6 PM9 Cozumel Mexico lOAM 10 At Sea 10 At Sea 11 At Sea
Portordtrllndtlmtsmayvllry 11 flo Lauderdale florida DISEMBARK AM Portorntr IInltf timpoundi may vary 11 Galveston Texas DISEMBARK AM Port ordu and Nmes may vary 12 Galv_es~on Texas DISEMBARK AM
ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL
8 DAYS
CORAL PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP
from
FT LAUDERDALE
2004 DEPARTURE DATE Dec 20
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Fl Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM 2-3 At Sea 4 Lim6n Costa Rica 7AM 7PM 5 Panama Canal (to Gatun Lake) 7 AM 430 PM 5 Co16n Panama 5PM SPM 6 At Sea 7 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands SAM 5PM S At Sea 9 Flo Lauderdale Florida DISEMBARK AM Bridge of the Americas Panama
f OptIonll fOllTS inclld1lI tht AtlllnH to Pacific RlIlllfll) joumq will dlmlldrt tilt ship b) tctdtr lit Gfttlm uk AJkr tour plIssmm dlstmlrark tilt shipwin procmlllat through tilt Gatun Locb lIndjlnlllly dock in Gl6lI Hmal1p41Sl11tmmttydiumlmtheJldlo~ lflrshops IInd~llI toIIrsrrnrl CIItutl14ktlllIrtonlflrJhlp
GRAND PANAMA CANAL CRUISES
GRAND PANAMA CANAL GRAND PANAMA CANAL GRAND PANAMA CANAL
150R 18 150R 1715 DAYS DAYS DAYS
CORAL PRINCESS SUN PRINCESS
REGAL PRINCESS REGAL PRINCESS SUN PRINCESS
DAWN PRINCESS REGAL PRINCESS sail between DAWN PRINCESS
sail between FT LAUDERDALE FT LAUDERDALE sail betweenand
FT LAUDERDALEand SAN DIEGO andLOS ANGELES
SAN FRANCISCO 2004 DEPARTURE DATES 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
DAWN PRINCESS 2004 DEPARTURE DATESNov 24Sp191
CRUISE ITINERARY Dec9t CORAL PRINCESSREGAL PRINCESS 5ltp261 CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE ITINERARY
200S DEPARTURE DATES Dec 24 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
SUN PRINCESS DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARIltPM200S DEPARTURE DATES DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Sep 2StMar 24
3 Ocho Rios Jamaica lOAM 6PM 2-3 At5ea 2 At Sea 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBA8KPM
REGAL PRINCESS AprSt 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBA8KPM Jan stu 200S DEPARTURE DATES2 At Sea4 At Sea 4 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 7AM lPMJan 23 5 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 7AM lPM 3 Ocho Rios Jamaica lOAM 6PM REGAL PRINCESS 5 Cartagena Colombia 9AM 3PMFeb7t 4 At Sea Apr 239AM 3PM 6 Transit Panama Canal 7AM 430 PMFb22 ~ yenr~fte~~~~~~u 7AM 430 PM 5 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 7AM lPM At SeaMar9t CORAL PRINCESS 79AM 3PM8 At Sea Apr 27 8 Puntarenas Costa Rica 7AM 7PMSUN PRINCESS 9 Puntarenas Costa Rica 7 AM 7PM ~ yenr~fte~n~~~~~u 7AM 430 PM 9-10 At SeaApr1S 8 At Sea DAWN PRINCESS10-11 At Sea 11 Acapulco Mexico 8AM 5PM
5PM 9 Puntarenas Costa Rica 7AM 7PM Apr 29H ~ae~lcoMexico 8 AM 12 At SeatllWrryopmllzlfrarnLls~in 10-11 At Sea rmrKfIfikTiIIrttimnma1 tlliJlrraryoptJllllsfrlJflSlmFranrimlJn 13 Cabo San lucas Mexico 8AM 5PM
gt This mUJI C4Jl llfwmblnld wlth a 3 14 Cabo San Lucas Mexico 7 AM lPM H ~e~o Mexico 8AM SPM rmruordrrorttimamG)llIryCoIutar CnUK to VlWOIlllr SC Dqs ThUIltIIIflltllnlltCllIIblntdwilhaZ-day 14-15 At Sea 16lhrlllllhI9lllIbtboobdulaquoSC)lQ4k t Illncral) lIpCutcs in mrmt orm Pllrt IiIIIa CocastaICnliutoVan(ouKrBCDlIys16 16 San Francisco California 7AM 4PMcowtlIrcrllisr IIIIYlIl1Ymiddot IhrounIScankboobdlUaK)lllllluU t~A~geles California 6 AM 5PM 14 Cabo San Lucas Mexico 8AM 5PM
Thllwl1JIIICllllslltMOlIkpilllyJmtcad 17-18 At Sea middotmiddotThliIAfllIllCltlllsatMGnIqclBaylnstcadllf 15 At Sea CPlIilldCI1IIu 17 At Sea o[OdKKwsPurllilllrlmllYWlry OchoRicJsPortllmtslllllYVllfymiddot D1SEMBA8K AM19 Vancouver BC DISEMBA8K AM 16 San Die20 California DlSEMBA8K AM 18 Val1couver BC
GRAND PANAMA CANAL COASTAL CRUISING
2-4 CORAL PRINCESS ISLAND PRINCESS SUN PRINCESS18 DAWN PRINCESS DIAMOND PRINCESS STAR PRINCESSDAYSDAYS
COASTAL CRUISE SCHEDULEREGAL PRINCESS
SHIP DAYS FROM TO DEPARTURE DATE DIAMOND PRINCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 5104
SAN FRANCISCO DIAMOND PRINCES5 4 Vancouver Seattle 5404 to CORAL PRINCESS 2 San Francisco Vancouver 5604
NEW YORK DAWN PRiNCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 5704 ISLAND PRiNCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 51204
2004 DEPARTURE DATE SUN PRINCESS 3 San Francisco Vancouver 51404Aug 24 ISLAND PRiNCESS 3 Vancouver LOI Angeles 91804
DIAMOND PRINCESS 1 Seattle Vancouver 91804CRUISE ITINERARY DIAMOND PRINCESS 6 Vancouver Los Angeles 91904 SAPPHIRE PRINCESS 1 Seattle Vancouver 91904 SAPPHREPRINCESS 2 Vancouver San Francisco 92004 DIAMOND PRINCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 43005 DlAMONDPRiNCES$ 4 Vancouver Seattle 5305 SUN PRINCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 5305
ISLAND PRiNCESS 3 Los Angeles VancOllver 5405 CORAL PRiNCESS 2 San Francisco Vancouver 51205
Coral Princess in the Panama Canal
CRUISE PLUS
Extend your adventure with our Cruise Plusreg program Cruise Plusreg enables you to enhance your vacation with one- to four-night hotel
packages in cities that stand on their own as vacation destinations Add nights in Sydney before you cruise or extend your vacation with nights in the city by the
bay San Francisco Transportation and luggage handling costs from the airport to both hotel and ship plus meet and greet services are always included
Wherever you choose to explore youll enjoy properties that are carefully chosen based on service value location and the peace of mind of knowing that Princess
has arranged it all for you
Anchorage Alaska Trevi Fountain Rome Auckland Harbor New Zealand
The Cruise Plusreg Program is available in over 30 major cities including
MEDITERRANEANAEGEAN EXOTICS PANAMA CANAL Barcelona London Rome and Venice Auckland Bangkok Beijing Buenos Aires Ft Lauderdale Los Angeles New York City
Cape Town Ft Lauderdale Honolulu Los San Diego San Francisco Sanjuan Vancouver NORTHERN EUROPE Angeles Montreal Moorea New York City Copenhagen and London MEXICO CARIBBEANOsaka Papeete Rome San Francisco
Ft Lauderdale Galveston Los AngelesTRANSATLANTIC Santiago Seattle Sydney Vancouver Venice Barcelona Copenhagen Ft Lauderdale San Francisco and San Juan
London New York City and Rome ALASKA Anchorage Calgary Fairbanks Kenai San Francisco Seattle and Vancouver
For more information about options and pricing reference a destination specific brochure or contact your travel agent
TRAVEL THE WORLD WITH THE LEADER IN CRUISINGmiddot Princess
Analysis by the Hawaii Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism Comparing the Economic Impact of Foreign Flag Ships with US Flag Cruise Ships Sailing in Hawaii
This is a summary of an analysis prepared by the Hawai Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism (DBEDT) of the economic impact of the foreign flag cruise ship fleet sailing in Hawaii as compared to each of the US flag ships operating in Honolulu
The comparison is set out below
Foreign Pride Pride Pride
Fleet Of Hawaii Of Aloha Of America
Total economic output impact (spendingsales) ($mil) 155 542 4225 4958
Total earnings impact (labor earnings) ($mil) 44 155 1207 1411
Total employment impact Uobs) 1447 5059 3943 4627
This analysis demonstrates that a single US-flagged ship the Pride of America home ported in Honolulu is 32 times more economically impactful and creates 32 times as many jobs as the entire foreign flag fleet that sails into and out of Hawaii ports of call
Economic Impact of Pride of America
Assumptions 1 Annual impact though Pride of Aloha is leaving in May 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existing Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($) 4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of outputl$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job multiplier (jobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
118700 105
2706 3373
147 042
1372
4958
1417
4627
Data sourcelformula Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Line 1 x line 2 x line 31 000000
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 4 x line 5
Line 4 x line 6
Line 4 x line 7
Economic Impact of Pride of Hawaii
Assumptions
1 Annual impact though Pride of Hawaii is leaving in February 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existing Pride of Aloha and Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($) 4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job multiplier (jobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
Data sourceformula 139770 Actual 2007 figure
975 Actual 2007 figure 2706 Actual 2007 figure 3688 Line 1 x line 2 x line 31000000
147 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model 042 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
1372 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
5421 Line 4 x line 5
1549 Line 4 x line 6
5059 Line 4 x line 7
Economic Impact of Pride of Aloha
Assumptions 1 Annual impact though Pride of Aloha is leaving in May 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existlng Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($)
4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job mUltiplier Oobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
95680 111
2706 2874
147 042
1372
4225
1207
3943
Data sourcelformula Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Line 1 x line 2 x line 31000000
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 4 x line 5
Line 4 x line 6
Line 4 x line 7
lt
Methodology Used in Calculating Impact of International Cruise Ships
Cruise ship visitors 1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Came with ships 3 Flied in 4 Average length of stay (days) 5 PPPD ($) 6 Cruise visitor spending ($mil))
Cruise ship crews 7 Ratio of crew spending to cruise visitor spending 8 Cruise crew spending
Cruisline 9 Ratio of crew spending to cruise visitor spending
10 Cruiseline spending
11 Total cruise-related spending ($mil)
12 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 13 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 14 Job multiplier Uobs$ cruise -related spending)
15 Total output impact ($miJ)
16 Total earnings impact ($miJ)
17 Total employment impact (jobs)
106641 98307
8334 739 847 668
02 134
038 254
1055
147 042
1372
1551
444
1447
Data sourceformula Line 2 + line 3 DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report Line 1 x line 4 x line 5
DBEDT 2003 Cruise study Line 7 x line 6
DBEDT 2003 Cruise study Line 9 x line 6
Line 6 + line 8 + line 10
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 11 x line 12
Line 11 x line 13
Line 11 x line 14
Economic Contributions Foreign-Flag Fleet operating in Hawaii vs Three US-Flag Ships
$1500
Pride of Hawaii$1000- $542 million VIc -0-E c Pride of AlohaCo
423 million$500
Pride of America $496 million155 million$shy
Foreign-Flag US-Flag Fleet Fleet
Source State of Hawaii Department of US-Flag $1460 billion Business Economic Development and Tourism
Foreign-Flag $ 155 million 7292008
Employment Foreign-Flag Fleet operating in Hawaii vs Three US-Flag Ships
15000
10000
til c o Pride of Aloha
39435000
Pride of America 1447 4627
~---------
Foreign-Flag US-Flag Fleet Fleet
Source State of Hawaii Department of US-Flag 13629 jobs Business Economic Development and Tourism
Foreign-Flag 1447 jobs 7292008
Foreign Flag Capacity Growth Foreign flag passenger capacity has changed five-fold on roundtrip Hawaii cruises from the West Coast since enactment of the Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative
1600000
1400000
tn 1200000
J enshyZ
1000000
I shyG) en 800000 s G) tn tn
600000 as D 400000
200000
0 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Year
Source US Maritime Administration (derived from the US Customs and Border Patrol Vessel Entrance and Clearance documents - final 2007 data) 7292008
NCL America Hawaii Economic Contributions
(2004-2008)
bull (in Millions) bull $399 in wages benefits and overtime to US seafarers bull $35 in Federal and State payroll Taxes bull $64 in Government Fees and Taxes to Hawaii bull $28 in wages benefits and overtime to US other employees bull $52 in Port Charges to Hawaii Companies (Stevedores tugs pilots etc) bull $85 in Fuel to Tesoro Hawaii bull $130 for shore excursions to Hawaii tour operators bull $39 for Hawaii hotel rooms and ground transport bull $75 for food grown in Hawaii bull $57 in union fees and levies (incl $32M paid directly by employees) bull $1 in MMD fees to the United States Coast Guard bull $51 for recruitment screening processing and training crew bull $76 advertising and promoting Hawaii as a destination bull $1092
COASTWISE CRUISES INTERPRETIVE RULE RESOLUTION Adopted at the
US Conference of Mayors 76th Annual Meeting
June 20-242008 Miami
WHEREAS the Department of Homeland Securitys Customs and Border Protection (CBP) issued a proposed Interpretive Rule regulating Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises on foreign flagged vessels between US ports of call under the Passenger Vessel Services Act at the request of the United States Maritime Administration and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule would require that a foreign-flagged vessel on a coastwise cruise to call at a foreign port for at least 48 hours with that foreign stop constituting at least 50 percent of the cruise itinerary and allowing passengers to disembark the cruise vessel at the foreign port before continuing the cruise to a US port of call and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule establishes burdensome criteria that are wholly inconsistent with industry practice particularly the 48-hour call at foreign port shyinasmuch as the standard port call is six to eight hours - as well as the requirement that 50 percent of a cruise be spent at the foreign port and
WHEREAS the intent of the proposed Interpretive Rule is to protect the single remaining US flag vessel serving the Inter-Hawaiian Island cruise trade that according to the Hawaii Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism generates more than 4600 jobs and generates nearly $500 million in economic benefits for the state annually and
WHEREAS thousands of members of the International Longshore Workers Union (nWU) are employed at US ports serving cruise ships and whose jobs would be at risk if the proposed Interpretive Rule were implemented and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule is vague as to the breadth of its application ie to coastwise cruises between all United States ports or applied solely to coastwise cruises from West Coast ports to Hawaii and
WHEREAS the Cruise Lines International Association estimates the proposed Interpretive Rule would upend the $17 billion in national cruise industry spending and put at risk more than 300000 jobs generated by the international cruise industry including jobs held by nWU at US ports and the local allied industries supporting the cruise industry and
Executive Order Submissions Under Review
II Reglnfogov Where to ind Federal Regulatory Information -~
Home ] Lnitied Agenda and Regulator) Ilan pound012866 Regulator) Review Jnformalion Collection Review
EO 12866 Regulatory Rlvlw dvanced Search IJitorical RepWI Review Counh Jriter XIL
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA)
Executive Order Submissions Under Review July 25 2008 - _------------____ _shy
Department of Homeland Security
AGENCY DHS-TSA RIN 1652-AA53
TITLE Large Aircraft Security Program Other Aircraft Operator Security Programs and Airport Operator Security Program
STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT Yes RECEIVED DATE 06302008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
AGENCY DHS-USCIS RIN Llti15-AB67 TITLE Changes to Requirements Affecting H-2B Nonimmigrants and Their Employers
STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT No RECEIVED DATE 06092008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
AGENCY DHS-USCBP RIN 1651AA11 TITLE Issuance of a Visa and Authorization for Temporary Admission Into the United States for Certain Nonimmigrant Aliens Afflicted W HIV Infection
STAGE Final Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT No RECEIVED DATE 03042008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
-_RE_V-IE-W-E-X-T-EN-D-E-D---------- _
AGENCY DHS-USCBP RIN 1651-AA76 TITLE Coastwise Transportation of Passengers STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT Yes RECEIVED DATE 07142008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
Disclosure I Accessibility I Privacy Policy I Contact Us
httpwwwreginfogovpublicdoeoReviewSearch 7252008
View Rule Page 11
Shere D find Federal ReguLatory InformciiorlReglnfogov Home J Cnified Agenda al1d Regulatory Plan EO 12866 Regulatory Reyiew Information Collection Reiew
Current rnified Agenda and Regulatory Plan Historical Pnified Agenda and Regulatory Plan Search
View Rule
DHSIUSCBP RIN 1651-AA76 Publication ill Spring 2008
Title llCoastwise Transportation of Passengers
Abstract This interim rule amends the Department of Homeland Securitys (DHS) current regulations relating to the transportation of passengers by non-coastwise-qualified vessels on voyages that begin and end at a US port and stop at intervening US and foreign port(s) Under this interim final rule voyages that begin and end at a US port and stop at a foreign port(s) and at intervening US port(s) where a large USshyflag coastwise-qualified passenger vessel engages in regular service are in violation of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) unless the cumulative length of stay(s) at intervening foreign port(s) is more than 50 percent of the total amount of time spent at the intervening US port(s) and passengers are permitted to go ashore at the foreign port(s) The purpose of this amendment is to ensure that the Congressional purpose in enacting the PVSA which is to preserve the economic benefits of US coastwise trade to US-flag coastwise-qualified vessels is properly implemented
Agency Department of Homeland Security(DHS) Priority Substantive Nonsignificant
KIN Status First time published in the Unified Agenda Agenda Stage of Rulemaking Final Rule Stage
Major No Unfunded Mandates No
CFR Citation -LCER 4J~)(h)(plusmnJ
Legal Authority 5JJSS_30J12lJ-SClt16 J9_lJiCJ 431 9_L1C1plusmn3JJ2JScHJ1J2JSCJ624 L(LlLSc207LIl(gtJfHgt~ _CiQJ _46lSC 6QLQ~
Legal Deadline None
Timetable Action Date FR Cite
Interim Final Action 0510012008
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required No Government Levels Affected None
Federalism No
Included in the Regulatory Plan No
RIN Data Printed in the FR No
Agency Contact Glen E Vereb Chief Entry Procedures and Carriers Branch Department of Homeland Security US Customs and Border Protection Office of Regulations and Rulings 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington DC 20229 Phone202572-8730
Disclosure I Accessibility I Privacy Policy I Contact Us
httpwwwreginfogovpublicdoeAgendaViewRuleruleID=286751 7128120
Federal RegisterVol 72 No 224Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules 65487
SPECULATIVE POSITION LIMITS 1-Continued [In contract units)
Contract
Soybeans and Mini-Soybeans 2
Wheat and Mini-Wheat 2 bullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbull
Soybean Oil
SingleSpot month All monthsmonth
600 8600 13300 600 11100 14500 540 6600 8600
Soybean Meal 720 5500 7100
Minneapolis Grain Exchange
Hard Red Spring Wheat I 600 I 11100 I 14500
New York Board of Trade
Cotton No2 I 300 I 5300 I 7300
Kansas City Board of Trade
Hard Winter Wheat I 600 I 11100 I 14500
1 For purposes of compliance with these limits positions in a futures contract that shares ~ubstantially identical terms with a contract market enumerated herein including a futures contract that is cash-settled based on the settlement price of an enumerated contract market shall be agshygregated with positions in the enumerated contract market
2 For purposes of compliance with these limits positions in the regular-sized and mini-sized contracts shall be aggregated
Issued by the Commission this November 152007 in Washington DC David Stawick Secretary of the Commission [FR Doc E7-22681 Filed 11-20-07 845 amI BILLING CODE 6351-Q1-P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Bureau of Customs and Border Protection
19 CFR Part 4
[USCBP-2007-o098]
Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises
AGENCY Customs and Border Protection Department of Homeland Security ACTION Proposed interpretation solicitation of comments
SUMMARY This document proposes new criteria to be used by Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to determine whether non-coastwise-qualified vessels are in violation ofthe Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) when engaging in cruise itineraries in which passengers board at a US port the vessel calls at several Hawaiian ports and then the vessel proceeds to a foreign port or ports for a brief period before ultimately returning to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their cruise CBP believes these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because it appears that the primary objective of the foreign stop is evasion of the PVSA
DATES Comments must be received on or before December 212007 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT Glen E Vereb Cargo Security Carriers amp Immigration Branch Office of International Trade (202) 572-8730 ADDRESSES You may submit comments identified by docket number by one of the following methods
bull Federal eRulemaking Portal http wwwregulationsgov Follow the instructions for submitting comments
bull Mail Border Security Regulations Branch Office of International Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
I Public Participation
Interested persons are invited to participate in this proposed interpretation by submitting written data views or arguments on all aspects of the proposed interpretation Customs and Border Protection (CBP) also invites comments that relate to the economic environmental or federalism effects that might result from this proposed interpretation Comments that will provide the most assistance to CBP in developing these procedures will reference a specific portion of the proposed interpretation explain the reason for any recommended change and include data information or authority that support such recommended change
Instructions All submissions received must include the agency name and docket number for this proposed
interpretation All comments received will be posted without change to http wwwregulationsgov including any personal information provided
Docket For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received go to http wwwregulationsgov Submitted comments may also be inspected on regular business days between the hours of 9 am and 430 pm at the Office of International Trade Customs and Border Protection 799 9th Street NW 5th Floor Washington DC Arrangements to inspect submitted documents should be made in advance by calling Mr Joseph Clark at (202) 572shy8768
II Background
The maritime cabotage law governing the transportation of passengers was first established by section 8 of the Passenger Vessel Services Act of June 191886 (the PVSA) 24 Stat 81 as amended by section 2 of the Act of February 17 1898 30 Stat 248 formerly codified at 46 USC App 289 (now codified at 46 USC 55103) 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 of $200 (now $300 as promulgated in TD 03-11 pursuant to the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 199028 USC 2461 note) for each passenger so transported and landed
The intent of the maritime cabotage laws including the PVSA was to provide a legal structure that guarantees a coastwise monopoly to
65488 Federal RegisterVol 72 No 224Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules
American shipping and thereby promotes development of the American merchant marine Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 28 (DC Cir 1984) see also The Granada 35 FSupp 892 8931940 AMC 1601 (DC Pa 1940) (stating that the legislative aim of section 289 [now 55102] was the creation of a practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping business for United States ships) In other words the PVSA was enacted to advance the United States merchant marine and fleet by restricting the use of foreign-ownedflagged passenger vessels in United States territorial waters
Passenger vessel transportation between United States ports has historically been viewed to be part of the coastwise trade after the enactment of the PVSA This view is premised on the concepts of continuity of the voyage and whether its intended purpose or objective was coastwise transportation In other words the PVSA was held to be violated if the coastwise movement was continuous or if the purpose of the trip was a coastwise voyage (See 18 OAG 445 September 4 1886 28 OAG 204 February 16 1910 29 OAG 318 February 12 1912 30 OAG 44 February 1 1913 34 OAG 340 December 24 1924 and 36 OAG 352 August 13 1930)
The CBP regulations promulgated pursuant to the PVSA are found at section 480a of title 19 of the Code of Federal Regulations (19 CFR 480a) and are reflective of the above cited Office of the Attorney General decisions These regulations provide among other things that a non-coastwise-qualified vessel which embarks a passenger at a port in the United States embraced within the coastwise laws (a coastwise port) will be deemed to have landed that passenger in violation of the PVSA if the passenger disembarks at a different coastwise port on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a nearby foreign port or ports (as defined in 19 CFR 480a(a)(2) see also 19 CFR 480a(b)(2)) The terms embark and disembark are words of art which are defined as going on board a vessel for the duration of a specific voyage and leaving a vessel at the conclusion of a specific voyage respectively (See 19 CFR 480a(a)(4))
The references in section 480a to nearby foreign ports (defined in 19 CFR 480a(a)(2)) are the results of attempts by CBP to apply an Office of the Attorney Generals opinion dated February 26 1910 (28 OAG 204) In that case a foreign-flag vessel transported 615 passengers on a voyage around the world beginning in New
York and concluding in San Francisco The Attorney General opined that since the primary object of the voyage was to visit various parts of the world on a pleasure tour returning home via California and not to be transported in domestic commerce the transportation was not in violation of the PVSA
The 1910 Attorney Generals opinion was extended to voyages that included foreign ports other than nearby foreign ports (See Treasury Decision (TD) 68shy285 (33 FR 16558) November 14 1968) However voyages solely to one or more coastwise ports have always been considered predominantly coastwise Therefore non-coastwise-qualified vessels engaging in such a voyage where passengers temporarily go ashore at a coastwise port have been deemed to have violated the PVSA
m Current Law and Policy Pursuant to Public Law 109-304 120
Stat 1632 enacted on October 6 2006 Title 46 United States Code was substantially reorganized and recodified Consequently the PVSA is now codified at 46 USC 55103 and provides that no vessel shall transport passengers between ports or places in the United States either directly or by way of a foreign port under a penalty of $300 for each person so transported and landed except one that (1) Is wholly owned by citizens of the United States for purposes of engaging in the coastwise trade and (2) has been issued a certificate of documentation with a coastwise endorsement or is exempt from documentation but would otherwise be eligible for such a certificate and endorsement
In 2003 Congress enacted Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II Section 211 for the purpose of revitalizing the oceangoing US-flag cruise industry in Hawaii (the 2003 Act) Three oceangoing US-flag cruise ships PRIDE OF ALOHA PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAII were documented with coastwise privileges pursuant to the 2003 Act These vessels entered regular service in Hawaii in 2004 2005 and 2006 respectively and pursuant to the express language of the 2003 Act are limited in their operation to providing regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands of Hawaii
The CBP regulations promulgated pursuant to the PVSA are set forth in 19 CFR 480a and have remained unchanged throughout both the recodification of Title 46 of the United States Code and the enactment of the 2003 Act They provide that a violation of the PVSA occurs when passengers embark (board a vessel for the
duration of a voyage) a non-coastwiseshyqualified vessel at one US port and disembark (leave the vessel at the conclusion of a voyage) at a different US port unless they proceed with the vessel to a distant foreign port (Le any port not considered a nearby foreign port which is defined as any port located in North America Central America Bermuda or the West Indies including the Bahamas) Currently these regulations do not contain specific criteria for non-coastwise-qualified vessels on itineraries including US ports and either nearby or distant foreign ports in order for such foreign port calls to be compliant with the PVSA
To reiterate the applicable CBP regulations provide that the PVSA is violated when a non-coastwise-qualified vessel transports a passenger on a voyage solely to one or more coastwise ports and the passenger disembarks or goes ashore temporarily at a coastwise port (19 CFR 480a(b)(1)) Furthermore a violation of the PVSA also occurs when a non-coastwise-qualified vessel transports a passenger on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a nearby foreign port or ports (but no other foreign port) and the passenger disembarks at a coastwise port other than the port of embarkation (19 CFR 480a(b)(2)) However there is no violation of the PVSA when a passenger is on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a distant foreign port or ports (whether or not the voyage includes a nearby foreign port or ports) and the passenger disembarks at a coastwise port provided the passenger has proceeded with the vessel to a distant foreign port (19 CFR 480a(b)(3))
IV Request From MARAD To Provide Guidance
The US Department of Transportation Maritime Administration (MARAD) has requested that CBP take action to ensure enforcement of the PVSA MARAD has asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreignshyflag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwiseshyqualified cruise ship operators
In April of 2007 the operator of the three US-flag cruise vessels operating solely in Hawaii pursuant to the 2003 Act announced their intent to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAIl from the Hawaii market and redeploy her to Europe The operator intends to re-flag the vessel to foreign registry directly resulting in the loss of over 1100 crewmember jobs The primary reason cited for this decision is the rapid increase in foreign-flag competition entering the Hawaii market
Federal Register I Vol 72 No 224 I Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules 65489
from the West Coast This competition is evidenced in published cruise itineraries of foreign-flag carriers offering a variety of round trip cruises that depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period usually in the early morning and ultimately return to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their cruise These cruises are often marketed as Hawaii cruises and except for the brief stop in the nearby foreign port of Ensenada are purely coastwise in nature It is these cruise itineraries that pose an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels that pursuant to the 2003 Act are currently engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands
V Preliminary Notice
In response to MARADs concerns CBP sent letters to two carriers known to operate the itineraries in question as well as to the Cruise Lines International Association Inc stating that CBP believes that these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because it appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA The letters further indicated that CBP is taking steps to publish this position
VI CBPs Proposed Interpretive Rule Accordingly in this document CBP is
proposing to provide that cruise itineraries for non-qualified coastwise vessels which allow passengers to board at a US port call at several Hawaiian ports proceed to a foreign port or ports for a brief period and then ultimately return to the original US port of embarkation for disembarkation are not consistent with the PVSA and the regulations promulgated pursuant thereto Specifically CBP interprets a voyage to be solely to one or more coastwise ports even where it stops at a foreign port unless the stop at the foreign port is a legitimate object of the cruise CBP will presume that a stop at a foreign port is not a legitimate object of the cruise unless
(1) The stop lasts at least 48 hours at the foreign port
(2) The amount of time at the foreign port is more than 50 percent of the total amount of time at the US ports of call and
(3) The passengers are permitted to go ashore temporarily at the foreign port
Accordingly CBP proposes to adopt an interpretive rule under which it will presume that any cruise itinerary that does not include a foreign port call that
satisfies each of these three criteria constitutes coastwise transportation of passengers in violation of 19 CFR 480a(b)(1)
Dated November 16 2007 W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection [FR Doc E7-22788 Filed 11-20-07 845 am] BILLING CODe 9111-14-1
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau
27 CFR Part 9
[Notice No 76]
RIN 1513-AB49
Proposed Establishment of the Leona Valley Viticultural Area (2007R-281 P)
AGENCY Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau Treasury ACTION Notice of proposed rulemaking
SUMMARY The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau proposes to establish the 134 square mile Leona Valley viticultural area in the northeast part of Los Angeles County California We designate viticultural areas to allow vintners to better describe the origin of their wines and to allow consumers to better identify wines they may purchase We invite comments on this proposed addition to our regulations DATES We must receive written comments on or before January 22 2008
ADDRESSES You may send comments on this notice to one of the following addresses
bull httpwwwregulationsgov (Federal e-rulemaking portal follow the instructions for submitting comments) or
bull Director Regulations and Rulings Division Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau PO Box 14412 Washington DC 20044-4412
See the Public Participation section of this notice for specific instructions and requirements for submitting comments and for information on how to request a public hearing
You may view copies of this notice selected supporting materials and any comments we receive about this proposal at httpwwwregulationsgov under Docket No 2007-0066 You also may view copies of this notice all related petitions maps or other supporting materials and any comments we receive about this
proposal by appointment at the TTB Information Resource Center 1310 G Street NW Washington DC 20220 To make an appointment call 202-927shy2400
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT NA Sutton Regulations and Rulings Division Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau 925 Lakeville S1 No 158 Petaluma CA 94952 phone 415shy271-1254 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
Background on Viticultural Areas
TTB Authority Section 105(e) of the Federal Alcohol
Administration Act (FAA Act) 27 USC 205(e) authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to prescribe regulations for the labeling of wine distilled spirits and malt beverages The FAA Act provides that these regulations should among other things prohibit consumer deception and the use of misleading statements on labels and ensure that labels provide the consumer with adequate information as to the identity and quality of the product The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) administers the regulations promulgated under the FAA Act
Part 4 ofthe TTB regulations (27 CFR part 4) allows the establishment of definitive viticultural areas and the use of their names as appellations of origin on wine labels and in wine advertisements Part 9 of the TTB regulations (27 CFR part 9) contains the list of approved viticultural areas
Definition Section 425(e)(1)(i) ofthe TTB
regulations (27 CFR 425(e)(1)(i)) defines a viticultural area for American wine as a delimited grape-growing region distinguishable by geographical features the boundaries of which have been recognized and defined in part 9 of the regulations These designations allow vintners and consumers to attribute a given quality reputation or other characteristic of a wine made from grapes grown in an area to its geographic origin The establishment of viticultural areas allows vintners to describe more accurately the origin of their wines to consumers and helps consumers to identify wines they may purchase Establishment of a viticultural area is neither an approval nor an endorsement by TTB of the wine produced in that area
Requirements Section 425(e)(2) of the TTB
regulations outlines the procedure for proposing an American viticultural area and provides that any interested party
Us Department ofHomelaDd Secmity Washington DC 10229
bull ~
US Customs and Border Protection
AUG 15 2fXJJ
VE5-3-02-QTRRBSTCCCI - ti015502-GG-
Mr leon Sutcliffe Director Port Operations Camivai Cruise Unes Camival Place 3655 NW 87Avenue Miami Aorlda 33178
RE P~nger Vessef Services Ad Coastwise Transportation 46 USC sect 55103 19 CFR sect 480a(b)
Dear Mr Sutcliffe
As you know US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) enforces the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) codified at TItle 46 United States Code section 55103 (46 USC 55103) This statute prohibits non-coastwise-qualifled vessels (ie those vessels not US-buill owned and documented with a coastwise endorsement) from transporting passengers between porls or places within the United States The regUlations promUlgated pursuant to the PVSA are found at TrtJe 19 Code of Federal Regulations section 4808 (19 CFR 4808)
It has come to our attention that passenger vessels of your company are engaging in cruise itineraries that include ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands Two USAlagged coastwise-endorsed passenger vessefs are also currenUy engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of caD wittlin the Hawaiian Islands
As part of your cruise itineraries some of your foreign-flagged vessels depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period and ultimately rebJm to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their endse For example the MS ZAANDAM of Holand America Lines departs San Diego cruises the Hawaiian Islands stops in Ensenada from 800pm to 11 OOpmbull and returns to san Diego CBP believes these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because It appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA -- - - ~~~------
Please be advised that CBP is taking steps to publish this position Should have any questions pertaining to this matter please contact Mr Glen Vereb Chief Cargo Security Carriers and Immigration Branch at (202) 572-8724
Sincerely
F Jl E EST Y LEe A U I 5 I N Gmiddot
December 21 2007
The Honorable W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection co Border Security Regulations Branch Office ofInternational Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229
Re Hawaii Coastwise Cruises (USCBP-2007-0098) Comments in Response to Proposed Interpretation
Dear Commissioner Basham
NCL America Inc1 (NCLA) submits these comments in support ofthe efforts ofCustoms and Border Protection to enforce the Passenger Vessel Services Act and the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative as applied to Hawaii coastwise cruises
1 Introduction and Summary of Position
NCLA operates three large oceangoing US flag cruise ships in Hawaii These ships are documented under US flag and are required to operate in regular service in Hawaii pursuant to the authority of the Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative a 2003 federal statute intended to revitalize the US flag cruise industry and to maximize economic and national security benefits to the United States (the 2003 Act)
NCLA has invested $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships pursuant to the 2003 Act and in direct reliance on the protections of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) and its proper enforcement The PVSA limits the transportation ofpassengers between US ports to coastwise documented US flag ships Its statutory protections recognize that US flag ships have significantly higher operational costs in part because they are subject to more stringent US laws including US labor laws and federal
1 NCL America Inc is a US corporation incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware headquartered in Honolulu Hawaii As a US corporation it is subject to US taxes at both the federal and state level The Chief Executive Officer the Chairman of the Board and all of the Board of Directors of NCL America are US citizens The company is also subject to US labor and employment laws and is required by statute to maintain a workforce comprised primarily ofUS citizens
700 Bishop St SUite 900 I Honolulu HawMi 96813 I Tel 8085273800 Fax 8085273820 I ndcom
2
income tax among others The NCLA ships operating in Hawaii are the only large oceangoing cruise ships operating under US flag In furtherance of the policy goals of the PVSA and the 2003 Act these ships have created over 4000 seafaring jobs all subject to US minimum wage and other labor statutes
Since 2003 there has been a significant increase in capacity in the Hawaii market from foreign flag ships providing cruise service to Hawaii from the West Coast Many of these foreign flag cruises are marketed as Hawaii cruises and consist entirely ofUS ports ofcall with the sole exception of a token stop in Mexico for as little as an hour late at night under circumstances where passengers are not permitted to get offthe ship There are no reported rulings approving these particular foreign flag itineraries
Lower cost foreign competition in the Hawaii market has unfairly hurt NCLAs operations NCLA has incurred substantial losses which have contributed significantly to its decision earlier this year to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAll from US flag and reshydeploy it foreign Unfair foreign competition poses an imminent threat to the remaining US flag passenger vessels operating in the Hawaii trades pursuant to the 2003 Act
As the agency statutorily charged with implementation of the 2003 Act the US Department ofTransportation Maritime Administration (MARAn) is aware of the threat foreign flag Hawaii itineraries pose to the US flag fleet and brought the situation to the attention ofthe US Department ofHomeland Security Bureau ofCustoms and Border Protection (CBP or Customs) Customs determined that the primary object of these itineraries was coastwise and that the Ensenada stop was an evasion of the PVSA
In August 2007 Customs provided written notice to the affected foreign lines and their trade association that the existing itineraries were contrary to the PVSA None of these lines sought advance rulings even after the Customs notice with respect to their Hawaii itineraries pursuant to Customs regulations and many continued to market the itineraries as Hawaii cruises NCLA supports the efforts ofCustoms and MARAD to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act for Hawaii cruises
2 Statutory Authority for Customs Proposed Interpretation
(a) Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA)
Congress passed the PVSA in 1886 to protect the US maritime transportation industry from foreign competition2 Protection is afforded through penalty assessments on foreign vessels transporting passengers between US ports or places directly or by way ofa foreign port 3 As Congress and the courts have recognized coastwise protections for the US maritime transportation industry are only one dimension of the PVSA Operating in conjunction with other coastwise laws and with the US
2 See United States v Honduran SS GRANADA 35 F Supp 892 894 (BD Pa 1940)(citing purpose of PVSA to meet threats to the practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping which was to be preserved for US ships)
46 USc sect 55103 (originally 46 USC App 289)
3
documentation laws the PVSA also enhances military sealift in times ofnational emergency sustains a US merchant marine and supports the US shipbuilding and repair industry4
(b) Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative (the 2003 Act)
Over the past decade Congress has sought to reinforce the goals of the PVSA by providing mechanisms to revitalize the oceangoing US flag cruise fleet particularly in Hawaii The Project America legislation enacted in 1997 authorized among other things the re~flagging ofone existing cruise ship contingent on the operator contracting for the construction oftwo new oceangoing cruise shipss Following the default of the operator under the original contract Congress enacted the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative for the purpose ofrecovering economic and national security benefits to the United States bull 6 These same goals of the original PVSA were expressly referenced in the legislative history of the 2003 Act which emphasized that these ships will be assets available in time ofnational emergency and will significantly expand the pool ofqualified seafarers upon which the US Department ofDefense relies to crew non-combatant vessels
The 2003 Act authorizes the US documentation ofthree cruise ships for operation in regular service in Hawaii subject to certain conditions including a prohibition on operating in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico and the Caribbean Sea and a requirement that all vessel repair work be undertaken in the United States MARAD is charged with implementation of the 2003 Act
3 Customs Implementation of PVSA
(a) Regulations
The current regulations implementing the PVSA were published by Customs in 19858 The growth of the foreign flag cruise industry in North America and in particular the development of the Alaska cruise market led to an effort in 1984 to amend the thenshyexisting regulations to increase the ease of administration and operational flexibility The effort to change the regulation had support from US port interests who saw benefit in the potential increase in the number ofUS ports that foreign vessels could call and was opposed by proponents ofpotential US flag projects as detrimental to efforts to revitalize the US fleet 9 The preamble to the 1985 rule emphasized that it was of paramount importance to consider the primary object ofpassengers in taking a
4 See American Hawaii Cruises v Skinner 713 F Supp 452 457 (DDC 1989) (recognizing the contribution of the PVSA and the Jones Act in helping to secure national defense by maintaining a merchant marine oftbe best equipped and most suitable types ofvessels sufficient to serve in time of war or national emergency) see also Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 30 (DC Cir 1984) Wirth Ltd v SIS Acadia Forest 537 F2d 1272 1281 n32 (5th Cir 1976) S Public Law 105-56 Section 8109 (111 Stat 1203 1244) (Oct 81997 ) 6 Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II General Provisions - Department ofCommerce Section 211 (117 Stat 1179) (Feb 20 2003) 1 149 Cong Rec S1118 (dailyed Jan 17 2003(statement ofSenator Inouye) 8 19 CFR sect 480a 950 Fed Reg 26981 (July I 1985)
4
voyage10 a concept which is reinforced elsewhere in Customs regulations11 In its analysis of the comments received at the time Customs accepted the view ofport interests that the modified rule would help their business but did so recognizing the absence ofa regular salt water US flag passenger fleet Customs acknowledged the potential harm to prospective efforts to revitalize the US flag passenger fleet and expressly cautioned that if it were ever shown that coastwise qualified vessels in competition with foreign vessels were in fact hurt by the modified Customs regulation then Customs would immediately reconsider its position12
(b) Customs Rulings
Given the significant penalties associated with violating the PVSA13 Customs regulations expressly provide a mechanism for the owner or charterer of a foreign vessel or any other interested person to request an advisory ruling as to whether a contemplated voyage would be considered in violation of the PVSA14 Customs regulations provide that vessel operators can rely on these ruling letters only to the extent that the facts and circumstances are identical to those in the ruling letter IS
Notwithstanding the fact that several foreign cruise lines offer Hawaii itineraries originating in a US mainland port and calling at Hawaii ports with a token intervening stop in Mexico there are no reported rulings expressly approving such an itinerary for these foreign cruise lines 16
4 The Cruise Industry in Hawaii
(a) NCL America Returns US flag to the Oceangoing Passenger Fleet
Pursuant to the requirements ofthe 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative NCLA agreed to promote US-flag cruising enhance military sealift capacity and expand the US maritime labor base No other major cruise line had ever undertaken such a commitment to the US flag and the public policy objectives Congress sought to achieve under the PVSA or the 2003 Act Introduction ofPRIDE OF ALOHA in 2004 was a significant development in the maritime industry because it marked the restoration ofthe
10 Id at 26983 11 Customs Regulations include a provision on the effect ofruling letters and with respect to carrier rulings the applicable regulation refers to rulings setting forth a determination as to whether or not the primary object of a contemplated voyage is coastwise transportation in violation of46 USC sect 289 [pYSA codified at 46 USC sect55103] 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 12 50 Fed Reg at 26983 13 A modem cruise ship with 2400 passengers for example would be subject to a fine of$720OOO per cruise based on the statutory penalty of$300 for each passenger transported in violation of the Act 14 19 CFR sect 480a(d) IS 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 16 There is one older reported mling involving a request to drop the Ensenada port call from a Los AngeleslHawaiiLos Angeles itinerary which Customs held would violate the PYSA In dicta Customs acknowledged that the itinerary could be in compliance if the Ensenada call were not dropped but did not address the issue ofwhether a one hour service call where no passengers depart the vessel would be sufficient The carrier that obtained that ruling has since left the Hawaii market See Customs Ruling HQ 114078 re Crystal Hannony (Nov 4 1997)
5
us flag to the oceangoing cruise industry A contemporaneous press release from the Us Department ofTransportation reported that the three US-flag cruise ships to be introduced pursuant to the 2003 Act were expected to create more than 20000 US jobs generate more than $825 million ofexpenditures in the US economy and create nearly $360 million in federal tax revenue by the end of 200717 In 2005 the PRIDE OF AMERICA was introduced and in 2006 the third vessel PRIDE OF HAWAll was introduced to Hawaii Both the PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAIl offer 7shyday inter-island Hawaii itineraries whereas PRIDE OF ALOHA operates on 7 and 10 day cruises exclusively among the islands ofHawaii as well as 11 day cruises that include a foreign port call at Fanning Island To date NCLA has invested over $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships in furtherance ofthe policy objectives of the PVSA and the 2003 Act These ships employ over 4000 seafarers and generate hundreds ofmillions of dollars in benefits for Hawaii and the nation
(b) Significant Increase in Foreign Flag Capacity Since 2003
The most significant change in the Hawaii cruise market since 2003 has been the dramatic increase in capacity A significant portion ofthis capacity increase is directly attributable to NCLAs fulfillment ofthe Congressional mandate in the 2003 Act However foreign-flag operations in the Hawaii market as measured in passenger nights18 have skyrocketed Based on MARAn data derived from the US Customs Border Patrol Vessel Entrance and Clearance documents the passenger nights for foreign flag vessels departing from the West Coast to Hawaii on round trip cruise have increased several hundredfold during this period19 See Exhibit A
(c) NCLA Has Incurred Substantial Losses During this Period
Since 2004 NCLA has lost cumulatively more than a quarter ofa billion dollars A principal reason for these losses has been the increase in foreign capacity in this market NCLA has taken significant steps to reduce costs to address the increase in foreign competition but NCLA is at an inherent disadvantage when competing against foreign companies that are not subject to US labor laws US tax laws and other laws Ofcourse the statutory protections of the PVSA are intended to address these very issues That is why Customs immediate action to implement the proposed interpretation is critical for the US flag fleet Regrettably NCLA has already been forced to reduce overall capacity early next year with the withdrawal ofPRIDE OF HAWAlI to another
17 DOT Press Release dated June 72004 see also DOT Press Release dated August 132004 in connection with visit to PRIDE OF ALOHA by US Transportation Secretary Norman Y Mineta 11 Passenger nights (also referred to as passenger capacity days) are calculated by multiplying the number ofpassengers per vessel by the number ofcruise days in each itinerary by the number of cruises This is the unit ofmeasurement employed by MARAn In contrast passenger bed supply (also referred to as passenger capacity) data reflects only the number ofberths per vessel multiplied by the number of cruises and hence understates the market by excluding the full economic value ofthe cruise perfonned 19 In 2003 the total number ofpassenger nights for round-trip West Coast to Hawaii cruises was 303325 which jumped by 353 to 1072329 in 2006 and by 430 to 1304546 from 2003 to 2007 (The 2007 figure is based on MARAD data for six months and a1ll1ualized by published itineraries for the balance of the year)
6
market for operation under foreign flag This move alone will result in the loss ofover 1000 American seafaring jobs
5 Customs Proposed Interpretation is Necessary to Further the Important National Security and Public Policy Objectives Embodied in Federal Law
As Customs has properly noted the increase in foreign competition in the Hawaii trades in contravention of the PVSA pose[s] an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels[] As the operator of these ships NCLA has a vested interest in protecting the jobs ofthe thousands ofAmerican crewmembers and cruise ship service providers who support these vessels NCLA also has an interest in protecting the substantial economic investment it has made to revitalize the US flag passenger vessel fleet But a balancing of interests in the context of Customs enforcement ofexisting law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act requires a much broader focus
The legislative history of the 2003 Act expressly recognized the national security and public policy import ofestablishing a US flag passenger vessel fleet as a means to maintain the countrys preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool of qualified seafarers and as a means to help sustain a fleet ofUS-flag vessels to su~ort
the nations military and maritime industrial base for times ofnational emergency
Congress understood the importance ofestablishing a viable US flag cruise ship fleet as something larger than the vessels themselves These national security and public policy objectives must be weighed in the balance as Customs assesses how best to interpret its rules to give effect to the PVSA and the 2003 Act
6 Customs Should Clarify that the Proposed Interpretation is Limited to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades and Adopt Reasonable Measures to Ensure Sufficient Foreign Content
Since publication ofthe proposed interpretative rule several commenters have observed that the scope of the proposed interpretation is ambiguous because the language of Section VI referencing any cruise itinerary appears broader than the caption Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises and the entire discussion in the published notice which focuses exclusively on US-flag coastwise vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA agrees that the proposed interpretation should be clarified so that its scope is limited to vessels operating roundtrip voyages from US ports that include Hawaii port calls
NCLA supports the concept reflected in the proposed interpretive rule that round trip Hawaii itineraries from US ports on foreign ships must include a material and measurable degree ofoverall foreign port content as compared to US port content
20 149 Congo Rec S1117 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)
7
(a) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is also Consistent with Subsequent Congressional Enactments Modifying the PVSA
As discussed above it is well established that the PVSA was designed toRrotect US-flag vessels from foreign competition in the coastwise and domestic trades 1
Subsequent legislative enactments however have appropriately differentiated among distinct geographic markets and trades including Canada Alaska Puerto Rico and Hawaii based on the existence or non-existence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
In 1938 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers by Canadian passenger vessels on Lake Ontario and the St Lawrence River until such time as passenger service shall be established by vessels of the United States22 Similarly in 1961 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers on Canadian vessels within Alaska or between Alaska and other points in the United States until such time as passenger service is established by vessels ofthe United States23
In 1984 Congress modified the application ofthe PVSA to pennit the transportation ofpassengers between Puerto Rico and other United States ports on foreign-flag vessels24 As with the other statutory exceptions this provision is qualified and expires [o]n a showing that a United States passenger vessel qualified to engage in the coastwise trade is offering or advertising passenger service between a port in Puerto Rico and another port in the United States2S
Congress acted again with respect to the application of the PVSA with the 2003 Act in which it authorized three vessels that did not meet the US-build requirements of the PVSA to operate as modem US-flagged cruise ships in regular service in Hawaii26 The 2003 Act imposes a specific geographic limitation on the operation of any ship documented under this authority to operations only in regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands ofHawaii and shall not transport passengers in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico or the Caribbean Sea except in certain limited circumstances27 As above the limited nature of the 2003 Act is express it is strictly limited to the large ocean-going cruise ships and then only those operating in the regular Hawaii service where there are no US-flag operations28
21 See Act ofJune 19 1886 c 421 sec 8 24 Stat 81 Act of February 171898 c 26 sec 2 30 Stat 248 22 S] Res 174 75th Cong 52 Stat 223 (Alp 251938) codified at46 USC sect 55121(a) 23 See Pub L 87-77 75 Stat 196 (Jun 30 1961) codified at 46 USC sect 55121(b) 24 See Pub L 98-563 98 Stat 2916 (Oct 301984) codified at 46 USC sect 55104(b) 25 46 USC sect 55104(c)(l) see also 46 USC 46 USc sect 55104(cX2)(expiration of exemption upon availability ofa non-coastwise qualified US-flag vessel offering service in the relevant market) 26 149 Congo Rec SI118 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)(statementofSen Inouye) 27 Pub L 108-7 117 Stat 79 (Feb 20 2003) 28 149 Congo Rec S11l9 (dailyed Jan 17 2003Xstatement of Sen Inouye)
8
In each ofthese instances Congress fashioned a narrow exception to the PVSA that differentiated among distinct geographic markets based on the existence or nonshyexistence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
As the federal agency responsible for administering the 2003 Act MARAD requested that Customs act to protect US flag passenger vessel interests in the Hawaii trades29 Limiting the scope ofthe proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades also reflects Customs appreciation of the PVSA in the context of the subsequent Congressional action30 Viewing the Congressional modifications to the PVSA as a whole Congress has specifically and repeatedly differentiated among distinct geographic markets when it has found it necessary and appropriate to do so to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests It is well established that the proper interpretation of a statutory scheme includes consideration ofsubsequent statutes even though the underlying statute itselfhas not been expressly amended31 Accordingly Customs should likewise limit the scope ofthe proposed PVSA interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades because that is the only geographic market as mandated by the 2003 Act in which oceangoing US-flag cruise ships are operating
(b) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Consistent with Public Policy Objectives of the 1985 Rulemaking
In 1985middot Customs liberalized the regulations implementing the PVSA by eliminating certain regulatory prohibitions on foreign flag vessels In the context of the 1985 rulemaking Customs justified a relaxation ofthe regulations on the grounds that it would simplify the administration of the PVSA and would benefit the economy ofcertain American coastwise ports without eroding the statutory protection given to American vessels engaged in solely domestic trade32
Customs thus sought to reconcile US port economic interests with US-flag passenger vessel interests Both of these twin policy objectives are furthered by
29 See 72 Fed Reg 65488 (Nov 21 2007)( MARAn bas asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the ~eratiODS ofcoastwise-qualified cruise ship operators)
See generally FDA v Brown amp Williamson Tobacco Corp 529 US 120 132-133 (2000)(assessing propriety ofagency construction ofFood DIUg and Cosmetics Act and descnbing responsibility of reviewing cowt to assess statutory provisions in the context of subsequent legislative enactments) 31 See Brown amp Williamson 529 US 143 (holding that proper construction ofstatutory provision must necessarily assume that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications ofa later statute This is particularly so where the scope of the earlier statute is broad but the subsequent statutes more specifically address the topic athand) see also United States v Estate ofRomani 523 US 517 530-531 (1998)( holding that a later-enacted statute should control the construction of the federal lien priority statute a specific policy embodied in a later federal statute should control om construction of the [earlier] statute even though it ha[s] not been expressly amended) United States v Fausto 484 US 439453 (1988)(The courts frequently find Congress to have done this - whenever in fact they interpret a statutory text in the light ofsurrounding texts that happen to have been subsequently enacted This classic judicial task of reconciling many laws enacted over time and getting them to make sense in combination necessarily assumes that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications of a later statute) 32 50 Fed Reg 26982 (JuI 11985)
9
limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades
As noted earlier the 2003 Act limits the operation of the NCLA US-flag oceangoing passenger vessels to regular service in Hawaii Because there are no oceangoing US-flag vessels operating in any market other than the Hawaii trades Customs should limit the scope of the proposed interPretation to that market Such a limitation protects US flag passenger vessel interests without prejudicing US port interests In contrast an application of the proposed interpretation to any itinerary would needlessly harm US port interests unrelated to Hawaii without any countervailing benefit to US-flag passenger vessel interests Accordingly limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation is consistent with the public policy objectives of the 1985 rulemaking as well as the 2003 Act
(c) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Also Consistent with Customs Commitment to Revisit the Scope of its Rules to Protect US-Flag Interests
The relaxation ofthe PVSA regulations in 1985 was premised in large part on Customs finding that there was no regular salt water US-flag passenger fleet in operation at that time33 Acknowledging that the relaxed regulations could harm USshyflag interests Customs committed in the preamble ofthe 1985 final rule to immediately reconsider its interpretation if it is ever shown that there is a viable US flag vessel operating in competition with foreign-flag vessels34
Congress enacted the 2003 Act to stimulate the development of a US flag cruise ship industry As noted above the legislative history ofthat Act makes clear that Congress sought to revitalize the US-flag cruise industry as a means to maintain Americas preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool ofqualified seafarers help sustain a fleet of US flag vessels to support our military and a maritime industrial base create thousands of seagoing and shoreside American jobs and stimulate the development ofa US flag cruise ship tourism business with the commensurate benefits to the US tax base the US economy and US employment
Customs is now acting at MARADs request to revisit its interpretation ofthe regulations implementing the PVSA because recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwise-qualified cruise ship operations35 That is to say that the concerns articulated by Customs in the context of the 1985 rulemaking have materialized and US-flag passenger vessel interests are in fact being hanned in the Hawaii trades by foreign competitors
33 50 Fed Reg 26983 34Id
3S 72 Fed Reg 56488 (Nov 21 2007)
I
10
Because the US-flag passenger vessels are limited by statute to regular service in Hawaii limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the
Hawaii trades is consistent with Customs historical commitment to revisit its interpretation ofthe implementing regulations to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests
7 Conclusion
For the reasons stated above NCLA commends the efforts ofCustoms and MARAn to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act as applied to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA respectfully requests Customs to move ahead promptly with p~blicati~nof a final interpretive rule to advance the important national security arid public policy objectives ofthese laws
We greatly appreciate the opportunity to submit these comments
Sincerely
~~~ Alan T Yamamoto Vice President Hawaii Operations
Exhibit A
Ship Name Serenade Of The Seas Departure Port San Diego California Ports of Call San Diego California Kailua Kona Hawaii Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii Hlo Hawaii Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii Ensenada Mexico San Qigo California
2007 Date(s) Oct 05
Sailing Itinerary
Day Port H ~rrive Depart Activity
05-0ct San Diego California 500 PM
06-0ct Cruising
07-0ct Cruising
08-0ct Cruising
09-0ct Cruising
10-0ct Kailua Kona Hawaii 700 AM 900 PM Tendered
11-00t Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 1000 AM Tendered
12middot0ct Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 900 PM Tendered
13-0ct Hilo Hawaii 700 AM 600 PM Docked
14middot0ct Honoulu (Oahu) Hawaii 700 AM Docked
15-0ct Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii 200 AM Docked
6-0ct CrUising
17-0ct Cruising
18-0ct Cruising
19middot0ct Cruising
-7 20-00t
O-Oot
Ensenada ~i1exico
San Deqo California
i 00 ~r1
700 ~M
200 oM D1Jcked ~
EXOTICS CRU ISES
HAWAIITAHITI HAWAIIAN ISLANDS SOUTH PACIFIC ISLANDS
12 1515 DAYS DAYSDAYS
PACIFIC
TAHITIAN PRINCESS ISLAND PRINCESSPAClFIC PRINCESS
PRINCESS
SYDNEYROUNDTRIP sail between tofrom
PAPEETE PAPEETELOS ANGELES and
2004 DEPARnIRE DATEHONOLULU 2004 DEPARTURE DATES Apr 21
2004 DEPARTURE DATES ~~~l CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE 11 INERARY
Oet21t CRUISE ITINERARY Nov Sf
MayS PACIFIC PRINCESS DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
Nov20t DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART DecSt 1 Los Angeles CalifornIa EMBARK AM 1 Sydney AustralIa EMBARK PMAug 17t
Dec20t1 Papeete Tahiti EMBARK PM 2-4 At Sea
2005 DEPARTURE DATE Jan 4 2-5 At Sea
(overnight onboard ship) Jan 19 5 Auckland New Zealand 7 AM 2PMFeb 3t 6 Iiilo Hawaii 8 AM 6 PM
TAHITIAN PRINCESS Papeete Tahiti 11 PM fb 18 6-7 At Sea Kilauea Voko ~enic CruisingApr 12 MarS t 3 Moorea Polynesia 8 AM 5 PM 8 Suva fijI 11 AM 430 PM1~i~t 7 Kona Hawaii 8AM 6PM4 Bora Bora PolYnesia 8 AM 5 PM 9 At Sea Cross International Dateline Apr 19
5-6 At Sea 8 Honolulu Hawaii 8AM 11 PM 10 Apia Western Samoa 830 AM 2PM 7 Christmas Isl~ndKiribati 1Z N 5 PM 9 Kauai Hawaii (Nawlliwlli) 8AM 6PM 11-12 At Sea 8-9 At Sea 10 Maui Hawaii (Lahaina) 6PM 13 Bora Bora Polynesia lOAM 6PM 10 HlloliaWlii 6 PM 13 Raiatea Polynesia (overnight onboard 11 PM11-14 At Sea 11 Maui Hawaii (Lahaina) 8 AM 6 PM 14 Raiatea Polynesia 11 PM
15 Ensenada Mexico (service call)KaUaiH~waii(Nawllfwtli) 8AM 6 PM 15 Moorea Polynesia 8AM 5PM
tllinemyopcr~ttsln=x QnIerPurtlimcslmYvary Honolulu Hawaii DISEMBARK AM 16 Los Angeles CalIfornia DISEMBARK AM 16 Papeete Tahiti DISEMBARK AM
ISLANDS OF THE PACIFIC THEATER SOUTH PACIFIC EXPLORER
24 24 DAYS DAYS
PAClFIC PRINCESS PAClFIC PRINCESS
sail between HONOLULU PAPEETE
and to OSAKA FT LAUDERDALE
2004 DEPARTURE DATES
Mayl 2004 DEPARTURE DATEJul2Sj
Aug 29 CRUISE ITINERARY
CRUISE ITINERARYDAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART EMBARK PM DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
1 Papeete Tahiti EMBARK PM lPM 7PM 2 8AM 11 PM
3 ~~~~~~ ~~~~Sta 8AM 5 PM 4-6 At Sea 7 Pitcairn Island Scenic Cruising 8AM 1211
8AM 12 N
7AM ZPM 8-9 At Sea 10 Easter Island Chile 8AM 2PM
9AM 11-14 At Sea 15 Callao Peru (overnight for Lima and Machu Picchu) 8AM 16 Callao Peru lPM 17 At Sea 18 Manta Ecuador (for Quito) 9fM 7PM 19 At Sea 20 Transit Panama Canal 7 AM 430 PM 21 San BIas Panama 8AM 5 PM 22 ft Sea 23 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands 7AM 4PM 24 At Sea
25 Ft Lauderdale Florida DISEMBARK AMMoorea Polynesia tllinemyoperataln~12onlerPortl1mesmiYmymiddot
EXOTICS CRUISES
HAWAIITAHITISOUTH PACIFIC AMAZONSOUTHERN CARIBBEAN CAPE HORNSTRAIT OF MAGELLAN
1430 12 DAYS DAYSDAYS
ROYAL PRINCESS ROYAL PRINCESSSAPPHIRE PRINCESS
sail betweenFT LAUDERDALE SANTIAGOLOS ANGELES to
andto MANAUS BUENOS AIRESSYDNEY 2005 DEPARTURE DATE 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
2004 DEPARTURE DATE Apr 9 Jan 10
Nov 22 Jan 241 Feb 7
FebZt
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
CRUISE ITINERARY
CRUISE ITINERARYCRUISE ITINERARY 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTDAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 2-3 At Sea 1 Santiago Chile (Valparaiso) EMBARK PM
1 Los ingeles California EMBARK PM 4 Tortola BritIsh Virgin Islands 8 AM 6 PM 2 At Sea 2 Ensenada Mexico 8AM 5PM 3 Puerto Montt Chile 7AM 6PM
3middot6 At Sea 4 At Sea 5 Dominica 9 AM 4 PM 7 Hilo Hawaii 8AM 5 At Sea Chilean Fjords Scenic Cruising6PM 6 Trinidad 9 AM 6 PM
8 Maui Hawaii (Lahaina) 8AM 6PM 6 At Sea Amalia Glacier Scentc CruiSi3f7 At Sea 7 Punta Arenas Chile (Strait of Magei an) 7AM 6PM9 Honolulu Hawaii 7AM 5PM
- 10middot13 At Sea 8 Beagle Channel Scenic Cruising 8 Ushuaia Argentina (Tierra del Fuo) 12N 8PM
8 Devils Island French Guiana (Isle Royal) 8 AM 2 PM 14 Bora Bora Polynesia 8AM 6PM 9 At Sea 9 At Sea Cape Hom Scenic Cruising
10 Santarem Brazil 9 AM 7 PM 10 Moorea Polynesia 8AM 6PM 10 Falkland Islands (Stanley) 8AM 6PM 10 Papeete Tahiti (overnight onboard ship) 9PM 11 At Sea
i 16 Papeete Tahiti 6PM 11 Boca da Valeria Brazil (Amazon River) 7 AM 2 PM 12 Puerto Madryn Argentina 6AM 5PM 17middot18 AtSea 12 Manaus Brazil (overnight onboard ship) 10 AM 13 At Sea
14 Montevideo Uruguay 9AM 6PM19 Pago Pago merlcan Samoa 8AM 6PM 13 Manaus Brazil DISEMBARK AM 15 Buenos Aires Argentina DISEMBARK AM 20 Apia Western Samoa 8AM 6PM 21 At Sea Cross International Dateline middotl1me5forallscenkouisinCile subjectlDclwIgc
tllinmryopefilteslnr=rscordttPorttlmislm)vary22 Suva Fiji 8AM 6PM l 23-24 At Sea
20 Auckland New Zealand 8AM 6PM ORINOCO RIVERSOUTHERN CARIBBEAN ANDESSOUTH AMERICA 26 Tauranga New Zealand 8AM 7PM 27 At Sea
28 Wellington Newealand 8AM 6PM 16 17 DAYS DAYS 29-30 AtSea
31 Sydney Australia DISEMBARK AM ROYAL PRINCESS ROYAL PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP SANTIAGO from to
FT LAUDERDALE FT LAUDERDALE
200S DEPARTURE DATE2005 DEPARTURE DATE
Mar 7Mar 24
CRUISE IIJNERARYCRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Santiago Chlle (Valparaiso) EMBARK PM
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM
2 La Serena Chile (Coquimbo) 8 AM 5 PM2-3 At Sea 3 At Sea Um6n Costa Rica 7AM 7PM 4 Arica Chile 7AM 6PMCristobal Panama (for Panama Canal) 8AM 5PM o At Sea
6 Cartagena Colombia 9AM 2 PM 6 San Martin Peru (for Pisco and Machu Picchu) 7AM 6PM 7 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 130 PM 7PM 7 Callao Peru (overnight for Lima) 530 AM 8-9 At sea 8 Callao Peru 1PM 10 Puerto Ordaz Venezuela (Orinoco River) 8AM 6PM 9 At Sea
i 11 At Sea 10 Manta Ecuador (overnight for Quito) 530AM 12 Greada 8AM i 11 Manta Ecuador 1lM5PMt 1~ Dolllinlca i 7N1 5 PM 12 At Sea
i 13 Transit Panama C~nal 7AM 430 PM14 St Thomas us Virgilslands 9AM 5PM 14 Cartagena Colombia 8AM 130 PMJs AtSei i 15 Aruba Netherlands intiiles 1PM 7PM 16 Princess Cays Bahamas 8AM 16-17 At Sea Tahiti Polynesia 17 FtLallardale Flillilt~ DISEMBARK AM 1ampmiddot Ft L~uderdale Florida DISEMBARK AM
AMAZON RIVERMEDITERRANEAN
21 DAYS
ROYAL PRINCESS
MANAUS
to ROME
2005 DEPARTURE DATE
Apr 21
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE M~naus Brazil (Wemight onboardship) Manaus Brazil
3 BocadaValeria Brazil (AriiazonRivet) 11 AM 4-6 At Sea 7 Recife Brazil 1 PM 8-11 AtSea 12 Dakar Senegal 8AM 13-14 At Sea 15 Agadir Morocco 7AM 16 Casablanca Morocco (for Marrakech) 8AM 17 Gibraltar lOAM 18 Allcante Spain 12 N 19 Barcelona Spain 8AM 20 Cannes France (for Monte Carlo) 8AM 21 FlorencePisa Italy (Livarno) 7AM 22 Rome Italy (Civitavecchia) DISEMBARK AM
INDIAN OCEANAUSTRALIA
28 DAYS
PACIfIC PRINCESS
CAPE TOWN
to SYDNEY
2004 DEPARTURpound DATE
Oct 20
CRUISE ITINERARY1 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Cape Town South Africa EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 3 East London South Africa 7AM 3PM 4 DurbahSouth Africa 8AM 6PM 5-7 At Sea 8 Nosy BeMadagascar 7AM 4PM 9 At Sea 10 Poilit des Galets Reunioll]slahd 11 Port Louis Mauritius 12c19 At Sea 20 Perth Australia (Fremantle) 21-23 At Sea 24 Adelaide Australla 25 At Sea 26 Melbourne Australla 7 27 Tasmania AUstralia (Burnie) 28 At Sea 29 Sydney Australia DISEMBARK AM
I
DEPART EMBARK PM
7PM 6PM
8pM
5PM
3PM 9PM 6PM 6PM 5PM 7PM 7PM
EXOTICS CRUISES
SOUIB ATIANTICANTARCfICNSOUIB AMERICA
24 DAYS
ROYAL PRINCESS
CAPE TOWN
to SANTIAGO
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
Dec 17
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Cape TownSouthAfrica (overnighfol1board ship) EMBARK PM 2 Cape Town South Africa 3PM 2 if~~t Good HopSCenic Crulsing 3-6 6 Tristan DaCunha United Kingdom 8AM 5PM 7-10 At Sea 11 Falkland Islands (Staliley) 8 AM 5PM 12 At Sea 13-16 Antarctica Peninsula ScehltmiddotCruising 14 days ihcludingmiddot Elephant
Island AntarcticSotind Deceptionlslana GerlacheStrait NaxefChannel Schollaert Channel SigJtla Island and Boyd Strait)
17 At Sea Cape Horn Scenic Cruising1amp UshuaiaArgentina (Tierra del fuego) bull middot6 AM 19 Punta Arenas Chile (Strait of Magellan) 7 AM 20 At Sea Amalia Glacier Scenic Cruising21 At Sea Chilean Fjords Scenic Cruising22 AtSea 23 Puerto Mont Chile 7AM 6PM 24 At Sea 25 Santiago Chile (Valparaiso) DISEMBARK AM
-nmes for1l scenlccruisinc are subJect to change
ASIAINDIAMEDITERRANEAN
30 ROYAL PRINCESSDAYS
ROME
to BANGKOK
2004 DEPARlURE DATE
Sep 16
CRUISE Il INERARY
WEST AFRICASOUTH AMERICA
28 DAYS
PACIFIC PRINCESS
FT LAUDERDALE
to CAPE TOWN
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
51 22
CRUISE ITINERARY
DISEMBARK AM
Aruba
EXOTICS CRU ISES amp CRU ISETOU RS
AUSTRALIANEW ZEALAND CRUISETOUR
AUSTRALIAN EXPLORER 2004 DEPARTURE DATESAPPHIRE21 plus
DAYS PRINCESS SYDNEY Dec 17 to
AUCKLAND CRUISETOUR 5P CRUiSE
CRUISETOUR ITINERARY
DAY PORT By Sea By Land DAY PORT
1 Sydney 14 Fiordland National Park 2 Sydney Scenic Cruising
3 SydneyAyers Rock 15 Dunedin New Zealand (Port Chalmers) 4 Ayers ROek
5 Ayers RockPort Douglas 16 Christchurch New Zealand 6 Port Douglas - (Lytleton)
7 Port DouglasSydneyEmbark 17 Wellilgton New Zealand 8 At Sea 18 At Sea 9 Melbourne Australia 19 Tauranga New Zealand
10 At Sea 20 Bay of Islands New Zealand 11 Tasmania Australia (Hobart) 21 Auckland New Zealand 12middot13 At Sea
Sydney Opera House Australia
AUSTRALIANEW ZEALAND CRUISETOUR SOUTHEAST ASIACHINA CRUISETOUR CAPE HORNSTRAIT OF MAGELLAN CRUISETOUR AUSTRALIAN BEIJING Be TERRA COTTA 2004 DEPARTURE DATES RIO 8t IGUAZU FALLS Post-Crulsetour1 Pre-Crulsetour 217EXPLORER 2005 DEPARTURE DATES PACIFICSAPPHIRE WARRIORS19 plw or PRINCESS jul9t loieifie
DAYS PRINCESS SYDNEY Jan 12 plus 19 ROYAL plw Feb 5 Oct 28 Royal BUENOS AIRES
AUCKLAND DAYS ROYAL PRINCESS to 21 ampto DAYS PRINCESS
BEUING CRUISE t ~~S~i BeWln~~~~e
to SANTIAGO~e~s~Ot~r~ih~fi1BANGKOK CRUiSE CRUISECRUISETOUR 3t3P landtourm~yvlty CRUISETOUR 12
DAY PORT DAY PORT
DAY PORT By Sea ltBy LaDd DAY PORT
1 Beijing 11-12 At Sea 1 Rio de janeiro 11 Cape Horn Scenic Cruising
13 Hong Kong 2 Rio de jneiro c 12 Ushuaia Argentina 14 At Sea 3 RiolgUaiu Falls 12 Beagle Channel Scenlc Cruising
15 Nha Trang Vietnam 4 IIDIilZll FaU$13u~os~re$ 13 Punta Arenas Chile
16 Phu My Vietnam 5 Buens AiresEmbark 14 At Sea 17 At Sea 6 Montevideo Uruguay 15 Seno Eyre Fjord Scenic Cruising 18 Singapore 7 At Sea 16 At Sea 19 Kualtan Malaysia 8 Puerto Madryn Argentina 17 Puerto Montt Chile 20 At Sea 9 At Sea 18 At Sea 21 Bangkok Thail3nd 10 Falkland Islands (Stanley) 19 Santiago Chile
DAY PORT DAY PORT
At Sea Pusan SouthKOrea Nagasaki japan At Sea Shanghai China
Note CnIlst route shown for Royil Princess Oct 28 only Timcsforil1lsccnkoulslngmsubjccttothange
CRUISE [OUR ITINERARY
CRUISETOUR ITINERARY
CRUISrrOlJR ITINERARY Fiordland National Park Scenic Cruising DlUedin New Zealand Christchurch New Zealand Wellington New Zealand
14
GRAND PANAMA CANAL CRUISES
ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL
10 10 11 DAYSDAYS DAYS
CORAL PRINCESS GRAND PRINCESS GRAND PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIPfrom from
fromFT LAUDERDALE GALVESTON GALVESTON
2004 DEPARTURE DATES Oct n 21 31 2004 DEPARTURE DATE
2004 DEPARTURE DATENov 10 20 30middot DeelSmiddot
DedSDec 10 28
2005 DEPARTURE DATES CRUISE ITINERARY Jan 7 17 27
CRUISE ITINERARY Feb 6 16 26 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART MarS 1828 CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Galveston Texas EMBARK PMApr 7 17 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTshy 1 Galveston Texas EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 1 ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 3 Belize City Belize 1 PM 7PM 2-3 At Sea 3 Belize City Belize lPM 7PM 4 Costa Maya Mexico (Mahahual) 8AM 4PM 4 Um6n Costa Rica 7AM rPM 4 Costa Maya Mexico (Mahahual) SAM 4 PM 5 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands 12 PM 7PM 5 Panama Canal (to Gatun Lake) 7AM 430 PM 5 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands 12 PM 7PM 6 Ocho Rios Jamaica SAM 5PM 5 Col6n Panama 5PM 8PM 6 At Sea 7 At Sea 6 At Sea Cristobal Panama 7AM 4PM 8 7AM 4PM 7 Grand Cayman Cayman IslandS 7AM 4PM (fot Panama Canal) ftrtpg~niaa~~) S Corumel Mexico SAM 6PM 8 At Sea 9 At Sea 9 Bclize City Belize 7AM 4 PM 6PM 10 Coromel Mexico lOAM 6 PM9 Cozumel Mexico lOAM 10 At Sea 10 At Sea 11 At Sea
Portordtrllndtlmtsmayvllry 11 flo Lauderdale florida DISEMBARK AM Portorntr IInltf timpoundi may vary 11 Galveston Texas DISEMBARK AM Port ordu and Nmes may vary 12 Galv_es~on Texas DISEMBARK AM
ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL
8 DAYS
CORAL PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP
from
FT LAUDERDALE
2004 DEPARTURE DATE Dec 20
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Fl Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM 2-3 At Sea 4 Lim6n Costa Rica 7AM 7PM 5 Panama Canal (to Gatun Lake) 7 AM 430 PM 5 Co16n Panama 5PM SPM 6 At Sea 7 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands SAM 5PM S At Sea 9 Flo Lauderdale Florida DISEMBARK AM Bridge of the Americas Panama
f OptIonll fOllTS inclld1lI tht AtlllnH to Pacific RlIlllfll) joumq will dlmlldrt tilt ship b) tctdtr lit Gfttlm uk AJkr tour plIssmm dlstmlrark tilt shipwin procmlllat through tilt Gatun Locb lIndjlnlllly dock in Gl6lI Hmal1p41Sl11tmmttydiumlmtheJldlo~ lflrshops IInd~llI toIIrsrrnrl CIItutl14ktlllIrtonlflrJhlp
GRAND PANAMA CANAL CRUISES
GRAND PANAMA CANAL GRAND PANAMA CANAL GRAND PANAMA CANAL
150R 18 150R 1715 DAYS DAYS DAYS
CORAL PRINCESS SUN PRINCESS
REGAL PRINCESS REGAL PRINCESS SUN PRINCESS
DAWN PRINCESS REGAL PRINCESS sail between DAWN PRINCESS
sail between FT LAUDERDALE FT LAUDERDALE sail betweenand
FT LAUDERDALEand SAN DIEGO andLOS ANGELES
SAN FRANCISCO 2004 DEPARTURE DATES 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
DAWN PRINCESS 2004 DEPARTURE DATESNov 24Sp191
CRUISE ITINERARY Dec9t CORAL PRINCESSREGAL PRINCESS 5ltp261 CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE ITINERARY
200S DEPARTURE DATES Dec 24 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
SUN PRINCESS DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARIltPM200S DEPARTURE DATES DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Sep 2StMar 24
3 Ocho Rios Jamaica lOAM 6PM 2-3 At5ea 2 At Sea 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBA8KPM
REGAL PRINCESS AprSt 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBA8KPM Jan stu 200S DEPARTURE DATES2 At Sea4 At Sea 4 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 7AM lPMJan 23 5 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 7AM lPM 3 Ocho Rios Jamaica lOAM 6PM REGAL PRINCESS 5 Cartagena Colombia 9AM 3PMFeb7t 4 At Sea Apr 239AM 3PM 6 Transit Panama Canal 7AM 430 PMFb22 ~ yenr~fte~~~~~~u 7AM 430 PM 5 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 7AM lPM At SeaMar9t CORAL PRINCESS 79AM 3PM8 At Sea Apr 27 8 Puntarenas Costa Rica 7AM 7PMSUN PRINCESS 9 Puntarenas Costa Rica 7 AM 7PM ~ yenr~fte~n~~~~~u 7AM 430 PM 9-10 At SeaApr1S 8 At Sea DAWN PRINCESS10-11 At Sea 11 Acapulco Mexico 8AM 5PM
5PM 9 Puntarenas Costa Rica 7AM 7PM Apr 29H ~ae~lcoMexico 8 AM 12 At SeatllWrryopmllzlfrarnLls~in 10-11 At Sea rmrKfIfikTiIIrttimnma1 tlliJlrraryoptJllllsfrlJflSlmFranrimlJn 13 Cabo San lucas Mexico 8AM 5PM
gt This mUJI C4Jl llfwmblnld wlth a 3 14 Cabo San Lucas Mexico 7 AM lPM H ~e~o Mexico 8AM SPM rmruordrrorttimamG)llIryCoIutar CnUK to VlWOIlllr SC Dqs ThUIltIIIflltllnlltCllIIblntdwilhaZ-day 14-15 At Sea 16lhrlllllhI9lllIbtboobdulaquoSC)lQ4k t Illncral) lIpCutcs in mrmt orm Pllrt IiIIIa CocastaICnliutoVan(ouKrBCDlIys16 16 San Francisco California 7AM 4PMcowtlIrcrllisr IIIIYlIl1Ymiddot IhrounIScankboobdlUaK)lllllluU t~A~geles California 6 AM 5PM 14 Cabo San Lucas Mexico 8AM 5PM
Thllwl1JIIICllllslltMOlIkpilllyJmtcad 17-18 At Sea middotmiddotThliIAfllIllCltlllsatMGnIqclBaylnstcadllf 15 At Sea CPlIilldCI1IIu 17 At Sea o[OdKKwsPurllilllrlmllYWlry OchoRicJsPortllmtslllllYVllfymiddot D1SEMBA8K AM19 Vancouver BC DISEMBA8K AM 16 San Die20 California DlSEMBA8K AM 18 Val1couver BC
GRAND PANAMA CANAL COASTAL CRUISING
2-4 CORAL PRINCESS ISLAND PRINCESS SUN PRINCESS18 DAWN PRINCESS DIAMOND PRINCESS STAR PRINCESSDAYSDAYS
COASTAL CRUISE SCHEDULEREGAL PRINCESS
SHIP DAYS FROM TO DEPARTURE DATE DIAMOND PRINCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 5104
SAN FRANCISCO DIAMOND PRINCES5 4 Vancouver Seattle 5404 to CORAL PRINCESS 2 San Francisco Vancouver 5604
NEW YORK DAWN PRiNCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 5704 ISLAND PRiNCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 51204
2004 DEPARTURE DATE SUN PRINCESS 3 San Francisco Vancouver 51404Aug 24 ISLAND PRiNCESS 3 Vancouver LOI Angeles 91804
DIAMOND PRINCESS 1 Seattle Vancouver 91804CRUISE ITINERARY DIAMOND PRINCESS 6 Vancouver Los Angeles 91904 SAPPHIRE PRINCESS 1 Seattle Vancouver 91904 SAPPHREPRINCESS 2 Vancouver San Francisco 92004 DIAMOND PRINCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 43005 DlAMONDPRiNCES$ 4 Vancouver Seattle 5305 SUN PRINCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 5305
ISLAND PRiNCESS 3 Los Angeles VancOllver 5405 CORAL PRiNCESS 2 San Francisco Vancouver 51205
Coral Princess in the Panama Canal
CRUISE PLUS
Extend your adventure with our Cruise Plusreg program Cruise Plusreg enables you to enhance your vacation with one- to four-night hotel
packages in cities that stand on their own as vacation destinations Add nights in Sydney before you cruise or extend your vacation with nights in the city by the
bay San Francisco Transportation and luggage handling costs from the airport to both hotel and ship plus meet and greet services are always included
Wherever you choose to explore youll enjoy properties that are carefully chosen based on service value location and the peace of mind of knowing that Princess
has arranged it all for you
Anchorage Alaska Trevi Fountain Rome Auckland Harbor New Zealand
The Cruise Plusreg Program is available in over 30 major cities including
MEDITERRANEANAEGEAN EXOTICS PANAMA CANAL Barcelona London Rome and Venice Auckland Bangkok Beijing Buenos Aires Ft Lauderdale Los Angeles New York City
Cape Town Ft Lauderdale Honolulu Los San Diego San Francisco Sanjuan Vancouver NORTHERN EUROPE Angeles Montreal Moorea New York City Copenhagen and London MEXICO CARIBBEANOsaka Papeete Rome San Francisco
Ft Lauderdale Galveston Los AngelesTRANSATLANTIC Santiago Seattle Sydney Vancouver Venice Barcelona Copenhagen Ft Lauderdale San Francisco and San Juan
London New York City and Rome ALASKA Anchorage Calgary Fairbanks Kenai San Francisco Seattle and Vancouver
For more information about options and pricing reference a destination specific brochure or contact your travel agent
TRAVEL THE WORLD WITH THE LEADER IN CRUISINGmiddot Princess
Analysis by the Hawaii Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism Comparing the Economic Impact of Foreign Flag Ships with US Flag Cruise Ships Sailing in Hawaii
This is a summary of an analysis prepared by the Hawai Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism (DBEDT) of the economic impact of the foreign flag cruise ship fleet sailing in Hawaii as compared to each of the US flag ships operating in Honolulu
The comparison is set out below
Foreign Pride Pride Pride
Fleet Of Hawaii Of Aloha Of America
Total economic output impact (spendingsales) ($mil) 155 542 4225 4958
Total earnings impact (labor earnings) ($mil) 44 155 1207 1411
Total employment impact Uobs) 1447 5059 3943 4627
This analysis demonstrates that a single US-flagged ship the Pride of America home ported in Honolulu is 32 times more economically impactful and creates 32 times as many jobs as the entire foreign flag fleet that sails into and out of Hawaii ports of call
Economic Impact of Pride of America
Assumptions 1 Annual impact though Pride of Aloha is leaving in May 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existing Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($) 4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of outputl$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job multiplier (jobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
118700 105
2706 3373
147 042
1372
4958
1417
4627
Data sourcelformula Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Line 1 x line 2 x line 31 000000
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 4 x line 5
Line 4 x line 6
Line 4 x line 7
Economic Impact of Pride of Hawaii
Assumptions
1 Annual impact though Pride of Hawaii is leaving in February 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existing Pride of Aloha and Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($) 4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job multiplier (jobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
Data sourceformula 139770 Actual 2007 figure
975 Actual 2007 figure 2706 Actual 2007 figure 3688 Line 1 x line 2 x line 31000000
147 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model 042 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
1372 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
5421 Line 4 x line 5
1549 Line 4 x line 6
5059 Line 4 x line 7
Economic Impact of Pride of Aloha
Assumptions 1 Annual impact though Pride of Aloha is leaving in May 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existlng Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($)
4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job mUltiplier Oobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
95680 111
2706 2874
147 042
1372
4225
1207
3943
Data sourcelformula Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Line 1 x line 2 x line 31000000
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 4 x line 5
Line 4 x line 6
Line 4 x line 7
lt
Methodology Used in Calculating Impact of International Cruise Ships
Cruise ship visitors 1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Came with ships 3 Flied in 4 Average length of stay (days) 5 PPPD ($) 6 Cruise visitor spending ($mil))
Cruise ship crews 7 Ratio of crew spending to cruise visitor spending 8 Cruise crew spending
Cruisline 9 Ratio of crew spending to cruise visitor spending
10 Cruiseline spending
11 Total cruise-related spending ($mil)
12 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 13 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 14 Job multiplier Uobs$ cruise -related spending)
15 Total output impact ($miJ)
16 Total earnings impact ($miJ)
17 Total employment impact (jobs)
106641 98307
8334 739 847 668
02 134
038 254
1055
147 042
1372
1551
444
1447
Data sourceformula Line 2 + line 3 DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report Line 1 x line 4 x line 5
DBEDT 2003 Cruise study Line 7 x line 6
DBEDT 2003 Cruise study Line 9 x line 6
Line 6 + line 8 + line 10
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 11 x line 12
Line 11 x line 13
Line 11 x line 14
Economic Contributions Foreign-Flag Fleet operating in Hawaii vs Three US-Flag Ships
$1500
Pride of Hawaii$1000- $542 million VIc -0-E c Pride of AlohaCo
423 million$500
Pride of America $496 million155 million$shy
Foreign-Flag US-Flag Fleet Fleet
Source State of Hawaii Department of US-Flag $1460 billion Business Economic Development and Tourism
Foreign-Flag $ 155 million 7292008
Employment Foreign-Flag Fleet operating in Hawaii vs Three US-Flag Ships
15000
10000
til c o Pride of Aloha
39435000
Pride of America 1447 4627
~---------
Foreign-Flag US-Flag Fleet Fleet
Source State of Hawaii Department of US-Flag 13629 jobs Business Economic Development and Tourism
Foreign-Flag 1447 jobs 7292008
Foreign Flag Capacity Growth Foreign flag passenger capacity has changed five-fold on roundtrip Hawaii cruises from the West Coast since enactment of the Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative
1600000
1400000
tn 1200000
J enshyZ
1000000
I shyG) en 800000 s G) tn tn
600000 as D 400000
200000
0 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Year
Source US Maritime Administration (derived from the US Customs and Border Patrol Vessel Entrance and Clearance documents - final 2007 data) 7292008
NCL America Hawaii Economic Contributions
(2004-2008)
bull (in Millions) bull $399 in wages benefits and overtime to US seafarers bull $35 in Federal and State payroll Taxes bull $64 in Government Fees and Taxes to Hawaii bull $28 in wages benefits and overtime to US other employees bull $52 in Port Charges to Hawaii Companies (Stevedores tugs pilots etc) bull $85 in Fuel to Tesoro Hawaii bull $130 for shore excursions to Hawaii tour operators bull $39 for Hawaii hotel rooms and ground transport bull $75 for food grown in Hawaii bull $57 in union fees and levies (incl $32M paid directly by employees) bull $1 in MMD fees to the United States Coast Guard bull $51 for recruitment screening processing and training crew bull $76 advertising and promoting Hawaii as a destination bull $1092
COASTWISE CRUISES INTERPRETIVE RULE RESOLUTION Adopted at the
US Conference of Mayors 76th Annual Meeting
June 20-242008 Miami
WHEREAS the Department of Homeland Securitys Customs and Border Protection (CBP) issued a proposed Interpretive Rule regulating Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises on foreign flagged vessels between US ports of call under the Passenger Vessel Services Act at the request of the United States Maritime Administration and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule would require that a foreign-flagged vessel on a coastwise cruise to call at a foreign port for at least 48 hours with that foreign stop constituting at least 50 percent of the cruise itinerary and allowing passengers to disembark the cruise vessel at the foreign port before continuing the cruise to a US port of call and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule establishes burdensome criteria that are wholly inconsistent with industry practice particularly the 48-hour call at foreign port shyinasmuch as the standard port call is six to eight hours - as well as the requirement that 50 percent of a cruise be spent at the foreign port and
WHEREAS the intent of the proposed Interpretive Rule is to protect the single remaining US flag vessel serving the Inter-Hawaiian Island cruise trade that according to the Hawaii Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism generates more than 4600 jobs and generates nearly $500 million in economic benefits for the state annually and
WHEREAS thousands of members of the International Longshore Workers Union (nWU) are employed at US ports serving cruise ships and whose jobs would be at risk if the proposed Interpretive Rule were implemented and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule is vague as to the breadth of its application ie to coastwise cruises between all United States ports or applied solely to coastwise cruises from West Coast ports to Hawaii and
WHEREAS the Cruise Lines International Association estimates the proposed Interpretive Rule would upend the $17 billion in national cruise industry spending and put at risk more than 300000 jobs generated by the international cruise industry including jobs held by nWU at US ports and the local allied industries supporting the cruise industry and
Executive Order Submissions Under Review
II Reglnfogov Where to ind Federal Regulatory Information -~
Home ] Lnitied Agenda and Regulator) Ilan pound012866 Regulator) Review Jnformalion Collection Review
EO 12866 Regulatory Rlvlw dvanced Search IJitorical RepWI Review Counh Jriter XIL
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA)
Executive Order Submissions Under Review July 25 2008 - _------------____ _shy
Department of Homeland Security
AGENCY DHS-TSA RIN 1652-AA53
TITLE Large Aircraft Security Program Other Aircraft Operator Security Programs and Airport Operator Security Program
STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT Yes RECEIVED DATE 06302008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
AGENCY DHS-USCIS RIN Llti15-AB67 TITLE Changes to Requirements Affecting H-2B Nonimmigrants and Their Employers
STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT No RECEIVED DATE 06092008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
AGENCY DHS-USCBP RIN 1651AA11 TITLE Issuance of a Visa and Authorization for Temporary Admission Into the United States for Certain Nonimmigrant Aliens Afflicted W HIV Infection
STAGE Final Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT No RECEIVED DATE 03042008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
-_RE_V-IE-W-E-X-T-EN-D-E-D---------- _
AGENCY DHS-USCBP RIN 1651-AA76 TITLE Coastwise Transportation of Passengers STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT Yes RECEIVED DATE 07142008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
Disclosure I Accessibility I Privacy Policy I Contact Us
httpwwwreginfogovpublicdoeoReviewSearch 7252008
View Rule Page 11
Shere D find Federal ReguLatory InformciiorlReglnfogov Home J Cnified Agenda al1d Regulatory Plan EO 12866 Regulatory Reyiew Information Collection Reiew
Current rnified Agenda and Regulatory Plan Historical Pnified Agenda and Regulatory Plan Search
View Rule
DHSIUSCBP RIN 1651-AA76 Publication ill Spring 2008
Title llCoastwise Transportation of Passengers
Abstract This interim rule amends the Department of Homeland Securitys (DHS) current regulations relating to the transportation of passengers by non-coastwise-qualified vessels on voyages that begin and end at a US port and stop at intervening US and foreign port(s) Under this interim final rule voyages that begin and end at a US port and stop at a foreign port(s) and at intervening US port(s) where a large USshyflag coastwise-qualified passenger vessel engages in regular service are in violation of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) unless the cumulative length of stay(s) at intervening foreign port(s) is more than 50 percent of the total amount of time spent at the intervening US port(s) and passengers are permitted to go ashore at the foreign port(s) The purpose of this amendment is to ensure that the Congressional purpose in enacting the PVSA which is to preserve the economic benefits of US coastwise trade to US-flag coastwise-qualified vessels is properly implemented
Agency Department of Homeland Security(DHS) Priority Substantive Nonsignificant
KIN Status First time published in the Unified Agenda Agenda Stage of Rulemaking Final Rule Stage
Major No Unfunded Mandates No
CFR Citation -LCER 4J~)(h)(plusmnJ
Legal Authority 5JJSS_30J12lJ-SClt16 J9_lJiCJ 431 9_L1C1plusmn3JJ2JScHJ1J2JSCJ624 L(LlLSc207LIl(gtJfHgt~ _CiQJ _46lSC 6QLQ~
Legal Deadline None
Timetable Action Date FR Cite
Interim Final Action 0510012008
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required No Government Levels Affected None
Federalism No
Included in the Regulatory Plan No
RIN Data Printed in the FR No
Agency Contact Glen E Vereb Chief Entry Procedures and Carriers Branch Department of Homeland Security US Customs and Border Protection Office of Regulations and Rulings 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington DC 20229 Phone202572-8730
Disclosure I Accessibility I Privacy Policy I Contact Us
httpwwwreginfogovpublicdoeAgendaViewRuleruleID=286751 7128120
Federal RegisterVol 72 No 224Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules 65487
SPECULATIVE POSITION LIMITS 1-Continued [In contract units)
Contract
Soybeans and Mini-Soybeans 2
Wheat and Mini-Wheat 2 bullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbull
Soybean Oil
SingleSpot month All monthsmonth
600 8600 13300 600 11100 14500 540 6600 8600
Soybean Meal 720 5500 7100
Minneapolis Grain Exchange
Hard Red Spring Wheat I 600 I 11100 I 14500
New York Board of Trade
Cotton No2 I 300 I 5300 I 7300
Kansas City Board of Trade
Hard Winter Wheat I 600 I 11100 I 14500
1 For purposes of compliance with these limits positions in a futures contract that shares ~ubstantially identical terms with a contract market enumerated herein including a futures contract that is cash-settled based on the settlement price of an enumerated contract market shall be agshygregated with positions in the enumerated contract market
2 For purposes of compliance with these limits positions in the regular-sized and mini-sized contracts shall be aggregated
Issued by the Commission this November 152007 in Washington DC David Stawick Secretary of the Commission [FR Doc E7-22681 Filed 11-20-07 845 amI BILLING CODE 6351-Q1-P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Bureau of Customs and Border Protection
19 CFR Part 4
[USCBP-2007-o098]
Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises
AGENCY Customs and Border Protection Department of Homeland Security ACTION Proposed interpretation solicitation of comments
SUMMARY This document proposes new criteria to be used by Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to determine whether non-coastwise-qualified vessels are in violation ofthe Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) when engaging in cruise itineraries in which passengers board at a US port the vessel calls at several Hawaiian ports and then the vessel proceeds to a foreign port or ports for a brief period before ultimately returning to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their cruise CBP believes these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because it appears that the primary objective of the foreign stop is evasion of the PVSA
DATES Comments must be received on or before December 212007 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT Glen E Vereb Cargo Security Carriers amp Immigration Branch Office of International Trade (202) 572-8730 ADDRESSES You may submit comments identified by docket number by one of the following methods
bull Federal eRulemaking Portal http wwwregulationsgov Follow the instructions for submitting comments
bull Mail Border Security Regulations Branch Office of International Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
I Public Participation
Interested persons are invited to participate in this proposed interpretation by submitting written data views or arguments on all aspects of the proposed interpretation Customs and Border Protection (CBP) also invites comments that relate to the economic environmental or federalism effects that might result from this proposed interpretation Comments that will provide the most assistance to CBP in developing these procedures will reference a specific portion of the proposed interpretation explain the reason for any recommended change and include data information or authority that support such recommended change
Instructions All submissions received must include the agency name and docket number for this proposed
interpretation All comments received will be posted without change to http wwwregulationsgov including any personal information provided
Docket For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received go to http wwwregulationsgov Submitted comments may also be inspected on regular business days between the hours of 9 am and 430 pm at the Office of International Trade Customs and Border Protection 799 9th Street NW 5th Floor Washington DC Arrangements to inspect submitted documents should be made in advance by calling Mr Joseph Clark at (202) 572shy8768
II Background
The maritime cabotage law governing the transportation of passengers was first established by section 8 of the Passenger Vessel Services Act of June 191886 (the PVSA) 24 Stat 81 as amended by section 2 of the Act of February 17 1898 30 Stat 248 formerly codified at 46 USC App 289 (now codified at 46 USC 55103) 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 of $200 (now $300 as promulgated in TD 03-11 pursuant to the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 199028 USC 2461 note) for each passenger so transported and landed
The intent of the maritime cabotage laws including the PVSA was to provide a legal structure that guarantees a coastwise monopoly to
65488 Federal RegisterVol 72 No 224Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules
American shipping and thereby promotes development of the American merchant marine Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 28 (DC Cir 1984) see also The Granada 35 FSupp 892 8931940 AMC 1601 (DC Pa 1940) (stating that the legislative aim of section 289 [now 55102] was the creation of a practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping business for United States ships) In other words the PVSA was enacted to advance the United States merchant marine and fleet by restricting the use of foreign-ownedflagged passenger vessels in United States territorial waters
Passenger vessel transportation between United States ports has historically been viewed to be part of the coastwise trade after the enactment of the PVSA This view is premised on the concepts of continuity of the voyage and whether its intended purpose or objective was coastwise transportation In other words the PVSA was held to be violated if the coastwise movement was continuous or if the purpose of the trip was a coastwise voyage (See 18 OAG 445 September 4 1886 28 OAG 204 February 16 1910 29 OAG 318 February 12 1912 30 OAG 44 February 1 1913 34 OAG 340 December 24 1924 and 36 OAG 352 August 13 1930)
The CBP regulations promulgated pursuant to the PVSA are found at section 480a of title 19 of the Code of Federal Regulations (19 CFR 480a) and are reflective of the above cited Office of the Attorney General decisions These regulations provide among other things that a non-coastwise-qualified vessel which embarks a passenger at a port in the United States embraced within the coastwise laws (a coastwise port) will be deemed to have landed that passenger in violation of the PVSA if the passenger disembarks at a different coastwise port on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a nearby foreign port or ports (as defined in 19 CFR 480a(a)(2) see also 19 CFR 480a(b)(2)) The terms embark and disembark are words of art which are defined as going on board a vessel for the duration of a specific voyage and leaving a vessel at the conclusion of a specific voyage respectively (See 19 CFR 480a(a)(4))
The references in section 480a to nearby foreign ports (defined in 19 CFR 480a(a)(2)) are the results of attempts by CBP to apply an Office of the Attorney Generals opinion dated February 26 1910 (28 OAG 204) In that case a foreign-flag vessel transported 615 passengers on a voyage around the world beginning in New
York and concluding in San Francisco The Attorney General opined that since the primary object of the voyage was to visit various parts of the world on a pleasure tour returning home via California and not to be transported in domestic commerce the transportation was not in violation of the PVSA
The 1910 Attorney Generals opinion was extended to voyages that included foreign ports other than nearby foreign ports (See Treasury Decision (TD) 68shy285 (33 FR 16558) November 14 1968) However voyages solely to one or more coastwise ports have always been considered predominantly coastwise Therefore non-coastwise-qualified vessels engaging in such a voyage where passengers temporarily go ashore at a coastwise port have been deemed to have violated the PVSA
m Current Law and Policy Pursuant to Public Law 109-304 120
Stat 1632 enacted on October 6 2006 Title 46 United States Code was substantially reorganized and recodified Consequently the PVSA is now codified at 46 USC 55103 and provides that no vessel shall transport passengers between ports or places in the United States either directly or by way of a foreign port under a penalty of $300 for each person so transported and landed except one that (1) Is wholly owned by citizens of the United States for purposes of engaging in the coastwise trade and (2) has been issued a certificate of documentation with a coastwise endorsement or is exempt from documentation but would otherwise be eligible for such a certificate and endorsement
In 2003 Congress enacted Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II Section 211 for the purpose of revitalizing the oceangoing US-flag cruise industry in Hawaii (the 2003 Act) Three oceangoing US-flag cruise ships PRIDE OF ALOHA PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAII were documented with coastwise privileges pursuant to the 2003 Act These vessels entered regular service in Hawaii in 2004 2005 and 2006 respectively and pursuant to the express language of the 2003 Act are limited in their operation to providing regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands of Hawaii
The CBP regulations promulgated pursuant to the PVSA are set forth in 19 CFR 480a and have remained unchanged throughout both the recodification of Title 46 of the United States Code and the enactment of the 2003 Act They provide that a violation of the PVSA occurs when passengers embark (board a vessel for the
duration of a voyage) a non-coastwiseshyqualified vessel at one US port and disembark (leave the vessel at the conclusion of a voyage) at a different US port unless they proceed with the vessel to a distant foreign port (Le any port not considered a nearby foreign port which is defined as any port located in North America Central America Bermuda or the West Indies including the Bahamas) Currently these regulations do not contain specific criteria for non-coastwise-qualified vessels on itineraries including US ports and either nearby or distant foreign ports in order for such foreign port calls to be compliant with the PVSA
To reiterate the applicable CBP regulations provide that the PVSA is violated when a non-coastwise-qualified vessel transports a passenger on a voyage solely to one or more coastwise ports and the passenger disembarks or goes ashore temporarily at a coastwise port (19 CFR 480a(b)(1)) Furthermore a violation of the PVSA also occurs when a non-coastwise-qualified vessel transports a passenger on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a nearby foreign port or ports (but no other foreign port) and the passenger disembarks at a coastwise port other than the port of embarkation (19 CFR 480a(b)(2)) However there is no violation of the PVSA when a passenger is on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a distant foreign port or ports (whether or not the voyage includes a nearby foreign port or ports) and the passenger disembarks at a coastwise port provided the passenger has proceeded with the vessel to a distant foreign port (19 CFR 480a(b)(3))
IV Request From MARAD To Provide Guidance
The US Department of Transportation Maritime Administration (MARAD) has requested that CBP take action to ensure enforcement of the PVSA MARAD has asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreignshyflag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwiseshyqualified cruise ship operators
In April of 2007 the operator of the three US-flag cruise vessels operating solely in Hawaii pursuant to the 2003 Act announced their intent to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAIl from the Hawaii market and redeploy her to Europe The operator intends to re-flag the vessel to foreign registry directly resulting in the loss of over 1100 crewmember jobs The primary reason cited for this decision is the rapid increase in foreign-flag competition entering the Hawaii market
Federal Register I Vol 72 No 224 I Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules 65489
from the West Coast This competition is evidenced in published cruise itineraries of foreign-flag carriers offering a variety of round trip cruises that depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period usually in the early morning and ultimately return to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their cruise These cruises are often marketed as Hawaii cruises and except for the brief stop in the nearby foreign port of Ensenada are purely coastwise in nature It is these cruise itineraries that pose an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels that pursuant to the 2003 Act are currently engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands
V Preliminary Notice
In response to MARADs concerns CBP sent letters to two carriers known to operate the itineraries in question as well as to the Cruise Lines International Association Inc stating that CBP believes that these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because it appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA The letters further indicated that CBP is taking steps to publish this position
VI CBPs Proposed Interpretive Rule Accordingly in this document CBP is
proposing to provide that cruise itineraries for non-qualified coastwise vessels which allow passengers to board at a US port call at several Hawaiian ports proceed to a foreign port or ports for a brief period and then ultimately return to the original US port of embarkation for disembarkation are not consistent with the PVSA and the regulations promulgated pursuant thereto Specifically CBP interprets a voyage to be solely to one or more coastwise ports even where it stops at a foreign port unless the stop at the foreign port is a legitimate object of the cruise CBP will presume that a stop at a foreign port is not a legitimate object of the cruise unless
(1) The stop lasts at least 48 hours at the foreign port
(2) The amount of time at the foreign port is more than 50 percent of the total amount of time at the US ports of call and
(3) The passengers are permitted to go ashore temporarily at the foreign port
Accordingly CBP proposes to adopt an interpretive rule under which it will presume that any cruise itinerary that does not include a foreign port call that
satisfies each of these three criteria constitutes coastwise transportation of passengers in violation of 19 CFR 480a(b)(1)
Dated November 16 2007 W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection [FR Doc E7-22788 Filed 11-20-07 845 am] BILLING CODe 9111-14-1
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau
27 CFR Part 9
[Notice No 76]
RIN 1513-AB49
Proposed Establishment of the Leona Valley Viticultural Area (2007R-281 P)
AGENCY Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau Treasury ACTION Notice of proposed rulemaking
SUMMARY The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau proposes to establish the 134 square mile Leona Valley viticultural area in the northeast part of Los Angeles County California We designate viticultural areas to allow vintners to better describe the origin of their wines and to allow consumers to better identify wines they may purchase We invite comments on this proposed addition to our regulations DATES We must receive written comments on or before January 22 2008
ADDRESSES You may send comments on this notice to one of the following addresses
bull httpwwwregulationsgov (Federal e-rulemaking portal follow the instructions for submitting comments) or
bull Director Regulations and Rulings Division Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau PO Box 14412 Washington DC 20044-4412
See the Public Participation section of this notice for specific instructions and requirements for submitting comments and for information on how to request a public hearing
You may view copies of this notice selected supporting materials and any comments we receive about this proposal at httpwwwregulationsgov under Docket No 2007-0066 You also may view copies of this notice all related petitions maps or other supporting materials and any comments we receive about this
proposal by appointment at the TTB Information Resource Center 1310 G Street NW Washington DC 20220 To make an appointment call 202-927shy2400
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT NA Sutton Regulations and Rulings Division Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau 925 Lakeville S1 No 158 Petaluma CA 94952 phone 415shy271-1254 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
Background on Viticultural Areas
TTB Authority Section 105(e) of the Federal Alcohol
Administration Act (FAA Act) 27 USC 205(e) authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to prescribe regulations for the labeling of wine distilled spirits and malt beverages The FAA Act provides that these regulations should among other things prohibit consumer deception and the use of misleading statements on labels and ensure that labels provide the consumer with adequate information as to the identity and quality of the product The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) administers the regulations promulgated under the FAA Act
Part 4 ofthe TTB regulations (27 CFR part 4) allows the establishment of definitive viticultural areas and the use of their names as appellations of origin on wine labels and in wine advertisements Part 9 of the TTB regulations (27 CFR part 9) contains the list of approved viticultural areas
Definition Section 425(e)(1)(i) ofthe TTB
regulations (27 CFR 425(e)(1)(i)) defines a viticultural area for American wine as a delimited grape-growing region distinguishable by geographical features the boundaries of which have been recognized and defined in part 9 of the regulations These designations allow vintners and consumers to attribute a given quality reputation or other characteristic of a wine made from grapes grown in an area to its geographic origin The establishment of viticultural areas allows vintners to describe more accurately the origin of their wines to consumers and helps consumers to identify wines they may purchase Establishment of a viticultural area is neither an approval nor an endorsement by TTB of the wine produced in that area
Requirements Section 425(e)(2) of the TTB
regulations outlines the procedure for proposing an American viticultural area and provides that any interested party
Us Department ofHomelaDd Secmity Washington DC 10229
bull ~
US Customs and Border Protection
AUG 15 2fXJJ
VE5-3-02-QTRRBSTCCCI - ti015502-GG-
Mr leon Sutcliffe Director Port Operations Camivai Cruise Unes Camival Place 3655 NW 87Avenue Miami Aorlda 33178
RE P~nger Vessef Services Ad Coastwise Transportation 46 USC sect 55103 19 CFR sect 480a(b)
Dear Mr Sutcliffe
As you know US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) enforces the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) codified at TItle 46 United States Code section 55103 (46 USC 55103) This statute prohibits non-coastwise-qualifled vessels (ie those vessels not US-buill owned and documented with a coastwise endorsement) from transporting passengers between porls or places within the United States The regUlations promUlgated pursuant to the PVSA are found at TrtJe 19 Code of Federal Regulations section 4808 (19 CFR 4808)
It has come to our attention that passenger vessels of your company are engaging in cruise itineraries that include ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands Two USAlagged coastwise-endorsed passenger vessefs are also currenUy engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of caD wittlin the Hawaiian Islands
As part of your cruise itineraries some of your foreign-flagged vessels depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period and ultimately rebJm to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their endse For example the MS ZAANDAM of Holand America Lines departs San Diego cruises the Hawaiian Islands stops in Ensenada from 800pm to 11 OOpmbull and returns to san Diego CBP believes these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because It appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA -- - - ~~~------
Please be advised that CBP is taking steps to publish this position Should have any questions pertaining to this matter please contact Mr Glen Vereb Chief Cargo Security Carriers and Immigration Branch at (202) 572-8724
Sincerely
F Jl E EST Y LEe A U I 5 I N Gmiddot
December 21 2007
The Honorable W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection co Border Security Regulations Branch Office ofInternational Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229
Re Hawaii Coastwise Cruises (USCBP-2007-0098) Comments in Response to Proposed Interpretation
Dear Commissioner Basham
NCL America Inc1 (NCLA) submits these comments in support ofthe efforts ofCustoms and Border Protection to enforce the Passenger Vessel Services Act and the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative as applied to Hawaii coastwise cruises
1 Introduction and Summary of Position
NCLA operates three large oceangoing US flag cruise ships in Hawaii These ships are documented under US flag and are required to operate in regular service in Hawaii pursuant to the authority of the Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative a 2003 federal statute intended to revitalize the US flag cruise industry and to maximize economic and national security benefits to the United States (the 2003 Act)
NCLA has invested $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships pursuant to the 2003 Act and in direct reliance on the protections of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) and its proper enforcement The PVSA limits the transportation ofpassengers between US ports to coastwise documented US flag ships Its statutory protections recognize that US flag ships have significantly higher operational costs in part because they are subject to more stringent US laws including US labor laws and federal
1 NCL America Inc is a US corporation incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware headquartered in Honolulu Hawaii As a US corporation it is subject to US taxes at both the federal and state level The Chief Executive Officer the Chairman of the Board and all of the Board of Directors of NCL America are US citizens The company is also subject to US labor and employment laws and is required by statute to maintain a workforce comprised primarily ofUS citizens
700 Bishop St SUite 900 I Honolulu HawMi 96813 I Tel 8085273800 Fax 8085273820 I ndcom
2
income tax among others The NCLA ships operating in Hawaii are the only large oceangoing cruise ships operating under US flag In furtherance of the policy goals of the PVSA and the 2003 Act these ships have created over 4000 seafaring jobs all subject to US minimum wage and other labor statutes
Since 2003 there has been a significant increase in capacity in the Hawaii market from foreign flag ships providing cruise service to Hawaii from the West Coast Many of these foreign flag cruises are marketed as Hawaii cruises and consist entirely ofUS ports ofcall with the sole exception of a token stop in Mexico for as little as an hour late at night under circumstances where passengers are not permitted to get offthe ship There are no reported rulings approving these particular foreign flag itineraries
Lower cost foreign competition in the Hawaii market has unfairly hurt NCLAs operations NCLA has incurred substantial losses which have contributed significantly to its decision earlier this year to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAll from US flag and reshydeploy it foreign Unfair foreign competition poses an imminent threat to the remaining US flag passenger vessels operating in the Hawaii trades pursuant to the 2003 Act
As the agency statutorily charged with implementation of the 2003 Act the US Department ofTransportation Maritime Administration (MARAn) is aware of the threat foreign flag Hawaii itineraries pose to the US flag fleet and brought the situation to the attention ofthe US Department ofHomeland Security Bureau ofCustoms and Border Protection (CBP or Customs) Customs determined that the primary object of these itineraries was coastwise and that the Ensenada stop was an evasion of the PVSA
In August 2007 Customs provided written notice to the affected foreign lines and their trade association that the existing itineraries were contrary to the PVSA None of these lines sought advance rulings even after the Customs notice with respect to their Hawaii itineraries pursuant to Customs regulations and many continued to market the itineraries as Hawaii cruises NCLA supports the efforts ofCustoms and MARAD to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act for Hawaii cruises
2 Statutory Authority for Customs Proposed Interpretation
(a) Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA)
Congress passed the PVSA in 1886 to protect the US maritime transportation industry from foreign competition2 Protection is afforded through penalty assessments on foreign vessels transporting passengers between US ports or places directly or by way ofa foreign port 3 As Congress and the courts have recognized coastwise protections for the US maritime transportation industry are only one dimension of the PVSA Operating in conjunction with other coastwise laws and with the US
2 See United States v Honduran SS GRANADA 35 F Supp 892 894 (BD Pa 1940)(citing purpose of PVSA to meet threats to the practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping which was to be preserved for US ships)
46 USc sect 55103 (originally 46 USC App 289)
3
documentation laws the PVSA also enhances military sealift in times ofnational emergency sustains a US merchant marine and supports the US shipbuilding and repair industry4
(b) Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative (the 2003 Act)
Over the past decade Congress has sought to reinforce the goals of the PVSA by providing mechanisms to revitalize the oceangoing US flag cruise fleet particularly in Hawaii The Project America legislation enacted in 1997 authorized among other things the re~flagging ofone existing cruise ship contingent on the operator contracting for the construction oftwo new oceangoing cruise shipss Following the default of the operator under the original contract Congress enacted the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative for the purpose ofrecovering economic and national security benefits to the United States bull 6 These same goals of the original PVSA were expressly referenced in the legislative history of the 2003 Act which emphasized that these ships will be assets available in time ofnational emergency and will significantly expand the pool ofqualified seafarers upon which the US Department ofDefense relies to crew non-combatant vessels
The 2003 Act authorizes the US documentation ofthree cruise ships for operation in regular service in Hawaii subject to certain conditions including a prohibition on operating in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico and the Caribbean Sea and a requirement that all vessel repair work be undertaken in the United States MARAD is charged with implementation of the 2003 Act
3 Customs Implementation of PVSA
(a) Regulations
The current regulations implementing the PVSA were published by Customs in 19858 The growth of the foreign flag cruise industry in North America and in particular the development of the Alaska cruise market led to an effort in 1984 to amend the thenshyexisting regulations to increase the ease of administration and operational flexibility The effort to change the regulation had support from US port interests who saw benefit in the potential increase in the number ofUS ports that foreign vessels could call and was opposed by proponents ofpotential US flag projects as detrimental to efforts to revitalize the US fleet 9 The preamble to the 1985 rule emphasized that it was of paramount importance to consider the primary object ofpassengers in taking a
4 See American Hawaii Cruises v Skinner 713 F Supp 452 457 (DDC 1989) (recognizing the contribution of the PVSA and the Jones Act in helping to secure national defense by maintaining a merchant marine oftbe best equipped and most suitable types ofvessels sufficient to serve in time of war or national emergency) see also Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 30 (DC Cir 1984) Wirth Ltd v SIS Acadia Forest 537 F2d 1272 1281 n32 (5th Cir 1976) S Public Law 105-56 Section 8109 (111 Stat 1203 1244) (Oct 81997 ) 6 Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II General Provisions - Department ofCommerce Section 211 (117 Stat 1179) (Feb 20 2003) 1 149 Cong Rec S1118 (dailyed Jan 17 2003(statement ofSenator Inouye) 8 19 CFR sect 480a 950 Fed Reg 26981 (July I 1985)
4
voyage10 a concept which is reinforced elsewhere in Customs regulations11 In its analysis of the comments received at the time Customs accepted the view ofport interests that the modified rule would help their business but did so recognizing the absence ofa regular salt water US flag passenger fleet Customs acknowledged the potential harm to prospective efforts to revitalize the US flag passenger fleet and expressly cautioned that if it were ever shown that coastwise qualified vessels in competition with foreign vessels were in fact hurt by the modified Customs regulation then Customs would immediately reconsider its position12
(b) Customs Rulings
Given the significant penalties associated with violating the PVSA13 Customs regulations expressly provide a mechanism for the owner or charterer of a foreign vessel or any other interested person to request an advisory ruling as to whether a contemplated voyage would be considered in violation of the PVSA14 Customs regulations provide that vessel operators can rely on these ruling letters only to the extent that the facts and circumstances are identical to those in the ruling letter IS
Notwithstanding the fact that several foreign cruise lines offer Hawaii itineraries originating in a US mainland port and calling at Hawaii ports with a token intervening stop in Mexico there are no reported rulings expressly approving such an itinerary for these foreign cruise lines 16
4 The Cruise Industry in Hawaii
(a) NCL America Returns US flag to the Oceangoing Passenger Fleet
Pursuant to the requirements ofthe 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative NCLA agreed to promote US-flag cruising enhance military sealift capacity and expand the US maritime labor base No other major cruise line had ever undertaken such a commitment to the US flag and the public policy objectives Congress sought to achieve under the PVSA or the 2003 Act Introduction ofPRIDE OF ALOHA in 2004 was a significant development in the maritime industry because it marked the restoration ofthe
10 Id at 26983 11 Customs Regulations include a provision on the effect ofruling letters and with respect to carrier rulings the applicable regulation refers to rulings setting forth a determination as to whether or not the primary object of a contemplated voyage is coastwise transportation in violation of46 USC sect 289 [pYSA codified at 46 USC sect55103] 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 12 50 Fed Reg at 26983 13 A modem cruise ship with 2400 passengers for example would be subject to a fine of$720OOO per cruise based on the statutory penalty of$300 for each passenger transported in violation of the Act 14 19 CFR sect 480a(d) IS 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 16 There is one older reported mling involving a request to drop the Ensenada port call from a Los AngeleslHawaiiLos Angeles itinerary which Customs held would violate the PYSA In dicta Customs acknowledged that the itinerary could be in compliance if the Ensenada call were not dropped but did not address the issue ofwhether a one hour service call where no passengers depart the vessel would be sufficient The carrier that obtained that ruling has since left the Hawaii market See Customs Ruling HQ 114078 re Crystal Hannony (Nov 4 1997)
5
us flag to the oceangoing cruise industry A contemporaneous press release from the Us Department ofTransportation reported that the three US-flag cruise ships to be introduced pursuant to the 2003 Act were expected to create more than 20000 US jobs generate more than $825 million ofexpenditures in the US economy and create nearly $360 million in federal tax revenue by the end of 200717 In 2005 the PRIDE OF AMERICA was introduced and in 2006 the third vessel PRIDE OF HAWAll was introduced to Hawaii Both the PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAIl offer 7shyday inter-island Hawaii itineraries whereas PRIDE OF ALOHA operates on 7 and 10 day cruises exclusively among the islands ofHawaii as well as 11 day cruises that include a foreign port call at Fanning Island To date NCLA has invested over $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships in furtherance ofthe policy objectives of the PVSA and the 2003 Act These ships employ over 4000 seafarers and generate hundreds ofmillions of dollars in benefits for Hawaii and the nation
(b) Significant Increase in Foreign Flag Capacity Since 2003
The most significant change in the Hawaii cruise market since 2003 has been the dramatic increase in capacity A significant portion ofthis capacity increase is directly attributable to NCLAs fulfillment ofthe Congressional mandate in the 2003 Act However foreign-flag operations in the Hawaii market as measured in passenger nights18 have skyrocketed Based on MARAn data derived from the US Customs Border Patrol Vessel Entrance and Clearance documents the passenger nights for foreign flag vessels departing from the West Coast to Hawaii on round trip cruise have increased several hundredfold during this period19 See Exhibit A
(c) NCLA Has Incurred Substantial Losses During this Period
Since 2004 NCLA has lost cumulatively more than a quarter ofa billion dollars A principal reason for these losses has been the increase in foreign capacity in this market NCLA has taken significant steps to reduce costs to address the increase in foreign competition but NCLA is at an inherent disadvantage when competing against foreign companies that are not subject to US labor laws US tax laws and other laws Ofcourse the statutory protections of the PVSA are intended to address these very issues That is why Customs immediate action to implement the proposed interpretation is critical for the US flag fleet Regrettably NCLA has already been forced to reduce overall capacity early next year with the withdrawal ofPRIDE OF HAWAlI to another
17 DOT Press Release dated June 72004 see also DOT Press Release dated August 132004 in connection with visit to PRIDE OF ALOHA by US Transportation Secretary Norman Y Mineta 11 Passenger nights (also referred to as passenger capacity days) are calculated by multiplying the number ofpassengers per vessel by the number ofcruise days in each itinerary by the number of cruises This is the unit ofmeasurement employed by MARAn In contrast passenger bed supply (also referred to as passenger capacity) data reflects only the number ofberths per vessel multiplied by the number of cruises and hence understates the market by excluding the full economic value ofthe cruise perfonned 19 In 2003 the total number ofpassenger nights for round-trip West Coast to Hawaii cruises was 303325 which jumped by 353 to 1072329 in 2006 and by 430 to 1304546 from 2003 to 2007 (The 2007 figure is based on MARAD data for six months and a1ll1ualized by published itineraries for the balance of the year)
6
market for operation under foreign flag This move alone will result in the loss ofover 1000 American seafaring jobs
5 Customs Proposed Interpretation is Necessary to Further the Important National Security and Public Policy Objectives Embodied in Federal Law
As Customs has properly noted the increase in foreign competition in the Hawaii trades in contravention of the PVSA pose[s] an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels[] As the operator of these ships NCLA has a vested interest in protecting the jobs ofthe thousands ofAmerican crewmembers and cruise ship service providers who support these vessels NCLA also has an interest in protecting the substantial economic investment it has made to revitalize the US flag passenger vessel fleet But a balancing of interests in the context of Customs enforcement ofexisting law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act requires a much broader focus
The legislative history of the 2003 Act expressly recognized the national security and public policy import ofestablishing a US flag passenger vessel fleet as a means to maintain the countrys preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool of qualified seafarers and as a means to help sustain a fleet ofUS-flag vessels to su~ort
the nations military and maritime industrial base for times ofnational emergency
Congress understood the importance ofestablishing a viable US flag cruise ship fleet as something larger than the vessels themselves These national security and public policy objectives must be weighed in the balance as Customs assesses how best to interpret its rules to give effect to the PVSA and the 2003 Act
6 Customs Should Clarify that the Proposed Interpretation is Limited to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades and Adopt Reasonable Measures to Ensure Sufficient Foreign Content
Since publication ofthe proposed interpretative rule several commenters have observed that the scope of the proposed interpretation is ambiguous because the language of Section VI referencing any cruise itinerary appears broader than the caption Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises and the entire discussion in the published notice which focuses exclusively on US-flag coastwise vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA agrees that the proposed interpretation should be clarified so that its scope is limited to vessels operating roundtrip voyages from US ports that include Hawaii port calls
NCLA supports the concept reflected in the proposed interpretive rule that round trip Hawaii itineraries from US ports on foreign ships must include a material and measurable degree ofoverall foreign port content as compared to US port content
20 149 Congo Rec S1117 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)
7
(a) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is also Consistent with Subsequent Congressional Enactments Modifying the PVSA
As discussed above it is well established that the PVSA was designed toRrotect US-flag vessels from foreign competition in the coastwise and domestic trades 1
Subsequent legislative enactments however have appropriately differentiated among distinct geographic markets and trades including Canada Alaska Puerto Rico and Hawaii based on the existence or non-existence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
In 1938 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers by Canadian passenger vessels on Lake Ontario and the St Lawrence River until such time as passenger service shall be established by vessels of the United States22 Similarly in 1961 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers on Canadian vessels within Alaska or between Alaska and other points in the United States until such time as passenger service is established by vessels ofthe United States23
In 1984 Congress modified the application ofthe PVSA to pennit the transportation ofpassengers between Puerto Rico and other United States ports on foreign-flag vessels24 As with the other statutory exceptions this provision is qualified and expires [o]n a showing that a United States passenger vessel qualified to engage in the coastwise trade is offering or advertising passenger service between a port in Puerto Rico and another port in the United States2S
Congress acted again with respect to the application of the PVSA with the 2003 Act in which it authorized three vessels that did not meet the US-build requirements of the PVSA to operate as modem US-flagged cruise ships in regular service in Hawaii26 The 2003 Act imposes a specific geographic limitation on the operation of any ship documented under this authority to operations only in regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands ofHawaii and shall not transport passengers in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico or the Caribbean Sea except in certain limited circumstances27 As above the limited nature of the 2003 Act is express it is strictly limited to the large ocean-going cruise ships and then only those operating in the regular Hawaii service where there are no US-flag operations28
21 See Act ofJune 19 1886 c 421 sec 8 24 Stat 81 Act of February 171898 c 26 sec 2 30 Stat 248 22 S] Res 174 75th Cong 52 Stat 223 (Alp 251938) codified at46 USC sect 55121(a) 23 See Pub L 87-77 75 Stat 196 (Jun 30 1961) codified at 46 USC sect 55121(b) 24 See Pub L 98-563 98 Stat 2916 (Oct 301984) codified at 46 USC sect 55104(b) 25 46 USC sect 55104(c)(l) see also 46 USC 46 USc sect 55104(cX2)(expiration of exemption upon availability ofa non-coastwise qualified US-flag vessel offering service in the relevant market) 26 149 Congo Rec SI118 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)(statementofSen Inouye) 27 Pub L 108-7 117 Stat 79 (Feb 20 2003) 28 149 Congo Rec S11l9 (dailyed Jan 17 2003Xstatement of Sen Inouye)
8
In each ofthese instances Congress fashioned a narrow exception to the PVSA that differentiated among distinct geographic markets based on the existence or nonshyexistence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
As the federal agency responsible for administering the 2003 Act MARAD requested that Customs act to protect US flag passenger vessel interests in the Hawaii trades29 Limiting the scope ofthe proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades also reflects Customs appreciation of the PVSA in the context of the subsequent Congressional action30 Viewing the Congressional modifications to the PVSA as a whole Congress has specifically and repeatedly differentiated among distinct geographic markets when it has found it necessary and appropriate to do so to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests It is well established that the proper interpretation of a statutory scheme includes consideration ofsubsequent statutes even though the underlying statute itselfhas not been expressly amended31 Accordingly Customs should likewise limit the scope ofthe proposed PVSA interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades because that is the only geographic market as mandated by the 2003 Act in which oceangoing US-flag cruise ships are operating
(b) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Consistent with Public Policy Objectives of the 1985 Rulemaking
In 1985middot Customs liberalized the regulations implementing the PVSA by eliminating certain regulatory prohibitions on foreign flag vessels In the context of the 1985 rulemaking Customs justified a relaxation ofthe regulations on the grounds that it would simplify the administration of the PVSA and would benefit the economy ofcertain American coastwise ports without eroding the statutory protection given to American vessels engaged in solely domestic trade32
Customs thus sought to reconcile US port economic interests with US-flag passenger vessel interests Both of these twin policy objectives are furthered by
29 See 72 Fed Reg 65488 (Nov 21 2007)( MARAn bas asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the ~eratiODS ofcoastwise-qualified cruise ship operators)
See generally FDA v Brown amp Williamson Tobacco Corp 529 US 120 132-133 (2000)(assessing propriety ofagency construction ofFood DIUg and Cosmetics Act and descnbing responsibility of reviewing cowt to assess statutory provisions in the context of subsequent legislative enactments) 31 See Brown amp Williamson 529 US 143 (holding that proper construction ofstatutory provision must necessarily assume that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications ofa later statute This is particularly so where the scope of the earlier statute is broad but the subsequent statutes more specifically address the topic athand) see also United States v Estate ofRomani 523 US 517 530-531 (1998)( holding that a later-enacted statute should control the construction of the federal lien priority statute a specific policy embodied in a later federal statute should control om construction of the [earlier] statute even though it ha[s] not been expressly amended) United States v Fausto 484 US 439453 (1988)(The courts frequently find Congress to have done this - whenever in fact they interpret a statutory text in the light ofsurrounding texts that happen to have been subsequently enacted This classic judicial task of reconciling many laws enacted over time and getting them to make sense in combination necessarily assumes that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications of a later statute) 32 50 Fed Reg 26982 (JuI 11985)
9
limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades
As noted earlier the 2003 Act limits the operation of the NCLA US-flag oceangoing passenger vessels to regular service in Hawaii Because there are no oceangoing US-flag vessels operating in any market other than the Hawaii trades Customs should limit the scope of the proposed interPretation to that market Such a limitation protects US flag passenger vessel interests without prejudicing US port interests In contrast an application of the proposed interpretation to any itinerary would needlessly harm US port interests unrelated to Hawaii without any countervailing benefit to US-flag passenger vessel interests Accordingly limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation is consistent with the public policy objectives of the 1985 rulemaking as well as the 2003 Act
(c) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Also Consistent with Customs Commitment to Revisit the Scope of its Rules to Protect US-Flag Interests
The relaxation ofthe PVSA regulations in 1985 was premised in large part on Customs finding that there was no regular salt water US-flag passenger fleet in operation at that time33 Acknowledging that the relaxed regulations could harm USshyflag interests Customs committed in the preamble ofthe 1985 final rule to immediately reconsider its interpretation if it is ever shown that there is a viable US flag vessel operating in competition with foreign-flag vessels34
Congress enacted the 2003 Act to stimulate the development of a US flag cruise ship industry As noted above the legislative history ofthat Act makes clear that Congress sought to revitalize the US-flag cruise industry as a means to maintain Americas preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool ofqualified seafarers help sustain a fleet of US flag vessels to support our military and a maritime industrial base create thousands of seagoing and shoreside American jobs and stimulate the development ofa US flag cruise ship tourism business with the commensurate benefits to the US tax base the US economy and US employment
Customs is now acting at MARADs request to revisit its interpretation ofthe regulations implementing the PVSA because recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwise-qualified cruise ship operations35 That is to say that the concerns articulated by Customs in the context of the 1985 rulemaking have materialized and US-flag passenger vessel interests are in fact being hanned in the Hawaii trades by foreign competitors
33 50 Fed Reg 26983 34Id
3S 72 Fed Reg 56488 (Nov 21 2007)
I
10
Because the US-flag passenger vessels are limited by statute to regular service in Hawaii limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the
Hawaii trades is consistent with Customs historical commitment to revisit its interpretation ofthe implementing regulations to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests
7 Conclusion
For the reasons stated above NCLA commends the efforts ofCustoms and MARAn to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act as applied to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA respectfully requests Customs to move ahead promptly with p~blicati~nof a final interpretive rule to advance the important national security arid public policy objectives ofthese laws
We greatly appreciate the opportunity to submit these comments
Sincerely
~~~ Alan T Yamamoto Vice President Hawaii Operations
Exhibit A
Ship Name Serenade Of The Seas Departure Port San Diego California Ports of Call San Diego California Kailua Kona Hawaii Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii Hlo Hawaii Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii Ensenada Mexico San Qigo California
2007 Date(s) Oct 05
Sailing Itinerary
Day Port H ~rrive Depart Activity
05-0ct San Diego California 500 PM
06-0ct Cruising
07-0ct Cruising
08-0ct Cruising
09-0ct Cruising
10-0ct Kailua Kona Hawaii 700 AM 900 PM Tendered
11-00t Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 1000 AM Tendered
12middot0ct Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 900 PM Tendered
13-0ct Hilo Hawaii 700 AM 600 PM Docked
14middot0ct Honoulu (Oahu) Hawaii 700 AM Docked
15-0ct Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii 200 AM Docked
6-0ct CrUising
17-0ct Cruising
18-0ct Cruising
19middot0ct Cruising
-7 20-00t
O-Oot
Ensenada ~i1exico
San Deqo California
i 00 ~r1
700 ~M
200 oM D1Jcked ~
EXOTICS CRUISES
HAWAIITAHITISOUTH PACIFIC AMAZONSOUTHERN CARIBBEAN CAPE HORNSTRAIT OF MAGELLAN
1430 12 DAYS DAYSDAYS
ROYAL PRINCESS ROYAL PRINCESSSAPPHIRE PRINCESS
sail betweenFT LAUDERDALE SANTIAGOLOS ANGELES to
andto MANAUS BUENOS AIRESSYDNEY 2005 DEPARTURE DATE 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
2004 DEPARTURE DATE Apr 9 Jan 10
Nov 22 Jan 241 Feb 7
FebZt
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
CRUISE ITINERARY
CRUISE ITINERARYCRUISE ITINERARY 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTDAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 2-3 At Sea 1 Santiago Chile (Valparaiso) EMBARK PM
1 Los ingeles California EMBARK PM 4 Tortola BritIsh Virgin Islands 8 AM 6 PM 2 At Sea 2 Ensenada Mexico 8AM 5PM 3 Puerto Montt Chile 7AM 6PM
3middot6 At Sea 4 At Sea 5 Dominica 9 AM 4 PM 7 Hilo Hawaii 8AM 5 At Sea Chilean Fjords Scenic Cruising6PM 6 Trinidad 9 AM 6 PM
8 Maui Hawaii (Lahaina) 8AM 6PM 6 At Sea Amalia Glacier Scentc CruiSi3f7 At Sea 7 Punta Arenas Chile (Strait of Magei an) 7AM 6PM9 Honolulu Hawaii 7AM 5PM
- 10middot13 At Sea 8 Beagle Channel Scenic Cruising 8 Ushuaia Argentina (Tierra del Fuo) 12N 8PM
8 Devils Island French Guiana (Isle Royal) 8 AM 2 PM 14 Bora Bora Polynesia 8AM 6PM 9 At Sea 9 At Sea Cape Hom Scenic Cruising
10 Santarem Brazil 9 AM 7 PM 10 Moorea Polynesia 8AM 6PM 10 Falkland Islands (Stanley) 8AM 6PM 10 Papeete Tahiti (overnight onboard ship) 9PM 11 At Sea
i 16 Papeete Tahiti 6PM 11 Boca da Valeria Brazil (Amazon River) 7 AM 2 PM 12 Puerto Madryn Argentina 6AM 5PM 17middot18 AtSea 12 Manaus Brazil (overnight onboard ship) 10 AM 13 At Sea
14 Montevideo Uruguay 9AM 6PM19 Pago Pago merlcan Samoa 8AM 6PM 13 Manaus Brazil DISEMBARK AM 15 Buenos Aires Argentina DISEMBARK AM 20 Apia Western Samoa 8AM 6PM 21 At Sea Cross International Dateline middotl1me5forallscenkouisinCile subjectlDclwIgc
tllinmryopefilteslnr=rscordttPorttlmislm)vary22 Suva Fiji 8AM 6PM l 23-24 At Sea
20 Auckland New Zealand 8AM 6PM ORINOCO RIVERSOUTHERN CARIBBEAN ANDESSOUTH AMERICA 26 Tauranga New Zealand 8AM 7PM 27 At Sea
28 Wellington Newealand 8AM 6PM 16 17 DAYS DAYS 29-30 AtSea
31 Sydney Australia DISEMBARK AM ROYAL PRINCESS ROYAL PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP SANTIAGO from to
FT LAUDERDALE FT LAUDERDALE
200S DEPARTURE DATE2005 DEPARTURE DATE
Mar 7Mar 24
CRUISE IIJNERARYCRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Santiago Chlle (Valparaiso) EMBARK PM
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM
2 La Serena Chile (Coquimbo) 8 AM 5 PM2-3 At Sea 3 At Sea Um6n Costa Rica 7AM 7PM 4 Arica Chile 7AM 6PMCristobal Panama (for Panama Canal) 8AM 5PM o At Sea
6 Cartagena Colombia 9AM 2 PM 6 San Martin Peru (for Pisco and Machu Picchu) 7AM 6PM 7 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 130 PM 7PM 7 Callao Peru (overnight for Lima) 530 AM 8-9 At sea 8 Callao Peru 1PM 10 Puerto Ordaz Venezuela (Orinoco River) 8AM 6PM 9 At Sea
i 11 At Sea 10 Manta Ecuador (overnight for Quito) 530AM 12 Greada 8AM i 11 Manta Ecuador 1lM5PMt 1~ Dolllinlca i 7N1 5 PM 12 At Sea
i 13 Transit Panama C~nal 7AM 430 PM14 St Thomas us Virgilslands 9AM 5PM 14 Cartagena Colombia 8AM 130 PMJs AtSei i 15 Aruba Netherlands intiiles 1PM 7PM 16 Princess Cays Bahamas 8AM 16-17 At Sea Tahiti Polynesia 17 FtLallardale Flillilt~ DISEMBARK AM 1ampmiddot Ft L~uderdale Florida DISEMBARK AM
AMAZON RIVERMEDITERRANEAN
21 DAYS
ROYAL PRINCESS
MANAUS
to ROME
2005 DEPARTURE DATE
Apr 21
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE M~naus Brazil (Wemight onboardship) Manaus Brazil
3 BocadaValeria Brazil (AriiazonRivet) 11 AM 4-6 At Sea 7 Recife Brazil 1 PM 8-11 AtSea 12 Dakar Senegal 8AM 13-14 At Sea 15 Agadir Morocco 7AM 16 Casablanca Morocco (for Marrakech) 8AM 17 Gibraltar lOAM 18 Allcante Spain 12 N 19 Barcelona Spain 8AM 20 Cannes France (for Monte Carlo) 8AM 21 FlorencePisa Italy (Livarno) 7AM 22 Rome Italy (Civitavecchia) DISEMBARK AM
INDIAN OCEANAUSTRALIA
28 DAYS
PACIfIC PRINCESS
CAPE TOWN
to SYDNEY
2004 DEPARTURpound DATE
Oct 20
CRUISE ITINERARY1 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Cape Town South Africa EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 3 East London South Africa 7AM 3PM 4 DurbahSouth Africa 8AM 6PM 5-7 At Sea 8 Nosy BeMadagascar 7AM 4PM 9 At Sea 10 Poilit des Galets Reunioll]slahd 11 Port Louis Mauritius 12c19 At Sea 20 Perth Australia (Fremantle) 21-23 At Sea 24 Adelaide Australla 25 At Sea 26 Melbourne Australla 7 27 Tasmania AUstralia (Burnie) 28 At Sea 29 Sydney Australia DISEMBARK AM
I
DEPART EMBARK PM
7PM 6PM
8pM
5PM
3PM 9PM 6PM 6PM 5PM 7PM 7PM
EXOTICS CRUISES
SOUIB ATIANTICANTARCfICNSOUIB AMERICA
24 DAYS
ROYAL PRINCESS
CAPE TOWN
to SANTIAGO
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
Dec 17
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Cape TownSouthAfrica (overnighfol1board ship) EMBARK PM 2 Cape Town South Africa 3PM 2 if~~t Good HopSCenic Crulsing 3-6 6 Tristan DaCunha United Kingdom 8AM 5PM 7-10 At Sea 11 Falkland Islands (Staliley) 8 AM 5PM 12 At Sea 13-16 Antarctica Peninsula ScehltmiddotCruising 14 days ihcludingmiddot Elephant
Island AntarcticSotind Deceptionlslana GerlacheStrait NaxefChannel Schollaert Channel SigJtla Island and Boyd Strait)
17 At Sea Cape Horn Scenic Cruising1amp UshuaiaArgentina (Tierra del fuego) bull middot6 AM 19 Punta Arenas Chile (Strait of Magellan) 7 AM 20 At Sea Amalia Glacier Scenic Cruising21 At Sea Chilean Fjords Scenic Cruising22 AtSea 23 Puerto Mont Chile 7AM 6PM 24 At Sea 25 Santiago Chile (Valparaiso) DISEMBARK AM
-nmes for1l scenlccruisinc are subJect to change
ASIAINDIAMEDITERRANEAN
30 ROYAL PRINCESSDAYS
ROME
to BANGKOK
2004 DEPARlURE DATE
Sep 16
CRUISE Il INERARY
WEST AFRICASOUTH AMERICA
28 DAYS
PACIFIC PRINCESS
FT LAUDERDALE
to CAPE TOWN
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
51 22
CRUISE ITINERARY
DISEMBARK AM
Aruba
EXOTICS CRU ISES amp CRU ISETOU RS
AUSTRALIANEW ZEALAND CRUISETOUR
AUSTRALIAN EXPLORER 2004 DEPARTURE DATESAPPHIRE21 plus
DAYS PRINCESS SYDNEY Dec 17 to
AUCKLAND CRUISETOUR 5P CRUiSE
CRUISETOUR ITINERARY
DAY PORT By Sea By Land DAY PORT
1 Sydney 14 Fiordland National Park 2 Sydney Scenic Cruising
3 SydneyAyers Rock 15 Dunedin New Zealand (Port Chalmers) 4 Ayers ROek
5 Ayers RockPort Douglas 16 Christchurch New Zealand 6 Port Douglas - (Lytleton)
7 Port DouglasSydneyEmbark 17 Wellilgton New Zealand 8 At Sea 18 At Sea 9 Melbourne Australia 19 Tauranga New Zealand
10 At Sea 20 Bay of Islands New Zealand 11 Tasmania Australia (Hobart) 21 Auckland New Zealand 12middot13 At Sea
Sydney Opera House Australia
AUSTRALIANEW ZEALAND CRUISETOUR SOUTHEAST ASIACHINA CRUISETOUR CAPE HORNSTRAIT OF MAGELLAN CRUISETOUR AUSTRALIAN BEIJING Be TERRA COTTA 2004 DEPARTURE DATES RIO 8t IGUAZU FALLS Post-Crulsetour1 Pre-Crulsetour 217EXPLORER 2005 DEPARTURE DATES PACIFICSAPPHIRE WARRIORS19 plw or PRINCESS jul9t loieifie
DAYS PRINCESS SYDNEY Jan 12 plus 19 ROYAL plw Feb 5 Oct 28 Royal BUENOS AIRES
AUCKLAND DAYS ROYAL PRINCESS to 21 ampto DAYS PRINCESS
BEUING CRUISE t ~~S~i BeWln~~~~e
to SANTIAGO~e~s~Ot~r~ih~fi1BANGKOK CRUiSE CRUISECRUISETOUR 3t3P landtourm~yvlty CRUISETOUR 12
DAY PORT DAY PORT
DAY PORT By Sea ltBy LaDd DAY PORT
1 Beijing 11-12 At Sea 1 Rio de janeiro 11 Cape Horn Scenic Cruising
13 Hong Kong 2 Rio de jneiro c 12 Ushuaia Argentina 14 At Sea 3 RiolgUaiu Falls 12 Beagle Channel Scenlc Cruising
15 Nha Trang Vietnam 4 IIDIilZll FaU$13u~os~re$ 13 Punta Arenas Chile
16 Phu My Vietnam 5 Buens AiresEmbark 14 At Sea 17 At Sea 6 Montevideo Uruguay 15 Seno Eyre Fjord Scenic Cruising 18 Singapore 7 At Sea 16 At Sea 19 Kualtan Malaysia 8 Puerto Madryn Argentina 17 Puerto Montt Chile 20 At Sea 9 At Sea 18 At Sea 21 Bangkok Thail3nd 10 Falkland Islands (Stanley) 19 Santiago Chile
DAY PORT DAY PORT
At Sea Pusan SouthKOrea Nagasaki japan At Sea Shanghai China
Note CnIlst route shown for Royil Princess Oct 28 only Timcsforil1lsccnkoulslngmsubjccttothange
CRUISE [OUR ITINERARY
CRUISETOUR ITINERARY
CRUISrrOlJR ITINERARY Fiordland National Park Scenic Cruising DlUedin New Zealand Christchurch New Zealand Wellington New Zealand
14
GRAND PANAMA CANAL CRUISES
ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL
10 10 11 DAYSDAYS DAYS
CORAL PRINCESS GRAND PRINCESS GRAND PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIPfrom from
fromFT LAUDERDALE GALVESTON GALVESTON
2004 DEPARTURE DATES Oct n 21 31 2004 DEPARTURE DATE
2004 DEPARTURE DATENov 10 20 30middot DeelSmiddot
DedSDec 10 28
2005 DEPARTURE DATES CRUISE ITINERARY Jan 7 17 27
CRUISE ITINERARY Feb 6 16 26 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART MarS 1828 CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Galveston Texas EMBARK PMApr 7 17 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTshy 1 Galveston Texas EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 1 ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 3 Belize City Belize 1 PM 7PM 2-3 At Sea 3 Belize City Belize lPM 7PM 4 Costa Maya Mexico (Mahahual) 8AM 4PM 4 Um6n Costa Rica 7AM rPM 4 Costa Maya Mexico (Mahahual) SAM 4 PM 5 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands 12 PM 7PM 5 Panama Canal (to Gatun Lake) 7AM 430 PM 5 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands 12 PM 7PM 6 Ocho Rios Jamaica SAM 5PM 5 Col6n Panama 5PM 8PM 6 At Sea 7 At Sea 6 At Sea Cristobal Panama 7AM 4PM 8 7AM 4PM 7 Grand Cayman Cayman IslandS 7AM 4PM (fot Panama Canal) ftrtpg~niaa~~) S Corumel Mexico SAM 6PM 8 At Sea 9 At Sea 9 Bclize City Belize 7AM 4 PM 6PM 10 Coromel Mexico lOAM 6 PM9 Cozumel Mexico lOAM 10 At Sea 10 At Sea 11 At Sea
Portordtrllndtlmtsmayvllry 11 flo Lauderdale florida DISEMBARK AM Portorntr IInltf timpoundi may vary 11 Galveston Texas DISEMBARK AM Port ordu and Nmes may vary 12 Galv_es~on Texas DISEMBARK AM
ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL
8 DAYS
CORAL PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP
from
FT LAUDERDALE
2004 DEPARTURE DATE Dec 20
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Fl Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM 2-3 At Sea 4 Lim6n Costa Rica 7AM 7PM 5 Panama Canal (to Gatun Lake) 7 AM 430 PM 5 Co16n Panama 5PM SPM 6 At Sea 7 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands SAM 5PM S At Sea 9 Flo Lauderdale Florida DISEMBARK AM Bridge of the Americas Panama
f OptIonll fOllTS inclld1lI tht AtlllnH to Pacific RlIlllfll) joumq will dlmlldrt tilt ship b) tctdtr lit Gfttlm uk AJkr tour plIssmm dlstmlrark tilt shipwin procmlllat through tilt Gatun Locb lIndjlnlllly dock in Gl6lI Hmal1p41Sl11tmmttydiumlmtheJldlo~ lflrshops IInd~llI toIIrsrrnrl CIItutl14ktlllIrtonlflrJhlp
GRAND PANAMA CANAL CRUISES
GRAND PANAMA CANAL GRAND PANAMA CANAL GRAND PANAMA CANAL
150R 18 150R 1715 DAYS DAYS DAYS
CORAL PRINCESS SUN PRINCESS
REGAL PRINCESS REGAL PRINCESS SUN PRINCESS
DAWN PRINCESS REGAL PRINCESS sail between DAWN PRINCESS
sail between FT LAUDERDALE FT LAUDERDALE sail betweenand
FT LAUDERDALEand SAN DIEGO andLOS ANGELES
SAN FRANCISCO 2004 DEPARTURE DATES 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
DAWN PRINCESS 2004 DEPARTURE DATESNov 24Sp191
CRUISE ITINERARY Dec9t CORAL PRINCESSREGAL PRINCESS 5ltp261 CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE ITINERARY
200S DEPARTURE DATES Dec 24 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
SUN PRINCESS DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARIltPM200S DEPARTURE DATES DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Sep 2StMar 24
3 Ocho Rios Jamaica lOAM 6PM 2-3 At5ea 2 At Sea 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBA8KPM
REGAL PRINCESS AprSt 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBA8KPM Jan stu 200S DEPARTURE DATES2 At Sea4 At Sea 4 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 7AM lPMJan 23 5 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 7AM lPM 3 Ocho Rios Jamaica lOAM 6PM REGAL PRINCESS 5 Cartagena Colombia 9AM 3PMFeb7t 4 At Sea Apr 239AM 3PM 6 Transit Panama Canal 7AM 430 PMFb22 ~ yenr~fte~~~~~~u 7AM 430 PM 5 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 7AM lPM At SeaMar9t CORAL PRINCESS 79AM 3PM8 At Sea Apr 27 8 Puntarenas Costa Rica 7AM 7PMSUN PRINCESS 9 Puntarenas Costa Rica 7 AM 7PM ~ yenr~fte~n~~~~~u 7AM 430 PM 9-10 At SeaApr1S 8 At Sea DAWN PRINCESS10-11 At Sea 11 Acapulco Mexico 8AM 5PM
5PM 9 Puntarenas Costa Rica 7AM 7PM Apr 29H ~ae~lcoMexico 8 AM 12 At SeatllWrryopmllzlfrarnLls~in 10-11 At Sea rmrKfIfikTiIIrttimnma1 tlliJlrraryoptJllllsfrlJflSlmFranrimlJn 13 Cabo San lucas Mexico 8AM 5PM
gt This mUJI C4Jl llfwmblnld wlth a 3 14 Cabo San Lucas Mexico 7 AM lPM H ~e~o Mexico 8AM SPM rmruordrrorttimamG)llIryCoIutar CnUK to VlWOIlllr SC Dqs ThUIltIIIflltllnlltCllIIblntdwilhaZ-day 14-15 At Sea 16lhrlllllhI9lllIbtboobdulaquoSC)lQ4k t Illncral) lIpCutcs in mrmt orm Pllrt IiIIIa CocastaICnliutoVan(ouKrBCDlIys16 16 San Francisco California 7AM 4PMcowtlIrcrllisr IIIIYlIl1Ymiddot IhrounIScankboobdlUaK)lllllluU t~A~geles California 6 AM 5PM 14 Cabo San Lucas Mexico 8AM 5PM
Thllwl1JIIICllllslltMOlIkpilllyJmtcad 17-18 At Sea middotmiddotThliIAfllIllCltlllsatMGnIqclBaylnstcadllf 15 At Sea CPlIilldCI1IIu 17 At Sea o[OdKKwsPurllilllrlmllYWlry OchoRicJsPortllmtslllllYVllfymiddot D1SEMBA8K AM19 Vancouver BC DISEMBA8K AM 16 San Die20 California DlSEMBA8K AM 18 Val1couver BC
GRAND PANAMA CANAL COASTAL CRUISING
2-4 CORAL PRINCESS ISLAND PRINCESS SUN PRINCESS18 DAWN PRINCESS DIAMOND PRINCESS STAR PRINCESSDAYSDAYS
COASTAL CRUISE SCHEDULEREGAL PRINCESS
SHIP DAYS FROM TO DEPARTURE DATE DIAMOND PRINCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 5104
SAN FRANCISCO DIAMOND PRINCES5 4 Vancouver Seattle 5404 to CORAL PRINCESS 2 San Francisco Vancouver 5604
NEW YORK DAWN PRiNCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 5704 ISLAND PRiNCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 51204
2004 DEPARTURE DATE SUN PRINCESS 3 San Francisco Vancouver 51404Aug 24 ISLAND PRiNCESS 3 Vancouver LOI Angeles 91804
DIAMOND PRINCESS 1 Seattle Vancouver 91804CRUISE ITINERARY DIAMOND PRINCESS 6 Vancouver Los Angeles 91904 SAPPHIRE PRINCESS 1 Seattle Vancouver 91904 SAPPHREPRINCESS 2 Vancouver San Francisco 92004 DIAMOND PRINCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 43005 DlAMONDPRiNCES$ 4 Vancouver Seattle 5305 SUN PRINCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 5305
ISLAND PRiNCESS 3 Los Angeles VancOllver 5405 CORAL PRiNCESS 2 San Francisco Vancouver 51205
Coral Princess in the Panama Canal
CRUISE PLUS
Extend your adventure with our Cruise Plusreg program Cruise Plusreg enables you to enhance your vacation with one- to four-night hotel
packages in cities that stand on their own as vacation destinations Add nights in Sydney before you cruise or extend your vacation with nights in the city by the
bay San Francisco Transportation and luggage handling costs from the airport to both hotel and ship plus meet and greet services are always included
Wherever you choose to explore youll enjoy properties that are carefully chosen based on service value location and the peace of mind of knowing that Princess
has arranged it all for you
Anchorage Alaska Trevi Fountain Rome Auckland Harbor New Zealand
The Cruise Plusreg Program is available in over 30 major cities including
MEDITERRANEANAEGEAN EXOTICS PANAMA CANAL Barcelona London Rome and Venice Auckland Bangkok Beijing Buenos Aires Ft Lauderdale Los Angeles New York City
Cape Town Ft Lauderdale Honolulu Los San Diego San Francisco Sanjuan Vancouver NORTHERN EUROPE Angeles Montreal Moorea New York City Copenhagen and London MEXICO CARIBBEANOsaka Papeete Rome San Francisco
Ft Lauderdale Galveston Los AngelesTRANSATLANTIC Santiago Seattle Sydney Vancouver Venice Barcelona Copenhagen Ft Lauderdale San Francisco and San Juan
London New York City and Rome ALASKA Anchorage Calgary Fairbanks Kenai San Francisco Seattle and Vancouver
For more information about options and pricing reference a destination specific brochure or contact your travel agent
TRAVEL THE WORLD WITH THE LEADER IN CRUISINGmiddot Princess
Analysis by the Hawaii Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism Comparing the Economic Impact of Foreign Flag Ships with US Flag Cruise Ships Sailing in Hawaii
This is a summary of an analysis prepared by the Hawai Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism (DBEDT) of the economic impact of the foreign flag cruise ship fleet sailing in Hawaii as compared to each of the US flag ships operating in Honolulu
The comparison is set out below
Foreign Pride Pride Pride
Fleet Of Hawaii Of Aloha Of America
Total economic output impact (spendingsales) ($mil) 155 542 4225 4958
Total earnings impact (labor earnings) ($mil) 44 155 1207 1411
Total employment impact Uobs) 1447 5059 3943 4627
This analysis demonstrates that a single US-flagged ship the Pride of America home ported in Honolulu is 32 times more economically impactful and creates 32 times as many jobs as the entire foreign flag fleet that sails into and out of Hawaii ports of call
Economic Impact of Pride of America
Assumptions 1 Annual impact though Pride of Aloha is leaving in May 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existing Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($) 4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of outputl$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job multiplier (jobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
118700 105
2706 3373
147 042
1372
4958
1417
4627
Data sourcelformula Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Line 1 x line 2 x line 31 000000
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 4 x line 5
Line 4 x line 6
Line 4 x line 7
Economic Impact of Pride of Hawaii
Assumptions
1 Annual impact though Pride of Hawaii is leaving in February 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existing Pride of Aloha and Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($) 4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job multiplier (jobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
Data sourceformula 139770 Actual 2007 figure
975 Actual 2007 figure 2706 Actual 2007 figure 3688 Line 1 x line 2 x line 31000000
147 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model 042 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
1372 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
5421 Line 4 x line 5
1549 Line 4 x line 6
5059 Line 4 x line 7
Economic Impact of Pride of Aloha
Assumptions 1 Annual impact though Pride of Aloha is leaving in May 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existlng Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($)
4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job mUltiplier Oobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
95680 111
2706 2874
147 042
1372
4225
1207
3943
Data sourcelformula Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Line 1 x line 2 x line 31000000
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 4 x line 5
Line 4 x line 6
Line 4 x line 7
lt
Methodology Used in Calculating Impact of International Cruise Ships
Cruise ship visitors 1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Came with ships 3 Flied in 4 Average length of stay (days) 5 PPPD ($) 6 Cruise visitor spending ($mil))
Cruise ship crews 7 Ratio of crew spending to cruise visitor spending 8 Cruise crew spending
Cruisline 9 Ratio of crew spending to cruise visitor spending
10 Cruiseline spending
11 Total cruise-related spending ($mil)
12 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 13 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 14 Job multiplier Uobs$ cruise -related spending)
15 Total output impact ($miJ)
16 Total earnings impact ($miJ)
17 Total employment impact (jobs)
106641 98307
8334 739 847 668
02 134
038 254
1055
147 042
1372
1551
444
1447
Data sourceformula Line 2 + line 3 DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report Line 1 x line 4 x line 5
DBEDT 2003 Cruise study Line 7 x line 6
DBEDT 2003 Cruise study Line 9 x line 6
Line 6 + line 8 + line 10
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 11 x line 12
Line 11 x line 13
Line 11 x line 14
Economic Contributions Foreign-Flag Fleet operating in Hawaii vs Three US-Flag Ships
$1500
Pride of Hawaii$1000- $542 million VIc -0-E c Pride of AlohaCo
423 million$500
Pride of America $496 million155 million$shy
Foreign-Flag US-Flag Fleet Fleet
Source State of Hawaii Department of US-Flag $1460 billion Business Economic Development and Tourism
Foreign-Flag $ 155 million 7292008
Employment Foreign-Flag Fleet operating in Hawaii vs Three US-Flag Ships
15000
10000
til c o Pride of Aloha
39435000
Pride of America 1447 4627
~---------
Foreign-Flag US-Flag Fleet Fleet
Source State of Hawaii Department of US-Flag 13629 jobs Business Economic Development and Tourism
Foreign-Flag 1447 jobs 7292008
Foreign Flag Capacity Growth Foreign flag passenger capacity has changed five-fold on roundtrip Hawaii cruises from the West Coast since enactment of the Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative
1600000
1400000
tn 1200000
J enshyZ
1000000
I shyG) en 800000 s G) tn tn
600000 as D 400000
200000
0 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Year
Source US Maritime Administration (derived from the US Customs and Border Patrol Vessel Entrance and Clearance documents - final 2007 data) 7292008
NCL America Hawaii Economic Contributions
(2004-2008)
bull (in Millions) bull $399 in wages benefits and overtime to US seafarers bull $35 in Federal and State payroll Taxes bull $64 in Government Fees and Taxes to Hawaii bull $28 in wages benefits and overtime to US other employees bull $52 in Port Charges to Hawaii Companies (Stevedores tugs pilots etc) bull $85 in Fuel to Tesoro Hawaii bull $130 for shore excursions to Hawaii tour operators bull $39 for Hawaii hotel rooms and ground transport bull $75 for food grown in Hawaii bull $57 in union fees and levies (incl $32M paid directly by employees) bull $1 in MMD fees to the United States Coast Guard bull $51 for recruitment screening processing and training crew bull $76 advertising and promoting Hawaii as a destination bull $1092
COASTWISE CRUISES INTERPRETIVE RULE RESOLUTION Adopted at the
US Conference of Mayors 76th Annual Meeting
June 20-242008 Miami
WHEREAS the Department of Homeland Securitys Customs and Border Protection (CBP) issued a proposed Interpretive Rule regulating Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises on foreign flagged vessels between US ports of call under the Passenger Vessel Services Act at the request of the United States Maritime Administration and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule would require that a foreign-flagged vessel on a coastwise cruise to call at a foreign port for at least 48 hours with that foreign stop constituting at least 50 percent of the cruise itinerary and allowing passengers to disembark the cruise vessel at the foreign port before continuing the cruise to a US port of call and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule establishes burdensome criteria that are wholly inconsistent with industry practice particularly the 48-hour call at foreign port shyinasmuch as the standard port call is six to eight hours - as well as the requirement that 50 percent of a cruise be spent at the foreign port and
WHEREAS the intent of the proposed Interpretive Rule is to protect the single remaining US flag vessel serving the Inter-Hawaiian Island cruise trade that according to the Hawaii Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism generates more than 4600 jobs and generates nearly $500 million in economic benefits for the state annually and
WHEREAS thousands of members of the International Longshore Workers Union (nWU) are employed at US ports serving cruise ships and whose jobs would be at risk if the proposed Interpretive Rule were implemented and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule is vague as to the breadth of its application ie to coastwise cruises between all United States ports or applied solely to coastwise cruises from West Coast ports to Hawaii and
WHEREAS the Cruise Lines International Association estimates the proposed Interpretive Rule would upend the $17 billion in national cruise industry spending and put at risk more than 300000 jobs generated by the international cruise industry including jobs held by nWU at US ports and the local allied industries supporting the cruise industry and
Executive Order Submissions Under Review
II Reglnfogov Where to ind Federal Regulatory Information -~
Home ] Lnitied Agenda and Regulator) Ilan pound012866 Regulator) Review Jnformalion Collection Review
EO 12866 Regulatory Rlvlw dvanced Search IJitorical RepWI Review Counh Jriter XIL
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA)
Executive Order Submissions Under Review July 25 2008 - _------------____ _shy
Department of Homeland Security
AGENCY DHS-TSA RIN 1652-AA53
TITLE Large Aircraft Security Program Other Aircraft Operator Security Programs and Airport Operator Security Program
STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT Yes RECEIVED DATE 06302008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
AGENCY DHS-USCIS RIN Llti15-AB67 TITLE Changes to Requirements Affecting H-2B Nonimmigrants and Their Employers
STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT No RECEIVED DATE 06092008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
AGENCY DHS-USCBP RIN 1651AA11 TITLE Issuance of a Visa and Authorization for Temporary Admission Into the United States for Certain Nonimmigrant Aliens Afflicted W HIV Infection
STAGE Final Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT No RECEIVED DATE 03042008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
-_RE_V-IE-W-E-X-T-EN-D-E-D---------- _
AGENCY DHS-USCBP RIN 1651-AA76 TITLE Coastwise Transportation of Passengers STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT Yes RECEIVED DATE 07142008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
Disclosure I Accessibility I Privacy Policy I Contact Us
httpwwwreginfogovpublicdoeoReviewSearch 7252008
View Rule Page 11
Shere D find Federal ReguLatory InformciiorlReglnfogov Home J Cnified Agenda al1d Regulatory Plan EO 12866 Regulatory Reyiew Information Collection Reiew
Current rnified Agenda and Regulatory Plan Historical Pnified Agenda and Regulatory Plan Search
View Rule
DHSIUSCBP RIN 1651-AA76 Publication ill Spring 2008
Title llCoastwise Transportation of Passengers
Abstract This interim rule amends the Department of Homeland Securitys (DHS) current regulations relating to the transportation of passengers by non-coastwise-qualified vessels on voyages that begin and end at a US port and stop at intervening US and foreign port(s) Under this interim final rule voyages that begin and end at a US port and stop at a foreign port(s) and at intervening US port(s) where a large USshyflag coastwise-qualified passenger vessel engages in regular service are in violation of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) unless the cumulative length of stay(s) at intervening foreign port(s) is more than 50 percent of the total amount of time spent at the intervening US port(s) and passengers are permitted to go ashore at the foreign port(s) The purpose of this amendment is to ensure that the Congressional purpose in enacting the PVSA which is to preserve the economic benefits of US coastwise trade to US-flag coastwise-qualified vessels is properly implemented
Agency Department of Homeland Security(DHS) Priority Substantive Nonsignificant
KIN Status First time published in the Unified Agenda Agenda Stage of Rulemaking Final Rule Stage
Major No Unfunded Mandates No
CFR Citation -LCER 4J~)(h)(plusmnJ
Legal Authority 5JJSS_30J12lJ-SClt16 J9_lJiCJ 431 9_L1C1plusmn3JJ2JScHJ1J2JSCJ624 L(LlLSc207LIl(gtJfHgt~ _CiQJ _46lSC 6QLQ~
Legal Deadline None
Timetable Action Date FR Cite
Interim Final Action 0510012008
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required No Government Levels Affected None
Federalism No
Included in the Regulatory Plan No
RIN Data Printed in the FR No
Agency Contact Glen E Vereb Chief Entry Procedures and Carriers Branch Department of Homeland Security US Customs and Border Protection Office of Regulations and Rulings 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington DC 20229 Phone202572-8730
Disclosure I Accessibility I Privacy Policy I Contact Us
httpwwwreginfogovpublicdoeAgendaViewRuleruleID=286751 7128120
Federal RegisterVol 72 No 224Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules 65487
SPECULATIVE POSITION LIMITS 1-Continued [In contract units)
Contract
Soybeans and Mini-Soybeans 2
Wheat and Mini-Wheat 2 bullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbull
Soybean Oil
SingleSpot month All monthsmonth
600 8600 13300 600 11100 14500 540 6600 8600
Soybean Meal 720 5500 7100
Minneapolis Grain Exchange
Hard Red Spring Wheat I 600 I 11100 I 14500
New York Board of Trade
Cotton No2 I 300 I 5300 I 7300
Kansas City Board of Trade
Hard Winter Wheat I 600 I 11100 I 14500
1 For purposes of compliance with these limits positions in a futures contract that shares ~ubstantially identical terms with a contract market enumerated herein including a futures contract that is cash-settled based on the settlement price of an enumerated contract market shall be agshygregated with positions in the enumerated contract market
2 For purposes of compliance with these limits positions in the regular-sized and mini-sized contracts shall be aggregated
Issued by the Commission this November 152007 in Washington DC David Stawick Secretary of the Commission [FR Doc E7-22681 Filed 11-20-07 845 amI BILLING CODE 6351-Q1-P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Bureau of Customs and Border Protection
19 CFR Part 4
[USCBP-2007-o098]
Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises
AGENCY Customs and Border Protection Department of Homeland Security ACTION Proposed interpretation solicitation of comments
SUMMARY This document proposes new criteria to be used by Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to determine whether non-coastwise-qualified vessels are in violation ofthe Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) when engaging in cruise itineraries in which passengers board at a US port the vessel calls at several Hawaiian ports and then the vessel proceeds to a foreign port or ports for a brief period before ultimately returning to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their cruise CBP believes these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because it appears that the primary objective of the foreign stop is evasion of the PVSA
DATES Comments must be received on or before December 212007 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT Glen E Vereb Cargo Security Carriers amp Immigration Branch Office of International Trade (202) 572-8730 ADDRESSES You may submit comments identified by docket number by one of the following methods
bull Federal eRulemaking Portal http wwwregulationsgov Follow the instructions for submitting comments
bull Mail Border Security Regulations Branch Office of International Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
I Public Participation
Interested persons are invited to participate in this proposed interpretation by submitting written data views or arguments on all aspects of the proposed interpretation Customs and Border Protection (CBP) also invites comments that relate to the economic environmental or federalism effects that might result from this proposed interpretation Comments that will provide the most assistance to CBP in developing these procedures will reference a specific portion of the proposed interpretation explain the reason for any recommended change and include data information or authority that support such recommended change
Instructions All submissions received must include the agency name and docket number for this proposed
interpretation All comments received will be posted without change to http wwwregulationsgov including any personal information provided
Docket For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received go to http wwwregulationsgov Submitted comments may also be inspected on regular business days between the hours of 9 am and 430 pm at the Office of International Trade Customs and Border Protection 799 9th Street NW 5th Floor Washington DC Arrangements to inspect submitted documents should be made in advance by calling Mr Joseph Clark at (202) 572shy8768
II Background
The maritime cabotage law governing the transportation of passengers was first established by section 8 of the Passenger Vessel Services Act of June 191886 (the PVSA) 24 Stat 81 as amended by section 2 of the Act of February 17 1898 30 Stat 248 formerly codified at 46 USC App 289 (now codified at 46 USC 55103) 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 of $200 (now $300 as promulgated in TD 03-11 pursuant to the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 199028 USC 2461 note) for each passenger so transported and landed
The intent of the maritime cabotage laws including the PVSA was to provide a legal structure that guarantees a coastwise monopoly to
65488 Federal RegisterVol 72 No 224Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules
American shipping and thereby promotes development of the American merchant marine Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 28 (DC Cir 1984) see also The Granada 35 FSupp 892 8931940 AMC 1601 (DC Pa 1940) (stating that the legislative aim of section 289 [now 55102] was the creation of a practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping business for United States ships) In other words the PVSA was enacted to advance the United States merchant marine and fleet by restricting the use of foreign-ownedflagged passenger vessels in United States territorial waters
Passenger vessel transportation between United States ports has historically been viewed to be part of the coastwise trade after the enactment of the PVSA This view is premised on the concepts of continuity of the voyage and whether its intended purpose or objective was coastwise transportation In other words the PVSA was held to be violated if the coastwise movement was continuous or if the purpose of the trip was a coastwise voyage (See 18 OAG 445 September 4 1886 28 OAG 204 February 16 1910 29 OAG 318 February 12 1912 30 OAG 44 February 1 1913 34 OAG 340 December 24 1924 and 36 OAG 352 August 13 1930)
The CBP regulations promulgated pursuant to the PVSA are found at section 480a of title 19 of the Code of Federal Regulations (19 CFR 480a) and are reflective of the above cited Office of the Attorney General decisions These regulations provide among other things that a non-coastwise-qualified vessel which embarks a passenger at a port in the United States embraced within the coastwise laws (a coastwise port) will be deemed to have landed that passenger in violation of the PVSA if the passenger disembarks at a different coastwise port on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a nearby foreign port or ports (as defined in 19 CFR 480a(a)(2) see also 19 CFR 480a(b)(2)) The terms embark and disembark are words of art which are defined as going on board a vessel for the duration of a specific voyage and leaving a vessel at the conclusion of a specific voyage respectively (See 19 CFR 480a(a)(4))
The references in section 480a to nearby foreign ports (defined in 19 CFR 480a(a)(2)) are the results of attempts by CBP to apply an Office of the Attorney Generals opinion dated February 26 1910 (28 OAG 204) In that case a foreign-flag vessel transported 615 passengers on a voyage around the world beginning in New
York and concluding in San Francisco The Attorney General opined that since the primary object of the voyage was to visit various parts of the world on a pleasure tour returning home via California and not to be transported in domestic commerce the transportation was not in violation of the PVSA
The 1910 Attorney Generals opinion was extended to voyages that included foreign ports other than nearby foreign ports (See Treasury Decision (TD) 68shy285 (33 FR 16558) November 14 1968) However voyages solely to one or more coastwise ports have always been considered predominantly coastwise Therefore non-coastwise-qualified vessels engaging in such a voyage where passengers temporarily go ashore at a coastwise port have been deemed to have violated the PVSA
m Current Law and Policy Pursuant to Public Law 109-304 120
Stat 1632 enacted on October 6 2006 Title 46 United States Code was substantially reorganized and recodified Consequently the PVSA is now codified at 46 USC 55103 and provides that no vessel shall transport passengers between ports or places in the United States either directly or by way of a foreign port under a penalty of $300 for each person so transported and landed except one that (1) Is wholly owned by citizens of the United States for purposes of engaging in the coastwise trade and (2) has been issued a certificate of documentation with a coastwise endorsement or is exempt from documentation but would otherwise be eligible for such a certificate and endorsement
In 2003 Congress enacted Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II Section 211 for the purpose of revitalizing the oceangoing US-flag cruise industry in Hawaii (the 2003 Act) Three oceangoing US-flag cruise ships PRIDE OF ALOHA PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAII were documented with coastwise privileges pursuant to the 2003 Act These vessels entered regular service in Hawaii in 2004 2005 and 2006 respectively and pursuant to the express language of the 2003 Act are limited in their operation to providing regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands of Hawaii
The CBP regulations promulgated pursuant to the PVSA are set forth in 19 CFR 480a and have remained unchanged throughout both the recodification of Title 46 of the United States Code and the enactment of the 2003 Act They provide that a violation of the PVSA occurs when passengers embark (board a vessel for the
duration of a voyage) a non-coastwiseshyqualified vessel at one US port and disembark (leave the vessel at the conclusion of a voyage) at a different US port unless they proceed with the vessel to a distant foreign port (Le any port not considered a nearby foreign port which is defined as any port located in North America Central America Bermuda or the West Indies including the Bahamas) Currently these regulations do not contain specific criteria for non-coastwise-qualified vessels on itineraries including US ports and either nearby or distant foreign ports in order for such foreign port calls to be compliant with the PVSA
To reiterate the applicable CBP regulations provide that the PVSA is violated when a non-coastwise-qualified vessel transports a passenger on a voyage solely to one or more coastwise ports and the passenger disembarks or goes ashore temporarily at a coastwise port (19 CFR 480a(b)(1)) Furthermore a violation of the PVSA also occurs when a non-coastwise-qualified vessel transports a passenger on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a nearby foreign port or ports (but no other foreign port) and the passenger disembarks at a coastwise port other than the port of embarkation (19 CFR 480a(b)(2)) However there is no violation of the PVSA when a passenger is on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a distant foreign port or ports (whether or not the voyage includes a nearby foreign port or ports) and the passenger disembarks at a coastwise port provided the passenger has proceeded with the vessel to a distant foreign port (19 CFR 480a(b)(3))
IV Request From MARAD To Provide Guidance
The US Department of Transportation Maritime Administration (MARAD) has requested that CBP take action to ensure enforcement of the PVSA MARAD has asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreignshyflag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwiseshyqualified cruise ship operators
In April of 2007 the operator of the three US-flag cruise vessels operating solely in Hawaii pursuant to the 2003 Act announced their intent to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAIl from the Hawaii market and redeploy her to Europe The operator intends to re-flag the vessel to foreign registry directly resulting in the loss of over 1100 crewmember jobs The primary reason cited for this decision is the rapid increase in foreign-flag competition entering the Hawaii market
Federal Register I Vol 72 No 224 I Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules 65489
from the West Coast This competition is evidenced in published cruise itineraries of foreign-flag carriers offering a variety of round trip cruises that depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period usually in the early morning and ultimately return to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their cruise These cruises are often marketed as Hawaii cruises and except for the brief stop in the nearby foreign port of Ensenada are purely coastwise in nature It is these cruise itineraries that pose an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels that pursuant to the 2003 Act are currently engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands
V Preliminary Notice
In response to MARADs concerns CBP sent letters to two carriers known to operate the itineraries in question as well as to the Cruise Lines International Association Inc stating that CBP believes that these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because it appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA The letters further indicated that CBP is taking steps to publish this position
VI CBPs Proposed Interpretive Rule Accordingly in this document CBP is
proposing to provide that cruise itineraries for non-qualified coastwise vessels which allow passengers to board at a US port call at several Hawaiian ports proceed to a foreign port or ports for a brief period and then ultimately return to the original US port of embarkation for disembarkation are not consistent with the PVSA and the regulations promulgated pursuant thereto Specifically CBP interprets a voyage to be solely to one or more coastwise ports even where it stops at a foreign port unless the stop at the foreign port is a legitimate object of the cruise CBP will presume that a stop at a foreign port is not a legitimate object of the cruise unless
(1) The stop lasts at least 48 hours at the foreign port
(2) The amount of time at the foreign port is more than 50 percent of the total amount of time at the US ports of call and
(3) The passengers are permitted to go ashore temporarily at the foreign port
Accordingly CBP proposes to adopt an interpretive rule under which it will presume that any cruise itinerary that does not include a foreign port call that
satisfies each of these three criteria constitutes coastwise transportation of passengers in violation of 19 CFR 480a(b)(1)
Dated November 16 2007 W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection [FR Doc E7-22788 Filed 11-20-07 845 am] BILLING CODe 9111-14-1
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau
27 CFR Part 9
[Notice No 76]
RIN 1513-AB49
Proposed Establishment of the Leona Valley Viticultural Area (2007R-281 P)
AGENCY Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau Treasury ACTION Notice of proposed rulemaking
SUMMARY The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau proposes to establish the 134 square mile Leona Valley viticultural area in the northeast part of Los Angeles County California We designate viticultural areas to allow vintners to better describe the origin of their wines and to allow consumers to better identify wines they may purchase We invite comments on this proposed addition to our regulations DATES We must receive written comments on or before January 22 2008
ADDRESSES You may send comments on this notice to one of the following addresses
bull httpwwwregulationsgov (Federal e-rulemaking portal follow the instructions for submitting comments) or
bull Director Regulations and Rulings Division Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau PO Box 14412 Washington DC 20044-4412
See the Public Participation section of this notice for specific instructions and requirements for submitting comments and for information on how to request a public hearing
You may view copies of this notice selected supporting materials and any comments we receive about this proposal at httpwwwregulationsgov under Docket No 2007-0066 You also may view copies of this notice all related petitions maps or other supporting materials and any comments we receive about this
proposal by appointment at the TTB Information Resource Center 1310 G Street NW Washington DC 20220 To make an appointment call 202-927shy2400
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT NA Sutton Regulations and Rulings Division Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau 925 Lakeville S1 No 158 Petaluma CA 94952 phone 415shy271-1254 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
Background on Viticultural Areas
TTB Authority Section 105(e) of the Federal Alcohol
Administration Act (FAA Act) 27 USC 205(e) authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to prescribe regulations for the labeling of wine distilled spirits and malt beverages The FAA Act provides that these regulations should among other things prohibit consumer deception and the use of misleading statements on labels and ensure that labels provide the consumer with adequate information as to the identity and quality of the product The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) administers the regulations promulgated under the FAA Act
Part 4 ofthe TTB regulations (27 CFR part 4) allows the establishment of definitive viticultural areas and the use of their names as appellations of origin on wine labels and in wine advertisements Part 9 of the TTB regulations (27 CFR part 9) contains the list of approved viticultural areas
Definition Section 425(e)(1)(i) ofthe TTB
regulations (27 CFR 425(e)(1)(i)) defines a viticultural area for American wine as a delimited grape-growing region distinguishable by geographical features the boundaries of which have been recognized and defined in part 9 of the regulations These designations allow vintners and consumers to attribute a given quality reputation or other characteristic of a wine made from grapes grown in an area to its geographic origin The establishment of viticultural areas allows vintners to describe more accurately the origin of their wines to consumers and helps consumers to identify wines they may purchase Establishment of a viticultural area is neither an approval nor an endorsement by TTB of the wine produced in that area
Requirements Section 425(e)(2) of the TTB
regulations outlines the procedure for proposing an American viticultural area and provides that any interested party
Us Department ofHomelaDd Secmity Washington DC 10229
bull ~
US Customs and Border Protection
AUG 15 2fXJJ
VE5-3-02-QTRRBSTCCCI - ti015502-GG-
Mr leon Sutcliffe Director Port Operations Camivai Cruise Unes Camival Place 3655 NW 87Avenue Miami Aorlda 33178
RE P~nger Vessef Services Ad Coastwise Transportation 46 USC sect 55103 19 CFR sect 480a(b)
Dear Mr Sutcliffe
As you know US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) enforces the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) codified at TItle 46 United States Code section 55103 (46 USC 55103) This statute prohibits non-coastwise-qualifled vessels (ie those vessels not US-buill owned and documented with a coastwise endorsement) from transporting passengers between porls or places within the United States The regUlations promUlgated pursuant to the PVSA are found at TrtJe 19 Code of Federal Regulations section 4808 (19 CFR 4808)
It has come to our attention that passenger vessels of your company are engaging in cruise itineraries that include ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands Two USAlagged coastwise-endorsed passenger vessefs are also currenUy engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of caD wittlin the Hawaiian Islands
As part of your cruise itineraries some of your foreign-flagged vessels depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period and ultimately rebJm to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their endse For example the MS ZAANDAM of Holand America Lines departs San Diego cruises the Hawaiian Islands stops in Ensenada from 800pm to 11 OOpmbull and returns to san Diego CBP believes these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because It appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA -- - - ~~~------
Please be advised that CBP is taking steps to publish this position Should have any questions pertaining to this matter please contact Mr Glen Vereb Chief Cargo Security Carriers and Immigration Branch at (202) 572-8724
Sincerely
F Jl E EST Y LEe A U I 5 I N Gmiddot
December 21 2007
The Honorable W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection co Border Security Regulations Branch Office ofInternational Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229
Re Hawaii Coastwise Cruises (USCBP-2007-0098) Comments in Response to Proposed Interpretation
Dear Commissioner Basham
NCL America Inc1 (NCLA) submits these comments in support ofthe efforts ofCustoms and Border Protection to enforce the Passenger Vessel Services Act and the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative as applied to Hawaii coastwise cruises
1 Introduction and Summary of Position
NCLA operates three large oceangoing US flag cruise ships in Hawaii These ships are documented under US flag and are required to operate in regular service in Hawaii pursuant to the authority of the Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative a 2003 federal statute intended to revitalize the US flag cruise industry and to maximize economic and national security benefits to the United States (the 2003 Act)
NCLA has invested $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships pursuant to the 2003 Act and in direct reliance on the protections of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) and its proper enforcement The PVSA limits the transportation ofpassengers between US ports to coastwise documented US flag ships Its statutory protections recognize that US flag ships have significantly higher operational costs in part because they are subject to more stringent US laws including US labor laws and federal
1 NCL America Inc is a US corporation incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware headquartered in Honolulu Hawaii As a US corporation it is subject to US taxes at both the federal and state level The Chief Executive Officer the Chairman of the Board and all of the Board of Directors of NCL America are US citizens The company is also subject to US labor and employment laws and is required by statute to maintain a workforce comprised primarily ofUS citizens
700 Bishop St SUite 900 I Honolulu HawMi 96813 I Tel 8085273800 Fax 8085273820 I ndcom
2
income tax among others The NCLA ships operating in Hawaii are the only large oceangoing cruise ships operating under US flag In furtherance of the policy goals of the PVSA and the 2003 Act these ships have created over 4000 seafaring jobs all subject to US minimum wage and other labor statutes
Since 2003 there has been a significant increase in capacity in the Hawaii market from foreign flag ships providing cruise service to Hawaii from the West Coast Many of these foreign flag cruises are marketed as Hawaii cruises and consist entirely ofUS ports ofcall with the sole exception of a token stop in Mexico for as little as an hour late at night under circumstances where passengers are not permitted to get offthe ship There are no reported rulings approving these particular foreign flag itineraries
Lower cost foreign competition in the Hawaii market has unfairly hurt NCLAs operations NCLA has incurred substantial losses which have contributed significantly to its decision earlier this year to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAll from US flag and reshydeploy it foreign Unfair foreign competition poses an imminent threat to the remaining US flag passenger vessels operating in the Hawaii trades pursuant to the 2003 Act
As the agency statutorily charged with implementation of the 2003 Act the US Department ofTransportation Maritime Administration (MARAn) is aware of the threat foreign flag Hawaii itineraries pose to the US flag fleet and brought the situation to the attention ofthe US Department ofHomeland Security Bureau ofCustoms and Border Protection (CBP or Customs) Customs determined that the primary object of these itineraries was coastwise and that the Ensenada stop was an evasion of the PVSA
In August 2007 Customs provided written notice to the affected foreign lines and their trade association that the existing itineraries were contrary to the PVSA None of these lines sought advance rulings even after the Customs notice with respect to their Hawaii itineraries pursuant to Customs regulations and many continued to market the itineraries as Hawaii cruises NCLA supports the efforts ofCustoms and MARAD to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act for Hawaii cruises
2 Statutory Authority for Customs Proposed Interpretation
(a) Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA)
Congress passed the PVSA in 1886 to protect the US maritime transportation industry from foreign competition2 Protection is afforded through penalty assessments on foreign vessels transporting passengers between US ports or places directly or by way ofa foreign port 3 As Congress and the courts have recognized coastwise protections for the US maritime transportation industry are only one dimension of the PVSA Operating in conjunction with other coastwise laws and with the US
2 See United States v Honduran SS GRANADA 35 F Supp 892 894 (BD Pa 1940)(citing purpose of PVSA to meet threats to the practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping which was to be preserved for US ships)
46 USc sect 55103 (originally 46 USC App 289)
3
documentation laws the PVSA also enhances military sealift in times ofnational emergency sustains a US merchant marine and supports the US shipbuilding and repair industry4
(b) Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative (the 2003 Act)
Over the past decade Congress has sought to reinforce the goals of the PVSA by providing mechanisms to revitalize the oceangoing US flag cruise fleet particularly in Hawaii The Project America legislation enacted in 1997 authorized among other things the re~flagging ofone existing cruise ship contingent on the operator contracting for the construction oftwo new oceangoing cruise shipss Following the default of the operator under the original contract Congress enacted the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative for the purpose ofrecovering economic and national security benefits to the United States bull 6 These same goals of the original PVSA were expressly referenced in the legislative history of the 2003 Act which emphasized that these ships will be assets available in time ofnational emergency and will significantly expand the pool ofqualified seafarers upon which the US Department ofDefense relies to crew non-combatant vessels
The 2003 Act authorizes the US documentation ofthree cruise ships for operation in regular service in Hawaii subject to certain conditions including a prohibition on operating in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico and the Caribbean Sea and a requirement that all vessel repair work be undertaken in the United States MARAD is charged with implementation of the 2003 Act
3 Customs Implementation of PVSA
(a) Regulations
The current regulations implementing the PVSA were published by Customs in 19858 The growth of the foreign flag cruise industry in North America and in particular the development of the Alaska cruise market led to an effort in 1984 to amend the thenshyexisting regulations to increase the ease of administration and operational flexibility The effort to change the regulation had support from US port interests who saw benefit in the potential increase in the number ofUS ports that foreign vessels could call and was opposed by proponents ofpotential US flag projects as detrimental to efforts to revitalize the US fleet 9 The preamble to the 1985 rule emphasized that it was of paramount importance to consider the primary object ofpassengers in taking a
4 See American Hawaii Cruises v Skinner 713 F Supp 452 457 (DDC 1989) (recognizing the contribution of the PVSA and the Jones Act in helping to secure national defense by maintaining a merchant marine oftbe best equipped and most suitable types ofvessels sufficient to serve in time of war or national emergency) see also Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 30 (DC Cir 1984) Wirth Ltd v SIS Acadia Forest 537 F2d 1272 1281 n32 (5th Cir 1976) S Public Law 105-56 Section 8109 (111 Stat 1203 1244) (Oct 81997 ) 6 Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II General Provisions - Department ofCommerce Section 211 (117 Stat 1179) (Feb 20 2003) 1 149 Cong Rec S1118 (dailyed Jan 17 2003(statement ofSenator Inouye) 8 19 CFR sect 480a 950 Fed Reg 26981 (July I 1985)
4
voyage10 a concept which is reinforced elsewhere in Customs regulations11 In its analysis of the comments received at the time Customs accepted the view ofport interests that the modified rule would help their business but did so recognizing the absence ofa regular salt water US flag passenger fleet Customs acknowledged the potential harm to prospective efforts to revitalize the US flag passenger fleet and expressly cautioned that if it were ever shown that coastwise qualified vessels in competition with foreign vessels were in fact hurt by the modified Customs regulation then Customs would immediately reconsider its position12
(b) Customs Rulings
Given the significant penalties associated with violating the PVSA13 Customs regulations expressly provide a mechanism for the owner or charterer of a foreign vessel or any other interested person to request an advisory ruling as to whether a contemplated voyage would be considered in violation of the PVSA14 Customs regulations provide that vessel operators can rely on these ruling letters only to the extent that the facts and circumstances are identical to those in the ruling letter IS
Notwithstanding the fact that several foreign cruise lines offer Hawaii itineraries originating in a US mainland port and calling at Hawaii ports with a token intervening stop in Mexico there are no reported rulings expressly approving such an itinerary for these foreign cruise lines 16
4 The Cruise Industry in Hawaii
(a) NCL America Returns US flag to the Oceangoing Passenger Fleet
Pursuant to the requirements ofthe 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative NCLA agreed to promote US-flag cruising enhance military sealift capacity and expand the US maritime labor base No other major cruise line had ever undertaken such a commitment to the US flag and the public policy objectives Congress sought to achieve under the PVSA or the 2003 Act Introduction ofPRIDE OF ALOHA in 2004 was a significant development in the maritime industry because it marked the restoration ofthe
10 Id at 26983 11 Customs Regulations include a provision on the effect ofruling letters and with respect to carrier rulings the applicable regulation refers to rulings setting forth a determination as to whether or not the primary object of a contemplated voyage is coastwise transportation in violation of46 USC sect 289 [pYSA codified at 46 USC sect55103] 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 12 50 Fed Reg at 26983 13 A modem cruise ship with 2400 passengers for example would be subject to a fine of$720OOO per cruise based on the statutory penalty of$300 for each passenger transported in violation of the Act 14 19 CFR sect 480a(d) IS 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 16 There is one older reported mling involving a request to drop the Ensenada port call from a Los AngeleslHawaiiLos Angeles itinerary which Customs held would violate the PYSA In dicta Customs acknowledged that the itinerary could be in compliance if the Ensenada call were not dropped but did not address the issue ofwhether a one hour service call where no passengers depart the vessel would be sufficient The carrier that obtained that ruling has since left the Hawaii market See Customs Ruling HQ 114078 re Crystal Hannony (Nov 4 1997)
5
us flag to the oceangoing cruise industry A contemporaneous press release from the Us Department ofTransportation reported that the three US-flag cruise ships to be introduced pursuant to the 2003 Act were expected to create more than 20000 US jobs generate more than $825 million ofexpenditures in the US economy and create nearly $360 million in federal tax revenue by the end of 200717 In 2005 the PRIDE OF AMERICA was introduced and in 2006 the third vessel PRIDE OF HAWAll was introduced to Hawaii Both the PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAIl offer 7shyday inter-island Hawaii itineraries whereas PRIDE OF ALOHA operates on 7 and 10 day cruises exclusively among the islands ofHawaii as well as 11 day cruises that include a foreign port call at Fanning Island To date NCLA has invested over $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships in furtherance ofthe policy objectives of the PVSA and the 2003 Act These ships employ over 4000 seafarers and generate hundreds ofmillions of dollars in benefits for Hawaii and the nation
(b) Significant Increase in Foreign Flag Capacity Since 2003
The most significant change in the Hawaii cruise market since 2003 has been the dramatic increase in capacity A significant portion ofthis capacity increase is directly attributable to NCLAs fulfillment ofthe Congressional mandate in the 2003 Act However foreign-flag operations in the Hawaii market as measured in passenger nights18 have skyrocketed Based on MARAn data derived from the US Customs Border Patrol Vessel Entrance and Clearance documents the passenger nights for foreign flag vessels departing from the West Coast to Hawaii on round trip cruise have increased several hundredfold during this period19 See Exhibit A
(c) NCLA Has Incurred Substantial Losses During this Period
Since 2004 NCLA has lost cumulatively more than a quarter ofa billion dollars A principal reason for these losses has been the increase in foreign capacity in this market NCLA has taken significant steps to reduce costs to address the increase in foreign competition but NCLA is at an inherent disadvantage when competing against foreign companies that are not subject to US labor laws US tax laws and other laws Ofcourse the statutory protections of the PVSA are intended to address these very issues That is why Customs immediate action to implement the proposed interpretation is critical for the US flag fleet Regrettably NCLA has already been forced to reduce overall capacity early next year with the withdrawal ofPRIDE OF HAWAlI to another
17 DOT Press Release dated June 72004 see also DOT Press Release dated August 132004 in connection with visit to PRIDE OF ALOHA by US Transportation Secretary Norman Y Mineta 11 Passenger nights (also referred to as passenger capacity days) are calculated by multiplying the number ofpassengers per vessel by the number ofcruise days in each itinerary by the number of cruises This is the unit ofmeasurement employed by MARAn In contrast passenger bed supply (also referred to as passenger capacity) data reflects only the number ofberths per vessel multiplied by the number of cruises and hence understates the market by excluding the full economic value ofthe cruise perfonned 19 In 2003 the total number ofpassenger nights for round-trip West Coast to Hawaii cruises was 303325 which jumped by 353 to 1072329 in 2006 and by 430 to 1304546 from 2003 to 2007 (The 2007 figure is based on MARAD data for six months and a1ll1ualized by published itineraries for the balance of the year)
6
market for operation under foreign flag This move alone will result in the loss ofover 1000 American seafaring jobs
5 Customs Proposed Interpretation is Necessary to Further the Important National Security and Public Policy Objectives Embodied in Federal Law
As Customs has properly noted the increase in foreign competition in the Hawaii trades in contravention of the PVSA pose[s] an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels[] As the operator of these ships NCLA has a vested interest in protecting the jobs ofthe thousands ofAmerican crewmembers and cruise ship service providers who support these vessels NCLA also has an interest in protecting the substantial economic investment it has made to revitalize the US flag passenger vessel fleet But a balancing of interests in the context of Customs enforcement ofexisting law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act requires a much broader focus
The legislative history of the 2003 Act expressly recognized the national security and public policy import ofestablishing a US flag passenger vessel fleet as a means to maintain the countrys preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool of qualified seafarers and as a means to help sustain a fleet ofUS-flag vessels to su~ort
the nations military and maritime industrial base for times ofnational emergency
Congress understood the importance ofestablishing a viable US flag cruise ship fleet as something larger than the vessels themselves These national security and public policy objectives must be weighed in the balance as Customs assesses how best to interpret its rules to give effect to the PVSA and the 2003 Act
6 Customs Should Clarify that the Proposed Interpretation is Limited to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades and Adopt Reasonable Measures to Ensure Sufficient Foreign Content
Since publication ofthe proposed interpretative rule several commenters have observed that the scope of the proposed interpretation is ambiguous because the language of Section VI referencing any cruise itinerary appears broader than the caption Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises and the entire discussion in the published notice which focuses exclusively on US-flag coastwise vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA agrees that the proposed interpretation should be clarified so that its scope is limited to vessels operating roundtrip voyages from US ports that include Hawaii port calls
NCLA supports the concept reflected in the proposed interpretive rule that round trip Hawaii itineraries from US ports on foreign ships must include a material and measurable degree ofoverall foreign port content as compared to US port content
20 149 Congo Rec S1117 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)
7
(a) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is also Consistent with Subsequent Congressional Enactments Modifying the PVSA
As discussed above it is well established that the PVSA was designed toRrotect US-flag vessels from foreign competition in the coastwise and domestic trades 1
Subsequent legislative enactments however have appropriately differentiated among distinct geographic markets and trades including Canada Alaska Puerto Rico and Hawaii based on the existence or non-existence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
In 1938 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers by Canadian passenger vessels on Lake Ontario and the St Lawrence River until such time as passenger service shall be established by vessels of the United States22 Similarly in 1961 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers on Canadian vessels within Alaska or between Alaska and other points in the United States until such time as passenger service is established by vessels ofthe United States23
In 1984 Congress modified the application ofthe PVSA to pennit the transportation ofpassengers between Puerto Rico and other United States ports on foreign-flag vessels24 As with the other statutory exceptions this provision is qualified and expires [o]n a showing that a United States passenger vessel qualified to engage in the coastwise trade is offering or advertising passenger service between a port in Puerto Rico and another port in the United States2S
Congress acted again with respect to the application of the PVSA with the 2003 Act in which it authorized three vessels that did not meet the US-build requirements of the PVSA to operate as modem US-flagged cruise ships in regular service in Hawaii26 The 2003 Act imposes a specific geographic limitation on the operation of any ship documented under this authority to operations only in regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands ofHawaii and shall not transport passengers in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico or the Caribbean Sea except in certain limited circumstances27 As above the limited nature of the 2003 Act is express it is strictly limited to the large ocean-going cruise ships and then only those operating in the regular Hawaii service where there are no US-flag operations28
21 See Act ofJune 19 1886 c 421 sec 8 24 Stat 81 Act of February 171898 c 26 sec 2 30 Stat 248 22 S] Res 174 75th Cong 52 Stat 223 (Alp 251938) codified at46 USC sect 55121(a) 23 See Pub L 87-77 75 Stat 196 (Jun 30 1961) codified at 46 USC sect 55121(b) 24 See Pub L 98-563 98 Stat 2916 (Oct 301984) codified at 46 USC sect 55104(b) 25 46 USC sect 55104(c)(l) see also 46 USC 46 USc sect 55104(cX2)(expiration of exemption upon availability ofa non-coastwise qualified US-flag vessel offering service in the relevant market) 26 149 Congo Rec SI118 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)(statementofSen Inouye) 27 Pub L 108-7 117 Stat 79 (Feb 20 2003) 28 149 Congo Rec S11l9 (dailyed Jan 17 2003Xstatement of Sen Inouye)
8
In each ofthese instances Congress fashioned a narrow exception to the PVSA that differentiated among distinct geographic markets based on the existence or nonshyexistence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
As the federal agency responsible for administering the 2003 Act MARAD requested that Customs act to protect US flag passenger vessel interests in the Hawaii trades29 Limiting the scope ofthe proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades also reflects Customs appreciation of the PVSA in the context of the subsequent Congressional action30 Viewing the Congressional modifications to the PVSA as a whole Congress has specifically and repeatedly differentiated among distinct geographic markets when it has found it necessary and appropriate to do so to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests It is well established that the proper interpretation of a statutory scheme includes consideration ofsubsequent statutes even though the underlying statute itselfhas not been expressly amended31 Accordingly Customs should likewise limit the scope ofthe proposed PVSA interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades because that is the only geographic market as mandated by the 2003 Act in which oceangoing US-flag cruise ships are operating
(b) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Consistent with Public Policy Objectives of the 1985 Rulemaking
In 1985middot Customs liberalized the regulations implementing the PVSA by eliminating certain regulatory prohibitions on foreign flag vessels In the context of the 1985 rulemaking Customs justified a relaxation ofthe regulations on the grounds that it would simplify the administration of the PVSA and would benefit the economy ofcertain American coastwise ports without eroding the statutory protection given to American vessels engaged in solely domestic trade32
Customs thus sought to reconcile US port economic interests with US-flag passenger vessel interests Both of these twin policy objectives are furthered by
29 See 72 Fed Reg 65488 (Nov 21 2007)( MARAn bas asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the ~eratiODS ofcoastwise-qualified cruise ship operators)
See generally FDA v Brown amp Williamson Tobacco Corp 529 US 120 132-133 (2000)(assessing propriety ofagency construction ofFood DIUg and Cosmetics Act and descnbing responsibility of reviewing cowt to assess statutory provisions in the context of subsequent legislative enactments) 31 See Brown amp Williamson 529 US 143 (holding that proper construction ofstatutory provision must necessarily assume that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications ofa later statute This is particularly so where the scope of the earlier statute is broad but the subsequent statutes more specifically address the topic athand) see also United States v Estate ofRomani 523 US 517 530-531 (1998)( holding that a later-enacted statute should control the construction of the federal lien priority statute a specific policy embodied in a later federal statute should control om construction of the [earlier] statute even though it ha[s] not been expressly amended) United States v Fausto 484 US 439453 (1988)(The courts frequently find Congress to have done this - whenever in fact they interpret a statutory text in the light ofsurrounding texts that happen to have been subsequently enacted This classic judicial task of reconciling many laws enacted over time and getting them to make sense in combination necessarily assumes that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications of a later statute) 32 50 Fed Reg 26982 (JuI 11985)
9
limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades
As noted earlier the 2003 Act limits the operation of the NCLA US-flag oceangoing passenger vessels to regular service in Hawaii Because there are no oceangoing US-flag vessels operating in any market other than the Hawaii trades Customs should limit the scope of the proposed interPretation to that market Such a limitation protects US flag passenger vessel interests without prejudicing US port interests In contrast an application of the proposed interpretation to any itinerary would needlessly harm US port interests unrelated to Hawaii without any countervailing benefit to US-flag passenger vessel interests Accordingly limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation is consistent with the public policy objectives of the 1985 rulemaking as well as the 2003 Act
(c) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Also Consistent with Customs Commitment to Revisit the Scope of its Rules to Protect US-Flag Interests
The relaxation ofthe PVSA regulations in 1985 was premised in large part on Customs finding that there was no regular salt water US-flag passenger fleet in operation at that time33 Acknowledging that the relaxed regulations could harm USshyflag interests Customs committed in the preamble ofthe 1985 final rule to immediately reconsider its interpretation if it is ever shown that there is a viable US flag vessel operating in competition with foreign-flag vessels34
Congress enacted the 2003 Act to stimulate the development of a US flag cruise ship industry As noted above the legislative history ofthat Act makes clear that Congress sought to revitalize the US-flag cruise industry as a means to maintain Americas preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool ofqualified seafarers help sustain a fleet of US flag vessels to support our military and a maritime industrial base create thousands of seagoing and shoreside American jobs and stimulate the development ofa US flag cruise ship tourism business with the commensurate benefits to the US tax base the US economy and US employment
Customs is now acting at MARADs request to revisit its interpretation ofthe regulations implementing the PVSA because recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwise-qualified cruise ship operations35 That is to say that the concerns articulated by Customs in the context of the 1985 rulemaking have materialized and US-flag passenger vessel interests are in fact being hanned in the Hawaii trades by foreign competitors
33 50 Fed Reg 26983 34Id
3S 72 Fed Reg 56488 (Nov 21 2007)
I
10
Because the US-flag passenger vessels are limited by statute to regular service in Hawaii limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the
Hawaii trades is consistent with Customs historical commitment to revisit its interpretation ofthe implementing regulations to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests
7 Conclusion
For the reasons stated above NCLA commends the efforts ofCustoms and MARAn to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act as applied to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA respectfully requests Customs to move ahead promptly with p~blicati~nof a final interpretive rule to advance the important national security arid public policy objectives ofthese laws
We greatly appreciate the opportunity to submit these comments
Sincerely
~~~ Alan T Yamamoto Vice President Hawaii Operations
Exhibit A
Ship Name Serenade Of The Seas Departure Port San Diego California Ports of Call San Diego California Kailua Kona Hawaii Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii Hlo Hawaii Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii Ensenada Mexico San Qigo California
2007 Date(s) Oct 05
Sailing Itinerary
Day Port H ~rrive Depart Activity
05-0ct San Diego California 500 PM
06-0ct Cruising
07-0ct Cruising
08-0ct Cruising
09-0ct Cruising
10-0ct Kailua Kona Hawaii 700 AM 900 PM Tendered
11-00t Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 1000 AM Tendered
12middot0ct Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 900 PM Tendered
13-0ct Hilo Hawaii 700 AM 600 PM Docked
14middot0ct Honoulu (Oahu) Hawaii 700 AM Docked
15-0ct Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii 200 AM Docked
6-0ct CrUising
17-0ct Cruising
18-0ct Cruising
19middot0ct Cruising
-7 20-00t
O-Oot
Ensenada ~i1exico
San Deqo California
i 00 ~r1
700 ~M
200 oM D1Jcked ~
AMAZON RIVERMEDITERRANEAN
21 DAYS
ROYAL PRINCESS
MANAUS
to ROME
2005 DEPARTURE DATE
Apr 21
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE M~naus Brazil (Wemight onboardship) Manaus Brazil
3 BocadaValeria Brazil (AriiazonRivet) 11 AM 4-6 At Sea 7 Recife Brazil 1 PM 8-11 AtSea 12 Dakar Senegal 8AM 13-14 At Sea 15 Agadir Morocco 7AM 16 Casablanca Morocco (for Marrakech) 8AM 17 Gibraltar lOAM 18 Allcante Spain 12 N 19 Barcelona Spain 8AM 20 Cannes France (for Monte Carlo) 8AM 21 FlorencePisa Italy (Livarno) 7AM 22 Rome Italy (Civitavecchia) DISEMBARK AM
INDIAN OCEANAUSTRALIA
28 DAYS
PACIfIC PRINCESS
CAPE TOWN
to SYDNEY
2004 DEPARTURpound DATE
Oct 20
CRUISE ITINERARY1 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Cape Town South Africa EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 3 East London South Africa 7AM 3PM 4 DurbahSouth Africa 8AM 6PM 5-7 At Sea 8 Nosy BeMadagascar 7AM 4PM 9 At Sea 10 Poilit des Galets Reunioll]slahd 11 Port Louis Mauritius 12c19 At Sea 20 Perth Australia (Fremantle) 21-23 At Sea 24 Adelaide Australla 25 At Sea 26 Melbourne Australla 7 27 Tasmania AUstralia (Burnie) 28 At Sea 29 Sydney Australia DISEMBARK AM
I
DEPART EMBARK PM
7PM 6PM
8pM
5PM
3PM 9PM 6PM 6PM 5PM 7PM 7PM
EXOTICS CRUISES
SOUIB ATIANTICANTARCfICNSOUIB AMERICA
24 DAYS
ROYAL PRINCESS
CAPE TOWN
to SANTIAGO
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
Dec 17
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Cape TownSouthAfrica (overnighfol1board ship) EMBARK PM 2 Cape Town South Africa 3PM 2 if~~t Good HopSCenic Crulsing 3-6 6 Tristan DaCunha United Kingdom 8AM 5PM 7-10 At Sea 11 Falkland Islands (Staliley) 8 AM 5PM 12 At Sea 13-16 Antarctica Peninsula ScehltmiddotCruising 14 days ihcludingmiddot Elephant
Island AntarcticSotind Deceptionlslana GerlacheStrait NaxefChannel Schollaert Channel SigJtla Island and Boyd Strait)
17 At Sea Cape Horn Scenic Cruising1amp UshuaiaArgentina (Tierra del fuego) bull middot6 AM 19 Punta Arenas Chile (Strait of Magellan) 7 AM 20 At Sea Amalia Glacier Scenic Cruising21 At Sea Chilean Fjords Scenic Cruising22 AtSea 23 Puerto Mont Chile 7AM 6PM 24 At Sea 25 Santiago Chile (Valparaiso) DISEMBARK AM
-nmes for1l scenlccruisinc are subJect to change
ASIAINDIAMEDITERRANEAN
30 ROYAL PRINCESSDAYS
ROME
to BANGKOK
2004 DEPARlURE DATE
Sep 16
CRUISE Il INERARY
WEST AFRICASOUTH AMERICA
28 DAYS
PACIFIC PRINCESS
FT LAUDERDALE
to CAPE TOWN
2004 DEPARTURE DATE
51 22
CRUISE ITINERARY
DISEMBARK AM
Aruba
EXOTICS CRU ISES amp CRU ISETOU RS
AUSTRALIANEW ZEALAND CRUISETOUR
AUSTRALIAN EXPLORER 2004 DEPARTURE DATESAPPHIRE21 plus
DAYS PRINCESS SYDNEY Dec 17 to
AUCKLAND CRUISETOUR 5P CRUiSE
CRUISETOUR ITINERARY
DAY PORT By Sea By Land DAY PORT
1 Sydney 14 Fiordland National Park 2 Sydney Scenic Cruising
3 SydneyAyers Rock 15 Dunedin New Zealand (Port Chalmers) 4 Ayers ROek
5 Ayers RockPort Douglas 16 Christchurch New Zealand 6 Port Douglas - (Lytleton)
7 Port DouglasSydneyEmbark 17 Wellilgton New Zealand 8 At Sea 18 At Sea 9 Melbourne Australia 19 Tauranga New Zealand
10 At Sea 20 Bay of Islands New Zealand 11 Tasmania Australia (Hobart) 21 Auckland New Zealand 12middot13 At Sea
Sydney Opera House Australia
AUSTRALIANEW ZEALAND CRUISETOUR SOUTHEAST ASIACHINA CRUISETOUR CAPE HORNSTRAIT OF MAGELLAN CRUISETOUR AUSTRALIAN BEIJING Be TERRA COTTA 2004 DEPARTURE DATES RIO 8t IGUAZU FALLS Post-Crulsetour1 Pre-Crulsetour 217EXPLORER 2005 DEPARTURE DATES PACIFICSAPPHIRE WARRIORS19 plw or PRINCESS jul9t loieifie
DAYS PRINCESS SYDNEY Jan 12 plus 19 ROYAL plw Feb 5 Oct 28 Royal BUENOS AIRES
AUCKLAND DAYS ROYAL PRINCESS to 21 ampto DAYS PRINCESS
BEUING CRUISE t ~~S~i BeWln~~~~e
to SANTIAGO~e~s~Ot~r~ih~fi1BANGKOK CRUiSE CRUISECRUISETOUR 3t3P landtourm~yvlty CRUISETOUR 12
DAY PORT DAY PORT
DAY PORT By Sea ltBy LaDd DAY PORT
1 Beijing 11-12 At Sea 1 Rio de janeiro 11 Cape Horn Scenic Cruising
13 Hong Kong 2 Rio de jneiro c 12 Ushuaia Argentina 14 At Sea 3 RiolgUaiu Falls 12 Beagle Channel Scenlc Cruising
15 Nha Trang Vietnam 4 IIDIilZll FaU$13u~os~re$ 13 Punta Arenas Chile
16 Phu My Vietnam 5 Buens AiresEmbark 14 At Sea 17 At Sea 6 Montevideo Uruguay 15 Seno Eyre Fjord Scenic Cruising 18 Singapore 7 At Sea 16 At Sea 19 Kualtan Malaysia 8 Puerto Madryn Argentina 17 Puerto Montt Chile 20 At Sea 9 At Sea 18 At Sea 21 Bangkok Thail3nd 10 Falkland Islands (Stanley) 19 Santiago Chile
DAY PORT DAY PORT
At Sea Pusan SouthKOrea Nagasaki japan At Sea Shanghai China
Note CnIlst route shown for Royil Princess Oct 28 only Timcsforil1lsccnkoulslngmsubjccttothange
CRUISE [OUR ITINERARY
CRUISETOUR ITINERARY
CRUISrrOlJR ITINERARY Fiordland National Park Scenic Cruising DlUedin New Zealand Christchurch New Zealand Wellington New Zealand
14
GRAND PANAMA CANAL CRUISES
ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL
10 10 11 DAYSDAYS DAYS
CORAL PRINCESS GRAND PRINCESS GRAND PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIPfrom from
fromFT LAUDERDALE GALVESTON GALVESTON
2004 DEPARTURE DATES Oct n 21 31 2004 DEPARTURE DATE
2004 DEPARTURE DATENov 10 20 30middot DeelSmiddot
DedSDec 10 28
2005 DEPARTURE DATES CRUISE ITINERARY Jan 7 17 27
CRUISE ITINERARY Feb 6 16 26 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART MarS 1828 CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Galveston Texas EMBARK PMApr 7 17 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTshy 1 Galveston Texas EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 1 ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 3 Belize City Belize 1 PM 7PM 2-3 At Sea 3 Belize City Belize lPM 7PM 4 Costa Maya Mexico (Mahahual) 8AM 4PM 4 Um6n Costa Rica 7AM rPM 4 Costa Maya Mexico (Mahahual) SAM 4 PM 5 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands 12 PM 7PM 5 Panama Canal (to Gatun Lake) 7AM 430 PM 5 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands 12 PM 7PM 6 Ocho Rios Jamaica SAM 5PM 5 Col6n Panama 5PM 8PM 6 At Sea 7 At Sea 6 At Sea Cristobal Panama 7AM 4PM 8 7AM 4PM 7 Grand Cayman Cayman IslandS 7AM 4PM (fot Panama Canal) ftrtpg~niaa~~) S Corumel Mexico SAM 6PM 8 At Sea 9 At Sea 9 Bclize City Belize 7AM 4 PM 6PM 10 Coromel Mexico lOAM 6 PM9 Cozumel Mexico lOAM 10 At Sea 10 At Sea 11 At Sea
Portordtrllndtlmtsmayvllry 11 flo Lauderdale florida DISEMBARK AM Portorntr IInltf timpoundi may vary 11 Galveston Texas DISEMBARK AM Port ordu and Nmes may vary 12 Galv_es~on Texas DISEMBARK AM
ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL
8 DAYS
CORAL PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP
from
FT LAUDERDALE
2004 DEPARTURE DATE Dec 20
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Fl Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM 2-3 At Sea 4 Lim6n Costa Rica 7AM 7PM 5 Panama Canal (to Gatun Lake) 7 AM 430 PM 5 Co16n Panama 5PM SPM 6 At Sea 7 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands SAM 5PM S At Sea 9 Flo Lauderdale Florida DISEMBARK AM Bridge of the Americas Panama
f OptIonll fOllTS inclld1lI tht AtlllnH to Pacific RlIlllfll) joumq will dlmlldrt tilt ship b) tctdtr lit Gfttlm uk AJkr tour plIssmm dlstmlrark tilt shipwin procmlllat through tilt Gatun Locb lIndjlnlllly dock in Gl6lI Hmal1p41Sl11tmmttydiumlmtheJldlo~ lflrshops IInd~llI toIIrsrrnrl CIItutl14ktlllIrtonlflrJhlp
GRAND PANAMA CANAL CRUISES
GRAND PANAMA CANAL GRAND PANAMA CANAL GRAND PANAMA CANAL
150R 18 150R 1715 DAYS DAYS DAYS
CORAL PRINCESS SUN PRINCESS
REGAL PRINCESS REGAL PRINCESS SUN PRINCESS
DAWN PRINCESS REGAL PRINCESS sail between DAWN PRINCESS
sail between FT LAUDERDALE FT LAUDERDALE sail betweenand
FT LAUDERDALEand SAN DIEGO andLOS ANGELES
SAN FRANCISCO 2004 DEPARTURE DATES 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
DAWN PRINCESS 2004 DEPARTURE DATESNov 24Sp191
CRUISE ITINERARY Dec9t CORAL PRINCESSREGAL PRINCESS 5ltp261 CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE ITINERARY
200S DEPARTURE DATES Dec 24 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
SUN PRINCESS DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARIltPM200S DEPARTURE DATES DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Sep 2StMar 24
3 Ocho Rios Jamaica lOAM 6PM 2-3 At5ea 2 At Sea 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBA8KPM
REGAL PRINCESS AprSt 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBA8KPM Jan stu 200S DEPARTURE DATES2 At Sea4 At Sea 4 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 7AM lPMJan 23 5 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 7AM lPM 3 Ocho Rios Jamaica lOAM 6PM REGAL PRINCESS 5 Cartagena Colombia 9AM 3PMFeb7t 4 At Sea Apr 239AM 3PM 6 Transit Panama Canal 7AM 430 PMFb22 ~ yenr~fte~~~~~~u 7AM 430 PM 5 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 7AM lPM At SeaMar9t CORAL PRINCESS 79AM 3PM8 At Sea Apr 27 8 Puntarenas Costa Rica 7AM 7PMSUN PRINCESS 9 Puntarenas Costa Rica 7 AM 7PM ~ yenr~fte~n~~~~~u 7AM 430 PM 9-10 At SeaApr1S 8 At Sea DAWN PRINCESS10-11 At Sea 11 Acapulco Mexico 8AM 5PM
5PM 9 Puntarenas Costa Rica 7AM 7PM Apr 29H ~ae~lcoMexico 8 AM 12 At SeatllWrryopmllzlfrarnLls~in 10-11 At Sea rmrKfIfikTiIIrttimnma1 tlliJlrraryoptJllllsfrlJflSlmFranrimlJn 13 Cabo San lucas Mexico 8AM 5PM
gt This mUJI C4Jl llfwmblnld wlth a 3 14 Cabo San Lucas Mexico 7 AM lPM H ~e~o Mexico 8AM SPM rmruordrrorttimamG)llIryCoIutar CnUK to VlWOIlllr SC Dqs ThUIltIIIflltllnlltCllIIblntdwilhaZ-day 14-15 At Sea 16lhrlllllhI9lllIbtboobdulaquoSC)lQ4k t Illncral) lIpCutcs in mrmt orm Pllrt IiIIIa CocastaICnliutoVan(ouKrBCDlIys16 16 San Francisco California 7AM 4PMcowtlIrcrllisr IIIIYlIl1Ymiddot IhrounIScankboobdlUaK)lllllluU t~A~geles California 6 AM 5PM 14 Cabo San Lucas Mexico 8AM 5PM
Thllwl1JIIICllllslltMOlIkpilllyJmtcad 17-18 At Sea middotmiddotThliIAfllIllCltlllsatMGnIqclBaylnstcadllf 15 At Sea CPlIilldCI1IIu 17 At Sea o[OdKKwsPurllilllrlmllYWlry OchoRicJsPortllmtslllllYVllfymiddot D1SEMBA8K AM19 Vancouver BC DISEMBA8K AM 16 San Die20 California DlSEMBA8K AM 18 Val1couver BC
GRAND PANAMA CANAL COASTAL CRUISING
2-4 CORAL PRINCESS ISLAND PRINCESS SUN PRINCESS18 DAWN PRINCESS DIAMOND PRINCESS STAR PRINCESSDAYSDAYS
COASTAL CRUISE SCHEDULEREGAL PRINCESS
SHIP DAYS FROM TO DEPARTURE DATE DIAMOND PRINCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 5104
SAN FRANCISCO DIAMOND PRINCES5 4 Vancouver Seattle 5404 to CORAL PRINCESS 2 San Francisco Vancouver 5604
NEW YORK DAWN PRiNCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 5704 ISLAND PRiNCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 51204
2004 DEPARTURE DATE SUN PRINCESS 3 San Francisco Vancouver 51404Aug 24 ISLAND PRiNCESS 3 Vancouver LOI Angeles 91804
DIAMOND PRINCESS 1 Seattle Vancouver 91804CRUISE ITINERARY DIAMOND PRINCESS 6 Vancouver Los Angeles 91904 SAPPHIRE PRINCESS 1 Seattle Vancouver 91904 SAPPHREPRINCESS 2 Vancouver San Francisco 92004 DIAMOND PRINCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 43005 DlAMONDPRiNCES$ 4 Vancouver Seattle 5305 SUN PRINCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 5305
ISLAND PRiNCESS 3 Los Angeles VancOllver 5405 CORAL PRiNCESS 2 San Francisco Vancouver 51205
Coral Princess in the Panama Canal
CRUISE PLUS
Extend your adventure with our Cruise Plusreg program Cruise Plusreg enables you to enhance your vacation with one- to four-night hotel
packages in cities that stand on their own as vacation destinations Add nights in Sydney before you cruise or extend your vacation with nights in the city by the
bay San Francisco Transportation and luggage handling costs from the airport to both hotel and ship plus meet and greet services are always included
Wherever you choose to explore youll enjoy properties that are carefully chosen based on service value location and the peace of mind of knowing that Princess
has arranged it all for you
Anchorage Alaska Trevi Fountain Rome Auckland Harbor New Zealand
The Cruise Plusreg Program is available in over 30 major cities including
MEDITERRANEANAEGEAN EXOTICS PANAMA CANAL Barcelona London Rome and Venice Auckland Bangkok Beijing Buenos Aires Ft Lauderdale Los Angeles New York City
Cape Town Ft Lauderdale Honolulu Los San Diego San Francisco Sanjuan Vancouver NORTHERN EUROPE Angeles Montreal Moorea New York City Copenhagen and London MEXICO CARIBBEANOsaka Papeete Rome San Francisco
Ft Lauderdale Galveston Los AngelesTRANSATLANTIC Santiago Seattle Sydney Vancouver Venice Barcelona Copenhagen Ft Lauderdale San Francisco and San Juan
London New York City and Rome ALASKA Anchorage Calgary Fairbanks Kenai San Francisco Seattle and Vancouver
For more information about options and pricing reference a destination specific brochure or contact your travel agent
TRAVEL THE WORLD WITH THE LEADER IN CRUISINGmiddot Princess
Analysis by the Hawaii Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism Comparing the Economic Impact of Foreign Flag Ships with US Flag Cruise Ships Sailing in Hawaii
This is a summary of an analysis prepared by the Hawai Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism (DBEDT) of the economic impact of the foreign flag cruise ship fleet sailing in Hawaii as compared to each of the US flag ships operating in Honolulu
The comparison is set out below
Foreign Pride Pride Pride
Fleet Of Hawaii Of Aloha Of America
Total economic output impact (spendingsales) ($mil) 155 542 4225 4958
Total earnings impact (labor earnings) ($mil) 44 155 1207 1411
Total employment impact Uobs) 1447 5059 3943 4627
This analysis demonstrates that a single US-flagged ship the Pride of America home ported in Honolulu is 32 times more economically impactful and creates 32 times as many jobs as the entire foreign flag fleet that sails into and out of Hawaii ports of call
Economic Impact of Pride of America
Assumptions 1 Annual impact though Pride of Aloha is leaving in May 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existing Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($) 4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of outputl$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job multiplier (jobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
118700 105
2706 3373
147 042
1372
4958
1417
4627
Data sourcelformula Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Line 1 x line 2 x line 31 000000
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 4 x line 5
Line 4 x line 6
Line 4 x line 7
Economic Impact of Pride of Hawaii
Assumptions
1 Annual impact though Pride of Hawaii is leaving in February 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existing Pride of Aloha and Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($) 4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job multiplier (jobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
Data sourceformula 139770 Actual 2007 figure
975 Actual 2007 figure 2706 Actual 2007 figure 3688 Line 1 x line 2 x line 31000000
147 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model 042 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
1372 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
5421 Line 4 x line 5
1549 Line 4 x line 6
5059 Line 4 x line 7
Economic Impact of Pride of Aloha
Assumptions 1 Annual impact though Pride of Aloha is leaving in May 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existlng Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($)
4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job mUltiplier Oobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
95680 111
2706 2874
147 042
1372
4225
1207
3943
Data sourcelformula Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Line 1 x line 2 x line 31000000
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 4 x line 5
Line 4 x line 6
Line 4 x line 7
lt
Methodology Used in Calculating Impact of International Cruise Ships
Cruise ship visitors 1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Came with ships 3 Flied in 4 Average length of stay (days) 5 PPPD ($) 6 Cruise visitor spending ($mil))
Cruise ship crews 7 Ratio of crew spending to cruise visitor spending 8 Cruise crew spending
Cruisline 9 Ratio of crew spending to cruise visitor spending
10 Cruiseline spending
11 Total cruise-related spending ($mil)
12 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 13 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 14 Job multiplier Uobs$ cruise -related spending)
15 Total output impact ($miJ)
16 Total earnings impact ($miJ)
17 Total employment impact (jobs)
106641 98307
8334 739 847 668
02 134
038 254
1055
147 042
1372
1551
444
1447
Data sourceformula Line 2 + line 3 DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report Line 1 x line 4 x line 5
DBEDT 2003 Cruise study Line 7 x line 6
DBEDT 2003 Cruise study Line 9 x line 6
Line 6 + line 8 + line 10
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 11 x line 12
Line 11 x line 13
Line 11 x line 14
Economic Contributions Foreign-Flag Fleet operating in Hawaii vs Three US-Flag Ships
$1500
Pride of Hawaii$1000- $542 million VIc -0-E c Pride of AlohaCo
423 million$500
Pride of America $496 million155 million$shy
Foreign-Flag US-Flag Fleet Fleet
Source State of Hawaii Department of US-Flag $1460 billion Business Economic Development and Tourism
Foreign-Flag $ 155 million 7292008
Employment Foreign-Flag Fleet operating in Hawaii vs Three US-Flag Ships
15000
10000
til c o Pride of Aloha
39435000
Pride of America 1447 4627
~---------
Foreign-Flag US-Flag Fleet Fleet
Source State of Hawaii Department of US-Flag 13629 jobs Business Economic Development and Tourism
Foreign-Flag 1447 jobs 7292008
Foreign Flag Capacity Growth Foreign flag passenger capacity has changed five-fold on roundtrip Hawaii cruises from the West Coast since enactment of the Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative
1600000
1400000
tn 1200000
J enshyZ
1000000
I shyG) en 800000 s G) tn tn
600000 as D 400000
200000
0 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Year
Source US Maritime Administration (derived from the US Customs and Border Patrol Vessel Entrance and Clearance documents - final 2007 data) 7292008
NCL America Hawaii Economic Contributions
(2004-2008)
bull (in Millions) bull $399 in wages benefits and overtime to US seafarers bull $35 in Federal and State payroll Taxes bull $64 in Government Fees and Taxes to Hawaii bull $28 in wages benefits and overtime to US other employees bull $52 in Port Charges to Hawaii Companies (Stevedores tugs pilots etc) bull $85 in Fuel to Tesoro Hawaii bull $130 for shore excursions to Hawaii tour operators bull $39 for Hawaii hotel rooms and ground transport bull $75 for food grown in Hawaii bull $57 in union fees and levies (incl $32M paid directly by employees) bull $1 in MMD fees to the United States Coast Guard bull $51 for recruitment screening processing and training crew bull $76 advertising and promoting Hawaii as a destination bull $1092
COASTWISE CRUISES INTERPRETIVE RULE RESOLUTION Adopted at the
US Conference of Mayors 76th Annual Meeting
June 20-242008 Miami
WHEREAS the Department of Homeland Securitys Customs and Border Protection (CBP) issued a proposed Interpretive Rule regulating Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises on foreign flagged vessels between US ports of call under the Passenger Vessel Services Act at the request of the United States Maritime Administration and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule would require that a foreign-flagged vessel on a coastwise cruise to call at a foreign port for at least 48 hours with that foreign stop constituting at least 50 percent of the cruise itinerary and allowing passengers to disembark the cruise vessel at the foreign port before continuing the cruise to a US port of call and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule establishes burdensome criteria that are wholly inconsistent with industry practice particularly the 48-hour call at foreign port shyinasmuch as the standard port call is six to eight hours - as well as the requirement that 50 percent of a cruise be spent at the foreign port and
WHEREAS the intent of the proposed Interpretive Rule is to protect the single remaining US flag vessel serving the Inter-Hawaiian Island cruise trade that according to the Hawaii Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism generates more than 4600 jobs and generates nearly $500 million in economic benefits for the state annually and
WHEREAS thousands of members of the International Longshore Workers Union (nWU) are employed at US ports serving cruise ships and whose jobs would be at risk if the proposed Interpretive Rule were implemented and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule is vague as to the breadth of its application ie to coastwise cruises between all United States ports or applied solely to coastwise cruises from West Coast ports to Hawaii and
WHEREAS the Cruise Lines International Association estimates the proposed Interpretive Rule would upend the $17 billion in national cruise industry spending and put at risk more than 300000 jobs generated by the international cruise industry including jobs held by nWU at US ports and the local allied industries supporting the cruise industry and
Executive Order Submissions Under Review
II Reglnfogov Where to ind Federal Regulatory Information -~
Home ] Lnitied Agenda and Regulator) Ilan pound012866 Regulator) Review Jnformalion Collection Review
EO 12866 Regulatory Rlvlw dvanced Search IJitorical RepWI Review Counh Jriter XIL
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA)
Executive Order Submissions Under Review July 25 2008 - _------------____ _shy
Department of Homeland Security
AGENCY DHS-TSA RIN 1652-AA53
TITLE Large Aircraft Security Program Other Aircraft Operator Security Programs and Airport Operator Security Program
STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT Yes RECEIVED DATE 06302008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
AGENCY DHS-USCIS RIN Llti15-AB67 TITLE Changes to Requirements Affecting H-2B Nonimmigrants and Their Employers
STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT No RECEIVED DATE 06092008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
AGENCY DHS-USCBP RIN 1651AA11 TITLE Issuance of a Visa and Authorization for Temporary Admission Into the United States for Certain Nonimmigrant Aliens Afflicted W HIV Infection
STAGE Final Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT No RECEIVED DATE 03042008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
-_RE_V-IE-W-E-X-T-EN-D-E-D---------- _
AGENCY DHS-USCBP RIN 1651-AA76 TITLE Coastwise Transportation of Passengers STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT Yes RECEIVED DATE 07142008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
Disclosure I Accessibility I Privacy Policy I Contact Us
httpwwwreginfogovpublicdoeoReviewSearch 7252008
View Rule Page 11
Shere D find Federal ReguLatory InformciiorlReglnfogov Home J Cnified Agenda al1d Regulatory Plan EO 12866 Regulatory Reyiew Information Collection Reiew
Current rnified Agenda and Regulatory Plan Historical Pnified Agenda and Regulatory Plan Search
View Rule
DHSIUSCBP RIN 1651-AA76 Publication ill Spring 2008
Title llCoastwise Transportation of Passengers
Abstract This interim rule amends the Department of Homeland Securitys (DHS) current regulations relating to the transportation of passengers by non-coastwise-qualified vessels on voyages that begin and end at a US port and stop at intervening US and foreign port(s) Under this interim final rule voyages that begin and end at a US port and stop at a foreign port(s) and at intervening US port(s) where a large USshyflag coastwise-qualified passenger vessel engages in regular service are in violation of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) unless the cumulative length of stay(s) at intervening foreign port(s) is more than 50 percent of the total amount of time spent at the intervening US port(s) and passengers are permitted to go ashore at the foreign port(s) The purpose of this amendment is to ensure that the Congressional purpose in enacting the PVSA which is to preserve the economic benefits of US coastwise trade to US-flag coastwise-qualified vessels is properly implemented
Agency Department of Homeland Security(DHS) Priority Substantive Nonsignificant
KIN Status First time published in the Unified Agenda Agenda Stage of Rulemaking Final Rule Stage
Major No Unfunded Mandates No
CFR Citation -LCER 4J~)(h)(plusmnJ
Legal Authority 5JJSS_30J12lJ-SClt16 J9_lJiCJ 431 9_L1C1plusmn3JJ2JScHJ1J2JSCJ624 L(LlLSc207LIl(gtJfHgt~ _CiQJ _46lSC 6QLQ~
Legal Deadline None
Timetable Action Date FR Cite
Interim Final Action 0510012008
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required No Government Levels Affected None
Federalism No
Included in the Regulatory Plan No
RIN Data Printed in the FR No
Agency Contact Glen E Vereb Chief Entry Procedures and Carriers Branch Department of Homeland Security US Customs and Border Protection Office of Regulations and Rulings 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington DC 20229 Phone202572-8730
Disclosure I Accessibility I Privacy Policy I Contact Us
httpwwwreginfogovpublicdoeAgendaViewRuleruleID=286751 7128120
Federal RegisterVol 72 No 224Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules 65487
SPECULATIVE POSITION LIMITS 1-Continued [In contract units)
Contract
Soybeans and Mini-Soybeans 2
Wheat and Mini-Wheat 2 bullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbull
Soybean Oil
SingleSpot month All monthsmonth
600 8600 13300 600 11100 14500 540 6600 8600
Soybean Meal 720 5500 7100
Minneapolis Grain Exchange
Hard Red Spring Wheat I 600 I 11100 I 14500
New York Board of Trade
Cotton No2 I 300 I 5300 I 7300
Kansas City Board of Trade
Hard Winter Wheat I 600 I 11100 I 14500
1 For purposes of compliance with these limits positions in a futures contract that shares ~ubstantially identical terms with a contract market enumerated herein including a futures contract that is cash-settled based on the settlement price of an enumerated contract market shall be agshygregated with positions in the enumerated contract market
2 For purposes of compliance with these limits positions in the regular-sized and mini-sized contracts shall be aggregated
Issued by the Commission this November 152007 in Washington DC David Stawick Secretary of the Commission [FR Doc E7-22681 Filed 11-20-07 845 amI BILLING CODE 6351-Q1-P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Bureau of Customs and Border Protection
19 CFR Part 4
[USCBP-2007-o098]
Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises
AGENCY Customs and Border Protection Department of Homeland Security ACTION Proposed interpretation solicitation of comments
SUMMARY This document proposes new criteria to be used by Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to determine whether non-coastwise-qualified vessels are in violation ofthe Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) when engaging in cruise itineraries in which passengers board at a US port the vessel calls at several Hawaiian ports and then the vessel proceeds to a foreign port or ports for a brief period before ultimately returning to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their cruise CBP believes these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because it appears that the primary objective of the foreign stop is evasion of the PVSA
DATES Comments must be received on or before December 212007 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT Glen E Vereb Cargo Security Carriers amp Immigration Branch Office of International Trade (202) 572-8730 ADDRESSES You may submit comments identified by docket number by one of the following methods
bull Federal eRulemaking Portal http wwwregulationsgov Follow the instructions for submitting comments
bull Mail Border Security Regulations Branch Office of International Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
I Public Participation
Interested persons are invited to participate in this proposed interpretation by submitting written data views or arguments on all aspects of the proposed interpretation Customs and Border Protection (CBP) also invites comments that relate to the economic environmental or federalism effects that might result from this proposed interpretation Comments that will provide the most assistance to CBP in developing these procedures will reference a specific portion of the proposed interpretation explain the reason for any recommended change and include data information or authority that support such recommended change
Instructions All submissions received must include the agency name and docket number for this proposed
interpretation All comments received will be posted without change to http wwwregulationsgov including any personal information provided
Docket For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received go to http wwwregulationsgov Submitted comments may also be inspected on regular business days between the hours of 9 am and 430 pm at the Office of International Trade Customs and Border Protection 799 9th Street NW 5th Floor Washington DC Arrangements to inspect submitted documents should be made in advance by calling Mr Joseph Clark at (202) 572shy8768
II Background
The maritime cabotage law governing the transportation of passengers was first established by section 8 of the Passenger Vessel Services Act of June 191886 (the PVSA) 24 Stat 81 as amended by section 2 of the Act of February 17 1898 30 Stat 248 formerly codified at 46 USC App 289 (now codified at 46 USC 55103) 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 of $200 (now $300 as promulgated in TD 03-11 pursuant to the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 199028 USC 2461 note) for each passenger so transported and landed
The intent of the maritime cabotage laws including the PVSA was to provide a legal structure that guarantees a coastwise monopoly to
65488 Federal RegisterVol 72 No 224Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules
American shipping and thereby promotes development of the American merchant marine Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 28 (DC Cir 1984) see also The Granada 35 FSupp 892 8931940 AMC 1601 (DC Pa 1940) (stating that the legislative aim of section 289 [now 55102] was the creation of a practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping business for United States ships) In other words the PVSA was enacted to advance the United States merchant marine and fleet by restricting the use of foreign-ownedflagged passenger vessels in United States territorial waters
Passenger vessel transportation between United States ports has historically been viewed to be part of the coastwise trade after the enactment of the PVSA This view is premised on the concepts of continuity of the voyage and whether its intended purpose or objective was coastwise transportation In other words the PVSA was held to be violated if the coastwise movement was continuous or if the purpose of the trip was a coastwise voyage (See 18 OAG 445 September 4 1886 28 OAG 204 February 16 1910 29 OAG 318 February 12 1912 30 OAG 44 February 1 1913 34 OAG 340 December 24 1924 and 36 OAG 352 August 13 1930)
The CBP regulations promulgated pursuant to the PVSA are found at section 480a of title 19 of the Code of Federal Regulations (19 CFR 480a) and are reflective of the above cited Office of the Attorney General decisions These regulations provide among other things that a non-coastwise-qualified vessel which embarks a passenger at a port in the United States embraced within the coastwise laws (a coastwise port) will be deemed to have landed that passenger in violation of the PVSA if the passenger disembarks at a different coastwise port on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a nearby foreign port or ports (as defined in 19 CFR 480a(a)(2) see also 19 CFR 480a(b)(2)) The terms embark and disembark are words of art which are defined as going on board a vessel for the duration of a specific voyage and leaving a vessel at the conclusion of a specific voyage respectively (See 19 CFR 480a(a)(4))
The references in section 480a to nearby foreign ports (defined in 19 CFR 480a(a)(2)) are the results of attempts by CBP to apply an Office of the Attorney Generals opinion dated February 26 1910 (28 OAG 204) In that case a foreign-flag vessel transported 615 passengers on a voyage around the world beginning in New
York and concluding in San Francisco The Attorney General opined that since the primary object of the voyage was to visit various parts of the world on a pleasure tour returning home via California and not to be transported in domestic commerce the transportation was not in violation of the PVSA
The 1910 Attorney Generals opinion was extended to voyages that included foreign ports other than nearby foreign ports (See Treasury Decision (TD) 68shy285 (33 FR 16558) November 14 1968) However voyages solely to one or more coastwise ports have always been considered predominantly coastwise Therefore non-coastwise-qualified vessels engaging in such a voyage where passengers temporarily go ashore at a coastwise port have been deemed to have violated the PVSA
m Current Law and Policy Pursuant to Public Law 109-304 120
Stat 1632 enacted on October 6 2006 Title 46 United States Code was substantially reorganized and recodified Consequently the PVSA is now codified at 46 USC 55103 and provides that no vessel shall transport passengers between ports or places in the United States either directly or by way of a foreign port under a penalty of $300 for each person so transported and landed except one that (1) Is wholly owned by citizens of the United States for purposes of engaging in the coastwise trade and (2) has been issued a certificate of documentation with a coastwise endorsement or is exempt from documentation but would otherwise be eligible for such a certificate and endorsement
In 2003 Congress enacted Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II Section 211 for the purpose of revitalizing the oceangoing US-flag cruise industry in Hawaii (the 2003 Act) Three oceangoing US-flag cruise ships PRIDE OF ALOHA PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAII were documented with coastwise privileges pursuant to the 2003 Act These vessels entered regular service in Hawaii in 2004 2005 and 2006 respectively and pursuant to the express language of the 2003 Act are limited in their operation to providing regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands of Hawaii
The CBP regulations promulgated pursuant to the PVSA are set forth in 19 CFR 480a and have remained unchanged throughout both the recodification of Title 46 of the United States Code and the enactment of the 2003 Act They provide that a violation of the PVSA occurs when passengers embark (board a vessel for the
duration of a voyage) a non-coastwiseshyqualified vessel at one US port and disembark (leave the vessel at the conclusion of a voyage) at a different US port unless they proceed with the vessel to a distant foreign port (Le any port not considered a nearby foreign port which is defined as any port located in North America Central America Bermuda or the West Indies including the Bahamas) Currently these regulations do not contain specific criteria for non-coastwise-qualified vessels on itineraries including US ports and either nearby or distant foreign ports in order for such foreign port calls to be compliant with the PVSA
To reiterate the applicable CBP regulations provide that the PVSA is violated when a non-coastwise-qualified vessel transports a passenger on a voyage solely to one or more coastwise ports and the passenger disembarks or goes ashore temporarily at a coastwise port (19 CFR 480a(b)(1)) Furthermore a violation of the PVSA also occurs when a non-coastwise-qualified vessel transports a passenger on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a nearby foreign port or ports (but no other foreign port) and the passenger disembarks at a coastwise port other than the port of embarkation (19 CFR 480a(b)(2)) However there is no violation of the PVSA when a passenger is on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a distant foreign port or ports (whether or not the voyage includes a nearby foreign port or ports) and the passenger disembarks at a coastwise port provided the passenger has proceeded with the vessel to a distant foreign port (19 CFR 480a(b)(3))
IV Request From MARAD To Provide Guidance
The US Department of Transportation Maritime Administration (MARAD) has requested that CBP take action to ensure enforcement of the PVSA MARAD has asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreignshyflag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwiseshyqualified cruise ship operators
In April of 2007 the operator of the three US-flag cruise vessels operating solely in Hawaii pursuant to the 2003 Act announced their intent to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAIl from the Hawaii market and redeploy her to Europe The operator intends to re-flag the vessel to foreign registry directly resulting in the loss of over 1100 crewmember jobs The primary reason cited for this decision is the rapid increase in foreign-flag competition entering the Hawaii market
Federal Register I Vol 72 No 224 I Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules 65489
from the West Coast This competition is evidenced in published cruise itineraries of foreign-flag carriers offering a variety of round trip cruises that depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period usually in the early morning and ultimately return to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their cruise These cruises are often marketed as Hawaii cruises and except for the brief stop in the nearby foreign port of Ensenada are purely coastwise in nature It is these cruise itineraries that pose an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels that pursuant to the 2003 Act are currently engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands
V Preliminary Notice
In response to MARADs concerns CBP sent letters to two carriers known to operate the itineraries in question as well as to the Cruise Lines International Association Inc stating that CBP believes that these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because it appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA The letters further indicated that CBP is taking steps to publish this position
VI CBPs Proposed Interpretive Rule Accordingly in this document CBP is
proposing to provide that cruise itineraries for non-qualified coastwise vessels which allow passengers to board at a US port call at several Hawaiian ports proceed to a foreign port or ports for a brief period and then ultimately return to the original US port of embarkation for disembarkation are not consistent with the PVSA and the regulations promulgated pursuant thereto Specifically CBP interprets a voyage to be solely to one or more coastwise ports even where it stops at a foreign port unless the stop at the foreign port is a legitimate object of the cruise CBP will presume that a stop at a foreign port is not a legitimate object of the cruise unless
(1) The stop lasts at least 48 hours at the foreign port
(2) The amount of time at the foreign port is more than 50 percent of the total amount of time at the US ports of call and
(3) The passengers are permitted to go ashore temporarily at the foreign port
Accordingly CBP proposes to adopt an interpretive rule under which it will presume that any cruise itinerary that does not include a foreign port call that
satisfies each of these three criteria constitutes coastwise transportation of passengers in violation of 19 CFR 480a(b)(1)
Dated November 16 2007 W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection [FR Doc E7-22788 Filed 11-20-07 845 am] BILLING CODe 9111-14-1
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau
27 CFR Part 9
[Notice No 76]
RIN 1513-AB49
Proposed Establishment of the Leona Valley Viticultural Area (2007R-281 P)
AGENCY Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau Treasury ACTION Notice of proposed rulemaking
SUMMARY The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau proposes to establish the 134 square mile Leona Valley viticultural area in the northeast part of Los Angeles County California We designate viticultural areas to allow vintners to better describe the origin of their wines and to allow consumers to better identify wines they may purchase We invite comments on this proposed addition to our regulations DATES We must receive written comments on or before January 22 2008
ADDRESSES You may send comments on this notice to one of the following addresses
bull httpwwwregulationsgov (Federal e-rulemaking portal follow the instructions for submitting comments) or
bull Director Regulations and Rulings Division Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau PO Box 14412 Washington DC 20044-4412
See the Public Participation section of this notice for specific instructions and requirements for submitting comments and for information on how to request a public hearing
You may view copies of this notice selected supporting materials and any comments we receive about this proposal at httpwwwregulationsgov under Docket No 2007-0066 You also may view copies of this notice all related petitions maps or other supporting materials and any comments we receive about this
proposal by appointment at the TTB Information Resource Center 1310 G Street NW Washington DC 20220 To make an appointment call 202-927shy2400
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT NA Sutton Regulations and Rulings Division Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau 925 Lakeville S1 No 158 Petaluma CA 94952 phone 415shy271-1254 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
Background on Viticultural Areas
TTB Authority Section 105(e) of the Federal Alcohol
Administration Act (FAA Act) 27 USC 205(e) authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to prescribe regulations for the labeling of wine distilled spirits and malt beverages The FAA Act provides that these regulations should among other things prohibit consumer deception and the use of misleading statements on labels and ensure that labels provide the consumer with adequate information as to the identity and quality of the product The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) administers the regulations promulgated under the FAA Act
Part 4 ofthe TTB regulations (27 CFR part 4) allows the establishment of definitive viticultural areas and the use of their names as appellations of origin on wine labels and in wine advertisements Part 9 of the TTB regulations (27 CFR part 9) contains the list of approved viticultural areas
Definition Section 425(e)(1)(i) ofthe TTB
regulations (27 CFR 425(e)(1)(i)) defines a viticultural area for American wine as a delimited grape-growing region distinguishable by geographical features the boundaries of which have been recognized and defined in part 9 of the regulations These designations allow vintners and consumers to attribute a given quality reputation or other characteristic of a wine made from grapes grown in an area to its geographic origin The establishment of viticultural areas allows vintners to describe more accurately the origin of their wines to consumers and helps consumers to identify wines they may purchase Establishment of a viticultural area is neither an approval nor an endorsement by TTB of the wine produced in that area
Requirements Section 425(e)(2) of the TTB
regulations outlines the procedure for proposing an American viticultural area and provides that any interested party
Us Department ofHomelaDd Secmity Washington DC 10229
bull ~
US Customs and Border Protection
AUG 15 2fXJJ
VE5-3-02-QTRRBSTCCCI - ti015502-GG-
Mr leon Sutcliffe Director Port Operations Camivai Cruise Unes Camival Place 3655 NW 87Avenue Miami Aorlda 33178
RE P~nger Vessef Services Ad Coastwise Transportation 46 USC sect 55103 19 CFR sect 480a(b)
Dear Mr Sutcliffe
As you know US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) enforces the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) codified at TItle 46 United States Code section 55103 (46 USC 55103) This statute prohibits non-coastwise-qualifled vessels (ie those vessels not US-buill owned and documented with a coastwise endorsement) from transporting passengers between porls or places within the United States The regUlations promUlgated pursuant to the PVSA are found at TrtJe 19 Code of Federal Regulations section 4808 (19 CFR 4808)
It has come to our attention that passenger vessels of your company are engaging in cruise itineraries that include ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands Two USAlagged coastwise-endorsed passenger vessefs are also currenUy engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of caD wittlin the Hawaiian Islands
As part of your cruise itineraries some of your foreign-flagged vessels depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period and ultimately rebJm to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their endse For example the MS ZAANDAM of Holand America Lines departs San Diego cruises the Hawaiian Islands stops in Ensenada from 800pm to 11 OOpmbull and returns to san Diego CBP believes these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because It appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA -- - - ~~~------
Please be advised that CBP is taking steps to publish this position Should have any questions pertaining to this matter please contact Mr Glen Vereb Chief Cargo Security Carriers and Immigration Branch at (202) 572-8724
Sincerely
F Jl E EST Y LEe A U I 5 I N Gmiddot
December 21 2007
The Honorable W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection co Border Security Regulations Branch Office ofInternational Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229
Re Hawaii Coastwise Cruises (USCBP-2007-0098) Comments in Response to Proposed Interpretation
Dear Commissioner Basham
NCL America Inc1 (NCLA) submits these comments in support ofthe efforts ofCustoms and Border Protection to enforce the Passenger Vessel Services Act and the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative as applied to Hawaii coastwise cruises
1 Introduction and Summary of Position
NCLA operates three large oceangoing US flag cruise ships in Hawaii These ships are documented under US flag and are required to operate in regular service in Hawaii pursuant to the authority of the Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative a 2003 federal statute intended to revitalize the US flag cruise industry and to maximize economic and national security benefits to the United States (the 2003 Act)
NCLA has invested $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships pursuant to the 2003 Act and in direct reliance on the protections of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) and its proper enforcement The PVSA limits the transportation ofpassengers between US ports to coastwise documented US flag ships Its statutory protections recognize that US flag ships have significantly higher operational costs in part because they are subject to more stringent US laws including US labor laws and federal
1 NCL America Inc is a US corporation incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware headquartered in Honolulu Hawaii As a US corporation it is subject to US taxes at both the federal and state level The Chief Executive Officer the Chairman of the Board and all of the Board of Directors of NCL America are US citizens The company is also subject to US labor and employment laws and is required by statute to maintain a workforce comprised primarily ofUS citizens
700 Bishop St SUite 900 I Honolulu HawMi 96813 I Tel 8085273800 Fax 8085273820 I ndcom
2
income tax among others The NCLA ships operating in Hawaii are the only large oceangoing cruise ships operating under US flag In furtherance of the policy goals of the PVSA and the 2003 Act these ships have created over 4000 seafaring jobs all subject to US minimum wage and other labor statutes
Since 2003 there has been a significant increase in capacity in the Hawaii market from foreign flag ships providing cruise service to Hawaii from the West Coast Many of these foreign flag cruises are marketed as Hawaii cruises and consist entirely ofUS ports ofcall with the sole exception of a token stop in Mexico for as little as an hour late at night under circumstances where passengers are not permitted to get offthe ship There are no reported rulings approving these particular foreign flag itineraries
Lower cost foreign competition in the Hawaii market has unfairly hurt NCLAs operations NCLA has incurred substantial losses which have contributed significantly to its decision earlier this year to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAll from US flag and reshydeploy it foreign Unfair foreign competition poses an imminent threat to the remaining US flag passenger vessels operating in the Hawaii trades pursuant to the 2003 Act
As the agency statutorily charged with implementation of the 2003 Act the US Department ofTransportation Maritime Administration (MARAn) is aware of the threat foreign flag Hawaii itineraries pose to the US flag fleet and brought the situation to the attention ofthe US Department ofHomeland Security Bureau ofCustoms and Border Protection (CBP or Customs) Customs determined that the primary object of these itineraries was coastwise and that the Ensenada stop was an evasion of the PVSA
In August 2007 Customs provided written notice to the affected foreign lines and their trade association that the existing itineraries were contrary to the PVSA None of these lines sought advance rulings even after the Customs notice with respect to their Hawaii itineraries pursuant to Customs regulations and many continued to market the itineraries as Hawaii cruises NCLA supports the efforts ofCustoms and MARAD to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act for Hawaii cruises
2 Statutory Authority for Customs Proposed Interpretation
(a) Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA)
Congress passed the PVSA in 1886 to protect the US maritime transportation industry from foreign competition2 Protection is afforded through penalty assessments on foreign vessels transporting passengers between US ports or places directly or by way ofa foreign port 3 As Congress and the courts have recognized coastwise protections for the US maritime transportation industry are only one dimension of the PVSA Operating in conjunction with other coastwise laws and with the US
2 See United States v Honduran SS GRANADA 35 F Supp 892 894 (BD Pa 1940)(citing purpose of PVSA to meet threats to the practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping which was to be preserved for US ships)
46 USc sect 55103 (originally 46 USC App 289)
3
documentation laws the PVSA also enhances military sealift in times ofnational emergency sustains a US merchant marine and supports the US shipbuilding and repair industry4
(b) Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative (the 2003 Act)
Over the past decade Congress has sought to reinforce the goals of the PVSA by providing mechanisms to revitalize the oceangoing US flag cruise fleet particularly in Hawaii The Project America legislation enacted in 1997 authorized among other things the re~flagging ofone existing cruise ship contingent on the operator contracting for the construction oftwo new oceangoing cruise shipss Following the default of the operator under the original contract Congress enacted the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative for the purpose ofrecovering economic and national security benefits to the United States bull 6 These same goals of the original PVSA were expressly referenced in the legislative history of the 2003 Act which emphasized that these ships will be assets available in time ofnational emergency and will significantly expand the pool ofqualified seafarers upon which the US Department ofDefense relies to crew non-combatant vessels
The 2003 Act authorizes the US documentation ofthree cruise ships for operation in regular service in Hawaii subject to certain conditions including a prohibition on operating in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico and the Caribbean Sea and a requirement that all vessel repair work be undertaken in the United States MARAD is charged with implementation of the 2003 Act
3 Customs Implementation of PVSA
(a) Regulations
The current regulations implementing the PVSA were published by Customs in 19858 The growth of the foreign flag cruise industry in North America and in particular the development of the Alaska cruise market led to an effort in 1984 to amend the thenshyexisting regulations to increase the ease of administration and operational flexibility The effort to change the regulation had support from US port interests who saw benefit in the potential increase in the number ofUS ports that foreign vessels could call and was opposed by proponents ofpotential US flag projects as detrimental to efforts to revitalize the US fleet 9 The preamble to the 1985 rule emphasized that it was of paramount importance to consider the primary object ofpassengers in taking a
4 See American Hawaii Cruises v Skinner 713 F Supp 452 457 (DDC 1989) (recognizing the contribution of the PVSA and the Jones Act in helping to secure national defense by maintaining a merchant marine oftbe best equipped and most suitable types ofvessels sufficient to serve in time of war or national emergency) see also Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 30 (DC Cir 1984) Wirth Ltd v SIS Acadia Forest 537 F2d 1272 1281 n32 (5th Cir 1976) S Public Law 105-56 Section 8109 (111 Stat 1203 1244) (Oct 81997 ) 6 Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II General Provisions - Department ofCommerce Section 211 (117 Stat 1179) (Feb 20 2003) 1 149 Cong Rec S1118 (dailyed Jan 17 2003(statement ofSenator Inouye) 8 19 CFR sect 480a 950 Fed Reg 26981 (July I 1985)
4
voyage10 a concept which is reinforced elsewhere in Customs regulations11 In its analysis of the comments received at the time Customs accepted the view ofport interests that the modified rule would help their business but did so recognizing the absence ofa regular salt water US flag passenger fleet Customs acknowledged the potential harm to prospective efforts to revitalize the US flag passenger fleet and expressly cautioned that if it were ever shown that coastwise qualified vessels in competition with foreign vessels were in fact hurt by the modified Customs regulation then Customs would immediately reconsider its position12
(b) Customs Rulings
Given the significant penalties associated with violating the PVSA13 Customs regulations expressly provide a mechanism for the owner or charterer of a foreign vessel or any other interested person to request an advisory ruling as to whether a contemplated voyage would be considered in violation of the PVSA14 Customs regulations provide that vessel operators can rely on these ruling letters only to the extent that the facts and circumstances are identical to those in the ruling letter IS
Notwithstanding the fact that several foreign cruise lines offer Hawaii itineraries originating in a US mainland port and calling at Hawaii ports with a token intervening stop in Mexico there are no reported rulings expressly approving such an itinerary for these foreign cruise lines 16
4 The Cruise Industry in Hawaii
(a) NCL America Returns US flag to the Oceangoing Passenger Fleet
Pursuant to the requirements ofthe 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative NCLA agreed to promote US-flag cruising enhance military sealift capacity and expand the US maritime labor base No other major cruise line had ever undertaken such a commitment to the US flag and the public policy objectives Congress sought to achieve under the PVSA or the 2003 Act Introduction ofPRIDE OF ALOHA in 2004 was a significant development in the maritime industry because it marked the restoration ofthe
10 Id at 26983 11 Customs Regulations include a provision on the effect ofruling letters and with respect to carrier rulings the applicable regulation refers to rulings setting forth a determination as to whether or not the primary object of a contemplated voyage is coastwise transportation in violation of46 USC sect 289 [pYSA codified at 46 USC sect55103] 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 12 50 Fed Reg at 26983 13 A modem cruise ship with 2400 passengers for example would be subject to a fine of$720OOO per cruise based on the statutory penalty of$300 for each passenger transported in violation of the Act 14 19 CFR sect 480a(d) IS 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 16 There is one older reported mling involving a request to drop the Ensenada port call from a Los AngeleslHawaiiLos Angeles itinerary which Customs held would violate the PYSA In dicta Customs acknowledged that the itinerary could be in compliance if the Ensenada call were not dropped but did not address the issue ofwhether a one hour service call where no passengers depart the vessel would be sufficient The carrier that obtained that ruling has since left the Hawaii market See Customs Ruling HQ 114078 re Crystal Hannony (Nov 4 1997)
5
us flag to the oceangoing cruise industry A contemporaneous press release from the Us Department ofTransportation reported that the three US-flag cruise ships to be introduced pursuant to the 2003 Act were expected to create more than 20000 US jobs generate more than $825 million ofexpenditures in the US economy and create nearly $360 million in federal tax revenue by the end of 200717 In 2005 the PRIDE OF AMERICA was introduced and in 2006 the third vessel PRIDE OF HAWAll was introduced to Hawaii Both the PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAIl offer 7shyday inter-island Hawaii itineraries whereas PRIDE OF ALOHA operates on 7 and 10 day cruises exclusively among the islands ofHawaii as well as 11 day cruises that include a foreign port call at Fanning Island To date NCLA has invested over $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships in furtherance ofthe policy objectives of the PVSA and the 2003 Act These ships employ over 4000 seafarers and generate hundreds ofmillions of dollars in benefits for Hawaii and the nation
(b) Significant Increase in Foreign Flag Capacity Since 2003
The most significant change in the Hawaii cruise market since 2003 has been the dramatic increase in capacity A significant portion ofthis capacity increase is directly attributable to NCLAs fulfillment ofthe Congressional mandate in the 2003 Act However foreign-flag operations in the Hawaii market as measured in passenger nights18 have skyrocketed Based on MARAn data derived from the US Customs Border Patrol Vessel Entrance and Clearance documents the passenger nights for foreign flag vessels departing from the West Coast to Hawaii on round trip cruise have increased several hundredfold during this period19 See Exhibit A
(c) NCLA Has Incurred Substantial Losses During this Period
Since 2004 NCLA has lost cumulatively more than a quarter ofa billion dollars A principal reason for these losses has been the increase in foreign capacity in this market NCLA has taken significant steps to reduce costs to address the increase in foreign competition but NCLA is at an inherent disadvantage when competing against foreign companies that are not subject to US labor laws US tax laws and other laws Ofcourse the statutory protections of the PVSA are intended to address these very issues That is why Customs immediate action to implement the proposed interpretation is critical for the US flag fleet Regrettably NCLA has already been forced to reduce overall capacity early next year with the withdrawal ofPRIDE OF HAWAlI to another
17 DOT Press Release dated June 72004 see also DOT Press Release dated August 132004 in connection with visit to PRIDE OF ALOHA by US Transportation Secretary Norman Y Mineta 11 Passenger nights (also referred to as passenger capacity days) are calculated by multiplying the number ofpassengers per vessel by the number ofcruise days in each itinerary by the number of cruises This is the unit ofmeasurement employed by MARAn In contrast passenger bed supply (also referred to as passenger capacity) data reflects only the number ofberths per vessel multiplied by the number of cruises and hence understates the market by excluding the full economic value ofthe cruise perfonned 19 In 2003 the total number ofpassenger nights for round-trip West Coast to Hawaii cruises was 303325 which jumped by 353 to 1072329 in 2006 and by 430 to 1304546 from 2003 to 2007 (The 2007 figure is based on MARAD data for six months and a1ll1ualized by published itineraries for the balance of the year)
6
market for operation under foreign flag This move alone will result in the loss ofover 1000 American seafaring jobs
5 Customs Proposed Interpretation is Necessary to Further the Important National Security and Public Policy Objectives Embodied in Federal Law
As Customs has properly noted the increase in foreign competition in the Hawaii trades in contravention of the PVSA pose[s] an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels[] As the operator of these ships NCLA has a vested interest in protecting the jobs ofthe thousands ofAmerican crewmembers and cruise ship service providers who support these vessels NCLA also has an interest in protecting the substantial economic investment it has made to revitalize the US flag passenger vessel fleet But a balancing of interests in the context of Customs enforcement ofexisting law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act requires a much broader focus
The legislative history of the 2003 Act expressly recognized the national security and public policy import ofestablishing a US flag passenger vessel fleet as a means to maintain the countrys preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool of qualified seafarers and as a means to help sustain a fleet ofUS-flag vessels to su~ort
the nations military and maritime industrial base for times ofnational emergency
Congress understood the importance ofestablishing a viable US flag cruise ship fleet as something larger than the vessels themselves These national security and public policy objectives must be weighed in the balance as Customs assesses how best to interpret its rules to give effect to the PVSA and the 2003 Act
6 Customs Should Clarify that the Proposed Interpretation is Limited to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades and Adopt Reasonable Measures to Ensure Sufficient Foreign Content
Since publication ofthe proposed interpretative rule several commenters have observed that the scope of the proposed interpretation is ambiguous because the language of Section VI referencing any cruise itinerary appears broader than the caption Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises and the entire discussion in the published notice which focuses exclusively on US-flag coastwise vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA agrees that the proposed interpretation should be clarified so that its scope is limited to vessels operating roundtrip voyages from US ports that include Hawaii port calls
NCLA supports the concept reflected in the proposed interpretive rule that round trip Hawaii itineraries from US ports on foreign ships must include a material and measurable degree ofoverall foreign port content as compared to US port content
20 149 Congo Rec S1117 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)
7
(a) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is also Consistent with Subsequent Congressional Enactments Modifying the PVSA
As discussed above it is well established that the PVSA was designed toRrotect US-flag vessels from foreign competition in the coastwise and domestic trades 1
Subsequent legislative enactments however have appropriately differentiated among distinct geographic markets and trades including Canada Alaska Puerto Rico and Hawaii based on the existence or non-existence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
In 1938 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers by Canadian passenger vessels on Lake Ontario and the St Lawrence River until such time as passenger service shall be established by vessels of the United States22 Similarly in 1961 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers on Canadian vessels within Alaska or between Alaska and other points in the United States until such time as passenger service is established by vessels ofthe United States23
In 1984 Congress modified the application ofthe PVSA to pennit the transportation ofpassengers between Puerto Rico and other United States ports on foreign-flag vessels24 As with the other statutory exceptions this provision is qualified and expires [o]n a showing that a United States passenger vessel qualified to engage in the coastwise trade is offering or advertising passenger service between a port in Puerto Rico and another port in the United States2S
Congress acted again with respect to the application of the PVSA with the 2003 Act in which it authorized three vessels that did not meet the US-build requirements of the PVSA to operate as modem US-flagged cruise ships in regular service in Hawaii26 The 2003 Act imposes a specific geographic limitation on the operation of any ship documented under this authority to operations only in regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands ofHawaii and shall not transport passengers in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico or the Caribbean Sea except in certain limited circumstances27 As above the limited nature of the 2003 Act is express it is strictly limited to the large ocean-going cruise ships and then only those operating in the regular Hawaii service where there are no US-flag operations28
21 See Act ofJune 19 1886 c 421 sec 8 24 Stat 81 Act of February 171898 c 26 sec 2 30 Stat 248 22 S] Res 174 75th Cong 52 Stat 223 (Alp 251938) codified at46 USC sect 55121(a) 23 See Pub L 87-77 75 Stat 196 (Jun 30 1961) codified at 46 USC sect 55121(b) 24 See Pub L 98-563 98 Stat 2916 (Oct 301984) codified at 46 USC sect 55104(b) 25 46 USC sect 55104(c)(l) see also 46 USC 46 USc sect 55104(cX2)(expiration of exemption upon availability ofa non-coastwise qualified US-flag vessel offering service in the relevant market) 26 149 Congo Rec SI118 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)(statementofSen Inouye) 27 Pub L 108-7 117 Stat 79 (Feb 20 2003) 28 149 Congo Rec S11l9 (dailyed Jan 17 2003Xstatement of Sen Inouye)
8
In each ofthese instances Congress fashioned a narrow exception to the PVSA that differentiated among distinct geographic markets based on the existence or nonshyexistence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
As the federal agency responsible for administering the 2003 Act MARAD requested that Customs act to protect US flag passenger vessel interests in the Hawaii trades29 Limiting the scope ofthe proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades also reflects Customs appreciation of the PVSA in the context of the subsequent Congressional action30 Viewing the Congressional modifications to the PVSA as a whole Congress has specifically and repeatedly differentiated among distinct geographic markets when it has found it necessary and appropriate to do so to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests It is well established that the proper interpretation of a statutory scheme includes consideration ofsubsequent statutes even though the underlying statute itselfhas not been expressly amended31 Accordingly Customs should likewise limit the scope ofthe proposed PVSA interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades because that is the only geographic market as mandated by the 2003 Act in which oceangoing US-flag cruise ships are operating
(b) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Consistent with Public Policy Objectives of the 1985 Rulemaking
In 1985middot Customs liberalized the regulations implementing the PVSA by eliminating certain regulatory prohibitions on foreign flag vessels In the context of the 1985 rulemaking Customs justified a relaxation ofthe regulations on the grounds that it would simplify the administration of the PVSA and would benefit the economy ofcertain American coastwise ports without eroding the statutory protection given to American vessels engaged in solely domestic trade32
Customs thus sought to reconcile US port economic interests with US-flag passenger vessel interests Both of these twin policy objectives are furthered by
29 See 72 Fed Reg 65488 (Nov 21 2007)( MARAn bas asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the ~eratiODS ofcoastwise-qualified cruise ship operators)
See generally FDA v Brown amp Williamson Tobacco Corp 529 US 120 132-133 (2000)(assessing propriety ofagency construction ofFood DIUg and Cosmetics Act and descnbing responsibility of reviewing cowt to assess statutory provisions in the context of subsequent legislative enactments) 31 See Brown amp Williamson 529 US 143 (holding that proper construction ofstatutory provision must necessarily assume that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications ofa later statute This is particularly so where the scope of the earlier statute is broad but the subsequent statutes more specifically address the topic athand) see also United States v Estate ofRomani 523 US 517 530-531 (1998)( holding that a later-enacted statute should control the construction of the federal lien priority statute a specific policy embodied in a later federal statute should control om construction of the [earlier] statute even though it ha[s] not been expressly amended) United States v Fausto 484 US 439453 (1988)(The courts frequently find Congress to have done this - whenever in fact they interpret a statutory text in the light ofsurrounding texts that happen to have been subsequently enacted This classic judicial task of reconciling many laws enacted over time and getting them to make sense in combination necessarily assumes that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications of a later statute) 32 50 Fed Reg 26982 (JuI 11985)
9
limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades
As noted earlier the 2003 Act limits the operation of the NCLA US-flag oceangoing passenger vessels to regular service in Hawaii Because there are no oceangoing US-flag vessels operating in any market other than the Hawaii trades Customs should limit the scope of the proposed interPretation to that market Such a limitation protects US flag passenger vessel interests without prejudicing US port interests In contrast an application of the proposed interpretation to any itinerary would needlessly harm US port interests unrelated to Hawaii without any countervailing benefit to US-flag passenger vessel interests Accordingly limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation is consistent with the public policy objectives of the 1985 rulemaking as well as the 2003 Act
(c) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Also Consistent with Customs Commitment to Revisit the Scope of its Rules to Protect US-Flag Interests
The relaxation ofthe PVSA regulations in 1985 was premised in large part on Customs finding that there was no regular salt water US-flag passenger fleet in operation at that time33 Acknowledging that the relaxed regulations could harm USshyflag interests Customs committed in the preamble ofthe 1985 final rule to immediately reconsider its interpretation if it is ever shown that there is a viable US flag vessel operating in competition with foreign-flag vessels34
Congress enacted the 2003 Act to stimulate the development of a US flag cruise ship industry As noted above the legislative history ofthat Act makes clear that Congress sought to revitalize the US-flag cruise industry as a means to maintain Americas preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool ofqualified seafarers help sustain a fleet of US flag vessels to support our military and a maritime industrial base create thousands of seagoing and shoreside American jobs and stimulate the development ofa US flag cruise ship tourism business with the commensurate benefits to the US tax base the US economy and US employment
Customs is now acting at MARADs request to revisit its interpretation ofthe regulations implementing the PVSA because recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwise-qualified cruise ship operations35 That is to say that the concerns articulated by Customs in the context of the 1985 rulemaking have materialized and US-flag passenger vessel interests are in fact being hanned in the Hawaii trades by foreign competitors
33 50 Fed Reg 26983 34Id
3S 72 Fed Reg 56488 (Nov 21 2007)
I
10
Because the US-flag passenger vessels are limited by statute to regular service in Hawaii limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the
Hawaii trades is consistent with Customs historical commitment to revisit its interpretation ofthe implementing regulations to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests
7 Conclusion
For the reasons stated above NCLA commends the efforts ofCustoms and MARAn to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act as applied to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA respectfully requests Customs to move ahead promptly with p~blicati~nof a final interpretive rule to advance the important national security arid public policy objectives ofthese laws
We greatly appreciate the opportunity to submit these comments
Sincerely
~~~ Alan T Yamamoto Vice President Hawaii Operations
Exhibit A
Ship Name Serenade Of The Seas Departure Port San Diego California Ports of Call San Diego California Kailua Kona Hawaii Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii Hlo Hawaii Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii Ensenada Mexico San Qigo California
2007 Date(s) Oct 05
Sailing Itinerary
Day Port H ~rrive Depart Activity
05-0ct San Diego California 500 PM
06-0ct Cruising
07-0ct Cruising
08-0ct Cruising
09-0ct Cruising
10-0ct Kailua Kona Hawaii 700 AM 900 PM Tendered
11-00t Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 1000 AM Tendered
12middot0ct Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 900 PM Tendered
13-0ct Hilo Hawaii 700 AM 600 PM Docked
14middot0ct Honoulu (Oahu) Hawaii 700 AM Docked
15-0ct Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii 200 AM Docked
6-0ct CrUising
17-0ct Cruising
18-0ct Cruising
19middot0ct Cruising
-7 20-00t
O-Oot
Ensenada ~i1exico
San Deqo California
i 00 ~r1
700 ~M
200 oM D1Jcked ~
EXOTICS CRU ISES amp CRU ISETOU RS
AUSTRALIANEW ZEALAND CRUISETOUR
AUSTRALIAN EXPLORER 2004 DEPARTURE DATESAPPHIRE21 plus
DAYS PRINCESS SYDNEY Dec 17 to
AUCKLAND CRUISETOUR 5P CRUiSE
CRUISETOUR ITINERARY
DAY PORT By Sea By Land DAY PORT
1 Sydney 14 Fiordland National Park 2 Sydney Scenic Cruising
3 SydneyAyers Rock 15 Dunedin New Zealand (Port Chalmers) 4 Ayers ROek
5 Ayers RockPort Douglas 16 Christchurch New Zealand 6 Port Douglas - (Lytleton)
7 Port DouglasSydneyEmbark 17 Wellilgton New Zealand 8 At Sea 18 At Sea 9 Melbourne Australia 19 Tauranga New Zealand
10 At Sea 20 Bay of Islands New Zealand 11 Tasmania Australia (Hobart) 21 Auckland New Zealand 12middot13 At Sea
Sydney Opera House Australia
AUSTRALIANEW ZEALAND CRUISETOUR SOUTHEAST ASIACHINA CRUISETOUR CAPE HORNSTRAIT OF MAGELLAN CRUISETOUR AUSTRALIAN BEIJING Be TERRA COTTA 2004 DEPARTURE DATES RIO 8t IGUAZU FALLS Post-Crulsetour1 Pre-Crulsetour 217EXPLORER 2005 DEPARTURE DATES PACIFICSAPPHIRE WARRIORS19 plw or PRINCESS jul9t loieifie
DAYS PRINCESS SYDNEY Jan 12 plus 19 ROYAL plw Feb 5 Oct 28 Royal BUENOS AIRES
AUCKLAND DAYS ROYAL PRINCESS to 21 ampto DAYS PRINCESS
BEUING CRUISE t ~~S~i BeWln~~~~e
to SANTIAGO~e~s~Ot~r~ih~fi1BANGKOK CRUiSE CRUISECRUISETOUR 3t3P landtourm~yvlty CRUISETOUR 12
DAY PORT DAY PORT
DAY PORT By Sea ltBy LaDd DAY PORT
1 Beijing 11-12 At Sea 1 Rio de janeiro 11 Cape Horn Scenic Cruising
13 Hong Kong 2 Rio de jneiro c 12 Ushuaia Argentina 14 At Sea 3 RiolgUaiu Falls 12 Beagle Channel Scenlc Cruising
15 Nha Trang Vietnam 4 IIDIilZll FaU$13u~os~re$ 13 Punta Arenas Chile
16 Phu My Vietnam 5 Buens AiresEmbark 14 At Sea 17 At Sea 6 Montevideo Uruguay 15 Seno Eyre Fjord Scenic Cruising 18 Singapore 7 At Sea 16 At Sea 19 Kualtan Malaysia 8 Puerto Madryn Argentina 17 Puerto Montt Chile 20 At Sea 9 At Sea 18 At Sea 21 Bangkok Thail3nd 10 Falkland Islands (Stanley) 19 Santiago Chile
DAY PORT DAY PORT
At Sea Pusan SouthKOrea Nagasaki japan At Sea Shanghai China
Note CnIlst route shown for Royil Princess Oct 28 only Timcsforil1lsccnkoulslngmsubjccttothange
CRUISE [OUR ITINERARY
CRUISETOUR ITINERARY
CRUISrrOlJR ITINERARY Fiordland National Park Scenic Cruising DlUedin New Zealand Christchurch New Zealand Wellington New Zealand
14
GRAND PANAMA CANAL CRUISES
ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL
10 10 11 DAYSDAYS DAYS
CORAL PRINCESS GRAND PRINCESS GRAND PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIPfrom from
fromFT LAUDERDALE GALVESTON GALVESTON
2004 DEPARTURE DATES Oct n 21 31 2004 DEPARTURE DATE
2004 DEPARTURE DATENov 10 20 30middot DeelSmiddot
DedSDec 10 28
2005 DEPARTURE DATES CRUISE ITINERARY Jan 7 17 27
CRUISE ITINERARY Feb 6 16 26 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART MarS 1828 CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Galveston Texas EMBARK PMApr 7 17 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTshy 1 Galveston Texas EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 1 ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 3 Belize City Belize 1 PM 7PM 2-3 At Sea 3 Belize City Belize lPM 7PM 4 Costa Maya Mexico (Mahahual) 8AM 4PM 4 Um6n Costa Rica 7AM rPM 4 Costa Maya Mexico (Mahahual) SAM 4 PM 5 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands 12 PM 7PM 5 Panama Canal (to Gatun Lake) 7AM 430 PM 5 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands 12 PM 7PM 6 Ocho Rios Jamaica SAM 5PM 5 Col6n Panama 5PM 8PM 6 At Sea 7 At Sea 6 At Sea Cristobal Panama 7AM 4PM 8 7AM 4PM 7 Grand Cayman Cayman IslandS 7AM 4PM (fot Panama Canal) ftrtpg~niaa~~) S Corumel Mexico SAM 6PM 8 At Sea 9 At Sea 9 Bclize City Belize 7AM 4 PM 6PM 10 Coromel Mexico lOAM 6 PM9 Cozumel Mexico lOAM 10 At Sea 10 At Sea 11 At Sea
Portordtrllndtlmtsmayvllry 11 flo Lauderdale florida DISEMBARK AM Portorntr IInltf timpoundi may vary 11 Galveston Texas DISEMBARK AM Port ordu and Nmes may vary 12 Galv_es~on Texas DISEMBARK AM
ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL
8 DAYS
CORAL PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP
from
FT LAUDERDALE
2004 DEPARTURE DATE Dec 20
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Fl Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM 2-3 At Sea 4 Lim6n Costa Rica 7AM 7PM 5 Panama Canal (to Gatun Lake) 7 AM 430 PM 5 Co16n Panama 5PM SPM 6 At Sea 7 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands SAM 5PM S At Sea 9 Flo Lauderdale Florida DISEMBARK AM Bridge of the Americas Panama
f OptIonll fOllTS inclld1lI tht AtlllnH to Pacific RlIlllfll) joumq will dlmlldrt tilt ship b) tctdtr lit Gfttlm uk AJkr tour plIssmm dlstmlrark tilt shipwin procmlllat through tilt Gatun Locb lIndjlnlllly dock in Gl6lI Hmal1p41Sl11tmmttydiumlmtheJldlo~ lflrshops IInd~llI toIIrsrrnrl CIItutl14ktlllIrtonlflrJhlp
GRAND PANAMA CANAL CRUISES
GRAND PANAMA CANAL GRAND PANAMA CANAL GRAND PANAMA CANAL
150R 18 150R 1715 DAYS DAYS DAYS
CORAL PRINCESS SUN PRINCESS
REGAL PRINCESS REGAL PRINCESS SUN PRINCESS
DAWN PRINCESS REGAL PRINCESS sail between DAWN PRINCESS
sail between FT LAUDERDALE FT LAUDERDALE sail betweenand
FT LAUDERDALEand SAN DIEGO andLOS ANGELES
SAN FRANCISCO 2004 DEPARTURE DATES 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
DAWN PRINCESS 2004 DEPARTURE DATESNov 24Sp191
CRUISE ITINERARY Dec9t CORAL PRINCESSREGAL PRINCESS 5ltp261 CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE ITINERARY
200S DEPARTURE DATES Dec 24 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
SUN PRINCESS DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARIltPM200S DEPARTURE DATES DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Sep 2StMar 24
3 Ocho Rios Jamaica lOAM 6PM 2-3 At5ea 2 At Sea 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBA8KPM
REGAL PRINCESS AprSt 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBA8KPM Jan stu 200S DEPARTURE DATES2 At Sea4 At Sea 4 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 7AM lPMJan 23 5 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 7AM lPM 3 Ocho Rios Jamaica lOAM 6PM REGAL PRINCESS 5 Cartagena Colombia 9AM 3PMFeb7t 4 At Sea Apr 239AM 3PM 6 Transit Panama Canal 7AM 430 PMFb22 ~ yenr~fte~~~~~~u 7AM 430 PM 5 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 7AM lPM At SeaMar9t CORAL PRINCESS 79AM 3PM8 At Sea Apr 27 8 Puntarenas Costa Rica 7AM 7PMSUN PRINCESS 9 Puntarenas Costa Rica 7 AM 7PM ~ yenr~fte~n~~~~~u 7AM 430 PM 9-10 At SeaApr1S 8 At Sea DAWN PRINCESS10-11 At Sea 11 Acapulco Mexico 8AM 5PM
5PM 9 Puntarenas Costa Rica 7AM 7PM Apr 29H ~ae~lcoMexico 8 AM 12 At SeatllWrryopmllzlfrarnLls~in 10-11 At Sea rmrKfIfikTiIIrttimnma1 tlliJlrraryoptJllllsfrlJflSlmFranrimlJn 13 Cabo San lucas Mexico 8AM 5PM
gt This mUJI C4Jl llfwmblnld wlth a 3 14 Cabo San Lucas Mexico 7 AM lPM H ~e~o Mexico 8AM SPM rmruordrrorttimamG)llIryCoIutar CnUK to VlWOIlllr SC Dqs ThUIltIIIflltllnlltCllIIblntdwilhaZ-day 14-15 At Sea 16lhrlllllhI9lllIbtboobdulaquoSC)lQ4k t Illncral) lIpCutcs in mrmt orm Pllrt IiIIIa CocastaICnliutoVan(ouKrBCDlIys16 16 San Francisco California 7AM 4PMcowtlIrcrllisr IIIIYlIl1Ymiddot IhrounIScankboobdlUaK)lllllluU t~A~geles California 6 AM 5PM 14 Cabo San Lucas Mexico 8AM 5PM
Thllwl1JIIICllllslltMOlIkpilllyJmtcad 17-18 At Sea middotmiddotThliIAfllIllCltlllsatMGnIqclBaylnstcadllf 15 At Sea CPlIilldCI1IIu 17 At Sea o[OdKKwsPurllilllrlmllYWlry OchoRicJsPortllmtslllllYVllfymiddot D1SEMBA8K AM19 Vancouver BC DISEMBA8K AM 16 San Die20 California DlSEMBA8K AM 18 Val1couver BC
GRAND PANAMA CANAL COASTAL CRUISING
2-4 CORAL PRINCESS ISLAND PRINCESS SUN PRINCESS18 DAWN PRINCESS DIAMOND PRINCESS STAR PRINCESSDAYSDAYS
COASTAL CRUISE SCHEDULEREGAL PRINCESS
SHIP DAYS FROM TO DEPARTURE DATE DIAMOND PRINCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 5104
SAN FRANCISCO DIAMOND PRINCES5 4 Vancouver Seattle 5404 to CORAL PRINCESS 2 San Francisco Vancouver 5604
NEW YORK DAWN PRiNCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 5704 ISLAND PRiNCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 51204
2004 DEPARTURE DATE SUN PRINCESS 3 San Francisco Vancouver 51404Aug 24 ISLAND PRiNCESS 3 Vancouver LOI Angeles 91804
DIAMOND PRINCESS 1 Seattle Vancouver 91804CRUISE ITINERARY DIAMOND PRINCESS 6 Vancouver Los Angeles 91904 SAPPHIRE PRINCESS 1 Seattle Vancouver 91904 SAPPHREPRINCESS 2 Vancouver San Francisco 92004 DIAMOND PRINCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 43005 DlAMONDPRiNCES$ 4 Vancouver Seattle 5305 SUN PRINCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 5305
ISLAND PRiNCESS 3 Los Angeles VancOllver 5405 CORAL PRiNCESS 2 San Francisco Vancouver 51205
Coral Princess in the Panama Canal
CRUISE PLUS
Extend your adventure with our Cruise Plusreg program Cruise Plusreg enables you to enhance your vacation with one- to four-night hotel
packages in cities that stand on their own as vacation destinations Add nights in Sydney before you cruise or extend your vacation with nights in the city by the
bay San Francisco Transportation and luggage handling costs from the airport to both hotel and ship plus meet and greet services are always included
Wherever you choose to explore youll enjoy properties that are carefully chosen based on service value location and the peace of mind of knowing that Princess
has arranged it all for you
Anchorage Alaska Trevi Fountain Rome Auckland Harbor New Zealand
The Cruise Plusreg Program is available in over 30 major cities including
MEDITERRANEANAEGEAN EXOTICS PANAMA CANAL Barcelona London Rome and Venice Auckland Bangkok Beijing Buenos Aires Ft Lauderdale Los Angeles New York City
Cape Town Ft Lauderdale Honolulu Los San Diego San Francisco Sanjuan Vancouver NORTHERN EUROPE Angeles Montreal Moorea New York City Copenhagen and London MEXICO CARIBBEANOsaka Papeete Rome San Francisco
Ft Lauderdale Galveston Los AngelesTRANSATLANTIC Santiago Seattle Sydney Vancouver Venice Barcelona Copenhagen Ft Lauderdale San Francisco and San Juan
London New York City and Rome ALASKA Anchorage Calgary Fairbanks Kenai San Francisco Seattle and Vancouver
For more information about options and pricing reference a destination specific brochure or contact your travel agent
TRAVEL THE WORLD WITH THE LEADER IN CRUISINGmiddot Princess
Analysis by the Hawaii Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism Comparing the Economic Impact of Foreign Flag Ships with US Flag Cruise Ships Sailing in Hawaii
This is a summary of an analysis prepared by the Hawai Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism (DBEDT) of the economic impact of the foreign flag cruise ship fleet sailing in Hawaii as compared to each of the US flag ships operating in Honolulu
The comparison is set out below
Foreign Pride Pride Pride
Fleet Of Hawaii Of Aloha Of America
Total economic output impact (spendingsales) ($mil) 155 542 4225 4958
Total earnings impact (labor earnings) ($mil) 44 155 1207 1411
Total employment impact Uobs) 1447 5059 3943 4627
This analysis demonstrates that a single US-flagged ship the Pride of America home ported in Honolulu is 32 times more economically impactful and creates 32 times as many jobs as the entire foreign flag fleet that sails into and out of Hawaii ports of call
Economic Impact of Pride of America
Assumptions 1 Annual impact though Pride of Aloha is leaving in May 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existing Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($) 4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of outputl$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job multiplier (jobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
118700 105
2706 3373
147 042
1372
4958
1417
4627
Data sourcelformula Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Line 1 x line 2 x line 31 000000
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 4 x line 5
Line 4 x line 6
Line 4 x line 7
Economic Impact of Pride of Hawaii
Assumptions
1 Annual impact though Pride of Hawaii is leaving in February 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existing Pride of Aloha and Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($) 4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job multiplier (jobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
Data sourceformula 139770 Actual 2007 figure
975 Actual 2007 figure 2706 Actual 2007 figure 3688 Line 1 x line 2 x line 31000000
147 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model 042 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
1372 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
5421 Line 4 x line 5
1549 Line 4 x line 6
5059 Line 4 x line 7
Economic Impact of Pride of Aloha
Assumptions 1 Annual impact though Pride of Aloha is leaving in May 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existlng Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($)
4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job mUltiplier Oobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
95680 111
2706 2874
147 042
1372
4225
1207
3943
Data sourcelformula Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Line 1 x line 2 x line 31000000
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 4 x line 5
Line 4 x line 6
Line 4 x line 7
lt
Methodology Used in Calculating Impact of International Cruise Ships
Cruise ship visitors 1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Came with ships 3 Flied in 4 Average length of stay (days) 5 PPPD ($) 6 Cruise visitor spending ($mil))
Cruise ship crews 7 Ratio of crew spending to cruise visitor spending 8 Cruise crew spending
Cruisline 9 Ratio of crew spending to cruise visitor spending
10 Cruiseline spending
11 Total cruise-related spending ($mil)
12 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 13 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 14 Job multiplier Uobs$ cruise -related spending)
15 Total output impact ($miJ)
16 Total earnings impact ($miJ)
17 Total employment impact (jobs)
106641 98307
8334 739 847 668
02 134
038 254
1055
147 042
1372
1551
444
1447
Data sourceformula Line 2 + line 3 DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report Line 1 x line 4 x line 5
DBEDT 2003 Cruise study Line 7 x line 6
DBEDT 2003 Cruise study Line 9 x line 6
Line 6 + line 8 + line 10
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 11 x line 12
Line 11 x line 13
Line 11 x line 14
Economic Contributions Foreign-Flag Fleet operating in Hawaii vs Three US-Flag Ships
$1500
Pride of Hawaii$1000- $542 million VIc -0-E c Pride of AlohaCo
423 million$500
Pride of America $496 million155 million$shy
Foreign-Flag US-Flag Fleet Fleet
Source State of Hawaii Department of US-Flag $1460 billion Business Economic Development and Tourism
Foreign-Flag $ 155 million 7292008
Employment Foreign-Flag Fleet operating in Hawaii vs Three US-Flag Ships
15000
10000
til c o Pride of Aloha
39435000
Pride of America 1447 4627
~---------
Foreign-Flag US-Flag Fleet Fleet
Source State of Hawaii Department of US-Flag 13629 jobs Business Economic Development and Tourism
Foreign-Flag 1447 jobs 7292008
Foreign Flag Capacity Growth Foreign flag passenger capacity has changed five-fold on roundtrip Hawaii cruises from the West Coast since enactment of the Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative
1600000
1400000
tn 1200000
J enshyZ
1000000
I shyG) en 800000 s G) tn tn
600000 as D 400000
200000
0 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Year
Source US Maritime Administration (derived from the US Customs and Border Patrol Vessel Entrance and Clearance documents - final 2007 data) 7292008
NCL America Hawaii Economic Contributions
(2004-2008)
bull (in Millions) bull $399 in wages benefits and overtime to US seafarers bull $35 in Federal and State payroll Taxes bull $64 in Government Fees and Taxes to Hawaii bull $28 in wages benefits and overtime to US other employees bull $52 in Port Charges to Hawaii Companies (Stevedores tugs pilots etc) bull $85 in Fuel to Tesoro Hawaii bull $130 for shore excursions to Hawaii tour operators bull $39 for Hawaii hotel rooms and ground transport bull $75 for food grown in Hawaii bull $57 in union fees and levies (incl $32M paid directly by employees) bull $1 in MMD fees to the United States Coast Guard bull $51 for recruitment screening processing and training crew bull $76 advertising and promoting Hawaii as a destination bull $1092
COASTWISE CRUISES INTERPRETIVE RULE RESOLUTION Adopted at the
US Conference of Mayors 76th Annual Meeting
June 20-242008 Miami
WHEREAS the Department of Homeland Securitys Customs and Border Protection (CBP) issued a proposed Interpretive Rule regulating Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises on foreign flagged vessels between US ports of call under the Passenger Vessel Services Act at the request of the United States Maritime Administration and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule would require that a foreign-flagged vessel on a coastwise cruise to call at a foreign port for at least 48 hours with that foreign stop constituting at least 50 percent of the cruise itinerary and allowing passengers to disembark the cruise vessel at the foreign port before continuing the cruise to a US port of call and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule establishes burdensome criteria that are wholly inconsistent with industry practice particularly the 48-hour call at foreign port shyinasmuch as the standard port call is six to eight hours - as well as the requirement that 50 percent of a cruise be spent at the foreign port and
WHEREAS the intent of the proposed Interpretive Rule is to protect the single remaining US flag vessel serving the Inter-Hawaiian Island cruise trade that according to the Hawaii Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism generates more than 4600 jobs and generates nearly $500 million in economic benefits for the state annually and
WHEREAS thousands of members of the International Longshore Workers Union (nWU) are employed at US ports serving cruise ships and whose jobs would be at risk if the proposed Interpretive Rule were implemented and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule is vague as to the breadth of its application ie to coastwise cruises between all United States ports or applied solely to coastwise cruises from West Coast ports to Hawaii and
WHEREAS the Cruise Lines International Association estimates the proposed Interpretive Rule would upend the $17 billion in national cruise industry spending and put at risk more than 300000 jobs generated by the international cruise industry including jobs held by nWU at US ports and the local allied industries supporting the cruise industry and
Executive Order Submissions Under Review
II Reglnfogov Where to ind Federal Regulatory Information -~
Home ] Lnitied Agenda and Regulator) Ilan pound012866 Regulator) Review Jnformalion Collection Review
EO 12866 Regulatory Rlvlw dvanced Search IJitorical RepWI Review Counh Jriter XIL
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA)
Executive Order Submissions Under Review July 25 2008 - _------------____ _shy
Department of Homeland Security
AGENCY DHS-TSA RIN 1652-AA53
TITLE Large Aircraft Security Program Other Aircraft Operator Security Programs and Airport Operator Security Program
STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT Yes RECEIVED DATE 06302008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
AGENCY DHS-USCIS RIN Llti15-AB67 TITLE Changes to Requirements Affecting H-2B Nonimmigrants and Their Employers
STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT No RECEIVED DATE 06092008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
AGENCY DHS-USCBP RIN 1651AA11 TITLE Issuance of a Visa and Authorization for Temporary Admission Into the United States for Certain Nonimmigrant Aliens Afflicted W HIV Infection
STAGE Final Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT No RECEIVED DATE 03042008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
-_RE_V-IE-W-E-X-T-EN-D-E-D---------- _
AGENCY DHS-USCBP RIN 1651-AA76 TITLE Coastwise Transportation of Passengers STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT Yes RECEIVED DATE 07142008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
Disclosure I Accessibility I Privacy Policy I Contact Us
httpwwwreginfogovpublicdoeoReviewSearch 7252008
View Rule Page 11
Shere D find Federal ReguLatory InformciiorlReglnfogov Home J Cnified Agenda al1d Regulatory Plan EO 12866 Regulatory Reyiew Information Collection Reiew
Current rnified Agenda and Regulatory Plan Historical Pnified Agenda and Regulatory Plan Search
View Rule
DHSIUSCBP RIN 1651-AA76 Publication ill Spring 2008
Title llCoastwise Transportation of Passengers
Abstract This interim rule amends the Department of Homeland Securitys (DHS) current regulations relating to the transportation of passengers by non-coastwise-qualified vessels on voyages that begin and end at a US port and stop at intervening US and foreign port(s) Under this interim final rule voyages that begin and end at a US port and stop at a foreign port(s) and at intervening US port(s) where a large USshyflag coastwise-qualified passenger vessel engages in regular service are in violation of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) unless the cumulative length of stay(s) at intervening foreign port(s) is more than 50 percent of the total amount of time spent at the intervening US port(s) and passengers are permitted to go ashore at the foreign port(s) The purpose of this amendment is to ensure that the Congressional purpose in enacting the PVSA which is to preserve the economic benefits of US coastwise trade to US-flag coastwise-qualified vessels is properly implemented
Agency Department of Homeland Security(DHS) Priority Substantive Nonsignificant
KIN Status First time published in the Unified Agenda Agenda Stage of Rulemaking Final Rule Stage
Major No Unfunded Mandates No
CFR Citation -LCER 4J~)(h)(plusmnJ
Legal Authority 5JJSS_30J12lJ-SClt16 J9_lJiCJ 431 9_L1C1plusmn3JJ2JScHJ1J2JSCJ624 L(LlLSc207LIl(gtJfHgt~ _CiQJ _46lSC 6QLQ~
Legal Deadline None
Timetable Action Date FR Cite
Interim Final Action 0510012008
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required No Government Levels Affected None
Federalism No
Included in the Regulatory Plan No
RIN Data Printed in the FR No
Agency Contact Glen E Vereb Chief Entry Procedures and Carriers Branch Department of Homeland Security US Customs and Border Protection Office of Regulations and Rulings 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington DC 20229 Phone202572-8730
Disclosure I Accessibility I Privacy Policy I Contact Us
httpwwwreginfogovpublicdoeAgendaViewRuleruleID=286751 7128120
Federal RegisterVol 72 No 224Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules 65487
SPECULATIVE POSITION LIMITS 1-Continued [In contract units)
Contract
Soybeans and Mini-Soybeans 2
Wheat and Mini-Wheat 2 bullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbull
Soybean Oil
SingleSpot month All monthsmonth
600 8600 13300 600 11100 14500 540 6600 8600
Soybean Meal 720 5500 7100
Minneapolis Grain Exchange
Hard Red Spring Wheat I 600 I 11100 I 14500
New York Board of Trade
Cotton No2 I 300 I 5300 I 7300
Kansas City Board of Trade
Hard Winter Wheat I 600 I 11100 I 14500
1 For purposes of compliance with these limits positions in a futures contract that shares ~ubstantially identical terms with a contract market enumerated herein including a futures contract that is cash-settled based on the settlement price of an enumerated contract market shall be agshygregated with positions in the enumerated contract market
2 For purposes of compliance with these limits positions in the regular-sized and mini-sized contracts shall be aggregated
Issued by the Commission this November 152007 in Washington DC David Stawick Secretary of the Commission [FR Doc E7-22681 Filed 11-20-07 845 amI BILLING CODE 6351-Q1-P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Bureau of Customs and Border Protection
19 CFR Part 4
[USCBP-2007-o098]
Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises
AGENCY Customs and Border Protection Department of Homeland Security ACTION Proposed interpretation solicitation of comments
SUMMARY This document proposes new criteria to be used by Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to determine whether non-coastwise-qualified vessels are in violation ofthe Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) when engaging in cruise itineraries in which passengers board at a US port the vessel calls at several Hawaiian ports and then the vessel proceeds to a foreign port or ports for a brief period before ultimately returning to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their cruise CBP believes these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because it appears that the primary objective of the foreign stop is evasion of the PVSA
DATES Comments must be received on or before December 212007 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT Glen E Vereb Cargo Security Carriers amp Immigration Branch Office of International Trade (202) 572-8730 ADDRESSES You may submit comments identified by docket number by one of the following methods
bull Federal eRulemaking Portal http wwwregulationsgov Follow the instructions for submitting comments
bull Mail Border Security Regulations Branch Office of International Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
I Public Participation
Interested persons are invited to participate in this proposed interpretation by submitting written data views or arguments on all aspects of the proposed interpretation Customs and Border Protection (CBP) also invites comments that relate to the economic environmental or federalism effects that might result from this proposed interpretation Comments that will provide the most assistance to CBP in developing these procedures will reference a specific portion of the proposed interpretation explain the reason for any recommended change and include data information or authority that support such recommended change
Instructions All submissions received must include the agency name and docket number for this proposed
interpretation All comments received will be posted without change to http wwwregulationsgov including any personal information provided
Docket For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received go to http wwwregulationsgov Submitted comments may also be inspected on regular business days between the hours of 9 am and 430 pm at the Office of International Trade Customs and Border Protection 799 9th Street NW 5th Floor Washington DC Arrangements to inspect submitted documents should be made in advance by calling Mr Joseph Clark at (202) 572shy8768
II Background
The maritime cabotage law governing the transportation of passengers was first established by section 8 of the Passenger Vessel Services Act of June 191886 (the PVSA) 24 Stat 81 as amended by section 2 of the Act of February 17 1898 30 Stat 248 formerly codified at 46 USC App 289 (now codified at 46 USC 55103) 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 of $200 (now $300 as promulgated in TD 03-11 pursuant to the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 199028 USC 2461 note) for each passenger so transported and landed
The intent of the maritime cabotage laws including the PVSA was to provide a legal structure that guarantees a coastwise monopoly to
65488 Federal RegisterVol 72 No 224Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules
American shipping and thereby promotes development of the American merchant marine Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 28 (DC Cir 1984) see also The Granada 35 FSupp 892 8931940 AMC 1601 (DC Pa 1940) (stating that the legislative aim of section 289 [now 55102] was the creation of a practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping business for United States ships) In other words the PVSA was enacted to advance the United States merchant marine and fleet by restricting the use of foreign-ownedflagged passenger vessels in United States territorial waters
Passenger vessel transportation between United States ports has historically been viewed to be part of the coastwise trade after the enactment of the PVSA This view is premised on the concepts of continuity of the voyage and whether its intended purpose or objective was coastwise transportation In other words the PVSA was held to be violated if the coastwise movement was continuous or if the purpose of the trip was a coastwise voyage (See 18 OAG 445 September 4 1886 28 OAG 204 February 16 1910 29 OAG 318 February 12 1912 30 OAG 44 February 1 1913 34 OAG 340 December 24 1924 and 36 OAG 352 August 13 1930)
The CBP regulations promulgated pursuant to the PVSA are found at section 480a of title 19 of the Code of Federal Regulations (19 CFR 480a) and are reflective of the above cited Office of the Attorney General decisions These regulations provide among other things that a non-coastwise-qualified vessel which embarks a passenger at a port in the United States embraced within the coastwise laws (a coastwise port) will be deemed to have landed that passenger in violation of the PVSA if the passenger disembarks at a different coastwise port on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a nearby foreign port or ports (as defined in 19 CFR 480a(a)(2) see also 19 CFR 480a(b)(2)) The terms embark and disembark are words of art which are defined as going on board a vessel for the duration of a specific voyage and leaving a vessel at the conclusion of a specific voyage respectively (See 19 CFR 480a(a)(4))
The references in section 480a to nearby foreign ports (defined in 19 CFR 480a(a)(2)) are the results of attempts by CBP to apply an Office of the Attorney Generals opinion dated February 26 1910 (28 OAG 204) In that case a foreign-flag vessel transported 615 passengers on a voyage around the world beginning in New
York and concluding in San Francisco The Attorney General opined that since the primary object of the voyage was to visit various parts of the world on a pleasure tour returning home via California and not to be transported in domestic commerce the transportation was not in violation of the PVSA
The 1910 Attorney Generals opinion was extended to voyages that included foreign ports other than nearby foreign ports (See Treasury Decision (TD) 68shy285 (33 FR 16558) November 14 1968) However voyages solely to one or more coastwise ports have always been considered predominantly coastwise Therefore non-coastwise-qualified vessels engaging in such a voyage where passengers temporarily go ashore at a coastwise port have been deemed to have violated the PVSA
m Current Law and Policy Pursuant to Public Law 109-304 120
Stat 1632 enacted on October 6 2006 Title 46 United States Code was substantially reorganized and recodified Consequently the PVSA is now codified at 46 USC 55103 and provides that no vessel shall transport passengers between ports or places in the United States either directly or by way of a foreign port under a penalty of $300 for each person so transported and landed except one that (1) Is wholly owned by citizens of the United States for purposes of engaging in the coastwise trade and (2) has been issued a certificate of documentation with a coastwise endorsement or is exempt from documentation but would otherwise be eligible for such a certificate and endorsement
In 2003 Congress enacted Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II Section 211 for the purpose of revitalizing the oceangoing US-flag cruise industry in Hawaii (the 2003 Act) Three oceangoing US-flag cruise ships PRIDE OF ALOHA PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAII were documented with coastwise privileges pursuant to the 2003 Act These vessels entered regular service in Hawaii in 2004 2005 and 2006 respectively and pursuant to the express language of the 2003 Act are limited in their operation to providing regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands of Hawaii
The CBP regulations promulgated pursuant to the PVSA are set forth in 19 CFR 480a and have remained unchanged throughout both the recodification of Title 46 of the United States Code and the enactment of the 2003 Act They provide that a violation of the PVSA occurs when passengers embark (board a vessel for the
duration of a voyage) a non-coastwiseshyqualified vessel at one US port and disembark (leave the vessel at the conclusion of a voyage) at a different US port unless they proceed with the vessel to a distant foreign port (Le any port not considered a nearby foreign port which is defined as any port located in North America Central America Bermuda or the West Indies including the Bahamas) Currently these regulations do not contain specific criteria for non-coastwise-qualified vessels on itineraries including US ports and either nearby or distant foreign ports in order for such foreign port calls to be compliant with the PVSA
To reiterate the applicable CBP regulations provide that the PVSA is violated when a non-coastwise-qualified vessel transports a passenger on a voyage solely to one or more coastwise ports and the passenger disembarks or goes ashore temporarily at a coastwise port (19 CFR 480a(b)(1)) Furthermore a violation of the PVSA also occurs when a non-coastwise-qualified vessel transports a passenger on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a nearby foreign port or ports (but no other foreign port) and the passenger disembarks at a coastwise port other than the port of embarkation (19 CFR 480a(b)(2)) However there is no violation of the PVSA when a passenger is on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a distant foreign port or ports (whether or not the voyage includes a nearby foreign port or ports) and the passenger disembarks at a coastwise port provided the passenger has proceeded with the vessel to a distant foreign port (19 CFR 480a(b)(3))
IV Request From MARAD To Provide Guidance
The US Department of Transportation Maritime Administration (MARAD) has requested that CBP take action to ensure enforcement of the PVSA MARAD has asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreignshyflag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwiseshyqualified cruise ship operators
In April of 2007 the operator of the three US-flag cruise vessels operating solely in Hawaii pursuant to the 2003 Act announced their intent to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAIl from the Hawaii market and redeploy her to Europe The operator intends to re-flag the vessel to foreign registry directly resulting in the loss of over 1100 crewmember jobs The primary reason cited for this decision is the rapid increase in foreign-flag competition entering the Hawaii market
Federal Register I Vol 72 No 224 I Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules 65489
from the West Coast This competition is evidenced in published cruise itineraries of foreign-flag carriers offering a variety of round trip cruises that depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period usually in the early morning and ultimately return to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their cruise These cruises are often marketed as Hawaii cruises and except for the brief stop in the nearby foreign port of Ensenada are purely coastwise in nature It is these cruise itineraries that pose an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels that pursuant to the 2003 Act are currently engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands
V Preliminary Notice
In response to MARADs concerns CBP sent letters to two carriers known to operate the itineraries in question as well as to the Cruise Lines International Association Inc stating that CBP believes that these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because it appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA The letters further indicated that CBP is taking steps to publish this position
VI CBPs Proposed Interpretive Rule Accordingly in this document CBP is
proposing to provide that cruise itineraries for non-qualified coastwise vessels which allow passengers to board at a US port call at several Hawaiian ports proceed to a foreign port or ports for a brief period and then ultimately return to the original US port of embarkation for disembarkation are not consistent with the PVSA and the regulations promulgated pursuant thereto Specifically CBP interprets a voyage to be solely to one or more coastwise ports even where it stops at a foreign port unless the stop at the foreign port is a legitimate object of the cruise CBP will presume that a stop at a foreign port is not a legitimate object of the cruise unless
(1) The stop lasts at least 48 hours at the foreign port
(2) The amount of time at the foreign port is more than 50 percent of the total amount of time at the US ports of call and
(3) The passengers are permitted to go ashore temporarily at the foreign port
Accordingly CBP proposes to adopt an interpretive rule under which it will presume that any cruise itinerary that does not include a foreign port call that
satisfies each of these three criteria constitutes coastwise transportation of passengers in violation of 19 CFR 480a(b)(1)
Dated November 16 2007 W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection [FR Doc E7-22788 Filed 11-20-07 845 am] BILLING CODe 9111-14-1
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau
27 CFR Part 9
[Notice No 76]
RIN 1513-AB49
Proposed Establishment of the Leona Valley Viticultural Area (2007R-281 P)
AGENCY Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau Treasury ACTION Notice of proposed rulemaking
SUMMARY The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau proposes to establish the 134 square mile Leona Valley viticultural area in the northeast part of Los Angeles County California We designate viticultural areas to allow vintners to better describe the origin of their wines and to allow consumers to better identify wines they may purchase We invite comments on this proposed addition to our regulations DATES We must receive written comments on or before January 22 2008
ADDRESSES You may send comments on this notice to one of the following addresses
bull httpwwwregulationsgov (Federal e-rulemaking portal follow the instructions for submitting comments) or
bull Director Regulations and Rulings Division Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau PO Box 14412 Washington DC 20044-4412
See the Public Participation section of this notice for specific instructions and requirements for submitting comments and for information on how to request a public hearing
You may view copies of this notice selected supporting materials and any comments we receive about this proposal at httpwwwregulationsgov under Docket No 2007-0066 You also may view copies of this notice all related petitions maps or other supporting materials and any comments we receive about this
proposal by appointment at the TTB Information Resource Center 1310 G Street NW Washington DC 20220 To make an appointment call 202-927shy2400
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT NA Sutton Regulations and Rulings Division Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau 925 Lakeville S1 No 158 Petaluma CA 94952 phone 415shy271-1254 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
Background on Viticultural Areas
TTB Authority Section 105(e) of the Federal Alcohol
Administration Act (FAA Act) 27 USC 205(e) authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to prescribe regulations for the labeling of wine distilled spirits and malt beverages The FAA Act provides that these regulations should among other things prohibit consumer deception and the use of misleading statements on labels and ensure that labels provide the consumer with adequate information as to the identity and quality of the product The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) administers the regulations promulgated under the FAA Act
Part 4 ofthe TTB regulations (27 CFR part 4) allows the establishment of definitive viticultural areas and the use of their names as appellations of origin on wine labels and in wine advertisements Part 9 of the TTB regulations (27 CFR part 9) contains the list of approved viticultural areas
Definition Section 425(e)(1)(i) ofthe TTB
regulations (27 CFR 425(e)(1)(i)) defines a viticultural area for American wine as a delimited grape-growing region distinguishable by geographical features the boundaries of which have been recognized and defined in part 9 of the regulations These designations allow vintners and consumers to attribute a given quality reputation or other characteristic of a wine made from grapes grown in an area to its geographic origin The establishment of viticultural areas allows vintners to describe more accurately the origin of their wines to consumers and helps consumers to identify wines they may purchase Establishment of a viticultural area is neither an approval nor an endorsement by TTB of the wine produced in that area
Requirements Section 425(e)(2) of the TTB
regulations outlines the procedure for proposing an American viticultural area and provides that any interested party
Us Department ofHomelaDd Secmity Washington DC 10229
bull ~
US Customs and Border Protection
AUG 15 2fXJJ
VE5-3-02-QTRRBSTCCCI - ti015502-GG-
Mr leon Sutcliffe Director Port Operations Camivai Cruise Unes Camival Place 3655 NW 87Avenue Miami Aorlda 33178
RE P~nger Vessef Services Ad Coastwise Transportation 46 USC sect 55103 19 CFR sect 480a(b)
Dear Mr Sutcliffe
As you know US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) enforces the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) codified at TItle 46 United States Code section 55103 (46 USC 55103) This statute prohibits non-coastwise-qualifled vessels (ie those vessels not US-buill owned and documented with a coastwise endorsement) from transporting passengers between porls or places within the United States The regUlations promUlgated pursuant to the PVSA are found at TrtJe 19 Code of Federal Regulations section 4808 (19 CFR 4808)
It has come to our attention that passenger vessels of your company are engaging in cruise itineraries that include ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands Two USAlagged coastwise-endorsed passenger vessefs are also currenUy engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of caD wittlin the Hawaiian Islands
As part of your cruise itineraries some of your foreign-flagged vessels depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period and ultimately rebJm to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their endse For example the MS ZAANDAM of Holand America Lines departs San Diego cruises the Hawaiian Islands stops in Ensenada from 800pm to 11 OOpmbull and returns to san Diego CBP believes these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because It appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA -- - - ~~~------
Please be advised that CBP is taking steps to publish this position Should have any questions pertaining to this matter please contact Mr Glen Vereb Chief Cargo Security Carriers and Immigration Branch at (202) 572-8724
Sincerely
F Jl E EST Y LEe A U I 5 I N Gmiddot
December 21 2007
The Honorable W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection co Border Security Regulations Branch Office ofInternational Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229
Re Hawaii Coastwise Cruises (USCBP-2007-0098) Comments in Response to Proposed Interpretation
Dear Commissioner Basham
NCL America Inc1 (NCLA) submits these comments in support ofthe efforts ofCustoms and Border Protection to enforce the Passenger Vessel Services Act and the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative as applied to Hawaii coastwise cruises
1 Introduction and Summary of Position
NCLA operates three large oceangoing US flag cruise ships in Hawaii These ships are documented under US flag and are required to operate in regular service in Hawaii pursuant to the authority of the Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative a 2003 federal statute intended to revitalize the US flag cruise industry and to maximize economic and national security benefits to the United States (the 2003 Act)
NCLA has invested $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships pursuant to the 2003 Act and in direct reliance on the protections of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) and its proper enforcement The PVSA limits the transportation ofpassengers between US ports to coastwise documented US flag ships Its statutory protections recognize that US flag ships have significantly higher operational costs in part because they are subject to more stringent US laws including US labor laws and federal
1 NCL America Inc is a US corporation incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware headquartered in Honolulu Hawaii As a US corporation it is subject to US taxes at both the federal and state level The Chief Executive Officer the Chairman of the Board and all of the Board of Directors of NCL America are US citizens The company is also subject to US labor and employment laws and is required by statute to maintain a workforce comprised primarily ofUS citizens
700 Bishop St SUite 900 I Honolulu HawMi 96813 I Tel 8085273800 Fax 8085273820 I ndcom
2
income tax among others The NCLA ships operating in Hawaii are the only large oceangoing cruise ships operating under US flag In furtherance of the policy goals of the PVSA and the 2003 Act these ships have created over 4000 seafaring jobs all subject to US minimum wage and other labor statutes
Since 2003 there has been a significant increase in capacity in the Hawaii market from foreign flag ships providing cruise service to Hawaii from the West Coast Many of these foreign flag cruises are marketed as Hawaii cruises and consist entirely ofUS ports ofcall with the sole exception of a token stop in Mexico for as little as an hour late at night under circumstances where passengers are not permitted to get offthe ship There are no reported rulings approving these particular foreign flag itineraries
Lower cost foreign competition in the Hawaii market has unfairly hurt NCLAs operations NCLA has incurred substantial losses which have contributed significantly to its decision earlier this year to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAll from US flag and reshydeploy it foreign Unfair foreign competition poses an imminent threat to the remaining US flag passenger vessels operating in the Hawaii trades pursuant to the 2003 Act
As the agency statutorily charged with implementation of the 2003 Act the US Department ofTransportation Maritime Administration (MARAn) is aware of the threat foreign flag Hawaii itineraries pose to the US flag fleet and brought the situation to the attention ofthe US Department ofHomeland Security Bureau ofCustoms and Border Protection (CBP or Customs) Customs determined that the primary object of these itineraries was coastwise and that the Ensenada stop was an evasion of the PVSA
In August 2007 Customs provided written notice to the affected foreign lines and their trade association that the existing itineraries were contrary to the PVSA None of these lines sought advance rulings even after the Customs notice with respect to their Hawaii itineraries pursuant to Customs regulations and many continued to market the itineraries as Hawaii cruises NCLA supports the efforts ofCustoms and MARAD to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act for Hawaii cruises
2 Statutory Authority for Customs Proposed Interpretation
(a) Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA)
Congress passed the PVSA in 1886 to protect the US maritime transportation industry from foreign competition2 Protection is afforded through penalty assessments on foreign vessels transporting passengers between US ports or places directly or by way ofa foreign port 3 As Congress and the courts have recognized coastwise protections for the US maritime transportation industry are only one dimension of the PVSA Operating in conjunction with other coastwise laws and with the US
2 See United States v Honduran SS GRANADA 35 F Supp 892 894 (BD Pa 1940)(citing purpose of PVSA to meet threats to the practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping which was to be preserved for US ships)
46 USc sect 55103 (originally 46 USC App 289)
3
documentation laws the PVSA also enhances military sealift in times ofnational emergency sustains a US merchant marine and supports the US shipbuilding and repair industry4
(b) Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative (the 2003 Act)
Over the past decade Congress has sought to reinforce the goals of the PVSA by providing mechanisms to revitalize the oceangoing US flag cruise fleet particularly in Hawaii The Project America legislation enacted in 1997 authorized among other things the re~flagging ofone existing cruise ship contingent on the operator contracting for the construction oftwo new oceangoing cruise shipss Following the default of the operator under the original contract Congress enacted the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative for the purpose ofrecovering economic and national security benefits to the United States bull 6 These same goals of the original PVSA were expressly referenced in the legislative history of the 2003 Act which emphasized that these ships will be assets available in time ofnational emergency and will significantly expand the pool ofqualified seafarers upon which the US Department ofDefense relies to crew non-combatant vessels
The 2003 Act authorizes the US documentation ofthree cruise ships for operation in regular service in Hawaii subject to certain conditions including a prohibition on operating in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico and the Caribbean Sea and a requirement that all vessel repair work be undertaken in the United States MARAD is charged with implementation of the 2003 Act
3 Customs Implementation of PVSA
(a) Regulations
The current regulations implementing the PVSA were published by Customs in 19858 The growth of the foreign flag cruise industry in North America and in particular the development of the Alaska cruise market led to an effort in 1984 to amend the thenshyexisting regulations to increase the ease of administration and operational flexibility The effort to change the regulation had support from US port interests who saw benefit in the potential increase in the number ofUS ports that foreign vessels could call and was opposed by proponents ofpotential US flag projects as detrimental to efforts to revitalize the US fleet 9 The preamble to the 1985 rule emphasized that it was of paramount importance to consider the primary object ofpassengers in taking a
4 See American Hawaii Cruises v Skinner 713 F Supp 452 457 (DDC 1989) (recognizing the contribution of the PVSA and the Jones Act in helping to secure national defense by maintaining a merchant marine oftbe best equipped and most suitable types ofvessels sufficient to serve in time of war or national emergency) see also Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 30 (DC Cir 1984) Wirth Ltd v SIS Acadia Forest 537 F2d 1272 1281 n32 (5th Cir 1976) S Public Law 105-56 Section 8109 (111 Stat 1203 1244) (Oct 81997 ) 6 Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II General Provisions - Department ofCommerce Section 211 (117 Stat 1179) (Feb 20 2003) 1 149 Cong Rec S1118 (dailyed Jan 17 2003(statement ofSenator Inouye) 8 19 CFR sect 480a 950 Fed Reg 26981 (July I 1985)
4
voyage10 a concept which is reinforced elsewhere in Customs regulations11 In its analysis of the comments received at the time Customs accepted the view ofport interests that the modified rule would help their business but did so recognizing the absence ofa regular salt water US flag passenger fleet Customs acknowledged the potential harm to prospective efforts to revitalize the US flag passenger fleet and expressly cautioned that if it were ever shown that coastwise qualified vessels in competition with foreign vessels were in fact hurt by the modified Customs regulation then Customs would immediately reconsider its position12
(b) Customs Rulings
Given the significant penalties associated with violating the PVSA13 Customs regulations expressly provide a mechanism for the owner or charterer of a foreign vessel or any other interested person to request an advisory ruling as to whether a contemplated voyage would be considered in violation of the PVSA14 Customs regulations provide that vessel operators can rely on these ruling letters only to the extent that the facts and circumstances are identical to those in the ruling letter IS
Notwithstanding the fact that several foreign cruise lines offer Hawaii itineraries originating in a US mainland port and calling at Hawaii ports with a token intervening stop in Mexico there are no reported rulings expressly approving such an itinerary for these foreign cruise lines 16
4 The Cruise Industry in Hawaii
(a) NCL America Returns US flag to the Oceangoing Passenger Fleet
Pursuant to the requirements ofthe 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative NCLA agreed to promote US-flag cruising enhance military sealift capacity and expand the US maritime labor base No other major cruise line had ever undertaken such a commitment to the US flag and the public policy objectives Congress sought to achieve under the PVSA or the 2003 Act Introduction ofPRIDE OF ALOHA in 2004 was a significant development in the maritime industry because it marked the restoration ofthe
10 Id at 26983 11 Customs Regulations include a provision on the effect ofruling letters and with respect to carrier rulings the applicable regulation refers to rulings setting forth a determination as to whether or not the primary object of a contemplated voyage is coastwise transportation in violation of46 USC sect 289 [pYSA codified at 46 USC sect55103] 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 12 50 Fed Reg at 26983 13 A modem cruise ship with 2400 passengers for example would be subject to a fine of$720OOO per cruise based on the statutory penalty of$300 for each passenger transported in violation of the Act 14 19 CFR sect 480a(d) IS 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 16 There is one older reported mling involving a request to drop the Ensenada port call from a Los AngeleslHawaiiLos Angeles itinerary which Customs held would violate the PYSA In dicta Customs acknowledged that the itinerary could be in compliance if the Ensenada call were not dropped but did not address the issue ofwhether a one hour service call where no passengers depart the vessel would be sufficient The carrier that obtained that ruling has since left the Hawaii market See Customs Ruling HQ 114078 re Crystal Hannony (Nov 4 1997)
5
us flag to the oceangoing cruise industry A contemporaneous press release from the Us Department ofTransportation reported that the three US-flag cruise ships to be introduced pursuant to the 2003 Act were expected to create more than 20000 US jobs generate more than $825 million ofexpenditures in the US economy and create nearly $360 million in federal tax revenue by the end of 200717 In 2005 the PRIDE OF AMERICA was introduced and in 2006 the third vessel PRIDE OF HAWAll was introduced to Hawaii Both the PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAIl offer 7shyday inter-island Hawaii itineraries whereas PRIDE OF ALOHA operates on 7 and 10 day cruises exclusively among the islands ofHawaii as well as 11 day cruises that include a foreign port call at Fanning Island To date NCLA has invested over $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships in furtherance ofthe policy objectives of the PVSA and the 2003 Act These ships employ over 4000 seafarers and generate hundreds ofmillions of dollars in benefits for Hawaii and the nation
(b) Significant Increase in Foreign Flag Capacity Since 2003
The most significant change in the Hawaii cruise market since 2003 has been the dramatic increase in capacity A significant portion ofthis capacity increase is directly attributable to NCLAs fulfillment ofthe Congressional mandate in the 2003 Act However foreign-flag operations in the Hawaii market as measured in passenger nights18 have skyrocketed Based on MARAn data derived from the US Customs Border Patrol Vessel Entrance and Clearance documents the passenger nights for foreign flag vessels departing from the West Coast to Hawaii on round trip cruise have increased several hundredfold during this period19 See Exhibit A
(c) NCLA Has Incurred Substantial Losses During this Period
Since 2004 NCLA has lost cumulatively more than a quarter ofa billion dollars A principal reason for these losses has been the increase in foreign capacity in this market NCLA has taken significant steps to reduce costs to address the increase in foreign competition but NCLA is at an inherent disadvantage when competing against foreign companies that are not subject to US labor laws US tax laws and other laws Ofcourse the statutory protections of the PVSA are intended to address these very issues That is why Customs immediate action to implement the proposed interpretation is critical for the US flag fleet Regrettably NCLA has already been forced to reduce overall capacity early next year with the withdrawal ofPRIDE OF HAWAlI to another
17 DOT Press Release dated June 72004 see also DOT Press Release dated August 132004 in connection with visit to PRIDE OF ALOHA by US Transportation Secretary Norman Y Mineta 11 Passenger nights (also referred to as passenger capacity days) are calculated by multiplying the number ofpassengers per vessel by the number ofcruise days in each itinerary by the number of cruises This is the unit ofmeasurement employed by MARAn In contrast passenger bed supply (also referred to as passenger capacity) data reflects only the number ofberths per vessel multiplied by the number of cruises and hence understates the market by excluding the full economic value ofthe cruise perfonned 19 In 2003 the total number ofpassenger nights for round-trip West Coast to Hawaii cruises was 303325 which jumped by 353 to 1072329 in 2006 and by 430 to 1304546 from 2003 to 2007 (The 2007 figure is based on MARAD data for six months and a1ll1ualized by published itineraries for the balance of the year)
6
market for operation under foreign flag This move alone will result in the loss ofover 1000 American seafaring jobs
5 Customs Proposed Interpretation is Necessary to Further the Important National Security and Public Policy Objectives Embodied in Federal Law
As Customs has properly noted the increase in foreign competition in the Hawaii trades in contravention of the PVSA pose[s] an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels[] As the operator of these ships NCLA has a vested interest in protecting the jobs ofthe thousands ofAmerican crewmembers and cruise ship service providers who support these vessels NCLA also has an interest in protecting the substantial economic investment it has made to revitalize the US flag passenger vessel fleet But a balancing of interests in the context of Customs enforcement ofexisting law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act requires a much broader focus
The legislative history of the 2003 Act expressly recognized the national security and public policy import ofestablishing a US flag passenger vessel fleet as a means to maintain the countrys preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool of qualified seafarers and as a means to help sustain a fleet ofUS-flag vessels to su~ort
the nations military and maritime industrial base for times ofnational emergency
Congress understood the importance ofestablishing a viable US flag cruise ship fleet as something larger than the vessels themselves These national security and public policy objectives must be weighed in the balance as Customs assesses how best to interpret its rules to give effect to the PVSA and the 2003 Act
6 Customs Should Clarify that the Proposed Interpretation is Limited to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades and Adopt Reasonable Measures to Ensure Sufficient Foreign Content
Since publication ofthe proposed interpretative rule several commenters have observed that the scope of the proposed interpretation is ambiguous because the language of Section VI referencing any cruise itinerary appears broader than the caption Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises and the entire discussion in the published notice which focuses exclusively on US-flag coastwise vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA agrees that the proposed interpretation should be clarified so that its scope is limited to vessels operating roundtrip voyages from US ports that include Hawaii port calls
NCLA supports the concept reflected in the proposed interpretive rule that round trip Hawaii itineraries from US ports on foreign ships must include a material and measurable degree ofoverall foreign port content as compared to US port content
20 149 Congo Rec S1117 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)
7
(a) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is also Consistent with Subsequent Congressional Enactments Modifying the PVSA
As discussed above it is well established that the PVSA was designed toRrotect US-flag vessels from foreign competition in the coastwise and domestic trades 1
Subsequent legislative enactments however have appropriately differentiated among distinct geographic markets and trades including Canada Alaska Puerto Rico and Hawaii based on the existence or non-existence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
In 1938 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers by Canadian passenger vessels on Lake Ontario and the St Lawrence River until such time as passenger service shall be established by vessels of the United States22 Similarly in 1961 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers on Canadian vessels within Alaska or between Alaska and other points in the United States until such time as passenger service is established by vessels ofthe United States23
In 1984 Congress modified the application ofthe PVSA to pennit the transportation ofpassengers between Puerto Rico and other United States ports on foreign-flag vessels24 As with the other statutory exceptions this provision is qualified and expires [o]n a showing that a United States passenger vessel qualified to engage in the coastwise trade is offering or advertising passenger service between a port in Puerto Rico and another port in the United States2S
Congress acted again with respect to the application of the PVSA with the 2003 Act in which it authorized three vessels that did not meet the US-build requirements of the PVSA to operate as modem US-flagged cruise ships in regular service in Hawaii26 The 2003 Act imposes a specific geographic limitation on the operation of any ship documented under this authority to operations only in regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands ofHawaii and shall not transport passengers in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico or the Caribbean Sea except in certain limited circumstances27 As above the limited nature of the 2003 Act is express it is strictly limited to the large ocean-going cruise ships and then only those operating in the regular Hawaii service where there are no US-flag operations28
21 See Act ofJune 19 1886 c 421 sec 8 24 Stat 81 Act of February 171898 c 26 sec 2 30 Stat 248 22 S] Res 174 75th Cong 52 Stat 223 (Alp 251938) codified at46 USC sect 55121(a) 23 See Pub L 87-77 75 Stat 196 (Jun 30 1961) codified at 46 USC sect 55121(b) 24 See Pub L 98-563 98 Stat 2916 (Oct 301984) codified at 46 USC sect 55104(b) 25 46 USC sect 55104(c)(l) see also 46 USC 46 USc sect 55104(cX2)(expiration of exemption upon availability ofa non-coastwise qualified US-flag vessel offering service in the relevant market) 26 149 Congo Rec SI118 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)(statementofSen Inouye) 27 Pub L 108-7 117 Stat 79 (Feb 20 2003) 28 149 Congo Rec S11l9 (dailyed Jan 17 2003Xstatement of Sen Inouye)
8
In each ofthese instances Congress fashioned a narrow exception to the PVSA that differentiated among distinct geographic markets based on the existence or nonshyexistence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
As the federal agency responsible for administering the 2003 Act MARAD requested that Customs act to protect US flag passenger vessel interests in the Hawaii trades29 Limiting the scope ofthe proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades also reflects Customs appreciation of the PVSA in the context of the subsequent Congressional action30 Viewing the Congressional modifications to the PVSA as a whole Congress has specifically and repeatedly differentiated among distinct geographic markets when it has found it necessary and appropriate to do so to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests It is well established that the proper interpretation of a statutory scheme includes consideration ofsubsequent statutes even though the underlying statute itselfhas not been expressly amended31 Accordingly Customs should likewise limit the scope ofthe proposed PVSA interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades because that is the only geographic market as mandated by the 2003 Act in which oceangoing US-flag cruise ships are operating
(b) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Consistent with Public Policy Objectives of the 1985 Rulemaking
In 1985middot Customs liberalized the regulations implementing the PVSA by eliminating certain regulatory prohibitions on foreign flag vessels In the context of the 1985 rulemaking Customs justified a relaxation ofthe regulations on the grounds that it would simplify the administration of the PVSA and would benefit the economy ofcertain American coastwise ports without eroding the statutory protection given to American vessels engaged in solely domestic trade32
Customs thus sought to reconcile US port economic interests with US-flag passenger vessel interests Both of these twin policy objectives are furthered by
29 See 72 Fed Reg 65488 (Nov 21 2007)( MARAn bas asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the ~eratiODS ofcoastwise-qualified cruise ship operators)
See generally FDA v Brown amp Williamson Tobacco Corp 529 US 120 132-133 (2000)(assessing propriety ofagency construction ofFood DIUg and Cosmetics Act and descnbing responsibility of reviewing cowt to assess statutory provisions in the context of subsequent legislative enactments) 31 See Brown amp Williamson 529 US 143 (holding that proper construction ofstatutory provision must necessarily assume that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications ofa later statute This is particularly so where the scope of the earlier statute is broad but the subsequent statutes more specifically address the topic athand) see also United States v Estate ofRomani 523 US 517 530-531 (1998)( holding that a later-enacted statute should control the construction of the federal lien priority statute a specific policy embodied in a later federal statute should control om construction of the [earlier] statute even though it ha[s] not been expressly amended) United States v Fausto 484 US 439453 (1988)(The courts frequently find Congress to have done this - whenever in fact they interpret a statutory text in the light ofsurrounding texts that happen to have been subsequently enacted This classic judicial task of reconciling many laws enacted over time and getting them to make sense in combination necessarily assumes that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications of a later statute) 32 50 Fed Reg 26982 (JuI 11985)
9
limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades
As noted earlier the 2003 Act limits the operation of the NCLA US-flag oceangoing passenger vessels to regular service in Hawaii Because there are no oceangoing US-flag vessels operating in any market other than the Hawaii trades Customs should limit the scope of the proposed interPretation to that market Such a limitation protects US flag passenger vessel interests without prejudicing US port interests In contrast an application of the proposed interpretation to any itinerary would needlessly harm US port interests unrelated to Hawaii without any countervailing benefit to US-flag passenger vessel interests Accordingly limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation is consistent with the public policy objectives of the 1985 rulemaking as well as the 2003 Act
(c) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Also Consistent with Customs Commitment to Revisit the Scope of its Rules to Protect US-Flag Interests
The relaxation ofthe PVSA regulations in 1985 was premised in large part on Customs finding that there was no regular salt water US-flag passenger fleet in operation at that time33 Acknowledging that the relaxed regulations could harm USshyflag interests Customs committed in the preamble ofthe 1985 final rule to immediately reconsider its interpretation if it is ever shown that there is a viable US flag vessel operating in competition with foreign-flag vessels34
Congress enacted the 2003 Act to stimulate the development of a US flag cruise ship industry As noted above the legislative history ofthat Act makes clear that Congress sought to revitalize the US-flag cruise industry as a means to maintain Americas preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool ofqualified seafarers help sustain a fleet of US flag vessels to support our military and a maritime industrial base create thousands of seagoing and shoreside American jobs and stimulate the development ofa US flag cruise ship tourism business with the commensurate benefits to the US tax base the US economy and US employment
Customs is now acting at MARADs request to revisit its interpretation ofthe regulations implementing the PVSA because recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwise-qualified cruise ship operations35 That is to say that the concerns articulated by Customs in the context of the 1985 rulemaking have materialized and US-flag passenger vessel interests are in fact being hanned in the Hawaii trades by foreign competitors
33 50 Fed Reg 26983 34Id
3S 72 Fed Reg 56488 (Nov 21 2007)
I
10
Because the US-flag passenger vessels are limited by statute to regular service in Hawaii limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the
Hawaii trades is consistent with Customs historical commitment to revisit its interpretation ofthe implementing regulations to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests
7 Conclusion
For the reasons stated above NCLA commends the efforts ofCustoms and MARAn to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act as applied to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA respectfully requests Customs to move ahead promptly with p~blicati~nof a final interpretive rule to advance the important national security arid public policy objectives ofthese laws
We greatly appreciate the opportunity to submit these comments
Sincerely
~~~ Alan T Yamamoto Vice President Hawaii Operations
Exhibit A
Ship Name Serenade Of The Seas Departure Port San Diego California Ports of Call San Diego California Kailua Kona Hawaii Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii Hlo Hawaii Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii Ensenada Mexico San Qigo California
2007 Date(s) Oct 05
Sailing Itinerary
Day Port H ~rrive Depart Activity
05-0ct San Diego California 500 PM
06-0ct Cruising
07-0ct Cruising
08-0ct Cruising
09-0ct Cruising
10-0ct Kailua Kona Hawaii 700 AM 900 PM Tendered
11-00t Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 1000 AM Tendered
12middot0ct Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 900 PM Tendered
13-0ct Hilo Hawaii 700 AM 600 PM Docked
14middot0ct Honoulu (Oahu) Hawaii 700 AM Docked
15-0ct Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii 200 AM Docked
6-0ct CrUising
17-0ct Cruising
18-0ct Cruising
19middot0ct Cruising
-7 20-00t
O-Oot
Ensenada ~i1exico
San Deqo California
i 00 ~r1
700 ~M
200 oM D1Jcked ~
GRAND PANAMA CANAL CRUISES
ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL
10 10 11 DAYSDAYS DAYS
CORAL PRINCESS GRAND PRINCESS GRAND PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIP ROUNDTRIPfrom from
fromFT LAUDERDALE GALVESTON GALVESTON
2004 DEPARTURE DATES Oct n 21 31 2004 DEPARTURE DATE
2004 DEPARTURE DATENov 10 20 30middot DeelSmiddot
DedSDec 10 28
2005 DEPARTURE DATES CRUISE ITINERARY Jan 7 17 27
CRUISE ITINERARY Feb 6 16 26 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART MarS 1828 CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Galveston Texas EMBARK PMApr 7 17 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPARTshy 1 Galveston Texas EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 1 ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM 2 At Sea 3 Belize City Belize 1 PM 7PM 2-3 At Sea 3 Belize City Belize lPM 7PM 4 Costa Maya Mexico (Mahahual) 8AM 4PM 4 Um6n Costa Rica 7AM rPM 4 Costa Maya Mexico (Mahahual) SAM 4 PM 5 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands 12 PM 7PM 5 Panama Canal (to Gatun Lake) 7AM 430 PM 5 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands 12 PM 7PM 6 Ocho Rios Jamaica SAM 5PM 5 Col6n Panama 5PM 8PM 6 At Sea 7 At Sea 6 At Sea Cristobal Panama 7AM 4PM 8 7AM 4PM 7 Grand Cayman Cayman IslandS 7AM 4PM (fot Panama Canal) ftrtpg~niaa~~) S Corumel Mexico SAM 6PM 8 At Sea 9 At Sea 9 Bclize City Belize 7AM 4 PM 6PM 10 Coromel Mexico lOAM 6 PM9 Cozumel Mexico lOAM 10 At Sea 10 At Sea 11 At Sea
Portordtrllndtlmtsmayvllry 11 flo Lauderdale florida DISEMBARK AM Portorntr IInltf timpoundi may vary 11 Galveston Texas DISEMBARK AM Port ordu and Nmes may vary 12 Galv_es~on Texas DISEMBARK AM
ROUNDTRIP PANAMA CANAL
8 DAYS
CORAL PRINCESS
ROUNDTRIP
from
FT LAUDERDALE
2004 DEPARTURE DATE Dec 20
CRUISE ITINERARY
DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART 1 Fl Lauderdale Florida EMBARK PM 2-3 At Sea 4 Lim6n Costa Rica 7AM 7PM 5 Panama Canal (to Gatun Lake) 7 AM 430 PM 5 Co16n Panama 5PM SPM 6 At Sea 7 Grand Cayman Cayman Islands SAM 5PM S At Sea 9 Flo Lauderdale Florida DISEMBARK AM Bridge of the Americas Panama
f OptIonll fOllTS inclld1lI tht AtlllnH to Pacific RlIlllfll) joumq will dlmlldrt tilt ship b) tctdtr lit Gfttlm uk AJkr tour plIssmm dlstmlrark tilt shipwin procmlllat through tilt Gatun Locb lIndjlnlllly dock in Gl6lI Hmal1p41Sl11tmmttydiumlmtheJldlo~ lflrshops IInd~llI toIIrsrrnrl CIItutl14ktlllIrtonlflrJhlp
GRAND PANAMA CANAL CRUISES
GRAND PANAMA CANAL GRAND PANAMA CANAL GRAND PANAMA CANAL
150R 18 150R 1715 DAYS DAYS DAYS
CORAL PRINCESS SUN PRINCESS
REGAL PRINCESS REGAL PRINCESS SUN PRINCESS
DAWN PRINCESS REGAL PRINCESS sail between DAWN PRINCESS
sail between FT LAUDERDALE FT LAUDERDALE sail betweenand
FT LAUDERDALEand SAN DIEGO andLOS ANGELES
SAN FRANCISCO 2004 DEPARTURE DATES 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
DAWN PRINCESS 2004 DEPARTURE DATESNov 24Sp191
CRUISE ITINERARY Dec9t CORAL PRINCESSREGAL PRINCESS 5ltp261 CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE ITINERARY
200S DEPARTURE DATES Dec 24 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
SUN PRINCESS DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARIltPM200S DEPARTURE DATES DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Sep 2StMar 24
3 Ocho Rios Jamaica lOAM 6PM 2-3 At5ea 2 At Sea 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBA8KPM
REGAL PRINCESS AprSt 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBA8KPM Jan stu 200S DEPARTURE DATES2 At Sea4 At Sea 4 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 7AM lPMJan 23 5 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 7AM lPM 3 Ocho Rios Jamaica lOAM 6PM REGAL PRINCESS 5 Cartagena Colombia 9AM 3PMFeb7t 4 At Sea Apr 239AM 3PM 6 Transit Panama Canal 7AM 430 PMFb22 ~ yenr~fte~~~~~~u 7AM 430 PM 5 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 7AM lPM At SeaMar9t CORAL PRINCESS 79AM 3PM8 At Sea Apr 27 8 Puntarenas Costa Rica 7AM 7PMSUN PRINCESS 9 Puntarenas Costa Rica 7 AM 7PM ~ yenr~fte~n~~~~~u 7AM 430 PM 9-10 At SeaApr1S 8 At Sea DAWN PRINCESS10-11 At Sea 11 Acapulco Mexico 8AM 5PM
5PM 9 Puntarenas Costa Rica 7AM 7PM Apr 29H ~ae~lcoMexico 8 AM 12 At SeatllWrryopmllzlfrarnLls~in 10-11 At Sea rmrKfIfikTiIIrttimnma1 tlliJlrraryoptJllllsfrlJflSlmFranrimlJn 13 Cabo San lucas Mexico 8AM 5PM
gt This mUJI C4Jl llfwmblnld wlth a 3 14 Cabo San Lucas Mexico 7 AM lPM H ~e~o Mexico 8AM SPM rmruordrrorttimamG)llIryCoIutar CnUK to VlWOIlllr SC Dqs ThUIltIIIflltllnlltCllIIblntdwilhaZ-day 14-15 At Sea 16lhrlllllhI9lllIbtboobdulaquoSC)lQ4k t Illncral) lIpCutcs in mrmt orm Pllrt IiIIIa CocastaICnliutoVan(ouKrBCDlIys16 16 San Francisco California 7AM 4PMcowtlIrcrllisr IIIIYlIl1Ymiddot IhrounIScankboobdlUaK)lllllluU t~A~geles California 6 AM 5PM 14 Cabo San Lucas Mexico 8AM 5PM
Thllwl1JIIICllllslltMOlIkpilllyJmtcad 17-18 At Sea middotmiddotThliIAfllIllCltlllsatMGnIqclBaylnstcadllf 15 At Sea CPlIilldCI1IIu 17 At Sea o[OdKKwsPurllilllrlmllYWlry OchoRicJsPortllmtslllllYVllfymiddot D1SEMBA8K AM19 Vancouver BC DISEMBA8K AM 16 San Die20 California DlSEMBA8K AM 18 Val1couver BC
GRAND PANAMA CANAL COASTAL CRUISING
2-4 CORAL PRINCESS ISLAND PRINCESS SUN PRINCESS18 DAWN PRINCESS DIAMOND PRINCESS STAR PRINCESSDAYSDAYS
COASTAL CRUISE SCHEDULEREGAL PRINCESS
SHIP DAYS FROM TO DEPARTURE DATE DIAMOND PRINCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 5104
SAN FRANCISCO DIAMOND PRINCES5 4 Vancouver Seattle 5404 to CORAL PRINCESS 2 San Francisco Vancouver 5604
NEW YORK DAWN PRiNCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 5704 ISLAND PRiNCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 51204
2004 DEPARTURE DATE SUN PRINCESS 3 San Francisco Vancouver 51404Aug 24 ISLAND PRiNCESS 3 Vancouver LOI Angeles 91804
DIAMOND PRINCESS 1 Seattle Vancouver 91804CRUISE ITINERARY DIAMOND PRINCESS 6 Vancouver Los Angeles 91904 SAPPHIRE PRINCESS 1 Seattle Vancouver 91904 SAPPHREPRINCESS 2 Vancouver San Francisco 92004 DIAMOND PRINCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 43005 DlAMONDPRiNCES$ 4 Vancouver Seattle 5305 SUN PRINCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 5305
ISLAND PRiNCESS 3 Los Angeles VancOllver 5405 CORAL PRiNCESS 2 San Francisco Vancouver 51205
Coral Princess in the Panama Canal
CRUISE PLUS
Extend your adventure with our Cruise Plusreg program Cruise Plusreg enables you to enhance your vacation with one- to four-night hotel
packages in cities that stand on their own as vacation destinations Add nights in Sydney before you cruise or extend your vacation with nights in the city by the
bay San Francisco Transportation and luggage handling costs from the airport to both hotel and ship plus meet and greet services are always included
Wherever you choose to explore youll enjoy properties that are carefully chosen based on service value location and the peace of mind of knowing that Princess
has arranged it all for you
Anchorage Alaska Trevi Fountain Rome Auckland Harbor New Zealand
The Cruise Plusreg Program is available in over 30 major cities including
MEDITERRANEANAEGEAN EXOTICS PANAMA CANAL Barcelona London Rome and Venice Auckland Bangkok Beijing Buenos Aires Ft Lauderdale Los Angeles New York City
Cape Town Ft Lauderdale Honolulu Los San Diego San Francisco Sanjuan Vancouver NORTHERN EUROPE Angeles Montreal Moorea New York City Copenhagen and London MEXICO CARIBBEANOsaka Papeete Rome San Francisco
Ft Lauderdale Galveston Los AngelesTRANSATLANTIC Santiago Seattle Sydney Vancouver Venice Barcelona Copenhagen Ft Lauderdale San Francisco and San Juan
London New York City and Rome ALASKA Anchorage Calgary Fairbanks Kenai San Francisco Seattle and Vancouver
For more information about options and pricing reference a destination specific brochure or contact your travel agent
TRAVEL THE WORLD WITH THE LEADER IN CRUISINGmiddot Princess
Analysis by the Hawaii Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism Comparing the Economic Impact of Foreign Flag Ships with US Flag Cruise Ships Sailing in Hawaii
This is a summary of an analysis prepared by the Hawai Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism (DBEDT) of the economic impact of the foreign flag cruise ship fleet sailing in Hawaii as compared to each of the US flag ships operating in Honolulu
The comparison is set out below
Foreign Pride Pride Pride
Fleet Of Hawaii Of Aloha Of America
Total economic output impact (spendingsales) ($mil) 155 542 4225 4958
Total earnings impact (labor earnings) ($mil) 44 155 1207 1411
Total employment impact Uobs) 1447 5059 3943 4627
This analysis demonstrates that a single US-flagged ship the Pride of America home ported in Honolulu is 32 times more economically impactful and creates 32 times as many jobs as the entire foreign flag fleet that sails into and out of Hawaii ports of call
Economic Impact of Pride of America
Assumptions 1 Annual impact though Pride of Aloha is leaving in May 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existing Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($) 4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of outputl$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job multiplier (jobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
118700 105
2706 3373
147 042
1372
4958
1417
4627
Data sourcelformula Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Line 1 x line 2 x line 31 000000
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 4 x line 5
Line 4 x line 6
Line 4 x line 7
Economic Impact of Pride of Hawaii
Assumptions
1 Annual impact though Pride of Hawaii is leaving in February 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existing Pride of Aloha and Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($) 4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job multiplier (jobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
Data sourceformula 139770 Actual 2007 figure
975 Actual 2007 figure 2706 Actual 2007 figure 3688 Line 1 x line 2 x line 31000000
147 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model 042 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
1372 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
5421 Line 4 x line 5
1549 Line 4 x line 6
5059 Line 4 x line 7
Economic Impact of Pride of Aloha
Assumptions 1 Annual impact though Pride of Aloha is leaving in May 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existlng Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($)
4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job mUltiplier Oobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
95680 111
2706 2874
147 042
1372
4225
1207
3943
Data sourcelformula Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Line 1 x line 2 x line 31000000
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 4 x line 5
Line 4 x line 6
Line 4 x line 7
lt
Methodology Used in Calculating Impact of International Cruise Ships
Cruise ship visitors 1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Came with ships 3 Flied in 4 Average length of stay (days) 5 PPPD ($) 6 Cruise visitor spending ($mil))
Cruise ship crews 7 Ratio of crew spending to cruise visitor spending 8 Cruise crew spending
Cruisline 9 Ratio of crew spending to cruise visitor spending
10 Cruiseline spending
11 Total cruise-related spending ($mil)
12 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 13 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 14 Job multiplier Uobs$ cruise -related spending)
15 Total output impact ($miJ)
16 Total earnings impact ($miJ)
17 Total employment impact (jobs)
106641 98307
8334 739 847 668
02 134
038 254
1055
147 042
1372
1551
444
1447
Data sourceformula Line 2 + line 3 DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report Line 1 x line 4 x line 5
DBEDT 2003 Cruise study Line 7 x line 6
DBEDT 2003 Cruise study Line 9 x line 6
Line 6 + line 8 + line 10
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 11 x line 12
Line 11 x line 13
Line 11 x line 14
Economic Contributions Foreign-Flag Fleet operating in Hawaii vs Three US-Flag Ships
$1500
Pride of Hawaii$1000- $542 million VIc -0-E c Pride of AlohaCo
423 million$500
Pride of America $496 million155 million$shy
Foreign-Flag US-Flag Fleet Fleet
Source State of Hawaii Department of US-Flag $1460 billion Business Economic Development and Tourism
Foreign-Flag $ 155 million 7292008
Employment Foreign-Flag Fleet operating in Hawaii vs Three US-Flag Ships
15000
10000
til c o Pride of Aloha
39435000
Pride of America 1447 4627
~---------
Foreign-Flag US-Flag Fleet Fleet
Source State of Hawaii Department of US-Flag 13629 jobs Business Economic Development and Tourism
Foreign-Flag 1447 jobs 7292008
Foreign Flag Capacity Growth Foreign flag passenger capacity has changed five-fold on roundtrip Hawaii cruises from the West Coast since enactment of the Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative
1600000
1400000
tn 1200000
J enshyZ
1000000
I shyG) en 800000 s G) tn tn
600000 as D 400000
200000
0 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Year
Source US Maritime Administration (derived from the US Customs and Border Patrol Vessel Entrance and Clearance documents - final 2007 data) 7292008
NCL America Hawaii Economic Contributions
(2004-2008)
bull (in Millions) bull $399 in wages benefits and overtime to US seafarers bull $35 in Federal and State payroll Taxes bull $64 in Government Fees and Taxes to Hawaii bull $28 in wages benefits and overtime to US other employees bull $52 in Port Charges to Hawaii Companies (Stevedores tugs pilots etc) bull $85 in Fuel to Tesoro Hawaii bull $130 for shore excursions to Hawaii tour operators bull $39 for Hawaii hotel rooms and ground transport bull $75 for food grown in Hawaii bull $57 in union fees and levies (incl $32M paid directly by employees) bull $1 in MMD fees to the United States Coast Guard bull $51 for recruitment screening processing and training crew bull $76 advertising and promoting Hawaii as a destination bull $1092
COASTWISE CRUISES INTERPRETIVE RULE RESOLUTION Adopted at the
US Conference of Mayors 76th Annual Meeting
June 20-242008 Miami
WHEREAS the Department of Homeland Securitys Customs and Border Protection (CBP) issued a proposed Interpretive Rule regulating Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises on foreign flagged vessels between US ports of call under the Passenger Vessel Services Act at the request of the United States Maritime Administration and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule would require that a foreign-flagged vessel on a coastwise cruise to call at a foreign port for at least 48 hours with that foreign stop constituting at least 50 percent of the cruise itinerary and allowing passengers to disembark the cruise vessel at the foreign port before continuing the cruise to a US port of call and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule establishes burdensome criteria that are wholly inconsistent with industry practice particularly the 48-hour call at foreign port shyinasmuch as the standard port call is six to eight hours - as well as the requirement that 50 percent of a cruise be spent at the foreign port and
WHEREAS the intent of the proposed Interpretive Rule is to protect the single remaining US flag vessel serving the Inter-Hawaiian Island cruise trade that according to the Hawaii Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism generates more than 4600 jobs and generates nearly $500 million in economic benefits for the state annually and
WHEREAS thousands of members of the International Longshore Workers Union (nWU) are employed at US ports serving cruise ships and whose jobs would be at risk if the proposed Interpretive Rule were implemented and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule is vague as to the breadth of its application ie to coastwise cruises between all United States ports or applied solely to coastwise cruises from West Coast ports to Hawaii and
WHEREAS the Cruise Lines International Association estimates the proposed Interpretive Rule would upend the $17 billion in national cruise industry spending and put at risk more than 300000 jobs generated by the international cruise industry including jobs held by nWU at US ports and the local allied industries supporting the cruise industry and
Executive Order Submissions Under Review
II Reglnfogov Where to ind Federal Regulatory Information -~
Home ] Lnitied Agenda and Regulator) Ilan pound012866 Regulator) Review Jnformalion Collection Review
EO 12866 Regulatory Rlvlw dvanced Search IJitorical RepWI Review Counh Jriter XIL
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA)
Executive Order Submissions Under Review July 25 2008 - _------------____ _shy
Department of Homeland Security
AGENCY DHS-TSA RIN 1652-AA53
TITLE Large Aircraft Security Program Other Aircraft Operator Security Programs and Airport Operator Security Program
STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT Yes RECEIVED DATE 06302008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
AGENCY DHS-USCIS RIN Llti15-AB67 TITLE Changes to Requirements Affecting H-2B Nonimmigrants and Their Employers
STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT No RECEIVED DATE 06092008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
AGENCY DHS-USCBP RIN 1651AA11 TITLE Issuance of a Visa and Authorization for Temporary Admission Into the United States for Certain Nonimmigrant Aliens Afflicted W HIV Infection
STAGE Final Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT No RECEIVED DATE 03042008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
-_RE_V-IE-W-E-X-T-EN-D-E-D---------- _
AGENCY DHS-USCBP RIN 1651-AA76 TITLE Coastwise Transportation of Passengers STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT Yes RECEIVED DATE 07142008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
Disclosure I Accessibility I Privacy Policy I Contact Us
httpwwwreginfogovpublicdoeoReviewSearch 7252008
View Rule Page 11
Shere D find Federal ReguLatory InformciiorlReglnfogov Home J Cnified Agenda al1d Regulatory Plan EO 12866 Regulatory Reyiew Information Collection Reiew
Current rnified Agenda and Regulatory Plan Historical Pnified Agenda and Regulatory Plan Search
View Rule
DHSIUSCBP RIN 1651-AA76 Publication ill Spring 2008
Title llCoastwise Transportation of Passengers
Abstract This interim rule amends the Department of Homeland Securitys (DHS) current regulations relating to the transportation of passengers by non-coastwise-qualified vessels on voyages that begin and end at a US port and stop at intervening US and foreign port(s) Under this interim final rule voyages that begin and end at a US port and stop at a foreign port(s) and at intervening US port(s) where a large USshyflag coastwise-qualified passenger vessel engages in regular service are in violation of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) unless the cumulative length of stay(s) at intervening foreign port(s) is more than 50 percent of the total amount of time spent at the intervening US port(s) and passengers are permitted to go ashore at the foreign port(s) The purpose of this amendment is to ensure that the Congressional purpose in enacting the PVSA which is to preserve the economic benefits of US coastwise trade to US-flag coastwise-qualified vessels is properly implemented
Agency Department of Homeland Security(DHS) Priority Substantive Nonsignificant
KIN Status First time published in the Unified Agenda Agenda Stage of Rulemaking Final Rule Stage
Major No Unfunded Mandates No
CFR Citation -LCER 4J~)(h)(plusmnJ
Legal Authority 5JJSS_30J12lJ-SClt16 J9_lJiCJ 431 9_L1C1plusmn3JJ2JScHJ1J2JSCJ624 L(LlLSc207LIl(gtJfHgt~ _CiQJ _46lSC 6QLQ~
Legal Deadline None
Timetable Action Date FR Cite
Interim Final Action 0510012008
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required No Government Levels Affected None
Federalism No
Included in the Regulatory Plan No
RIN Data Printed in the FR No
Agency Contact Glen E Vereb Chief Entry Procedures and Carriers Branch Department of Homeland Security US Customs and Border Protection Office of Regulations and Rulings 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington DC 20229 Phone202572-8730
Disclosure I Accessibility I Privacy Policy I Contact Us
httpwwwreginfogovpublicdoeAgendaViewRuleruleID=286751 7128120
Federal RegisterVol 72 No 224Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules 65487
SPECULATIVE POSITION LIMITS 1-Continued [In contract units)
Contract
Soybeans and Mini-Soybeans 2
Wheat and Mini-Wheat 2 bullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbull
Soybean Oil
SingleSpot month All monthsmonth
600 8600 13300 600 11100 14500 540 6600 8600
Soybean Meal 720 5500 7100
Minneapolis Grain Exchange
Hard Red Spring Wheat I 600 I 11100 I 14500
New York Board of Trade
Cotton No2 I 300 I 5300 I 7300
Kansas City Board of Trade
Hard Winter Wheat I 600 I 11100 I 14500
1 For purposes of compliance with these limits positions in a futures contract that shares ~ubstantially identical terms with a contract market enumerated herein including a futures contract that is cash-settled based on the settlement price of an enumerated contract market shall be agshygregated with positions in the enumerated contract market
2 For purposes of compliance with these limits positions in the regular-sized and mini-sized contracts shall be aggregated
Issued by the Commission this November 152007 in Washington DC David Stawick Secretary of the Commission [FR Doc E7-22681 Filed 11-20-07 845 amI BILLING CODE 6351-Q1-P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Bureau of Customs and Border Protection
19 CFR Part 4
[USCBP-2007-o098]
Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises
AGENCY Customs and Border Protection Department of Homeland Security ACTION Proposed interpretation solicitation of comments
SUMMARY This document proposes new criteria to be used by Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to determine whether non-coastwise-qualified vessels are in violation ofthe Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) when engaging in cruise itineraries in which passengers board at a US port the vessel calls at several Hawaiian ports and then the vessel proceeds to a foreign port or ports for a brief period before ultimately returning to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their cruise CBP believes these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because it appears that the primary objective of the foreign stop is evasion of the PVSA
DATES Comments must be received on or before December 212007 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT Glen E Vereb Cargo Security Carriers amp Immigration Branch Office of International Trade (202) 572-8730 ADDRESSES You may submit comments identified by docket number by one of the following methods
bull Federal eRulemaking Portal http wwwregulationsgov Follow the instructions for submitting comments
bull Mail Border Security Regulations Branch Office of International Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
I Public Participation
Interested persons are invited to participate in this proposed interpretation by submitting written data views or arguments on all aspects of the proposed interpretation Customs and Border Protection (CBP) also invites comments that relate to the economic environmental or federalism effects that might result from this proposed interpretation Comments that will provide the most assistance to CBP in developing these procedures will reference a specific portion of the proposed interpretation explain the reason for any recommended change and include data information or authority that support such recommended change
Instructions All submissions received must include the agency name and docket number for this proposed
interpretation All comments received will be posted without change to http wwwregulationsgov including any personal information provided
Docket For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received go to http wwwregulationsgov Submitted comments may also be inspected on regular business days between the hours of 9 am and 430 pm at the Office of International Trade Customs and Border Protection 799 9th Street NW 5th Floor Washington DC Arrangements to inspect submitted documents should be made in advance by calling Mr Joseph Clark at (202) 572shy8768
II Background
The maritime cabotage law governing the transportation of passengers was first established by section 8 of the Passenger Vessel Services Act of June 191886 (the PVSA) 24 Stat 81 as amended by section 2 of the Act of February 17 1898 30 Stat 248 formerly codified at 46 USC App 289 (now codified at 46 USC 55103) 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 of $200 (now $300 as promulgated in TD 03-11 pursuant to the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 199028 USC 2461 note) for each passenger so transported and landed
The intent of the maritime cabotage laws including the PVSA was to provide a legal structure that guarantees a coastwise monopoly to
65488 Federal RegisterVol 72 No 224Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules
American shipping and thereby promotes development of the American merchant marine Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 28 (DC Cir 1984) see also The Granada 35 FSupp 892 8931940 AMC 1601 (DC Pa 1940) (stating that the legislative aim of section 289 [now 55102] was the creation of a practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping business for United States ships) In other words the PVSA was enacted to advance the United States merchant marine and fleet by restricting the use of foreign-ownedflagged passenger vessels in United States territorial waters
Passenger vessel transportation between United States ports has historically been viewed to be part of the coastwise trade after the enactment of the PVSA This view is premised on the concepts of continuity of the voyage and whether its intended purpose or objective was coastwise transportation In other words the PVSA was held to be violated if the coastwise movement was continuous or if the purpose of the trip was a coastwise voyage (See 18 OAG 445 September 4 1886 28 OAG 204 February 16 1910 29 OAG 318 February 12 1912 30 OAG 44 February 1 1913 34 OAG 340 December 24 1924 and 36 OAG 352 August 13 1930)
The CBP regulations promulgated pursuant to the PVSA are found at section 480a of title 19 of the Code of Federal Regulations (19 CFR 480a) and are reflective of the above cited Office of the Attorney General decisions These regulations provide among other things that a non-coastwise-qualified vessel which embarks a passenger at a port in the United States embraced within the coastwise laws (a coastwise port) will be deemed to have landed that passenger in violation of the PVSA if the passenger disembarks at a different coastwise port on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a nearby foreign port or ports (as defined in 19 CFR 480a(a)(2) see also 19 CFR 480a(b)(2)) The terms embark and disembark are words of art which are defined as going on board a vessel for the duration of a specific voyage and leaving a vessel at the conclusion of a specific voyage respectively (See 19 CFR 480a(a)(4))
The references in section 480a to nearby foreign ports (defined in 19 CFR 480a(a)(2)) are the results of attempts by CBP to apply an Office of the Attorney Generals opinion dated February 26 1910 (28 OAG 204) In that case a foreign-flag vessel transported 615 passengers on a voyage around the world beginning in New
York and concluding in San Francisco The Attorney General opined that since the primary object of the voyage was to visit various parts of the world on a pleasure tour returning home via California and not to be transported in domestic commerce the transportation was not in violation of the PVSA
The 1910 Attorney Generals opinion was extended to voyages that included foreign ports other than nearby foreign ports (See Treasury Decision (TD) 68shy285 (33 FR 16558) November 14 1968) However voyages solely to one or more coastwise ports have always been considered predominantly coastwise Therefore non-coastwise-qualified vessels engaging in such a voyage where passengers temporarily go ashore at a coastwise port have been deemed to have violated the PVSA
m Current Law and Policy Pursuant to Public Law 109-304 120
Stat 1632 enacted on October 6 2006 Title 46 United States Code was substantially reorganized and recodified Consequently the PVSA is now codified at 46 USC 55103 and provides that no vessel shall transport passengers between ports or places in the United States either directly or by way of a foreign port under a penalty of $300 for each person so transported and landed except one that (1) Is wholly owned by citizens of the United States for purposes of engaging in the coastwise trade and (2) has been issued a certificate of documentation with a coastwise endorsement or is exempt from documentation but would otherwise be eligible for such a certificate and endorsement
In 2003 Congress enacted Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II Section 211 for the purpose of revitalizing the oceangoing US-flag cruise industry in Hawaii (the 2003 Act) Three oceangoing US-flag cruise ships PRIDE OF ALOHA PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAII were documented with coastwise privileges pursuant to the 2003 Act These vessels entered regular service in Hawaii in 2004 2005 and 2006 respectively and pursuant to the express language of the 2003 Act are limited in their operation to providing regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands of Hawaii
The CBP regulations promulgated pursuant to the PVSA are set forth in 19 CFR 480a and have remained unchanged throughout both the recodification of Title 46 of the United States Code and the enactment of the 2003 Act They provide that a violation of the PVSA occurs when passengers embark (board a vessel for the
duration of a voyage) a non-coastwiseshyqualified vessel at one US port and disembark (leave the vessel at the conclusion of a voyage) at a different US port unless they proceed with the vessel to a distant foreign port (Le any port not considered a nearby foreign port which is defined as any port located in North America Central America Bermuda or the West Indies including the Bahamas) Currently these regulations do not contain specific criteria for non-coastwise-qualified vessels on itineraries including US ports and either nearby or distant foreign ports in order for such foreign port calls to be compliant with the PVSA
To reiterate the applicable CBP regulations provide that the PVSA is violated when a non-coastwise-qualified vessel transports a passenger on a voyage solely to one or more coastwise ports and the passenger disembarks or goes ashore temporarily at a coastwise port (19 CFR 480a(b)(1)) Furthermore a violation of the PVSA also occurs when a non-coastwise-qualified vessel transports a passenger on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a nearby foreign port or ports (but no other foreign port) and the passenger disembarks at a coastwise port other than the port of embarkation (19 CFR 480a(b)(2)) However there is no violation of the PVSA when a passenger is on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a distant foreign port or ports (whether or not the voyage includes a nearby foreign port or ports) and the passenger disembarks at a coastwise port provided the passenger has proceeded with the vessel to a distant foreign port (19 CFR 480a(b)(3))
IV Request From MARAD To Provide Guidance
The US Department of Transportation Maritime Administration (MARAD) has requested that CBP take action to ensure enforcement of the PVSA MARAD has asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreignshyflag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwiseshyqualified cruise ship operators
In April of 2007 the operator of the three US-flag cruise vessels operating solely in Hawaii pursuant to the 2003 Act announced their intent to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAIl from the Hawaii market and redeploy her to Europe The operator intends to re-flag the vessel to foreign registry directly resulting in the loss of over 1100 crewmember jobs The primary reason cited for this decision is the rapid increase in foreign-flag competition entering the Hawaii market
Federal Register I Vol 72 No 224 I Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules 65489
from the West Coast This competition is evidenced in published cruise itineraries of foreign-flag carriers offering a variety of round trip cruises that depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period usually in the early morning and ultimately return to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their cruise These cruises are often marketed as Hawaii cruises and except for the brief stop in the nearby foreign port of Ensenada are purely coastwise in nature It is these cruise itineraries that pose an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels that pursuant to the 2003 Act are currently engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands
V Preliminary Notice
In response to MARADs concerns CBP sent letters to two carriers known to operate the itineraries in question as well as to the Cruise Lines International Association Inc stating that CBP believes that these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because it appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA The letters further indicated that CBP is taking steps to publish this position
VI CBPs Proposed Interpretive Rule Accordingly in this document CBP is
proposing to provide that cruise itineraries for non-qualified coastwise vessels which allow passengers to board at a US port call at several Hawaiian ports proceed to a foreign port or ports for a brief period and then ultimately return to the original US port of embarkation for disembarkation are not consistent with the PVSA and the regulations promulgated pursuant thereto Specifically CBP interprets a voyage to be solely to one or more coastwise ports even where it stops at a foreign port unless the stop at the foreign port is a legitimate object of the cruise CBP will presume that a stop at a foreign port is not a legitimate object of the cruise unless
(1) The stop lasts at least 48 hours at the foreign port
(2) The amount of time at the foreign port is more than 50 percent of the total amount of time at the US ports of call and
(3) The passengers are permitted to go ashore temporarily at the foreign port
Accordingly CBP proposes to adopt an interpretive rule under which it will presume that any cruise itinerary that does not include a foreign port call that
satisfies each of these three criteria constitutes coastwise transportation of passengers in violation of 19 CFR 480a(b)(1)
Dated November 16 2007 W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection [FR Doc E7-22788 Filed 11-20-07 845 am] BILLING CODe 9111-14-1
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau
27 CFR Part 9
[Notice No 76]
RIN 1513-AB49
Proposed Establishment of the Leona Valley Viticultural Area (2007R-281 P)
AGENCY Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau Treasury ACTION Notice of proposed rulemaking
SUMMARY The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau proposes to establish the 134 square mile Leona Valley viticultural area in the northeast part of Los Angeles County California We designate viticultural areas to allow vintners to better describe the origin of their wines and to allow consumers to better identify wines they may purchase We invite comments on this proposed addition to our regulations DATES We must receive written comments on or before January 22 2008
ADDRESSES You may send comments on this notice to one of the following addresses
bull httpwwwregulationsgov (Federal e-rulemaking portal follow the instructions for submitting comments) or
bull Director Regulations and Rulings Division Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau PO Box 14412 Washington DC 20044-4412
See the Public Participation section of this notice for specific instructions and requirements for submitting comments and for information on how to request a public hearing
You may view copies of this notice selected supporting materials and any comments we receive about this proposal at httpwwwregulationsgov under Docket No 2007-0066 You also may view copies of this notice all related petitions maps or other supporting materials and any comments we receive about this
proposal by appointment at the TTB Information Resource Center 1310 G Street NW Washington DC 20220 To make an appointment call 202-927shy2400
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT NA Sutton Regulations and Rulings Division Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau 925 Lakeville S1 No 158 Petaluma CA 94952 phone 415shy271-1254 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
Background on Viticultural Areas
TTB Authority Section 105(e) of the Federal Alcohol
Administration Act (FAA Act) 27 USC 205(e) authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to prescribe regulations for the labeling of wine distilled spirits and malt beverages The FAA Act provides that these regulations should among other things prohibit consumer deception and the use of misleading statements on labels and ensure that labels provide the consumer with adequate information as to the identity and quality of the product The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) administers the regulations promulgated under the FAA Act
Part 4 ofthe TTB regulations (27 CFR part 4) allows the establishment of definitive viticultural areas and the use of their names as appellations of origin on wine labels and in wine advertisements Part 9 of the TTB regulations (27 CFR part 9) contains the list of approved viticultural areas
Definition Section 425(e)(1)(i) ofthe TTB
regulations (27 CFR 425(e)(1)(i)) defines a viticultural area for American wine as a delimited grape-growing region distinguishable by geographical features the boundaries of which have been recognized and defined in part 9 of the regulations These designations allow vintners and consumers to attribute a given quality reputation or other characteristic of a wine made from grapes grown in an area to its geographic origin The establishment of viticultural areas allows vintners to describe more accurately the origin of their wines to consumers and helps consumers to identify wines they may purchase Establishment of a viticultural area is neither an approval nor an endorsement by TTB of the wine produced in that area
Requirements Section 425(e)(2) of the TTB
regulations outlines the procedure for proposing an American viticultural area and provides that any interested party
Us Department ofHomelaDd Secmity Washington DC 10229
bull ~
US Customs and Border Protection
AUG 15 2fXJJ
VE5-3-02-QTRRBSTCCCI - ti015502-GG-
Mr leon Sutcliffe Director Port Operations Camivai Cruise Unes Camival Place 3655 NW 87Avenue Miami Aorlda 33178
RE P~nger Vessef Services Ad Coastwise Transportation 46 USC sect 55103 19 CFR sect 480a(b)
Dear Mr Sutcliffe
As you know US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) enforces the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) codified at TItle 46 United States Code section 55103 (46 USC 55103) This statute prohibits non-coastwise-qualifled vessels (ie those vessels not US-buill owned and documented with a coastwise endorsement) from transporting passengers between porls or places within the United States The regUlations promUlgated pursuant to the PVSA are found at TrtJe 19 Code of Federal Regulations section 4808 (19 CFR 4808)
It has come to our attention that passenger vessels of your company are engaging in cruise itineraries that include ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands Two USAlagged coastwise-endorsed passenger vessefs are also currenUy engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of caD wittlin the Hawaiian Islands
As part of your cruise itineraries some of your foreign-flagged vessels depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period and ultimately rebJm to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their endse For example the MS ZAANDAM of Holand America Lines departs San Diego cruises the Hawaiian Islands stops in Ensenada from 800pm to 11 OOpmbull and returns to san Diego CBP believes these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because It appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA -- - - ~~~------
Please be advised that CBP is taking steps to publish this position Should have any questions pertaining to this matter please contact Mr Glen Vereb Chief Cargo Security Carriers and Immigration Branch at (202) 572-8724
Sincerely
F Jl E EST Y LEe A U I 5 I N Gmiddot
December 21 2007
The Honorable W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection co Border Security Regulations Branch Office ofInternational Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229
Re Hawaii Coastwise Cruises (USCBP-2007-0098) Comments in Response to Proposed Interpretation
Dear Commissioner Basham
NCL America Inc1 (NCLA) submits these comments in support ofthe efforts ofCustoms and Border Protection to enforce the Passenger Vessel Services Act and the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative as applied to Hawaii coastwise cruises
1 Introduction and Summary of Position
NCLA operates three large oceangoing US flag cruise ships in Hawaii These ships are documented under US flag and are required to operate in regular service in Hawaii pursuant to the authority of the Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative a 2003 federal statute intended to revitalize the US flag cruise industry and to maximize economic and national security benefits to the United States (the 2003 Act)
NCLA has invested $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships pursuant to the 2003 Act and in direct reliance on the protections of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) and its proper enforcement The PVSA limits the transportation ofpassengers between US ports to coastwise documented US flag ships Its statutory protections recognize that US flag ships have significantly higher operational costs in part because they are subject to more stringent US laws including US labor laws and federal
1 NCL America Inc is a US corporation incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware headquartered in Honolulu Hawaii As a US corporation it is subject to US taxes at both the federal and state level The Chief Executive Officer the Chairman of the Board and all of the Board of Directors of NCL America are US citizens The company is also subject to US labor and employment laws and is required by statute to maintain a workforce comprised primarily ofUS citizens
700 Bishop St SUite 900 I Honolulu HawMi 96813 I Tel 8085273800 Fax 8085273820 I ndcom
2
income tax among others The NCLA ships operating in Hawaii are the only large oceangoing cruise ships operating under US flag In furtherance of the policy goals of the PVSA and the 2003 Act these ships have created over 4000 seafaring jobs all subject to US minimum wage and other labor statutes
Since 2003 there has been a significant increase in capacity in the Hawaii market from foreign flag ships providing cruise service to Hawaii from the West Coast Many of these foreign flag cruises are marketed as Hawaii cruises and consist entirely ofUS ports ofcall with the sole exception of a token stop in Mexico for as little as an hour late at night under circumstances where passengers are not permitted to get offthe ship There are no reported rulings approving these particular foreign flag itineraries
Lower cost foreign competition in the Hawaii market has unfairly hurt NCLAs operations NCLA has incurred substantial losses which have contributed significantly to its decision earlier this year to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAll from US flag and reshydeploy it foreign Unfair foreign competition poses an imminent threat to the remaining US flag passenger vessels operating in the Hawaii trades pursuant to the 2003 Act
As the agency statutorily charged with implementation of the 2003 Act the US Department ofTransportation Maritime Administration (MARAn) is aware of the threat foreign flag Hawaii itineraries pose to the US flag fleet and brought the situation to the attention ofthe US Department ofHomeland Security Bureau ofCustoms and Border Protection (CBP or Customs) Customs determined that the primary object of these itineraries was coastwise and that the Ensenada stop was an evasion of the PVSA
In August 2007 Customs provided written notice to the affected foreign lines and their trade association that the existing itineraries were contrary to the PVSA None of these lines sought advance rulings even after the Customs notice with respect to their Hawaii itineraries pursuant to Customs regulations and many continued to market the itineraries as Hawaii cruises NCLA supports the efforts ofCustoms and MARAD to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act for Hawaii cruises
2 Statutory Authority for Customs Proposed Interpretation
(a) Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA)
Congress passed the PVSA in 1886 to protect the US maritime transportation industry from foreign competition2 Protection is afforded through penalty assessments on foreign vessels transporting passengers between US ports or places directly or by way ofa foreign port 3 As Congress and the courts have recognized coastwise protections for the US maritime transportation industry are only one dimension of the PVSA Operating in conjunction with other coastwise laws and with the US
2 See United States v Honduran SS GRANADA 35 F Supp 892 894 (BD Pa 1940)(citing purpose of PVSA to meet threats to the practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping which was to be preserved for US ships)
46 USc sect 55103 (originally 46 USC App 289)
3
documentation laws the PVSA also enhances military sealift in times ofnational emergency sustains a US merchant marine and supports the US shipbuilding and repair industry4
(b) Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative (the 2003 Act)
Over the past decade Congress has sought to reinforce the goals of the PVSA by providing mechanisms to revitalize the oceangoing US flag cruise fleet particularly in Hawaii The Project America legislation enacted in 1997 authorized among other things the re~flagging ofone existing cruise ship contingent on the operator contracting for the construction oftwo new oceangoing cruise shipss Following the default of the operator under the original contract Congress enacted the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative for the purpose ofrecovering economic and national security benefits to the United States bull 6 These same goals of the original PVSA were expressly referenced in the legislative history of the 2003 Act which emphasized that these ships will be assets available in time ofnational emergency and will significantly expand the pool ofqualified seafarers upon which the US Department ofDefense relies to crew non-combatant vessels
The 2003 Act authorizes the US documentation ofthree cruise ships for operation in regular service in Hawaii subject to certain conditions including a prohibition on operating in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico and the Caribbean Sea and a requirement that all vessel repair work be undertaken in the United States MARAD is charged with implementation of the 2003 Act
3 Customs Implementation of PVSA
(a) Regulations
The current regulations implementing the PVSA were published by Customs in 19858 The growth of the foreign flag cruise industry in North America and in particular the development of the Alaska cruise market led to an effort in 1984 to amend the thenshyexisting regulations to increase the ease of administration and operational flexibility The effort to change the regulation had support from US port interests who saw benefit in the potential increase in the number ofUS ports that foreign vessels could call and was opposed by proponents ofpotential US flag projects as detrimental to efforts to revitalize the US fleet 9 The preamble to the 1985 rule emphasized that it was of paramount importance to consider the primary object ofpassengers in taking a
4 See American Hawaii Cruises v Skinner 713 F Supp 452 457 (DDC 1989) (recognizing the contribution of the PVSA and the Jones Act in helping to secure national defense by maintaining a merchant marine oftbe best equipped and most suitable types ofvessels sufficient to serve in time of war or national emergency) see also Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 30 (DC Cir 1984) Wirth Ltd v SIS Acadia Forest 537 F2d 1272 1281 n32 (5th Cir 1976) S Public Law 105-56 Section 8109 (111 Stat 1203 1244) (Oct 81997 ) 6 Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II General Provisions - Department ofCommerce Section 211 (117 Stat 1179) (Feb 20 2003) 1 149 Cong Rec S1118 (dailyed Jan 17 2003(statement ofSenator Inouye) 8 19 CFR sect 480a 950 Fed Reg 26981 (July I 1985)
4
voyage10 a concept which is reinforced elsewhere in Customs regulations11 In its analysis of the comments received at the time Customs accepted the view ofport interests that the modified rule would help their business but did so recognizing the absence ofa regular salt water US flag passenger fleet Customs acknowledged the potential harm to prospective efforts to revitalize the US flag passenger fleet and expressly cautioned that if it were ever shown that coastwise qualified vessels in competition with foreign vessels were in fact hurt by the modified Customs regulation then Customs would immediately reconsider its position12
(b) Customs Rulings
Given the significant penalties associated with violating the PVSA13 Customs regulations expressly provide a mechanism for the owner or charterer of a foreign vessel or any other interested person to request an advisory ruling as to whether a contemplated voyage would be considered in violation of the PVSA14 Customs regulations provide that vessel operators can rely on these ruling letters only to the extent that the facts and circumstances are identical to those in the ruling letter IS
Notwithstanding the fact that several foreign cruise lines offer Hawaii itineraries originating in a US mainland port and calling at Hawaii ports with a token intervening stop in Mexico there are no reported rulings expressly approving such an itinerary for these foreign cruise lines 16
4 The Cruise Industry in Hawaii
(a) NCL America Returns US flag to the Oceangoing Passenger Fleet
Pursuant to the requirements ofthe 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative NCLA agreed to promote US-flag cruising enhance military sealift capacity and expand the US maritime labor base No other major cruise line had ever undertaken such a commitment to the US flag and the public policy objectives Congress sought to achieve under the PVSA or the 2003 Act Introduction ofPRIDE OF ALOHA in 2004 was a significant development in the maritime industry because it marked the restoration ofthe
10 Id at 26983 11 Customs Regulations include a provision on the effect ofruling letters and with respect to carrier rulings the applicable regulation refers to rulings setting forth a determination as to whether or not the primary object of a contemplated voyage is coastwise transportation in violation of46 USC sect 289 [pYSA codified at 46 USC sect55103] 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 12 50 Fed Reg at 26983 13 A modem cruise ship with 2400 passengers for example would be subject to a fine of$720OOO per cruise based on the statutory penalty of$300 for each passenger transported in violation of the Act 14 19 CFR sect 480a(d) IS 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 16 There is one older reported mling involving a request to drop the Ensenada port call from a Los AngeleslHawaiiLos Angeles itinerary which Customs held would violate the PYSA In dicta Customs acknowledged that the itinerary could be in compliance if the Ensenada call were not dropped but did not address the issue ofwhether a one hour service call where no passengers depart the vessel would be sufficient The carrier that obtained that ruling has since left the Hawaii market See Customs Ruling HQ 114078 re Crystal Hannony (Nov 4 1997)
5
us flag to the oceangoing cruise industry A contemporaneous press release from the Us Department ofTransportation reported that the three US-flag cruise ships to be introduced pursuant to the 2003 Act were expected to create more than 20000 US jobs generate more than $825 million ofexpenditures in the US economy and create nearly $360 million in federal tax revenue by the end of 200717 In 2005 the PRIDE OF AMERICA was introduced and in 2006 the third vessel PRIDE OF HAWAll was introduced to Hawaii Both the PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAIl offer 7shyday inter-island Hawaii itineraries whereas PRIDE OF ALOHA operates on 7 and 10 day cruises exclusively among the islands ofHawaii as well as 11 day cruises that include a foreign port call at Fanning Island To date NCLA has invested over $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships in furtherance ofthe policy objectives of the PVSA and the 2003 Act These ships employ over 4000 seafarers and generate hundreds ofmillions of dollars in benefits for Hawaii and the nation
(b) Significant Increase in Foreign Flag Capacity Since 2003
The most significant change in the Hawaii cruise market since 2003 has been the dramatic increase in capacity A significant portion ofthis capacity increase is directly attributable to NCLAs fulfillment ofthe Congressional mandate in the 2003 Act However foreign-flag operations in the Hawaii market as measured in passenger nights18 have skyrocketed Based on MARAn data derived from the US Customs Border Patrol Vessel Entrance and Clearance documents the passenger nights for foreign flag vessels departing from the West Coast to Hawaii on round trip cruise have increased several hundredfold during this period19 See Exhibit A
(c) NCLA Has Incurred Substantial Losses During this Period
Since 2004 NCLA has lost cumulatively more than a quarter ofa billion dollars A principal reason for these losses has been the increase in foreign capacity in this market NCLA has taken significant steps to reduce costs to address the increase in foreign competition but NCLA is at an inherent disadvantage when competing against foreign companies that are not subject to US labor laws US tax laws and other laws Ofcourse the statutory protections of the PVSA are intended to address these very issues That is why Customs immediate action to implement the proposed interpretation is critical for the US flag fleet Regrettably NCLA has already been forced to reduce overall capacity early next year with the withdrawal ofPRIDE OF HAWAlI to another
17 DOT Press Release dated June 72004 see also DOT Press Release dated August 132004 in connection with visit to PRIDE OF ALOHA by US Transportation Secretary Norman Y Mineta 11 Passenger nights (also referred to as passenger capacity days) are calculated by multiplying the number ofpassengers per vessel by the number ofcruise days in each itinerary by the number of cruises This is the unit ofmeasurement employed by MARAn In contrast passenger bed supply (also referred to as passenger capacity) data reflects only the number ofberths per vessel multiplied by the number of cruises and hence understates the market by excluding the full economic value ofthe cruise perfonned 19 In 2003 the total number ofpassenger nights for round-trip West Coast to Hawaii cruises was 303325 which jumped by 353 to 1072329 in 2006 and by 430 to 1304546 from 2003 to 2007 (The 2007 figure is based on MARAD data for six months and a1ll1ualized by published itineraries for the balance of the year)
6
market for operation under foreign flag This move alone will result in the loss ofover 1000 American seafaring jobs
5 Customs Proposed Interpretation is Necessary to Further the Important National Security and Public Policy Objectives Embodied in Federal Law
As Customs has properly noted the increase in foreign competition in the Hawaii trades in contravention of the PVSA pose[s] an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels[] As the operator of these ships NCLA has a vested interest in protecting the jobs ofthe thousands ofAmerican crewmembers and cruise ship service providers who support these vessels NCLA also has an interest in protecting the substantial economic investment it has made to revitalize the US flag passenger vessel fleet But a balancing of interests in the context of Customs enforcement ofexisting law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act requires a much broader focus
The legislative history of the 2003 Act expressly recognized the national security and public policy import ofestablishing a US flag passenger vessel fleet as a means to maintain the countrys preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool of qualified seafarers and as a means to help sustain a fleet ofUS-flag vessels to su~ort
the nations military and maritime industrial base for times ofnational emergency
Congress understood the importance ofestablishing a viable US flag cruise ship fleet as something larger than the vessels themselves These national security and public policy objectives must be weighed in the balance as Customs assesses how best to interpret its rules to give effect to the PVSA and the 2003 Act
6 Customs Should Clarify that the Proposed Interpretation is Limited to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades and Adopt Reasonable Measures to Ensure Sufficient Foreign Content
Since publication ofthe proposed interpretative rule several commenters have observed that the scope of the proposed interpretation is ambiguous because the language of Section VI referencing any cruise itinerary appears broader than the caption Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises and the entire discussion in the published notice which focuses exclusively on US-flag coastwise vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA agrees that the proposed interpretation should be clarified so that its scope is limited to vessels operating roundtrip voyages from US ports that include Hawaii port calls
NCLA supports the concept reflected in the proposed interpretive rule that round trip Hawaii itineraries from US ports on foreign ships must include a material and measurable degree ofoverall foreign port content as compared to US port content
20 149 Congo Rec S1117 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)
7
(a) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is also Consistent with Subsequent Congressional Enactments Modifying the PVSA
As discussed above it is well established that the PVSA was designed toRrotect US-flag vessels from foreign competition in the coastwise and domestic trades 1
Subsequent legislative enactments however have appropriately differentiated among distinct geographic markets and trades including Canada Alaska Puerto Rico and Hawaii based on the existence or non-existence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
In 1938 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers by Canadian passenger vessels on Lake Ontario and the St Lawrence River until such time as passenger service shall be established by vessels of the United States22 Similarly in 1961 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers on Canadian vessels within Alaska or between Alaska and other points in the United States until such time as passenger service is established by vessels ofthe United States23
In 1984 Congress modified the application ofthe PVSA to pennit the transportation ofpassengers between Puerto Rico and other United States ports on foreign-flag vessels24 As with the other statutory exceptions this provision is qualified and expires [o]n a showing that a United States passenger vessel qualified to engage in the coastwise trade is offering or advertising passenger service between a port in Puerto Rico and another port in the United States2S
Congress acted again with respect to the application of the PVSA with the 2003 Act in which it authorized three vessels that did not meet the US-build requirements of the PVSA to operate as modem US-flagged cruise ships in regular service in Hawaii26 The 2003 Act imposes a specific geographic limitation on the operation of any ship documented under this authority to operations only in regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands ofHawaii and shall not transport passengers in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico or the Caribbean Sea except in certain limited circumstances27 As above the limited nature of the 2003 Act is express it is strictly limited to the large ocean-going cruise ships and then only those operating in the regular Hawaii service where there are no US-flag operations28
21 See Act ofJune 19 1886 c 421 sec 8 24 Stat 81 Act of February 171898 c 26 sec 2 30 Stat 248 22 S] Res 174 75th Cong 52 Stat 223 (Alp 251938) codified at46 USC sect 55121(a) 23 See Pub L 87-77 75 Stat 196 (Jun 30 1961) codified at 46 USC sect 55121(b) 24 See Pub L 98-563 98 Stat 2916 (Oct 301984) codified at 46 USC sect 55104(b) 25 46 USC sect 55104(c)(l) see also 46 USC 46 USc sect 55104(cX2)(expiration of exemption upon availability ofa non-coastwise qualified US-flag vessel offering service in the relevant market) 26 149 Congo Rec SI118 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)(statementofSen Inouye) 27 Pub L 108-7 117 Stat 79 (Feb 20 2003) 28 149 Congo Rec S11l9 (dailyed Jan 17 2003Xstatement of Sen Inouye)
8
In each ofthese instances Congress fashioned a narrow exception to the PVSA that differentiated among distinct geographic markets based on the existence or nonshyexistence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
As the federal agency responsible for administering the 2003 Act MARAD requested that Customs act to protect US flag passenger vessel interests in the Hawaii trades29 Limiting the scope ofthe proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades also reflects Customs appreciation of the PVSA in the context of the subsequent Congressional action30 Viewing the Congressional modifications to the PVSA as a whole Congress has specifically and repeatedly differentiated among distinct geographic markets when it has found it necessary and appropriate to do so to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests It is well established that the proper interpretation of a statutory scheme includes consideration ofsubsequent statutes even though the underlying statute itselfhas not been expressly amended31 Accordingly Customs should likewise limit the scope ofthe proposed PVSA interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades because that is the only geographic market as mandated by the 2003 Act in which oceangoing US-flag cruise ships are operating
(b) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Consistent with Public Policy Objectives of the 1985 Rulemaking
In 1985middot Customs liberalized the regulations implementing the PVSA by eliminating certain regulatory prohibitions on foreign flag vessels In the context of the 1985 rulemaking Customs justified a relaxation ofthe regulations on the grounds that it would simplify the administration of the PVSA and would benefit the economy ofcertain American coastwise ports without eroding the statutory protection given to American vessels engaged in solely domestic trade32
Customs thus sought to reconcile US port economic interests with US-flag passenger vessel interests Both of these twin policy objectives are furthered by
29 See 72 Fed Reg 65488 (Nov 21 2007)( MARAn bas asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the ~eratiODS ofcoastwise-qualified cruise ship operators)
See generally FDA v Brown amp Williamson Tobacco Corp 529 US 120 132-133 (2000)(assessing propriety ofagency construction ofFood DIUg and Cosmetics Act and descnbing responsibility of reviewing cowt to assess statutory provisions in the context of subsequent legislative enactments) 31 See Brown amp Williamson 529 US 143 (holding that proper construction ofstatutory provision must necessarily assume that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications ofa later statute This is particularly so where the scope of the earlier statute is broad but the subsequent statutes more specifically address the topic athand) see also United States v Estate ofRomani 523 US 517 530-531 (1998)( holding that a later-enacted statute should control the construction of the federal lien priority statute a specific policy embodied in a later federal statute should control om construction of the [earlier] statute even though it ha[s] not been expressly amended) United States v Fausto 484 US 439453 (1988)(The courts frequently find Congress to have done this - whenever in fact they interpret a statutory text in the light ofsurrounding texts that happen to have been subsequently enacted This classic judicial task of reconciling many laws enacted over time and getting them to make sense in combination necessarily assumes that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications of a later statute) 32 50 Fed Reg 26982 (JuI 11985)
9
limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades
As noted earlier the 2003 Act limits the operation of the NCLA US-flag oceangoing passenger vessels to regular service in Hawaii Because there are no oceangoing US-flag vessels operating in any market other than the Hawaii trades Customs should limit the scope of the proposed interPretation to that market Such a limitation protects US flag passenger vessel interests without prejudicing US port interests In contrast an application of the proposed interpretation to any itinerary would needlessly harm US port interests unrelated to Hawaii without any countervailing benefit to US-flag passenger vessel interests Accordingly limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation is consistent with the public policy objectives of the 1985 rulemaking as well as the 2003 Act
(c) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Also Consistent with Customs Commitment to Revisit the Scope of its Rules to Protect US-Flag Interests
The relaxation ofthe PVSA regulations in 1985 was premised in large part on Customs finding that there was no regular salt water US-flag passenger fleet in operation at that time33 Acknowledging that the relaxed regulations could harm USshyflag interests Customs committed in the preamble ofthe 1985 final rule to immediately reconsider its interpretation if it is ever shown that there is a viable US flag vessel operating in competition with foreign-flag vessels34
Congress enacted the 2003 Act to stimulate the development of a US flag cruise ship industry As noted above the legislative history ofthat Act makes clear that Congress sought to revitalize the US-flag cruise industry as a means to maintain Americas preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool ofqualified seafarers help sustain a fleet of US flag vessels to support our military and a maritime industrial base create thousands of seagoing and shoreside American jobs and stimulate the development ofa US flag cruise ship tourism business with the commensurate benefits to the US tax base the US economy and US employment
Customs is now acting at MARADs request to revisit its interpretation ofthe regulations implementing the PVSA because recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwise-qualified cruise ship operations35 That is to say that the concerns articulated by Customs in the context of the 1985 rulemaking have materialized and US-flag passenger vessel interests are in fact being hanned in the Hawaii trades by foreign competitors
33 50 Fed Reg 26983 34Id
3S 72 Fed Reg 56488 (Nov 21 2007)
I
10
Because the US-flag passenger vessels are limited by statute to regular service in Hawaii limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the
Hawaii trades is consistent with Customs historical commitment to revisit its interpretation ofthe implementing regulations to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests
7 Conclusion
For the reasons stated above NCLA commends the efforts ofCustoms and MARAn to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act as applied to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA respectfully requests Customs to move ahead promptly with p~blicati~nof a final interpretive rule to advance the important national security arid public policy objectives ofthese laws
We greatly appreciate the opportunity to submit these comments
Sincerely
~~~ Alan T Yamamoto Vice President Hawaii Operations
Exhibit A
Ship Name Serenade Of The Seas Departure Port San Diego California Ports of Call San Diego California Kailua Kona Hawaii Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii Hlo Hawaii Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii Ensenada Mexico San Qigo California
2007 Date(s) Oct 05
Sailing Itinerary
Day Port H ~rrive Depart Activity
05-0ct San Diego California 500 PM
06-0ct Cruising
07-0ct Cruising
08-0ct Cruising
09-0ct Cruising
10-0ct Kailua Kona Hawaii 700 AM 900 PM Tendered
11-00t Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 1000 AM Tendered
12middot0ct Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 900 PM Tendered
13-0ct Hilo Hawaii 700 AM 600 PM Docked
14middot0ct Honoulu (Oahu) Hawaii 700 AM Docked
15-0ct Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii 200 AM Docked
6-0ct CrUising
17-0ct Cruising
18-0ct Cruising
19middot0ct Cruising
-7 20-00t
O-Oot
Ensenada ~i1exico
San Deqo California
i 00 ~r1
700 ~M
200 oM D1Jcked ~
GRAND PANAMA CANAL CRUISES
GRAND PANAMA CANAL GRAND PANAMA CANAL GRAND PANAMA CANAL
150R 18 150R 1715 DAYS DAYS DAYS
CORAL PRINCESS SUN PRINCESS
REGAL PRINCESS REGAL PRINCESS SUN PRINCESS
DAWN PRINCESS REGAL PRINCESS sail between DAWN PRINCESS
sail between FT LAUDERDALE FT LAUDERDALE sail betweenand
FT LAUDERDALEand SAN DIEGO andLOS ANGELES
SAN FRANCISCO 2004 DEPARTURE DATES 2004 DEPARTURE DATES
DAWN PRINCESS 2004 DEPARTURE DATESNov 24Sp191
CRUISE ITINERARY Dec9t CORAL PRINCESSREGAL PRINCESS 5ltp261 CRUISE ITINERARY CRUISE ITINERARY
200S DEPARTURE DATES Dec 24 DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART
SUN PRINCESS DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBARIltPM200S DEPARTURE DATES DAY PORT ARRIVE DEPART Sep 2StMar 24
3 Ocho Rios Jamaica lOAM 6PM 2-3 At5ea 2 At Sea 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBA8KPM
REGAL PRINCESS AprSt 1 Ft Lauderdale Florida EMBA8KPM Jan stu 200S DEPARTURE DATES2 At Sea4 At Sea 4 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 7AM lPMJan 23 5 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 7AM lPM 3 Ocho Rios Jamaica lOAM 6PM REGAL PRINCESS 5 Cartagena Colombia 9AM 3PMFeb7t 4 At Sea Apr 239AM 3PM 6 Transit Panama Canal 7AM 430 PMFb22 ~ yenr~fte~~~~~~u 7AM 430 PM 5 Aruba Netherlands Antilles 7AM lPM At SeaMar9t CORAL PRINCESS 79AM 3PM8 At Sea Apr 27 8 Puntarenas Costa Rica 7AM 7PMSUN PRINCESS 9 Puntarenas Costa Rica 7 AM 7PM ~ yenr~fte~n~~~~~u 7AM 430 PM 9-10 At SeaApr1S 8 At Sea DAWN PRINCESS10-11 At Sea 11 Acapulco Mexico 8AM 5PM
5PM 9 Puntarenas Costa Rica 7AM 7PM Apr 29H ~ae~lcoMexico 8 AM 12 At SeatllWrryopmllzlfrarnLls~in 10-11 At Sea rmrKfIfikTiIIrttimnma1 tlliJlrraryoptJllllsfrlJflSlmFranrimlJn 13 Cabo San lucas Mexico 8AM 5PM
gt This mUJI C4Jl llfwmblnld wlth a 3 14 Cabo San Lucas Mexico 7 AM lPM H ~e~o Mexico 8AM SPM rmruordrrorttimamG)llIryCoIutar CnUK to VlWOIlllr SC Dqs ThUIltIIIflltllnlltCllIIblntdwilhaZ-day 14-15 At Sea 16lhrlllllhI9lllIbtboobdulaquoSC)lQ4k t Illncral) lIpCutcs in mrmt orm Pllrt IiIIIa CocastaICnliutoVan(ouKrBCDlIys16 16 San Francisco California 7AM 4PMcowtlIrcrllisr IIIIYlIl1Ymiddot IhrounIScankboobdlUaK)lllllluU t~A~geles California 6 AM 5PM 14 Cabo San Lucas Mexico 8AM 5PM
Thllwl1JIIICllllslltMOlIkpilllyJmtcad 17-18 At Sea middotmiddotThliIAfllIllCltlllsatMGnIqclBaylnstcadllf 15 At Sea CPlIilldCI1IIu 17 At Sea o[OdKKwsPurllilllrlmllYWlry OchoRicJsPortllmtslllllYVllfymiddot D1SEMBA8K AM19 Vancouver BC DISEMBA8K AM 16 San Die20 California DlSEMBA8K AM 18 Val1couver BC
GRAND PANAMA CANAL COASTAL CRUISING
2-4 CORAL PRINCESS ISLAND PRINCESS SUN PRINCESS18 DAWN PRINCESS DIAMOND PRINCESS STAR PRINCESSDAYSDAYS
COASTAL CRUISE SCHEDULEREGAL PRINCESS
SHIP DAYS FROM TO DEPARTURE DATE DIAMOND PRINCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 5104
SAN FRANCISCO DIAMOND PRINCES5 4 Vancouver Seattle 5404 to CORAL PRINCESS 2 San Francisco Vancouver 5604
NEW YORK DAWN PRiNCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 5704 ISLAND PRiNCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 51204
2004 DEPARTURE DATE SUN PRINCESS 3 San Francisco Vancouver 51404Aug 24 ISLAND PRiNCESS 3 Vancouver LOI Angeles 91804
DIAMOND PRINCESS 1 Seattle Vancouver 91804CRUISE ITINERARY DIAMOND PRINCESS 6 Vancouver Los Angeles 91904 SAPPHIRE PRINCESS 1 Seattle Vancouver 91904 SAPPHREPRINCESS 2 Vancouver San Francisco 92004 DIAMOND PRINCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 43005 DlAMONDPRiNCES$ 4 Vancouver Seattle 5305 SUN PRINCESS 3 Los Angeles Vancouver 5305
ISLAND PRiNCESS 3 Los Angeles VancOllver 5405 CORAL PRiNCESS 2 San Francisco Vancouver 51205
Coral Princess in the Panama Canal
CRUISE PLUS
Extend your adventure with our Cruise Plusreg program Cruise Plusreg enables you to enhance your vacation with one- to four-night hotel
packages in cities that stand on their own as vacation destinations Add nights in Sydney before you cruise or extend your vacation with nights in the city by the
bay San Francisco Transportation and luggage handling costs from the airport to both hotel and ship plus meet and greet services are always included
Wherever you choose to explore youll enjoy properties that are carefully chosen based on service value location and the peace of mind of knowing that Princess
has arranged it all for you
Anchorage Alaska Trevi Fountain Rome Auckland Harbor New Zealand
The Cruise Plusreg Program is available in over 30 major cities including
MEDITERRANEANAEGEAN EXOTICS PANAMA CANAL Barcelona London Rome and Venice Auckland Bangkok Beijing Buenos Aires Ft Lauderdale Los Angeles New York City
Cape Town Ft Lauderdale Honolulu Los San Diego San Francisco Sanjuan Vancouver NORTHERN EUROPE Angeles Montreal Moorea New York City Copenhagen and London MEXICO CARIBBEANOsaka Papeete Rome San Francisco
Ft Lauderdale Galveston Los AngelesTRANSATLANTIC Santiago Seattle Sydney Vancouver Venice Barcelona Copenhagen Ft Lauderdale San Francisco and San Juan
London New York City and Rome ALASKA Anchorage Calgary Fairbanks Kenai San Francisco Seattle and Vancouver
For more information about options and pricing reference a destination specific brochure or contact your travel agent
TRAVEL THE WORLD WITH THE LEADER IN CRUISINGmiddot Princess
Analysis by the Hawaii Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism Comparing the Economic Impact of Foreign Flag Ships with US Flag Cruise Ships Sailing in Hawaii
This is a summary of an analysis prepared by the Hawai Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism (DBEDT) of the economic impact of the foreign flag cruise ship fleet sailing in Hawaii as compared to each of the US flag ships operating in Honolulu
The comparison is set out below
Foreign Pride Pride Pride
Fleet Of Hawaii Of Aloha Of America
Total economic output impact (spendingsales) ($mil) 155 542 4225 4958
Total earnings impact (labor earnings) ($mil) 44 155 1207 1411
Total employment impact Uobs) 1447 5059 3943 4627
This analysis demonstrates that a single US-flagged ship the Pride of America home ported in Honolulu is 32 times more economically impactful and creates 32 times as many jobs as the entire foreign flag fleet that sails into and out of Hawaii ports of call
Economic Impact of Pride of America
Assumptions 1 Annual impact though Pride of Aloha is leaving in May 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existing Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($) 4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of outputl$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job multiplier (jobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
118700 105
2706 3373
147 042
1372
4958
1417
4627
Data sourcelformula Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Line 1 x line 2 x line 31 000000
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 4 x line 5
Line 4 x line 6
Line 4 x line 7
Economic Impact of Pride of Hawaii
Assumptions
1 Annual impact though Pride of Hawaii is leaving in February 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existing Pride of Aloha and Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($) 4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job multiplier (jobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
Data sourceformula 139770 Actual 2007 figure
975 Actual 2007 figure 2706 Actual 2007 figure 3688 Line 1 x line 2 x line 31000000
147 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model 042 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
1372 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
5421 Line 4 x line 5
1549 Line 4 x line 6
5059 Line 4 x line 7
Economic Impact of Pride of Aloha
Assumptions 1 Annual impact though Pride of Aloha is leaving in May 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existlng Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($)
4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job mUltiplier Oobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
95680 111
2706 2874
147 042
1372
4225
1207
3943
Data sourcelformula Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Line 1 x line 2 x line 31000000
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 4 x line 5
Line 4 x line 6
Line 4 x line 7
lt
Methodology Used in Calculating Impact of International Cruise Ships
Cruise ship visitors 1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Came with ships 3 Flied in 4 Average length of stay (days) 5 PPPD ($) 6 Cruise visitor spending ($mil))
Cruise ship crews 7 Ratio of crew spending to cruise visitor spending 8 Cruise crew spending
Cruisline 9 Ratio of crew spending to cruise visitor spending
10 Cruiseline spending
11 Total cruise-related spending ($mil)
12 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 13 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 14 Job multiplier Uobs$ cruise -related spending)
15 Total output impact ($miJ)
16 Total earnings impact ($miJ)
17 Total employment impact (jobs)
106641 98307
8334 739 847 668
02 134
038 254
1055
147 042
1372
1551
444
1447
Data sourceformula Line 2 + line 3 DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report Line 1 x line 4 x line 5
DBEDT 2003 Cruise study Line 7 x line 6
DBEDT 2003 Cruise study Line 9 x line 6
Line 6 + line 8 + line 10
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 11 x line 12
Line 11 x line 13
Line 11 x line 14
Economic Contributions Foreign-Flag Fleet operating in Hawaii vs Three US-Flag Ships
$1500
Pride of Hawaii$1000- $542 million VIc -0-E c Pride of AlohaCo
423 million$500
Pride of America $496 million155 million$shy
Foreign-Flag US-Flag Fleet Fleet
Source State of Hawaii Department of US-Flag $1460 billion Business Economic Development and Tourism
Foreign-Flag $ 155 million 7292008
Employment Foreign-Flag Fleet operating in Hawaii vs Three US-Flag Ships
15000
10000
til c o Pride of Aloha
39435000
Pride of America 1447 4627
~---------
Foreign-Flag US-Flag Fleet Fleet
Source State of Hawaii Department of US-Flag 13629 jobs Business Economic Development and Tourism
Foreign-Flag 1447 jobs 7292008
Foreign Flag Capacity Growth Foreign flag passenger capacity has changed five-fold on roundtrip Hawaii cruises from the West Coast since enactment of the Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative
1600000
1400000
tn 1200000
J enshyZ
1000000
I shyG) en 800000 s G) tn tn
600000 as D 400000
200000
0 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Year
Source US Maritime Administration (derived from the US Customs and Border Patrol Vessel Entrance and Clearance documents - final 2007 data) 7292008
NCL America Hawaii Economic Contributions
(2004-2008)
bull (in Millions) bull $399 in wages benefits and overtime to US seafarers bull $35 in Federal and State payroll Taxes bull $64 in Government Fees and Taxes to Hawaii bull $28 in wages benefits and overtime to US other employees bull $52 in Port Charges to Hawaii Companies (Stevedores tugs pilots etc) bull $85 in Fuel to Tesoro Hawaii bull $130 for shore excursions to Hawaii tour operators bull $39 for Hawaii hotel rooms and ground transport bull $75 for food grown in Hawaii bull $57 in union fees and levies (incl $32M paid directly by employees) bull $1 in MMD fees to the United States Coast Guard bull $51 for recruitment screening processing and training crew bull $76 advertising and promoting Hawaii as a destination bull $1092
COASTWISE CRUISES INTERPRETIVE RULE RESOLUTION Adopted at the
US Conference of Mayors 76th Annual Meeting
June 20-242008 Miami
WHEREAS the Department of Homeland Securitys Customs and Border Protection (CBP) issued a proposed Interpretive Rule regulating Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises on foreign flagged vessels between US ports of call under the Passenger Vessel Services Act at the request of the United States Maritime Administration and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule would require that a foreign-flagged vessel on a coastwise cruise to call at a foreign port for at least 48 hours with that foreign stop constituting at least 50 percent of the cruise itinerary and allowing passengers to disembark the cruise vessel at the foreign port before continuing the cruise to a US port of call and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule establishes burdensome criteria that are wholly inconsistent with industry practice particularly the 48-hour call at foreign port shyinasmuch as the standard port call is six to eight hours - as well as the requirement that 50 percent of a cruise be spent at the foreign port and
WHEREAS the intent of the proposed Interpretive Rule is to protect the single remaining US flag vessel serving the Inter-Hawaiian Island cruise trade that according to the Hawaii Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism generates more than 4600 jobs and generates nearly $500 million in economic benefits for the state annually and
WHEREAS thousands of members of the International Longshore Workers Union (nWU) are employed at US ports serving cruise ships and whose jobs would be at risk if the proposed Interpretive Rule were implemented and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule is vague as to the breadth of its application ie to coastwise cruises between all United States ports or applied solely to coastwise cruises from West Coast ports to Hawaii and
WHEREAS the Cruise Lines International Association estimates the proposed Interpretive Rule would upend the $17 billion in national cruise industry spending and put at risk more than 300000 jobs generated by the international cruise industry including jobs held by nWU at US ports and the local allied industries supporting the cruise industry and
Executive Order Submissions Under Review
II Reglnfogov Where to ind Federal Regulatory Information -~
Home ] Lnitied Agenda and Regulator) Ilan pound012866 Regulator) Review Jnformalion Collection Review
EO 12866 Regulatory Rlvlw dvanced Search IJitorical RepWI Review Counh Jriter XIL
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA)
Executive Order Submissions Under Review July 25 2008 - _------------____ _shy
Department of Homeland Security
AGENCY DHS-TSA RIN 1652-AA53
TITLE Large Aircraft Security Program Other Aircraft Operator Security Programs and Airport Operator Security Program
STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT Yes RECEIVED DATE 06302008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
AGENCY DHS-USCIS RIN Llti15-AB67 TITLE Changes to Requirements Affecting H-2B Nonimmigrants and Their Employers
STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT No RECEIVED DATE 06092008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
AGENCY DHS-USCBP RIN 1651AA11 TITLE Issuance of a Visa and Authorization for Temporary Admission Into the United States for Certain Nonimmigrant Aliens Afflicted W HIV Infection
STAGE Final Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT No RECEIVED DATE 03042008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
-_RE_V-IE-W-E-X-T-EN-D-E-D---------- _
AGENCY DHS-USCBP RIN 1651-AA76 TITLE Coastwise Transportation of Passengers STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT Yes RECEIVED DATE 07142008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
Disclosure I Accessibility I Privacy Policy I Contact Us
httpwwwreginfogovpublicdoeoReviewSearch 7252008
View Rule Page 11
Shere D find Federal ReguLatory InformciiorlReglnfogov Home J Cnified Agenda al1d Regulatory Plan EO 12866 Regulatory Reyiew Information Collection Reiew
Current rnified Agenda and Regulatory Plan Historical Pnified Agenda and Regulatory Plan Search
View Rule
DHSIUSCBP RIN 1651-AA76 Publication ill Spring 2008
Title llCoastwise Transportation of Passengers
Abstract This interim rule amends the Department of Homeland Securitys (DHS) current regulations relating to the transportation of passengers by non-coastwise-qualified vessels on voyages that begin and end at a US port and stop at intervening US and foreign port(s) Under this interim final rule voyages that begin and end at a US port and stop at a foreign port(s) and at intervening US port(s) where a large USshyflag coastwise-qualified passenger vessel engages in regular service are in violation of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) unless the cumulative length of stay(s) at intervening foreign port(s) is more than 50 percent of the total amount of time spent at the intervening US port(s) and passengers are permitted to go ashore at the foreign port(s) The purpose of this amendment is to ensure that the Congressional purpose in enacting the PVSA which is to preserve the economic benefits of US coastwise trade to US-flag coastwise-qualified vessels is properly implemented
Agency Department of Homeland Security(DHS) Priority Substantive Nonsignificant
KIN Status First time published in the Unified Agenda Agenda Stage of Rulemaking Final Rule Stage
Major No Unfunded Mandates No
CFR Citation -LCER 4J~)(h)(plusmnJ
Legal Authority 5JJSS_30J12lJ-SClt16 J9_lJiCJ 431 9_L1C1plusmn3JJ2JScHJ1J2JSCJ624 L(LlLSc207LIl(gtJfHgt~ _CiQJ _46lSC 6QLQ~
Legal Deadline None
Timetable Action Date FR Cite
Interim Final Action 0510012008
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required No Government Levels Affected None
Federalism No
Included in the Regulatory Plan No
RIN Data Printed in the FR No
Agency Contact Glen E Vereb Chief Entry Procedures and Carriers Branch Department of Homeland Security US Customs and Border Protection Office of Regulations and Rulings 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington DC 20229 Phone202572-8730
Disclosure I Accessibility I Privacy Policy I Contact Us
httpwwwreginfogovpublicdoeAgendaViewRuleruleID=286751 7128120
Federal RegisterVol 72 No 224Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules 65487
SPECULATIVE POSITION LIMITS 1-Continued [In contract units)
Contract
Soybeans and Mini-Soybeans 2
Wheat and Mini-Wheat 2 bullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbull
Soybean Oil
SingleSpot month All monthsmonth
600 8600 13300 600 11100 14500 540 6600 8600
Soybean Meal 720 5500 7100
Minneapolis Grain Exchange
Hard Red Spring Wheat I 600 I 11100 I 14500
New York Board of Trade
Cotton No2 I 300 I 5300 I 7300
Kansas City Board of Trade
Hard Winter Wheat I 600 I 11100 I 14500
1 For purposes of compliance with these limits positions in a futures contract that shares ~ubstantially identical terms with a contract market enumerated herein including a futures contract that is cash-settled based on the settlement price of an enumerated contract market shall be agshygregated with positions in the enumerated contract market
2 For purposes of compliance with these limits positions in the regular-sized and mini-sized contracts shall be aggregated
Issued by the Commission this November 152007 in Washington DC David Stawick Secretary of the Commission [FR Doc E7-22681 Filed 11-20-07 845 amI BILLING CODE 6351-Q1-P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Bureau of Customs and Border Protection
19 CFR Part 4
[USCBP-2007-o098]
Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises
AGENCY Customs and Border Protection Department of Homeland Security ACTION Proposed interpretation solicitation of comments
SUMMARY This document proposes new criteria to be used by Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to determine whether non-coastwise-qualified vessels are in violation ofthe Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) when engaging in cruise itineraries in which passengers board at a US port the vessel calls at several Hawaiian ports and then the vessel proceeds to a foreign port or ports for a brief period before ultimately returning to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their cruise CBP believes these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because it appears that the primary objective of the foreign stop is evasion of the PVSA
DATES Comments must be received on or before December 212007 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT Glen E Vereb Cargo Security Carriers amp Immigration Branch Office of International Trade (202) 572-8730 ADDRESSES You may submit comments identified by docket number by one of the following methods
bull Federal eRulemaking Portal http wwwregulationsgov Follow the instructions for submitting comments
bull Mail Border Security Regulations Branch Office of International Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
I Public Participation
Interested persons are invited to participate in this proposed interpretation by submitting written data views or arguments on all aspects of the proposed interpretation Customs and Border Protection (CBP) also invites comments that relate to the economic environmental or federalism effects that might result from this proposed interpretation Comments that will provide the most assistance to CBP in developing these procedures will reference a specific portion of the proposed interpretation explain the reason for any recommended change and include data information or authority that support such recommended change
Instructions All submissions received must include the agency name and docket number for this proposed
interpretation All comments received will be posted without change to http wwwregulationsgov including any personal information provided
Docket For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received go to http wwwregulationsgov Submitted comments may also be inspected on regular business days between the hours of 9 am and 430 pm at the Office of International Trade Customs and Border Protection 799 9th Street NW 5th Floor Washington DC Arrangements to inspect submitted documents should be made in advance by calling Mr Joseph Clark at (202) 572shy8768
II Background
The maritime cabotage law governing the transportation of passengers was first established by section 8 of the Passenger Vessel Services Act of June 191886 (the PVSA) 24 Stat 81 as amended by section 2 of the Act of February 17 1898 30 Stat 248 formerly codified at 46 USC App 289 (now codified at 46 USC 55103) 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 of $200 (now $300 as promulgated in TD 03-11 pursuant to the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 199028 USC 2461 note) for each passenger so transported and landed
The intent of the maritime cabotage laws including the PVSA was to provide a legal structure that guarantees a coastwise monopoly to
65488 Federal RegisterVol 72 No 224Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules
American shipping and thereby promotes development of the American merchant marine Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 28 (DC Cir 1984) see also The Granada 35 FSupp 892 8931940 AMC 1601 (DC Pa 1940) (stating that the legislative aim of section 289 [now 55102] was the creation of a practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping business for United States ships) In other words the PVSA was enacted to advance the United States merchant marine and fleet by restricting the use of foreign-ownedflagged passenger vessels in United States territorial waters
Passenger vessel transportation between United States ports has historically been viewed to be part of the coastwise trade after the enactment of the PVSA This view is premised on the concepts of continuity of the voyage and whether its intended purpose or objective was coastwise transportation In other words the PVSA was held to be violated if the coastwise movement was continuous or if the purpose of the trip was a coastwise voyage (See 18 OAG 445 September 4 1886 28 OAG 204 February 16 1910 29 OAG 318 February 12 1912 30 OAG 44 February 1 1913 34 OAG 340 December 24 1924 and 36 OAG 352 August 13 1930)
The CBP regulations promulgated pursuant to the PVSA are found at section 480a of title 19 of the Code of Federal Regulations (19 CFR 480a) and are reflective of the above cited Office of the Attorney General decisions These regulations provide among other things that a non-coastwise-qualified vessel which embarks a passenger at a port in the United States embraced within the coastwise laws (a coastwise port) will be deemed to have landed that passenger in violation of the PVSA if the passenger disembarks at a different coastwise port on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a nearby foreign port or ports (as defined in 19 CFR 480a(a)(2) see also 19 CFR 480a(b)(2)) The terms embark and disembark are words of art which are defined as going on board a vessel for the duration of a specific voyage and leaving a vessel at the conclusion of a specific voyage respectively (See 19 CFR 480a(a)(4))
The references in section 480a to nearby foreign ports (defined in 19 CFR 480a(a)(2)) are the results of attempts by CBP to apply an Office of the Attorney Generals opinion dated February 26 1910 (28 OAG 204) In that case a foreign-flag vessel transported 615 passengers on a voyage around the world beginning in New
York and concluding in San Francisco The Attorney General opined that since the primary object of the voyage was to visit various parts of the world on a pleasure tour returning home via California and not to be transported in domestic commerce the transportation was not in violation of the PVSA
The 1910 Attorney Generals opinion was extended to voyages that included foreign ports other than nearby foreign ports (See Treasury Decision (TD) 68shy285 (33 FR 16558) November 14 1968) However voyages solely to one or more coastwise ports have always been considered predominantly coastwise Therefore non-coastwise-qualified vessels engaging in such a voyage where passengers temporarily go ashore at a coastwise port have been deemed to have violated the PVSA
m Current Law and Policy Pursuant to Public Law 109-304 120
Stat 1632 enacted on October 6 2006 Title 46 United States Code was substantially reorganized and recodified Consequently the PVSA is now codified at 46 USC 55103 and provides that no vessel shall transport passengers between ports or places in the United States either directly or by way of a foreign port under a penalty of $300 for each person so transported and landed except one that (1) Is wholly owned by citizens of the United States for purposes of engaging in the coastwise trade and (2) has been issued a certificate of documentation with a coastwise endorsement or is exempt from documentation but would otherwise be eligible for such a certificate and endorsement
In 2003 Congress enacted Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II Section 211 for the purpose of revitalizing the oceangoing US-flag cruise industry in Hawaii (the 2003 Act) Three oceangoing US-flag cruise ships PRIDE OF ALOHA PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAII were documented with coastwise privileges pursuant to the 2003 Act These vessels entered regular service in Hawaii in 2004 2005 and 2006 respectively and pursuant to the express language of the 2003 Act are limited in their operation to providing regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands of Hawaii
The CBP regulations promulgated pursuant to the PVSA are set forth in 19 CFR 480a and have remained unchanged throughout both the recodification of Title 46 of the United States Code and the enactment of the 2003 Act They provide that a violation of the PVSA occurs when passengers embark (board a vessel for the
duration of a voyage) a non-coastwiseshyqualified vessel at one US port and disembark (leave the vessel at the conclusion of a voyage) at a different US port unless they proceed with the vessel to a distant foreign port (Le any port not considered a nearby foreign port which is defined as any port located in North America Central America Bermuda or the West Indies including the Bahamas) Currently these regulations do not contain specific criteria for non-coastwise-qualified vessels on itineraries including US ports and either nearby or distant foreign ports in order for such foreign port calls to be compliant with the PVSA
To reiterate the applicable CBP regulations provide that the PVSA is violated when a non-coastwise-qualified vessel transports a passenger on a voyage solely to one or more coastwise ports and the passenger disembarks or goes ashore temporarily at a coastwise port (19 CFR 480a(b)(1)) Furthermore a violation of the PVSA also occurs when a non-coastwise-qualified vessel transports a passenger on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a nearby foreign port or ports (but no other foreign port) and the passenger disembarks at a coastwise port other than the port of embarkation (19 CFR 480a(b)(2)) However there is no violation of the PVSA when a passenger is on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a distant foreign port or ports (whether or not the voyage includes a nearby foreign port or ports) and the passenger disembarks at a coastwise port provided the passenger has proceeded with the vessel to a distant foreign port (19 CFR 480a(b)(3))
IV Request From MARAD To Provide Guidance
The US Department of Transportation Maritime Administration (MARAD) has requested that CBP take action to ensure enforcement of the PVSA MARAD has asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreignshyflag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwiseshyqualified cruise ship operators
In April of 2007 the operator of the three US-flag cruise vessels operating solely in Hawaii pursuant to the 2003 Act announced their intent to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAIl from the Hawaii market and redeploy her to Europe The operator intends to re-flag the vessel to foreign registry directly resulting in the loss of over 1100 crewmember jobs The primary reason cited for this decision is the rapid increase in foreign-flag competition entering the Hawaii market
Federal Register I Vol 72 No 224 I Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules 65489
from the West Coast This competition is evidenced in published cruise itineraries of foreign-flag carriers offering a variety of round trip cruises that depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period usually in the early morning and ultimately return to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their cruise These cruises are often marketed as Hawaii cruises and except for the brief stop in the nearby foreign port of Ensenada are purely coastwise in nature It is these cruise itineraries that pose an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels that pursuant to the 2003 Act are currently engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands
V Preliminary Notice
In response to MARADs concerns CBP sent letters to two carriers known to operate the itineraries in question as well as to the Cruise Lines International Association Inc stating that CBP believes that these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because it appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA The letters further indicated that CBP is taking steps to publish this position
VI CBPs Proposed Interpretive Rule Accordingly in this document CBP is
proposing to provide that cruise itineraries for non-qualified coastwise vessels which allow passengers to board at a US port call at several Hawaiian ports proceed to a foreign port or ports for a brief period and then ultimately return to the original US port of embarkation for disembarkation are not consistent with the PVSA and the regulations promulgated pursuant thereto Specifically CBP interprets a voyage to be solely to one or more coastwise ports even where it stops at a foreign port unless the stop at the foreign port is a legitimate object of the cruise CBP will presume that a stop at a foreign port is not a legitimate object of the cruise unless
(1) The stop lasts at least 48 hours at the foreign port
(2) The amount of time at the foreign port is more than 50 percent of the total amount of time at the US ports of call and
(3) The passengers are permitted to go ashore temporarily at the foreign port
Accordingly CBP proposes to adopt an interpretive rule under which it will presume that any cruise itinerary that does not include a foreign port call that
satisfies each of these three criteria constitutes coastwise transportation of passengers in violation of 19 CFR 480a(b)(1)
Dated November 16 2007 W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection [FR Doc E7-22788 Filed 11-20-07 845 am] BILLING CODe 9111-14-1
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau
27 CFR Part 9
[Notice No 76]
RIN 1513-AB49
Proposed Establishment of the Leona Valley Viticultural Area (2007R-281 P)
AGENCY Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau Treasury ACTION Notice of proposed rulemaking
SUMMARY The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau proposes to establish the 134 square mile Leona Valley viticultural area in the northeast part of Los Angeles County California We designate viticultural areas to allow vintners to better describe the origin of their wines and to allow consumers to better identify wines they may purchase We invite comments on this proposed addition to our regulations DATES We must receive written comments on or before January 22 2008
ADDRESSES You may send comments on this notice to one of the following addresses
bull httpwwwregulationsgov (Federal e-rulemaking portal follow the instructions for submitting comments) or
bull Director Regulations and Rulings Division Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau PO Box 14412 Washington DC 20044-4412
See the Public Participation section of this notice for specific instructions and requirements for submitting comments and for information on how to request a public hearing
You may view copies of this notice selected supporting materials and any comments we receive about this proposal at httpwwwregulationsgov under Docket No 2007-0066 You also may view copies of this notice all related petitions maps or other supporting materials and any comments we receive about this
proposal by appointment at the TTB Information Resource Center 1310 G Street NW Washington DC 20220 To make an appointment call 202-927shy2400
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT NA Sutton Regulations and Rulings Division Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau 925 Lakeville S1 No 158 Petaluma CA 94952 phone 415shy271-1254 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
Background on Viticultural Areas
TTB Authority Section 105(e) of the Federal Alcohol
Administration Act (FAA Act) 27 USC 205(e) authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to prescribe regulations for the labeling of wine distilled spirits and malt beverages The FAA Act provides that these regulations should among other things prohibit consumer deception and the use of misleading statements on labels and ensure that labels provide the consumer with adequate information as to the identity and quality of the product The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) administers the regulations promulgated under the FAA Act
Part 4 ofthe TTB regulations (27 CFR part 4) allows the establishment of definitive viticultural areas and the use of their names as appellations of origin on wine labels and in wine advertisements Part 9 of the TTB regulations (27 CFR part 9) contains the list of approved viticultural areas
Definition Section 425(e)(1)(i) ofthe TTB
regulations (27 CFR 425(e)(1)(i)) defines a viticultural area for American wine as a delimited grape-growing region distinguishable by geographical features the boundaries of which have been recognized and defined in part 9 of the regulations These designations allow vintners and consumers to attribute a given quality reputation or other characteristic of a wine made from grapes grown in an area to its geographic origin The establishment of viticultural areas allows vintners to describe more accurately the origin of their wines to consumers and helps consumers to identify wines they may purchase Establishment of a viticultural area is neither an approval nor an endorsement by TTB of the wine produced in that area
Requirements Section 425(e)(2) of the TTB
regulations outlines the procedure for proposing an American viticultural area and provides that any interested party
Us Department ofHomelaDd Secmity Washington DC 10229
bull ~
US Customs and Border Protection
AUG 15 2fXJJ
VE5-3-02-QTRRBSTCCCI - ti015502-GG-
Mr leon Sutcliffe Director Port Operations Camivai Cruise Unes Camival Place 3655 NW 87Avenue Miami Aorlda 33178
RE P~nger Vessef Services Ad Coastwise Transportation 46 USC sect 55103 19 CFR sect 480a(b)
Dear Mr Sutcliffe
As you know US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) enforces the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) codified at TItle 46 United States Code section 55103 (46 USC 55103) This statute prohibits non-coastwise-qualifled vessels (ie those vessels not US-buill owned and documented with a coastwise endorsement) from transporting passengers between porls or places within the United States The regUlations promUlgated pursuant to the PVSA are found at TrtJe 19 Code of Federal Regulations section 4808 (19 CFR 4808)
It has come to our attention that passenger vessels of your company are engaging in cruise itineraries that include ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands Two USAlagged coastwise-endorsed passenger vessefs are also currenUy engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of caD wittlin the Hawaiian Islands
As part of your cruise itineraries some of your foreign-flagged vessels depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period and ultimately rebJm to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their endse For example the MS ZAANDAM of Holand America Lines departs San Diego cruises the Hawaiian Islands stops in Ensenada from 800pm to 11 OOpmbull and returns to san Diego CBP believes these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because It appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA -- - - ~~~------
Please be advised that CBP is taking steps to publish this position Should have any questions pertaining to this matter please contact Mr Glen Vereb Chief Cargo Security Carriers and Immigration Branch at (202) 572-8724
Sincerely
F Jl E EST Y LEe A U I 5 I N Gmiddot
December 21 2007
The Honorable W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection co Border Security Regulations Branch Office ofInternational Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229
Re Hawaii Coastwise Cruises (USCBP-2007-0098) Comments in Response to Proposed Interpretation
Dear Commissioner Basham
NCL America Inc1 (NCLA) submits these comments in support ofthe efforts ofCustoms and Border Protection to enforce the Passenger Vessel Services Act and the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative as applied to Hawaii coastwise cruises
1 Introduction and Summary of Position
NCLA operates three large oceangoing US flag cruise ships in Hawaii These ships are documented under US flag and are required to operate in regular service in Hawaii pursuant to the authority of the Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative a 2003 federal statute intended to revitalize the US flag cruise industry and to maximize economic and national security benefits to the United States (the 2003 Act)
NCLA has invested $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships pursuant to the 2003 Act and in direct reliance on the protections of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) and its proper enforcement The PVSA limits the transportation ofpassengers between US ports to coastwise documented US flag ships Its statutory protections recognize that US flag ships have significantly higher operational costs in part because they are subject to more stringent US laws including US labor laws and federal
1 NCL America Inc is a US corporation incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware headquartered in Honolulu Hawaii As a US corporation it is subject to US taxes at both the federal and state level The Chief Executive Officer the Chairman of the Board and all of the Board of Directors of NCL America are US citizens The company is also subject to US labor and employment laws and is required by statute to maintain a workforce comprised primarily ofUS citizens
700 Bishop St SUite 900 I Honolulu HawMi 96813 I Tel 8085273800 Fax 8085273820 I ndcom
2
income tax among others The NCLA ships operating in Hawaii are the only large oceangoing cruise ships operating under US flag In furtherance of the policy goals of the PVSA and the 2003 Act these ships have created over 4000 seafaring jobs all subject to US minimum wage and other labor statutes
Since 2003 there has been a significant increase in capacity in the Hawaii market from foreign flag ships providing cruise service to Hawaii from the West Coast Many of these foreign flag cruises are marketed as Hawaii cruises and consist entirely ofUS ports ofcall with the sole exception of a token stop in Mexico for as little as an hour late at night under circumstances where passengers are not permitted to get offthe ship There are no reported rulings approving these particular foreign flag itineraries
Lower cost foreign competition in the Hawaii market has unfairly hurt NCLAs operations NCLA has incurred substantial losses which have contributed significantly to its decision earlier this year to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAll from US flag and reshydeploy it foreign Unfair foreign competition poses an imminent threat to the remaining US flag passenger vessels operating in the Hawaii trades pursuant to the 2003 Act
As the agency statutorily charged with implementation of the 2003 Act the US Department ofTransportation Maritime Administration (MARAn) is aware of the threat foreign flag Hawaii itineraries pose to the US flag fleet and brought the situation to the attention ofthe US Department ofHomeland Security Bureau ofCustoms and Border Protection (CBP or Customs) Customs determined that the primary object of these itineraries was coastwise and that the Ensenada stop was an evasion of the PVSA
In August 2007 Customs provided written notice to the affected foreign lines and their trade association that the existing itineraries were contrary to the PVSA None of these lines sought advance rulings even after the Customs notice with respect to their Hawaii itineraries pursuant to Customs regulations and many continued to market the itineraries as Hawaii cruises NCLA supports the efforts ofCustoms and MARAD to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act for Hawaii cruises
2 Statutory Authority for Customs Proposed Interpretation
(a) Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA)
Congress passed the PVSA in 1886 to protect the US maritime transportation industry from foreign competition2 Protection is afforded through penalty assessments on foreign vessels transporting passengers between US ports or places directly or by way ofa foreign port 3 As Congress and the courts have recognized coastwise protections for the US maritime transportation industry are only one dimension of the PVSA Operating in conjunction with other coastwise laws and with the US
2 See United States v Honduran SS GRANADA 35 F Supp 892 894 (BD Pa 1940)(citing purpose of PVSA to meet threats to the practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping which was to be preserved for US ships)
46 USc sect 55103 (originally 46 USC App 289)
3
documentation laws the PVSA also enhances military sealift in times ofnational emergency sustains a US merchant marine and supports the US shipbuilding and repair industry4
(b) Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative (the 2003 Act)
Over the past decade Congress has sought to reinforce the goals of the PVSA by providing mechanisms to revitalize the oceangoing US flag cruise fleet particularly in Hawaii The Project America legislation enacted in 1997 authorized among other things the re~flagging ofone existing cruise ship contingent on the operator contracting for the construction oftwo new oceangoing cruise shipss Following the default of the operator under the original contract Congress enacted the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative for the purpose ofrecovering economic and national security benefits to the United States bull 6 These same goals of the original PVSA were expressly referenced in the legislative history of the 2003 Act which emphasized that these ships will be assets available in time ofnational emergency and will significantly expand the pool ofqualified seafarers upon which the US Department ofDefense relies to crew non-combatant vessels
The 2003 Act authorizes the US documentation ofthree cruise ships for operation in regular service in Hawaii subject to certain conditions including a prohibition on operating in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico and the Caribbean Sea and a requirement that all vessel repair work be undertaken in the United States MARAD is charged with implementation of the 2003 Act
3 Customs Implementation of PVSA
(a) Regulations
The current regulations implementing the PVSA were published by Customs in 19858 The growth of the foreign flag cruise industry in North America and in particular the development of the Alaska cruise market led to an effort in 1984 to amend the thenshyexisting regulations to increase the ease of administration and operational flexibility The effort to change the regulation had support from US port interests who saw benefit in the potential increase in the number ofUS ports that foreign vessels could call and was opposed by proponents ofpotential US flag projects as detrimental to efforts to revitalize the US fleet 9 The preamble to the 1985 rule emphasized that it was of paramount importance to consider the primary object ofpassengers in taking a
4 See American Hawaii Cruises v Skinner 713 F Supp 452 457 (DDC 1989) (recognizing the contribution of the PVSA and the Jones Act in helping to secure national defense by maintaining a merchant marine oftbe best equipped and most suitable types ofvessels sufficient to serve in time of war or national emergency) see also Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 30 (DC Cir 1984) Wirth Ltd v SIS Acadia Forest 537 F2d 1272 1281 n32 (5th Cir 1976) S Public Law 105-56 Section 8109 (111 Stat 1203 1244) (Oct 81997 ) 6 Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II General Provisions - Department ofCommerce Section 211 (117 Stat 1179) (Feb 20 2003) 1 149 Cong Rec S1118 (dailyed Jan 17 2003(statement ofSenator Inouye) 8 19 CFR sect 480a 950 Fed Reg 26981 (July I 1985)
4
voyage10 a concept which is reinforced elsewhere in Customs regulations11 In its analysis of the comments received at the time Customs accepted the view ofport interests that the modified rule would help their business but did so recognizing the absence ofa regular salt water US flag passenger fleet Customs acknowledged the potential harm to prospective efforts to revitalize the US flag passenger fleet and expressly cautioned that if it were ever shown that coastwise qualified vessels in competition with foreign vessels were in fact hurt by the modified Customs regulation then Customs would immediately reconsider its position12
(b) Customs Rulings
Given the significant penalties associated with violating the PVSA13 Customs regulations expressly provide a mechanism for the owner or charterer of a foreign vessel or any other interested person to request an advisory ruling as to whether a contemplated voyage would be considered in violation of the PVSA14 Customs regulations provide that vessel operators can rely on these ruling letters only to the extent that the facts and circumstances are identical to those in the ruling letter IS
Notwithstanding the fact that several foreign cruise lines offer Hawaii itineraries originating in a US mainland port and calling at Hawaii ports with a token intervening stop in Mexico there are no reported rulings expressly approving such an itinerary for these foreign cruise lines 16
4 The Cruise Industry in Hawaii
(a) NCL America Returns US flag to the Oceangoing Passenger Fleet
Pursuant to the requirements ofthe 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative NCLA agreed to promote US-flag cruising enhance military sealift capacity and expand the US maritime labor base No other major cruise line had ever undertaken such a commitment to the US flag and the public policy objectives Congress sought to achieve under the PVSA or the 2003 Act Introduction ofPRIDE OF ALOHA in 2004 was a significant development in the maritime industry because it marked the restoration ofthe
10 Id at 26983 11 Customs Regulations include a provision on the effect ofruling letters and with respect to carrier rulings the applicable regulation refers to rulings setting forth a determination as to whether or not the primary object of a contemplated voyage is coastwise transportation in violation of46 USC sect 289 [pYSA codified at 46 USC sect55103] 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 12 50 Fed Reg at 26983 13 A modem cruise ship with 2400 passengers for example would be subject to a fine of$720OOO per cruise based on the statutory penalty of$300 for each passenger transported in violation of the Act 14 19 CFR sect 480a(d) IS 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 16 There is one older reported mling involving a request to drop the Ensenada port call from a Los AngeleslHawaiiLos Angeles itinerary which Customs held would violate the PYSA In dicta Customs acknowledged that the itinerary could be in compliance if the Ensenada call were not dropped but did not address the issue ofwhether a one hour service call where no passengers depart the vessel would be sufficient The carrier that obtained that ruling has since left the Hawaii market See Customs Ruling HQ 114078 re Crystal Hannony (Nov 4 1997)
5
us flag to the oceangoing cruise industry A contemporaneous press release from the Us Department ofTransportation reported that the three US-flag cruise ships to be introduced pursuant to the 2003 Act were expected to create more than 20000 US jobs generate more than $825 million ofexpenditures in the US economy and create nearly $360 million in federal tax revenue by the end of 200717 In 2005 the PRIDE OF AMERICA was introduced and in 2006 the third vessel PRIDE OF HAWAll was introduced to Hawaii Both the PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAIl offer 7shyday inter-island Hawaii itineraries whereas PRIDE OF ALOHA operates on 7 and 10 day cruises exclusively among the islands ofHawaii as well as 11 day cruises that include a foreign port call at Fanning Island To date NCLA has invested over $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships in furtherance ofthe policy objectives of the PVSA and the 2003 Act These ships employ over 4000 seafarers and generate hundreds ofmillions of dollars in benefits for Hawaii and the nation
(b) Significant Increase in Foreign Flag Capacity Since 2003
The most significant change in the Hawaii cruise market since 2003 has been the dramatic increase in capacity A significant portion ofthis capacity increase is directly attributable to NCLAs fulfillment ofthe Congressional mandate in the 2003 Act However foreign-flag operations in the Hawaii market as measured in passenger nights18 have skyrocketed Based on MARAn data derived from the US Customs Border Patrol Vessel Entrance and Clearance documents the passenger nights for foreign flag vessels departing from the West Coast to Hawaii on round trip cruise have increased several hundredfold during this period19 See Exhibit A
(c) NCLA Has Incurred Substantial Losses During this Period
Since 2004 NCLA has lost cumulatively more than a quarter ofa billion dollars A principal reason for these losses has been the increase in foreign capacity in this market NCLA has taken significant steps to reduce costs to address the increase in foreign competition but NCLA is at an inherent disadvantage when competing against foreign companies that are not subject to US labor laws US tax laws and other laws Ofcourse the statutory protections of the PVSA are intended to address these very issues That is why Customs immediate action to implement the proposed interpretation is critical for the US flag fleet Regrettably NCLA has already been forced to reduce overall capacity early next year with the withdrawal ofPRIDE OF HAWAlI to another
17 DOT Press Release dated June 72004 see also DOT Press Release dated August 132004 in connection with visit to PRIDE OF ALOHA by US Transportation Secretary Norman Y Mineta 11 Passenger nights (also referred to as passenger capacity days) are calculated by multiplying the number ofpassengers per vessel by the number ofcruise days in each itinerary by the number of cruises This is the unit ofmeasurement employed by MARAn In contrast passenger bed supply (also referred to as passenger capacity) data reflects only the number ofberths per vessel multiplied by the number of cruises and hence understates the market by excluding the full economic value ofthe cruise perfonned 19 In 2003 the total number ofpassenger nights for round-trip West Coast to Hawaii cruises was 303325 which jumped by 353 to 1072329 in 2006 and by 430 to 1304546 from 2003 to 2007 (The 2007 figure is based on MARAD data for six months and a1ll1ualized by published itineraries for the balance of the year)
6
market for operation under foreign flag This move alone will result in the loss ofover 1000 American seafaring jobs
5 Customs Proposed Interpretation is Necessary to Further the Important National Security and Public Policy Objectives Embodied in Federal Law
As Customs has properly noted the increase in foreign competition in the Hawaii trades in contravention of the PVSA pose[s] an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels[] As the operator of these ships NCLA has a vested interest in protecting the jobs ofthe thousands ofAmerican crewmembers and cruise ship service providers who support these vessels NCLA also has an interest in protecting the substantial economic investment it has made to revitalize the US flag passenger vessel fleet But a balancing of interests in the context of Customs enforcement ofexisting law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act requires a much broader focus
The legislative history of the 2003 Act expressly recognized the national security and public policy import ofestablishing a US flag passenger vessel fleet as a means to maintain the countrys preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool of qualified seafarers and as a means to help sustain a fleet ofUS-flag vessels to su~ort
the nations military and maritime industrial base for times ofnational emergency
Congress understood the importance ofestablishing a viable US flag cruise ship fleet as something larger than the vessels themselves These national security and public policy objectives must be weighed in the balance as Customs assesses how best to interpret its rules to give effect to the PVSA and the 2003 Act
6 Customs Should Clarify that the Proposed Interpretation is Limited to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades and Adopt Reasonable Measures to Ensure Sufficient Foreign Content
Since publication ofthe proposed interpretative rule several commenters have observed that the scope of the proposed interpretation is ambiguous because the language of Section VI referencing any cruise itinerary appears broader than the caption Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises and the entire discussion in the published notice which focuses exclusively on US-flag coastwise vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA agrees that the proposed interpretation should be clarified so that its scope is limited to vessels operating roundtrip voyages from US ports that include Hawaii port calls
NCLA supports the concept reflected in the proposed interpretive rule that round trip Hawaii itineraries from US ports on foreign ships must include a material and measurable degree ofoverall foreign port content as compared to US port content
20 149 Congo Rec S1117 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)
7
(a) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is also Consistent with Subsequent Congressional Enactments Modifying the PVSA
As discussed above it is well established that the PVSA was designed toRrotect US-flag vessels from foreign competition in the coastwise and domestic trades 1
Subsequent legislative enactments however have appropriately differentiated among distinct geographic markets and trades including Canada Alaska Puerto Rico and Hawaii based on the existence or non-existence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
In 1938 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers by Canadian passenger vessels on Lake Ontario and the St Lawrence River until such time as passenger service shall be established by vessels of the United States22 Similarly in 1961 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers on Canadian vessels within Alaska or between Alaska and other points in the United States until such time as passenger service is established by vessels ofthe United States23
In 1984 Congress modified the application ofthe PVSA to pennit the transportation ofpassengers between Puerto Rico and other United States ports on foreign-flag vessels24 As with the other statutory exceptions this provision is qualified and expires [o]n a showing that a United States passenger vessel qualified to engage in the coastwise trade is offering or advertising passenger service between a port in Puerto Rico and another port in the United States2S
Congress acted again with respect to the application of the PVSA with the 2003 Act in which it authorized three vessels that did not meet the US-build requirements of the PVSA to operate as modem US-flagged cruise ships in regular service in Hawaii26 The 2003 Act imposes a specific geographic limitation on the operation of any ship documented under this authority to operations only in regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands ofHawaii and shall not transport passengers in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico or the Caribbean Sea except in certain limited circumstances27 As above the limited nature of the 2003 Act is express it is strictly limited to the large ocean-going cruise ships and then only those operating in the regular Hawaii service where there are no US-flag operations28
21 See Act ofJune 19 1886 c 421 sec 8 24 Stat 81 Act of February 171898 c 26 sec 2 30 Stat 248 22 S] Res 174 75th Cong 52 Stat 223 (Alp 251938) codified at46 USC sect 55121(a) 23 See Pub L 87-77 75 Stat 196 (Jun 30 1961) codified at 46 USC sect 55121(b) 24 See Pub L 98-563 98 Stat 2916 (Oct 301984) codified at 46 USC sect 55104(b) 25 46 USC sect 55104(c)(l) see also 46 USC 46 USc sect 55104(cX2)(expiration of exemption upon availability ofa non-coastwise qualified US-flag vessel offering service in the relevant market) 26 149 Congo Rec SI118 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)(statementofSen Inouye) 27 Pub L 108-7 117 Stat 79 (Feb 20 2003) 28 149 Congo Rec S11l9 (dailyed Jan 17 2003Xstatement of Sen Inouye)
8
In each ofthese instances Congress fashioned a narrow exception to the PVSA that differentiated among distinct geographic markets based on the existence or nonshyexistence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
As the federal agency responsible for administering the 2003 Act MARAD requested that Customs act to protect US flag passenger vessel interests in the Hawaii trades29 Limiting the scope ofthe proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades also reflects Customs appreciation of the PVSA in the context of the subsequent Congressional action30 Viewing the Congressional modifications to the PVSA as a whole Congress has specifically and repeatedly differentiated among distinct geographic markets when it has found it necessary and appropriate to do so to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests It is well established that the proper interpretation of a statutory scheme includes consideration ofsubsequent statutes even though the underlying statute itselfhas not been expressly amended31 Accordingly Customs should likewise limit the scope ofthe proposed PVSA interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades because that is the only geographic market as mandated by the 2003 Act in which oceangoing US-flag cruise ships are operating
(b) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Consistent with Public Policy Objectives of the 1985 Rulemaking
In 1985middot Customs liberalized the regulations implementing the PVSA by eliminating certain regulatory prohibitions on foreign flag vessels In the context of the 1985 rulemaking Customs justified a relaxation ofthe regulations on the grounds that it would simplify the administration of the PVSA and would benefit the economy ofcertain American coastwise ports without eroding the statutory protection given to American vessels engaged in solely domestic trade32
Customs thus sought to reconcile US port economic interests with US-flag passenger vessel interests Both of these twin policy objectives are furthered by
29 See 72 Fed Reg 65488 (Nov 21 2007)( MARAn bas asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the ~eratiODS ofcoastwise-qualified cruise ship operators)
See generally FDA v Brown amp Williamson Tobacco Corp 529 US 120 132-133 (2000)(assessing propriety ofagency construction ofFood DIUg and Cosmetics Act and descnbing responsibility of reviewing cowt to assess statutory provisions in the context of subsequent legislative enactments) 31 See Brown amp Williamson 529 US 143 (holding that proper construction ofstatutory provision must necessarily assume that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications ofa later statute This is particularly so where the scope of the earlier statute is broad but the subsequent statutes more specifically address the topic athand) see also United States v Estate ofRomani 523 US 517 530-531 (1998)( holding that a later-enacted statute should control the construction of the federal lien priority statute a specific policy embodied in a later federal statute should control om construction of the [earlier] statute even though it ha[s] not been expressly amended) United States v Fausto 484 US 439453 (1988)(The courts frequently find Congress to have done this - whenever in fact they interpret a statutory text in the light ofsurrounding texts that happen to have been subsequently enacted This classic judicial task of reconciling many laws enacted over time and getting them to make sense in combination necessarily assumes that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications of a later statute) 32 50 Fed Reg 26982 (JuI 11985)
9
limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades
As noted earlier the 2003 Act limits the operation of the NCLA US-flag oceangoing passenger vessels to regular service in Hawaii Because there are no oceangoing US-flag vessels operating in any market other than the Hawaii trades Customs should limit the scope of the proposed interPretation to that market Such a limitation protects US flag passenger vessel interests without prejudicing US port interests In contrast an application of the proposed interpretation to any itinerary would needlessly harm US port interests unrelated to Hawaii without any countervailing benefit to US-flag passenger vessel interests Accordingly limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation is consistent with the public policy objectives of the 1985 rulemaking as well as the 2003 Act
(c) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Also Consistent with Customs Commitment to Revisit the Scope of its Rules to Protect US-Flag Interests
The relaxation ofthe PVSA regulations in 1985 was premised in large part on Customs finding that there was no regular salt water US-flag passenger fleet in operation at that time33 Acknowledging that the relaxed regulations could harm USshyflag interests Customs committed in the preamble ofthe 1985 final rule to immediately reconsider its interpretation if it is ever shown that there is a viable US flag vessel operating in competition with foreign-flag vessels34
Congress enacted the 2003 Act to stimulate the development of a US flag cruise ship industry As noted above the legislative history ofthat Act makes clear that Congress sought to revitalize the US-flag cruise industry as a means to maintain Americas preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool ofqualified seafarers help sustain a fleet of US flag vessels to support our military and a maritime industrial base create thousands of seagoing and shoreside American jobs and stimulate the development ofa US flag cruise ship tourism business with the commensurate benefits to the US tax base the US economy and US employment
Customs is now acting at MARADs request to revisit its interpretation ofthe regulations implementing the PVSA because recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwise-qualified cruise ship operations35 That is to say that the concerns articulated by Customs in the context of the 1985 rulemaking have materialized and US-flag passenger vessel interests are in fact being hanned in the Hawaii trades by foreign competitors
33 50 Fed Reg 26983 34Id
3S 72 Fed Reg 56488 (Nov 21 2007)
I
10
Because the US-flag passenger vessels are limited by statute to regular service in Hawaii limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the
Hawaii trades is consistent with Customs historical commitment to revisit its interpretation ofthe implementing regulations to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests
7 Conclusion
For the reasons stated above NCLA commends the efforts ofCustoms and MARAn to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act as applied to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA respectfully requests Customs to move ahead promptly with p~blicati~nof a final interpretive rule to advance the important national security arid public policy objectives ofthese laws
We greatly appreciate the opportunity to submit these comments
Sincerely
~~~ Alan T Yamamoto Vice President Hawaii Operations
Exhibit A
Ship Name Serenade Of The Seas Departure Port San Diego California Ports of Call San Diego California Kailua Kona Hawaii Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii Hlo Hawaii Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii Ensenada Mexico San Qigo California
2007 Date(s) Oct 05
Sailing Itinerary
Day Port H ~rrive Depart Activity
05-0ct San Diego California 500 PM
06-0ct Cruising
07-0ct Cruising
08-0ct Cruising
09-0ct Cruising
10-0ct Kailua Kona Hawaii 700 AM 900 PM Tendered
11-00t Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 1000 AM Tendered
12middot0ct Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 900 PM Tendered
13-0ct Hilo Hawaii 700 AM 600 PM Docked
14middot0ct Honoulu (Oahu) Hawaii 700 AM Docked
15-0ct Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii 200 AM Docked
6-0ct CrUising
17-0ct Cruising
18-0ct Cruising
19middot0ct Cruising
-7 20-00t
O-Oot
Ensenada ~i1exico
San Deqo California
i 00 ~r1
700 ~M
200 oM D1Jcked ~
CRUISE PLUS
Extend your adventure with our Cruise Plusreg program Cruise Plusreg enables you to enhance your vacation with one- to four-night hotel
packages in cities that stand on their own as vacation destinations Add nights in Sydney before you cruise or extend your vacation with nights in the city by the
bay San Francisco Transportation and luggage handling costs from the airport to both hotel and ship plus meet and greet services are always included
Wherever you choose to explore youll enjoy properties that are carefully chosen based on service value location and the peace of mind of knowing that Princess
has arranged it all for you
Anchorage Alaska Trevi Fountain Rome Auckland Harbor New Zealand
The Cruise Plusreg Program is available in over 30 major cities including
MEDITERRANEANAEGEAN EXOTICS PANAMA CANAL Barcelona London Rome and Venice Auckland Bangkok Beijing Buenos Aires Ft Lauderdale Los Angeles New York City
Cape Town Ft Lauderdale Honolulu Los San Diego San Francisco Sanjuan Vancouver NORTHERN EUROPE Angeles Montreal Moorea New York City Copenhagen and London MEXICO CARIBBEANOsaka Papeete Rome San Francisco
Ft Lauderdale Galveston Los AngelesTRANSATLANTIC Santiago Seattle Sydney Vancouver Venice Barcelona Copenhagen Ft Lauderdale San Francisco and San Juan
London New York City and Rome ALASKA Anchorage Calgary Fairbanks Kenai San Francisco Seattle and Vancouver
For more information about options and pricing reference a destination specific brochure or contact your travel agent
TRAVEL THE WORLD WITH THE LEADER IN CRUISINGmiddot Princess
Analysis by the Hawaii Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism Comparing the Economic Impact of Foreign Flag Ships with US Flag Cruise Ships Sailing in Hawaii
This is a summary of an analysis prepared by the Hawai Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism (DBEDT) of the economic impact of the foreign flag cruise ship fleet sailing in Hawaii as compared to each of the US flag ships operating in Honolulu
The comparison is set out below
Foreign Pride Pride Pride
Fleet Of Hawaii Of Aloha Of America
Total economic output impact (spendingsales) ($mil) 155 542 4225 4958
Total earnings impact (labor earnings) ($mil) 44 155 1207 1411
Total employment impact Uobs) 1447 5059 3943 4627
This analysis demonstrates that a single US-flagged ship the Pride of America home ported in Honolulu is 32 times more economically impactful and creates 32 times as many jobs as the entire foreign flag fleet that sails into and out of Hawaii ports of call
Economic Impact of Pride of America
Assumptions 1 Annual impact though Pride of Aloha is leaving in May 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existing Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($) 4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of outputl$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job multiplier (jobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
118700 105
2706 3373
147 042
1372
4958
1417
4627
Data sourcelformula Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Line 1 x line 2 x line 31 000000
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 4 x line 5
Line 4 x line 6
Line 4 x line 7
Economic Impact of Pride of Hawaii
Assumptions
1 Annual impact though Pride of Hawaii is leaving in February 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existing Pride of Aloha and Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($) 4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job multiplier (jobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
Data sourceformula 139770 Actual 2007 figure
975 Actual 2007 figure 2706 Actual 2007 figure 3688 Line 1 x line 2 x line 31000000
147 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model 042 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
1372 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
5421 Line 4 x line 5
1549 Line 4 x line 6
5059 Line 4 x line 7
Economic Impact of Pride of Aloha
Assumptions 1 Annual impact though Pride of Aloha is leaving in May 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existlng Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($)
4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job mUltiplier Oobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
95680 111
2706 2874
147 042
1372
4225
1207
3943
Data sourcelformula Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Line 1 x line 2 x line 31000000
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 4 x line 5
Line 4 x line 6
Line 4 x line 7
lt
Methodology Used in Calculating Impact of International Cruise Ships
Cruise ship visitors 1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Came with ships 3 Flied in 4 Average length of stay (days) 5 PPPD ($) 6 Cruise visitor spending ($mil))
Cruise ship crews 7 Ratio of crew spending to cruise visitor spending 8 Cruise crew spending
Cruisline 9 Ratio of crew spending to cruise visitor spending
10 Cruiseline spending
11 Total cruise-related spending ($mil)
12 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 13 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 14 Job multiplier Uobs$ cruise -related spending)
15 Total output impact ($miJ)
16 Total earnings impact ($miJ)
17 Total employment impact (jobs)
106641 98307
8334 739 847 668
02 134
038 254
1055
147 042
1372
1551
444
1447
Data sourceformula Line 2 + line 3 DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report Line 1 x line 4 x line 5
DBEDT 2003 Cruise study Line 7 x line 6
DBEDT 2003 Cruise study Line 9 x line 6
Line 6 + line 8 + line 10
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 11 x line 12
Line 11 x line 13
Line 11 x line 14
Economic Contributions Foreign-Flag Fleet operating in Hawaii vs Three US-Flag Ships
$1500
Pride of Hawaii$1000- $542 million VIc -0-E c Pride of AlohaCo
423 million$500
Pride of America $496 million155 million$shy
Foreign-Flag US-Flag Fleet Fleet
Source State of Hawaii Department of US-Flag $1460 billion Business Economic Development and Tourism
Foreign-Flag $ 155 million 7292008
Employment Foreign-Flag Fleet operating in Hawaii vs Three US-Flag Ships
15000
10000
til c o Pride of Aloha
39435000
Pride of America 1447 4627
~---------
Foreign-Flag US-Flag Fleet Fleet
Source State of Hawaii Department of US-Flag 13629 jobs Business Economic Development and Tourism
Foreign-Flag 1447 jobs 7292008
Foreign Flag Capacity Growth Foreign flag passenger capacity has changed five-fold on roundtrip Hawaii cruises from the West Coast since enactment of the Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative
1600000
1400000
tn 1200000
J enshyZ
1000000
I shyG) en 800000 s G) tn tn
600000 as D 400000
200000
0 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Year
Source US Maritime Administration (derived from the US Customs and Border Patrol Vessel Entrance and Clearance documents - final 2007 data) 7292008
NCL America Hawaii Economic Contributions
(2004-2008)
bull (in Millions) bull $399 in wages benefits and overtime to US seafarers bull $35 in Federal and State payroll Taxes bull $64 in Government Fees and Taxes to Hawaii bull $28 in wages benefits and overtime to US other employees bull $52 in Port Charges to Hawaii Companies (Stevedores tugs pilots etc) bull $85 in Fuel to Tesoro Hawaii bull $130 for shore excursions to Hawaii tour operators bull $39 for Hawaii hotel rooms and ground transport bull $75 for food grown in Hawaii bull $57 in union fees and levies (incl $32M paid directly by employees) bull $1 in MMD fees to the United States Coast Guard bull $51 for recruitment screening processing and training crew bull $76 advertising and promoting Hawaii as a destination bull $1092
COASTWISE CRUISES INTERPRETIVE RULE RESOLUTION Adopted at the
US Conference of Mayors 76th Annual Meeting
June 20-242008 Miami
WHEREAS the Department of Homeland Securitys Customs and Border Protection (CBP) issued a proposed Interpretive Rule regulating Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises on foreign flagged vessels between US ports of call under the Passenger Vessel Services Act at the request of the United States Maritime Administration and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule would require that a foreign-flagged vessel on a coastwise cruise to call at a foreign port for at least 48 hours with that foreign stop constituting at least 50 percent of the cruise itinerary and allowing passengers to disembark the cruise vessel at the foreign port before continuing the cruise to a US port of call and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule establishes burdensome criteria that are wholly inconsistent with industry practice particularly the 48-hour call at foreign port shyinasmuch as the standard port call is six to eight hours - as well as the requirement that 50 percent of a cruise be spent at the foreign port and
WHEREAS the intent of the proposed Interpretive Rule is to protect the single remaining US flag vessel serving the Inter-Hawaiian Island cruise trade that according to the Hawaii Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism generates more than 4600 jobs and generates nearly $500 million in economic benefits for the state annually and
WHEREAS thousands of members of the International Longshore Workers Union (nWU) are employed at US ports serving cruise ships and whose jobs would be at risk if the proposed Interpretive Rule were implemented and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule is vague as to the breadth of its application ie to coastwise cruises between all United States ports or applied solely to coastwise cruises from West Coast ports to Hawaii and
WHEREAS the Cruise Lines International Association estimates the proposed Interpretive Rule would upend the $17 billion in national cruise industry spending and put at risk more than 300000 jobs generated by the international cruise industry including jobs held by nWU at US ports and the local allied industries supporting the cruise industry and
Executive Order Submissions Under Review
II Reglnfogov Where to ind Federal Regulatory Information -~
Home ] Lnitied Agenda and Regulator) Ilan pound012866 Regulator) Review Jnformalion Collection Review
EO 12866 Regulatory Rlvlw dvanced Search IJitorical RepWI Review Counh Jriter XIL
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA)
Executive Order Submissions Under Review July 25 2008 - _------------____ _shy
Department of Homeland Security
AGENCY DHS-TSA RIN 1652-AA53
TITLE Large Aircraft Security Program Other Aircraft Operator Security Programs and Airport Operator Security Program
STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT Yes RECEIVED DATE 06302008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
AGENCY DHS-USCIS RIN Llti15-AB67 TITLE Changes to Requirements Affecting H-2B Nonimmigrants and Their Employers
STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT No RECEIVED DATE 06092008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
AGENCY DHS-USCBP RIN 1651AA11 TITLE Issuance of a Visa and Authorization for Temporary Admission Into the United States for Certain Nonimmigrant Aliens Afflicted W HIV Infection
STAGE Final Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT No RECEIVED DATE 03042008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
-_RE_V-IE-W-E-X-T-EN-D-E-D---------- _
AGENCY DHS-USCBP RIN 1651-AA76 TITLE Coastwise Transportation of Passengers STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT Yes RECEIVED DATE 07142008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
Disclosure I Accessibility I Privacy Policy I Contact Us
httpwwwreginfogovpublicdoeoReviewSearch 7252008
View Rule Page 11
Shere D find Federal ReguLatory InformciiorlReglnfogov Home J Cnified Agenda al1d Regulatory Plan EO 12866 Regulatory Reyiew Information Collection Reiew
Current rnified Agenda and Regulatory Plan Historical Pnified Agenda and Regulatory Plan Search
View Rule
DHSIUSCBP RIN 1651-AA76 Publication ill Spring 2008
Title llCoastwise Transportation of Passengers
Abstract This interim rule amends the Department of Homeland Securitys (DHS) current regulations relating to the transportation of passengers by non-coastwise-qualified vessels on voyages that begin and end at a US port and stop at intervening US and foreign port(s) Under this interim final rule voyages that begin and end at a US port and stop at a foreign port(s) and at intervening US port(s) where a large USshyflag coastwise-qualified passenger vessel engages in regular service are in violation of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) unless the cumulative length of stay(s) at intervening foreign port(s) is more than 50 percent of the total amount of time spent at the intervening US port(s) and passengers are permitted to go ashore at the foreign port(s) The purpose of this amendment is to ensure that the Congressional purpose in enacting the PVSA which is to preserve the economic benefits of US coastwise trade to US-flag coastwise-qualified vessels is properly implemented
Agency Department of Homeland Security(DHS) Priority Substantive Nonsignificant
KIN Status First time published in the Unified Agenda Agenda Stage of Rulemaking Final Rule Stage
Major No Unfunded Mandates No
CFR Citation -LCER 4J~)(h)(plusmnJ
Legal Authority 5JJSS_30J12lJ-SClt16 J9_lJiCJ 431 9_L1C1plusmn3JJ2JScHJ1J2JSCJ624 L(LlLSc207LIl(gtJfHgt~ _CiQJ _46lSC 6QLQ~
Legal Deadline None
Timetable Action Date FR Cite
Interim Final Action 0510012008
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required No Government Levels Affected None
Federalism No
Included in the Regulatory Plan No
RIN Data Printed in the FR No
Agency Contact Glen E Vereb Chief Entry Procedures and Carriers Branch Department of Homeland Security US Customs and Border Protection Office of Regulations and Rulings 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington DC 20229 Phone202572-8730
Disclosure I Accessibility I Privacy Policy I Contact Us
httpwwwreginfogovpublicdoeAgendaViewRuleruleID=286751 7128120
Federal RegisterVol 72 No 224Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules 65487
SPECULATIVE POSITION LIMITS 1-Continued [In contract units)
Contract
Soybeans and Mini-Soybeans 2
Wheat and Mini-Wheat 2 bullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbull
Soybean Oil
SingleSpot month All monthsmonth
600 8600 13300 600 11100 14500 540 6600 8600
Soybean Meal 720 5500 7100
Minneapolis Grain Exchange
Hard Red Spring Wheat I 600 I 11100 I 14500
New York Board of Trade
Cotton No2 I 300 I 5300 I 7300
Kansas City Board of Trade
Hard Winter Wheat I 600 I 11100 I 14500
1 For purposes of compliance with these limits positions in a futures contract that shares ~ubstantially identical terms with a contract market enumerated herein including a futures contract that is cash-settled based on the settlement price of an enumerated contract market shall be agshygregated with positions in the enumerated contract market
2 For purposes of compliance with these limits positions in the regular-sized and mini-sized contracts shall be aggregated
Issued by the Commission this November 152007 in Washington DC David Stawick Secretary of the Commission [FR Doc E7-22681 Filed 11-20-07 845 amI BILLING CODE 6351-Q1-P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Bureau of Customs and Border Protection
19 CFR Part 4
[USCBP-2007-o098]
Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises
AGENCY Customs and Border Protection Department of Homeland Security ACTION Proposed interpretation solicitation of comments
SUMMARY This document proposes new criteria to be used by Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to determine whether non-coastwise-qualified vessels are in violation ofthe Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) when engaging in cruise itineraries in which passengers board at a US port the vessel calls at several Hawaiian ports and then the vessel proceeds to a foreign port or ports for a brief period before ultimately returning to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their cruise CBP believes these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because it appears that the primary objective of the foreign stop is evasion of the PVSA
DATES Comments must be received on or before December 212007 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT Glen E Vereb Cargo Security Carriers amp Immigration Branch Office of International Trade (202) 572-8730 ADDRESSES You may submit comments identified by docket number by one of the following methods
bull Federal eRulemaking Portal http wwwregulationsgov Follow the instructions for submitting comments
bull Mail Border Security Regulations Branch Office of International Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
I Public Participation
Interested persons are invited to participate in this proposed interpretation by submitting written data views or arguments on all aspects of the proposed interpretation Customs and Border Protection (CBP) also invites comments that relate to the economic environmental or federalism effects that might result from this proposed interpretation Comments that will provide the most assistance to CBP in developing these procedures will reference a specific portion of the proposed interpretation explain the reason for any recommended change and include data information or authority that support such recommended change
Instructions All submissions received must include the agency name and docket number for this proposed
interpretation All comments received will be posted without change to http wwwregulationsgov including any personal information provided
Docket For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received go to http wwwregulationsgov Submitted comments may also be inspected on regular business days between the hours of 9 am and 430 pm at the Office of International Trade Customs and Border Protection 799 9th Street NW 5th Floor Washington DC Arrangements to inspect submitted documents should be made in advance by calling Mr Joseph Clark at (202) 572shy8768
II Background
The maritime cabotage law governing the transportation of passengers was first established by section 8 of the Passenger Vessel Services Act of June 191886 (the PVSA) 24 Stat 81 as amended by section 2 of the Act of February 17 1898 30 Stat 248 formerly codified at 46 USC App 289 (now codified at 46 USC 55103) 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 of $200 (now $300 as promulgated in TD 03-11 pursuant to the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 199028 USC 2461 note) for each passenger so transported and landed
The intent of the maritime cabotage laws including the PVSA was to provide a legal structure that guarantees a coastwise monopoly to
65488 Federal RegisterVol 72 No 224Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules
American shipping and thereby promotes development of the American merchant marine Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 28 (DC Cir 1984) see also The Granada 35 FSupp 892 8931940 AMC 1601 (DC Pa 1940) (stating that the legislative aim of section 289 [now 55102] was the creation of a practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping business for United States ships) In other words the PVSA was enacted to advance the United States merchant marine and fleet by restricting the use of foreign-ownedflagged passenger vessels in United States territorial waters
Passenger vessel transportation between United States ports has historically been viewed to be part of the coastwise trade after the enactment of the PVSA This view is premised on the concepts of continuity of the voyage and whether its intended purpose or objective was coastwise transportation In other words the PVSA was held to be violated if the coastwise movement was continuous or if the purpose of the trip was a coastwise voyage (See 18 OAG 445 September 4 1886 28 OAG 204 February 16 1910 29 OAG 318 February 12 1912 30 OAG 44 February 1 1913 34 OAG 340 December 24 1924 and 36 OAG 352 August 13 1930)
The CBP regulations promulgated pursuant to the PVSA are found at section 480a of title 19 of the Code of Federal Regulations (19 CFR 480a) and are reflective of the above cited Office of the Attorney General decisions These regulations provide among other things that a non-coastwise-qualified vessel which embarks a passenger at a port in the United States embraced within the coastwise laws (a coastwise port) will be deemed to have landed that passenger in violation of the PVSA if the passenger disembarks at a different coastwise port on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a nearby foreign port or ports (as defined in 19 CFR 480a(a)(2) see also 19 CFR 480a(b)(2)) The terms embark and disembark are words of art which are defined as going on board a vessel for the duration of a specific voyage and leaving a vessel at the conclusion of a specific voyage respectively (See 19 CFR 480a(a)(4))
The references in section 480a to nearby foreign ports (defined in 19 CFR 480a(a)(2)) are the results of attempts by CBP to apply an Office of the Attorney Generals opinion dated February 26 1910 (28 OAG 204) In that case a foreign-flag vessel transported 615 passengers on a voyage around the world beginning in New
York and concluding in San Francisco The Attorney General opined that since the primary object of the voyage was to visit various parts of the world on a pleasure tour returning home via California and not to be transported in domestic commerce the transportation was not in violation of the PVSA
The 1910 Attorney Generals opinion was extended to voyages that included foreign ports other than nearby foreign ports (See Treasury Decision (TD) 68shy285 (33 FR 16558) November 14 1968) However voyages solely to one or more coastwise ports have always been considered predominantly coastwise Therefore non-coastwise-qualified vessels engaging in such a voyage where passengers temporarily go ashore at a coastwise port have been deemed to have violated the PVSA
m Current Law and Policy Pursuant to Public Law 109-304 120
Stat 1632 enacted on October 6 2006 Title 46 United States Code was substantially reorganized and recodified Consequently the PVSA is now codified at 46 USC 55103 and provides that no vessel shall transport passengers between ports or places in the United States either directly or by way of a foreign port under a penalty of $300 for each person so transported and landed except one that (1) Is wholly owned by citizens of the United States for purposes of engaging in the coastwise trade and (2) has been issued a certificate of documentation with a coastwise endorsement or is exempt from documentation but would otherwise be eligible for such a certificate and endorsement
In 2003 Congress enacted Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II Section 211 for the purpose of revitalizing the oceangoing US-flag cruise industry in Hawaii (the 2003 Act) Three oceangoing US-flag cruise ships PRIDE OF ALOHA PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAII were documented with coastwise privileges pursuant to the 2003 Act These vessels entered regular service in Hawaii in 2004 2005 and 2006 respectively and pursuant to the express language of the 2003 Act are limited in their operation to providing regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands of Hawaii
The CBP regulations promulgated pursuant to the PVSA are set forth in 19 CFR 480a and have remained unchanged throughout both the recodification of Title 46 of the United States Code and the enactment of the 2003 Act They provide that a violation of the PVSA occurs when passengers embark (board a vessel for the
duration of a voyage) a non-coastwiseshyqualified vessel at one US port and disembark (leave the vessel at the conclusion of a voyage) at a different US port unless they proceed with the vessel to a distant foreign port (Le any port not considered a nearby foreign port which is defined as any port located in North America Central America Bermuda or the West Indies including the Bahamas) Currently these regulations do not contain specific criteria for non-coastwise-qualified vessels on itineraries including US ports and either nearby or distant foreign ports in order for such foreign port calls to be compliant with the PVSA
To reiterate the applicable CBP regulations provide that the PVSA is violated when a non-coastwise-qualified vessel transports a passenger on a voyage solely to one or more coastwise ports and the passenger disembarks or goes ashore temporarily at a coastwise port (19 CFR 480a(b)(1)) Furthermore a violation of the PVSA also occurs when a non-coastwise-qualified vessel transports a passenger on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a nearby foreign port or ports (but no other foreign port) and the passenger disembarks at a coastwise port other than the port of embarkation (19 CFR 480a(b)(2)) However there is no violation of the PVSA when a passenger is on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a distant foreign port or ports (whether or not the voyage includes a nearby foreign port or ports) and the passenger disembarks at a coastwise port provided the passenger has proceeded with the vessel to a distant foreign port (19 CFR 480a(b)(3))
IV Request From MARAD To Provide Guidance
The US Department of Transportation Maritime Administration (MARAD) has requested that CBP take action to ensure enforcement of the PVSA MARAD has asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreignshyflag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwiseshyqualified cruise ship operators
In April of 2007 the operator of the three US-flag cruise vessels operating solely in Hawaii pursuant to the 2003 Act announced their intent to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAIl from the Hawaii market and redeploy her to Europe The operator intends to re-flag the vessel to foreign registry directly resulting in the loss of over 1100 crewmember jobs The primary reason cited for this decision is the rapid increase in foreign-flag competition entering the Hawaii market
Federal Register I Vol 72 No 224 I Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules 65489
from the West Coast This competition is evidenced in published cruise itineraries of foreign-flag carriers offering a variety of round trip cruises that depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period usually in the early morning and ultimately return to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their cruise These cruises are often marketed as Hawaii cruises and except for the brief stop in the nearby foreign port of Ensenada are purely coastwise in nature It is these cruise itineraries that pose an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels that pursuant to the 2003 Act are currently engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands
V Preliminary Notice
In response to MARADs concerns CBP sent letters to two carriers known to operate the itineraries in question as well as to the Cruise Lines International Association Inc stating that CBP believes that these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because it appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA The letters further indicated that CBP is taking steps to publish this position
VI CBPs Proposed Interpretive Rule Accordingly in this document CBP is
proposing to provide that cruise itineraries for non-qualified coastwise vessels which allow passengers to board at a US port call at several Hawaiian ports proceed to a foreign port or ports for a brief period and then ultimately return to the original US port of embarkation for disembarkation are not consistent with the PVSA and the regulations promulgated pursuant thereto Specifically CBP interprets a voyage to be solely to one or more coastwise ports even where it stops at a foreign port unless the stop at the foreign port is a legitimate object of the cruise CBP will presume that a stop at a foreign port is not a legitimate object of the cruise unless
(1) The stop lasts at least 48 hours at the foreign port
(2) The amount of time at the foreign port is more than 50 percent of the total amount of time at the US ports of call and
(3) The passengers are permitted to go ashore temporarily at the foreign port
Accordingly CBP proposes to adopt an interpretive rule under which it will presume that any cruise itinerary that does not include a foreign port call that
satisfies each of these three criteria constitutes coastwise transportation of passengers in violation of 19 CFR 480a(b)(1)
Dated November 16 2007 W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection [FR Doc E7-22788 Filed 11-20-07 845 am] BILLING CODe 9111-14-1
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau
27 CFR Part 9
[Notice No 76]
RIN 1513-AB49
Proposed Establishment of the Leona Valley Viticultural Area (2007R-281 P)
AGENCY Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau Treasury ACTION Notice of proposed rulemaking
SUMMARY The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau proposes to establish the 134 square mile Leona Valley viticultural area in the northeast part of Los Angeles County California We designate viticultural areas to allow vintners to better describe the origin of their wines and to allow consumers to better identify wines they may purchase We invite comments on this proposed addition to our regulations DATES We must receive written comments on or before January 22 2008
ADDRESSES You may send comments on this notice to one of the following addresses
bull httpwwwregulationsgov (Federal e-rulemaking portal follow the instructions for submitting comments) or
bull Director Regulations and Rulings Division Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau PO Box 14412 Washington DC 20044-4412
See the Public Participation section of this notice for specific instructions and requirements for submitting comments and for information on how to request a public hearing
You may view copies of this notice selected supporting materials and any comments we receive about this proposal at httpwwwregulationsgov under Docket No 2007-0066 You also may view copies of this notice all related petitions maps or other supporting materials and any comments we receive about this
proposal by appointment at the TTB Information Resource Center 1310 G Street NW Washington DC 20220 To make an appointment call 202-927shy2400
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT NA Sutton Regulations and Rulings Division Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau 925 Lakeville S1 No 158 Petaluma CA 94952 phone 415shy271-1254 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
Background on Viticultural Areas
TTB Authority Section 105(e) of the Federal Alcohol
Administration Act (FAA Act) 27 USC 205(e) authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to prescribe regulations for the labeling of wine distilled spirits and malt beverages The FAA Act provides that these regulations should among other things prohibit consumer deception and the use of misleading statements on labels and ensure that labels provide the consumer with adequate information as to the identity and quality of the product The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) administers the regulations promulgated under the FAA Act
Part 4 ofthe TTB regulations (27 CFR part 4) allows the establishment of definitive viticultural areas and the use of their names as appellations of origin on wine labels and in wine advertisements Part 9 of the TTB regulations (27 CFR part 9) contains the list of approved viticultural areas
Definition Section 425(e)(1)(i) ofthe TTB
regulations (27 CFR 425(e)(1)(i)) defines a viticultural area for American wine as a delimited grape-growing region distinguishable by geographical features the boundaries of which have been recognized and defined in part 9 of the regulations These designations allow vintners and consumers to attribute a given quality reputation or other characteristic of a wine made from grapes grown in an area to its geographic origin The establishment of viticultural areas allows vintners to describe more accurately the origin of their wines to consumers and helps consumers to identify wines they may purchase Establishment of a viticultural area is neither an approval nor an endorsement by TTB of the wine produced in that area
Requirements Section 425(e)(2) of the TTB
regulations outlines the procedure for proposing an American viticultural area and provides that any interested party
Us Department ofHomelaDd Secmity Washington DC 10229
bull ~
US Customs and Border Protection
AUG 15 2fXJJ
VE5-3-02-QTRRBSTCCCI - ti015502-GG-
Mr leon Sutcliffe Director Port Operations Camivai Cruise Unes Camival Place 3655 NW 87Avenue Miami Aorlda 33178
RE P~nger Vessef Services Ad Coastwise Transportation 46 USC sect 55103 19 CFR sect 480a(b)
Dear Mr Sutcliffe
As you know US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) enforces the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) codified at TItle 46 United States Code section 55103 (46 USC 55103) This statute prohibits non-coastwise-qualifled vessels (ie those vessels not US-buill owned and documented with a coastwise endorsement) from transporting passengers between porls or places within the United States The regUlations promUlgated pursuant to the PVSA are found at TrtJe 19 Code of Federal Regulations section 4808 (19 CFR 4808)
It has come to our attention that passenger vessels of your company are engaging in cruise itineraries that include ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands Two USAlagged coastwise-endorsed passenger vessefs are also currenUy engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of caD wittlin the Hawaiian Islands
As part of your cruise itineraries some of your foreign-flagged vessels depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period and ultimately rebJm to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their endse For example the MS ZAANDAM of Holand America Lines departs San Diego cruises the Hawaiian Islands stops in Ensenada from 800pm to 11 OOpmbull and returns to san Diego CBP believes these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because It appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA -- - - ~~~------
Please be advised that CBP is taking steps to publish this position Should have any questions pertaining to this matter please contact Mr Glen Vereb Chief Cargo Security Carriers and Immigration Branch at (202) 572-8724
Sincerely
F Jl E EST Y LEe A U I 5 I N Gmiddot
December 21 2007
The Honorable W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection co Border Security Regulations Branch Office ofInternational Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229
Re Hawaii Coastwise Cruises (USCBP-2007-0098) Comments in Response to Proposed Interpretation
Dear Commissioner Basham
NCL America Inc1 (NCLA) submits these comments in support ofthe efforts ofCustoms and Border Protection to enforce the Passenger Vessel Services Act and the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative as applied to Hawaii coastwise cruises
1 Introduction and Summary of Position
NCLA operates three large oceangoing US flag cruise ships in Hawaii These ships are documented under US flag and are required to operate in regular service in Hawaii pursuant to the authority of the Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative a 2003 federal statute intended to revitalize the US flag cruise industry and to maximize economic and national security benefits to the United States (the 2003 Act)
NCLA has invested $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships pursuant to the 2003 Act and in direct reliance on the protections of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) and its proper enforcement The PVSA limits the transportation ofpassengers between US ports to coastwise documented US flag ships Its statutory protections recognize that US flag ships have significantly higher operational costs in part because they are subject to more stringent US laws including US labor laws and federal
1 NCL America Inc is a US corporation incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware headquartered in Honolulu Hawaii As a US corporation it is subject to US taxes at both the federal and state level The Chief Executive Officer the Chairman of the Board and all of the Board of Directors of NCL America are US citizens The company is also subject to US labor and employment laws and is required by statute to maintain a workforce comprised primarily ofUS citizens
700 Bishop St SUite 900 I Honolulu HawMi 96813 I Tel 8085273800 Fax 8085273820 I ndcom
2
income tax among others The NCLA ships operating in Hawaii are the only large oceangoing cruise ships operating under US flag In furtherance of the policy goals of the PVSA and the 2003 Act these ships have created over 4000 seafaring jobs all subject to US minimum wage and other labor statutes
Since 2003 there has been a significant increase in capacity in the Hawaii market from foreign flag ships providing cruise service to Hawaii from the West Coast Many of these foreign flag cruises are marketed as Hawaii cruises and consist entirely ofUS ports ofcall with the sole exception of a token stop in Mexico for as little as an hour late at night under circumstances where passengers are not permitted to get offthe ship There are no reported rulings approving these particular foreign flag itineraries
Lower cost foreign competition in the Hawaii market has unfairly hurt NCLAs operations NCLA has incurred substantial losses which have contributed significantly to its decision earlier this year to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAll from US flag and reshydeploy it foreign Unfair foreign competition poses an imminent threat to the remaining US flag passenger vessels operating in the Hawaii trades pursuant to the 2003 Act
As the agency statutorily charged with implementation of the 2003 Act the US Department ofTransportation Maritime Administration (MARAn) is aware of the threat foreign flag Hawaii itineraries pose to the US flag fleet and brought the situation to the attention ofthe US Department ofHomeland Security Bureau ofCustoms and Border Protection (CBP or Customs) Customs determined that the primary object of these itineraries was coastwise and that the Ensenada stop was an evasion of the PVSA
In August 2007 Customs provided written notice to the affected foreign lines and their trade association that the existing itineraries were contrary to the PVSA None of these lines sought advance rulings even after the Customs notice with respect to their Hawaii itineraries pursuant to Customs regulations and many continued to market the itineraries as Hawaii cruises NCLA supports the efforts ofCustoms and MARAD to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act for Hawaii cruises
2 Statutory Authority for Customs Proposed Interpretation
(a) Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA)
Congress passed the PVSA in 1886 to protect the US maritime transportation industry from foreign competition2 Protection is afforded through penalty assessments on foreign vessels transporting passengers between US ports or places directly or by way ofa foreign port 3 As Congress and the courts have recognized coastwise protections for the US maritime transportation industry are only one dimension of the PVSA Operating in conjunction with other coastwise laws and with the US
2 See United States v Honduran SS GRANADA 35 F Supp 892 894 (BD Pa 1940)(citing purpose of PVSA to meet threats to the practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping which was to be preserved for US ships)
46 USc sect 55103 (originally 46 USC App 289)
3
documentation laws the PVSA also enhances military sealift in times ofnational emergency sustains a US merchant marine and supports the US shipbuilding and repair industry4
(b) Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative (the 2003 Act)
Over the past decade Congress has sought to reinforce the goals of the PVSA by providing mechanisms to revitalize the oceangoing US flag cruise fleet particularly in Hawaii The Project America legislation enacted in 1997 authorized among other things the re~flagging ofone existing cruise ship contingent on the operator contracting for the construction oftwo new oceangoing cruise shipss Following the default of the operator under the original contract Congress enacted the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative for the purpose ofrecovering economic and national security benefits to the United States bull 6 These same goals of the original PVSA were expressly referenced in the legislative history of the 2003 Act which emphasized that these ships will be assets available in time ofnational emergency and will significantly expand the pool ofqualified seafarers upon which the US Department ofDefense relies to crew non-combatant vessels
The 2003 Act authorizes the US documentation ofthree cruise ships for operation in regular service in Hawaii subject to certain conditions including a prohibition on operating in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico and the Caribbean Sea and a requirement that all vessel repair work be undertaken in the United States MARAD is charged with implementation of the 2003 Act
3 Customs Implementation of PVSA
(a) Regulations
The current regulations implementing the PVSA were published by Customs in 19858 The growth of the foreign flag cruise industry in North America and in particular the development of the Alaska cruise market led to an effort in 1984 to amend the thenshyexisting regulations to increase the ease of administration and operational flexibility The effort to change the regulation had support from US port interests who saw benefit in the potential increase in the number ofUS ports that foreign vessels could call and was opposed by proponents ofpotential US flag projects as detrimental to efforts to revitalize the US fleet 9 The preamble to the 1985 rule emphasized that it was of paramount importance to consider the primary object ofpassengers in taking a
4 See American Hawaii Cruises v Skinner 713 F Supp 452 457 (DDC 1989) (recognizing the contribution of the PVSA and the Jones Act in helping to secure national defense by maintaining a merchant marine oftbe best equipped and most suitable types ofvessels sufficient to serve in time of war or national emergency) see also Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 30 (DC Cir 1984) Wirth Ltd v SIS Acadia Forest 537 F2d 1272 1281 n32 (5th Cir 1976) S Public Law 105-56 Section 8109 (111 Stat 1203 1244) (Oct 81997 ) 6 Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II General Provisions - Department ofCommerce Section 211 (117 Stat 1179) (Feb 20 2003) 1 149 Cong Rec S1118 (dailyed Jan 17 2003(statement ofSenator Inouye) 8 19 CFR sect 480a 950 Fed Reg 26981 (July I 1985)
4
voyage10 a concept which is reinforced elsewhere in Customs regulations11 In its analysis of the comments received at the time Customs accepted the view ofport interests that the modified rule would help their business but did so recognizing the absence ofa regular salt water US flag passenger fleet Customs acknowledged the potential harm to prospective efforts to revitalize the US flag passenger fleet and expressly cautioned that if it were ever shown that coastwise qualified vessels in competition with foreign vessels were in fact hurt by the modified Customs regulation then Customs would immediately reconsider its position12
(b) Customs Rulings
Given the significant penalties associated with violating the PVSA13 Customs regulations expressly provide a mechanism for the owner or charterer of a foreign vessel or any other interested person to request an advisory ruling as to whether a contemplated voyage would be considered in violation of the PVSA14 Customs regulations provide that vessel operators can rely on these ruling letters only to the extent that the facts and circumstances are identical to those in the ruling letter IS
Notwithstanding the fact that several foreign cruise lines offer Hawaii itineraries originating in a US mainland port and calling at Hawaii ports with a token intervening stop in Mexico there are no reported rulings expressly approving such an itinerary for these foreign cruise lines 16
4 The Cruise Industry in Hawaii
(a) NCL America Returns US flag to the Oceangoing Passenger Fleet
Pursuant to the requirements ofthe 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative NCLA agreed to promote US-flag cruising enhance military sealift capacity and expand the US maritime labor base No other major cruise line had ever undertaken such a commitment to the US flag and the public policy objectives Congress sought to achieve under the PVSA or the 2003 Act Introduction ofPRIDE OF ALOHA in 2004 was a significant development in the maritime industry because it marked the restoration ofthe
10 Id at 26983 11 Customs Regulations include a provision on the effect ofruling letters and with respect to carrier rulings the applicable regulation refers to rulings setting forth a determination as to whether or not the primary object of a contemplated voyage is coastwise transportation in violation of46 USC sect 289 [pYSA codified at 46 USC sect55103] 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 12 50 Fed Reg at 26983 13 A modem cruise ship with 2400 passengers for example would be subject to a fine of$720OOO per cruise based on the statutory penalty of$300 for each passenger transported in violation of the Act 14 19 CFR sect 480a(d) IS 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 16 There is one older reported mling involving a request to drop the Ensenada port call from a Los AngeleslHawaiiLos Angeles itinerary which Customs held would violate the PYSA In dicta Customs acknowledged that the itinerary could be in compliance if the Ensenada call were not dropped but did not address the issue ofwhether a one hour service call where no passengers depart the vessel would be sufficient The carrier that obtained that ruling has since left the Hawaii market See Customs Ruling HQ 114078 re Crystal Hannony (Nov 4 1997)
5
us flag to the oceangoing cruise industry A contemporaneous press release from the Us Department ofTransportation reported that the three US-flag cruise ships to be introduced pursuant to the 2003 Act were expected to create more than 20000 US jobs generate more than $825 million ofexpenditures in the US economy and create nearly $360 million in federal tax revenue by the end of 200717 In 2005 the PRIDE OF AMERICA was introduced and in 2006 the third vessel PRIDE OF HAWAll was introduced to Hawaii Both the PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAIl offer 7shyday inter-island Hawaii itineraries whereas PRIDE OF ALOHA operates on 7 and 10 day cruises exclusively among the islands ofHawaii as well as 11 day cruises that include a foreign port call at Fanning Island To date NCLA has invested over $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships in furtherance ofthe policy objectives of the PVSA and the 2003 Act These ships employ over 4000 seafarers and generate hundreds ofmillions of dollars in benefits for Hawaii and the nation
(b) Significant Increase in Foreign Flag Capacity Since 2003
The most significant change in the Hawaii cruise market since 2003 has been the dramatic increase in capacity A significant portion ofthis capacity increase is directly attributable to NCLAs fulfillment ofthe Congressional mandate in the 2003 Act However foreign-flag operations in the Hawaii market as measured in passenger nights18 have skyrocketed Based on MARAn data derived from the US Customs Border Patrol Vessel Entrance and Clearance documents the passenger nights for foreign flag vessels departing from the West Coast to Hawaii on round trip cruise have increased several hundredfold during this period19 See Exhibit A
(c) NCLA Has Incurred Substantial Losses During this Period
Since 2004 NCLA has lost cumulatively more than a quarter ofa billion dollars A principal reason for these losses has been the increase in foreign capacity in this market NCLA has taken significant steps to reduce costs to address the increase in foreign competition but NCLA is at an inherent disadvantage when competing against foreign companies that are not subject to US labor laws US tax laws and other laws Ofcourse the statutory protections of the PVSA are intended to address these very issues That is why Customs immediate action to implement the proposed interpretation is critical for the US flag fleet Regrettably NCLA has already been forced to reduce overall capacity early next year with the withdrawal ofPRIDE OF HAWAlI to another
17 DOT Press Release dated June 72004 see also DOT Press Release dated August 132004 in connection with visit to PRIDE OF ALOHA by US Transportation Secretary Norman Y Mineta 11 Passenger nights (also referred to as passenger capacity days) are calculated by multiplying the number ofpassengers per vessel by the number ofcruise days in each itinerary by the number of cruises This is the unit ofmeasurement employed by MARAn In contrast passenger bed supply (also referred to as passenger capacity) data reflects only the number ofberths per vessel multiplied by the number of cruises and hence understates the market by excluding the full economic value ofthe cruise perfonned 19 In 2003 the total number ofpassenger nights for round-trip West Coast to Hawaii cruises was 303325 which jumped by 353 to 1072329 in 2006 and by 430 to 1304546 from 2003 to 2007 (The 2007 figure is based on MARAD data for six months and a1ll1ualized by published itineraries for the balance of the year)
6
market for operation under foreign flag This move alone will result in the loss ofover 1000 American seafaring jobs
5 Customs Proposed Interpretation is Necessary to Further the Important National Security and Public Policy Objectives Embodied in Federal Law
As Customs has properly noted the increase in foreign competition in the Hawaii trades in contravention of the PVSA pose[s] an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels[] As the operator of these ships NCLA has a vested interest in protecting the jobs ofthe thousands ofAmerican crewmembers and cruise ship service providers who support these vessels NCLA also has an interest in protecting the substantial economic investment it has made to revitalize the US flag passenger vessel fleet But a balancing of interests in the context of Customs enforcement ofexisting law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act requires a much broader focus
The legislative history of the 2003 Act expressly recognized the national security and public policy import ofestablishing a US flag passenger vessel fleet as a means to maintain the countrys preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool of qualified seafarers and as a means to help sustain a fleet ofUS-flag vessels to su~ort
the nations military and maritime industrial base for times ofnational emergency
Congress understood the importance ofestablishing a viable US flag cruise ship fleet as something larger than the vessels themselves These national security and public policy objectives must be weighed in the balance as Customs assesses how best to interpret its rules to give effect to the PVSA and the 2003 Act
6 Customs Should Clarify that the Proposed Interpretation is Limited to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades and Adopt Reasonable Measures to Ensure Sufficient Foreign Content
Since publication ofthe proposed interpretative rule several commenters have observed that the scope of the proposed interpretation is ambiguous because the language of Section VI referencing any cruise itinerary appears broader than the caption Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises and the entire discussion in the published notice which focuses exclusively on US-flag coastwise vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA agrees that the proposed interpretation should be clarified so that its scope is limited to vessels operating roundtrip voyages from US ports that include Hawaii port calls
NCLA supports the concept reflected in the proposed interpretive rule that round trip Hawaii itineraries from US ports on foreign ships must include a material and measurable degree ofoverall foreign port content as compared to US port content
20 149 Congo Rec S1117 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)
7
(a) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is also Consistent with Subsequent Congressional Enactments Modifying the PVSA
As discussed above it is well established that the PVSA was designed toRrotect US-flag vessels from foreign competition in the coastwise and domestic trades 1
Subsequent legislative enactments however have appropriately differentiated among distinct geographic markets and trades including Canada Alaska Puerto Rico and Hawaii based on the existence or non-existence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
In 1938 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers by Canadian passenger vessels on Lake Ontario and the St Lawrence River until such time as passenger service shall be established by vessels of the United States22 Similarly in 1961 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers on Canadian vessels within Alaska or between Alaska and other points in the United States until such time as passenger service is established by vessels ofthe United States23
In 1984 Congress modified the application ofthe PVSA to pennit the transportation ofpassengers between Puerto Rico and other United States ports on foreign-flag vessels24 As with the other statutory exceptions this provision is qualified and expires [o]n a showing that a United States passenger vessel qualified to engage in the coastwise trade is offering or advertising passenger service between a port in Puerto Rico and another port in the United States2S
Congress acted again with respect to the application of the PVSA with the 2003 Act in which it authorized three vessels that did not meet the US-build requirements of the PVSA to operate as modem US-flagged cruise ships in regular service in Hawaii26 The 2003 Act imposes a specific geographic limitation on the operation of any ship documented under this authority to operations only in regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands ofHawaii and shall not transport passengers in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico or the Caribbean Sea except in certain limited circumstances27 As above the limited nature of the 2003 Act is express it is strictly limited to the large ocean-going cruise ships and then only those operating in the regular Hawaii service where there are no US-flag operations28
21 See Act ofJune 19 1886 c 421 sec 8 24 Stat 81 Act of February 171898 c 26 sec 2 30 Stat 248 22 S] Res 174 75th Cong 52 Stat 223 (Alp 251938) codified at46 USC sect 55121(a) 23 See Pub L 87-77 75 Stat 196 (Jun 30 1961) codified at 46 USC sect 55121(b) 24 See Pub L 98-563 98 Stat 2916 (Oct 301984) codified at 46 USC sect 55104(b) 25 46 USC sect 55104(c)(l) see also 46 USC 46 USc sect 55104(cX2)(expiration of exemption upon availability ofa non-coastwise qualified US-flag vessel offering service in the relevant market) 26 149 Congo Rec SI118 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)(statementofSen Inouye) 27 Pub L 108-7 117 Stat 79 (Feb 20 2003) 28 149 Congo Rec S11l9 (dailyed Jan 17 2003Xstatement of Sen Inouye)
8
In each ofthese instances Congress fashioned a narrow exception to the PVSA that differentiated among distinct geographic markets based on the existence or nonshyexistence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
As the federal agency responsible for administering the 2003 Act MARAD requested that Customs act to protect US flag passenger vessel interests in the Hawaii trades29 Limiting the scope ofthe proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades also reflects Customs appreciation of the PVSA in the context of the subsequent Congressional action30 Viewing the Congressional modifications to the PVSA as a whole Congress has specifically and repeatedly differentiated among distinct geographic markets when it has found it necessary and appropriate to do so to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests It is well established that the proper interpretation of a statutory scheme includes consideration ofsubsequent statutes even though the underlying statute itselfhas not been expressly amended31 Accordingly Customs should likewise limit the scope ofthe proposed PVSA interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades because that is the only geographic market as mandated by the 2003 Act in which oceangoing US-flag cruise ships are operating
(b) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Consistent with Public Policy Objectives of the 1985 Rulemaking
In 1985middot Customs liberalized the regulations implementing the PVSA by eliminating certain regulatory prohibitions on foreign flag vessels In the context of the 1985 rulemaking Customs justified a relaxation ofthe regulations on the grounds that it would simplify the administration of the PVSA and would benefit the economy ofcertain American coastwise ports without eroding the statutory protection given to American vessels engaged in solely domestic trade32
Customs thus sought to reconcile US port economic interests with US-flag passenger vessel interests Both of these twin policy objectives are furthered by
29 See 72 Fed Reg 65488 (Nov 21 2007)( MARAn bas asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the ~eratiODS ofcoastwise-qualified cruise ship operators)
See generally FDA v Brown amp Williamson Tobacco Corp 529 US 120 132-133 (2000)(assessing propriety ofagency construction ofFood DIUg and Cosmetics Act and descnbing responsibility of reviewing cowt to assess statutory provisions in the context of subsequent legislative enactments) 31 See Brown amp Williamson 529 US 143 (holding that proper construction ofstatutory provision must necessarily assume that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications ofa later statute This is particularly so where the scope of the earlier statute is broad but the subsequent statutes more specifically address the topic athand) see also United States v Estate ofRomani 523 US 517 530-531 (1998)( holding that a later-enacted statute should control the construction of the federal lien priority statute a specific policy embodied in a later federal statute should control om construction of the [earlier] statute even though it ha[s] not been expressly amended) United States v Fausto 484 US 439453 (1988)(The courts frequently find Congress to have done this - whenever in fact they interpret a statutory text in the light ofsurrounding texts that happen to have been subsequently enacted This classic judicial task of reconciling many laws enacted over time and getting them to make sense in combination necessarily assumes that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications of a later statute) 32 50 Fed Reg 26982 (JuI 11985)
9
limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades
As noted earlier the 2003 Act limits the operation of the NCLA US-flag oceangoing passenger vessels to regular service in Hawaii Because there are no oceangoing US-flag vessels operating in any market other than the Hawaii trades Customs should limit the scope of the proposed interPretation to that market Such a limitation protects US flag passenger vessel interests without prejudicing US port interests In contrast an application of the proposed interpretation to any itinerary would needlessly harm US port interests unrelated to Hawaii without any countervailing benefit to US-flag passenger vessel interests Accordingly limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation is consistent with the public policy objectives of the 1985 rulemaking as well as the 2003 Act
(c) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Also Consistent with Customs Commitment to Revisit the Scope of its Rules to Protect US-Flag Interests
The relaxation ofthe PVSA regulations in 1985 was premised in large part on Customs finding that there was no regular salt water US-flag passenger fleet in operation at that time33 Acknowledging that the relaxed regulations could harm USshyflag interests Customs committed in the preamble ofthe 1985 final rule to immediately reconsider its interpretation if it is ever shown that there is a viable US flag vessel operating in competition with foreign-flag vessels34
Congress enacted the 2003 Act to stimulate the development of a US flag cruise ship industry As noted above the legislative history ofthat Act makes clear that Congress sought to revitalize the US-flag cruise industry as a means to maintain Americas preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool ofqualified seafarers help sustain a fleet of US flag vessels to support our military and a maritime industrial base create thousands of seagoing and shoreside American jobs and stimulate the development ofa US flag cruise ship tourism business with the commensurate benefits to the US tax base the US economy and US employment
Customs is now acting at MARADs request to revisit its interpretation ofthe regulations implementing the PVSA because recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwise-qualified cruise ship operations35 That is to say that the concerns articulated by Customs in the context of the 1985 rulemaking have materialized and US-flag passenger vessel interests are in fact being hanned in the Hawaii trades by foreign competitors
33 50 Fed Reg 26983 34Id
3S 72 Fed Reg 56488 (Nov 21 2007)
I
10
Because the US-flag passenger vessels are limited by statute to regular service in Hawaii limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the
Hawaii trades is consistent with Customs historical commitment to revisit its interpretation ofthe implementing regulations to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests
7 Conclusion
For the reasons stated above NCLA commends the efforts ofCustoms and MARAn to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act as applied to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA respectfully requests Customs to move ahead promptly with p~blicati~nof a final interpretive rule to advance the important national security arid public policy objectives ofthese laws
We greatly appreciate the opportunity to submit these comments
Sincerely
~~~ Alan T Yamamoto Vice President Hawaii Operations
Exhibit A
Ship Name Serenade Of The Seas Departure Port San Diego California Ports of Call San Diego California Kailua Kona Hawaii Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii Hlo Hawaii Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii Ensenada Mexico San Qigo California
2007 Date(s) Oct 05
Sailing Itinerary
Day Port H ~rrive Depart Activity
05-0ct San Diego California 500 PM
06-0ct Cruising
07-0ct Cruising
08-0ct Cruising
09-0ct Cruising
10-0ct Kailua Kona Hawaii 700 AM 900 PM Tendered
11-00t Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 1000 AM Tendered
12middot0ct Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 900 PM Tendered
13-0ct Hilo Hawaii 700 AM 600 PM Docked
14middot0ct Honoulu (Oahu) Hawaii 700 AM Docked
15-0ct Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii 200 AM Docked
6-0ct CrUising
17-0ct Cruising
18-0ct Cruising
19middot0ct Cruising
-7 20-00t
O-Oot
Ensenada ~i1exico
San Deqo California
i 00 ~r1
700 ~M
200 oM D1Jcked ~
Analysis by the Hawaii Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism Comparing the Economic Impact of Foreign Flag Ships with US Flag Cruise Ships Sailing in Hawaii
This is a summary of an analysis prepared by the Hawai Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism (DBEDT) of the economic impact of the foreign flag cruise ship fleet sailing in Hawaii as compared to each of the US flag ships operating in Honolulu
The comparison is set out below
Foreign Pride Pride Pride
Fleet Of Hawaii Of Aloha Of America
Total economic output impact (spendingsales) ($mil) 155 542 4225 4958
Total earnings impact (labor earnings) ($mil) 44 155 1207 1411
Total employment impact Uobs) 1447 5059 3943 4627
This analysis demonstrates that a single US-flagged ship the Pride of America home ported in Honolulu is 32 times more economically impactful and creates 32 times as many jobs as the entire foreign flag fleet that sails into and out of Hawaii ports of call
Economic Impact of Pride of America
Assumptions 1 Annual impact though Pride of Aloha is leaving in May 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existing Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($) 4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of outputl$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job multiplier (jobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
118700 105
2706 3373
147 042
1372
4958
1417
4627
Data sourcelformula Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Line 1 x line 2 x line 31 000000
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 4 x line 5
Line 4 x line 6
Line 4 x line 7
Economic Impact of Pride of Hawaii
Assumptions
1 Annual impact though Pride of Hawaii is leaving in February 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existing Pride of Aloha and Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($) 4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job multiplier (jobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
Data sourceformula 139770 Actual 2007 figure
975 Actual 2007 figure 2706 Actual 2007 figure 3688 Line 1 x line 2 x line 31000000
147 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model 042 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
1372 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
5421 Line 4 x line 5
1549 Line 4 x line 6
5059 Line 4 x line 7
Economic Impact of Pride of Aloha
Assumptions 1 Annual impact though Pride of Aloha is leaving in May 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existlng Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($)
4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job mUltiplier Oobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
95680 111
2706 2874
147 042
1372
4225
1207
3943
Data sourcelformula Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Line 1 x line 2 x line 31000000
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 4 x line 5
Line 4 x line 6
Line 4 x line 7
lt
Methodology Used in Calculating Impact of International Cruise Ships
Cruise ship visitors 1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Came with ships 3 Flied in 4 Average length of stay (days) 5 PPPD ($) 6 Cruise visitor spending ($mil))
Cruise ship crews 7 Ratio of crew spending to cruise visitor spending 8 Cruise crew spending
Cruisline 9 Ratio of crew spending to cruise visitor spending
10 Cruiseline spending
11 Total cruise-related spending ($mil)
12 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 13 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 14 Job multiplier Uobs$ cruise -related spending)
15 Total output impact ($miJ)
16 Total earnings impact ($miJ)
17 Total employment impact (jobs)
106641 98307
8334 739 847 668
02 134
038 254
1055
147 042
1372
1551
444
1447
Data sourceformula Line 2 + line 3 DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report Line 1 x line 4 x line 5
DBEDT 2003 Cruise study Line 7 x line 6
DBEDT 2003 Cruise study Line 9 x line 6
Line 6 + line 8 + line 10
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 11 x line 12
Line 11 x line 13
Line 11 x line 14
Economic Contributions Foreign-Flag Fleet operating in Hawaii vs Three US-Flag Ships
$1500
Pride of Hawaii$1000- $542 million VIc -0-E c Pride of AlohaCo
423 million$500
Pride of America $496 million155 million$shy
Foreign-Flag US-Flag Fleet Fleet
Source State of Hawaii Department of US-Flag $1460 billion Business Economic Development and Tourism
Foreign-Flag $ 155 million 7292008
Employment Foreign-Flag Fleet operating in Hawaii vs Three US-Flag Ships
15000
10000
til c o Pride of Aloha
39435000
Pride of America 1447 4627
~---------
Foreign-Flag US-Flag Fleet Fleet
Source State of Hawaii Department of US-Flag 13629 jobs Business Economic Development and Tourism
Foreign-Flag 1447 jobs 7292008
Foreign Flag Capacity Growth Foreign flag passenger capacity has changed five-fold on roundtrip Hawaii cruises from the West Coast since enactment of the Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative
1600000
1400000
tn 1200000
J enshyZ
1000000
I shyG) en 800000 s G) tn tn
600000 as D 400000
200000
0 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Year
Source US Maritime Administration (derived from the US Customs and Border Patrol Vessel Entrance and Clearance documents - final 2007 data) 7292008
NCL America Hawaii Economic Contributions
(2004-2008)
bull (in Millions) bull $399 in wages benefits and overtime to US seafarers bull $35 in Federal and State payroll Taxes bull $64 in Government Fees and Taxes to Hawaii bull $28 in wages benefits and overtime to US other employees bull $52 in Port Charges to Hawaii Companies (Stevedores tugs pilots etc) bull $85 in Fuel to Tesoro Hawaii bull $130 for shore excursions to Hawaii tour operators bull $39 for Hawaii hotel rooms and ground transport bull $75 for food grown in Hawaii bull $57 in union fees and levies (incl $32M paid directly by employees) bull $1 in MMD fees to the United States Coast Guard bull $51 for recruitment screening processing and training crew bull $76 advertising and promoting Hawaii as a destination bull $1092
COASTWISE CRUISES INTERPRETIVE RULE RESOLUTION Adopted at the
US Conference of Mayors 76th Annual Meeting
June 20-242008 Miami
WHEREAS the Department of Homeland Securitys Customs and Border Protection (CBP) issued a proposed Interpretive Rule regulating Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises on foreign flagged vessels between US ports of call under the Passenger Vessel Services Act at the request of the United States Maritime Administration and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule would require that a foreign-flagged vessel on a coastwise cruise to call at a foreign port for at least 48 hours with that foreign stop constituting at least 50 percent of the cruise itinerary and allowing passengers to disembark the cruise vessel at the foreign port before continuing the cruise to a US port of call and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule establishes burdensome criteria that are wholly inconsistent with industry practice particularly the 48-hour call at foreign port shyinasmuch as the standard port call is six to eight hours - as well as the requirement that 50 percent of a cruise be spent at the foreign port and
WHEREAS the intent of the proposed Interpretive Rule is to protect the single remaining US flag vessel serving the Inter-Hawaiian Island cruise trade that according to the Hawaii Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism generates more than 4600 jobs and generates nearly $500 million in economic benefits for the state annually and
WHEREAS thousands of members of the International Longshore Workers Union (nWU) are employed at US ports serving cruise ships and whose jobs would be at risk if the proposed Interpretive Rule were implemented and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule is vague as to the breadth of its application ie to coastwise cruises between all United States ports or applied solely to coastwise cruises from West Coast ports to Hawaii and
WHEREAS the Cruise Lines International Association estimates the proposed Interpretive Rule would upend the $17 billion in national cruise industry spending and put at risk more than 300000 jobs generated by the international cruise industry including jobs held by nWU at US ports and the local allied industries supporting the cruise industry and
Executive Order Submissions Under Review
II Reglnfogov Where to ind Federal Regulatory Information -~
Home ] Lnitied Agenda and Regulator) Ilan pound012866 Regulator) Review Jnformalion Collection Review
EO 12866 Regulatory Rlvlw dvanced Search IJitorical RepWI Review Counh Jriter XIL
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA)
Executive Order Submissions Under Review July 25 2008 - _------------____ _shy
Department of Homeland Security
AGENCY DHS-TSA RIN 1652-AA53
TITLE Large Aircraft Security Program Other Aircraft Operator Security Programs and Airport Operator Security Program
STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT Yes RECEIVED DATE 06302008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
AGENCY DHS-USCIS RIN Llti15-AB67 TITLE Changes to Requirements Affecting H-2B Nonimmigrants and Their Employers
STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT No RECEIVED DATE 06092008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
AGENCY DHS-USCBP RIN 1651AA11 TITLE Issuance of a Visa and Authorization for Temporary Admission Into the United States for Certain Nonimmigrant Aliens Afflicted W HIV Infection
STAGE Final Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT No RECEIVED DATE 03042008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
-_RE_V-IE-W-E-X-T-EN-D-E-D---------- _
AGENCY DHS-USCBP RIN 1651-AA76 TITLE Coastwise Transportation of Passengers STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT Yes RECEIVED DATE 07142008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
Disclosure I Accessibility I Privacy Policy I Contact Us
httpwwwreginfogovpublicdoeoReviewSearch 7252008
View Rule Page 11
Shere D find Federal ReguLatory InformciiorlReglnfogov Home J Cnified Agenda al1d Regulatory Plan EO 12866 Regulatory Reyiew Information Collection Reiew
Current rnified Agenda and Regulatory Plan Historical Pnified Agenda and Regulatory Plan Search
View Rule
DHSIUSCBP RIN 1651-AA76 Publication ill Spring 2008
Title llCoastwise Transportation of Passengers
Abstract This interim rule amends the Department of Homeland Securitys (DHS) current regulations relating to the transportation of passengers by non-coastwise-qualified vessels on voyages that begin and end at a US port and stop at intervening US and foreign port(s) Under this interim final rule voyages that begin and end at a US port and stop at a foreign port(s) and at intervening US port(s) where a large USshyflag coastwise-qualified passenger vessel engages in regular service are in violation of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) unless the cumulative length of stay(s) at intervening foreign port(s) is more than 50 percent of the total amount of time spent at the intervening US port(s) and passengers are permitted to go ashore at the foreign port(s) The purpose of this amendment is to ensure that the Congressional purpose in enacting the PVSA which is to preserve the economic benefits of US coastwise trade to US-flag coastwise-qualified vessels is properly implemented
Agency Department of Homeland Security(DHS) Priority Substantive Nonsignificant
KIN Status First time published in the Unified Agenda Agenda Stage of Rulemaking Final Rule Stage
Major No Unfunded Mandates No
CFR Citation -LCER 4J~)(h)(plusmnJ
Legal Authority 5JJSS_30J12lJ-SClt16 J9_lJiCJ 431 9_L1C1plusmn3JJ2JScHJ1J2JSCJ624 L(LlLSc207LIl(gtJfHgt~ _CiQJ _46lSC 6QLQ~
Legal Deadline None
Timetable Action Date FR Cite
Interim Final Action 0510012008
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required No Government Levels Affected None
Federalism No
Included in the Regulatory Plan No
RIN Data Printed in the FR No
Agency Contact Glen E Vereb Chief Entry Procedures and Carriers Branch Department of Homeland Security US Customs and Border Protection Office of Regulations and Rulings 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington DC 20229 Phone202572-8730
Disclosure I Accessibility I Privacy Policy I Contact Us
httpwwwreginfogovpublicdoeAgendaViewRuleruleID=286751 7128120
Federal RegisterVol 72 No 224Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules 65487
SPECULATIVE POSITION LIMITS 1-Continued [In contract units)
Contract
Soybeans and Mini-Soybeans 2
Wheat and Mini-Wheat 2 bullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbull
Soybean Oil
SingleSpot month All monthsmonth
600 8600 13300 600 11100 14500 540 6600 8600
Soybean Meal 720 5500 7100
Minneapolis Grain Exchange
Hard Red Spring Wheat I 600 I 11100 I 14500
New York Board of Trade
Cotton No2 I 300 I 5300 I 7300
Kansas City Board of Trade
Hard Winter Wheat I 600 I 11100 I 14500
1 For purposes of compliance with these limits positions in a futures contract that shares ~ubstantially identical terms with a contract market enumerated herein including a futures contract that is cash-settled based on the settlement price of an enumerated contract market shall be agshygregated with positions in the enumerated contract market
2 For purposes of compliance with these limits positions in the regular-sized and mini-sized contracts shall be aggregated
Issued by the Commission this November 152007 in Washington DC David Stawick Secretary of the Commission [FR Doc E7-22681 Filed 11-20-07 845 amI BILLING CODE 6351-Q1-P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Bureau of Customs and Border Protection
19 CFR Part 4
[USCBP-2007-o098]
Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises
AGENCY Customs and Border Protection Department of Homeland Security ACTION Proposed interpretation solicitation of comments
SUMMARY This document proposes new criteria to be used by Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to determine whether non-coastwise-qualified vessels are in violation ofthe Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) when engaging in cruise itineraries in which passengers board at a US port the vessel calls at several Hawaiian ports and then the vessel proceeds to a foreign port or ports for a brief period before ultimately returning to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their cruise CBP believes these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because it appears that the primary objective of the foreign stop is evasion of the PVSA
DATES Comments must be received on or before December 212007 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT Glen E Vereb Cargo Security Carriers amp Immigration Branch Office of International Trade (202) 572-8730 ADDRESSES You may submit comments identified by docket number by one of the following methods
bull Federal eRulemaking Portal http wwwregulationsgov Follow the instructions for submitting comments
bull Mail Border Security Regulations Branch Office of International Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
I Public Participation
Interested persons are invited to participate in this proposed interpretation by submitting written data views or arguments on all aspects of the proposed interpretation Customs and Border Protection (CBP) also invites comments that relate to the economic environmental or federalism effects that might result from this proposed interpretation Comments that will provide the most assistance to CBP in developing these procedures will reference a specific portion of the proposed interpretation explain the reason for any recommended change and include data information or authority that support such recommended change
Instructions All submissions received must include the agency name and docket number for this proposed
interpretation All comments received will be posted without change to http wwwregulationsgov including any personal information provided
Docket For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received go to http wwwregulationsgov Submitted comments may also be inspected on regular business days between the hours of 9 am and 430 pm at the Office of International Trade Customs and Border Protection 799 9th Street NW 5th Floor Washington DC Arrangements to inspect submitted documents should be made in advance by calling Mr Joseph Clark at (202) 572shy8768
II Background
The maritime cabotage law governing the transportation of passengers was first established by section 8 of the Passenger Vessel Services Act of June 191886 (the PVSA) 24 Stat 81 as amended by section 2 of the Act of February 17 1898 30 Stat 248 formerly codified at 46 USC App 289 (now codified at 46 USC 55103) 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 of $200 (now $300 as promulgated in TD 03-11 pursuant to the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 199028 USC 2461 note) for each passenger so transported and landed
The intent of the maritime cabotage laws including the PVSA was to provide a legal structure that guarantees a coastwise monopoly to
65488 Federal RegisterVol 72 No 224Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules
American shipping and thereby promotes development of the American merchant marine Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 28 (DC Cir 1984) see also The Granada 35 FSupp 892 8931940 AMC 1601 (DC Pa 1940) (stating that the legislative aim of section 289 [now 55102] was the creation of a practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping business for United States ships) In other words the PVSA was enacted to advance the United States merchant marine and fleet by restricting the use of foreign-ownedflagged passenger vessels in United States territorial waters
Passenger vessel transportation between United States ports has historically been viewed to be part of the coastwise trade after the enactment of the PVSA This view is premised on the concepts of continuity of the voyage and whether its intended purpose or objective was coastwise transportation In other words the PVSA was held to be violated if the coastwise movement was continuous or if the purpose of the trip was a coastwise voyage (See 18 OAG 445 September 4 1886 28 OAG 204 February 16 1910 29 OAG 318 February 12 1912 30 OAG 44 February 1 1913 34 OAG 340 December 24 1924 and 36 OAG 352 August 13 1930)
The CBP regulations promulgated pursuant to the PVSA are found at section 480a of title 19 of the Code of Federal Regulations (19 CFR 480a) and are reflective of the above cited Office of the Attorney General decisions These regulations provide among other things that a non-coastwise-qualified vessel which embarks a passenger at a port in the United States embraced within the coastwise laws (a coastwise port) will be deemed to have landed that passenger in violation of the PVSA if the passenger disembarks at a different coastwise port on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a nearby foreign port or ports (as defined in 19 CFR 480a(a)(2) see also 19 CFR 480a(b)(2)) The terms embark and disembark are words of art which are defined as going on board a vessel for the duration of a specific voyage and leaving a vessel at the conclusion of a specific voyage respectively (See 19 CFR 480a(a)(4))
The references in section 480a to nearby foreign ports (defined in 19 CFR 480a(a)(2)) are the results of attempts by CBP to apply an Office of the Attorney Generals opinion dated February 26 1910 (28 OAG 204) In that case a foreign-flag vessel transported 615 passengers on a voyage around the world beginning in New
York and concluding in San Francisco The Attorney General opined that since the primary object of the voyage was to visit various parts of the world on a pleasure tour returning home via California and not to be transported in domestic commerce the transportation was not in violation of the PVSA
The 1910 Attorney Generals opinion was extended to voyages that included foreign ports other than nearby foreign ports (See Treasury Decision (TD) 68shy285 (33 FR 16558) November 14 1968) However voyages solely to one or more coastwise ports have always been considered predominantly coastwise Therefore non-coastwise-qualified vessels engaging in such a voyage where passengers temporarily go ashore at a coastwise port have been deemed to have violated the PVSA
m Current Law and Policy Pursuant to Public Law 109-304 120
Stat 1632 enacted on October 6 2006 Title 46 United States Code was substantially reorganized and recodified Consequently the PVSA is now codified at 46 USC 55103 and provides that no vessel shall transport passengers between ports or places in the United States either directly or by way of a foreign port under a penalty of $300 for each person so transported and landed except one that (1) Is wholly owned by citizens of the United States for purposes of engaging in the coastwise trade and (2) has been issued a certificate of documentation with a coastwise endorsement or is exempt from documentation but would otherwise be eligible for such a certificate and endorsement
In 2003 Congress enacted Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II Section 211 for the purpose of revitalizing the oceangoing US-flag cruise industry in Hawaii (the 2003 Act) Three oceangoing US-flag cruise ships PRIDE OF ALOHA PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAII were documented with coastwise privileges pursuant to the 2003 Act These vessels entered regular service in Hawaii in 2004 2005 and 2006 respectively and pursuant to the express language of the 2003 Act are limited in their operation to providing regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands of Hawaii
The CBP regulations promulgated pursuant to the PVSA are set forth in 19 CFR 480a and have remained unchanged throughout both the recodification of Title 46 of the United States Code and the enactment of the 2003 Act They provide that a violation of the PVSA occurs when passengers embark (board a vessel for the
duration of a voyage) a non-coastwiseshyqualified vessel at one US port and disembark (leave the vessel at the conclusion of a voyage) at a different US port unless they proceed with the vessel to a distant foreign port (Le any port not considered a nearby foreign port which is defined as any port located in North America Central America Bermuda or the West Indies including the Bahamas) Currently these regulations do not contain specific criteria for non-coastwise-qualified vessels on itineraries including US ports and either nearby or distant foreign ports in order for such foreign port calls to be compliant with the PVSA
To reiterate the applicable CBP regulations provide that the PVSA is violated when a non-coastwise-qualified vessel transports a passenger on a voyage solely to one or more coastwise ports and the passenger disembarks or goes ashore temporarily at a coastwise port (19 CFR 480a(b)(1)) Furthermore a violation of the PVSA also occurs when a non-coastwise-qualified vessel transports a passenger on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a nearby foreign port or ports (but no other foreign port) and the passenger disembarks at a coastwise port other than the port of embarkation (19 CFR 480a(b)(2)) However there is no violation of the PVSA when a passenger is on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a distant foreign port or ports (whether or not the voyage includes a nearby foreign port or ports) and the passenger disembarks at a coastwise port provided the passenger has proceeded with the vessel to a distant foreign port (19 CFR 480a(b)(3))
IV Request From MARAD To Provide Guidance
The US Department of Transportation Maritime Administration (MARAD) has requested that CBP take action to ensure enforcement of the PVSA MARAD has asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreignshyflag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwiseshyqualified cruise ship operators
In April of 2007 the operator of the three US-flag cruise vessels operating solely in Hawaii pursuant to the 2003 Act announced their intent to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAIl from the Hawaii market and redeploy her to Europe The operator intends to re-flag the vessel to foreign registry directly resulting in the loss of over 1100 crewmember jobs The primary reason cited for this decision is the rapid increase in foreign-flag competition entering the Hawaii market
Federal Register I Vol 72 No 224 I Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules 65489
from the West Coast This competition is evidenced in published cruise itineraries of foreign-flag carriers offering a variety of round trip cruises that depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period usually in the early morning and ultimately return to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their cruise These cruises are often marketed as Hawaii cruises and except for the brief stop in the nearby foreign port of Ensenada are purely coastwise in nature It is these cruise itineraries that pose an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels that pursuant to the 2003 Act are currently engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands
V Preliminary Notice
In response to MARADs concerns CBP sent letters to two carriers known to operate the itineraries in question as well as to the Cruise Lines International Association Inc stating that CBP believes that these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because it appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA The letters further indicated that CBP is taking steps to publish this position
VI CBPs Proposed Interpretive Rule Accordingly in this document CBP is
proposing to provide that cruise itineraries for non-qualified coastwise vessels which allow passengers to board at a US port call at several Hawaiian ports proceed to a foreign port or ports for a brief period and then ultimately return to the original US port of embarkation for disembarkation are not consistent with the PVSA and the regulations promulgated pursuant thereto Specifically CBP interprets a voyage to be solely to one or more coastwise ports even where it stops at a foreign port unless the stop at the foreign port is a legitimate object of the cruise CBP will presume that a stop at a foreign port is not a legitimate object of the cruise unless
(1) The stop lasts at least 48 hours at the foreign port
(2) The amount of time at the foreign port is more than 50 percent of the total amount of time at the US ports of call and
(3) The passengers are permitted to go ashore temporarily at the foreign port
Accordingly CBP proposes to adopt an interpretive rule under which it will presume that any cruise itinerary that does not include a foreign port call that
satisfies each of these three criteria constitutes coastwise transportation of passengers in violation of 19 CFR 480a(b)(1)
Dated November 16 2007 W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection [FR Doc E7-22788 Filed 11-20-07 845 am] BILLING CODe 9111-14-1
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau
27 CFR Part 9
[Notice No 76]
RIN 1513-AB49
Proposed Establishment of the Leona Valley Viticultural Area (2007R-281 P)
AGENCY Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau Treasury ACTION Notice of proposed rulemaking
SUMMARY The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau proposes to establish the 134 square mile Leona Valley viticultural area in the northeast part of Los Angeles County California We designate viticultural areas to allow vintners to better describe the origin of their wines and to allow consumers to better identify wines they may purchase We invite comments on this proposed addition to our regulations DATES We must receive written comments on or before January 22 2008
ADDRESSES You may send comments on this notice to one of the following addresses
bull httpwwwregulationsgov (Federal e-rulemaking portal follow the instructions for submitting comments) or
bull Director Regulations and Rulings Division Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau PO Box 14412 Washington DC 20044-4412
See the Public Participation section of this notice for specific instructions and requirements for submitting comments and for information on how to request a public hearing
You may view copies of this notice selected supporting materials and any comments we receive about this proposal at httpwwwregulationsgov under Docket No 2007-0066 You also may view copies of this notice all related petitions maps or other supporting materials and any comments we receive about this
proposal by appointment at the TTB Information Resource Center 1310 G Street NW Washington DC 20220 To make an appointment call 202-927shy2400
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT NA Sutton Regulations and Rulings Division Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau 925 Lakeville S1 No 158 Petaluma CA 94952 phone 415shy271-1254 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
Background on Viticultural Areas
TTB Authority Section 105(e) of the Federal Alcohol
Administration Act (FAA Act) 27 USC 205(e) authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to prescribe regulations for the labeling of wine distilled spirits and malt beverages The FAA Act provides that these regulations should among other things prohibit consumer deception and the use of misleading statements on labels and ensure that labels provide the consumer with adequate information as to the identity and quality of the product The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) administers the regulations promulgated under the FAA Act
Part 4 ofthe TTB regulations (27 CFR part 4) allows the establishment of definitive viticultural areas and the use of their names as appellations of origin on wine labels and in wine advertisements Part 9 of the TTB regulations (27 CFR part 9) contains the list of approved viticultural areas
Definition Section 425(e)(1)(i) ofthe TTB
regulations (27 CFR 425(e)(1)(i)) defines a viticultural area for American wine as a delimited grape-growing region distinguishable by geographical features the boundaries of which have been recognized and defined in part 9 of the regulations These designations allow vintners and consumers to attribute a given quality reputation or other characteristic of a wine made from grapes grown in an area to its geographic origin The establishment of viticultural areas allows vintners to describe more accurately the origin of their wines to consumers and helps consumers to identify wines they may purchase Establishment of a viticultural area is neither an approval nor an endorsement by TTB of the wine produced in that area
Requirements Section 425(e)(2) of the TTB
regulations outlines the procedure for proposing an American viticultural area and provides that any interested party
Us Department ofHomelaDd Secmity Washington DC 10229
bull ~
US Customs and Border Protection
AUG 15 2fXJJ
VE5-3-02-QTRRBSTCCCI - ti015502-GG-
Mr leon Sutcliffe Director Port Operations Camivai Cruise Unes Camival Place 3655 NW 87Avenue Miami Aorlda 33178
RE P~nger Vessef Services Ad Coastwise Transportation 46 USC sect 55103 19 CFR sect 480a(b)
Dear Mr Sutcliffe
As you know US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) enforces the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) codified at TItle 46 United States Code section 55103 (46 USC 55103) This statute prohibits non-coastwise-qualifled vessels (ie those vessels not US-buill owned and documented with a coastwise endorsement) from transporting passengers between porls or places within the United States The regUlations promUlgated pursuant to the PVSA are found at TrtJe 19 Code of Federal Regulations section 4808 (19 CFR 4808)
It has come to our attention that passenger vessels of your company are engaging in cruise itineraries that include ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands Two USAlagged coastwise-endorsed passenger vessefs are also currenUy engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of caD wittlin the Hawaiian Islands
As part of your cruise itineraries some of your foreign-flagged vessels depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period and ultimately rebJm to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their endse For example the MS ZAANDAM of Holand America Lines departs San Diego cruises the Hawaiian Islands stops in Ensenada from 800pm to 11 OOpmbull and returns to san Diego CBP believes these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because It appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA -- - - ~~~------
Please be advised that CBP is taking steps to publish this position Should have any questions pertaining to this matter please contact Mr Glen Vereb Chief Cargo Security Carriers and Immigration Branch at (202) 572-8724
Sincerely
F Jl E EST Y LEe A U I 5 I N Gmiddot
December 21 2007
The Honorable W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection co Border Security Regulations Branch Office ofInternational Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229
Re Hawaii Coastwise Cruises (USCBP-2007-0098) Comments in Response to Proposed Interpretation
Dear Commissioner Basham
NCL America Inc1 (NCLA) submits these comments in support ofthe efforts ofCustoms and Border Protection to enforce the Passenger Vessel Services Act and the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative as applied to Hawaii coastwise cruises
1 Introduction and Summary of Position
NCLA operates three large oceangoing US flag cruise ships in Hawaii These ships are documented under US flag and are required to operate in regular service in Hawaii pursuant to the authority of the Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative a 2003 federal statute intended to revitalize the US flag cruise industry and to maximize economic and national security benefits to the United States (the 2003 Act)
NCLA has invested $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships pursuant to the 2003 Act and in direct reliance on the protections of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) and its proper enforcement The PVSA limits the transportation ofpassengers between US ports to coastwise documented US flag ships Its statutory protections recognize that US flag ships have significantly higher operational costs in part because they are subject to more stringent US laws including US labor laws and federal
1 NCL America Inc is a US corporation incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware headquartered in Honolulu Hawaii As a US corporation it is subject to US taxes at both the federal and state level The Chief Executive Officer the Chairman of the Board and all of the Board of Directors of NCL America are US citizens The company is also subject to US labor and employment laws and is required by statute to maintain a workforce comprised primarily ofUS citizens
700 Bishop St SUite 900 I Honolulu HawMi 96813 I Tel 8085273800 Fax 8085273820 I ndcom
2
income tax among others The NCLA ships operating in Hawaii are the only large oceangoing cruise ships operating under US flag In furtherance of the policy goals of the PVSA and the 2003 Act these ships have created over 4000 seafaring jobs all subject to US minimum wage and other labor statutes
Since 2003 there has been a significant increase in capacity in the Hawaii market from foreign flag ships providing cruise service to Hawaii from the West Coast Many of these foreign flag cruises are marketed as Hawaii cruises and consist entirely ofUS ports ofcall with the sole exception of a token stop in Mexico for as little as an hour late at night under circumstances where passengers are not permitted to get offthe ship There are no reported rulings approving these particular foreign flag itineraries
Lower cost foreign competition in the Hawaii market has unfairly hurt NCLAs operations NCLA has incurred substantial losses which have contributed significantly to its decision earlier this year to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAll from US flag and reshydeploy it foreign Unfair foreign competition poses an imminent threat to the remaining US flag passenger vessels operating in the Hawaii trades pursuant to the 2003 Act
As the agency statutorily charged with implementation of the 2003 Act the US Department ofTransportation Maritime Administration (MARAn) is aware of the threat foreign flag Hawaii itineraries pose to the US flag fleet and brought the situation to the attention ofthe US Department ofHomeland Security Bureau ofCustoms and Border Protection (CBP or Customs) Customs determined that the primary object of these itineraries was coastwise and that the Ensenada stop was an evasion of the PVSA
In August 2007 Customs provided written notice to the affected foreign lines and their trade association that the existing itineraries were contrary to the PVSA None of these lines sought advance rulings even after the Customs notice with respect to their Hawaii itineraries pursuant to Customs regulations and many continued to market the itineraries as Hawaii cruises NCLA supports the efforts ofCustoms and MARAD to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act for Hawaii cruises
2 Statutory Authority for Customs Proposed Interpretation
(a) Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA)
Congress passed the PVSA in 1886 to protect the US maritime transportation industry from foreign competition2 Protection is afforded through penalty assessments on foreign vessels transporting passengers between US ports or places directly or by way ofa foreign port 3 As Congress and the courts have recognized coastwise protections for the US maritime transportation industry are only one dimension of the PVSA Operating in conjunction with other coastwise laws and with the US
2 See United States v Honduran SS GRANADA 35 F Supp 892 894 (BD Pa 1940)(citing purpose of PVSA to meet threats to the practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping which was to be preserved for US ships)
46 USc sect 55103 (originally 46 USC App 289)
3
documentation laws the PVSA also enhances military sealift in times ofnational emergency sustains a US merchant marine and supports the US shipbuilding and repair industry4
(b) Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative (the 2003 Act)
Over the past decade Congress has sought to reinforce the goals of the PVSA by providing mechanisms to revitalize the oceangoing US flag cruise fleet particularly in Hawaii The Project America legislation enacted in 1997 authorized among other things the re~flagging ofone existing cruise ship contingent on the operator contracting for the construction oftwo new oceangoing cruise shipss Following the default of the operator under the original contract Congress enacted the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative for the purpose ofrecovering economic and national security benefits to the United States bull 6 These same goals of the original PVSA were expressly referenced in the legislative history of the 2003 Act which emphasized that these ships will be assets available in time ofnational emergency and will significantly expand the pool ofqualified seafarers upon which the US Department ofDefense relies to crew non-combatant vessels
The 2003 Act authorizes the US documentation ofthree cruise ships for operation in regular service in Hawaii subject to certain conditions including a prohibition on operating in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico and the Caribbean Sea and a requirement that all vessel repair work be undertaken in the United States MARAD is charged with implementation of the 2003 Act
3 Customs Implementation of PVSA
(a) Regulations
The current regulations implementing the PVSA were published by Customs in 19858 The growth of the foreign flag cruise industry in North America and in particular the development of the Alaska cruise market led to an effort in 1984 to amend the thenshyexisting regulations to increase the ease of administration and operational flexibility The effort to change the regulation had support from US port interests who saw benefit in the potential increase in the number ofUS ports that foreign vessels could call and was opposed by proponents ofpotential US flag projects as detrimental to efforts to revitalize the US fleet 9 The preamble to the 1985 rule emphasized that it was of paramount importance to consider the primary object ofpassengers in taking a
4 See American Hawaii Cruises v Skinner 713 F Supp 452 457 (DDC 1989) (recognizing the contribution of the PVSA and the Jones Act in helping to secure national defense by maintaining a merchant marine oftbe best equipped and most suitable types ofvessels sufficient to serve in time of war or national emergency) see also Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 30 (DC Cir 1984) Wirth Ltd v SIS Acadia Forest 537 F2d 1272 1281 n32 (5th Cir 1976) S Public Law 105-56 Section 8109 (111 Stat 1203 1244) (Oct 81997 ) 6 Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II General Provisions - Department ofCommerce Section 211 (117 Stat 1179) (Feb 20 2003) 1 149 Cong Rec S1118 (dailyed Jan 17 2003(statement ofSenator Inouye) 8 19 CFR sect 480a 950 Fed Reg 26981 (July I 1985)
4
voyage10 a concept which is reinforced elsewhere in Customs regulations11 In its analysis of the comments received at the time Customs accepted the view ofport interests that the modified rule would help their business but did so recognizing the absence ofa regular salt water US flag passenger fleet Customs acknowledged the potential harm to prospective efforts to revitalize the US flag passenger fleet and expressly cautioned that if it were ever shown that coastwise qualified vessels in competition with foreign vessels were in fact hurt by the modified Customs regulation then Customs would immediately reconsider its position12
(b) Customs Rulings
Given the significant penalties associated with violating the PVSA13 Customs regulations expressly provide a mechanism for the owner or charterer of a foreign vessel or any other interested person to request an advisory ruling as to whether a contemplated voyage would be considered in violation of the PVSA14 Customs regulations provide that vessel operators can rely on these ruling letters only to the extent that the facts and circumstances are identical to those in the ruling letter IS
Notwithstanding the fact that several foreign cruise lines offer Hawaii itineraries originating in a US mainland port and calling at Hawaii ports with a token intervening stop in Mexico there are no reported rulings expressly approving such an itinerary for these foreign cruise lines 16
4 The Cruise Industry in Hawaii
(a) NCL America Returns US flag to the Oceangoing Passenger Fleet
Pursuant to the requirements ofthe 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative NCLA agreed to promote US-flag cruising enhance military sealift capacity and expand the US maritime labor base No other major cruise line had ever undertaken such a commitment to the US flag and the public policy objectives Congress sought to achieve under the PVSA or the 2003 Act Introduction ofPRIDE OF ALOHA in 2004 was a significant development in the maritime industry because it marked the restoration ofthe
10 Id at 26983 11 Customs Regulations include a provision on the effect ofruling letters and with respect to carrier rulings the applicable regulation refers to rulings setting forth a determination as to whether or not the primary object of a contemplated voyage is coastwise transportation in violation of46 USC sect 289 [pYSA codified at 46 USC sect55103] 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 12 50 Fed Reg at 26983 13 A modem cruise ship with 2400 passengers for example would be subject to a fine of$720OOO per cruise based on the statutory penalty of$300 for each passenger transported in violation of the Act 14 19 CFR sect 480a(d) IS 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 16 There is one older reported mling involving a request to drop the Ensenada port call from a Los AngeleslHawaiiLos Angeles itinerary which Customs held would violate the PYSA In dicta Customs acknowledged that the itinerary could be in compliance if the Ensenada call were not dropped but did not address the issue ofwhether a one hour service call where no passengers depart the vessel would be sufficient The carrier that obtained that ruling has since left the Hawaii market See Customs Ruling HQ 114078 re Crystal Hannony (Nov 4 1997)
5
us flag to the oceangoing cruise industry A contemporaneous press release from the Us Department ofTransportation reported that the three US-flag cruise ships to be introduced pursuant to the 2003 Act were expected to create more than 20000 US jobs generate more than $825 million ofexpenditures in the US economy and create nearly $360 million in federal tax revenue by the end of 200717 In 2005 the PRIDE OF AMERICA was introduced and in 2006 the third vessel PRIDE OF HAWAll was introduced to Hawaii Both the PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAIl offer 7shyday inter-island Hawaii itineraries whereas PRIDE OF ALOHA operates on 7 and 10 day cruises exclusively among the islands ofHawaii as well as 11 day cruises that include a foreign port call at Fanning Island To date NCLA has invested over $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships in furtherance ofthe policy objectives of the PVSA and the 2003 Act These ships employ over 4000 seafarers and generate hundreds ofmillions of dollars in benefits for Hawaii and the nation
(b) Significant Increase in Foreign Flag Capacity Since 2003
The most significant change in the Hawaii cruise market since 2003 has been the dramatic increase in capacity A significant portion ofthis capacity increase is directly attributable to NCLAs fulfillment ofthe Congressional mandate in the 2003 Act However foreign-flag operations in the Hawaii market as measured in passenger nights18 have skyrocketed Based on MARAn data derived from the US Customs Border Patrol Vessel Entrance and Clearance documents the passenger nights for foreign flag vessels departing from the West Coast to Hawaii on round trip cruise have increased several hundredfold during this period19 See Exhibit A
(c) NCLA Has Incurred Substantial Losses During this Period
Since 2004 NCLA has lost cumulatively more than a quarter ofa billion dollars A principal reason for these losses has been the increase in foreign capacity in this market NCLA has taken significant steps to reduce costs to address the increase in foreign competition but NCLA is at an inherent disadvantage when competing against foreign companies that are not subject to US labor laws US tax laws and other laws Ofcourse the statutory protections of the PVSA are intended to address these very issues That is why Customs immediate action to implement the proposed interpretation is critical for the US flag fleet Regrettably NCLA has already been forced to reduce overall capacity early next year with the withdrawal ofPRIDE OF HAWAlI to another
17 DOT Press Release dated June 72004 see also DOT Press Release dated August 132004 in connection with visit to PRIDE OF ALOHA by US Transportation Secretary Norman Y Mineta 11 Passenger nights (also referred to as passenger capacity days) are calculated by multiplying the number ofpassengers per vessel by the number ofcruise days in each itinerary by the number of cruises This is the unit ofmeasurement employed by MARAn In contrast passenger bed supply (also referred to as passenger capacity) data reflects only the number ofberths per vessel multiplied by the number of cruises and hence understates the market by excluding the full economic value ofthe cruise perfonned 19 In 2003 the total number ofpassenger nights for round-trip West Coast to Hawaii cruises was 303325 which jumped by 353 to 1072329 in 2006 and by 430 to 1304546 from 2003 to 2007 (The 2007 figure is based on MARAD data for six months and a1ll1ualized by published itineraries for the balance of the year)
6
market for operation under foreign flag This move alone will result in the loss ofover 1000 American seafaring jobs
5 Customs Proposed Interpretation is Necessary to Further the Important National Security and Public Policy Objectives Embodied in Federal Law
As Customs has properly noted the increase in foreign competition in the Hawaii trades in contravention of the PVSA pose[s] an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels[] As the operator of these ships NCLA has a vested interest in protecting the jobs ofthe thousands ofAmerican crewmembers and cruise ship service providers who support these vessels NCLA also has an interest in protecting the substantial economic investment it has made to revitalize the US flag passenger vessel fleet But a balancing of interests in the context of Customs enforcement ofexisting law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act requires a much broader focus
The legislative history of the 2003 Act expressly recognized the national security and public policy import ofestablishing a US flag passenger vessel fleet as a means to maintain the countrys preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool of qualified seafarers and as a means to help sustain a fleet ofUS-flag vessels to su~ort
the nations military and maritime industrial base for times ofnational emergency
Congress understood the importance ofestablishing a viable US flag cruise ship fleet as something larger than the vessels themselves These national security and public policy objectives must be weighed in the balance as Customs assesses how best to interpret its rules to give effect to the PVSA and the 2003 Act
6 Customs Should Clarify that the Proposed Interpretation is Limited to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades and Adopt Reasonable Measures to Ensure Sufficient Foreign Content
Since publication ofthe proposed interpretative rule several commenters have observed that the scope of the proposed interpretation is ambiguous because the language of Section VI referencing any cruise itinerary appears broader than the caption Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises and the entire discussion in the published notice which focuses exclusively on US-flag coastwise vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA agrees that the proposed interpretation should be clarified so that its scope is limited to vessels operating roundtrip voyages from US ports that include Hawaii port calls
NCLA supports the concept reflected in the proposed interpretive rule that round trip Hawaii itineraries from US ports on foreign ships must include a material and measurable degree ofoverall foreign port content as compared to US port content
20 149 Congo Rec S1117 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)
7
(a) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is also Consistent with Subsequent Congressional Enactments Modifying the PVSA
As discussed above it is well established that the PVSA was designed toRrotect US-flag vessels from foreign competition in the coastwise and domestic trades 1
Subsequent legislative enactments however have appropriately differentiated among distinct geographic markets and trades including Canada Alaska Puerto Rico and Hawaii based on the existence or non-existence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
In 1938 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers by Canadian passenger vessels on Lake Ontario and the St Lawrence River until such time as passenger service shall be established by vessels of the United States22 Similarly in 1961 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers on Canadian vessels within Alaska or between Alaska and other points in the United States until such time as passenger service is established by vessels ofthe United States23
In 1984 Congress modified the application ofthe PVSA to pennit the transportation ofpassengers between Puerto Rico and other United States ports on foreign-flag vessels24 As with the other statutory exceptions this provision is qualified and expires [o]n a showing that a United States passenger vessel qualified to engage in the coastwise trade is offering or advertising passenger service between a port in Puerto Rico and another port in the United States2S
Congress acted again with respect to the application of the PVSA with the 2003 Act in which it authorized three vessels that did not meet the US-build requirements of the PVSA to operate as modem US-flagged cruise ships in regular service in Hawaii26 The 2003 Act imposes a specific geographic limitation on the operation of any ship documented under this authority to operations only in regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands ofHawaii and shall not transport passengers in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico or the Caribbean Sea except in certain limited circumstances27 As above the limited nature of the 2003 Act is express it is strictly limited to the large ocean-going cruise ships and then only those operating in the regular Hawaii service where there are no US-flag operations28
21 See Act ofJune 19 1886 c 421 sec 8 24 Stat 81 Act of February 171898 c 26 sec 2 30 Stat 248 22 S] Res 174 75th Cong 52 Stat 223 (Alp 251938) codified at46 USC sect 55121(a) 23 See Pub L 87-77 75 Stat 196 (Jun 30 1961) codified at 46 USC sect 55121(b) 24 See Pub L 98-563 98 Stat 2916 (Oct 301984) codified at 46 USC sect 55104(b) 25 46 USC sect 55104(c)(l) see also 46 USC 46 USc sect 55104(cX2)(expiration of exemption upon availability ofa non-coastwise qualified US-flag vessel offering service in the relevant market) 26 149 Congo Rec SI118 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)(statementofSen Inouye) 27 Pub L 108-7 117 Stat 79 (Feb 20 2003) 28 149 Congo Rec S11l9 (dailyed Jan 17 2003Xstatement of Sen Inouye)
8
In each ofthese instances Congress fashioned a narrow exception to the PVSA that differentiated among distinct geographic markets based on the existence or nonshyexistence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
As the federal agency responsible for administering the 2003 Act MARAD requested that Customs act to protect US flag passenger vessel interests in the Hawaii trades29 Limiting the scope ofthe proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades also reflects Customs appreciation of the PVSA in the context of the subsequent Congressional action30 Viewing the Congressional modifications to the PVSA as a whole Congress has specifically and repeatedly differentiated among distinct geographic markets when it has found it necessary and appropriate to do so to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests It is well established that the proper interpretation of a statutory scheme includes consideration ofsubsequent statutes even though the underlying statute itselfhas not been expressly amended31 Accordingly Customs should likewise limit the scope ofthe proposed PVSA interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades because that is the only geographic market as mandated by the 2003 Act in which oceangoing US-flag cruise ships are operating
(b) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Consistent with Public Policy Objectives of the 1985 Rulemaking
In 1985middot Customs liberalized the regulations implementing the PVSA by eliminating certain regulatory prohibitions on foreign flag vessels In the context of the 1985 rulemaking Customs justified a relaxation ofthe regulations on the grounds that it would simplify the administration of the PVSA and would benefit the economy ofcertain American coastwise ports without eroding the statutory protection given to American vessels engaged in solely domestic trade32
Customs thus sought to reconcile US port economic interests with US-flag passenger vessel interests Both of these twin policy objectives are furthered by
29 See 72 Fed Reg 65488 (Nov 21 2007)( MARAn bas asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the ~eratiODS ofcoastwise-qualified cruise ship operators)
See generally FDA v Brown amp Williamson Tobacco Corp 529 US 120 132-133 (2000)(assessing propriety ofagency construction ofFood DIUg and Cosmetics Act and descnbing responsibility of reviewing cowt to assess statutory provisions in the context of subsequent legislative enactments) 31 See Brown amp Williamson 529 US 143 (holding that proper construction ofstatutory provision must necessarily assume that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications ofa later statute This is particularly so where the scope of the earlier statute is broad but the subsequent statutes more specifically address the topic athand) see also United States v Estate ofRomani 523 US 517 530-531 (1998)( holding that a later-enacted statute should control the construction of the federal lien priority statute a specific policy embodied in a later federal statute should control om construction of the [earlier] statute even though it ha[s] not been expressly amended) United States v Fausto 484 US 439453 (1988)(The courts frequently find Congress to have done this - whenever in fact they interpret a statutory text in the light ofsurrounding texts that happen to have been subsequently enacted This classic judicial task of reconciling many laws enacted over time and getting them to make sense in combination necessarily assumes that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications of a later statute) 32 50 Fed Reg 26982 (JuI 11985)
9
limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades
As noted earlier the 2003 Act limits the operation of the NCLA US-flag oceangoing passenger vessels to regular service in Hawaii Because there are no oceangoing US-flag vessels operating in any market other than the Hawaii trades Customs should limit the scope of the proposed interPretation to that market Such a limitation protects US flag passenger vessel interests without prejudicing US port interests In contrast an application of the proposed interpretation to any itinerary would needlessly harm US port interests unrelated to Hawaii without any countervailing benefit to US-flag passenger vessel interests Accordingly limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation is consistent with the public policy objectives of the 1985 rulemaking as well as the 2003 Act
(c) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Also Consistent with Customs Commitment to Revisit the Scope of its Rules to Protect US-Flag Interests
The relaxation ofthe PVSA regulations in 1985 was premised in large part on Customs finding that there was no regular salt water US-flag passenger fleet in operation at that time33 Acknowledging that the relaxed regulations could harm USshyflag interests Customs committed in the preamble ofthe 1985 final rule to immediately reconsider its interpretation if it is ever shown that there is a viable US flag vessel operating in competition with foreign-flag vessels34
Congress enacted the 2003 Act to stimulate the development of a US flag cruise ship industry As noted above the legislative history ofthat Act makes clear that Congress sought to revitalize the US-flag cruise industry as a means to maintain Americas preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool ofqualified seafarers help sustain a fleet of US flag vessels to support our military and a maritime industrial base create thousands of seagoing and shoreside American jobs and stimulate the development ofa US flag cruise ship tourism business with the commensurate benefits to the US tax base the US economy and US employment
Customs is now acting at MARADs request to revisit its interpretation ofthe regulations implementing the PVSA because recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwise-qualified cruise ship operations35 That is to say that the concerns articulated by Customs in the context of the 1985 rulemaking have materialized and US-flag passenger vessel interests are in fact being hanned in the Hawaii trades by foreign competitors
33 50 Fed Reg 26983 34Id
3S 72 Fed Reg 56488 (Nov 21 2007)
I
10
Because the US-flag passenger vessels are limited by statute to regular service in Hawaii limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the
Hawaii trades is consistent with Customs historical commitment to revisit its interpretation ofthe implementing regulations to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests
7 Conclusion
For the reasons stated above NCLA commends the efforts ofCustoms and MARAn to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act as applied to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA respectfully requests Customs to move ahead promptly with p~blicati~nof a final interpretive rule to advance the important national security arid public policy objectives ofthese laws
We greatly appreciate the opportunity to submit these comments
Sincerely
~~~ Alan T Yamamoto Vice President Hawaii Operations
Exhibit A
Ship Name Serenade Of The Seas Departure Port San Diego California Ports of Call San Diego California Kailua Kona Hawaii Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii Hlo Hawaii Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii Ensenada Mexico San Qigo California
2007 Date(s) Oct 05
Sailing Itinerary
Day Port H ~rrive Depart Activity
05-0ct San Diego California 500 PM
06-0ct Cruising
07-0ct Cruising
08-0ct Cruising
09-0ct Cruising
10-0ct Kailua Kona Hawaii 700 AM 900 PM Tendered
11-00t Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 1000 AM Tendered
12middot0ct Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 900 PM Tendered
13-0ct Hilo Hawaii 700 AM 600 PM Docked
14middot0ct Honoulu (Oahu) Hawaii 700 AM Docked
15-0ct Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii 200 AM Docked
6-0ct CrUising
17-0ct Cruising
18-0ct Cruising
19middot0ct Cruising
-7 20-00t
O-Oot
Ensenada ~i1exico
San Deqo California
i 00 ~r1
700 ~M
200 oM D1Jcked ~
Economic Impact of Pride of America
Assumptions 1 Annual impact though Pride of Aloha is leaving in May 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existing Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($) 4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of outputl$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job multiplier (jobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
118700 105
2706 3373
147 042
1372
4958
1417
4627
Data sourcelformula Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Line 1 x line 2 x line 31 000000
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 4 x line 5
Line 4 x line 6
Line 4 x line 7
Economic Impact of Pride of Hawaii
Assumptions
1 Annual impact though Pride of Hawaii is leaving in February 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existing Pride of Aloha and Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($) 4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job multiplier (jobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
Data sourceformula 139770 Actual 2007 figure
975 Actual 2007 figure 2706 Actual 2007 figure 3688 Line 1 x line 2 x line 31000000
147 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model 042 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
1372 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
5421 Line 4 x line 5
1549 Line 4 x line 6
5059 Line 4 x line 7
Economic Impact of Pride of Aloha
Assumptions 1 Annual impact though Pride of Aloha is leaving in May 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existlng Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($)
4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job mUltiplier Oobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
95680 111
2706 2874
147 042
1372
4225
1207
3943
Data sourcelformula Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Line 1 x line 2 x line 31000000
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 4 x line 5
Line 4 x line 6
Line 4 x line 7
lt
Methodology Used in Calculating Impact of International Cruise Ships
Cruise ship visitors 1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Came with ships 3 Flied in 4 Average length of stay (days) 5 PPPD ($) 6 Cruise visitor spending ($mil))
Cruise ship crews 7 Ratio of crew spending to cruise visitor spending 8 Cruise crew spending
Cruisline 9 Ratio of crew spending to cruise visitor spending
10 Cruiseline spending
11 Total cruise-related spending ($mil)
12 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 13 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 14 Job multiplier Uobs$ cruise -related spending)
15 Total output impact ($miJ)
16 Total earnings impact ($miJ)
17 Total employment impact (jobs)
106641 98307
8334 739 847 668
02 134
038 254
1055
147 042
1372
1551
444
1447
Data sourceformula Line 2 + line 3 DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report Line 1 x line 4 x line 5
DBEDT 2003 Cruise study Line 7 x line 6
DBEDT 2003 Cruise study Line 9 x line 6
Line 6 + line 8 + line 10
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 11 x line 12
Line 11 x line 13
Line 11 x line 14
Economic Contributions Foreign-Flag Fleet operating in Hawaii vs Three US-Flag Ships
$1500
Pride of Hawaii$1000- $542 million VIc -0-E c Pride of AlohaCo
423 million$500
Pride of America $496 million155 million$shy
Foreign-Flag US-Flag Fleet Fleet
Source State of Hawaii Department of US-Flag $1460 billion Business Economic Development and Tourism
Foreign-Flag $ 155 million 7292008
Employment Foreign-Flag Fleet operating in Hawaii vs Three US-Flag Ships
15000
10000
til c o Pride of Aloha
39435000
Pride of America 1447 4627
~---------
Foreign-Flag US-Flag Fleet Fleet
Source State of Hawaii Department of US-Flag 13629 jobs Business Economic Development and Tourism
Foreign-Flag 1447 jobs 7292008
Foreign Flag Capacity Growth Foreign flag passenger capacity has changed five-fold on roundtrip Hawaii cruises from the West Coast since enactment of the Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative
1600000
1400000
tn 1200000
J enshyZ
1000000
I shyG) en 800000 s G) tn tn
600000 as D 400000
200000
0 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Year
Source US Maritime Administration (derived from the US Customs and Border Patrol Vessel Entrance and Clearance documents - final 2007 data) 7292008
NCL America Hawaii Economic Contributions
(2004-2008)
bull (in Millions) bull $399 in wages benefits and overtime to US seafarers bull $35 in Federal and State payroll Taxes bull $64 in Government Fees and Taxes to Hawaii bull $28 in wages benefits and overtime to US other employees bull $52 in Port Charges to Hawaii Companies (Stevedores tugs pilots etc) bull $85 in Fuel to Tesoro Hawaii bull $130 for shore excursions to Hawaii tour operators bull $39 for Hawaii hotel rooms and ground transport bull $75 for food grown in Hawaii bull $57 in union fees and levies (incl $32M paid directly by employees) bull $1 in MMD fees to the United States Coast Guard bull $51 for recruitment screening processing and training crew bull $76 advertising and promoting Hawaii as a destination bull $1092
COASTWISE CRUISES INTERPRETIVE RULE RESOLUTION Adopted at the
US Conference of Mayors 76th Annual Meeting
June 20-242008 Miami
WHEREAS the Department of Homeland Securitys Customs and Border Protection (CBP) issued a proposed Interpretive Rule regulating Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises on foreign flagged vessels between US ports of call under the Passenger Vessel Services Act at the request of the United States Maritime Administration and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule would require that a foreign-flagged vessel on a coastwise cruise to call at a foreign port for at least 48 hours with that foreign stop constituting at least 50 percent of the cruise itinerary and allowing passengers to disembark the cruise vessel at the foreign port before continuing the cruise to a US port of call and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule establishes burdensome criteria that are wholly inconsistent with industry practice particularly the 48-hour call at foreign port shyinasmuch as the standard port call is six to eight hours - as well as the requirement that 50 percent of a cruise be spent at the foreign port and
WHEREAS the intent of the proposed Interpretive Rule is to protect the single remaining US flag vessel serving the Inter-Hawaiian Island cruise trade that according to the Hawaii Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism generates more than 4600 jobs and generates nearly $500 million in economic benefits for the state annually and
WHEREAS thousands of members of the International Longshore Workers Union (nWU) are employed at US ports serving cruise ships and whose jobs would be at risk if the proposed Interpretive Rule were implemented and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule is vague as to the breadth of its application ie to coastwise cruises between all United States ports or applied solely to coastwise cruises from West Coast ports to Hawaii and
WHEREAS the Cruise Lines International Association estimates the proposed Interpretive Rule would upend the $17 billion in national cruise industry spending and put at risk more than 300000 jobs generated by the international cruise industry including jobs held by nWU at US ports and the local allied industries supporting the cruise industry and
Executive Order Submissions Under Review
II Reglnfogov Where to ind Federal Regulatory Information -~
Home ] Lnitied Agenda and Regulator) Ilan pound012866 Regulator) Review Jnformalion Collection Review
EO 12866 Regulatory Rlvlw dvanced Search IJitorical RepWI Review Counh Jriter XIL
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA)
Executive Order Submissions Under Review July 25 2008 - _------------____ _shy
Department of Homeland Security
AGENCY DHS-TSA RIN 1652-AA53
TITLE Large Aircraft Security Program Other Aircraft Operator Security Programs and Airport Operator Security Program
STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT Yes RECEIVED DATE 06302008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
AGENCY DHS-USCIS RIN Llti15-AB67 TITLE Changes to Requirements Affecting H-2B Nonimmigrants and Their Employers
STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT No RECEIVED DATE 06092008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
AGENCY DHS-USCBP RIN 1651AA11 TITLE Issuance of a Visa and Authorization for Temporary Admission Into the United States for Certain Nonimmigrant Aliens Afflicted W HIV Infection
STAGE Final Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT No RECEIVED DATE 03042008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
-_RE_V-IE-W-E-X-T-EN-D-E-D---------- _
AGENCY DHS-USCBP RIN 1651-AA76 TITLE Coastwise Transportation of Passengers STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT Yes RECEIVED DATE 07142008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
Disclosure I Accessibility I Privacy Policy I Contact Us
httpwwwreginfogovpublicdoeoReviewSearch 7252008
View Rule Page 11
Shere D find Federal ReguLatory InformciiorlReglnfogov Home J Cnified Agenda al1d Regulatory Plan EO 12866 Regulatory Reyiew Information Collection Reiew
Current rnified Agenda and Regulatory Plan Historical Pnified Agenda and Regulatory Plan Search
View Rule
DHSIUSCBP RIN 1651-AA76 Publication ill Spring 2008
Title llCoastwise Transportation of Passengers
Abstract This interim rule amends the Department of Homeland Securitys (DHS) current regulations relating to the transportation of passengers by non-coastwise-qualified vessels on voyages that begin and end at a US port and stop at intervening US and foreign port(s) Under this interim final rule voyages that begin and end at a US port and stop at a foreign port(s) and at intervening US port(s) where a large USshyflag coastwise-qualified passenger vessel engages in regular service are in violation of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) unless the cumulative length of stay(s) at intervening foreign port(s) is more than 50 percent of the total amount of time spent at the intervening US port(s) and passengers are permitted to go ashore at the foreign port(s) The purpose of this amendment is to ensure that the Congressional purpose in enacting the PVSA which is to preserve the economic benefits of US coastwise trade to US-flag coastwise-qualified vessels is properly implemented
Agency Department of Homeland Security(DHS) Priority Substantive Nonsignificant
KIN Status First time published in the Unified Agenda Agenda Stage of Rulemaking Final Rule Stage
Major No Unfunded Mandates No
CFR Citation -LCER 4J~)(h)(plusmnJ
Legal Authority 5JJSS_30J12lJ-SClt16 J9_lJiCJ 431 9_L1C1plusmn3JJ2JScHJ1J2JSCJ624 L(LlLSc207LIl(gtJfHgt~ _CiQJ _46lSC 6QLQ~
Legal Deadline None
Timetable Action Date FR Cite
Interim Final Action 0510012008
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required No Government Levels Affected None
Federalism No
Included in the Regulatory Plan No
RIN Data Printed in the FR No
Agency Contact Glen E Vereb Chief Entry Procedures and Carriers Branch Department of Homeland Security US Customs and Border Protection Office of Regulations and Rulings 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington DC 20229 Phone202572-8730
Disclosure I Accessibility I Privacy Policy I Contact Us
httpwwwreginfogovpublicdoeAgendaViewRuleruleID=286751 7128120
Federal RegisterVol 72 No 224Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules 65487
SPECULATIVE POSITION LIMITS 1-Continued [In contract units)
Contract
Soybeans and Mini-Soybeans 2
Wheat and Mini-Wheat 2 bullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbull
Soybean Oil
SingleSpot month All monthsmonth
600 8600 13300 600 11100 14500 540 6600 8600
Soybean Meal 720 5500 7100
Minneapolis Grain Exchange
Hard Red Spring Wheat I 600 I 11100 I 14500
New York Board of Trade
Cotton No2 I 300 I 5300 I 7300
Kansas City Board of Trade
Hard Winter Wheat I 600 I 11100 I 14500
1 For purposes of compliance with these limits positions in a futures contract that shares ~ubstantially identical terms with a contract market enumerated herein including a futures contract that is cash-settled based on the settlement price of an enumerated contract market shall be agshygregated with positions in the enumerated contract market
2 For purposes of compliance with these limits positions in the regular-sized and mini-sized contracts shall be aggregated
Issued by the Commission this November 152007 in Washington DC David Stawick Secretary of the Commission [FR Doc E7-22681 Filed 11-20-07 845 amI BILLING CODE 6351-Q1-P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Bureau of Customs and Border Protection
19 CFR Part 4
[USCBP-2007-o098]
Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises
AGENCY Customs and Border Protection Department of Homeland Security ACTION Proposed interpretation solicitation of comments
SUMMARY This document proposes new criteria to be used by Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to determine whether non-coastwise-qualified vessels are in violation ofthe Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) when engaging in cruise itineraries in which passengers board at a US port the vessel calls at several Hawaiian ports and then the vessel proceeds to a foreign port or ports for a brief period before ultimately returning to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their cruise CBP believes these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because it appears that the primary objective of the foreign stop is evasion of the PVSA
DATES Comments must be received on or before December 212007 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT Glen E Vereb Cargo Security Carriers amp Immigration Branch Office of International Trade (202) 572-8730 ADDRESSES You may submit comments identified by docket number by one of the following methods
bull Federal eRulemaking Portal http wwwregulationsgov Follow the instructions for submitting comments
bull Mail Border Security Regulations Branch Office of International Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
I Public Participation
Interested persons are invited to participate in this proposed interpretation by submitting written data views or arguments on all aspects of the proposed interpretation Customs and Border Protection (CBP) also invites comments that relate to the economic environmental or federalism effects that might result from this proposed interpretation Comments that will provide the most assistance to CBP in developing these procedures will reference a specific portion of the proposed interpretation explain the reason for any recommended change and include data information or authority that support such recommended change
Instructions All submissions received must include the agency name and docket number for this proposed
interpretation All comments received will be posted without change to http wwwregulationsgov including any personal information provided
Docket For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received go to http wwwregulationsgov Submitted comments may also be inspected on regular business days between the hours of 9 am and 430 pm at the Office of International Trade Customs and Border Protection 799 9th Street NW 5th Floor Washington DC Arrangements to inspect submitted documents should be made in advance by calling Mr Joseph Clark at (202) 572shy8768
II Background
The maritime cabotage law governing the transportation of passengers was first established by section 8 of the Passenger Vessel Services Act of June 191886 (the PVSA) 24 Stat 81 as amended by section 2 of the Act of February 17 1898 30 Stat 248 formerly codified at 46 USC App 289 (now codified at 46 USC 55103) 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 of $200 (now $300 as promulgated in TD 03-11 pursuant to the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 199028 USC 2461 note) for each passenger so transported and landed
The intent of the maritime cabotage laws including the PVSA was to provide a legal structure that guarantees a coastwise monopoly to
65488 Federal RegisterVol 72 No 224Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules
American shipping and thereby promotes development of the American merchant marine Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 28 (DC Cir 1984) see also The Granada 35 FSupp 892 8931940 AMC 1601 (DC Pa 1940) (stating that the legislative aim of section 289 [now 55102] was the creation of a practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping business for United States ships) In other words the PVSA was enacted to advance the United States merchant marine and fleet by restricting the use of foreign-ownedflagged passenger vessels in United States territorial waters
Passenger vessel transportation between United States ports has historically been viewed to be part of the coastwise trade after the enactment of the PVSA This view is premised on the concepts of continuity of the voyage and whether its intended purpose or objective was coastwise transportation In other words the PVSA was held to be violated if the coastwise movement was continuous or if the purpose of the trip was a coastwise voyage (See 18 OAG 445 September 4 1886 28 OAG 204 February 16 1910 29 OAG 318 February 12 1912 30 OAG 44 February 1 1913 34 OAG 340 December 24 1924 and 36 OAG 352 August 13 1930)
The CBP regulations promulgated pursuant to the PVSA are found at section 480a of title 19 of the Code of Federal Regulations (19 CFR 480a) and are reflective of the above cited Office of the Attorney General decisions These regulations provide among other things that a non-coastwise-qualified vessel which embarks a passenger at a port in the United States embraced within the coastwise laws (a coastwise port) will be deemed to have landed that passenger in violation of the PVSA if the passenger disembarks at a different coastwise port on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a nearby foreign port or ports (as defined in 19 CFR 480a(a)(2) see also 19 CFR 480a(b)(2)) The terms embark and disembark are words of art which are defined as going on board a vessel for the duration of a specific voyage and leaving a vessel at the conclusion of a specific voyage respectively (See 19 CFR 480a(a)(4))
The references in section 480a to nearby foreign ports (defined in 19 CFR 480a(a)(2)) are the results of attempts by CBP to apply an Office of the Attorney Generals opinion dated February 26 1910 (28 OAG 204) In that case a foreign-flag vessel transported 615 passengers on a voyage around the world beginning in New
York and concluding in San Francisco The Attorney General opined that since the primary object of the voyage was to visit various parts of the world on a pleasure tour returning home via California and not to be transported in domestic commerce the transportation was not in violation of the PVSA
The 1910 Attorney Generals opinion was extended to voyages that included foreign ports other than nearby foreign ports (See Treasury Decision (TD) 68shy285 (33 FR 16558) November 14 1968) However voyages solely to one or more coastwise ports have always been considered predominantly coastwise Therefore non-coastwise-qualified vessels engaging in such a voyage where passengers temporarily go ashore at a coastwise port have been deemed to have violated the PVSA
m Current Law and Policy Pursuant to Public Law 109-304 120
Stat 1632 enacted on October 6 2006 Title 46 United States Code was substantially reorganized and recodified Consequently the PVSA is now codified at 46 USC 55103 and provides that no vessel shall transport passengers between ports or places in the United States either directly or by way of a foreign port under a penalty of $300 for each person so transported and landed except one that (1) Is wholly owned by citizens of the United States for purposes of engaging in the coastwise trade and (2) has been issued a certificate of documentation with a coastwise endorsement or is exempt from documentation but would otherwise be eligible for such a certificate and endorsement
In 2003 Congress enacted Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II Section 211 for the purpose of revitalizing the oceangoing US-flag cruise industry in Hawaii (the 2003 Act) Three oceangoing US-flag cruise ships PRIDE OF ALOHA PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAII were documented with coastwise privileges pursuant to the 2003 Act These vessels entered regular service in Hawaii in 2004 2005 and 2006 respectively and pursuant to the express language of the 2003 Act are limited in their operation to providing regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands of Hawaii
The CBP regulations promulgated pursuant to the PVSA are set forth in 19 CFR 480a and have remained unchanged throughout both the recodification of Title 46 of the United States Code and the enactment of the 2003 Act They provide that a violation of the PVSA occurs when passengers embark (board a vessel for the
duration of a voyage) a non-coastwiseshyqualified vessel at one US port and disembark (leave the vessel at the conclusion of a voyage) at a different US port unless they proceed with the vessel to a distant foreign port (Le any port not considered a nearby foreign port which is defined as any port located in North America Central America Bermuda or the West Indies including the Bahamas) Currently these regulations do not contain specific criteria for non-coastwise-qualified vessels on itineraries including US ports and either nearby or distant foreign ports in order for such foreign port calls to be compliant with the PVSA
To reiterate the applicable CBP regulations provide that the PVSA is violated when a non-coastwise-qualified vessel transports a passenger on a voyage solely to one or more coastwise ports and the passenger disembarks or goes ashore temporarily at a coastwise port (19 CFR 480a(b)(1)) Furthermore a violation of the PVSA also occurs when a non-coastwise-qualified vessel transports a passenger on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a nearby foreign port or ports (but no other foreign port) and the passenger disembarks at a coastwise port other than the port of embarkation (19 CFR 480a(b)(2)) However there is no violation of the PVSA when a passenger is on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a distant foreign port or ports (whether or not the voyage includes a nearby foreign port or ports) and the passenger disembarks at a coastwise port provided the passenger has proceeded with the vessel to a distant foreign port (19 CFR 480a(b)(3))
IV Request From MARAD To Provide Guidance
The US Department of Transportation Maritime Administration (MARAD) has requested that CBP take action to ensure enforcement of the PVSA MARAD has asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreignshyflag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwiseshyqualified cruise ship operators
In April of 2007 the operator of the three US-flag cruise vessels operating solely in Hawaii pursuant to the 2003 Act announced their intent to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAIl from the Hawaii market and redeploy her to Europe The operator intends to re-flag the vessel to foreign registry directly resulting in the loss of over 1100 crewmember jobs The primary reason cited for this decision is the rapid increase in foreign-flag competition entering the Hawaii market
Federal Register I Vol 72 No 224 I Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules 65489
from the West Coast This competition is evidenced in published cruise itineraries of foreign-flag carriers offering a variety of round trip cruises that depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period usually in the early morning and ultimately return to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their cruise These cruises are often marketed as Hawaii cruises and except for the brief stop in the nearby foreign port of Ensenada are purely coastwise in nature It is these cruise itineraries that pose an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels that pursuant to the 2003 Act are currently engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands
V Preliminary Notice
In response to MARADs concerns CBP sent letters to two carriers known to operate the itineraries in question as well as to the Cruise Lines International Association Inc stating that CBP believes that these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because it appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA The letters further indicated that CBP is taking steps to publish this position
VI CBPs Proposed Interpretive Rule Accordingly in this document CBP is
proposing to provide that cruise itineraries for non-qualified coastwise vessels which allow passengers to board at a US port call at several Hawaiian ports proceed to a foreign port or ports for a brief period and then ultimately return to the original US port of embarkation for disembarkation are not consistent with the PVSA and the regulations promulgated pursuant thereto Specifically CBP interprets a voyage to be solely to one or more coastwise ports even where it stops at a foreign port unless the stop at the foreign port is a legitimate object of the cruise CBP will presume that a stop at a foreign port is not a legitimate object of the cruise unless
(1) The stop lasts at least 48 hours at the foreign port
(2) The amount of time at the foreign port is more than 50 percent of the total amount of time at the US ports of call and
(3) The passengers are permitted to go ashore temporarily at the foreign port
Accordingly CBP proposes to adopt an interpretive rule under which it will presume that any cruise itinerary that does not include a foreign port call that
satisfies each of these three criteria constitutes coastwise transportation of passengers in violation of 19 CFR 480a(b)(1)
Dated November 16 2007 W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection [FR Doc E7-22788 Filed 11-20-07 845 am] BILLING CODe 9111-14-1
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau
27 CFR Part 9
[Notice No 76]
RIN 1513-AB49
Proposed Establishment of the Leona Valley Viticultural Area (2007R-281 P)
AGENCY Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau Treasury ACTION Notice of proposed rulemaking
SUMMARY The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau proposes to establish the 134 square mile Leona Valley viticultural area in the northeast part of Los Angeles County California We designate viticultural areas to allow vintners to better describe the origin of their wines and to allow consumers to better identify wines they may purchase We invite comments on this proposed addition to our regulations DATES We must receive written comments on or before January 22 2008
ADDRESSES You may send comments on this notice to one of the following addresses
bull httpwwwregulationsgov (Federal e-rulemaking portal follow the instructions for submitting comments) or
bull Director Regulations and Rulings Division Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau PO Box 14412 Washington DC 20044-4412
See the Public Participation section of this notice for specific instructions and requirements for submitting comments and for information on how to request a public hearing
You may view copies of this notice selected supporting materials and any comments we receive about this proposal at httpwwwregulationsgov under Docket No 2007-0066 You also may view copies of this notice all related petitions maps or other supporting materials and any comments we receive about this
proposal by appointment at the TTB Information Resource Center 1310 G Street NW Washington DC 20220 To make an appointment call 202-927shy2400
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT NA Sutton Regulations and Rulings Division Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau 925 Lakeville S1 No 158 Petaluma CA 94952 phone 415shy271-1254 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
Background on Viticultural Areas
TTB Authority Section 105(e) of the Federal Alcohol
Administration Act (FAA Act) 27 USC 205(e) authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to prescribe regulations for the labeling of wine distilled spirits and malt beverages The FAA Act provides that these regulations should among other things prohibit consumer deception and the use of misleading statements on labels and ensure that labels provide the consumer with adequate information as to the identity and quality of the product The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) administers the regulations promulgated under the FAA Act
Part 4 ofthe TTB regulations (27 CFR part 4) allows the establishment of definitive viticultural areas and the use of their names as appellations of origin on wine labels and in wine advertisements Part 9 of the TTB regulations (27 CFR part 9) contains the list of approved viticultural areas
Definition Section 425(e)(1)(i) ofthe TTB
regulations (27 CFR 425(e)(1)(i)) defines a viticultural area for American wine as a delimited grape-growing region distinguishable by geographical features the boundaries of which have been recognized and defined in part 9 of the regulations These designations allow vintners and consumers to attribute a given quality reputation or other characteristic of a wine made from grapes grown in an area to its geographic origin The establishment of viticultural areas allows vintners to describe more accurately the origin of their wines to consumers and helps consumers to identify wines they may purchase Establishment of a viticultural area is neither an approval nor an endorsement by TTB of the wine produced in that area
Requirements Section 425(e)(2) of the TTB
regulations outlines the procedure for proposing an American viticultural area and provides that any interested party
Us Department ofHomelaDd Secmity Washington DC 10229
bull ~
US Customs and Border Protection
AUG 15 2fXJJ
VE5-3-02-QTRRBSTCCCI - ti015502-GG-
Mr leon Sutcliffe Director Port Operations Camivai Cruise Unes Camival Place 3655 NW 87Avenue Miami Aorlda 33178
RE P~nger Vessef Services Ad Coastwise Transportation 46 USC sect 55103 19 CFR sect 480a(b)
Dear Mr Sutcliffe
As you know US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) enforces the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) codified at TItle 46 United States Code section 55103 (46 USC 55103) This statute prohibits non-coastwise-qualifled vessels (ie those vessels not US-buill owned and documented with a coastwise endorsement) from transporting passengers between porls or places within the United States The regUlations promUlgated pursuant to the PVSA are found at TrtJe 19 Code of Federal Regulations section 4808 (19 CFR 4808)
It has come to our attention that passenger vessels of your company are engaging in cruise itineraries that include ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands Two USAlagged coastwise-endorsed passenger vessefs are also currenUy engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of caD wittlin the Hawaiian Islands
As part of your cruise itineraries some of your foreign-flagged vessels depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period and ultimately rebJm to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their endse For example the MS ZAANDAM of Holand America Lines departs San Diego cruises the Hawaiian Islands stops in Ensenada from 800pm to 11 OOpmbull and returns to san Diego CBP believes these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because It appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA -- - - ~~~------
Please be advised that CBP is taking steps to publish this position Should have any questions pertaining to this matter please contact Mr Glen Vereb Chief Cargo Security Carriers and Immigration Branch at (202) 572-8724
Sincerely
F Jl E EST Y LEe A U I 5 I N Gmiddot
December 21 2007
The Honorable W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection co Border Security Regulations Branch Office ofInternational Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229
Re Hawaii Coastwise Cruises (USCBP-2007-0098) Comments in Response to Proposed Interpretation
Dear Commissioner Basham
NCL America Inc1 (NCLA) submits these comments in support ofthe efforts ofCustoms and Border Protection to enforce the Passenger Vessel Services Act and the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative as applied to Hawaii coastwise cruises
1 Introduction and Summary of Position
NCLA operates three large oceangoing US flag cruise ships in Hawaii These ships are documented under US flag and are required to operate in regular service in Hawaii pursuant to the authority of the Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative a 2003 federal statute intended to revitalize the US flag cruise industry and to maximize economic and national security benefits to the United States (the 2003 Act)
NCLA has invested $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships pursuant to the 2003 Act and in direct reliance on the protections of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) and its proper enforcement The PVSA limits the transportation ofpassengers between US ports to coastwise documented US flag ships Its statutory protections recognize that US flag ships have significantly higher operational costs in part because they are subject to more stringent US laws including US labor laws and federal
1 NCL America Inc is a US corporation incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware headquartered in Honolulu Hawaii As a US corporation it is subject to US taxes at both the federal and state level The Chief Executive Officer the Chairman of the Board and all of the Board of Directors of NCL America are US citizens The company is also subject to US labor and employment laws and is required by statute to maintain a workforce comprised primarily ofUS citizens
700 Bishop St SUite 900 I Honolulu HawMi 96813 I Tel 8085273800 Fax 8085273820 I ndcom
2
income tax among others The NCLA ships operating in Hawaii are the only large oceangoing cruise ships operating under US flag In furtherance of the policy goals of the PVSA and the 2003 Act these ships have created over 4000 seafaring jobs all subject to US minimum wage and other labor statutes
Since 2003 there has been a significant increase in capacity in the Hawaii market from foreign flag ships providing cruise service to Hawaii from the West Coast Many of these foreign flag cruises are marketed as Hawaii cruises and consist entirely ofUS ports ofcall with the sole exception of a token stop in Mexico for as little as an hour late at night under circumstances where passengers are not permitted to get offthe ship There are no reported rulings approving these particular foreign flag itineraries
Lower cost foreign competition in the Hawaii market has unfairly hurt NCLAs operations NCLA has incurred substantial losses which have contributed significantly to its decision earlier this year to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAll from US flag and reshydeploy it foreign Unfair foreign competition poses an imminent threat to the remaining US flag passenger vessels operating in the Hawaii trades pursuant to the 2003 Act
As the agency statutorily charged with implementation of the 2003 Act the US Department ofTransportation Maritime Administration (MARAn) is aware of the threat foreign flag Hawaii itineraries pose to the US flag fleet and brought the situation to the attention ofthe US Department ofHomeland Security Bureau ofCustoms and Border Protection (CBP or Customs) Customs determined that the primary object of these itineraries was coastwise and that the Ensenada stop was an evasion of the PVSA
In August 2007 Customs provided written notice to the affected foreign lines and their trade association that the existing itineraries were contrary to the PVSA None of these lines sought advance rulings even after the Customs notice with respect to their Hawaii itineraries pursuant to Customs regulations and many continued to market the itineraries as Hawaii cruises NCLA supports the efforts ofCustoms and MARAD to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act for Hawaii cruises
2 Statutory Authority for Customs Proposed Interpretation
(a) Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA)
Congress passed the PVSA in 1886 to protect the US maritime transportation industry from foreign competition2 Protection is afforded through penalty assessments on foreign vessels transporting passengers between US ports or places directly or by way ofa foreign port 3 As Congress and the courts have recognized coastwise protections for the US maritime transportation industry are only one dimension of the PVSA Operating in conjunction with other coastwise laws and with the US
2 See United States v Honduran SS GRANADA 35 F Supp 892 894 (BD Pa 1940)(citing purpose of PVSA to meet threats to the practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping which was to be preserved for US ships)
46 USc sect 55103 (originally 46 USC App 289)
3
documentation laws the PVSA also enhances military sealift in times ofnational emergency sustains a US merchant marine and supports the US shipbuilding and repair industry4
(b) Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative (the 2003 Act)
Over the past decade Congress has sought to reinforce the goals of the PVSA by providing mechanisms to revitalize the oceangoing US flag cruise fleet particularly in Hawaii The Project America legislation enacted in 1997 authorized among other things the re~flagging ofone existing cruise ship contingent on the operator contracting for the construction oftwo new oceangoing cruise shipss Following the default of the operator under the original contract Congress enacted the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative for the purpose ofrecovering economic and national security benefits to the United States bull 6 These same goals of the original PVSA were expressly referenced in the legislative history of the 2003 Act which emphasized that these ships will be assets available in time ofnational emergency and will significantly expand the pool ofqualified seafarers upon which the US Department ofDefense relies to crew non-combatant vessels
The 2003 Act authorizes the US documentation ofthree cruise ships for operation in regular service in Hawaii subject to certain conditions including a prohibition on operating in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico and the Caribbean Sea and a requirement that all vessel repair work be undertaken in the United States MARAD is charged with implementation of the 2003 Act
3 Customs Implementation of PVSA
(a) Regulations
The current regulations implementing the PVSA were published by Customs in 19858 The growth of the foreign flag cruise industry in North America and in particular the development of the Alaska cruise market led to an effort in 1984 to amend the thenshyexisting regulations to increase the ease of administration and operational flexibility The effort to change the regulation had support from US port interests who saw benefit in the potential increase in the number ofUS ports that foreign vessels could call and was opposed by proponents ofpotential US flag projects as detrimental to efforts to revitalize the US fleet 9 The preamble to the 1985 rule emphasized that it was of paramount importance to consider the primary object ofpassengers in taking a
4 See American Hawaii Cruises v Skinner 713 F Supp 452 457 (DDC 1989) (recognizing the contribution of the PVSA and the Jones Act in helping to secure national defense by maintaining a merchant marine oftbe best equipped and most suitable types ofvessels sufficient to serve in time of war or national emergency) see also Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 30 (DC Cir 1984) Wirth Ltd v SIS Acadia Forest 537 F2d 1272 1281 n32 (5th Cir 1976) S Public Law 105-56 Section 8109 (111 Stat 1203 1244) (Oct 81997 ) 6 Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II General Provisions - Department ofCommerce Section 211 (117 Stat 1179) (Feb 20 2003) 1 149 Cong Rec S1118 (dailyed Jan 17 2003(statement ofSenator Inouye) 8 19 CFR sect 480a 950 Fed Reg 26981 (July I 1985)
4
voyage10 a concept which is reinforced elsewhere in Customs regulations11 In its analysis of the comments received at the time Customs accepted the view ofport interests that the modified rule would help their business but did so recognizing the absence ofa regular salt water US flag passenger fleet Customs acknowledged the potential harm to prospective efforts to revitalize the US flag passenger fleet and expressly cautioned that if it were ever shown that coastwise qualified vessels in competition with foreign vessels were in fact hurt by the modified Customs regulation then Customs would immediately reconsider its position12
(b) Customs Rulings
Given the significant penalties associated with violating the PVSA13 Customs regulations expressly provide a mechanism for the owner or charterer of a foreign vessel or any other interested person to request an advisory ruling as to whether a contemplated voyage would be considered in violation of the PVSA14 Customs regulations provide that vessel operators can rely on these ruling letters only to the extent that the facts and circumstances are identical to those in the ruling letter IS
Notwithstanding the fact that several foreign cruise lines offer Hawaii itineraries originating in a US mainland port and calling at Hawaii ports with a token intervening stop in Mexico there are no reported rulings expressly approving such an itinerary for these foreign cruise lines 16
4 The Cruise Industry in Hawaii
(a) NCL America Returns US flag to the Oceangoing Passenger Fleet
Pursuant to the requirements ofthe 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative NCLA agreed to promote US-flag cruising enhance military sealift capacity and expand the US maritime labor base No other major cruise line had ever undertaken such a commitment to the US flag and the public policy objectives Congress sought to achieve under the PVSA or the 2003 Act Introduction ofPRIDE OF ALOHA in 2004 was a significant development in the maritime industry because it marked the restoration ofthe
10 Id at 26983 11 Customs Regulations include a provision on the effect ofruling letters and with respect to carrier rulings the applicable regulation refers to rulings setting forth a determination as to whether or not the primary object of a contemplated voyage is coastwise transportation in violation of46 USC sect 289 [pYSA codified at 46 USC sect55103] 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 12 50 Fed Reg at 26983 13 A modem cruise ship with 2400 passengers for example would be subject to a fine of$720OOO per cruise based on the statutory penalty of$300 for each passenger transported in violation of the Act 14 19 CFR sect 480a(d) IS 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 16 There is one older reported mling involving a request to drop the Ensenada port call from a Los AngeleslHawaiiLos Angeles itinerary which Customs held would violate the PYSA In dicta Customs acknowledged that the itinerary could be in compliance if the Ensenada call were not dropped but did not address the issue ofwhether a one hour service call where no passengers depart the vessel would be sufficient The carrier that obtained that ruling has since left the Hawaii market See Customs Ruling HQ 114078 re Crystal Hannony (Nov 4 1997)
5
us flag to the oceangoing cruise industry A contemporaneous press release from the Us Department ofTransportation reported that the three US-flag cruise ships to be introduced pursuant to the 2003 Act were expected to create more than 20000 US jobs generate more than $825 million ofexpenditures in the US economy and create nearly $360 million in federal tax revenue by the end of 200717 In 2005 the PRIDE OF AMERICA was introduced and in 2006 the third vessel PRIDE OF HAWAll was introduced to Hawaii Both the PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAIl offer 7shyday inter-island Hawaii itineraries whereas PRIDE OF ALOHA operates on 7 and 10 day cruises exclusively among the islands ofHawaii as well as 11 day cruises that include a foreign port call at Fanning Island To date NCLA has invested over $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships in furtherance ofthe policy objectives of the PVSA and the 2003 Act These ships employ over 4000 seafarers and generate hundreds ofmillions of dollars in benefits for Hawaii and the nation
(b) Significant Increase in Foreign Flag Capacity Since 2003
The most significant change in the Hawaii cruise market since 2003 has been the dramatic increase in capacity A significant portion ofthis capacity increase is directly attributable to NCLAs fulfillment ofthe Congressional mandate in the 2003 Act However foreign-flag operations in the Hawaii market as measured in passenger nights18 have skyrocketed Based on MARAn data derived from the US Customs Border Patrol Vessel Entrance and Clearance documents the passenger nights for foreign flag vessels departing from the West Coast to Hawaii on round trip cruise have increased several hundredfold during this period19 See Exhibit A
(c) NCLA Has Incurred Substantial Losses During this Period
Since 2004 NCLA has lost cumulatively more than a quarter ofa billion dollars A principal reason for these losses has been the increase in foreign capacity in this market NCLA has taken significant steps to reduce costs to address the increase in foreign competition but NCLA is at an inherent disadvantage when competing against foreign companies that are not subject to US labor laws US tax laws and other laws Ofcourse the statutory protections of the PVSA are intended to address these very issues That is why Customs immediate action to implement the proposed interpretation is critical for the US flag fleet Regrettably NCLA has already been forced to reduce overall capacity early next year with the withdrawal ofPRIDE OF HAWAlI to another
17 DOT Press Release dated June 72004 see also DOT Press Release dated August 132004 in connection with visit to PRIDE OF ALOHA by US Transportation Secretary Norman Y Mineta 11 Passenger nights (also referred to as passenger capacity days) are calculated by multiplying the number ofpassengers per vessel by the number ofcruise days in each itinerary by the number of cruises This is the unit ofmeasurement employed by MARAn In contrast passenger bed supply (also referred to as passenger capacity) data reflects only the number ofberths per vessel multiplied by the number of cruises and hence understates the market by excluding the full economic value ofthe cruise perfonned 19 In 2003 the total number ofpassenger nights for round-trip West Coast to Hawaii cruises was 303325 which jumped by 353 to 1072329 in 2006 and by 430 to 1304546 from 2003 to 2007 (The 2007 figure is based on MARAD data for six months and a1ll1ualized by published itineraries for the balance of the year)
6
market for operation under foreign flag This move alone will result in the loss ofover 1000 American seafaring jobs
5 Customs Proposed Interpretation is Necessary to Further the Important National Security and Public Policy Objectives Embodied in Federal Law
As Customs has properly noted the increase in foreign competition in the Hawaii trades in contravention of the PVSA pose[s] an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels[] As the operator of these ships NCLA has a vested interest in protecting the jobs ofthe thousands ofAmerican crewmembers and cruise ship service providers who support these vessels NCLA also has an interest in protecting the substantial economic investment it has made to revitalize the US flag passenger vessel fleet But a balancing of interests in the context of Customs enforcement ofexisting law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act requires a much broader focus
The legislative history of the 2003 Act expressly recognized the national security and public policy import ofestablishing a US flag passenger vessel fleet as a means to maintain the countrys preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool of qualified seafarers and as a means to help sustain a fleet ofUS-flag vessels to su~ort
the nations military and maritime industrial base for times ofnational emergency
Congress understood the importance ofestablishing a viable US flag cruise ship fleet as something larger than the vessels themselves These national security and public policy objectives must be weighed in the balance as Customs assesses how best to interpret its rules to give effect to the PVSA and the 2003 Act
6 Customs Should Clarify that the Proposed Interpretation is Limited to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades and Adopt Reasonable Measures to Ensure Sufficient Foreign Content
Since publication ofthe proposed interpretative rule several commenters have observed that the scope of the proposed interpretation is ambiguous because the language of Section VI referencing any cruise itinerary appears broader than the caption Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises and the entire discussion in the published notice which focuses exclusively on US-flag coastwise vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA agrees that the proposed interpretation should be clarified so that its scope is limited to vessels operating roundtrip voyages from US ports that include Hawaii port calls
NCLA supports the concept reflected in the proposed interpretive rule that round trip Hawaii itineraries from US ports on foreign ships must include a material and measurable degree ofoverall foreign port content as compared to US port content
20 149 Congo Rec S1117 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)
7
(a) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is also Consistent with Subsequent Congressional Enactments Modifying the PVSA
As discussed above it is well established that the PVSA was designed toRrotect US-flag vessels from foreign competition in the coastwise and domestic trades 1
Subsequent legislative enactments however have appropriately differentiated among distinct geographic markets and trades including Canada Alaska Puerto Rico and Hawaii based on the existence or non-existence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
In 1938 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers by Canadian passenger vessels on Lake Ontario and the St Lawrence River until such time as passenger service shall be established by vessels of the United States22 Similarly in 1961 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers on Canadian vessels within Alaska or between Alaska and other points in the United States until such time as passenger service is established by vessels ofthe United States23
In 1984 Congress modified the application ofthe PVSA to pennit the transportation ofpassengers between Puerto Rico and other United States ports on foreign-flag vessels24 As with the other statutory exceptions this provision is qualified and expires [o]n a showing that a United States passenger vessel qualified to engage in the coastwise trade is offering or advertising passenger service between a port in Puerto Rico and another port in the United States2S
Congress acted again with respect to the application of the PVSA with the 2003 Act in which it authorized three vessels that did not meet the US-build requirements of the PVSA to operate as modem US-flagged cruise ships in regular service in Hawaii26 The 2003 Act imposes a specific geographic limitation on the operation of any ship documented under this authority to operations only in regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands ofHawaii and shall not transport passengers in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico or the Caribbean Sea except in certain limited circumstances27 As above the limited nature of the 2003 Act is express it is strictly limited to the large ocean-going cruise ships and then only those operating in the regular Hawaii service where there are no US-flag operations28
21 See Act ofJune 19 1886 c 421 sec 8 24 Stat 81 Act of February 171898 c 26 sec 2 30 Stat 248 22 S] Res 174 75th Cong 52 Stat 223 (Alp 251938) codified at46 USC sect 55121(a) 23 See Pub L 87-77 75 Stat 196 (Jun 30 1961) codified at 46 USC sect 55121(b) 24 See Pub L 98-563 98 Stat 2916 (Oct 301984) codified at 46 USC sect 55104(b) 25 46 USC sect 55104(c)(l) see also 46 USC 46 USc sect 55104(cX2)(expiration of exemption upon availability ofa non-coastwise qualified US-flag vessel offering service in the relevant market) 26 149 Congo Rec SI118 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)(statementofSen Inouye) 27 Pub L 108-7 117 Stat 79 (Feb 20 2003) 28 149 Congo Rec S11l9 (dailyed Jan 17 2003Xstatement of Sen Inouye)
8
In each ofthese instances Congress fashioned a narrow exception to the PVSA that differentiated among distinct geographic markets based on the existence or nonshyexistence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
As the federal agency responsible for administering the 2003 Act MARAD requested that Customs act to protect US flag passenger vessel interests in the Hawaii trades29 Limiting the scope ofthe proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades also reflects Customs appreciation of the PVSA in the context of the subsequent Congressional action30 Viewing the Congressional modifications to the PVSA as a whole Congress has specifically and repeatedly differentiated among distinct geographic markets when it has found it necessary and appropriate to do so to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests It is well established that the proper interpretation of a statutory scheme includes consideration ofsubsequent statutes even though the underlying statute itselfhas not been expressly amended31 Accordingly Customs should likewise limit the scope ofthe proposed PVSA interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades because that is the only geographic market as mandated by the 2003 Act in which oceangoing US-flag cruise ships are operating
(b) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Consistent with Public Policy Objectives of the 1985 Rulemaking
In 1985middot Customs liberalized the regulations implementing the PVSA by eliminating certain regulatory prohibitions on foreign flag vessels In the context of the 1985 rulemaking Customs justified a relaxation ofthe regulations on the grounds that it would simplify the administration of the PVSA and would benefit the economy ofcertain American coastwise ports without eroding the statutory protection given to American vessels engaged in solely domestic trade32
Customs thus sought to reconcile US port economic interests with US-flag passenger vessel interests Both of these twin policy objectives are furthered by
29 See 72 Fed Reg 65488 (Nov 21 2007)( MARAn bas asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the ~eratiODS ofcoastwise-qualified cruise ship operators)
See generally FDA v Brown amp Williamson Tobacco Corp 529 US 120 132-133 (2000)(assessing propriety ofagency construction ofFood DIUg and Cosmetics Act and descnbing responsibility of reviewing cowt to assess statutory provisions in the context of subsequent legislative enactments) 31 See Brown amp Williamson 529 US 143 (holding that proper construction ofstatutory provision must necessarily assume that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications ofa later statute This is particularly so where the scope of the earlier statute is broad but the subsequent statutes more specifically address the topic athand) see also United States v Estate ofRomani 523 US 517 530-531 (1998)( holding that a later-enacted statute should control the construction of the federal lien priority statute a specific policy embodied in a later federal statute should control om construction of the [earlier] statute even though it ha[s] not been expressly amended) United States v Fausto 484 US 439453 (1988)(The courts frequently find Congress to have done this - whenever in fact they interpret a statutory text in the light ofsurrounding texts that happen to have been subsequently enacted This classic judicial task of reconciling many laws enacted over time and getting them to make sense in combination necessarily assumes that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications of a later statute) 32 50 Fed Reg 26982 (JuI 11985)
9
limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades
As noted earlier the 2003 Act limits the operation of the NCLA US-flag oceangoing passenger vessels to regular service in Hawaii Because there are no oceangoing US-flag vessels operating in any market other than the Hawaii trades Customs should limit the scope of the proposed interPretation to that market Such a limitation protects US flag passenger vessel interests without prejudicing US port interests In contrast an application of the proposed interpretation to any itinerary would needlessly harm US port interests unrelated to Hawaii without any countervailing benefit to US-flag passenger vessel interests Accordingly limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation is consistent with the public policy objectives of the 1985 rulemaking as well as the 2003 Act
(c) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Also Consistent with Customs Commitment to Revisit the Scope of its Rules to Protect US-Flag Interests
The relaxation ofthe PVSA regulations in 1985 was premised in large part on Customs finding that there was no regular salt water US-flag passenger fleet in operation at that time33 Acknowledging that the relaxed regulations could harm USshyflag interests Customs committed in the preamble ofthe 1985 final rule to immediately reconsider its interpretation if it is ever shown that there is a viable US flag vessel operating in competition with foreign-flag vessels34
Congress enacted the 2003 Act to stimulate the development of a US flag cruise ship industry As noted above the legislative history ofthat Act makes clear that Congress sought to revitalize the US-flag cruise industry as a means to maintain Americas preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool ofqualified seafarers help sustain a fleet of US flag vessels to support our military and a maritime industrial base create thousands of seagoing and shoreside American jobs and stimulate the development ofa US flag cruise ship tourism business with the commensurate benefits to the US tax base the US economy and US employment
Customs is now acting at MARADs request to revisit its interpretation ofthe regulations implementing the PVSA because recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwise-qualified cruise ship operations35 That is to say that the concerns articulated by Customs in the context of the 1985 rulemaking have materialized and US-flag passenger vessel interests are in fact being hanned in the Hawaii trades by foreign competitors
33 50 Fed Reg 26983 34Id
3S 72 Fed Reg 56488 (Nov 21 2007)
I
10
Because the US-flag passenger vessels are limited by statute to regular service in Hawaii limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the
Hawaii trades is consistent with Customs historical commitment to revisit its interpretation ofthe implementing regulations to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests
7 Conclusion
For the reasons stated above NCLA commends the efforts ofCustoms and MARAn to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act as applied to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA respectfully requests Customs to move ahead promptly with p~blicati~nof a final interpretive rule to advance the important national security arid public policy objectives ofthese laws
We greatly appreciate the opportunity to submit these comments
Sincerely
~~~ Alan T Yamamoto Vice President Hawaii Operations
Exhibit A
Ship Name Serenade Of The Seas Departure Port San Diego California Ports of Call San Diego California Kailua Kona Hawaii Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii Hlo Hawaii Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii Ensenada Mexico San Qigo California
2007 Date(s) Oct 05
Sailing Itinerary
Day Port H ~rrive Depart Activity
05-0ct San Diego California 500 PM
06-0ct Cruising
07-0ct Cruising
08-0ct Cruising
09-0ct Cruising
10-0ct Kailua Kona Hawaii 700 AM 900 PM Tendered
11-00t Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 1000 AM Tendered
12middot0ct Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 900 PM Tendered
13-0ct Hilo Hawaii 700 AM 600 PM Docked
14middot0ct Honoulu (Oahu) Hawaii 700 AM Docked
15-0ct Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii 200 AM Docked
6-0ct CrUising
17-0ct Cruising
18-0ct Cruising
19middot0ct Cruising
-7 20-00t
O-Oot
Ensenada ~i1exico
San Deqo California
i 00 ~r1
700 ~M
200 oM D1Jcked ~
Economic Impact of Pride of Hawaii
Assumptions
1 Annual impact though Pride of Hawaii is leaving in February 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existing Pride of Aloha and Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($) 4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job multiplier (jobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
Data sourceformula 139770 Actual 2007 figure
975 Actual 2007 figure 2706 Actual 2007 figure 3688 Line 1 x line 2 x line 31000000
147 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model 042 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
1372 Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
5421 Line 4 x line 5
1549 Line 4 x line 6
5059 Line 4 x line 7
Economic Impact of Pride of Aloha
Assumptions 1 Annual impact though Pride of Aloha is leaving in May 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existlng Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($)
4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job mUltiplier Oobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
95680 111
2706 2874
147 042
1372
4225
1207
3943
Data sourcelformula Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Line 1 x line 2 x line 31000000
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 4 x line 5
Line 4 x line 6
Line 4 x line 7
lt
Methodology Used in Calculating Impact of International Cruise Ships
Cruise ship visitors 1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Came with ships 3 Flied in 4 Average length of stay (days) 5 PPPD ($) 6 Cruise visitor spending ($mil))
Cruise ship crews 7 Ratio of crew spending to cruise visitor spending 8 Cruise crew spending
Cruisline 9 Ratio of crew spending to cruise visitor spending
10 Cruiseline spending
11 Total cruise-related spending ($mil)
12 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 13 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 14 Job multiplier Uobs$ cruise -related spending)
15 Total output impact ($miJ)
16 Total earnings impact ($miJ)
17 Total employment impact (jobs)
106641 98307
8334 739 847 668
02 134
038 254
1055
147 042
1372
1551
444
1447
Data sourceformula Line 2 + line 3 DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report Line 1 x line 4 x line 5
DBEDT 2003 Cruise study Line 7 x line 6
DBEDT 2003 Cruise study Line 9 x line 6
Line 6 + line 8 + line 10
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 11 x line 12
Line 11 x line 13
Line 11 x line 14
Economic Contributions Foreign-Flag Fleet operating in Hawaii vs Three US-Flag Ships
$1500
Pride of Hawaii$1000- $542 million VIc -0-E c Pride of AlohaCo
423 million$500
Pride of America $496 million155 million$shy
Foreign-Flag US-Flag Fleet Fleet
Source State of Hawaii Department of US-Flag $1460 billion Business Economic Development and Tourism
Foreign-Flag $ 155 million 7292008
Employment Foreign-Flag Fleet operating in Hawaii vs Three US-Flag Ships
15000
10000
til c o Pride of Aloha
39435000
Pride of America 1447 4627
~---------
Foreign-Flag US-Flag Fleet Fleet
Source State of Hawaii Department of US-Flag 13629 jobs Business Economic Development and Tourism
Foreign-Flag 1447 jobs 7292008
Foreign Flag Capacity Growth Foreign flag passenger capacity has changed five-fold on roundtrip Hawaii cruises from the West Coast since enactment of the Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative
1600000
1400000
tn 1200000
J enshyZ
1000000
I shyG) en 800000 s G) tn tn
600000 as D 400000
200000
0 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Year
Source US Maritime Administration (derived from the US Customs and Border Patrol Vessel Entrance and Clearance documents - final 2007 data) 7292008
NCL America Hawaii Economic Contributions
(2004-2008)
bull (in Millions) bull $399 in wages benefits and overtime to US seafarers bull $35 in Federal and State payroll Taxes bull $64 in Government Fees and Taxes to Hawaii bull $28 in wages benefits and overtime to US other employees bull $52 in Port Charges to Hawaii Companies (Stevedores tugs pilots etc) bull $85 in Fuel to Tesoro Hawaii bull $130 for shore excursions to Hawaii tour operators bull $39 for Hawaii hotel rooms and ground transport bull $75 for food grown in Hawaii bull $57 in union fees and levies (incl $32M paid directly by employees) bull $1 in MMD fees to the United States Coast Guard bull $51 for recruitment screening processing and training crew bull $76 advertising and promoting Hawaii as a destination bull $1092
COASTWISE CRUISES INTERPRETIVE RULE RESOLUTION Adopted at the
US Conference of Mayors 76th Annual Meeting
June 20-242008 Miami
WHEREAS the Department of Homeland Securitys Customs and Border Protection (CBP) issued a proposed Interpretive Rule regulating Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises on foreign flagged vessels between US ports of call under the Passenger Vessel Services Act at the request of the United States Maritime Administration and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule would require that a foreign-flagged vessel on a coastwise cruise to call at a foreign port for at least 48 hours with that foreign stop constituting at least 50 percent of the cruise itinerary and allowing passengers to disembark the cruise vessel at the foreign port before continuing the cruise to a US port of call and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule establishes burdensome criteria that are wholly inconsistent with industry practice particularly the 48-hour call at foreign port shyinasmuch as the standard port call is six to eight hours - as well as the requirement that 50 percent of a cruise be spent at the foreign port and
WHEREAS the intent of the proposed Interpretive Rule is to protect the single remaining US flag vessel serving the Inter-Hawaiian Island cruise trade that according to the Hawaii Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism generates more than 4600 jobs and generates nearly $500 million in economic benefits for the state annually and
WHEREAS thousands of members of the International Longshore Workers Union (nWU) are employed at US ports serving cruise ships and whose jobs would be at risk if the proposed Interpretive Rule were implemented and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule is vague as to the breadth of its application ie to coastwise cruises between all United States ports or applied solely to coastwise cruises from West Coast ports to Hawaii and
WHEREAS the Cruise Lines International Association estimates the proposed Interpretive Rule would upend the $17 billion in national cruise industry spending and put at risk more than 300000 jobs generated by the international cruise industry including jobs held by nWU at US ports and the local allied industries supporting the cruise industry and
Executive Order Submissions Under Review
II Reglnfogov Where to ind Federal Regulatory Information -~
Home ] Lnitied Agenda and Regulator) Ilan pound012866 Regulator) Review Jnformalion Collection Review
EO 12866 Regulatory Rlvlw dvanced Search IJitorical RepWI Review Counh Jriter XIL
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA)
Executive Order Submissions Under Review July 25 2008 - _------------____ _shy
Department of Homeland Security
AGENCY DHS-TSA RIN 1652-AA53
TITLE Large Aircraft Security Program Other Aircraft Operator Security Programs and Airport Operator Security Program
STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT Yes RECEIVED DATE 06302008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
AGENCY DHS-USCIS RIN Llti15-AB67 TITLE Changes to Requirements Affecting H-2B Nonimmigrants and Their Employers
STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT No RECEIVED DATE 06092008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
AGENCY DHS-USCBP RIN 1651AA11 TITLE Issuance of a Visa and Authorization for Temporary Admission Into the United States for Certain Nonimmigrant Aliens Afflicted W HIV Infection
STAGE Final Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT No RECEIVED DATE 03042008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
-_RE_V-IE-W-E-X-T-EN-D-E-D---------- _
AGENCY DHS-USCBP RIN 1651-AA76 TITLE Coastwise Transportation of Passengers STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT Yes RECEIVED DATE 07142008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
Disclosure I Accessibility I Privacy Policy I Contact Us
httpwwwreginfogovpublicdoeoReviewSearch 7252008
View Rule Page 11
Shere D find Federal ReguLatory InformciiorlReglnfogov Home J Cnified Agenda al1d Regulatory Plan EO 12866 Regulatory Reyiew Information Collection Reiew
Current rnified Agenda and Regulatory Plan Historical Pnified Agenda and Regulatory Plan Search
View Rule
DHSIUSCBP RIN 1651-AA76 Publication ill Spring 2008
Title llCoastwise Transportation of Passengers
Abstract This interim rule amends the Department of Homeland Securitys (DHS) current regulations relating to the transportation of passengers by non-coastwise-qualified vessels on voyages that begin and end at a US port and stop at intervening US and foreign port(s) Under this interim final rule voyages that begin and end at a US port and stop at a foreign port(s) and at intervening US port(s) where a large USshyflag coastwise-qualified passenger vessel engages in regular service are in violation of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) unless the cumulative length of stay(s) at intervening foreign port(s) is more than 50 percent of the total amount of time spent at the intervening US port(s) and passengers are permitted to go ashore at the foreign port(s) The purpose of this amendment is to ensure that the Congressional purpose in enacting the PVSA which is to preserve the economic benefits of US coastwise trade to US-flag coastwise-qualified vessels is properly implemented
Agency Department of Homeland Security(DHS) Priority Substantive Nonsignificant
KIN Status First time published in the Unified Agenda Agenda Stage of Rulemaking Final Rule Stage
Major No Unfunded Mandates No
CFR Citation -LCER 4J~)(h)(plusmnJ
Legal Authority 5JJSS_30J12lJ-SClt16 J9_lJiCJ 431 9_L1C1plusmn3JJ2JScHJ1J2JSCJ624 L(LlLSc207LIl(gtJfHgt~ _CiQJ _46lSC 6QLQ~
Legal Deadline None
Timetable Action Date FR Cite
Interim Final Action 0510012008
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required No Government Levels Affected None
Federalism No
Included in the Regulatory Plan No
RIN Data Printed in the FR No
Agency Contact Glen E Vereb Chief Entry Procedures and Carriers Branch Department of Homeland Security US Customs and Border Protection Office of Regulations and Rulings 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington DC 20229 Phone202572-8730
Disclosure I Accessibility I Privacy Policy I Contact Us
httpwwwreginfogovpublicdoeAgendaViewRuleruleID=286751 7128120
Federal RegisterVol 72 No 224Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules 65487
SPECULATIVE POSITION LIMITS 1-Continued [In contract units)
Contract
Soybeans and Mini-Soybeans 2
Wheat and Mini-Wheat 2 bullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbull
Soybean Oil
SingleSpot month All monthsmonth
600 8600 13300 600 11100 14500 540 6600 8600
Soybean Meal 720 5500 7100
Minneapolis Grain Exchange
Hard Red Spring Wheat I 600 I 11100 I 14500
New York Board of Trade
Cotton No2 I 300 I 5300 I 7300
Kansas City Board of Trade
Hard Winter Wheat I 600 I 11100 I 14500
1 For purposes of compliance with these limits positions in a futures contract that shares ~ubstantially identical terms with a contract market enumerated herein including a futures contract that is cash-settled based on the settlement price of an enumerated contract market shall be agshygregated with positions in the enumerated contract market
2 For purposes of compliance with these limits positions in the regular-sized and mini-sized contracts shall be aggregated
Issued by the Commission this November 152007 in Washington DC David Stawick Secretary of the Commission [FR Doc E7-22681 Filed 11-20-07 845 amI BILLING CODE 6351-Q1-P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Bureau of Customs and Border Protection
19 CFR Part 4
[USCBP-2007-o098]
Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises
AGENCY Customs and Border Protection Department of Homeland Security ACTION Proposed interpretation solicitation of comments
SUMMARY This document proposes new criteria to be used by Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to determine whether non-coastwise-qualified vessels are in violation ofthe Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) when engaging in cruise itineraries in which passengers board at a US port the vessel calls at several Hawaiian ports and then the vessel proceeds to a foreign port or ports for a brief period before ultimately returning to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their cruise CBP believes these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because it appears that the primary objective of the foreign stop is evasion of the PVSA
DATES Comments must be received on or before December 212007 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT Glen E Vereb Cargo Security Carriers amp Immigration Branch Office of International Trade (202) 572-8730 ADDRESSES You may submit comments identified by docket number by one of the following methods
bull Federal eRulemaking Portal http wwwregulationsgov Follow the instructions for submitting comments
bull Mail Border Security Regulations Branch Office of International Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
I Public Participation
Interested persons are invited to participate in this proposed interpretation by submitting written data views or arguments on all aspects of the proposed interpretation Customs and Border Protection (CBP) also invites comments that relate to the economic environmental or federalism effects that might result from this proposed interpretation Comments that will provide the most assistance to CBP in developing these procedures will reference a specific portion of the proposed interpretation explain the reason for any recommended change and include data information or authority that support such recommended change
Instructions All submissions received must include the agency name and docket number for this proposed
interpretation All comments received will be posted without change to http wwwregulationsgov including any personal information provided
Docket For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received go to http wwwregulationsgov Submitted comments may also be inspected on regular business days between the hours of 9 am and 430 pm at the Office of International Trade Customs and Border Protection 799 9th Street NW 5th Floor Washington DC Arrangements to inspect submitted documents should be made in advance by calling Mr Joseph Clark at (202) 572shy8768
II Background
The maritime cabotage law governing the transportation of passengers was first established by section 8 of the Passenger Vessel Services Act of June 191886 (the PVSA) 24 Stat 81 as amended by section 2 of the Act of February 17 1898 30 Stat 248 formerly codified at 46 USC App 289 (now codified at 46 USC 55103) 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 of $200 (now $300 as promulgated in TD 03-11 pursuant to the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 199028 USC 2461 note) for each passenger so transported and landed
The intent of the maritime cabotage laws including the PVSA was to provide a legal structure that guarantees a coastwise monopoly to
65488 Federal RegisterVol 72 No 224Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules
American shipping and thereby promotes development of the American merchant marine Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 28 (DC Cir 1984) see also The Granada 35 FSupp 892 8931940 AMC 1601 (DC Pa 1940) (stating that the legislative aim of section 289 [now 55102] was the creation of a practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping business for United States ships) In other words the PVSA was enacted to advance the United States merchant marine and fleet by restricting the use of foreign-ownedflagged passenger vessels in United States territorial waters
Passenger vessel transportation between United States ports has historically been viewed to be part of the coastwise trade after the enactment of the PVSA This view is premised on the concepts of continuity of the voyage and whether its intended purpose or objective was coastwise transportation In other words the PVSA was held to be violated if the coastwise movement was continuous or if the purpose of the trip was a coastwise voyage (See 18 OAG 445 September 4 1886 28 OAG 204 February 16 1910 29 OAG 318 February 12 1912 30 OAG 44 February 1 1913 34 OAG 340 December 24 1924 and 36 OAG 352 August 13 1930)
The CBP regulations promulgated pursuant to the PVSA are found at section 480a of title 19 of the Code of Federal Regulations (19 CFR 480a) and are reflective of the above cited Office of the Attorney General decisions These regulations provide among other things that a non-coastwise-qualified vessel which embarks a passenger at a port in the United States embraced within the coastwise laws (a coastwise port) will be deemed to have landed that passenger in violation of the PVSA if the passenger disembarks at a different coastwise port on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a nearby foreign port or ports (as defined in 19 CFR 480a(a)(2) see also 19 CFR 480a(b)(2)) The terms embark and disembark are words of art which are defined as going on board a vessel for the duration of a specific voyage and leaving a vessel at the conclusion of a specific voyage respectively (See 19 CFR 480a(a)(4))
The references in section 480a to nearby foreign ports (defined in 19 CFR 480a(a)(2)) are the results of attempts by CBP to apply an Office of the Attorney Generals opinion dated February 26 1910 (28 OAG 204) In that case a foreign-flag vessel transported 615 passengers on a voyage around the world beginning in New
York and concluding in San Francisco The Attorney General opined that since the primary object of the voyage was to visit various parts of the world on a pleasure tour returning home via California and not to be transported in domestic commerce the transportation was not in violation of the PVSA
The 1910 Attorney Generals opinion was extended to voyages that included foreign ports other than nearby foreign ports (See Treasury Decision (TD) 68shy285 (33 FR 16558) November 14 1968) However voyages solely to one or more coastwise ports have always been considered predominantly coastwise Therefore non-coastwise-qualified vessels engaging in such a voyage where passengers temporarily go ashore at a coastwise port have been deemed to have violated the PVSA
m Current Law and Policy Pursuant to Public Law 109-304 120
Stat 1632 enacted on October 6 2006 Title 46 United States Code was substantially reorganized and recodified Consequently the PVSA is now codified at 46 USC 55103 and provides that no vessel shall transport passengers between ports or places in the United States either directly or by way of a foreign port under a penalty of $300 for each person so transported and landed except one that (1) Is wholly owned by citizens of the United States for purposes of engaging in the coastwise trade and (2) has been issued a certificate of documentation with a coastwise endorsement or is exempt from documentation but would otherwise be eligible for such a certificate and endorsement
In 2003 Congress enacted Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II Section 211 for the purpose of revitalizing the oceangoing US-flag cruise industry in Hawaii (the 2003 Act) Three oceangoing US-flag cruise ships PRIDE OF ALOHA PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAII were documented with coastwise privileges pursuant to the 2003 Act These vessels entered regular service in Hawaii in 2004 2005 and 2006 respectively and pursuant to the express language of the 2003 Act are limited in their operation to providing regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands of Hawaii
The CBP regulations promulgated pursuant to the PVSA are set forth in 19 CFR 480a and have remained unchanged throughout both the recodification of Title 46 of the United States Code and the enactment of the 2003 Act They provide that a violation of the PVSA occurs when passengers embark (board a vessel for the
duration of a voyage) a non-coastwiseshyqualified vessel at one US port and disembark (leave the vessel at the conclusion of a voyage) at a different US port unless they proceed with the vessel to a distant foreign port (Le any port not considered a nearby foreign port which is defined as any port located in North America Central America Bermuda or the West Indies including the Bahamas) Currently these regulations do not contain specific criteria for non-coastwise-qualified vessels on itineraries including US ports and either nearby or distant foreign ports in order for such foreign port calls to be compliant with the PVSA
To reiterate the applicable CBP regulations provide that the PVSA is violated when a non-coastwise-qualified vessel transports a passenger on a voyage solely to one or more coastwise ports and the passenger disembarks or goes ashore temporarily at a coastwise port (19 CFR 480a(b)(1)) Furthermore a violation of the PVSA also occurs when a non-coastwise-qualified vessel transports a passenger on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a nearby foreign port or ports (but no other foreign port) and the passenger disembarks at a coastwise port other than the port of embarkation (19 CFR 480a(b)(2)) However there is no violation of the PVSA when a passenger is on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a distant foreign port or ports (whether or not the voyage includes a nearby foreign port or ports) and the passenger disembarks at a coastwise port provided the passenger has proceeded with the vessel to a distant foreign port (19 CFR 480a(b)(3))
IV Request From MARAD To Provide Guidance
The US Department of Transportation Maritime Administration (MARAD) has requested that CBP take action to ensure enforcement of the PVSA MARAD has asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreignshyflag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwiseshyqualified cruise ship operators
In April of 2007 the operator of the three US-flag cruise vessels operating solely in Hawaii pursuant to the 2003 Act announced their intent to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAIl from the Hawaii market and redeploy her to Europe The operator intends to re-flag the vessel to foreign registry directly resulting in the loss of over 1100 crewmember jobs The primary reason cited for this decision is the rapid increase in foreign-flag competition entering the Hawaii market
Federal Register I Vol 72 No 224 I Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules 65489
from the West Coast This competition is evidenced in published cruise itineraries of foreign-flag carriers offering a variety of round trip cruises that depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period usually in the early morning and ultimately return to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their cruise These cruises are often marketed as Hawaii cruises and except for the brief stop in the nearby foreign port of Ensenada are purely coastwise in nature It is these cruise itineraries that pose an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels that pursuant to the 2003 Act are currently engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands
V Preliminary Notice
In response to MARADs concerns CBP sent letters to two carriers known to operate the itineraries in question as well as to the Cruise Lines International Association Inc stating that CBP believes that these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because it appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA The letters further indicated that CBP is taking steps to publish this position
VI CBPs Proposed Interpretive Rule Accordingly in this document CBP is
proposing to provide that cruise itineraries for non-qualified coastwise vessels which allow passengers to board at a US port call at several Hawaiian ports proceed to a foreign port or ports for a brief period and then ultimately return to the original US port of embarkation for disembarkation are not consistent with the PVSA and the regulations promulgated pursuant thereto Specifically CBP interprets a voyage to be solely to one or more coastwise ports even where it stops at a foreign port unless the stop at the foreign port is a legitimate object of the cruise CBP will presume that a stop at a foreign port is not a legitimate object of the cruise unless
(1) The stop lasts at least 48 hours at the foreign port
(2) The amount of time at the foreign port is more than 50 percent of the total amount of time at the US ports of call and
(3) The passengers are permitted to go ashore temporarily at the foreign port
Accordingly CBP proposes to adopt an interpretive rule under which it will presume that any cruise itinerary that does not include a foreign port call that
satisfies each of these three criteria constitutes coastwise transportation of passengers in violation of 19 CFR 480a(b)(1)
Dated November 16 2007 W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection [FR Doc E7-22788 Filed 11-20-07 845 am] BILLING CODe 9111-14-1
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau
27 CFR Part 9
[Notice No 76]
RIN 1513-AB49
Proposed Establishment of the Leona Valley Viticultural Area (2007R-281 P)
AGENCY Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau Treasury ACTION Notice of proposed rulemaking
SUMMARY The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau proposes to establish the 134 square mile Leona Valley viticultural area in the northeast part of Los Angeles County California We designate viticultural areas to allow vintners to better describe the origin of their wines and to allow consumers to better identify wines they may purchase We invite comments on this proposed addition to our regulations DATES We must receive written comments on or before January 22 2008
ADDRESSES You may send comments on this notice to one of the following addresses
bull httpwwwregulationsgov (Federal e-rulemaking portal follow the instructions for submitting comments) or
bull Director Regulations and Rulings Division Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau PO Box 14412 Washington DC 20044-4412
See the Public Participation section of this notice for specific instructions and requirements for submitting comments and for information on how to request a public hearing
You may view copies of this notice selected supporting materials and any comments we receive about this proposal at httpwwwregulationsgov under Docket No 2007-0066 You also may view copies of this notice all related petitions maps or other supporting materials and any comments we receive about this
proposal by appointment at the TTB Information Resource Center 1310 G Street NW Washington DC 20220 To make an appointment call 202-927shy2400
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT NA Sutton Regulations and Rulings Division Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau 925 Lakeville S1 No 158 Petaluma CA 94952 phone 415shy271-1254 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
Background on Viticultural Areas
TTB Authority Section 105(e) of the Federal Alcohol
Administration Act (FAA Act) 27 USC 205(e) authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to prescribe regulations for the labeling of wine distilled spirits and malt beverages The FAA Act provides that these regulations should among other things prohibit consumer deception and the use of misleading statements on labels and ensure that labels provide the consumer with adequate information as to the identity and quality of the product The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) administers the regulations promulgated under the FAA Act
Part 4 ofthe TTB regulations (27 CFR part 4) allows the establishment of definitive viticultural areas and the use of their names as appellations of origin on wine labels and in wine advertisements Part 9 of the TTB regulations (27 CFR part 9) contains the list of approved viticultural areas
Definition Section 425(e)(1)(i) ofthe TTB
regulations (27 CFR 425(e)(1)(i)) defines a viticultural area for American wine as a delimited grape-growing region distinguishable by geographical features the boundaries of which have been recognized and defined in part 9 of the regulations These designations allow vintners and consumers to attribute a given quality reputation or other characteristic of a wine made from grapes grown in an area to its geographic origin The establishment of viticultural areas allows vintners to describe more accurately the origin of their wines to consumers and helps consumers to identify wines they may purchase Establishment of a viticultural area is neither an approval nor an endorsement by TTB of the wine produced in that area
Requirements Section 425(e)(2) of the TTB
regulations outlines the procedure for proposing an American viticultural area and provides that any interested party
Us Department ofHomelaDd Secmity Washington DC 10229
bull ~
US Customs and Border Protection
AUG 15 2fXJJ
VE5-3-02-QTRRBSTCCCI - ti015502-GG-
Mr leon Sutcliffe Director Port Operations Camivai Cruise Unes Camival Place 3655 NW 87Avenue Miami Aorlda 33178
RE P~nger Vessef Services Ad Coastwise Transportation 46 USC sect 55103 19 CFR sect 480a(b)
Dear Mr Sutcliffe
As you know US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) enforces the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) codified at TItle 46 United States Code section 55103 (46 USC 55103) This statute prohibits non-coastwise-qualifled vessels (ie those vessels not US-buill owned and documented with a coastwise endorsement) from transporting passengers between porls or places within the United States The regUlations promUlgated pursuant to the PVSA are found at TrtJe 19 Code of Federal Regulations section 4808 (19 CFR 4808)
It has come to our attention that passenger vessels of your company are engaging in cruise itineraries that include ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands Two USAlagged coastwise-endorsed passenger vessefs are also currenUy engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of caD wittlin the Hawaiian Islands
As part of your cruise itineraries some of your foreign-flagged vessels depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period and ultimately rebJm to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their endse For example the MS ZAANDAM of Holand America Lines departs San Diego cruises the Hawaiian Islands stops in Ensenada from 800pm to 11 OOpmbull and returns to san Diego CBP believes these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because It appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA -- - - ~~~------
Please be advised that CBP is taking steps to publish this position Should have any questions pertaining to this matter please contact Mr Glen Vereb Chief Cargo Security Carriers and Immigration Branch at (202) 572-8724
Sincerely
F Jl E EST Y LEe A U I 5 I N Gmiddot
December 21 2007
The Honorable W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection co Border Security Regulations Branch Office ofInternational Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229
Re Hawaii Coastwise Cruises (USCBP-2007-0098) Comments in Response to Proposed Interpretation
Dear Commissioner Basham
NCL America Inc1 (NCLA) submits these comments in support ofthe efforts ofCustoms and Border Protection to enforce the Passenger Vessel Services Act and the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative as applied to Hawaii coastwise cruises
1 Introduction and Summary of Position
NCLA operates three large oceangoing US flag cruise ships in Hawaii These ships are documented under US flag and are required to operate in regular service in Hawaii pursuant to the authority of the Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative a 2003 federal statute intended to revitalize the US flag cruise industry and to maximize economic and national security benefits to the United States (the 2003 Act)
NCLA has invested $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships pursuant to the 2003 Act and in direct reliance on the protections of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) and its proper enforcement The PVSA limits the transportation ofpassengers between US ports to coastwise documented US flag ships Its statutory protections recognize that US flag ships have significantly higher operational costs in part because they are subject to more stringent US laws including US labor laws and federal
1 NCL America Inc is a US corporation incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware headquartered in Honolulu Hawaii As a US corporation it is subject to US taxes at both the federal and state level The Chief Executive Officer the Chairman of the Board and all of the Board of Directors of NCL America are US citizens The company is also subject to US labor and employment laws and is required by statute to maintain a workforce comprised primarily ofUS citizens
700 Bishop St SUite 900 I Honolulu HawMi 96813 I Tel 8085273800 Fax 8085273820 I ndcom
2
income tax among others The NCLA ships operating in Hawaii are the only large oceangoing cruise ships operating under US flag In furtherance of the policy goals of the PVSA and the 2003 Act these ships have created over 4000 seafaring jobs all subject to US minimum wage and other labor statutes
Since 2003 there has been a significant increase in capacity in the Hawaii market from foreign flag ships providing cruise service to Hawaii from the West Coast Many of these foreign flag cruises are marketed as Hawaii cruises and consist entirely ofUS ports ofcall with the sole exception of a token stop in Mexico for as little as an hour late at night under circumstances where passengers are not permitted to get offthe ship There are no reported rulings approving these particular foreign flag itineraries
Lower cost foreign competition in the Hawaii market has unfairly hurt NCLAs operations NCLA has incurred substantial losses which have contributed significantly to its decision earlier this year to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAll from US flag and reshydeploy it foreign Unfair foreign competition poses an imminent threat to the remaining US flag passenger vessels operating in the Hawaii trades pursuant to the 2003 Act
As the agency statutorily charged with implementation of the 2003 Act the US Department ofTransportation Maritime Administration (MARAn) is aware of the threat foreign flag Hawaii itineraries pose to the US flag fleet and brought the situation to the attention ofthe US Department ofHomeland Security Bureau ofCustoms and Border Protection (CBP or Customs) Customs determined that the primary object of these itineraries was coastwise and that the Ensenada stop was an evasion of the PVSA
In August 2007 Customs provided written notice to the affected foreign lines and their trade association that the existing itineraries were contrary to the PVSA None of these lines sought advance rulings even after the Customs notice with respect to their Hawaii itineraries pursuant to Customs regulations and many continued to market the itineraries as Hawaii cruises NCLA supports the efforts ofCustoms and MARAD to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act for Hawaii cruises
2 Statutory Authority for Customs Proposed Interpretation
(a) Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA)
Congress passed the PVSA in 1886 to protect the US maritime transportation industry from foreign competition2 Protection is afforded through penalty assessments on foreign vessels transporting passengers between US ports or places directly or by way ofa foreign port 3 As Congress and the courts have recognized coastwise protections for the US maritime transportation industry are only one dimension of the PVSA Operating in conjunction with other coastwise laws and with the US
2 See United States v Honduran SS GRANADA 35 F Supp 892 894 (BD Pa 1940)(citing purpose of PVSA to meet threats to the practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping which was to be preserved for US ships)
46 USc sect 55103 (originally 46 USC App 289)
3
documentation laws the PVSA also enhances military sealift in times ofnational emergency sustains a US merchant marine and supports the US shipbuilding and repair industry4
(b) Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative (the 2003 Act)
Over the past decade Congress has sought to reinforce the goals of the PVSA by providing mechanisms to revitalize the oceangoing US flag cruise fleet particularly in Hawaii The Project America legislation enacted in 1997 authorized among other things the re~flagging ofone existing cruise ship contingent on the operator contracting for the construction oftwo new oceangoing cruise shipss Following the default of the operator under the original contract Congress enacted the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative for the purpose ofrecovering economic and national security benefits to the United States bull 6 These same goals of the original PVSA were expressly referenced in the legislative history of the 2003 Act which emphasized that these ships will be assets available in time ofnational emergency and will significantly expand the pool ofqualified seafarers upon which the US Department ofDefense relies to crew non-combatant vessels
The 2003 Act authorizes the US documentation ofthree cruise ships for operation in regular service in Hawaii subject to certain conditions including a prohibition on operating in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico and the Caribbean Sea and a requirement that all vessel repair work be undertaken in the United States MARAD is charged with implementation of the 2003 Act
3 Customs Implementation of PVSA
(a) Regulations
The current regulations implementing the PVSA were published by Customs in 19858 The growth of the foreign flag cruise industry in North America and in particular the development of the Alaska cruise market led to an effort in 1984 to amend the thenshyexisting regulations to increase the ease of administration and operational flexibility The effort to change the regulation had support from US port interests who saw benefit in the potential increase in the number ofUS ports that foreign vessels could call and was opposed by proponents ofpotential US flag projects as detrimental to efforts to revitalize the US fleet 9 The preamble to the 1985 rule emphasized that it was of paramount importance to consider the primary object ofpassengers in taking a
4 See American Hawaii Cruises v Skinner 713 F Supp 452 457 (DDC 1989) (recognizing the contribution of the PVSA and the Jones Act in helping to secure national defense by maintaining a merchant marine oftbe best equipped and most suitable types ofvessels sufficient to serve in time of war or national emergency) see also Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 30 (DC Cir 1984) Wirth Ltd v SIS Acadia Forest 537 F2d 1272 1281 n32 (5th Cir 1976) S Public Law 105-56 Section 8109 (111 Stat 1203 1244) (Oct 81997 ) 6 Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II General Provisions - Department ofCommerce Section 211 (117 Stat 1179) (Feb 20 2003) 1 149 Cong Rec S1118 (dailyed Jan 17 2003(statement ofSenator Inouye) 8 19 CFR sect 480a 950 Fed Reg 26981 (July I 1985)
4
voyage10 a concept which is reinforced elsewhere in Customs regulations11 In its analysis of the comments received at the time Customs accepted the view ofport interests that the modified rule would help their business but did so recognizing the absence ofa regular salt water US flag passenger fleet Customs acknowledged the potential harm to prospective efforts to revitalize the US flag passenger fleet and expressly cautioned that if it were ever shown that coastwise qualified vessels in competition with foreign vessels were in fact hurt by the modified Customs regulation then Customs would immediately reconsider its position12
(b) Customs Rulings
Given the significant penalties associated with violating the PVSA13 Customs regulations expressly provide a mechanism for the owner or charterer of a foreign vessel or any other interested person to request an advisory ruling as to whether a contemplated voyage would be considered in violation of the PVSA14 Customs regulations provide that vessel operators can rely on these ruling letters only to the extent that the facts and circumstances are identical to those in the ruling letter IS
Notwithstanding the fact that several foreign cruise lines offer Hawaii itineraries originating in a US mainland port and calling at Hawaii ports with a token intervening stop in Mexico there are no reported rulings expressly approving such an itinerary for these foreign cruise lines 16
4 The Cruise Industry in Hawaii
(a) NCL America Returns US flag to the Oceangoing Passenger Fleet
Pursuant to the requirements ofthe 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative NCLA agreed to promote US-flag cruising enhance military sealift capacity and expand the US maritime labor base No other major cruise line had ever undertaken such a commitment to the US flag and the public policy objectives Congress sought to achieve under the PVSA or the 2003 Act Introduction ofPRIDE OF ALOHA in 2004 was a significant development in the maritime industry because it marked the restoration ofthe
10 Id at 26983 11 Customs Regulations include a provision on the effect ofruling letters and with respect to carrier rulings the applicable regulation refers to rulings setting forth a determination as to whether or not the primary object of a contemplated voyage is coastwise transportation in violation of46 USC sect 289 [pYSA codified at 46 USC sect55103] 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 12 50 Fed Reg at 26983 13 A modem cruise ship with 2400 passengers for example would be subject to a fine of$720OOO per cruise based on the statutory penalty of$300 for each passenger transported in violation of the Act 14 19 CFR sect 480a(d) IS 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 16 There is one older reported mling involving a request to drop the Ensenada port call from a Los AngeleslHawaiiLos Angeles itinerary which Customs held would violate the PYSA In dicta Customs acknowledged that the itinerary could be in compliance if the Ensenada call were not dropped but did not address the issue ofwhether a one hour service call where no passengers depart the vessel would be sufficient The carrier that obtained that ruling has since left the Hawaii market See Customs Ruling HQ 114078 re Crystal Hannony (Nov 4 1997)
5
us flag to the oceangoing cruise industry A contemporaneous press release from the Us Department ofTransportation reported that the three US-flag cruise ships to be introduced pursuant to the 2003 Act were expected to create more than 20000 US jobs generate more than $825 million ofexpenditures in the US economy and create nearly $360 million in federal tax revenue by the end of 200717 In 2005 the PRIDE OF AMERICA was introduced and in 2006 the third vessel PRIDE OF HAWAll was introduced to Hawaii Both the PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAIl offer 7shyday inter-island Hawaii itineraries whereas PRIDE OF ALOHA operates on 7 and 10 day cruises exclusively among the islands ofHawaii as well as 11 day cruises that include a foreign port call at Fanning Island To date NCLA has invested over $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships in furtherance ofthe policy objectives of the PVSA and the 2003 Act These ships employ over 4000 seafarers and generate hundreds ofmillions of dollars in benefits for Hawaii and the nation
(b) Significant Increase in Foreign Flag Capacity Since 2003
The most significant change in the Hawaii cruise market since 2003 has been the dramatic increase in capacity A significant portion ofthis capacity increase is directly attributable to NCLAs fulfillment ofthe Congressional mandate in the 2003 Act However foreign-flag operations in the Hawaii market as measured in passenger nights18 have skyrocketed Based on MARAn data derived from the US Customs Border Patrol Vessel Entrance and Clearance documents the passenger nights for foreign flag vessels departing from the West Coast to Hawaii on round trip cruise have increased several hundredfold during this period19 See Exhibit A
(c) NCLA Has Incurred Substantial Losses During this Period
Since 2004 NCLA has lost cumulatively more than a quarter ofa billion dollars A principal reason for these losses has been the increase in foreign capacity in this market NCLA has taken significant steps to reduce costs to address the increase in foreign competition but NCLA is at an inherent disadvantage when competing against foreign companies that are not subject to US labor laws US tax laws and other laws Ofcourse the statutory protections of the PVSA are intended to address these very issues That is why Customs immediate action to implement the proposed interpretation is critical for the US flag fleet Regrettably NCLA has already been forced to reduce overall capacity early next year with the withdrawal ofPRIDE OF HAWAlI to another
17 DOT Press Release dated June 72004 see also DOT Press Release dated August 132004 in connection with visit to PRIDE OF ALOHA by US Transportation Secretary Norman Y Mineta 11 Passenger nights (also referred to as passenger capacity days) are calculated by multiplying the number ofpassengers per vessel by the number ofcruise days in each itinerary by the number of cruises This is the unit ofmeasurement employed by MARAn In contrast passenger bed supply (also referred to as passenger capacity) data reflects only the number ofberths per vessel multiplied by the number of cruises and hence understates the market by excluding the full economic value ofthe cruise perfonned 19 In 2003 the total number ofpassenger nights for round-trip West Coast to Hawaii cruises was 303325 which jumped by 353 to 1072329 in 2006 and by 430 to 1304546 from 2003 to 2007 (The 2007 figure is based on MARAD data for six months and a1ll1ualized by published itineraries for the balance of the year)
6
market for operation under foreign flag This move alone will result in the loss ofover 1000 American seafaring jobs
5 Customs Proposed Interpretation is Necessary to Further the Important National Security and Public Policy Objectives Embodied in Federal Law
As Customs has properly noted the increase in foreign competition in the Hawaii trades in contravention of the PVSA pose[s] an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels[] As the operator of these ships NCLA has a vested interest in protecting the jobs ofthe thousands ofAmerican crewmembers and cruise ship service providers who support these vessels NCLA also has an interest in protecting the substantial economic investment it has made to revitalize the US flag passenger vessel fleet But a balancing of interests in the context of Customs enforcement ofexisting law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act requires a much broader focus
The legislative history of the 2003 Act expressly recognized the national security and public policy import ofestablishing a US flag passenger vessel fleet as a means to maintain the countrys preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool of qualified seafarers and as a means to help sustain a fleet ofUS-flag vessels to su~ort
the nations military and maritime industrial base for times ofnational emergency
Congress understood the importance ofestablishing a viable US flag cruise ship fleet as something larger than the vessels themselves These national security and public policy objectives must be weighed in the balance as Customs assesses how best to interpret its rules to give effect to the PVSA and the 2003 Act
6 Customs Should Clarify that the Proposed Interpretation is Limited to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades and Adopt Reasonable Measures to Ensure Sufficient Foreign Content
Since publication ofthe proposed interpretative rule several commenters have observed that the scope of the proposed interpretation is ambiguous because the language of Section VI referencing any cruise itinerary appears broader than the caption Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises and the entire discussion in the published notice which focuses exclusively on US-flag coastwise vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA agrees that the proposed interpretation should be clarified so that its scope is limited to vessels operating roundtrip voyages from US ports that include Hawaii port calls
NCLA supports the concept reflected in the proposed interpretive rule that round trip Hawaii itineraries from US ports on foreign ships must include a material and measurable degree ofoverall foreign port content as compared to US port content
20 149 Congo Rec S1117 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)
7
(a) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is also Consistent with Subsequent Congressional Enactments Modifying the PVSA
As discussed above it is well established that the PVSA was designed toRrotect US-flag vessels from foreign competition in the coastwise and domestic trades 1
Subsequent legislative enactments however have appropriately differentiated among distinct geographic markets and trades including Canada Alaska Puerto Rico and Hawaii based on the existence or non-existence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
In 1938 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers by Canadian passenger vessels on Lake Ontario and the St Lawrence River until such time as passenger service shall be established by vessels of the United States22 Similarly in 1961 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers on Canadian vessels within Alaska or between Alaska and other points in the United States until such time as passenger service is established by vessels ofthe United States23
In 1984 Congress modified the application ofthe PVSA to pennit the transportation ofpassengers between Puerto Rico and other United States ports on foreign-flag vessels24 As with the other statutory exceptions this provision is qualified and expires [o]n a showing that a United States passenger vessel qualified to engage in the coastwise trade is offering or advertising passenger service between a port in Puerto Rico and another port in the United States2S
Congress acted again with respect to the application of the PVSA with the 2003 Act in which it authorized three vessels that did not meet the US-build requirements of the PVSA to operate as modem US-flagged cruise ships in regular service in Hawaii26 The 2003 Act imposes a specific geographic limitation on the operation of any ship documented under this authority to operations only in regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands ofHawaii and shall not transport passengers in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico or the Caribbean Sea except in certain limited circumstances27 As above the limited nature of the 2003 Act is express it is strictly limited to the large ocean-going cruise ships and then only those operating in the regular Hawaii service where there are no US-flag operations28
21 See Act ofJune 19 1886 c 421 sec 8 24 Stat 81 Act of February 171898 c 26 sec 2 30 Stat 248 22 S] Res 174 75th Cong 52 Stat 223 (Alp 251938) codified at46 USC sect 55121(a) 23 See Pub L 87-77 75 Stat 196 (Jun 30 1961) codified at 46 USC sect 55121(b) 24 See Pub L 98-563 98 Stat 2916 (Oct 301984) codified at 46 USC sect 55104(b) 25 46 USC sect 55104(c)(l) see also 46 USC 46 USc sect 55104(cX2)(expiration of exemption upon availability ofa non-coastwise qualified US-flag vessel offering service in the relevant market) 26 149 Congo Rec SI118 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)(statementofSen Inouye) 27 Pub L 108-7 117 Stat 79 (Feb 20 2003) 28 149 Congo Rec S11l9 (dailyed Jan 17 2003Xstatement of Sen Inouye)
8
In each ofthese instances Congress fashioned a narrow exception to the PVSA that differentiated among distinct geographic markets based on the existence or nonshyexistence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
As the federal agency responsible for administering the 2003 Act MARAD requested that Customs act to protect US flag passenger vessel interests in the Hawaii trades29 Limiting the scope ofthe proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades also reflects Customs appreciation of the PVSA in the context of the subsequent Congressional action30 Viewing the Congressional modifications to the PVSA as a whole Congress has specifically and repeatedly differentiated among distinct geographic markets when it has found it necessary and appropriate to do so to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests It is well established that the proper interpretation of a statutory scheme includes consideration ofsubsequent statutes even though the underlying statute itselfhas not been expressly amended31 Accordingly Customs should likewise limit the scope ofthe proposed PVSA interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades because that is the only geographic market as mandated by the 2003 Act in which oceangoing US-flag cruise ships are operating
(b) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Consistent with Public Policy Objectives of the 1985 Rulemaking
In 1985middot Customs liberalized the regulations implementing the PVSA by eliminating certain regulatory prohibitions on foreign flag vessels In the context of the 1985 rulemaking Customs justified a relaxation ofthe regulations on the grounds that it would simplify the administration of the PVSA and would benefit the economy ofcertain American coastwise ports without eroding the statutory protection given to American vessels engaged in solely domestic trade32
Customs thus sought to reconcile US port economic interests with US-flag passenger vessel interests Both of these twin policy objectives are furthered by
29 See 72 Fed Reg 65488 (Nov 21 2007)( MARAn bas asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the ~eratiODS ofcoastwise-qualified cruise ship operators)
See generally FDA v Brown amp Williamson Tobacco Corp 529 US 120 132-133 (2000)(assessing propriety ofagency construction ofFood DIUg and Cosmetics Act and descnbing responsibility of reviewing cowt to assess statutory provisions in the context of subsequent legislative enactments) 31 See Brown amp Williamson 529 US 143 (holding that proper construction ofstatutory provision must necessarily assume that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications ofa later statute This is particularly so where the scope of the earlier statute is broad but the subsequent statutes more specifically address the topic athand) see also United States v Estate ofRomani 523 US 517 530-531 (1998)( holding that a later-enacted statute should control the construction of the federal lien priority statute a specific policy embodied in a later federal statute should control om construction of the [earlier] statute even though it ha[s] not been expressly amended) United States v Fausto 484 US 439453 (1988)(The courts frequently find Congress to have done this - whenever in fact they interpret a statutory text in the light ofsurrounding texts that happen to have been subsequently enacted This classic judicial task of reconciling many laws enacted over time and getting them to make sense in combination necessarily assumes that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications of a later statute) 32 50 Fed Reg 26982 (JuI 11985)
9
limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades
As noted earlier the 2003 Act limits the operation of the NCLA US-flag oceangoing passenger vessels to regular service in Hawaii Because there are no oceangoing US-flag vessels operating in any market other than the Hawaii trades Customs should limit the scope of the proposed interPretation to that market Such a limitation protects US flag passenger vessel interests without prejudicing US port interests In contrast an application of the proposed interpretation to any itinerary would needlessly harm US port interests unrelated to Hawaii without any countervailing benefit to US-flag passenger vessel interests Accordingly limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation is consistent with the public policy objectives of the 1985 rulemaking as well as the 2003 Act
(c) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Also Consistent with Customs Commitment to Revisit the Scope of its Rules to Protect US-Flag Interests
The relaxation ofthe PVSA regulations in 1985 was premised in large part on Customs finding that there was no regular salt water US-flag passenger fleet in operation at that time33 Acknowledging that the relaxed regulations could harm USshyflag interests Customs committed in the preamble ofthe 1985 final rule to immediately reconsider its interpretation if it is ever shown that there is a viable US flag vessel operating in competition with foreign-flag vessels34
Congress enacted the 2003 Act to stimulate the development of a US flag cruise ship industry As noted above the legislative history ofthat Act makes clear that Congress sought to revitalize the US-flag cruise industry as a means to maintain Americas preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool ofqualified seafarers help sustain a fleet of US flag vessels to support our military and a maritime industrial base create thousands of seagoing and shoreside American jobs and stimulate the development ofa US flag cruise ship tourism business with the commensurate benefits to the US tax base the US economy and US employment
Customs is now acting at MARADs request to revisit its interpretation ofthe regulations implementing the PVSA because recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwise-qualified cruise ship operations35 That is to say that the concerns articulated by Customs in the context of the 1985 rulemaking have materialized and US-flag passenger vessel interests are in fact being hanned in the Hawaii trades by foreign competitors
33 50 Fed Reg 26983 34Id
3S 72 Fed Reg 56488 (Nov 21 2007)
I
10
Because the US-flag passenger vessels are limited by statute to regular service in Hawaii limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the
Hawaii trades is consistent with Customs historical commitment to revisit its interpretation ofthe implementing regulations to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests
7 Conclusion
For the reasons stated above NCLA commends the efforts ofCustoms and MARAn to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act as applied to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA respectfully requests Customs to move ahead promptly with p~blicati~nof a final interpretive rule to advance the important national security arid public policy objectives ofthese laws
We greatly appreciate the opportunity to submit these comments
Sincerely
~~~ Alan T Yamamoto Vice President Hawaii Operations
Exhibit A
Ship Name Serenade Of The Seas Departure Port San Diego California Ports of Call San Diego California Kailua Kona Hawaii Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii Hlo Hawaii Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii Ensenada Mexico San Qigo California
2007 Date(s) Oct 05
Sailing Itinerary
Day Port H ~rrive Depart Activity
05-0ct San Diego California 500 PM
06-0ct Cruising
07-0ct Cruising
08-0ct Cruising
09-0ct Cruising
10-0ct Kailua Kona Hawaii 700 AM 900 PM Tendered
11-00t Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 1000 AM Tendered
12middot0ct Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 900 PM Tendered
13-0ct Hilo Hawaii 700 AM 600 PM Docked
14middot0ct Honoulu (Oahu) Hawaii 700 AM Docked
15-0ct Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii 200 AM Docked
6-0ct CrUising
17-0ct Cruising
18-0ct Cruising
19middot0ct Cruising
-7 20-00t
O-Oot
Ensenada ~i1exico
San Deqo California
i 00 ~r1
700 ~M
200 oM D1Jcked ~
Economic Impact of Pride of Aloha
Assumptions 1 Annual impact though Pride of Aloha is leaving in May 2008 2 Visitors will not come to Hawaii 3 Package price of the existlng Pride of America remains the same 4 Cruiseline purchases on supplies are passed on to visitors 5 All crew members will stay in Hawaii
Impact Calculations Cruise ship visitors
1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Average length of stay (days) 3 PPPD ($)
4 Cruise visitor spending ($mil)
5 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 6 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 7 Job mUltiplier Oobs$ cruise -related spending)
8 Total output impact ($mil)
9 Total earnings impact ($mil)
10 Total employment impact (jobs)
95680 111
2706 2874
147 042
1372
4225
1207
3943
Data sourcelformula Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Actual 2007 figure Line 1 x line 2 x line 31000000
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 4 x line 5
Line 4 x line 6
Line 4 x line 7
lt
Methodology Used in Calculating Impact of International Cruise Ships
Cruise ship visitors 1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Came with ships 3 Flied in 4 Average length of stay (days) 5 PPPD ($) 6 Cruise visitor spending ($mil))
Cruise ship crews 7 Ratio of crew spending to cruise visitor spending 8 Cruise crew spending
Cruisline 9 Ratio of crew spending to cruise visitor spending
10 Cruiseline spending
11 Total cruise-related spending ($mil)
12 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 13 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 14 Job multiplier Uobs$ cruise -related spending)
15 Total output impact ($miJ)
16 Total earnings impact ($miJ)
17 Total employment impact (jobs)
106641 98307
8334 739 847 668
02 134
038 254
1055
147 042
1372
1551
444
1447
Data sourceformula Line 2 + line 3 DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report Line 1 x line 4 x line 5
DBEDT 2003 Cruise study Line 7 x line 6
DBEDT 2003 Cruise study Line 9 x line 6
Line 6 + line 8 + line 10
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 11 x line 12
Line 11 x line 13
Line 11 x line 14
Economic Contributions Foreign-Flag Fleet operating in Hawaii vs Three US-Flag Ships
$1500
Pride of Hawaii$1000- $542 million VIc -0-E c Pride of AlohaCo
423 million$500
Pride of America $496 million155 million$shy
Foreign-Flag US-Flag Fleet Fleet
Source State of Hawaii Department of US-Flag $1460 billion Business Economic Development and Tourism
Foreign-Flag $ 155 million 7292008
Employment Foreign-Flag Fleet operating in Hawaii vs Three US-Flag Ships
15000
10000
til c o Pride of Aloha
39435000
Pride of America 1447 4627
~---------
Foreign-Flag US-Flag Fleet Fleet
Source State of Hawaii Department of US-Flag 13629 jobs Business Economic Development and Tourism
Foreign-Flag 1447 jobs 7292008
Foreign Flag Capacity Growth Foreign flag passenger capacity has changed five-fold on roundtrip Hawaii cruises from the West Coast since enactment of the Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative
1600000
1400000
tn 1200000
J enshyZ
1000000
I shyG) en 800000 s G) tn tn
600000 as D 400000
200000
0 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Year
Source US Maritime Administration (derived from the US Customs and Border Patrol Vessel Entrance and Clearance documents - final 2007 data) 7292008
NCL America Hawaii Economic Contributions
(2004-2008)
bull (in Millions) bull $399 in wages benefits and overtime to US seafarers bull $35 in Federal and State payroll Taxes bull $64 in Government Fees and Taxes to Hawaii bull $28 in wages benefits and overtime to US other employees bull $52 in Port Charges to Hawaii Companies (Stevedores tugs pilots etc) bull $85 in Fuel to Tesoro Hawaii bull $130 for shore excursions to Hawaii tour operators bull $39 for Hawaii hotel rooms and ground transport bull $75 for food grown in Hawaii bull $57 in union fees and levies (incl $32M paid directly by employees) bull $1 in MMD fees to the United States Coast Guard bull $51 for recruitment screening processing and training crew bull $76 advertising and promoting Hawaii as a destination bull $1092
COASTWISE CRUISES INTERPRETIVE RULE RESOLUTION Adopted at the
US Conference of Mayors 76th Annual Meeting
June 20-242008 Miami
WHEREAS the Department of Homeland Securitys Customs and Border Protection (CBP) issued a proposed Interpretive Rule regulating Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises on foreign flagged vessels between US ports of call under the Passenger Vessel Services Act at the request of the United States Maritime Administration and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule would require that a foreign-flagged vessel on a coastwise cruise to call at a foreign port for at least 48 hours with that foreign stop constituting at least 50 percent of the cruise itinerary and allowing passengers to disembark the cruise vessel at the foreign port before continuing the cruise to a US port of call and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule establishes burdensome criteria that are wholly inconsistent with industry practice particularly the 48-hour call at foreign port shyinasmuch as the standard port call is six to eight hours - as well as the requirement that 50 percent of a cruise be spent at the foreign port and
WHEREAS the intent of the proposed Interpretive Rule is to protect the single remaining US flag vessel serving the Inter-Hawaiian Island cruise trade that according to the Hawaii Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism generates more than 4600 jobs and generates nearly $500 million in economic benefits for the state annually and
WHEREAS thousands of members of the International Longshore Workers Union (nWU) are employed at US ports serving cruise ships and whose jobs would be at risk if the proposed Interpretive Rule were implemented and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule is vague as to the breadth of its application ie to coastwise cruises between all United States ports or applied solely to coastwise cruises from West Coast ports to Hawaii and
WHEREAS the Cruise Lines International Association estimates the proposed Interpretive Rule would upend the $17 billion in national cruise industry spending and put at risk more than 300000 jobs generated by the international cruise industry including jobs held by nWU at US ports and the local allied industries supporting the cruise industry and
Executive Order Submissions Under Review
II Reglnfogov Where to ind Federal Regulatory Information -~
Home ] Lnitied Agenda and Regulator) Ilan pound012866 Regulator) Review Jnformalion Collection Review
EO 12866 Regulatory Rlvlw dvanced Search IJitorical RepWI Review Counh Jriter XIL
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA)
Executive Order Submissions Under Review July 25 2008 - _------------____ _shy
Department of Homeland Security
AGENCY DHS-TSA RIN 1652-AA53
TITLE Large Aircraft Security Program Other Aircraft Operator Security Programs and Airport Operator Security Program
STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT Yes RECEIVED DATE 06302008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
AGENCY DHS-USCIS RIN Llti15-AB67 TITLE Changes to Requirements Affecting H-2B Nonimmigrants and Their Employers
STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT No RECEIVED DATE 06092008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
AGENCY DHS-USCBP RIN 1651AA11 TITLE Issuance of a Visa and Authorization for Temporary Admission Into the United States for Certain Nonimmigrant Aliens Afflicted W HIV Infection
STAGE Final Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT No RECEIVED DATE 03042008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
-_RE_V-IE-W-E-X-T-EN-D-E-D---------- _
AGENCY DHS-USCBP RIN 1651-AA76 TITLE Coastwise Transportation of Passengers STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT Yes RECEIVED DATE 07142008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
Disclosure I Accessibility I Privacy Policy I Contact Us
httpwwwreginfogovpublicdoeoReviewSearch 7252008
View Rule Page 11
Shere D find Federal ReguLatory InformciiorlReglnfogov Home J Cnified Agenda al1d Regulatory Plan EO 12866 Regulatory Reyiew Information Collection Reiew
Current rnified Agenda and Regulatory Plan Historical Pnified Agenda and Regulatory Plan Search
View Rule
DHSIUSCBP RIN 1651-AA76 Publication ill Spring 2008
Title llCoastwise Transportation of Passengers
Abstract This interim rule amends the Department of Homeland Securitys (DHS) current regulations relating to the transportation of passengers by non-coastwise-qualified vessels on voyages that begin and end at a US port and stop at intervening US and foreign port(s) Under this interim final rule voyages that begin and end at a US port and stop at a foreign port(s) and at intervening US port(s) where a large USshyflag coastwise-qualified passenger vessel engages in regular service are in violation of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) unless the cumulative length of stay(s) at intervening foreign port(s) is more than 50 percent of the total amount of time spent at the intervening US port(s) and passengers are permitted to go ashore at the foreign port(s) The purpose of this amendment is to ensure that the Congressional purpose in enacting the PVSA which is to preserve the economic benefits of US coastwise trade to US-flag coastwise-qualified vessels is properly implemented
Agency Department of Homeland Security(DHS) Priority Substantive Nonsignificant
KIN Status First time published in the Unified Agenda Agenda Stage of Rulemaking Final Rule Stage
Major No Unfunded Mandates No
CFR Citation -LCER 4J~)(h)(plusmnJ
Legal Authority 5JJSS_30J12lJ-SClt16 J9_lJiCJ 431 9_L1C1plusmn3JJ2JScHJ1J2JSCJ624 L(LlLSc207LIl(gtJfHgt~ _CiQJ _46lSC 6QLQ~
Legal Deadline None
Timetable Action Date FR Cite
Interim Final Action 0510012008
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required No Government Levels Affected None
Federalism No
Included in the Regulatory Plan No
RIN Data Printed in the FR No
Agency Contact Glen E Vereb Chief Entry Procedures and Carriers Branch Department of Homeland Security US Customs and Border Protection Office of Regulations and Rulings 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington DC 20229 Phone202572-8730
Disclosure I Accessibility I Privacy Policy I Contact Us
httpwwwreginfogovpublicdoeAgendaViewRuleruleID=286751 7128120
Federal RegisterVol 72 No 224Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules 65487
SPECULATIVE POSITION LIMITS 1-Continued [In contract units)
Contract
Soybeans and Mini-Soybeans 2
Wheat and Mini-Wheat 2 bullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbull
Soybean Oil
SingleSpot month All monthsmonth
600 8600 13300 600 11100 14500 540 6600 8600
Soybean Meal 720 5500 7100
Minneapolis Grain Exchange
Hard Red Spring Wheat I 600 I 11100 I 14500
New York Board of Trade
Cotton No2 I 300 I 5300 I 7300
Kansas City Board of Trade
Hard Winter Wheat I 600 I 11100 I 14500
1 For purposes of compliance with these limits positions in a futures contract that shares ~ubstantially identical terms with a contract market enumerated herein including a futures contract that is cash-settled based on the settlement price of an enumerated contract market shall be agshygregated with positions in the enumerated contract market
2 For purposes of compliance with these limits positions in the regular-sized and mini-sized contracts shall be aggregated
Issued by the Commission this November 152007 in Washington DC David Stawick Secretary of the Commission [FR Doc E7-22681 Filed 11-20-07 845 amI BILLING CODE 6351-Q1-P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Bureau of Customs and Border Protection
19 CFR Part 4
[USCBP-2007-o098]
Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises
AGENCY Customs and Border Protection Department of Homeland Security ACTION Proposed interpretation solicitation of comments
SUMMARY This document proposes new criteria to be used by Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to determine whether non-coastwise-qualified vessels are in violation ofthe Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) when engaging in cruise itineraries in which passengers board at a US port the vessel calls at several Hawaiian ports and then the vessel proceeds to a foreign port or ports for a brief period before ultimately returning to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their cruise CBP believes these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because it appears that the primary objective of the foreign stop is evasion of the PVSA
DATES Comments must be received on or before December 212007 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT Glen E Vereb Cargo Security Carriers amp Immigration Branch Office of International Trade (202) 572-8730 ADDRESSES You may submit comments identified by docket number by one of the following methods
bull Federal eRulemaking Portal http wwwregulationsgov Follow the instructions for submitting comments
bull Mail Border Security Regulations Branch Office of International Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
I Public Participation
Interested persons are invited to participate in this proposed interpretation by submitting written data views or arguments on all aspects of the proposed interpretation Customs and Border Protection (CBP) also invites comments that relate to the economic environmental or federalism effects that might result from this proposed interpretation Comments that will provide the most assistance to CBP in developing these procedures will reference a specific portion of the proposed interpretation explain the reason for any recommended change and include data information or authority that support such recommended change
Instructions All submissions received must include the agency name and docket number for this proposed
interpretation All comments received will be posted without change to http wwwregulationsgov including any personal information provided
Docket For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received go to http wwwregulationsgov Submitted comments may also be inspected on regular business days between the hours of 9 am and 430 pm at the Office of International Trade Customs and Border Protection 799 9th Street NW 5th Floor Washington DC Arrangements to inspect submitted documents should be made in advance by calling Mr Joseph Clark at (202) 572shy8768
II Background
The maritime cabotage law governing the transportation of passengers was first established by section 8 of the Passenger Vessel Services Act of June 191886 (the PVSA) 24 Stat 81 as amended by section 2 of the Act of February 17 1898 30 Stat 248 formerly codified at 46 USC App 289 (now codified at 46 USC 55103) 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 of $200 (now $300 as promulgated in TD 03-11 pursuant to the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 199028 USC 2461 note) for each passenger so transported and landed
The intent of the maritime cabotage laws including the PVSA was to provide a legal structure that guarantees a coastwise monopoly to
65488 Federal RegisterVol 72 No 224Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules
American shipping and thereby promotes development of the American merchant marine Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 28 (DC Cir 1984) see also The Granada 35 FSupp 892 8931940 AMC 1601 (DC Pa 1940) (stating that the legislative aim of section 289 [now 55102] was the creation of a practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping business for United States ships) In other words the PVSA was enacted to advance the United States merchant marine and fleet by restricting the use of foreign-ownedflagged passenger vessels in United States territorial waters
Passenger vessel transportation between United States ports has historically been viewed to be part of the coastwise trade after the enactment of the PVSA This view is premised on the concepts of continuity of the voyage and whether its intended purpose or objective was coastwise transportation In other words the PVSA was held to be violated if the coastwise movement was continuous or if the purpose of the trip was a coastwise voyage (See 18 OAG 445 September 4 1886 28 OAG 204 February 16 1910 29 OAG 318 February 12 1912 30 OAG 44 February 1 1913 34 OAG 340 December 24 1924 and 36 OAG 352 August 13 1930)
The CBP regulations promulgated pursuant to the PVSA are found at section 480a of title 19 of the Code of Federal Regulations (19 CFR 480a) and are reflective of the above cited Office of the Attorney General decisions These regulations provide among other things that a non-coastwise-qualified vessel which embarks a passenger at a port in the United States embraced within the coastwise laws (a coastwise port) will be deemed to have landed that passenger in violation of the PVSA if the passenger disembarks at a different coastwise port on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a nearby foreign port or ports (as defined in 19 CFR 480a(a)(2) see also 19 CFR 480a(b)(2)) The terms embark and disembark are words of art which are defined as going on board a vessel for the duration of a specific voyage and leaving a vessel at the conclusion of a specific voyage respectively (See 19 CFR 480a(a)(4))
The references in section 480a to nearby foreign ports (defined in 19 CFR 480a(a)(2)) are the results of attempts by CBP to apply an Office of the Attorney Generals opinion dated February 26 1910 (28 OAG 204) In that case a foreign-flag vessel transported 615 passengers on a voyage around the world beginning in New
York and concluding in San Francisco The Attorney General opined that since the primary object of the voyage was to visit various parts of the world on a pleasure tour returning home via California and not to be transported in domestic commerce the transportation was not in violation of the PVSA
The 1910 Attorney Generals opinion was extended to voyages that included foreign ports other than nearby foreign ports (See Treasury Decision (TD) 68shy285 (33 FR 16558) November 14 1968) However voyages solely to one or more coastwise ports have always been considered predominantly coastwise Therefore non-coastwise-qualified vessels engaging in such a voyage where passengers temporarily go ashore at a coastwise port have been deemed to have violated the PVSA
m Current Law and Policy Pursuant to Public Law 109-304 120
Stat 1632 enacted on October 6 2006 Title 46 United States Code was substantially reorganized and recodified Consequently the PVSA is now codified at 46 USC 55103 and provides that no vessel shall transport passengers between ports or places in the United States either directly or by way of a foreign port under a penalty of $300 for each person so transported and landed except one that (1) Is wholly owned by citizens of the United States for purposes of engaging in the coastwise trade and (2) has been issued a certificate of documentation with a coastwise endorsement or is exempt from documentation but would otherwise be eligible for such a certificate and endorsement
In 2003 Congress enacted Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II Section 211 for the purpose of revitalizing the oceangoing US-flag cruise industry in Hawaii (the 2003 Act) Three oceangoing US-flag cruise ships PRIDE OF ALOHA PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAII were documented with coastwise privileges pursuant to the 2003 Act These vessels entered regular service in Hawaii in 2004 2005 and 2006 respectively and pursuant to the express language of the 2003 Act are limited in their operation to providing regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands of Hawaii
The CBP regulations promulgated pursuant to the PVSA are set forth in 19 CFR 480a and have remained unchanged throughout both the recodification of Title 46 of the United States Code and the enactment of the 2003 Act They provide that a violation of the PVSA occurs when passengers embark (board a vessel for the
duration of a voyage) a non-coastwiseshyqualified vessel at one US port and disembark (leave the vessel at the conclusion of a voyage) at a different US port unless they proceed with the vessel to a distant foreign port (Le any port not considered a nearby foreign port which is defined as any port located in North America Central America Bermuda or the West Indies including the Bahamas) Currently these regulations do not contain specific criteria for non-coastwise-qualified vessels on itineraries including US ports and either nearby or distant foreign ports in order for such foreign port calls to be compliant with the PVSA
To reiterate the applicable CBP regulations provide that the PVSA is violated when a non-coastwise-qualified vessel transports a passenger on a voyage solely to one or more coastwise ports and the passenger disembarks or goes ashore temporarily at a coastwise port (19 CFR 480a(b)(1)) Furthermore a violation of the PVSA also occurs when a non-coastwise-qualified vessel transports a passenger on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a nearby foreign port or ports (but no other foreign port) and the passenger disembarks at a coastwise port other than the port of embarkation (19 CFR 480a(b)(2)) However there is no violation of the PVSA when a passenger is on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a distant foreign port or ports (whether or not the voyage includes a nearby foreign port or ports) and the passenger disembarks at a coastwise port provided the passenger has proceeded with the vessel to a distant foreign port (19 CFR 480a(b)(3))
IV Request From MARAD To Provide Guidance
The US Department of Transportation Maritime Administration (MARAD) has requested that CBP take action to ensure enforcement of the PVSA MARAD has asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreignshyflag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwiseshyqualified cruise ship operators
In April of 2007 the operator of the three US-flag cruise vessels operating solely in Hawaii pursuant to the 2003 Act announced their intent to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAIl from the Hawaii market and redeploy her to Europe The operator intends to re-flag the vessel to foreign registry directly resulting in the loss of over 1100 crewmember jobs The primary reason cited for this decision is the rapid increase in foreign-flag competition entering the Hawaii market
Federal Register I Vol 72 No 224 I Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules 65489
from the West Coast This competition is evidenced in published cruise itineraries of foreign-flag carriers offering a variety of round trip cruises that depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period usually in the early morning and ultimately return to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their cruise These cruises are often marketed as Hawaii cruises and except for the brief stop in the nearby foreign port of Ensenada are purely coastwise in nature It is these cruise itineraries that pose an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels that pursuant to the 2003 Act are currently engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands
V Preliminary Notice
In response to MARADs concerns CBP sent letters to two carriers known to operate the itineraries in question as well as to the Cruise Lines International Association Inc stating that CBP believes that these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because it appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA The letters further indicated that CBP is taking steps to publish this position
VI CBPs Proposed Interpretive Rule Accordingly in this document CBP is
proposing to provide that cruise itineraries for non-qualified coastwise vessels which allow passengers to board at a US port call at several Hawaiian ports proceed to a foreign port or ports for a brief period and then ultimately return to the original US port of embarkation for disembarkation are not consistent with the PVSA and the regulations promulgated pursuant thereto Specifically CBP interprets a voyage to be solely to one or more coastwise ports even where it stops at a foreign port unless the stop at the foreign port is a legitimate object of the cruise CBP will presume that a stop at a foreign port is not a legitimate object of the cruise unless
(1) The stop lasts at least 48 hours at the foreign port
(2) The amount of time at the foreign port is more than 50 percent of the total amount of time at the US ports of call and
(3) The passengers are permitted to go ashore temporarily at the foreign port
Accordingly CBP proposes to adopt an interpretive rule under which it will presume that any cruise itinerary that does not include a foreign port call that
satisfies each of these three criteria constitutes coastwise transportation of passengers in violation of 19 CFR 480a(b)(1)
Dated November 16 2007 W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection [FR Doc E7-22788 Filed 11-20-07 845 am] BILLING CODe 9111-14-1
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau
27 CFR Part 9
[Notice No 76]
RIN 1513-AB49
Proposed Establishment of the Leona Valley Viticultural Area (2007R-281 P)
AGENCY Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau Treasury ACTION Notice of proposed rulemaking
SUMMARY The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau proposes to establish the 134 square mile Leona Valley viticultural area in the northeast part of Los Angeles County California We designate viticultural areas to allow vintners to better describe the origin of their wines and to allow consumers to better identify wines they may purchase We invite comments on this proposed addition to our regulations DATES We must receive written comments on or before January 22 2008
ADDRESSES You may send comments on this notice to one of the following addresses
bull httpwwwregulationsgov (Federal e-rulemaking portal follow the instructions for submitting comments) or
bull Director Regulations and Rulings Division Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau PO Box 14412 Washington DC 20044-4412
See the Public Participation section of this notice for specific instructions and requirements for submitting comments and for information on how to request a public hearing
You may view copies of this notice selected supporting materials and any comments we receive about this proposal at httpwwwregulationsgov under Docket No 2007-0066 You also may view copies of this notice all related petitions maps or other supporting materials and any comments we receive about this
proposal by appointment at the TTB Information Resource Center 1310 G Street NW Washington DC 20220 To make an appointment call 202-927shy2400
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT NA Sutton Regulations and Rulings Division Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau 925 Lakeville S1 No 158 Petaluma CA 94952 phone 415shy271-1254 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
Background on Viticultural Areas
TTB Authority Section 105(e) of the Federal Alcohol
Administration Act (FAA Act) 27 USC 205(e) authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to prescribe regulations for the labeling of wine distilled spirits and malt beverages The FAA Act provides that these regulations should among other things prohibit consumer deception and the use of misleading statements on labels and ensure that labels provide the consumer with adequate information as to the identity and quality of the product The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) administers the regulations promulgated under the FAA Act
Part 4 ofthe TTB regulations (27 CFR part 4) allows the establishment of definitive viticultural areas and the use of their names as appellations of origin on wine labels and in wine advertisements Part 9 of the TTB regulations (27 CFR part 9) contains the list of approved viticultural areas
Definition Section 425(e)(1)(i) ofthe TTB
regulations (27 CFR 425(e)(1)(i)) defines a viticultural area for American wine as a delimited grape-growing region distinguishable by geographical features the boundaries of which have been recognized and defined in part 9 of the regulations These designations allow vintners and consumers to attribute a given quality reputation or other characteristic of a wine made from grapes grown in an area to its geographic origin The establishment of viticultural areas allows vintners to describe more accurately the origin of their wines to consumers and helps consumers to identify wines they may purchase Establishment of a viticultural area is neither an approval nor an endorsement by TTB of the wine produced in that area
Requirements Section 425(e)(2) of the TTB
regulations outlines the procedure for proposing an American viticultural area and provides that any interested party
Us Department ofHomelaDd Secmity Washington DC 10229
bull ~
US Customs and Border Protection
AUG 15 2fXJJ
VE5-3-02-QTRRBSTCCCI - ti015502-GG-
Mr leon Sutcliffe Director Port Operations Camivai Cruise Unes Camival Place 3655 NW 87Avenue Miami Aorlda 33178
RE P~nger Vessef Services Ad Coastwise Transportation 46 USC sect 55103 19 CFR sect 480a(b)
Dear Mr Sutcliffe
As you know US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) enforces the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) codified at TItle 46 United States Code section 55103 (46 USC 55103) This statute prohibits non-coastwise-qualifled vessels (ie those vessels not US-buill owned and documented with a coastwise endorsement) from transporting passengers between porls or places within the United States The regUlations promUlgated pursuant to the PVSA are found at TrtJe 19 Code of Federal Regulations section 4808 (19 CFR 4808)
It has come to our attention that passenger vessels of your company are engaging in cruise itineraries that include ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands Two USAlagged coastwise-endorsed passenger vessefs are also currenUy engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of caD wittlin the Hawaiian Islands
As part of your cruise itineraries some of your foreign-flagged vessels depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period and ultimately rebJm to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their endse For example the MS ZAANDAM of Holand America Lines departs San Diego cruises the Hawaiian Islands stops in Ensenada from 800pm to 11 OOpmbull and returns to san Diego CBP believes these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because It appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA -- - - ~~~------
Please be advised that CBP is taking steps to publish this position Should have any questions pertaining to this matter please contact Mr Glen Vereb Chief Cargo Security Carriers and Immigration Branch at (202) 572-8724
Sincerely
F Jl E EST Y LEe A U I 5 I N Gmiddot
December 21 2007
The Honorable W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection co Border Security Regulations Branch Office ofInternational Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229
Re Hawaii Coastwise Cruises (USCBP-2007-0098) Comments in Response to Proposed Interpretation
Dear Commissioner Basham
NCL America Inc1 (NCLA) submits these comments in support ofthe efforts ofCustoms and Border Protection to enforce the Passenger Vessel Services Act and the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative as applied to Hawaii coastwise cruises
1 Introduction and Summary of Position
NCLA operates three large oceangoing US flag cruise ships in Hawaii These ships are documented under US flag and are required to operate in regular service in Hawaii pursuant to the authority of the Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative a 2003 federal statute intended to revitalize the US flag cruise industry and to maximize economic and national security benefits to the United States (the 2003 Act)
NCLA has invested $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships pursuant to the 2003 Act and in direct reliance on the protections of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) and its proper enforcement The PVSA limits the transportation ofpassengers between US ports to coastwise documented US flag ships Its statutory protections recognize that US flag ships have significantly higher operational costs in part because they are subject to more stringent US laws including US labor laws and federal
1 NCL America Inc is a US corporation incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware headquartered in Honolulu Hawaii As a US corporation it is subject to US taxes at both the federal and state level The Chief Executive Officer the Chairman of the Board and all of the Board of Directors of NCL America are US citizens The company is also subject to US labor and employment laws and is required by statute to maintain a workforce comprised primarily ofUS citizens
700 Bishop St SUite 900 I Honolulu HawMi 96813 I Tel 8085273800 Fax 8085273820 I ndcom
2
income tax among others The NCLA ships operating in Hawaii are the only large oceangoing cruise ships operating under US flag In furtherance of the policy goals of the PVSA and the 2003 Act these ships have created over 4000 seafaring jobs all subject to US minimum wage and other labor statutes
Since 2003 there has been a significant increase in capacity in the Hawaii market from foreign flag ships providing cruise service to Hawaii from the West Coast Many of these foreign flag cruises are marketed as Hawaii cruises and consist entirely ofUS ports ofcall with the sole exception of a token stop in Mexico for as little as an hour late at night under circumstances where passengers are not permitted to get offthe ship There are no reported rulings approving these particular foreign flag itineraries
Lower cost foreign competition in the Hawaii market has unfairly hurt NCLAs operations NCLA has incurred substantial losses which have contributed significantly to its decision earlier this year to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAll from US flag and reshydeploy it foreign Unfair foreign competition poses an imminent threat to the remaining US flag passenger vessels operating in the Hawaii trades pursuant to the 2003 Act
As the agency statutorily charged with implementation of the 2003 Act the US Department ofTransportation Maritime Administration (MARAn) is aware of the threat foreign flag Hawaii itineraries pose to the US flag fleet and brought the situation to the attention ofthe US Department ofHomeland Security Bureau ofCustoms and Border Protection (CBP or Customs) Customs determined that the primary object of these itineraries was coastwise and that the Ensenada stop was an evasion of the PVSA
In August 2007 Customs provided written notice to the affected foreign lines and their trade association that the existing itineraries were contrary to the PVSA None of these lines sought advance rulings even after the Customs notice with respect to their Hawaii itineraries pursuant to Customs regulations and many continued to market the itineraries as Hawaii cruises NCLA supports the efforts ofCustoms and MARAD to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act for Hawaii cruises
2 Statutory Authority for Customs Proposed Interpretation
(a) Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA)
Congress passed the PVSA in 1886 to protect the US maritime transportation industry from foreign competition2 Protection is afforded through penalty assessments on foreign vessels transporting passengers between US ports or places directly or by way ofa foreign port 3 As Congress and the courts have recognized coastwise protections for the US maritime transportation industry are only one dimension of the PVSA Operating in conjunction with other coastwise laws and with the US
2 See United States v Honduran SS GRANADA 35 F Supp 892 894 (BD Pa 1940)(citing purpose of PVSA to meet threats to the practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping which was to be preserved for US ships)
46 USc sect 55103 (originally 46 USC App 289)
3
documentation laws the PVSA also enhances military sealift in times ofnational emergency sustains a US merchant marine and supports the US shipbuilding and repair industry4
(b) Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative (the 2003 Act)
Over the past decade Congress has sought to reinforce the goals of the PVSA by providing mechanisms to revitalize the oceangoing US flag cruise fleet particularly in Hawaii The Project America legislation enacted in 1997 authorized among other things the re~flagging ofone existing cruise ship contingent on the operator contracting for the construction oftwo new oceangoing cruise shipss Following the default of the operator under the original contract Congress enacted the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative for the purpose ofrecovering economic and national security benefits to the United States bull 6 These same goals of the original PVSA were expressly referenced in the legislative history of the 2003 Act which emphasized that these ships will be assets available in time ofnational emergency and will significantly expand the pool ofqualified seafarers upon which the US Department ofDefense relies to crew non-combatant vessels
The 2003 Act authorizes the US documentation ofthree cruise ships for operation in regular service in Hawaii subject to certain conditions including a prohibition on operating in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico and the Caribbean Sea and a requirement that all vessel repair work be undertaken in the United States MARAD is charged with implementation of the 2003 Act
3 Customs Implementation of PVSA
(a) Regulations
The current regulations implementing the PVSA were published by Customs in 19858 The growth of the foreign flag cruise industry in North America and in particular the development of the Alaska cruise market led to an effort in 1984 to amend the thenshyexisting regulations to increase the ease of administration and operational flexibility The effort to change the regulation had support from US port interests who saw benefit in the potential increase in the number ofUS ports that foreign vessels could call and was opposed by proponents ofpotential US flag projects as detrimental to efforts to revitalize the US fleet 9 The preamble to the 1985 rule emphasized that it was of paramount importance to consider the primary object ofpassengers in taking a
4 See American Hawaii Cruises v Skinner 713 F Supp 452 457 (DDC 1989) (recognizing the contribution of the PVSA and the Jones Act in helping to secure national defense by maintaining a merchant marine oftbe best equipped and most suitable types ofvessels sufficient to serve in time of war or national emergency) see also Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 30 (DC Cir 1984) Wirth Ltd v SIS Acadia Forest 537 F2d 1272 1281 n32 (5th Cir 1976) S Public Law 105-56 Section 8109 (111 Stat 1203 1244) (Oct 81997 ) 6 Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II General Provisions - Department ofCommerce Section 211 (117 Stat 1179) (Feb 20 2003) 1 149 Cong Rec S1118 (dailyed Jan 17 2003(statement ofSenator Inouye) 8 19 CFR sect 480a 950 Fed Reg 26981 (July I 1985)
4
voyage10 a concept which is reinforced elsewhere in Customs regulations11 In its analysis of the comments received at the time Customs accepted the view ofport interests that the modified rule would help their business but did so recognizing the absence ofa regular salt water US flag passenger fleet Customs acknowledged the potential harm to prospective efforts to revitalize the US flag passenger fleet and expressly cautioned that if it were ever shown that coastwise qualified vessels in competition with foreign vessels were in fact hurt by the modified Customs regulation then Customs would immediately reconsider its position12
(b) Customs Rulings
Given the significant penalties associated with violating the PVSA13 Customs regulations expressly provide a mechanism for the owner or charterer of a foreign vessel or any other interested person to request an advisory ruling as to whether a contemplated voyage would be considered in violation of the PVSA14 Customs regulations provide that vessel operators can rely on these ruling letters only to the extent that the facts and circumstances are identical to those in the ruling letter IS
Notwithstanding the fact that several foreign cruise lines offer Hawaii itineraries originating in a US mainland port and calling at Hawaii ports with a token intervening stop in Mexico there are no reported rulings expressly approving such an itinerary for these foreign cruise lines 16
4 The Cruise Industry in Hawaii
(a) NCL America Returns US flag to the Oceangoing Passenger Fleet
Pursuant to the requirements ofthe 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative NCLA agreed to promote US-flag cruising enhance military sealift capacity and expand the US maritime labor base No other major cruise line had ever undertaken such a commitment to the US flag and the public policy objectives Congress sought to achieve under the PVSA or the 2003 Act Introduction ofPRIDE OF ALOHA in 2004 was a significant development in the maritime industry because it marked the restoration ofthe
10 Id at 26983 11 Customs Regulations include a provision on the effect ofruling letters and with respect to carrier rulings the applicable regulation refers to rulings setting forth a determination as to whether or not the primary object of a contemplated voyage is coastwise transportation in violation of46 USC sect 289 [pYSA codified at 46 USC sect55103] 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 12 50 Fed Reg at 26983 13 A modem cruise ship with 2400 passengers for example would be subject to a fine of$720OOO per cruise based on the statutory penalty of$300 for each passenger transported in violation of the Act 14 19 CFR sect 480a(d) IS 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 16 There is one older reported mling involving a request to drop the Ensenada port call from a Los AngeleslHawaiiLos Angeles itinerary which Customs held would violate the PYSA In dicta Customs acknowledged that the itinerary could be in compliance if the Ensenada call were not dropped but did not address the issue ofwhether a one hour service call where no passengers depart the vessel would be sufficient The carrier that obtained that ruling has since left the Hawaii market See Customs Ruling HQ 114078 re Crystal Hannony (Nov 4 1997)
5
us flag to the oceangoing cruise industry A contemporaneous press release from the Us Department ofTransportation reported that the three US-flag cruise ships to be introduced pursuant to the 2003 Act were expected to create more than 20000 US jobs generate more than $825 million ofexpenditures in the US economy and create nearly $360 million in federal tax revenue by the end of 200717 In 2005 the PRIDE OF AMERICA was introduced and in 2006 the third vessel PRIDE OF HAWAll was introduced to Hawaii Both the PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAIl offer 7shyday inter-island Hawaii itineraries whereas PRIDE OF ALOHA operates on 7 and 10 day cruises exclusively among the islands ofHawaii as well as 11 day cruises that include a foreign port call at Fanning Island To date NCLA has invested over $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships in furtherance ofthe policy objectives of the PVSA and the 2003 Act These ships employ over 4000 seafarers and generate hundreds ofmillions of dollars in benefits for Hawaii and the nation
(b) Significant Increase in Foreign Flag Capacity Since 2003
The most significant change in the Hawaii cruise market since 2003 has been the dramatic increase in capacity A significant portion ofthis capacity increase is directly attributable to NCLAs fulfillment ofthe Congressional mandate in the 2003 Act However foreign-flag operations in the Hawaii market as measured in passenger nights18 have skyrocketed Based on MARAn data derived from the US Customs Border Patrol Vessel Entrance and Clearance documents the passenger nights for foreign flag vessels departing from the West Coast to Hawaii on round trip cruise have increased several hundredfold during this period19 See Exhibit A
(c) NCLA Has Incurred Substantial Losses During this Period
Since 2004 NCLA has lost cumulatively more than a quarter ofa billion dollars A principal reason for these losses has been the increase in foreign capacity in this market NCLA has taken significant steps to reduce costs to address the increase in foreign competition but NCLA is at an inherent disadvantage when competing against foreign companies that are not subject to US labor laws US tax laws and other laws Ofcourse the statutory protections of the PVSA are intended to address these very issues That is why Customs immediate action to implement the proposed interpretation is critical for the US flag fleet Regrettably NCLA has already been forced to reduce overall capacity early next year with the withdrawal ofPRIDE OF HAWAlI to another
17 DOT Press Release dated June 72004 see also DOT Press Release dated August 132004 in connection with visit to PRIDE OF ALOHA by US Transportation Secretary Norman Y Mineta 11 Passenger nights (also referred to as passenger capacity days) are calculated by multiplying the number ofpassengers per vessel by the number ofcruise days in each itinerary by the number of cruises This is the unit ofmeasurement employed by MARAn In contrast passenger bed supply (also referred to as passenger capacity) data reflects only the number ofberths per vessel multiplied by the number of cruises and hence understates the market by excluding the full economic value ofthe cruise perfonned 19 In 2003 the total number ofpassenger nights for round-trip West Coast to Hawaii cruises was 303325 which jumped by 353 to 1072329 in 2006 and by 430 to 1304546 from 2003 to 2007 (The 2007 figure is based on MARAD data for six months and a1ll1ualized by published itineraries for the balance of the year)
6
market for operation under foreign flag This move alone will result in the loss ofover 1000 American seafaring jobs
5 Customs Proposed Interpretation is Necessary to Further the Important National Security and Public Policy Objectives Embodied in Federal Law
As Customs has properly noted the increase in foreign competition in the Hawaii trades in contravention of the PVSA pose[s] an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels[] As the operator of these ships NCLA has a vested interest in protecting the jobs ofthe thousands ofAmerican crewmembers and cruise ship service providers who support these vessels NCLA also has an interest in protecting the substantial economic investment it has made to revitalize the US flag passenger vessel fleet But a balancing of interests in the context of Customs enforcement ofexisting law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act requires a much broader focus
The legislative history of the 2003 Act expressly recognized the national security and public policy import ofestablishing a US flag passenger vessel fleet as a means to maintain the countrys preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool of qualified seafarers and as a means to help sustain a fleet ofUS-flag vessels to su~ort
the nations military and maritime industrial base for times ofnational emergency
Congress understood the importance ofestablishing a viable US flag cruise ship fleet as something larger than the vessels themselves These national security and public policy objectives must be weighed in the balance as Customs assesses how best to interpret its rules to give effect to the PVSA and the 2003 Act
6 Customs Should Clarify that the Proposed Interpretation is Limited to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades and Adopt Reasonable Measures to Ensure Sufficient Foreign Content
Since publication ofthe proposed interpretative rule several commenters have observed that the scope of the proposed interpretation is ambiguous because the language of Section VI referencing any cruise itinerary appears broader than the caption Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises and the entire discussion in the published notice which focuses exclusively on US-flag coastwise vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA agrees that the proposed interpretation should be clarified so that its scope is limited to vessels operating roundtrip voyages from US ports that include Hawaii port calls
NCLA supports the concept reflected in the proposed interpretive rule that round trip Hawaii itineraries from US ports on foreign ships must include a material and measurable degree ofoverall foreign port content as compared to US port content
20 149 Congo Rec S1117 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)
7
(a) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is also Consistent with Subsequent Congressional Enactments Modifying the PVSA
As discussed above it is well established that the PVSA was designed toRrotect US-flag vessels from foreign competition in the coastwise and domestic trades 1
Subsequent legislative enactments however have appropriately differentiated among distinct geographic markets and trades including Canada Alaska Puerto Rico and Hawaii based on the existence or non-existence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
In 1938 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers by Canadian passenger vessels on Lake Ontario and the St Lawrence River until such time as passenger service shall be established by vessels of the United States22 Similarly in 1961 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers on Canadian vessels within Alaska or between Alaska and other points in the United States until such time as passenger service is established by vessels ofthe United States23
In 1984 Congress modified the application ofthe PVSA to pennit the transportation ofpassengers between Puerto Rico and other United States ports on foreign-flag vessels24 As with the other statutory exceptions this provision is qualified and expires [o]n a showing that a United States passenger vessel qualified to engage in the coastwise trade is offering or advertising passenger service between a port in Puerto Rico and another port in the United States2S
Congress acted again with respect to the application of the PVSA with the 2003 Act in which it authorized three vessels that did not meet the US-build requirements of the PVSA to operate as modem US-flagged cruise ships in regular service in Hawaii26 The 2003 Act imposes a specific geographic limitation on the operation of any ship documented under this authority to operations only in regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands ofHawaii and shall not transport passengers in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico or the Caribbean Sea except in certain limited circumstances27 As above the limited nature of the 2003 Act is express it is strictly limited to the large ocean-going cruise ships and then only those operating in the regular Hawaii service where there are no US-flag operations28
21 See Act ofJune 19 1886 c 421 sec 8 24 Stat 81 Act of February 171898 c 26 sec 2 30 Stat 248 22 S] Res 174 75th Cong 52 Stat 223 (Alp 251938) codified at46 USC sect 55121(a) 23 See Pub L 87-77 75 Stat 196 (Jun 30 1961) codified at 46 USC sect 55121(b) 24 See Pub L 98-563 98 Stat 2916 (Oct 301984) codified at 46 USC sect 55104(b) 25 46 USC sect 55104(c)(l) see also 46 USC 46 USc sect 55104(cX2)(expiration of exemption upon availability ofa non-coastwise qualified US-flag vessel offering service in the relevant market) 26 149 Congo Rec SI118 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)(statementofSen Inouye) 27 Pub L 108-7 117 Stat 79 (Feb 20 2003) 28 149 Congo Rec S11l9 (dailyed Jan 17 2003Xstatement of Sen Inouye)
8
In each ofthese instances Congress fashioned a narrow exception to the PVSA that differentiated among distinct geographic markets based on the existence or nonshyexistence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
As the federal agency responsible for administering the 2003 Act MARAD requested that Customs act to protect US flag passenger vessel interests in the Hawaii trades29 Limiting the scope ofthe proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades also reflects Customs appreciation of the PVSA in the context of the subsequent Congressional action30 Viewing the Congressional modifications to the PVSA as a whole Congress has specifically and repeatedly differentiated among distinct geographic markets when it has found it necessary and appropriate to do so to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests It is well established that the proper interpretation of a statutory scheme includes consideration ofsubsequent statutes even though the underlying statute itselfhas not been expressly amended31 Accordingly Customs should likewise limit the scope ofthe proposed PVSA interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades because that is the only geographic market as mandated by the 2003 Act in which oceangoing US-flag cruise ships are operating
(b) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Consistent with Public Policy Objectives of the 1985 Rulemaking
In 1985middot Customs liberalized the regulations implementing the PVSA by eliminating certain regulatory prohibitions on foreign flag vessels In the context of the 1985 rulemaking Customs justified a relaxation ofthe regulations on the grounds that it would simplify the administration of the PVSA and would benefit the economy ofcertain American coastwise ports without eroding the statutory protection given to American vessels engaged in solely domestic trade32
Customs thus sought to reconcile US port economic interests with US-flag passenger vessel interests Both of these twin policy objectives are furthered by
29 See 72 Fed Reg 65488 (Nov 21 2007)( MARAn bas asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the ~eratiODS ofcoastwise-qualified cruise ship operators)
See generally FDA v Brown amp Williamson Tobacco Corp 529 US 120 132-133 (2000)(assessing propriety ofagency construction ofFood DIUg and Cosmetics Act and descnbing responsibility of reviewing cowt to assess statutory provisions in the context of subsequent legislative enactments) 31 See Brown amp Williamson 529 US 143 (holding that proper construction ofstatutory provision must necessarily assume that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications ofa later statute This is particularly so where the scope of the earlier statute is broad but the subsequent statutes more specifically address the topic athand) see also United States v Estate ofRomani 523 US 517 530-531 (1998)( holding that a later-enacted statute should control the construction of the federal lien priority statute a specific policy embodied in a later federal statute should control om construction of the [earlier] statute even though it ha[s] not been expressly amended) United States v Fausto 484 US 439453 (1988)(The courts frequently find Congress to have done this - whenever in fact they interpret a statutory text in the light ofsurrounding texts that happen to have been subsequently enacted This classic judicial task of reconciling many laws enacted over time and getting them to make sense in combination necessarily assumes that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications of a later statute) 32 50 Fed Reg 26982 (JuI 11985)
9
limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades
As noted earlier the 2003 Act limits the operation of the NCLA US-flag oceangoing passenger vessels to regular service in Hawaii Because there are no oceangoing US-flag vessels operating in any market other than the Hawaii trades Customs should limit the scope of the proposed interPretation to that market Such a limitation protects US flag passenger vessel interests without prejudicing US port interests In contrast an application of the proposed interpretation to any itinerary would needlessly harm US port interests unrelated to Hawaii without any countervailing benefit to US-flag passenger vessel interests Accordingly limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation is consistent with the public policy objectives of the 1985 rulemaking as well as the 2003 Act
(c) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Also Consistent with Customs Commitment to Revisit the Scope of its Rules to Protect US-Flag Interests
The relaxation ofthe PVSA regulations in 1985 was premised in large part on Customs finding that there was no regular salt water US-flag passenger fleet in operation at that time33 Acknowledging that the relaxed regulations could harm USshyflag interests Customs committed in the preamble ofthe 1985 final rule to immediately reconsider its interpretation if it is ever shown that there is a viable US flag vessel operating in competition with foreign-flag vessels34
Congress enacted the 2003 Act to stimulate the development of a US flag cruise ship industry As noted above the legislative history ofthat Act makes clear that Congress sought to revitalize the US-flag cruise industry as a means to maintain Americas preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool ofqualified seafarers help sustain a fleet of US flag vessels to support our military and a maritime industrial base create thousands of seagoing and shoreside American jobs and stimulate the development ofa US flag cruise ship tourism business with the commensurate benefits to the US tax base the US economy and US employment
Customs is now acting at MARADs request to revisit its interpretation ofthe regulations implementing the PVSA because recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwise-qualified cruise ship operations35 That is to say that the concerns articulated by Customs in the context of the 1985 rulemaking have materialized and US-flag passenger vessel interests are in fact being hanned in the Hawaii trades by foreign competitors
33 50 Fed Reg 26983 34Id
3S 72 Fed Reg 56488 (Nov 21 2007)
I
10
Because the US-flag passenger vessels are limited by statute to regular service in Hawaii limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the
Hawaii trades is consistent with Customs historical commitment to revisit its interpretation ofthe implementing regulations to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests
7 Conclusion
For the reasons stated above NCLA commends the efforts ofCustoms and MARAn to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act as applied to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA respectfully requests Customs to move ahead promptly with p~blicati~nof a final interpretive rule to advance the important national security arid public policy objectives ofthese laws
We greatly appreciate the opportunity to submit these comments
Sincerely
~~~ Alan T Yamamoto Vice President Hawaii Operations
Exhibit A
Ship Name Serenade Of The Seas Departure Port San Diego California Ports of Call San Diego California Kailua Kona Hawaii Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii Hlo Hawaii Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii Ensenada Mexico San Qigo California
2007 Date(s) Oct 05
Sailing Itinerary
Day Port H ~rrive Depart Activity
05-0ct San Diego California 500 PM
06-0ct Cruising
07-0ct Cruising
08-0ct Cruising
09-0ct Cruising
10-0ct Kailua Kona Hawaii 700 AM 900 PM Tendered
11-00t Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 1000 AM Tendered
12middot0ct Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 900 PM Tendered
13-0ct Hilo Hawaii 700 AM 600 PM Docked
14middot0ct Honoulu (Oahu) Hawaii 700 AM Docked
15-0ct Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii 200 AM Docked
6-0ct CrUising
17-0ct Cruising
18-0ct Cruising
19middot0ct Cruising
-7 20-00t
O-Oot
Ensenada ~i1exico
San Deqo California
i 00 ~r1
700 ~M
200 oM D1Jcked ~
lt
Methodology Used in Calculating Impact of International Cruise Ships
Cruise ship visitors 1 Cruise ship visitors 2 Came with ships 3 Flied in 4 Average length of stay (days) 5 PPPD ($) 6 Cruise visitor spending ($mil))
Cruise ship crews 7 Ratio of crew spending to cruise visitor spending 8 Cruise crew spending
Cruisline 9 Ratio of crew spending to cruise visitor spending
10 Cruiseline spending
11 Total cruise-related spending ($mil)
12 Output multiplier ($ of output$ of cruise-related spending) 13 Earnings multiplier ($ of earning$ cruise-related spending) 14 Job multiplier Uobs$ cruise -related spending)
15 Total output impact ($miJ)
16 Total earnings impact ($miJ)
17 Total employment impact (jobs)
106641 98307
8334 739 847 668
02 134
038 254
1055
147 042
1372
1551
444
1447
Data sourceformula Line 2 + line 3 DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report DBEDT 2006 Annual Visitor Report Line 1 x line 4 x line 5
DBEDT 2003 Cruise study Line 7 x line 6
DBEDT 2003 Cruise study Line 9 x line 6
Line 6 + line 8 + line 10
Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model Derived from DBEDT 2002 1-0 model
Line 11 x line 12
Line 11 x line 13
Line 11 x line 14
Economic Contributions Foreign-Flag Fleet operating in Hawaii vs Three US-Flag Ships
$1500
Pride of Hawaii$1000- $542 million VIc -0-E c Pride of AlohaCo
423 million$500
Pride of America $496 million155 million$shy
Foreign-Flag US-Flag Fleet Fleet
Source State of Hawaii Department of US-Flag $1460 billion Business Economic Development and Tourism
Foreign-Flag $ 155 million 7292008
Employment Foreign-Flag Fleet operating in Hawaii vs Three US-Flag Ships
15000
10000
til c o Pride of Aloha
39435000
Pride of America 1447 4627
~---------
Foreign-Flag US-Flag Fleet Fleet
Source State of Hawaii Department of US-Flag 13629 jobs Business Economic Development and Tourism
Foreign-Flag 1447 jobs 7292008
Foreign Flag Capacity Growth Foreign flag passenger capacity has changed five-fold on roundtrip Hawaii cruises from the West Coast since enactment of the Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative
1600000
1400000
tn 1200000
J enshyZ
1000000
I shyG) en 800000 s G) tn tn
600000 as D 400000
200000
0 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Year
Source US Maritime Administration (derived from the US Customs and Border Patrol Vessel Entrance and Clearance documents - final 2007 data) 7292008
NCL America Hawaii Economic Contributions
(2004-2008)
bull (in Millions) bull $399 in wages benefits and overtime to US seafarers bull $35 in Federal and State payroll Taxes bull $64 in Government Fees and Taxes to Hawaii bull $28 in wages benefits and overtime to US other employees bull $52 in Port Charges to Hawaii Companies (Stevedores tugs pilots etc) bull $85 in Fuel to Tesoro Hawaii bull $130 for shore excursions to Hawaii tour operators bull $39 for Hawaii hotel rooms and ground transport bull $75 for food grown in Hawaii bull $57 in union fees and levies (incl $32M paid directly by employees) bull $1 in MMD fees to the United States Coast Guard bull $51 for recruitment screening processing and training crew bull $76 advertising and promoting Hawaii as a destination bull $1092
COASTWISE CRUISES INTERPRETIVE RULE RESOLUTION Adopted at the
US Conference of Mayors 76th Annual Meeting
June 20-242008 Miami
WHEREAS the Department of Homeland Securitys Customs and Border Protection (CBP) issued a proposed Interpretive Rule regulating Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises on foreign flagged vessels between US ports of call under the Passenger Vessel Services Act at the request of the United States Maritime Administration and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule would require that a foreign-flagged vessel on a coastwise cruise to call at a foreign port for at least 48 hours with that foreign stop constituting at least 50 percent of the cruise itinerary and allowing passengers to disembark the cruise vessel at the foreign port before continuing the cruise to a US port of call and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule establishes burdensome criteria that are wholly inconsistent with industry practice particularly the 48-hour call at foreign port shyinasmuch as the standard port call is six to eight hours - as well as the requirement that 50 percent of a cruise be spent at the foreign port and
WHEREAS the intent of the proposed Interpretive Rule is to protect the single remaining US flag vessel serving the Inter-Hawaiian Island cruise trade that according to the Hawaii Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism generates more than 4600 jobs and generates nearly $500 million in economic benefits for the state annually and
WHEREAS thousands of members of the International Longshore Workers Union (nWU) are employed at US ports serving cruise ships and whose jobs would be at risk if the proposed Interpretive Rule were implemented and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule is vague as to the breadth of its application ie to coastwise cruises between all United States ports or applied solely to coastwise cruises from West Coast ports to Hawaii and
WHEREAS the Cruise Lines International Association estimates the proposed Interpretive Rule would upend the $17 billion in national cruise industry spending and put at risk more than 300000 jobs generated by the international cruise industry including jobs held by nWU at US ports and the local allied industries supporting the cruise industry and
Executive Order Submissions Under Review
II Reglnfogov Where to ind Federal Regulatory Information -~
Home ] Lnitied Agenda and Regulator) Ilan pound012866 Regulator) Review Jnformalion Collection Review
EO 12866 Regulatory Rlvlw dvanced Search IJitorical RepWI Review Counh Jriter XIL
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA)
Executive Order Submissions Under Review July 25 2008 - _------------____ _shy
Department of Homeland Security
AGENCY DHS-TSA RIN 1652-AA53
TITLE Large Aircraft Security Program Other Aircraft Operator Security Programs and Airport Operator Security Program
STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT Yes RECEIVED DATE 06302008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
AGENCY DHS-USCIS RIN Llti15-AB67 TITLE Changes to Requirements Affecting H-2B Nonimmigrants and Their Employers
STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT No RECEIVED DATE 06092008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
AGENCY DHS-USCBP RIN 1651AA11 TITLE Issuance of a Visa and Authorization for Temporary Admission Into the United States for Certain Nonimmigrant Aliens Afflicted W HIV Infection
STAGE Final Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT No RECEIVED DATE 03042008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
-_RE_V-IE-W-E-X-T-EN-D-E-D---------- _
AGENCY DHS-USCBP RIN 1651-AA76 TITLE Coastwise Transportation of Passengers STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT Yes RECEIVED DATE 07142008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
Disclosure I Accessibility I Privacy Policy I Contact Us
httpwwwreginfogovpublicdoeoReviewSearch 7252008
View Rule Page 11
Shere D find Federal ReguLatory InformciiorlReglnfogov Home J Cnified Agenda al1d Regulatory Plan EO 12866 Regulatory Reyiew Information Collection Reiew
Current rnified Agenda and Regulatory Plan Historical Pnified Agenda and Regulatory Plan Search
View Rule
DHSIUSCBP RIN 1651-AA76 Publication ill Spring 2008
Title llCoastwise Transportation of Passengers
Abstract This interim rule amends the Department of Homeland Securitys (DHS) current regulations relating to the transportation of passengers by non-coastwise-qualified vessels on voyages that begin and end at a US port and stop at intervening US and foreign port(s) Under this interim final rule voyages that begin and end at a US port and stop at a foreign port(s) and at intervening US port(s) where a large USshyflag coastwise-qualified passenger vessel engages in regular service are in violation of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) unless the cumulative length of stay(s) at intervening foreign port(s) is more than 50 percent of the total amount of time spent at the intervening US port(s) and passengers are permitted to go ashore at the foreign port(s) The purpose of this amendment is to ensure that the Congressional purpose in enacting the PVSA which is to preserve the economic benefits of US coastwise trade to US-flag coastwise-qualified vessels is properly implemented
Agency Department of Homeland Security(DHS) Priority Substantive Nonsignificant
KIN Status First time published in the Unified Agenda Agenda Stage of Rulemaking Final Rule Stage
Major No Unfunded Mandates No
CFR Citation -LCER 4J~)(h)(plusmnJ
Legal Authority 5JJSS_30J12lJ-SClt16 J9_lJiCJ 431 9_L1C1plusmn3JJ2JScHJ1J2JSCJ624 L(LlLSc207LIl(gtJfHgt~ _CiQJ _46lSC 6QLQ~
Legal Deadline None
Timetable Action Date FR Cite
Interim Final Action 0510012008
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required No Government Levels Affected None
Federalism No
Included in the Regulatory Plan No
RIN Data Printed in the FR No
Agency Contact Glen E Vereb Chief Entry Procedures and Carriers Branch Department of Homeland Security US Customs and Border Protection Office of Regulations and Rulings 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington DC 20229 Phone202572-8730
Disclosure I Accessibility I Privacy Policy I Contact Us
httpwwwreginfogovpublicdoeAgendaViewRuleruleID=286751 7128120
Federal RegisterVol 72 No 224Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules 65487
SPECULATIVE POSITION LIMITS 1-Continued [In contract units)
Contract
Soybeans and Mini-Soybeans 2
Wheat and Mini-Wheat 2 bullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbull
Soybean Oil
SingleSpot month All monthsmonth
600 8600 13300 600 11100 14500 540 6600 8600
Soybean Meal 720 5500 7100
Minneapolis Grain Exchange
Hard Red Spring Wheat I 600 I 11100 I 14500
New York Board of Trade
Cotton No2 I 300 I 5300 I 7300
Kansas City Board of Trade
Hard Winter Wheat I 600 I 11100 I 14500
1 For purposes of compliance with these limits positions in a futures contract that shares ~ubstantially identical terms with a contract market enumerated herein including a futures contract that is cash-settled based on the settlement price of an enumerated contract market shall be agshygregated with positions in the enumerated contract market
2 For purposes of compliance with these limits positions in the regular-sized and mini-sized contracts shall be aggregated
Issued by the Commission this November 152007 in Washington DC David Stawick Secretary of the Commission [FR Doc E7-22681 Filed 11-20-07 845 amI BILLING CODE 6351-Q1-P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Bureau of Customs and Border Protection
19 CFR Part 4
[USCBP-2007-o098]
Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises
AGENCY Customs and Border Protection Department of Homeland Security ACTION Proposed interpretation solicitation of comments
SUMMARY This document proposes new criteria to be used by Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to determine whether non-coastwise-qualified vessels are in violation ofthe Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) when engaging in cruise itineraries in which passengers board at a US port the vessel calls at several Hawaiian ports and then the vessel proceeds to a foreign port or ports for a brief period before ultimately returning to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their cruise CBP believes these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because it appears that the primary objective of the foreign stop is evasion of the PVSA
DATES Comments must be received on or before December 212007 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT Glen E Vereb Cargo Security Carriers amp Immigration Branch Office of International Trade (202) 572-8730 ADDRESSES You may submit comments identified by docket number by one of the following methods
bull Federal eRulemaking Portal http wwwregulationsgov Follow the instructions for submitting comments
bull Mail Border Security Regulations Branch Office of International Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
I Public Participation
Interested persons are invited to participate in this proposed interpretation by submitting written data views or arguments on all aspects of the proposed interpretation Customs and Border Protection (CBP) also invites comments that relate to the economic environmental or federalism effects that might result from this proposed interpretation Comments that will provide the most assistance to CBP in developing these procedures will reference a specific portion of the proposed interpretation explain the reason for any recommended change and include data information or authority that support such recommended change
Instructions All submissions received must include the agency name and docket number for this proposed
interpretation All comments received will be posted without change to http wwwregulationsgov including any personal information provided
Docket For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received go to http wwwregulationsgov Submitted comments may also be inspected on regular business days between the hours of 9 am and 430 pm at the Office of International Trade Customs and Border Protection 799 9th Street NW 5th Floor Washington DC Arrangements to inspect submitted documents should be made in advance by calling Mr Joseph Clark at (202) 572shy8768
II Background
The maritime cabotage law governing the transportation of passengers was first established by section 8 of the Passenger Vessel Services Act of June 191886 (the PVSA) 24 Stat 81 as amended by section 2 of the Act of February 17 1898 30 Stat 248 formerly codified at 46 USC App 289 (now codified at 46 USC 55103) 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 of $200 (now $300 as promulgated in TD 03-11 pursuant to the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 199028 USC 2461 note) for each passenger so transported and landed
The intent of the maritime cabotage laws including the PVSA was to provide a legal structure that guarantees a coastwise monopoly to
65488 Federal RegisterVol 72 No 224Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules
American shipping and thereby promotes development of the American merchant marine Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 28 (DC Cir 1984) see also The Granada 35 FSupp 892 8931940 AMC 1601 (DC Pa 1940) (stating that the legislative aim of section 289 [now 55102] was the creation of a practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping business for United States ships) In other words the PVSA was enacted to advance the United States merchant marine and fleet by restricting the use of foreign-ownedflagged passenger vessels in United States territorial waters
Passenger vessel transportation between United States ports has historically been viewed to be part of the coastwise trade after the enactment of the PVSA This view is premised on the concepts of continuity of the voyage and whether its intended purpose or objective was coastwise transportation In other words the PVSA was held to be violated if the coastwise movement was continuous or if the purpose of the trip was a coastwise voyage (See 18 OAG 445 September 4 1886 28 OAG 204 February 16 1910 29 OAG 318 February 12 1912 30 OAG 44 February 1 1913 34 OAG 340 December 24 1924 and 36 OAG 352 August 13 1930)
The CBP regulations promulgated pursuant to the PVSA are found at section 480a of title 19 of the Code of Federal Regulations (19 CFR 480a) and are reflective of the above cited Office of the Attorney General decisions These regulations provide among other things that a non-coastwise-qualified vessel which embarks a passenger at a port in the United States embraced within the coastwise laws (a coastwise port) will be deemed to have landed that passenger in violation of the PVSA if the passenger disembarks at a different coastwise port on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a nearby foreign port or ports (as defined in 19 CFR 480a(a)(2) see also 19 CFR 480a(b)(2)) The terms embark and disembark are words of art which are defined as going on board a vessel for the duration of a specific voyage and leaving a vessel at the conclusion of a specific voyage respectively (See 19 CFR 480a(a)(4))
The references in section 480a to nearby foreign ports (defined in 19 CFR 480a(a)(2)) are the results of attempts by CBP to apply an Office of the Attorney Generals opinion dated February 26 1910 (28 OAG 204) In that case a foreign-flag vessel transported 615 passengers on a voyage around the world beginning in New
York and concluding in San Francisco The Attorney General opined that since the primary object of the voyage was to visit various parts of the world on a pleasure tour returning home via California and not to be transported in domestic commerce the transportation was not in violation of the PVSA
The 1910 Attorney Generals opinion was extended to voyages that included foreign ports other than nearby foreign ports (See Treasury Decision (TD) 68shy285 (33 FR 16558) November 14 1968) However voyages solely to one or more coastwise ports have always been considered predominantly coastwise Therefore non-coastwise-qualified vessels engaging in such a voyage where passengers temporarily go ashore at a coastwise port have been deemed to have violated the PVSA
m Current Law and Policy Pursuant to Public Law 109-304 120
Stat 1632 enacted on October 6 2006 Title 46 United States Code was substantially reorganized and recodified Consequently the PVSA is now codified at 46 USC 55103 and provides that no vessel shall transport passengers between ports or places in the United States either directly or by way of a foreign port under a penalty of $300 for each person so transported and landed except one that (1) Is wholly owned by citizens of the United States for purposes of engaging in the coastwise trade and (2) has been issued a certificate of documentation with a coastwise endorsement or is exempt from documentation but would otherwise be eligible for such a certificate and endorsement
In 2003 Congress enacted Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II Section 211 for the purpose of revitalizing the oceangoing US-flag cruise industry in Hawaii (the 2003 Act) Three oceangoing US-flag cruise ships PRIDE OF ALOHA PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAII were documented with coastwise privileges pursuant to the 2003 Act These vessels entered regular service in Hawaii in 2004 2005 and 2006 respectively and pursuant to the express language of the 2003 Act are limited in their operation to providing regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands of Hawaii
The CBP regulations promulgated pursuant to the PVSA are set forth in 19 CFR 480a and have remained unchanged throughout both the recodification of Title 46 of the United States Code and the enactment of the 2003 Act They provide that a violation of the PVSA occurs when passengers embark (board a vessel for the
duration of a voyage) a non-coastwiseshyqualified vessel at one US port and disembark (leave the vessel at the conclusion of a voyage) at a different US port unless they proceed with the vessel to a distant foreign port (Le any port not considered a nearby foreign port which is defined as any port located in North America Central America Bermuda or the West Indies including the Bahamas) Currently these regulations do not contain specific criteria for non-coastwise-qualified vessels on itineraries including US ports and either nearby or distant foreign ports in order for such foreign port calls to be compliant with the PVSA
To reiterate the applicable CBP regulations provide that the PVSA is violated when a non-coastwise-qualified vessel transports a passenger on a voyage solely to one or more coastwise ports and the passenger disembarks or goes ashore temporarily at a coastwise port (19 CFR 480a(b)(1)) Furthermore a violation of the PVSA also occurs when a non-coastwise-qualified vessel transports a passenger on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a nearby foreign port or ports (but no other foreign port) and the passenger disembarks at a coastwise port other than the port of embarkation (19 CFR 480a(b)(2)) However there is no violation of the PVSA when a passenger is on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a distant foreign port or ports (whether or not the voyage includes a nearby foreign port or ports) and the passenger disembarks at a coastwise port provided the passenger has proceeded with the vessel to a distant foreign port (19 CFR 480a(b)(3))
IV Request From MARAD To Provide Guidance
The US Department of Transportation Maritime Administration (MARAD) has requested that CBP take action to ensure enforcement of the PVSA MARAD has asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreignshyflag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwiseshyqualified cruise ship operators
In April of 2007 the operator of the three US-flag cruise vessels operating solely in Hawaii pursuant to the 2003 Act announced their intent to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAIl from the Hawaii market and redeploy her to Europe The operator intends to re-flag the vessel to foreign registry directly resulting in the loss of over 1100 crewmember jobs The primary reason cited for this decision is the rapid increase in foreign-flag competition entering the Hawaii market
Federal Register I Vol 72 No 224 I Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules 65489
from the West Coast This competition is evidenced in published cruise itineraries of foreign-flag carriers offering a variety of round trip cruises that depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period usually in the early morning and ultimately return to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their cruise These cruises are often marketed as Hawaii cruises and except for the brief stop in the nearby foreign port of Ensenada are purely coastwise in nature It is these cruise itineraries that pose an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels that pursuant to the 2003 Act are currently engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands
V Preliminary Notice
In response to MARADs concerns CBP sent letters to two carriers known to operate the itineraries in question as well as to the Cruise Lines International Association Inc stating that CBP believes that these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because it appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA The letters further indicated that CBP is taking steps to publish this position
VI CBPs Proposed Interpretive Rule Accordingly in this document CBP is
proposing to provide that cruise itineraries for non-qualified coastwise vessels which allow passengers to board at a US port call at several Hawaiian ports proceed to a foreign port or ports for a brief period and then ultimately return to the original US port of embarkation for disembarkation are not consistent with the PVSA and the regulations promulgated pursuant thereto Specifically CBP interprets a voyage to be solely to one or more coastwise ports even where it stops at a foreign port unless the stop at the foreign port is a legitimate object of the cruise CBP will presume that a stop at a foreign port is not a legitimate object of the cruise unless
(1) The stop lasts at least 48 hours at the foreign port
(2) The amount of time at the foreign port is more than 50 percent of the total amount of time at the US ports of call and
(3) The passengers are permitted to go ashore temporarily at the foreign port
Accordingly CBP proposes to adopt an interpretive rule under which it will presume that any cruise itinerary that does not include a foreign port call that
satisfies each of these three criteria constitutes coastwise transportation of passengers in violation of 19 CFR 480a(b)(1)
Dated November 16 2007 W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection [FR Doc E7-22788 Filed 11-20-07 845 am] BILLING CODe 9111-14-1
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau
27 CFR Part 9
[Notice No 76]
RIN 1513-AB49
Proposed Establishment of the Leona Valley Viticultural Area (2007R-281 P)
AGENCY Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau Treasury ACTION Notice of proposed rulemaking
SUMMARY The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau proposes to establish the 134 square mile Leona Valley viticultural area in the northeast part of Los Angeles County California We designate viticultural areas to allow vintners to better describe the origin of their wines and to allow consumers to better identify wines they may purchase We invite comments on this proposed addition to our regulations DATES We must receive written comments on or before January 22 2008
ADDRESSES You may send comments on this notice to one of the following addresses
bull httpwwwregulationsgov (Federal e-rulemaking portal follow the instructions for submitting comments) or
bull Director Regulations and Rulings Division Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau PO Box 14412 Washington DC 20044-4412
See the Public Participation section of this notice for specific instructions and requirements for submitting comments and for information on how to request a public hearing
You may view copies of this notice selected supporting materials and any comments we receive about this proposal at httpwwwregulationsgov under Docket No 2007-0066 You also may view copies of this notice all related petitions maps or other supporting materials and any comments we receive about this
proposal by appointment at the TTB Information Resource Center 1310 G Street NW Washington DC 20220 To make an appointment call 202-927shy2400
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT NA Sutton Regulations and Rulings Division Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau 925 Lakeville S1 No 158 Petaluma CA 94952 phone 415shy271-1254 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
Background on Viticultural Areas
TTB Authority Section 105(e) of the Federal Alcohol
Administration Act (FAA Act) 27 USC 205(e) authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to prescribe regulations for the labeling of wine distilled spirits and malt beverages The FAA Act provides that these regulations should among other things prohibit consumer deception and the use of misleading statements on labels and ensure that labels provide the consumer with adequate information as to the identity and quality of the product The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) administers the regulations promulgated under the FAA Act
Part 4 ofthe TTB regulations (27 CFR part 4) allows the establishment of definitive viticultural areas and the use of their names as appellations of origin on wine labels and in wine advertisements Part 9 of the TTB regulations (27 CFR part 9) contains the list of approved viticultural areas
Definition Section 425(e)(1)(i) ofthe TTB
regulations (27 CFR 425(e)(1)(i)) defines a viticultural area for American wine as a delimited grape-growing region distinguishable by geographical features the boundaries of which have been recognized and defined in part 9 of the regulations These designations allow vintners and consumers to attribute a given quality reputation or other characteristic of a wine made from grapes grown in an area to its geographic origin The establishment of viticultural areas allows vintners to describe more accurately the origin of their wines to consumers and helps consumers to identify wines they may purchase Establishment of a viticultural area is neither an approval nor an endorsement by TTB of the wine produced in that area
Requirements Section 425(e)(2) of the TTB
regulations outlines the procedure for proposing an American viticultural area and provides that any interested party
Us Department ofHomelaDd Secmity Washington DC 10229
bull ~
US Customs and Border Protection
AUG 15 2fXJJ
VE5-3-02-QTRRBSTCCCI - ti015502-GG-
Mr leon Sutcliffe Director Port Operations Camivai Cruise Unes Camival Place 3655 NW 87Avenue Miami Aorlda 33178
RE P~nger Vessef Services Ad Coastwise Transportation 46 USC sect 55103 19 CFR sect 480a(b)
Dear Mr Sutcliffe
As you know US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) enforces the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) codified at TItle 46 United States Code section 55103 (46 USC 55103) This statute prohibits non-coastwise-qualifled vessels (ie those vessels not US-buill owned and documented with a coastwise endorsement) from transporting passengers between porls or places within the United States The regUlations promUlgated pursuant to the PVSA are found at TrtJe 19 Code of Federal Regulations section 4808 (19 CFR 4808)
It has come to our attention that passenger vessels of your company are engaging in cruise itineraries that include ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands Two USAlagged coastwise-endorsed passenger vessefs are also currenUy engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of caD wittlin the Hawaiian Islands
As part of your cruise itineraries some of your foreign-flagged vessels depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period and ultimately rebJm to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their endse For example the MS ZAANDAM of Holand America Lines departs San Diego cruises the Hawaiian Islands stops in Ensenada from 800pm to 11 OOpmbull and returns to san Diego CBP believes these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because It appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA -- - - ~~~------
Please be advised that CBP is taking steps to publish this position Should have any questions pertaining to this matter please contact Mr Glen Vereb Chief Cargo Security Carriers and Immigration Branch at (202) 572-8724
Sincerely
F Jl E EST Y LEe A U I 5 I N Gmiddot
December 21 2007
The Honorable W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection co Border Security Regulations Branch Office ofInternational Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229
Re Hawaii Coastwise Cruises (USCBP-2007-0098) Comments in Response to Proposed Interpretation
Dear Commissioner Basham
NCL America Inc1 (NCLA) submits these comments in support ofthe efforts ofCustoms and Border Protection to enforce the Passenger Vessel Services Act and the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative as applied to Hawaii coastwise cruises
1 Introduction and Summary of Position
NCLA operates three large oceangoing US flag cruise ships in Hawaii These ships are documented under US flag and are required to operate in regular service in Hawaii pursuant to the authority of the Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative a 2003 federal statute intended to revitalize the US flag cruise industry and to maximize economic and national security benefits to the United States (the 2003 Act)
NCLA has invested $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships pursuant to the 2003 Act and in direct reliance on the protections of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) and its proper enforcement The PVSA limits the transportation ofpassengers between US ports to coastwise documented US flag ships Its statutory protections recognize that US flag ships have significantly higher operational costs in part because they are subject to more stringent US laws including US labor laws and federal
1 NCL America Inc is a US corporation incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware headquartered in Honolulu Hawaii As a US corporation it is subject to US taxes at both the federal and state level The Chief Executive Officer the Chairman of the Board and all of the Board of Directors of NCL America are US citizens The company is also subject to US labor and employment laws and is required by statute to maintain a workforce comprised primarily ofUS citizens
700 Bishop St SUite 900 I Honolulu HawMi 96813 I Tel 8085273800 Fax 8085273820 I ndcom
2
income tax among others The NCLA ships operating in Hawaii are the only large oceangoing cruise ships operating under US flag In furtherance of the policy goals of the PVSA and the 2003 Act these ships have created over 4000 seafaring jobs all subject to US minimum wage and other labor statutes
Since 2003 there has been a significant increase in capacity in the Hawaii market from foreign flag ships providing cruise service to Hawaii from the West Coast Many of these foreign flag cruises are marketed as Hawaii cruises and consist entirely ofUS ports ofcall with the sole exception of a token stop in Mexico for as little as an hour late at night under circumstances where passengers are not permitted to get offthe ship There are no reported rulings approving these particular foreign flag itineraries
Lower cost foreign competition in the Hawaii market has unfairly hurt NCLAs operations NCLA has incurred substantial losses which have contributed significantly to its decision earlier this year to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAll from US flag and reshydeploy it foreign Unfair foreign competition poses an imminent threat to the remaining US flag passenger vessels operating in the Hawaii trades pursuant to the 2003 Act
As the agency statutorily charged with implementation of the 2003 Act the US Department ofTransportation Maritime Administration (MARAn) is aware of the threat foreign flag Hawaii itineraries pose to the US flag fleet and brought the situation to the attention ofthe US Department ofHomeland Security Bureau ofCustoms and Border Protection (CBP or Customs) Customs determined that the primary object of these itineraries was coastwise and that the Ensenada stop was an evasion of the PVSA
In August 2007 Customs provided written notice to the affected foreign lines and their trade association that the existing itineraries were contrary to the PVSA None of these lines sought advance rulings even after the Customs notice with respect to their Hawaii itineraries pursuant to Customs regulations and many continued to market the itineraries as Hawaii cruises NCLA supports the efforts ofCustoms and MARAD to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act for Hawaii cruises
2 Statutory Authority for Customs Proposed Interpretation
(a) Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA)
Congress passed the PVSA in 1886 to protect the US maritime transportation industry from foreign competition2 Protection is afforded through penalty assessments on foreign vessels transporting passengers between US ports or places directly or by way ofa foreign port 3 As Congress and the courts have recognized coastwise protections for the US maritime transportation industry are only one dimension of the PVSA Operating in conjunction with other coastwise laws and with the US
2 See United States v Honduran SS GRANADA 35 F Supp 892 894 (BD Pa 1940)(citing purpose of PVSA to meet threats to the practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping which was to be preserved for US ships)
46 USc sect 55103 (originally 46 USC App 289)
3
documentation laws the PVSA also enhances military sealift in times ofnational emergency sustains a US merchant marine and supports the US shipbuilding and repair industry4
(b) Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative (the 2003 Act)
Over the past decade Congress has sought to reinforce the goals of the PVSA by providing mechanisms to revitalize the oceangoing US flag cruise fleet particularly in Hawaii The Project America legislation enacted in 1997 authorized among other things the re~flagging ofone existing cruise ship contingent on the operator contracting for the construction oftwo new oceangoing cruise shipss Following the default of the operator under the original contract Congress enacted the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative for the purpose ofrecovering economic and national security benefits to the United States bull 6 These same goals of the original PVSA were expressly referenced in the legislative history of the 2003 Act which emphasized that these ships will be assets available in time ofnational emergency and will significantly expand the pool ofqualified seafarers upon which the US Department ofDefense relies to crew non-combatant vessels
The 2003 Act authorizes the US documentation ofthree cruise ships for operation in regular service in Hawaii subject to certain conditions including a prohibition on operating in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico and the Caribbean Sea and a requirement that all vessel repair work be undertaken in the United States MARAD is charged with implementation of the 2003 Act
3 Customs Implementation of PVSA
(a) Regulations
The current regulations implementing the PVSA were published by Customs in 19858 The growth of the foreign flag cruise industry in North America and in particular the development of the Alaska cruise market led to an effort in 1984 to amend the thenshyexisting regulations to increase the ease of administration and operational flexibility The effort to change the regulation had support from US port interests who saw benefit in the potential increase in the number ofUS ports that foreign vessels could call and was opposed by proponents ofpotential US flag projects as detrimental to efforts to revitalize the US fleet 9 The preamble to the 1985 rule emphasized that it was of paramount importance to consider the primary object ofpassengers in taking a
4 See American Hawaii Cruises v Skinner 713 F Supp 452 457 (DDC 1989) (recognizing the contribution of the PVSA and the Jones Act in helping to secure national defense by maintaining a merchant marine oftbe best equipped and most suitable types ofvessels sufficient to serve in time of war or national emergency) see also Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 30 (DC Cir 1984) Wirth Ltd v SIS Acadia Forest 537 F2d 1272 1281 n32 (5th Cir 1976) S Public Law 105-56 Section 8109 (111 Stat 1203 1244) (Oct 81997 ) 6 Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II General Provisions - Department ofCommerce Section 211 (117 Stat 1179) (Feb 20 2003) 1 149 Cong Rec S1118 (dailyed Jan 17 2003(statement ofSenator Inouye) 8 19 CFR sect 480a 950 Fed Reg 26981 (July I 1985)
4
voyage10 a concept which is reinforced elsewhere in Customs regulations11 In its analysis of the comments received at the time Customs accepted the view ofport interests that the modified rule would help their business but did so recognizing the absence ofa regular salt water US flag passenger fleet Customs acknowledged the potential harm to prospective efforts to revitalize the US flag passenger fleet and expressly cautioned that if it were ever shown that coastwise qualified vessels in competition with foreign vessels were in fact hurt by the modified Customs regulation then Customs would immediately reconsider its position12
(b) Customs Rulings
Given the significant penalties associated with violating the PVSA13 Customs regulations expressly provide a mechanism for the owner or charterer of a foreign vessel or any other interested person to request an advisory ruling as to whether a contemplated voyage would be considered in violation of the PVSA14 Customs regulations provide that vessel operators can rely on these ruling letters only to the extent that the facts and circumstances are identical to those in the ruling letter IS
Notwithstanding the fact that several foreign cruise lines offer Hawaii itineraries originating in a US mainland port and calling at Hawaii ports with a token intervening stop in Mexico there are no reported rulings expressly approving such an itinerary for these foreign cruise lines 16
4 The Cruise Industry in Hawaii
(a) NCL America Returns US flag to the Oceangoing Passenger Fleet
Pursuant to the requirements ofthe 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative NCLA agreed to promote US-flag cruising enhance military sealift capacity and expand the US maritime labor base No other major cruise line had ever undertaken such a commitment to the US flag and the public policy objectives Congress sought to achieve under the PVSA or the 2003 Act Introduction ofPRIDE OF ALOHA in 2004 was a significant development in the maritime industry because it marked the restoration ofthe
10 Id at 26983 11 Customs Regulations include a provision on the effect ofruling letters and with respect to carrier rulings the applicable regulation refers to rulings setting forth a determination as to whether or not the primary object of a contemplated voyage is coastwise transportation in violation of46 USC sect 289 [pYSA codified at 46 USC sect55103] 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 12 50 Fed Reg at 26983 13 A modem cruise ship with 2400 passengers for example would be subject to a fine of$720OOO per cruise based on the statutory penalty of$300 for each passenger transported in violation of the Act 14 19 CFR sect 480a(d) IS 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 16 There is one older reported mling involving a request to drop the Ensenada port call from a Los AngeleslHawaiiLos Angeles itinerary which Customs held would violate the PYSA In dicta Customs acknowledged that the itinerary could be in compliance if the Ensenada call were not dropped but did not address the issue ofwhether a one hour service call where no passengers depart the vessel would be sufficient The carrier that obtained that ruling has since left the Hawaii market See Customs Ruling HQ 114078 re Crystal Hannony (Nov 4 1997)
5
us flag to the oceangoing cruise industry A contemporaneous press release from the Us Department ofTransportation reported that the three US-flag cruise ships to be introduced pursuant to the 2003 Act were expected to create more than 20000 US jobs generate more than $825 million ofexpenditures in the US economy and create nearly $360 million in federal tax revenue by the end of 200717 In 2005 the PRIDE OF AMERICA was introduced and in 2006 the third vessel PRIDE OF HAWAll was introduced to Hawaii Both the PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAIl offer 7shyday inter-island Hawaii itineraries whereas PRIDE OF ALOHA operates on 7 and 10 day cruises exclusively among the islands ofHawaii as well as 11 day cruises that include a foreign port call at Fanning Island To date NCLA has invested over $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships in furtherance ofthe policy objectives of the PVSA and the 2003 Act These ships employ over 4000 seafarers and generate hundreds ofmillions of dollars in benefits for Hawaii and the nation
(b) Significant Increase in Foreign Flag Capacity Since 2003
The most significant change in the Hawaii cruise market since 2003 has been the dramatic increase in capacity A significant portion ofthis capacity increase is directly attributable to NCLAs fulfillment ofthe Congressional mandate in the 2003 Act However foreign-flag operations in the Hawaii market as measured in passenger nights18 have skyrocketed Based on MARAn data derived from the US Customs Border Patrol Vessel Entrance and Clearance documents the passenger nights for foreign flag vessels departing from the West Coast to Hawaii on round trip cruise have increased several hundredfold during this period19 See Exhibit A
(c) NCLA Has Incurred Substantial Losses During this Period
Since 2004 NCLA has lost cumulatively more than a quarter ofa billion dollars A principal reason for these losses has been the increase in foreign capacity in this market NCLA has taken significant steps to reduce costs to address the increase in foreign competition but NCLA is at an inherent disadvantage when competing against foreign companies that are not subject to US labor laws US tax laws and other laws Ofcourse the statutory protections of the PVSA are intended to address these very issues That is why Customs immediate action to implement the proposed interpretation is critical for the US flag fleet Regrettably NCLA has already been forced to reduce overall capacity early next year with the withdrawal ofPRIDE OF HAWAlI to another
17 DOT Press Release dated June 72004 see also DOT Press Release dated August 132004 in connection with visit to PRIDE OF ALOHA by US Transportation Secretary Norman Y Mineta 11 Passenger nights (also referred to as passenger capacity days) are calculated by multiplying the number ofpassengers per vessel by the number ofcruise days in each itinerary by the number of cruises This is the unit ofmeasurement employed by MARAn In contrast passenger bed supply (also referred to as passenger capacity) data reflects only the number ofberths per vessel multiplied by the number of cruises and hence understates the market by excluding the full economic value ofthe cruise perfonned 19 In 2003 the total number ofpassenger nights for round-trip West Coast to Hawaii cruises was 303325 which jumped by 353 to 1072329 in 2006 and by 430 to 1304546 from 2003 to 2007 (The 2007 figure is based on MARAD data for six months and a1ll1ualized by published itineraries for the balance of the year)
6
market for operation under foreign flag This move alone will result in the loss ofover 1000 American seafaring jobs
5 Customs Proposed Interpretation is Necessary to Further the Important National Security and Public Policy Objectives Embodied in Federal Law
As Customs has properly noted the increase in foreign competition in the Hawaii trades in contravention of the PVSA pose[s] an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels[] As the operator of these ships NCLA has a vested interest in protecting the jobs ofthe thousands ofAmerican crewmembers and cruise ship service providers who support these vessels NCLA also has an interest in protecting the substantial economic investment it has made to revitalize the US flag passenger vessel fleet But a balancing of interests in the context of Customs enforcement ofexisting law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act requires a much broader focus
The legislative history of the 2003 Act expressly recognized the national security and public policy import ofestablishing a US flag passenger vessel fleet as a means to maintain the countrys preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool of qualified seafarers and as a means to help sustain a fleet ofUS-flag vessels to su~ort
the nations military and maritime industrial base for times ofnational emergency
Congress understood the importance ofestablishing a viable US flag cruise ship fleet as something larger than the vessels themselves These national security and public policy objectives must be weighed in the balance as Customs assesses how best to interpret its rules to give effect to the PVSA and the 2003 Act
6 Customs Should Clarify that the Proposed Interpretation is Limited to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades and Adopt Reasonable Measures to Ensure Sufficient Foreign Content
Since publication ofthe proposed interpretative rule several commenters have observed that the scope of the proposed interpretation is ambiguous because the language of Section VI referencing any cruise itinerary appears broader than the caption Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises and the entire discussion in the published notice which focuses exclusively on US-flag coastwise vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA agrees that the proposed interpretation should be clarified so that its scope is limited to vessels operating roundtrip voyages from US ports that include Hawaii port calls
NCLA supports the concept reflected in the proposed interpretive rule that round trip Hawaii itineraries from US ports on foreign ships must include a material and measurable degree ofoverall foreign port content as compared to US port content
20 149 Congo Rec S1117 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)
7
(a) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is also Consistent with Subsequent Congressional Enactments Modifying the PVSA
As discussed above it is well established that the PVSA was designed toRrotect US-flag vessels from foreign competition in the coastwise and domestic trades 1
Subsequent legislative enactments however have appropriately differentiated among distinct geographic markets and trades including Canada Alaska Puerto Rico and Hawaii based on the existence or non-existence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
In 1938 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers by Canadian passenger vessels on Lake Ontario and the St Lawrence River until such time as passenger service shall be established by vessels of the United States22 Similarly in 1961 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers on Canadian vessels within Alaska or between Alaska and other points in the United States until such time as passenger service is established by vessels ofthe United States23
In 1984 Congress modified the application ofthe PVSA to pennit the transportation ofpassengers between Puerto Rico and other United States ports on foreign-flag vessels24 As with the other statutory exceptions this provision is qualified and expires [o]n a showing that a United States passenger vessel qualified to engage in the coastwise trade is offering or advertising passenger service between a port in Puerto Rico and another port in the United States2S
Congress acted again with respect to the application of the PVSA with the 2003 Act in which it authorized three vessels that did not meet the US-build requirements of the PVSA to operate as modem US-flagged cruise ships in regular service in Hawaii26 The 2003 Act imposes a specific geographic limitation on the operation of any ship documented under this authority to operations only in regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands ofHawaii and shall not transport passengers in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico or the Caribbean Sea except in certain limited circumstances27 As above the limited nature of the 2003 Act is express it is strictly limited to the large ocean-going cruise ships and then only those operating in the regular Hawaii service where there are no US-flag operations28
21 See Act ofJune 19 1886 c 421 sec 8 24 Stat 81 Act of February 171898 c 26 sec 2 30 Stat 248 22 S] Res 174 75th Cong 52 Stat 223 (Alp 251938) codified at46 USC sect 55121(a) 23 See Pub L 87-77 75 Stat 196 (Jun 30 1961) codified at 46 USC sect 55121(b) 24 See Pub L 98-563 98 Stat 2916 (Oct 301984) codified at 46 USC sect 55104(b) 25 46 USC sect 55104(c)(l) see also 46 USC 46 USc sect 55104(cX2)(expiration of exemption upon availability ofa non-coastwise qualified US-flag vessel offering service in the relevant market) 26 149 Congo Rec SI118 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)(statementofSen Inouye) 27 Pub L 108-7 117 Stat 79 (Feb 20 2003) 28 149 Congo Rec S11l9 (dailyed Jan 17 2003Xstatement of Sen Inouye)
8
In each ofthese instances Congress fashioned a narrow exception to the PVSA that differentiated among distinct geographic markets based on the existence or nonshyexistence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
As the federal agency responsible for administering the 2003 Act MARAD requested that Customs act to protect US flag passenger vessel interests in the Hawaii trades29 Limiting the scope ofthe proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades also reflects Customs appreciation of the PVSA in the context of the subsequent Congressional action30 Viewing the Congressional modifications to the PVSA as a whole Congress has specifically and repeatedly differentiated among distinct geographic markets when it has found it necessary and appropriate to do so to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests It is well established that the proper interpretation of a statutory scheme includes consideration ofsubsequent statutes even though the underlying statute itselfhas not been expressly amended31 Accordingly Customs should likewise limit the scope ofthe proposed PVSA interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades because that is the only geographic market as mandated by the 2003 Act in which oceangoing US-flag cruise ships are operating
(b) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Consistent with Public Policy Objectives of the 1985 Rulemaking
In 1985middot Customs liberalized the regulations implementing the PVSA by eliminating certain regulatory prohibitions on foreign flag vessels In the context of the 1985 rulemaking Customs justified a relaxation ofthe regulations on the grounds that it would simplify the administration of the PVSA and would benefit the economy ofcertain American coastwise ports without eroding the statutory protection given to American vessels engaged in solely domestic trade32
Customs thus sought to reconcile US port economic interests with US-flag passenger vessel interests Both of these twin policy objectives are furthered by
29 See 72 Fed Reg 65488 (Nov 21 2007)( MARAn bas asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the ~eratiODS ofcoastwise-qualified cruise ship operators)
See generally FDA v Brown amp Williamson Tobacco Corp 529 US 120 132-133 (2000)(assessing propriety ofagency construction ofFood DIUg and Cosmetics Act and descnbing responsibility of reviewing cowt to assess statutory provisions in the context of subsequent legislative enactments) 31 See Brown amp Williamson 529 US 143 (holding that proper construction ofstatutory provision must necessarily assume that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications ofa later statute This is particularly so where the scope of the earlier statute is broad but the subsequent statutes more specifically address the topic athand) see also United States v Estate ofRomani 523 US 517 530-531 (1998)( holding that a later-enacted statute should control the construction of the federal lien priority statute a specific policy embodied in a later federal statute should control om construction of the [earlier] statute even though it ha[s] not been expressly amended) United States v Fausto 484 US 439453 (1988)(The courts frequently find Congress to have done this - whenever in fact they interpret a statutory text in the light ofsurrounding texts that happen to have been subsequently enacted This classic judicial task of reconciling many laws enacted over time and getting them to make sense in combination necessarily assumes that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications of a later statute) 32 50 Fed Reg 26982 (JuI 11985)
9
limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades
As noted earlier the 2003 Act limits the operation of the NCLA US-flag oceangoing passenger vessels to regular service in Hawaii Because there are no oceangoing US-flag vessels operating in any market other than the Hawaii trades Customs should limit the scope of the proposed interPretation to that market Such a limitation protects US flag passenger vessel interests without prejudicing US port interests In contrast an application of the proposed interpretation to any itinerary would needlessly harm US port interests unrelated to Hawaii without any countervailing benefit to US-flag passenger vessel interests Accordingly limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation is consistent with the public policy objectives of the 1985 rulemaking as well as the 2003 Act
(c) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Also Consistent with Customs Commitment to Revisit the Scope of its Rules to Protect US-Flag Interests
The relaxation ofthe PVSA regulations in 1985 was premised in large part on Customs finding that there was no regular salt water US-flag passenger fleet in operation at that time33 Acknowledging that the relaxed regulations could harm USshyflag interests Customs committed in the preamble ofthe 1985 final rule to immediately reconsider its interpretation if it is ever shown that there is a viable US flag vessel operating in competition with foreign-flag vessels34
Congress enacted the 2003 Act to stimulate the development of a US flag cruise ship industry As noted above the legislative history ofthat Act makes clear that Congress sought to revitalize the US-flag cruise industry as a means to maintain Americas preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool ofqualified seafarers help sustain a fleet of US flag vessels to support our military and a maritime industrial base create thousands of seagoing and shoreside American jobs and stimulate the development ofa US flag cruise ship tourism business with the commensurate benefits to the US tax base the US economy and US employment
Customs is now acting at MARADs request to revisit its interpretation ofthe regulations implementing the PVSA because recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwise-qualified cruise ship operations35 That is to say that the concerns articulated by Customs in the context of the 1985 rulemaking have materialized and US-flag passenger vessel interests are in fact being hanned in the Hawaii trades by foreign competitors
33 50 Fed Reg 26983 34Id
3S 72 Fed Reg 56488 (Nov 21 2007)
I
10
Because the US-flag passenger vessels are limited by statute to regular service in Hawaii limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the
Hawaii trades is consistent with Customs historical commitment to revisit its interpretation ofthe implementing regulations to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests
7 Conclusion
For the reasons stated above NCLA commends the efforts ofCustoms and MARAn to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act as applied to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA respectfully requests Customs to move ahead promptly with p~blicati~nof a final interpretive rule to advance the important national security arid public policy objectives ofthese laws
We greatly appreciate the opportunity to submit these comments
Sincerely
~~~ Alan T Yamamoto Vice President Hawaii Operations
Exhibit A
Ship Name Serenade Of The Seas Departure Port San Diego California Ports of Call San Diego California Kailua Kona Hawaii Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii Hlo Hawaii Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii Ensenada Mexico San Qigo California
2007 Date(s) Oct 05
Sailing Itinerary
Day Port H ~rrive Depart Activity
05-0ct San Diego California 500 PM
06-0ct Cruising
07-0ct Cruising
08-0ct Cruising
09-0ct Cruising
10-0ct Kailua Kona Hawaii 700 AM 900 PM Tendered
11-00t Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 1000 AM Tendered
12middot0ct Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 900 PM Tendered
13-0ct Hilo Hawaii 700 AM 600 PM Docked
14middot0ct Honoulu (Oahu) Hawaii 700 AM Docked
15-0ct Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii 200 AM Docked
6-0ct CrUising
17-0ct Cruising
18-0ct Cruising
19middot0ct Cruising
-7 20-00t
O-Oot
Ensenada ~i1exico
San Deqo California
i 00 ~r1
700 ~M
200 oM D1Jcked ~
Economic Contributions Foreign-Flag Fleet operating in Hawaii vs Three US-Flag Ships
$1500
Pride of Hawaii$1000- $542 million VIc -0-E c Pride of AlohaCo
423 million$500
Pride of America $496 million155 million$shy
Foreign-Flag US-Flag Fleet Fleet
Source State of Hawaii Department of US-Flag $1460 billion Business Economic Development and Tourism
Foreign-Flag $ 155 million 7292008
Employment Foreign-Flag Fleet operating in Hawaii vs Three US-Flag Ships
15000
10000
til c o Pride of Aloha
39435000
Pride of America 1447 4627
~---------
Foreign-Flag US-Flag Fleet Fleet
Source State of Hawaii Department of US-Flag 13629 jobs Business Economic Development and Tourism
Foreign-Flag 1447 jobs 7292008
Foreign Flag Capacity Growth Foreign flag passenger capacity has changed five-fold on roundtrip Hawaii cruises from the West Coast since enactment of the Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative
1600000
1400000
tn 1200000
J enshyZ
1000000
I shyG) en 800000 s G) tn tn
600000 as D 400000
200000
0 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Year
Source US Maritime Administration (derived from the US Customs and Border Patrol Vessel Entrance and Clearance documents - final 2007 data) 7292008
NCL America Hawaii Economic Contributions
(2004-2008)
bull (in Millions) bull $399 in wages benefits and overtime to US seafarers bull $35 in Federal and State payroll Taxes bull $64 in Government Fees and Taxes to Hawaii bull $28 in wages benefits and overtime to US other employees bull $52 in Port Charges to Hawaii Companies (Stevedores tugs pilots etc) bull $85 in Fuel to Tesoro Hawaii bull $130 for shore excursions to Hawaii tour operators bull $39 for Hawaii hotel rooms and ground transport bull $75 for food grown in Hawaii bull $57 in union fees and levies (incl $32M paid directly by employees) bull $1 in MMD fees to the United States Coast Guard bull $51 for recruitment screening processing and training crew bull $76 advertising and promoting Hawaii as a destination bull $1092
COASTWISE CRUISES INTERPRETIVE RULE RESOLUTION Adopted at the
US Conference of Mayors 76th Annual Meeting
June 20-242008 Miami
WHEREAS the Department of Homeland Securitys Customs and Border Protection (CBP) issued a proposed Interpretive Rule regulating Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises on foreign flagged vessels between US ports of call under the Passenger Vessel Services Act at the request of the United States Maritime Administration and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule would require that a foreign-flagged vessel on a coastwise cruise to call at a foreign port for at least 48 hours with that foreign stop constituting at least 50 percent of the cruise itinerary and allowing passengers to disembark the cruise vessel at the foreign port before continuing the cruise to a US port of call and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule establishes burdensome criteria that are wholly inconsistent with industry practice particularly the 48-hour call at foreign port shyinasmuch as the standard port call is six to eight hours - as well as the requirement that 50 percent of a cruise be spent at the foreign port and
WHEREAS the intent of the proposed Interpretive Rule is to protect the single remaining US flag vessel serving the Inter-Hawaiian Island cruise trade that according to the Hawaii Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism generates more than 4600 jobs and generates nearly $500 million in economic benefits for the state annually and
WHEREAS thousands of members of the International Longshore Workers Union (nWU) are employed at US ports serving cruise ships and whose jobs would be at risk if the proposed Interpretive Rule were implemented and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule is vague as to the breadth of its application ie to coastwise cruises between all United States ports or applied solely to coastwise cruises from West Coast ports to Hawaii and
WHEREAS the Cruise Lines International Association estimates the proposed Interpretive Rule would upend the $17 billion in national cruise industry spending and put at risk more than 300000 jobs generated by the international cruise industry including jobs held by nWU at US ports and the local allied industries supporting the cruise industry and
Executive Order Submissions Under Review
II Reglnfogov Where to ind Federal Regulatory Information -~
Home ] Lnitied Agenda and Regulator) Ilan pound012866 Regulator) Review Jnformalion Collection Review
EO 12866 Regulatory Rlvlw dvanced Search IJitorical RepWI Review Counh Jriter XIL
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA)
Executive Order Submissions Under Review July 25 2008 - _------------____ _shy
Department of Homeland Security
AGENCY DHS-TSA RIN 1652-AA53
TITLE Large Aircraft Security Program Other Aircraft Operator Security Programs and Airport Operator Security Program
STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT Yes RECEIVED DATE 06302008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
AGENCY DHS-USCIS RIN Llti15-AB67 TITLE Changes to Requirements Affecting H-2B Nonimmigrants and Their Employers
STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT No RECEIVED DATE 06092008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
AGENCY DHS-USCBP RIN 1651AA11 TITLE Issuance of a Visa and Authorization for Temporary Admission Into the United States for Certain Nonimmigrant Aliens Afflicted W HIV Infection
STAGE Final Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT No RECEIVED DATE 03042008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
-_RE_V-IE-W-E-X-T-EN-D-E-D---------- _
AGENCY DHS-USCBP RIN 1651-AA76 TITLE Coastwise Transportation of Passengers STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT Yes RECEIVED DATE 07142008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
Disclosure I Accessibility I Privacy Policy I Contact Us
httpwwwreginfogovpublicdoeoReviewSearch 7252008
View Rule Page 11
Shere D find Federal ReguLatory InformciiorlReglnfogov Home J Cnified Agenda al1d Regulatory Plan EO 12866 Regulatory Reyiew Information Collection Reiew
Current rnified Agenda and Regulatory Plan Historical Pnified Agenda and Regulatory Plan Search
View Rule
DHSIUSCBP RIN 1651-AA76 Publication ill Spring 2008
Title llCoastwise Transportation of Passengers
Abstract This interim rule amends the Department of Homeland Securitys (DHS) current regulations relating to the transportation of passengers by non-coastwise-qualified vessels on voyages that begin and end at a US port and stop at intervening US and foreign port(s) Under this interim final rule voyages that begin and end at a US port and stop at a foreign port(s) and at intervening US port(s) where a large USshyflag coastwise-qualified passenger vessel engages in regular service are in violation of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) unless the cumulative length of stay(s) at intervening foreign port(s) is more than 50 percent of the total amount of time spent at the intervening US port(s) and passengers are permitted to go ashore at the foreign port(s) The purpose of this amendment is to ensure that the Congressional purpose in enacting the PVSA which is to preserve the economic benefits of US coastwise trade to US-flag coastwise-qualified vessels is properly implemented
Agency Department of Homeland Security(DHS) Priority Substantive Nonsignificant
KIN Status First time published in the Unified Agenda Agenda Stage of Rulemaking Final Rule Stage
Major No Unfunded Mandates No
CFR Citation -LCER 4J~)(h)(plusmnJ
Legal Authority 5JJSS_30J12lJ-SClt16 J9_lJiCJ 431 9_L1C1plusmn3JJ2JScHJ1J2JSCJ624 L(LlLSc207LIl(gtJfHgt~ _CiQJ _46lSC 6QLQ~
Legal Deadline None
Timetable Action Date FR Cite
Interim Final Action 0510012008
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required No Government Levels Affected None
Federalism No
Included in the Regulatory Plan No
RIN Data Printed in the FR No
Agency Contact Glen E Vereb Chief Entry Procedures and Carriers Branch Department of Homeland Security US Customs and Border Protection Office of Regulations and Rulings 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington DC 20229 Phone202572-8730
Disclosure I Accessibility I Privacy Policy I Contact Us
httpwwwreginfogovpublicdoeAgendaViewRuleruleID=286751 7128120
Federal RegisterVol 72 No 224Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules 65487
SPECULATIVE POSITION LIMITS 1-Continued [In contract units)
Contract
Soybeans and Mini-Soybeans 2
Wheat and Mini-Wheat 2 bullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbull
Soybean Oil
SingleSpot month All monthsmonth
600 8600 13300 600 11100 14500 540 6600 8600
Soybean Meal 720 5500 7100
Minneapolis Grain Exchange
Hard Red Spring Wheat I 600 I 11100 I 14500
New York Board of Trade
Cotton No2 I 300 I 5300 I 7300
Kansas City Board of Trade
Hard Winter Wheat I 600 I 11100 I 14500
1 For purposes of compliance with these limits positions in a futures contract that shares ~ubstantially identical terms with a contract market enumerated herein including a futures contract that is cash-settled based on the settlement price of an enumerated contract market shall be agshygregated with positions in the enumerated contract market
2 For purposes of compliance with these limits positions in the regular-sized and mini-sized contracts shall be aggregated
Issued by the Commission this November 152007 in Washington DC David Stawick Secretary of the Commission [FR Doc E7-22681 Filed 11-20-07 845 amI BILLING CODE 6351-Q1-P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Bureau of Customs and Border Protection
19 CFR Part 4
[USCBP-2007-o098]
Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises
AGENCY Customs and Border Protection Department of Homeland Security ACTION Proposed interpretation solicitation of comments
SUMMARY This document proposes new criteria to be used by Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to determine whether non-coastwise-qualified vessels are in violation ofthe Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) when engaging in cruise itineraries in which passengers board at a US port the vessel calls at several Hawaiian ports and then the vessel proceeds to a foreign port or ports for a brief period before ultimately returning to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their cruise CBP believes these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because it appears that the primary objective of the foreign stop is evasion of the PVSA
DATES Comments must be received on or before December 212007 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT Glen E Vereb Cargo Security Carriers amp Immigration Branch Office of International Trade (202) 572-8730 ADDRESSES You may submit comments identified by docket number by one of the following methods
bull Federal eRulemaking Portal http wwwregulationsgov Follow the instructions for submitting comments
bull Mail Border Security Regulations Branch Office of International Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
I Public Participation
Interested persons are invited to participate in this proposed interpretation by submitting written data views or arguments on all aspects of the proposed interpretation Customs and Border Protection (CBP) also invites comments that relate to the economic environmental or federalism effects that might result from this proposed interpretation Comments that will provide the most assistance to CBP in developing these procedures will reference a specific portion of the proposed interpretation explain the reason for any recommended change and include data information or authority that support such recommended change
Instructions All submissions received must include the agency name and docket number for this proposed
interpretation All comments received will be posted without change to http wwwregulationsgov including any personal information provided
Docket For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received go to http wwwregulationsgov Submitted comments may also be inspected on regular business days between the hours of 9 am and 430 pm at the Office of International Trade Customs and Border Protection 799 9th Street NW 5th Floor Washington DC Arrangements to inspect submitted documents should be made in advance by calling Mr Joseph Clark at (202) 572shy8768
II Background
The maritime cabotage law governing the transportation of passengers was first established by section 8 of the Passenger Vessel Services Act of June 191886 (the PVSA) 24 Stat 81 as amended by section 2 of the Act of February 17 1898 30 Stat 248 formerly codified at 46 USC App 289 (now codified at 46 USC 55103) 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 of $200 (now $300 as promulgated in TD 03-11 pursuant to the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 199028 USC 2461 note) for each passenger so transported and landed
The intent of the maritime cabotage laws including the PVSA was to provide a legal structure that guarantees a coastwise monopoly to
65488 Federal RegisterVol 72 No 224Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules
American shipping and thereby promotes development of the American merchant marine Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 28 (DC Cir 1984) see also The Granada 35 FSupp 892 8931940 AMC 1601 (DC Pa 1940) (stating that the legislative aim of section 289 [now 55102] was the creation of a practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping business for United States ships) In other words the PVSA was enacted to advance the United States merchant marine and fleet by restricting the use of foreign-ownedflagged passenger vessels in United States territorial waters
Passenger vessel transportation between United States ports has historically been viewed to be part of the coastwise trade after the enactment of the PVSA This view is premised on the concepts of continuity of the voyage and whether its intended purpose or objective was coastwise transportation In other words the PVSA was held to be violated if the coastwise movement was continuous or if the purpose of the trip was a coastwise voyage (See 18 OAG 445 September 4 1886 28 OAG 204 February 16 1910 29 OAG 318 February 12 1912 30 OAG 44 February 1 1913 34 OAG 340 December 24 1924 and 36 OAG 352 August 13 1930)
The CBP regulations promulgated pursuant to the PVSA are found at section 480a of title 19 of the Code of Federal Regulations (19 CFR 480a) and are reflective of the above cited Office of the Attorney General decisions These regulations provide among other things that a non-coastwise-qualified vessel which embarks a passenger at a port in the United States embraced within the coastwise laws (a coastwise port) will be deemed to have landed that passenger in violation of the PVSA if the passenger disembarks at a different coastwise port on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a nearby foreign port or ports (as defined in 19 CFR 480a(a)(2) see also 19 CFR 480a(b)(2)) The terms embark and disembark are words of art which are defined as going on board a vessel for the duration of a specific voyage and leaving a vessel at the conclusion of a specific voyage respectively (See 19 CFR 480a(a)(4))
The references in section 480a to nearby foreign ports (defined in 19 CFR 480a(a)(2)) are the results of attempts by CBP to apply an Office of the Attorney Generals opinion dated February 26 1910 (28 OAG 204) In that case a foreign-flag vessel transported 615 passengers on a voyage around the world beginning in New
York and concluding in San Francisco The Attorney General opined that since the primary object of the voyage was to visit various parts of the world on a pleasure tour returning home via California and not to be transported in domestic commerce the transportation was not in violation of the PVSA
The 1910 Attorney Generals opinion was extended to voyages that included foreign ports other than nearby foreign ports (See Treasury Decision (TD) 68shy285 (33 FR 16558) November 14 1968) However voyages solely to one or more coastwise ports have always been considered predominantly coastwise Therefore non-coastwise-qualified vessels engaging in such a voyage where passengers temporarily go ashore at a coastwise port have been deemed to have violated the PVSA
m Current Law and Policy Pursuant to Public Law 109-304 120
Stat 1632 enacted on October 6 2006 Title 46 United States Code was substantially reorganized and recodified Consequently the PVSA is now codified at 46 USC 55103 and provides that no vessel shall transport passengers between ports or places in the United States either directly or by way of a foreign port under a penalty of $300 for each person so transported and landed except one that (1) Is wholly owned by citizens of the United States for purposes of engaging in the coastwise trade and (2) has been issued a certificate of documentation with a coastwise endorsement or is exempt from documentation but would otherwise be eligible for such a certificate and endorsement
In 2003 Congress enacted Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II Section 211 for the purpose of revitalizing the oceangoing US-flag cruise industry in Hawaii (the 2003 Act) Three oceangoing US-flag cruise ships PRIDE OF ALOHA PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAII were documented with coastwise privileges pursuant to the 2003 Act These vessels entered regular service in Hawaii in 2004 2005 and 2006 respectively and pursuant to the express language of the 2003 Act are limited in their operation to providing regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands of Hawaii
The CBP regulations promulgated pursuant to the PVSA are set forth in 19 CFR 480a and have remained unchanged throughout both the recodification of Title 46 of the United States Code and the enactment of the 2003 Act They provide that a violation of the PVSA occurs when passengers embark (board a vessel for the
duration of a voyage) a non-coastwiseshyqualified vessel at one US port and disembark (leave the vessel at the conclusion of a voyage) at a different US port unless they proceed with the vessel to a distant foreign port (Le any port not considered a nearby foreign port which is defined as any port located in North America Central America Bermuda or the West Indies including the Bahamas) Currently these regulations do not contain specific criteria for non-coastwise-qualified vessels on itineraries including US ports and either nearby or distant foreign ports in order for such foreign port calls to be compliant with the PVSA
To reiterate the applicable CBP regulations provide that the PVSA is violated when a non-coastwise-qualified vessel transports a passenger on a voyage solely to one or more coastwise ports and the passenger disembarks or goes ashore temporarily at a coastwise port (19 CFR 480a(b)(1)) Furthermore a violation of the PVSA also occurs when a non-coastwise-qualified vessel transports a passenger on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a nearby foreign port or ports (but no other foreign port) and the passenger disembarks at a coastwise port other than the port of embarkation (19 CFR 480a(b)(2)) However there is no violation of the PVSA when a passenger is on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a distant foreign port or ports (whether or not the voyage includes a nearby foreign port or ports) and the passenger disembarks at a coastwise port provided the passenger has proceeded with the vessel to a distant foreign port (19 CFR 480a(b)(3))
IV Request From MARAD To Provide Guidance
The US Department of Transportation Maritime Administration (MARAD) has requested that CBP take action to ensure enforcement of the PVSA MARAD has asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreignshyflag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwiseshyqualified cruise ship operators
In April of 2007 the operator of the three US-flag cruise vessels operating solely in Hawaii pursuant to the 2003 Act announced their intent to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAIl from the Hawaii market and redeploy her to Europe The operator intends to re-flag the vessel to foreign registry directly resulting in the loss of over 1100 crewmember jobs The primary reason cited for this decision is the rapid increase in foreign-flag competition entering the Hawaii market
Federal Register I Vol 72 No 224 I Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules 65489
from the West Coast This competition is evidenced in published cruise itineraries of foreign-flag carriers offering a variety of round trip cruises that depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period usually in the early morning and ultimately return to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their cruise These cruises are often marketed as Hawaii cruises and except for the brief stop in the nearby foreign port of Ensenada are purely coastwise in nature It is these cruise itineraries that pose an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels that pursuant to the 2003 Act are currently engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands
V Preliminary Notice
In response to MARADs concerns CBP sent letters to two carriers known to operate the itineraries in question as well as to the Cruise Lines International Association Inc stating that CBP believes that these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because it appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA The letters further indicated that CBP is taking steps to publish this position
VI CBPs Proposed Interpretive Rule Accordingly in this document CBP is
proposing to provide that cruise itineraries for non-qualified coastwise vessels which allow passengers to board at a US port call at several Hawaiian ports proceed to a foreign port or ports for a brief period and then ultimately return to the original US port of embarkation for disembarkation are not consistent with the PVSA and the regulations promulgated pursuant thereto Specifically CBP interprets a voyage to be solely to one or more coastwise ports even where it stops at a foreign port unless the stop at the foreign port is a legitimate object of the cruise CBP will presume that a stop at a foreign port is not a legitimate object of the cruise unless
(1) The stop lasts at least 48 hours at the foreign port
(2) The amount of time at the foreign port is more than 50 percent of the total amount of time at the US ports of call and
(3) The passengers are permitted to go ashore temporarily at the foreign port
Accordingly CBP proposes to adopt an interpretive rule under which it will presume that any cruise itinerary that does not include a foreign port call that
satisfies each of these three criteria constitutes coastwise transportation of passengers in violation of 19 CFR 480a(b)(1)
Dated November 16 2007 W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection [FR Doc E7-22788 Filed 11-20-07 845 am] BILLING CODe 9111-14-1
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau
27 CFR Part 9
[Notice No 76]
RIN 1513-AB49
Proposed Establishment of the Leona Valley Viticultural Area (2007R-281 P)
AGENCY Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau Treasury ACTION Notice of proposed rulemaking
SUMMARY The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau proposes to establish the 134 square mile Leona Valley viticultural area in the northeast part of Los Angeles County California We designate viticultural areas to allow vintners to better describe the origin of their wines and to allow consumers to better identify wines they may purchase We invite comments on this proposed addition to our regulations DATES We must receive written comments on or before January 22 2008
ADDRESSES You may send comments on this notice to one of the following addresses
bull httpwwwregulationsgov (Federal e-rulemaking portal follow the instructions for submitting comments) or
bull Director Regulations and Rulings Division Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau PO Box 14412 Washington DC 20044-4412
See the Public Participation section of this notice for specific instructions and requirements for submitting comments and for information on how to request a public hearing
You may view copies of this notice selected supporting materials and any comments we receive about this proposal at httpwwwregulationsgov under Docket No 2007-0066 You also may view copies of this notice all related petitions maps or other supporting materials and any comments we receive about this
proposal by appointment at the TTB Information Resource Center 1310 G Street NW Washington DC 20220 To make an appointment call 202-927shy2400
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT NA Sutton Regulations and Rulings Division Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau 925 Lakeville S1 No 158 Petaluma CA 94952 phone 415shy271-1254 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
Background on Viticultural Areas
TTB Authority Section 105(e) of the Federal Alcohol
Administration Act (FAA Act) 27 USC 205(e) authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to prescribe regulations for the labeling of wine distilled spirits and malt beverages The FAA Act provides that these regulations should among other things prohibit consumer deception and the use of misleading statements on labels and ensure that labels provide the consumer with adequate information as to the identity and quality of the product The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) administers the regulations promulgated under the FAA Act
Part 4 ofthe TTB regulations (27 CFR part 4) allows the establishment of definitive viticultural areas and the use of their names as appellations of origin on wine labels and in wine advertisements Part 9 of the TTB regulations (27 CFR part 9) contains the list of approved viticultural areas
Definition Section 425(e)(1)(i) ofthe TTB
regulations (27 CFR 425(e)(1)(i)) defines a viticultural area for American wine as a delimited grape-growing region distinguishable by geographical features the boundaries of which have been recognized and defined in part 9 of the regulations These designations allow vintners and consumers to attribute a given quality reputation or other characteristic of a wine made from grapes grown in an area to its geographic origin The establishment of viticultural areas allows vintners to describe more accurately the origin of their wines to consumers and helps consumers to identify wines they may purchase Establishment of a viticultural area is neither an approval nor an endorsement by TTB of the wine produced in that area
Requirements Section 425(e)(2) of the TTB
regulations outlines the procedure for proposing an American viticultural area and provides that any interested party
Us Department ofHomelaDd Secmity Washington DC 10229
bull ~
US Customs and Border Protection
AUG 15 2fXJJ
VE5-3-02-QTRRBSTCCCI - ti015502-GG-
Mr leon Sutcliffe Director Port Operations Camivai Cruise Unes Camival Place 3655 NW 87Avenue Miami Aorlda 33178
RE P~nger Vessef Services Ad Coastwise Transportation 46 USC sect 55103 19 CFR sect 480a(b)
Dear Mr Sutcliffe
As you know US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) enforces the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) codified at TItle 46 United States Code section 55103 (46 USC 55103) This statute prohibits non-coastwise-qualifled vessels (ie those vessels not US-buill owned and documented with a coastwise endorsement) from transporting passengers between porls or places within the United States The regUlations promUlgated pursuant to the PVSA are found at TrtJe 19 Code of Federal Regulations section 4808 (19 CFR 4808)
It has come to our attention that passenger vessels of your company are engaging in cruise itineraries that include ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands Two USAlagged coastwise-endorsed passenger vessefs are also currenUy engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of caD wittlin the Hawaiian Islands
As part of your cruise itineraries some of your foreign-flagged vessels depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period and ultimately rebJm to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their endse For example the MS ZAANDAM of Holand America Lines departs San Diego cruises the Hawaiian Islands stops in Ensenada from 800pm to 11 OOpmbull and returns to san Diego CBP believes these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because It appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA -- - - ~~~------
Please be advised that CBP is taking steps to publish this position Should have any questions pertaining to this matter please contact Mr Glen Vereb Chief Cargo Security Carriers and Immigration Branch at (202) 572-8724
Sincerely
F Jl E EST Y LEe A U I 5 I N Gmiddot
December 21 2007
The Honorable W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection co Border Security Regulations Branch Office ofInternational Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229
Re Hawaii Coastwise Cruises (USCBP-2007-0098) Comments in Response to Proposed Interpretation
Dear Commissioner Basham
NCL America Inc1 (NCLA) submits these comments in support ofthe efforts ofCustoms and Border Protection to enforce the Passenger Vessel Services Act and the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative as applied to Hawaii coastwise cruises
1 Introduction and Summary of Position
NCLA operates three large oceangoing US flag cruise ships in Hawaii These ships are documented under US flag and are required to operate in regular service in Hawaii pursuant to the authority of the Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative a 2003 federal statute intended to revitalize the US flag cruise industry and to maximize economic and national security benefits to the United States (the 2003 Act)
NCLA has invested $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships pursuant to the 2003 Act and in direct reliance on the protections of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) and its proper enforcement The PVSA limits the transportation ofpassengers between US ports to coastwise documented US flag ships Its statutory protections recognize that US flag ships have significantly higher operational costs in part because they are subject to more stringent US laws including US labor laws and federal
1 NCL America Inc is a US corporation incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware headquartered in Honolulu Hawaii As a US corporation it is subject to US taxes at both the federal and state level The Chief Executive Officer the Chairman of the Board and all of the Board of Directors of NCL America are US citizens The company is also subject to US labor and employment laws and is required by statute to maintain a workforce comprised primarily ofUS citizens
700 Bishop St SUite 900 I Honolulu HawMi 96813 I Tel 8085273800 Fax 8085273820 I ndcom
2
income tax among others The NCLA ships operating in Hawaii are the only large oceangoing cruise ships operating under US flag In furtherance of the policy goals of the PVSA and the 2003 Act these ships have created over 4000 seafaring jobs all subject to US minimum wage and other labor statutes
Since 2003 there has been a significant increase in capacity in the Hawaii market from foreign flag ships providing cruise service to Hawaii from the West Coast Many of these foreign flag cruises are marketed as Hawaii cruises and consist entirely ofUS ports ofcall with the sole exception of a token stop in Mexico for as little as an hour late at night under circumstances where passengers are not permitted to get offthe ship There are no reported rulings approving these particular foreign flag itineraries
Lower cost foreign competition in the Hawaii market has unfairly hurt NCLAs operations NCLA has incurred substantial losses which have contributed significantly to its decision earlier this year to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAll from US flag and reshydeploy it foreign Unfair foreign competition poses an imminent threat to the remaining US flag passenger vessels operating in the Hawaii trades pursuant to the 2003 Act
As the agency statutorily charged with implementation of the 2003 Act the US Department ofTransportation Maritime Administration (MARAn) is aware of the threat foreign flag Hawaii itineraries pose to the US flag fleet and brought the situation to the attention ofthe US Department ofHomeland Security Bureau ofCustoms and Border Protection (CBP or Customs) Customs determined that the primary object of these itineraries was coastwise and that the Ensenada stop was an evasion of the PVSA
In August 2007 Customs provided written notice to the affected foreign lines and their trade association that the existing itineraries were contrary to the PVSA None of these lines sought advance rulings even after the Customs notice with respect to their Hawaii itineraries pursuant to Customs regulations and many continued to market the itineraries as Hawaii cruises NCLA supports the efforts ofCustoms and MARAD to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act for Hawaii cruises
2 Statutory Authority for Customs Proposed Interpretation
(a) Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA)
Congress passed the PVSA in 1886 to protect the US maritime transportation industry from foreign competition2 Protection is afforded through penalty assessments on foreign vessels transporting passengers between US ports or places directly or by way ofa foreign port 3 As Congress and the courts have recognized coastwise protections for the US maritime transportation industry are only one dimension of the PVSA Operating in conjunction with other coastwise laws and with the US
2 See United States v Honduran SS GRANADA 35 F Supp 892 894 (BD Pa 1940)(citing purpose of PVSA to meet threats to the practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping which was to be preserved for US ships)
46 USc sect 55103 (originally 46 USC App 289)
3
documentation laws the PVSA also enhances military sealift in times ofnational emergency sustains a US merchant marine and supports the US shipbuilding and repair industry4
(b) Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative (the 2003 Act)
Over the past decade Congress has sought to reinforce the goals of the PVSA by providing mechanisms to revitalize the oceangoing US flag cruise fleet particularly in Hawaii The Project America legislation enacted in 1997 authorized among other things the re~flagging ofone existing cruise ship contingent on the operator contracting for the construction oftwo new oceangoing cruise shipss Following the default of the operator under the original contract Congress enacted the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative for the purpose ofrecovering economic and national security benefits to the United States bull 6 These same goals of the original PVSA were expressly referenced in the legislative history of the 2003 Act which emphasized that these ships will be assets available in time ofnational emergency and will significantly expand the pool ofqualified seafarers upon which the US Department ofDefense relies to crew non-combatant vessels
The 2003 Act authorizes the US documentation ofthree cruise ships for operation in regular service in Hawaii subject to certain conditions including a prohibition on operating in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico and the Caribbean Sea and a requirement that all vessel repair work be undertaken in the United States MARAD is charged with implementation of the 2003 Act
3 Customs Implementation of PVSA
(a) Regulations
The current regulations implementing the PVSA were published by Customs in 19858 The growth of the foreign flag cruise industry in North America and in particular the development of the Alaska cruise market led to an effort in 1984 to amend the thenshyexisting regulations to increase the ease of administration and operational flexibility The effort to change the regulation had support from US port interests who saw benefit in the potential increase in the number ofUS ports that foreign vessels could call and was opposed by proponents ofpotential US flag projects as detrimental to efforts to revitalize the US fleet 9 The preamble to the 1985 rule emphasized that it was of paramount importance to consider the primary object ofpassengers in taking a
4 See American Hawaii Cruises v Skinner 713 F Supp 452 457 (DDC 1989) (recognizing the contribution of the PVSA and the Jones Act in helping to secure national defense by maintaining a merchant marine oftbe best equipped and most suitable types ofvessels sufficient to serve in time of war or national emergency) see also Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 30 (DC Cir 1984) Wirth Ltd v SIS Acadia Forest 537 F2d 1272 1281 n32 (5th Cir 1976) S Public Law 105-56 Section 8109 (111 Stat 1203 1244) (Oct 81997 ) 6 Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II General Provisions - Department ofCommerce Section 211 (117 Stat 1179) (Feb 20 2003) 1 149 Cong Rec S1118 (dailyed Jan 17 2003(statement ofSenator Inouye) 8 19 CFR sect 480a 950 Fed Reg 26981 (July I 1985)
4
voyage10 a concept which is reinforced elsewhere in Customs regulations11 In its analysis of the comments received at the time Customs accepted the view ofport interests that the modified rule would help their business but did so recognizing the absence ofa regular salt water US flag passenger fleet Customs acknowledged the potential harm to prospective efforts to revitalize the US flag passenger fleet and expressly cautioned that if it were ever shown that coastwise qualified vessels in competition with foreign vessels were in fact hurt by the modified Customs regulation then Customs would immediately reconsider its position12
(b) Customs Rulings
Given the significant penalties associated with violating the PVSA13 Customs regulations expressly provide a mechanism for the owner or charterer of a foreign vessel or any other interested person to request an advisory ruling as to whether a contemplated voyage would be considered in violation of the PVSA14 Customs regulations provide that vessel operators can rely on these ruling letters only to the extent that the facts and circumstances are identical to those in the ruling letter IS
Notwithstanding the fact that several foreign cruise lines offer Hawaii itineraries originating in a US mainland port and calling at Hawaii ports with a token intervening stop in Mexico there are no reported rulings expressly approving such an itinerary for these foreign cruise lines 16
4 The Cruise Industry in Hawaii
(a) NCL America Returns US flag to the Oceangoing Passenger Fleet
Pursuant to the requirements ofthe 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative NCLA agreed to promote US-flag cruising enhance military sealift capacity and expand the US maritime labor base No other major cruise line had ever undertaken such a commitment to the US flag and the public policy objectives Congress sought to achieve under the PVSA or the 2003 Act Introduction ofPRIDE OF ALOHA in 2004 was a significant development in the maritime industry because it marked the restoration ofthe
10 Id at 26983 11 Customs Regulations include a provision on the effect ofruling letters and with respect to carrier rulings the applicable regulation refers to rulings setting forth a determination as to whether or not the primary object of a contemplated voyage is coastwise transportation in violation of46 USC sect 289 [pYSA codified at 46 USC sect55103] 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 12 50 Fed Reg at 26983 13 A modem cruise ship with 2400 passengers for example would be subject to a fine of$720OOO per cruise based on the statutory penalty of$300 for each passenger transported in violation of the Act 14 19 CFR sect 480a(d) IS 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 16 There is one older reported mling involving a request to drop the Ensenada port call from a Los AngeleslHawaiiLos Angeles itinerary which Customs held would violate the PYSA In dicta Customs acknowledged that the itinerary could be in compliance if the Ensenada call were not dropped but did not address the issue ofwhether a one hour service call where no passengers depart the vessel would be sufficient The carrier that obtained that ruling has since left the Hawaii market See Customs Ruling HQ 114078 re Crystal Hannony (Nov 4 1997)
5
us flag to the oceangoing cruise industry A contemporaneous press release from the Us Department ofTransportation reported that the three US-flag cruise ships to be introduced pursuant to the 2003 Act were expected to create more than 20000 US jobs generate more than $825 million ofexpenditures in the US economy and create nearly $360 million in federal tax revenue by the end of 200717 In 2005 the PRIDE OF AMERICA was introduced and in 2006 the third vessel PRIDE OF HAWAll was introduced to Hawaii Both the PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAIl offer 7shyday inter-island Hawaii itineraries whereas PRIDE OF ALOHA operates on 7 and 10 day cruises exclusively among the islands ofHawaii as well as 11 day cruises that include a foreign port call at Fanning Island To date NCLA has invested over $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships in furtherance ofthe policy objectives of the PVSA and the 2003 Act These ships employ over 4000 seafarers and generate hundreds ofmillions of dollars in benefits for Hawaii and the nation
(b) Significant Increase in Foreign Flag Capacity Since 2003
The most significant change in the Hawaii cruise market since 2003 has been the dramatic increase in capacity A significant portion ofthis capacity increase is directly attributable to NCLAs fulfillment ofthe Congressional mandate in the 2003 Act However foreign-flag operations in the Hawaii market as measured in passenger nights18 have skyrocketed Based on MARAn data derived from the US Customs Border Patrol Vessel Entrance and Clearance documents the passenger nights for foreign flag vessels departing from the West Coast to Hawaii on round trip cruise have increased several hundredfold during this period19 See Exhibit A
(c) NCLA Has Incurred Substantial Losses During this Period
Since 2004 NCLA has lost cumulatively more than a quarter ofa billion dollars A principal reason for these losses has been the increase in foreign capacity in this market NCLA has taken significant steps to reduce costs to address the increase in foreign competition but NCLA is at an inherent disadvantage when competing against foreign companies that are not subject to US labor laws US tax laws and other laws Ofcourse the statutory protections of the PVSA are intended to address these very issues That is why Customs immediate action to implement the proposed interpretation is critical for the US flag fleet Regrettably NCLA has already been forced to reduce overall capacity early next year with the withdrawal ofPRIDE OF HAWAlI to another
17 DOT Press Release dated June 72004 see also DOT Press Release dated August 132004 in connection with visit to PRIDE OF ALOHA by US Transportation Secretary Norman Y Mineta 11 Passenger nights (also referred to as passenger capacity days) are calculated by multiplying the number ofpassengers per vessel by the number ofcruise days in each itinerary by the number of cruises This is the unit ofmeasurement employed by MARAn In contrast passenger bed supply (also referred to as passenger capacity) data reflects only the number ofberths per vessel multiplied by the number of cruises and hence understates the market by excluding the full economic value ofthe cruise perfonned 19 In 2003 the total number ofpassenger nights for round-trip West Coast to Hawaii cruises was 303325 which jumped by 353 to 1072329 in 2006 and by 430 to 1304546 from 2003 to 2007 (The 2007 figure is based on MARAD data for six months and a1ll1ualized by published itineraries for the balance of the year)
6
market for operation under foreign flag This move alone will result in the loss ofover 1000 American seafaring jobs
5 Customs Proposed Interpretation is Necessary to Further the Important National Security and Public Policy Objectives Embodied in Federal Law
As Customs has properly noted the increase in foreign competition in the Hawaii trades in contravention of the PVSA pose[s] an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels[] As the operator of these ships NCLA has a vested interest in protecting the jobs ofthe thousands ofAmerican crewmembers and cruise ship service providers who support these vessels NCLA also has an interest in protecting the substantial economic investment it has made to revitalize the US flag passenger vessel fleet But a balancing of interests in the context of Customs enforcement ofexisting law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act requires a much broader focus
The legislative history of the 2003 Act expressly recognized the national security and public policy import ofestablishing a US flag passenger vessel fleet as a means to maintain the countrys preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool of qualified seafarers and as a means to help sustain a fleet ofUS-flag vessels to su~ort
the nations military and maritime industrial base for times ofnational emergency
Congress understood the importance ofestablishing a viable US flag cruise ship fleet as something larger than the vessels themselves These national security and public policy objectives must be weighed in the balance as Customs assesses how best to interpret its rules to give effect to the PVSA and the 2003 Act
6 Customs Should Clarify that the Proposed Interpretation is Limited to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades and Adopt Reasonable Measures to Ensure Sufficient Foreign Content
Since publication ofthe proposed interpretative rule several commenters have observed that the scope of the proposed interpretation is ambiguous because the language of Section VI referencing any cruise itinerary appears broader than the caption Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises and the entire discussion in the published notice which focuses exclusively on US-flag coastwise vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA agrees that the proposed interpretation should be clarified so that its scope is limited to vessels operating roundtrip voyages from US ports that include Hawaii port calls
NCLA supports the concept reflected in the proposed interpretive rule that round trip Hawaii itineraries from US ports on foreign ships must include a material and measurable degree ofoverall foreign port content as compared to US port content
20 149 Congo Rec S1117 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)
7
(a) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is also Consistent with Subsequent Congressional Enactments Modifying the PVSA
As discussed above it is well established that the PVSA was designed toRrotect US-flag vessels from foreign competition in the coastwise and domestic trades 1
Subsequent legislative enactments however have appropriately differentiated among distinct geographic markets and trades including Canada Alaska Puerto Rico and Hawaii based on the existence or non-existence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
In 1938 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers by Canadian passenger vessels on Lake Ontario and the St Lawrence River until such time as passenger service shall be established by vessels of the United States22 Similarly in 1961 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers on Canadian vessels within Alaska or between Alaska and other points in the United States until such time as passenger service is established by vessels ofthe United States23
In 1984 Congress modified the application ofthe PVSA to pennit the transportation ofpassengers between Puerto Rico and other United States ports on foreign-flag vessels24 As with the other statutory exceptions this provision is qualified and expires [o]n a showing that a United States passenger vessel qualified to engage in the coastwise trade is offering or advertising passenger service between a port in Puerto Rico and another port in the United States2S
Congress acted again with respect to the application of the PVSA with the 2003 Act in which it authorized three vessels that did not meet the US-build requirements of the PVSA to operate as modem US-flagged cruise ships in regular service in Hawaii26 The 2003 Act imposes a specific geographic limitation on the operation of any ship documented under this authority to operations only in regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands ofHawaii and shall not transport passengers in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico or the Caribbean Sea except in certain limited circumstances27 As above the limited nature of the 2003 Act is express it is strictly limited to the large ocean-going cruise ships and then only those operating in the regular Hawaii service where there are no US-flag operations28
21 See Act ofJune 19 1886 c 421 sec 8 24 Stat 81 Act of February 171898 c 26 sec 2 30 Stat 248 22 S] Res 174 75th Cong 52 Stat 223 (Alp 251938) codified at46 USC sect 55121(a) 23 See Pub L 87-77 75 Stat 196 (Jun 30 1961) codified at 46 USC sect 55121(b) 24 See Pub L 98-563 98 Stat 2916 (Oct 301984) codified at 46 USC sect 55104(b) 25 46 USC sect 55104(c)(l) see also 46 USC 46 USc sect 55104(cX2)(expiration of exemption upon availability ofa non-coastwise qualified US-flag vessel offering service in the relevant market) 26 149 Congo Rec SI118 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)(statementofSen Inouye) 27 Pub L 108-7 117 Stat 79 (Feb 20 2003) 28 149 Congo Rec S11l9 (dailyed Jan 17 2003Xstatement of Sen Inouye)
8
In each ofthese instances Congress fashioned a narrow exception to the PVSA that differentiated among distinct geographic markets based on the existence or nonshyexistence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
As the federal agency responsible for administering the 2003 Act MARAD requested that Customs act to protect US flag passenger vessel interests in the Hawaii trades29 Limiting the scope ofthe proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades also reflects Customs appreciation of the PVSA in the context of the subsequent Congressional action30 Viewing the Congressional modifications to the PVSA as a whole Congress has specifically and repeatedly differentiated among distinct geographic markets when it has found it necessary and appropriate to do so to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests It is well established that the proper interpretation of a statutory scheme includes consideration ofsubsequent statutes even though the underlying statute itselfhas not been expressly amended31 Accordingly Customs should likewise limit the scope ofthe proposed PVSA interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades because that is the only geographic market as mandated by the 2003 Act in which oceangoing US-flag cruise ships are operating
(b) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Consistent with Public Policy Objectives of the 1985 Rulemaking
In 1985middot Customs liberalized the regulations implementing the PVSA by eliminating certain regulatory prohibitions on foreign flag vessels In the context of the 1985 rulemaking Customs justified a relaxation ofthe regulations on the grounds that it would simplify the administration of the PVSA and would benefit the economy ofcertain American coastwise ports without eroding the statutory protection given to American vessels engaged in solely domestic trade32
Customs thus sought to reconcile US port economic interests with US-flag passenger vessel interests Both of these twin policy objectives are furthered by
29 See 72 Fed Reg 65488 (Nov 21 2007)( MARAn bas asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the ~eratiODS ofcoastwise-qualified cruise ship operators)
See generally FDA v Brown amp Williamson Tobacco Corp 529 US 120 132-133 (2000)(assessing propriety ofagency construction ofFood DIUg and Cosmetics Act and descnbing responsibility of reviewing cowt to assess statutory provisions in the context of subsequent legislative enactments) 31 See Brown amp Williamson 529 US 143 (holding that proper construction ofstatutory provision must necessarily assume that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications ofa later statute This is particularly so where the scope of the earlier statute is broad but the subsequent statutes more specifically address the topic athand) see also United States v Estate ofRomani 523 US 517 530-531 (1998)( holding that a later-enacted statute should control the construction of the federal lien priority statute a specific policy embodied in a later federal statute should control om construction of the [earlier] statute even though it ha[s] not been expressly amended) United States v Fausto 484 US 439453 (1988)(The courts frequently find Congress to have done this - whenever in fact they interpret a statutory text in the light ofsurrounding texts that happen to have been subsequently enacted This classic judicial task of reconciling many laws enacted over time and getting them to make sense in combination necessarily assumes that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications of a later statute) 32 50 Fed Reg 26982 (JuI 11985)
9
limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades
As noted earlier the 2003 Act limits the operation of the NCLA US-flag oceangoing passenger vessels to regular service in Hawaii Because there are no oceangoing US-flag vessels operating in any market other than the Hawaii trades Customs should limit the scope of the proposed interPretation to that market Such a limitation protects US flag passenger vessel interests without prejudicing US port interests In contrast an application of the proposed interpretation to any itinerary would needlessly harm US port interests unrelated to Hawaii without any countervailing benefit to US-flag passenger vessel interests Accordingly limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation is consistent with the public policy objectives of the 1985 rulemaking as well as the 2003 Act
(c) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Also Consistent with Customs Commitment to Revisit the Scope of its Rules to Protect US-Flag Interests
The relaxation ofthe PVSA regulations in 1985 was premised in large part on Customs finding that there was no regular salt water US-flag passenger fleet in operation at that time33 Acknowledging that the relaxed regulations could harm USshyflag interests Customs committed in the preamble ofthe 1985 final rule to immediately reconsider its interpretation if it is ever shown that there is a viable US flag vessel operating in competition with foreign-flag vessels34
Congress enacted the 2003 Act to stimulate the development of a US flag cruise ship industry As noted above the legislative history ofthat Act makes clear that Congress sought to revitalize the US-flag cruise industry as a means to maintain Americas preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool ofqualified seafarers help sustain a fleet of US flag vessels to support our military and a maritime industrial base create thousands of seagoing and shoreside American jobs and stimulate the development ofa US flag cruise ship tourism business with the commensurate benefits to the US tax base the US economy and US employment
Customs is now acting at MARADs request to revisit its interpretation ofthe regulations implementing the PVSA because recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwise-qualified cruise ship operations35 That is to say that the concerns articulated by Customs in the context of the 1985 rulemaking have materialized and US-flag passenger vessel interests are in fact being hanned in the Hawaii trades by foreign competitors
33 50 Fed Reg 26983 34Id
3S 72 Fed Reg 56488 (Nov 21 2007)
I
10
Because the US-flag passenger vessels are limited by statute to regular service in Hawaii limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the
Hawaii trades is consistent with Customs historical commitment to revisit its interpretation ofthe implementing regulations to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests
7 Conclusion
For the reasons stated above NCLA commends the efforts ofCustoms and MARAn to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act as applied to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA respectfully requests Customs to move ahead promptly with p~blicati~nof a final interpretive rule to advance the important national security arid public policy objectives ofthese laws
We greatly appreciate the opportunity to submit these comments
Sincerely
~~~ Alan T Yamamoto Vice President Hawaii Operations
Exhibit A
Ship Name Serenade Of The Seas Departure Port San Diego California Ports of Call San Diego California Kailua Kona Hawaii Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii Hlo Hawaii Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii Ensenada Mexico San Qigo California
2007 Date(s) Oct 05
Sailing Itinerary
Day Port H ~rrive Depart Activity
05-0ct San Diego California 500 PM
06-0ct Cruising
07-0ct Cruising
08-0ct Cruising
09-0ct Cruising
10-0ct Kailua Kona Hawaii 700 AM 900 PM Tendered
11-00t Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 1000 AM Tendered
12middot0ct Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 900 PM Tendered
13-0ct Hilo Hawaii 700 AM 600 PM Docked
14middot0ct Honoulu (Oahu) Hawaii 700 AM Docked
15-0ct Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii 200 AM Docked
6-0ct CrUising
17-0ct Cruising
18-0ct Cruising
19middot0ct Cruising
-7 20-00t
O-Oot
Ensenada ~i1exico
San Deqo California
i 00 ~r1
700 ~M
200 oM D1Jcked ~
Employment Foreign-Flag Fleet operating in Hawaii vs Three US-Flag Ships
15000
10000
til c o Pride of Aloha
39435000
Pride of America 1447 4627
~---------
Foreign-Flag US-Flag Fleet Fleet
Source State of Hawaii Department of US-Flag 13629 jobs Business Economic Development and Tourism
Foreign-Flag 1447 jobs 7292008
Foreign Flag Capacity Growth Foreign flag passenger capacity has changed five-fold on roundtrip Hawaii cruises from the West Coast since enactment of the Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative
1600000
1400000
tn 1200000
J enshyZ
1000000
I shyG) en 800000 s G) tn tn
600000 as D 400000
200000
0 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Year
Source US Maritime Administration (derived from the US Customs and Border Patrol Vessel Entrance and Clearance documents - final 2007 data) 7292008
NCL America Hawaii Economic Contributions
(2004-2008)
bull (in Millions) bull $399 in wages benefits and overtime to US seafarers bull $35 in Federal and State payroll Taxes bull $64 in Government Fees and Taxes to Hawaii bull $28 in wages benefits and overtime to US other employees bull $52 in Port Charges to Hawaii Companies (Stevedores tugs pilots etc) bull $85 in Fuel to Tesoro Hawaii bull $130 for shore excursions to Hawaii tour operators bull $39 for Hawaii hotel rooms and ground transport bull $75 for food grown in Hawaii bull $57 in union fees and levies (incl $32M paid directly by employees) bull $1 in MMD fees to the United States Coast Guard bull $51 for recruitment screening processing and training crew bull $76 advertising and promoting Hawaii as a destination bull $1092
COASTWISE CRUISES INTERPRETIVE RULE RESOLUTION Adopted at the
US Conference of Mayors 76th Annual Meeting
June 20-242008 Miami
WHEREAS the Department of Homeland Securitys Customs and Border Protection (CBP) issued a proposed Interpretive Rule regulating Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises on foreign flagged vessels between US ports of call under the Passenger Vessel Services Act at the request of the United States Maritime Administration and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule would require that a foreign-flagged vessel on a coastwise cruise to call at a foreign port for at least 48 hours with that foreign stop constituting at least 50 percent of the cruise itinerary and allowing passengers to disembark the cruise vessel at the foreign port before continuing the cruise to a US port of call and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule establishes burdensome criteria that are wholly inconsistent with industry practice particularly the 48-hour call at foreign port shyinasmuch as the standard port call is six to eight hours - as well as the requirement that 50 percent of a cruise be spent at the foreign port and
WHEREAS the intent of the proposed Interpretive Rule is to protect the single remaining US flag vessel serving the Inter-Hawaiian Island cruise trade that according to the Hawaii Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism generates more than 4600 jobs and generates nearly $500 million in economic benefits for the state annually and
WHEREAS thousands of members of the International Longshore Workers Union (nWU) are employed at US ports serving cruise ships and whose jobs would be at risk if the proposed Interpretive Rule were implemented and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule is vague as to the breadth of its application ie to coastwise cruises between all United States ports or applied solely to coastwise cruises from West Coast ports to Hawaii and
WHEREAS the Cruise Lines International Association estimates the proposed Interpretive Rule would upend the $17 billion in national cruise industry spending and put at risk more than 300000 jobs generated by the international cruise industry including jobs held by nWU at US ports and the local allied industries supporting the cruise industry and
Executive Order Submissions Under Review
II Reglnfogov Where to ind Federal Regulatory Information -~
Home ] Lnitied Agenda and Regulator) Ilan pound012866 Regulator) Review Jnformalion Collection Review
EO 12866 Regulatory Rlvlw dvanced Search IJitorical RepWI Review Counh Jriter XIL
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA)
Executive Order Submissions Under Review July 25 2008 - _------------____ _shy
Department of Homeland Security
AGENCY DHS-TSA RIN 1652-AA53
TITLE Large Aircraft Security Program Other Aircraft Operator Security Programs and Airport Operator Security Program
STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT Yes RECEIVED DATE 06302008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
AGENCY DHS-USCIS RIN Llti15-AB67 TITLE Changes to Requirements Affecting H-2B Nonimmigrants and Their Employers
STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT No RECEIVED DATE 06092008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
AGENCY DHS-USCBP RIN 1651AA11 TITLE Issuance of a Visa and Authorization for Temporary Admission Into the United States for Certain Nonimmigrant Aliens Afflicted W HIV Infection
STAGE Final Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT No RECEIVED DATE 03042008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
-_RE_V-IE-W-E-X-T-EN-D-E-D---------- _
AGENCY DHS-USCBP RIN 1651-AA76 TITLE Coastwise Transportation of Passengers STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT Yes RECEIVED DATE 07142008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
Disclosure I Accessibility I Privacy Policy I Contact Us
httpwwwreginfogovpublicdoeoReviewSearch 7252008
View Rule Page 11
Shere D find Federal ReguLatory InformciiorlReglnfogov Home J Cnified Agenda al1d Regulatory Plan EO 12866 Regulatory Reyiew Information Collection Reiew
Current rnified Agenda and Regulatory Plan Historical Pnified Agenda and Regulatory Plan Search
View Rule
DHSIUSCBP RIN 1651-AA76 Publication ill Spring 2008
Title llCoastwise Transportation of Passengers
Abstract This interim rule amends the Department of Homeland Securitys (DHS) current regulations relating to the transportation of passengers by non-coastwise-qualified vessels on voyages that begin and end at a US port and stop at intervening US and foreign port(s) Under this interim final rule voyages that begin and end at a US port and stop at a foreign port(s) and at intervening US port(s) where a large USshyflag coastwise-qualified passenger vessel engages in regular service are in violation of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) unless the cumulative length of stay(s) at intervening foreign port(s) is more than 50 percent of the total amount of time spent at the intervening US port(s) and passengers are permitted to go ashore at the foreign port(s) The purpose of this amendment is to ensure that the Congressional purpose in enacting the PVSA which is to preserve the economic benefits of US coastwise trade to US-flag coastwise-qualified vessels is properly implemented
Agency Department of Homeland Security(DHS) Priority Substantive Nonsignificant
KIN Status First time published in the Unified Agenda Agenda Stage of Rulemaking Final Rule Stage
Major No Unfunded Mandates No
CFR Citation -LCER 4J~)(h)(plusmnJ
Legal Authority 5JJSS_30J12lJ-SClt16 J9_lJiCJ 431 9_L1C1plusmn3JJ2JScHJ1J2JSCJ624 L(LlLSc207LIl(gtJfHgt~ _CiQJ _46lSC 6QLQ~
Legal Deadline None
Timetable Action Date FR Cite
Interim Final Action 0510012008
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required No Government Levels Affected None
Federalism No
Included in the Regulatory Plan No
RIN Data Printed in the FR No
Agency Contact Glen E Vereb Chief Entry Procedures and Carriers Branch Department of Homeland Security US Customs and Border Protection Office of Regulations and Rulings 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington DC 20229 Phone202572-8730
Disclosure I Accessibility I Privacy Policy I Contact Us
httpwwwreginfogovpublicdoeAgendaViewRuleruleID=286751 7128120
Federal RegisterVol 72 No 224Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules 65487
SPECULATIVE POSITION LIMITS 1-Continued [In contract units)
Contract
Soybeans and Mini-Soybeans 2
Wheat and Mini-Wheat 2 bullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbull
Soybean Oil
SingleSpot month All monthsmonth
600 8600 13300 600 11100 14500 540 6600 8600
Soybean Meal 720 5500 7100
Minneapolis Grain Exchange
Hard Red Spring Wheat I 600 I 11100 I 14500
New York Board of Trade
Cotton No2 I 300 I 5300 I 7300
Kansas City Board of Trade
Hard Winter Wheat I 600 I 11100 I 14500
1 For purposes of compliance with these limits positions in a futures contract that shares ~ubstantially identical terms with a contract market enumerated herein including a futures contract that is cash-settled based on the settlement price of an enumerated contract market shall be agshygregated with positions in the enumerated contract market
2 For purposes of compliance with these limits positions in the regular-sized and mini-sized contracts shall be aggregated
Issued by the Commission this November 152007 in Washington DC David Stawick Secretary of the Commission [FR Doc E7-22681 Filed 11-20-07 845 amI BILLING CODE 6351-Q1-P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Bureau of Customs and Border Protection
19 CFR Part 4
[USCBP-2007-o098]
Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises
AGENCY Customs and Border Protection Department of Homeland Security ACTION Proposed interpretation solicitation of comments
SUMMARY This document proposes new criteria to be used by Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to determine whether non-coastwise-qualified vessels are in violation ofthe Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) when engaging in cruise itineraries in which passengers board at a US port the vessel calls at several Hawaiian ports and then the vessel proceeds to a foreign port or ports for a brief period before ultimately returning to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their cruise CBP believes these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because it appears that the primary objective of the foreign stop is evasion of the PVSA
DATES Comments must be received on or before December 212007 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT Glen E Vereb Cargo Security Carriers amp Immigration Branch Office of International Trade (202) 572-8730 ADDRESSES You may submit comments identified by docket number by one of the following methods
bull Federal eRulemaking Portal http wwwregulationsgov Follow the instructions for submitting comments
bull Mail Border Security Regulations Branch Office of International Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
I Public Participation
Interested persons are invited to participate in this proposed interpretation by submitting written data views or arguments on all aspects of the proposed interpretation Customs and Border Protection (CBP) also invites comments that relate to the economic environmental or federalism effects that might result from this proposed interpretation Comments that will provide the most assistance to CBP in developing these procedures will reference a specific portion of the proposed interpretation explain the reason for any recommended change and include data information or authority that support such recommended change
Instructions All submissions received must include the agency name and docket number for this proposed
interpretation All comments received will be posted without change to http wwwregulationsgov including any personal information provided
Docket For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received go to http wwwregulationsgov Submitted comments may also be inspected on regular business days between the hours of 9 am and 430 pm at the Office of International Trade Customs and Border Protection 799 9th Street NW 5th Floor Washington DC Arrangements to inspect submitted documents should be made in advance by calling Mr Joseph Clark at (202) 572shy8768
II Background
The maritime cabotage law governing the transportation of passengers was first established by section 8 of the Passenger Vessel Services Act of June 191886 (the PVSA) 24 Stat 81 as amended by section 2 of the Act of February 17 1898 30 Stat 248 formerly codified at 46 USC App 289 (now codified at 46 USC 55103) 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 of $200 (now $300 as promulgated in TD 03-11 pursuant to the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 199028 USC 2461 note) for each passenger so transported and landed
The intent of the maritime cabotage laws including the PVSA was to provide a legal structure that guarantees a coastwise monopoly to
65488 Federal RegisterVol 72 No 224Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules
American shipping and thereby promotes development of the American merchant marine Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 28 (DC Cir 1984) see also The Granada 35 FSupp 892 8931940 AMC 1601 (DC Pa 1940) (stating that the legislative aim of section 289 [now 55102] was the creation of a practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping business for United States ships) In other words the PVSA was enacted to advance the United States merchant marine and fleet by restricting the use of foreign-ownedflagged passenger vessels in United States territorial waters
Passenger vessel transportation between United States ports has historically been viewed to be part of the coastwise trade after the enactment of the PVSA This view is premised on the concepts of continuity of the voyage and whether its intended purpose or objective was coastwise transportation In other words the PVSA was held to be violated if the coastwise movement was continuous or if the purpose of the trip was a coastwise voyage (See 18 OAG 445 September 4 1886 28 OAG 204 February 16 1910 29 OAG 318 February 12 1912 30 OAG 44 February 1 1913 34 OAG 340 December 24 1924 and 36 OAG 352 August 13 1930)
The CBP regulations promulgated pursuant to the PVSA are found at section 480a of title 19 of the Code of Federal Regulations (19 CFR 480a) and are reflective of the above cited Office of the Attorney General decisions These regulations provide among other things that a non-coastwise-qualified vessel which embarks a passenger at a port in the United States embraced within the coastwise laws (a coastwise port) will be deemed to have landed that passenger in violation of the PVSA if the passenger disembarks at a different coastwise port on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a nearby foreign port or ports (as defined in 19 CFR 480a(a)(2) see also 19 CFR 480a(b)(2)) The terms embark and disembark are words of art which are defined as going on board a vessel for the duration of a specific voyage and leaving a vessel at the conclusion of a specific voyage respectively (See 19 CFR 480a(a)(4))
The references in section 480a to nearby foreign ports (defined in 19 CFR 480a(a)(2)) are the results of attempts by CBP to apply an Office of the Attorney Generals opinion dated February 26 1910 (28 OAG 204) In that case a foreign-flag vessel transported 615 passengers on a voyage around the world beginning in New
York and concluding in San Francisco The Attorney General opined that since the primary object of the voyage was to visit various parts of the world on a pleasure tour returning home via California and not to be transported in domestic commerce the transportation was not in violation of the PVSA
The 1910 Attorney Generals opinion was extended to voyages that included foreign ports other than nearby foreign ports (See Treasury Decision (TD) 68shy285 (33 FR 16558) November 14 1968) However voyages solely to one or more coastwise ports have always been considered predominantly coastwise Therefore non-coastwise-qualified vessels engaging in such a voyage where passengers temporarily go ashore at a coastwise port have been deemed to have violated the PVSA
m Current Law and Policy Pursuant to Public Law 109-304 120
Stat 1632 enacted on October 6 2006 Title 46 United States Code was substantially reorganized and recodified Consequently the PVSA is now codified at 46 USC 55103 and provides that no vessel shall transport passengers between ports or places in the United States either directly or by way of a foreign port under a penalty of $300 for each person so transported and landed except one that (1) Is wholly owned by citizens of the United States for purposes of engaging in the coastwise trade and (2) has been issued a certificate of documentation with a coastwise endorsement or is exempt from documentation but would otherwise be eligible for such a certificate and endorsement
In 2003 Congress enacted Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II Section 211 for the purpose of revitalizing the oceangoing US-flag cruise industry in Hawaii (the 2003 Act) Three oceangoing US-flag cruise ships PRIDE OF ALOHA PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAII were documented with coastwise privileges pursuant to the 2003 Act These vessels entered regular service in Hawaii in 2004 2005 and 2006 respectively and pursuant to the express language of the 2003 Act are limited in their operation to providing regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands of Hawaii
The CBP regulations promulgated pursuant to the PVSA are set forth in 19 CFR 480a and have remained unchanged throughout both the recodification of Title 46 of the United States Code and the enactment of the 2003 Act They provide that a violation of the PVSA occurs when passengers embark (board a vessel for the
duration of a voyage) a non-coastwiseshyqualified vessel at one US port and disembark (leave the vessel at the conclusion of a voyage) at a different US port unless they proceed with the vessel to a distant foreign port (Le any port not considered a nearby foreign port which is defined as any port located in North America Central America Bermuda or the West Indies including the Bahamas) Currently these regulations do not contain specific criteria for non-coastwise-qualified vessels on itineraries including US ports and either nearby or distant foreign ports in order for such foreign port calls to be compliant with the PVSA
To reiterate the applicable CBP regulations provide that the PVSA is violated when a non-coastwise-qualified vessel transports a passenger on a voyage solely to one or more coastwise ports and the passenger disembarks or goes ashore temporarily at a coastwise port (19 CFR 480a(b)(1)) Furthermore a violation of the PVSA also occurs when a non-coastwise-qualified vessel transports a passenger on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a nearby foreign port or ports (but no other foreign port) and the passenger disembarks at a coastwise port other than the port of embarkation (19 CFR 480a(b)(2)) However there is no violation of the PVSA when a passenger is on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a distant foreign port or ports (whether or not the voyage includes a nearby foreign port or ports) and the passenger disembarks at a coastwise port provided the passenger has proceeded with the vessel to a distant foreign port (19 CFR 480a(b)(3))
IV Request From MARAD To Provide Guidance
The US Department of Transportation Maritime Administration (MARAD) has requested that CBP take action to ensure enforcement of the PVSA MARAD has asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreignshyflag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwiseshyqualified cruise ship operators
In April of 2007 the operator of the three US-flag cruise vessels operating solely in Hawaii pursuant to the 2003 Act announced their intent to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAIl from the Hawaii market and redeploy her to Europe The operator intends to re-flag the vessel to foreign registry directly resulting in the loss of over 1100 crewmember jobs The primary reason cited for this decision is the rapid increase in foreign-flag competition entering the Hawaii market
Federal Register I Vol 72 No 224 I Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules 65489
from the West Coast This competition is evidenced in published cruise itineraries of foreign-flag carriers offering a variety of round trip cruises that depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period usually in the early morning and ultimately return to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their cruise These cruises are often marketed as Hawaii cruises and except for the brief stop in the nearby foreign port of Ensenada are purely coastwise in nature It is these cruise itineraries that pose an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels that pursuant to the 2003 Act are currently engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands
V Preliminary Notice
In response to MARADs concerns CBP sent letters to two carriers known to operate the itineraries in question as well as to the Cruise Lines International Association Inc stating that CBP believes that these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because it appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA The letters further indicated that CBP is taking steps to publish this position
VI CBPs Proposed Interpretive Rule Accordingly in this document CBP is
proposing to provide that cruise itineraries for non-qualified coastwise vessels which allow passengers to board at a US port call at several Hawaiian ports proceed to a foreign port or ports for a brief period and then ultimately return to the original US port of embarkation for disembarkation are not consistent with the PVSA and the regulations promulgated pursuant thereto Specifically CBP interprets a voyage to be solely to one or more coastwise ports even where it stops at a foreign port unless the stop at the foreign port is a legitimate object of the cruise CBP will presume that a stop at a foreign port is not a legitimate object of the cruise unless
(1) The stop lasts at least 48 hours at the foreign port
(2) The amount of time at the foreign port is more than 50 percent of the total amount of time at the US ports of call and
(3) The passengers are permitted to go ashore temporarily at the foreign port
Accordingly CBP proposes to adopt an interpretive rule under which it will presume that any cruise itinerary that does not include a foreign port call that
satisfies each of these three criteria constitutes coastwise transportation of passengers in violation of 19 CFR 480a(b)(1)
Dated November 16 2007 W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection [FR Doc E7-22788 Filed 11-20-07 845 am] BILLING CODe 9111-14-1
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau
27 CFR Part 9
[Notice No 76]
RIN 1513-AB49
Proposed Establishment of the Leona Valley Viticultural Area (2007R-281 P)
AGENCY Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau Treasury ACTION Notice of proposed rulemaking
SUMMARY The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau proposes to establish the 134 square mile Leona Valley viticultural area in the northeast part of Los Angeles County California We designate viticultural areas to allow vintners to better describe the origin of their wines and to allow consumers to better identify wines they may purchase We invite comments on this proposed addition to our regulations DATES We must receive written comments on or before January 22 2008
ADDRESSES You may send comments on this notice to one of the following addresses
bull httpwwwregulationsgov (Federal e-rulemaking portal follow the instructions for submitting comments) or
bull Director Regulations and Rulings Division Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau PO Box 14412 Washington DC 20044-4412
See the Public Participation section of this notice for specific instructions and requirements for submitting comments and for information on how to request a public hearing
You may view copies of this notice selected supporting materials and any comments we receive about this proposal at httpwwwregulationsgov under Docket No 2007-0066 You also may view copies of this notice all related petitions maps or other supporting materials and any comments we receive about this
proposal by appointment at the TTB Information Resource Center 1310 G Street NW Washington DC 20220 To make an appointment call 202-927shy2400
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT NA Sutton Regulations and Rulings Division Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau 925 Lakeville S1 No 158 Petaluma CA 94952 phone 415shy271-1254 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
Background on Viticultural Areas
TTB Authority Section 105(e) of the Federal Alcohol
Administration Act (FAA Act) 27 USC 205(e) authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to prescribe regulations for the labeling of wine distilled spirits and malt beverages The FAA Act provides that these regulations should among other things prohibit consumer deception and the use of misleading statements on labels and ensure that labels provide the consumer with adequate information as to the identity and quality of the product The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) administers the regulations promulgated under the FAA Act
Part 4 ofthe TTB regulations (27 CFR part 4) allows the establishment of definitive viticultural areas and the use of their names as appellations of origin on wine labels and in wine advertisements Part 9 of the TTB regulations (27 CFR part 9) contains the list of approved viticultural areas
Definition Section 425(e)(1)(i) ofthe TTB
regulations (27 CFR 425(e)(1)(i)) defines a viticultural area for American wine as a delimited grape-growing region distinguishable by geographical features the boundaries of which have been recognized and defined in part 9 of the regulations These designations allow vintners and consumers to attribute a given quality reputation or other characteristic of a wine made from grapes grown in an area to its geographic origin The establishment of viticultural areas allows vintners to describe more accurately the origin of their wines to consumers and helps consumers to identify wines they may purchase Establishment of a viticultural area is neither an approval nor an endorsement by TTB of the wine produced in that area
Requirements Section 425(e)(2) of the TTB
regulations outlines the procedure for proposing an American viticultural area and provides that any interested party
Us Department ofHomelaDd Secmity Washington DC 10229
bull ~
US Customs and Border Protection
AUG 15 2fXJJ
VE5-3-02-QTRRBSTCCCI - ti015502-GG-
Mr leon Sutcliffe Director Port Operations Camivai Cruise Unes Camival Place 3655 NW 87Avenue Miami Aorlda 33178
RE P~nger Vessef Services Ad Coastwise Transportation 46 USC sect 55103 19 CFR sect 480a(b)
Dear Mr Sutcliffe
As you know US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) enforces the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) codified at TItle 46 United States Code section 55103 (46 USC 55103) This statute prohibits non-coastwise-qualifled vessels (ie those vessels not US-buill owned and documented with a coastwise endorsement) from transporting passengers between porls or places within the United States The regUlations promUlgated pursuant to the PVSA are found at TrtJe 19 Code of Federal Regulations section 4808 (19 CFR 4808)
It has come to our attention that passenger vessels of your company are engaging in cruise itineraries that include ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands Two USAlagged coastwise-endorsed passenger vessefs are also currenUy engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of caD wittlin the Hawaiian Islands
As part of your cruise itineraries some of your foreign-flagged vessels depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period and ultimately rebJm to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their endse For example the MS ZAANDAM of Holand America Lines departs San Diego cruises the Hawaiian Islands stops in Ensenada from 800pm to 11 OOpmbull and returns to san Diego CBP believes these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because It appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA -- - - ~~~------
Please be advised that CBP is taking steps to publish this position Should have any questions pertaining to this matter please contact Mr Glen Vereb Chief Cargo Security Carriers and Immigration Branch at (202) 572-8724
Sincerely
F Jl E EST Y LEe A U I 5 I N Gmiddot
December 21 2007
The Honorable W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection co Border Security Regulations Branch Office ofInternational Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229
Re Hawaii Coastwise Cruises (USCBP-2007-0098) Comments in Response to Proposed Interpretation
Dear Commissioner Basham
NCL America Inc1 (NCLA) submits these comments in support ofthe efforts ofCustoms and Border Protection to enforce the Passenger Vessel Services Act and the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative as applied to Hawaii coastwise cruises
1 Introduction and Summary of Position
NCLA operates three large oceangoing US flag cruise ships in Hawaii These ships are documented under US flag and are required to operate in regular service in Hawaii pursuant to the authority of the Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative a 2003 federal statute intended to revitalize the US flag cruise industry and to maximize economic and national security benefits to the United States (the 2003 Act)
NCLA has invested $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships pursuant to the 2003 Act and in direct reliance on the protections of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) and its proper enforcement The PVSA limits the transportation ofpassengers between US ports to coastwise documented US flag ships Its statutory protections recognize that US flag ships have significantly higher operational costs in part because they are subject to more stringent US laws including US labor laws and federal
1 NCL America Inc is a US corporation incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware headquartered in Honolulu Hawaii As a US corporation it is subject to US taxes at both the federal and state level The Chief Executive Officer the Chairman of the Board and all of the Board of Directors of NCL America are US citizens The company is also subject to US labor and employment laws and is required by statute to maintain a workforce comprised primarily ofUS citizens
700 Bishop St SUite 900 I Honolulu HawMi 96813 I Tel 8085273800 Fax 8085273820 I ndcom
2
income tax among others The NCLA ships operating in Hawaii are the only large oceangoing cruise ships operating under US flag In furtherance of the policy goals of the PVSA and the 2003 Act these ships have created over 4000 seafaring jobs all subject to US minimum wage and other labor statutes
Since 2003 there has been a significant increase in capacity in the Hawaii market from foreign flag ships providing cruise service to Hawaii from the West Coast Many of these foreign flag cruises are marketed as Hawaii cruises and consist entirely ofUS ports ofcall with the sole exception of a token stop in Mexico for as little as an hour late at night under circumstances where passengers are not permitted to get offthe ship There are no reported rulings approving these particular foreign flag itineraries
Lower cost foreign competition in the Hawaii market has unfairly hurt NCLAs operations NCLA has incurred substantial losses which have contributed significantly to its decision earlier this year to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAll from US flag and reshydeploy it foreign Unfair foreign competition poses an imminent threat to the remaining US flag passenger vessels operating in the Hawaii trades pursuant to the 2003 Act
As the agency statutorily charged with implementation of the 2003 Act the US Department ofTransportation Maritime Administration (MARAn) is aware of the threat foreign flag Hawaii itineraries pose to the US flag fleet and brought the situation to the attention ofthe US Department ofHomeland Security Bureau ofCustoms and Border Protection (CBP or Customs) Customs determined that the primary object of these itineraries was coastwise and that the Ensenada stop was an evasion of the PVSA
In August 2007 Customs provided written notice to the affected foreign lines and their trade association that the existing itineraries were contrary to the PVSA None of these lines sought advance rulings even after the Customs notice with respect to their Hawaii itineraries pursuant to Customs regulations and many continued to market the itineraries as Hawaii cruises NCLA supports the efforts ofCustoms and MARAD to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act for Hawaii cruises
2 Statutory Authority for Customs Proposed Interpretation
(a) Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA)
Congress passed the PVSA in 1886 to protect the US maritime transportation industry from foreign competition2 Protection is afforded through penalty assessments on foreign vessels transporting passengers between US ports or places directly or by way ofa foreign port 3 As Congress and the courts have recognized coastwise protections for the US maritime transportation industry are only one dimension of the PVSA Operating in conjunction with other coastwise laws and with the US
2 See United States v Honduran SS GRANADA 35 F Supp 892 894 (BD Pa 1940)(citing purpose of PVSA to meet threats to the practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping which was to be preserved for US ships)
46 USc sect 55103 (originally 46 USC App 289)
3
documentation laws the PVSA also enhances military sealift in times ofnational emergency sustains a US merchant marine and supports the US shipbuilding and repair industry4
(b) Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative (the 2003 Act)
Over the past decade Congress has sought to reinforce the goals of the PVSA by providing mechanisms to revitalize the oceangoing US flag cruise fleet particularly in Hawaii The Project America legislation enacted in 1997 authorized among other things the re~flagging ofone existing cruise ship contingent on the operator contracting for the construction oftwo new oceangoing cruise shipss Following the default of the operator under the original contract Congress enacted the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative for the purpose ofrecovering economic and national security benefits to the United States bull 6 These same goals of the original PVSA were expressly referenced in the legislative history of the 2003 Act which emphasized that these ships will be assets available in time ofnational emergency and will significantly expand the pool ofqualified seafarers upon which the US Department ofDefense relies to crew non-combatant vessels
The 2003 Act authorizes the US documentation ofthree cruise ships for operation in regular service in Hawaii subject to certain conditions including a prohibition on operating in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico and the Caribbean Sea and a requirement that all vessel repair work be undertaken in the United States MARAD is charged with implementation of the 2003 Act
3 Customs Implementation of PVSA
(a) Regulations
The current regulations implementing the PVSA were published by Customs in 19858 The growth of the foreign flag cruise industry in North America and in particular the development of the Alaska cruise market led to an effort in 1984 to amend the thenshyexisting regulations to increase the ease of administration and operational flexibility The effort to change the regulation had support from US port interests who saw benefit in the potential increase in the number ofUS ports that foreign vessels could call and was opposed by proponents ofpotential US flag projects as detrimental to efforts to revitalize the US fleet 9 The preamble to the 1985 rule emphasized that it was of paramount importance to consider the primary object ofpassengers in taking a
4 See American Hawaii Cruises v Skinner 713 F Supp 452 457 (DDC 1989) (recognizing the contribution of the PVSA and the Jones Act in helping to secure national defense by maintaining a merchant marine oftbe best equipped and most suitable types ofvessels sufficient to serve in time of war or national emergency) see also Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 30 (DC Cir 1984) Wirth Ltd v SIS Acadia Forest 537 F2d 1272 1281 n32 (5th Cir 1976) S Public Law 105-56 Section 8109 (111 Stat 1203 1244) (Oct 81997 ) 6 Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II General Provisions - Department ofCommerce Section 211 (117 Stat 1179) (Feb 20 2003) 1 149 Cong Rec S1118 (dailyed Jan 17 2003(statement ofSenator Inouye) 8 19 CFR sect 480a 950 Fed Reg 26981 (July I 1985)
4
voyage10 a concept which is reinforced elsewhere in Customs regulations11 In its analysis of the comments received at the time Customs accepted the view ofport interests that the modified rule would help their business but did so recognizing the absence ofa regular salt water US flag passenger fleet Customs acknowledged the potential harm to prospective efforts to revitalize the US flag passenger fleet and expressly cautioned that if it were ever shown that coastwise qualified vessels in competition with foreign vessels were in fact hurt by the modified Customs regulation then Customs would immediately reconsider its position12
(b) Customs Rulings
Given the significant penalties associated with violating the PVSA13 Customs regulations expressly provide a mechanism for the owner or charterer of a foreign vessel or any other interested person to request an advisory ruling as to whether a contemplated voyage would be considered in violation of the PVSA14 Customs regulations provide that vessel operators can rely on these ruling letters only to the extent that the facts and circumstances are identical to those in the ruling letter IS
Notwithstanding the fact that several foreign cruise lines offer Hawaii itineraries originating in a US mainland port and calling at Hawaii ports with a token intervening stop in Mexico there are no reported rulings expressly approving such an itinerary for these foreign cruise lines 16
4 The Cruise Industry in Hawaii
(a) NCL America Returns US flag to the Oceangoing Passenger Fleet
Pursuant to the requirements ofthe 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative NCLA agreed to promote US-flag cruising enhance military sealift capacity and expand the US maritime labor base No other major cruise line had ever undertaken such a commitment to the US flag and the public policy objectives Congress sought to achieve under the PVSA or the 2003 Act Introduction ofPRIDE OF ALOHA in 2004 was a significant development in the maritime industry because it marked the restoration ofthe
10 Id at 26983 11 Customs Regulations include a provision on the effect ofruling letters and with respect to carrier rulings the applicable regulation refers to rulings setting forth a determination as to whether or not the primary object of a contemplated voyage is coastwise transportation in violation of46 USC sect 289 [pYSA codified at 46 USC sect55103] 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 12 50 Fed Reg at 26983 13 A modem cruise ship with 2400 passengers for example would be subject to a fine of$720OOO per cruise based on the statutory penalty of$300 for each passenger transported in violation of the Act 14 19 CFR sect 480a(d) IS 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 16 There is one older reported mling involving a request to drop the Ensenada port call from a Los AngeleslHawaiiLos Angeles itinerary which Customs held would violate the PYSA In dicta Customs acknowledged that the itinerary could be in compliance if the Ensenada call were not dropped but did not address the issue ofwhether a one hour service call where no passengers depart the vessel would be sufficient The carrier that obtained that ruling has since left the Hawaii market See Customs Ruling HQ 114078 re Crystal Hannony (Nov 4 1997)
5
us flag to the oceangoing cruise industry A contemporaneous press release from the Us Department ofTransportation reported that the three US-flag cruise ships to be introduced pursuant to the 2003 Act were expected to create more than 20000 US jobs generate more than $825 million ofexpenditures in the US economy and create nearly $360 million in federal tax revenue by the end of 200717 In 2005 the PRIDE OF AMERICA was introduced and in 2006 the third vessel PRIDE OF HAWAll was introduced to Hawaii Both the PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAIl offer 7shyday inter-island Hawaii itineraries whereas PRIDE OF ALOHA operates on 7 and 10 day cruises exclusively among the islands ofHawaii as well as 11 day cruises that include a foreign port call at Fanning Island To date NCLA has invested over $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships in furtherance ofthe policy objectives of the PVSA and the 2003 Act These ships employ over 4000 seafarers and generate hundreds ofmillions of dollars in benefits for Hawaii and the nation
(b) Significant Increase in Foreign Flag Capacity Since 2003
The most significant change in the Hawaii cruise market since 2003 has been the dramatic increase in capacity A significant portion ofthis capacity increase is directly attributable to NCLAs fulfillment ofthe Congressional mandate in the 2003 Act However foreign-flag operations in the Hawaii market as measured in passenger nights18 have skyrocketed Based on MARAn data derived from the US Customs Border Patrol Vessel Entrance and Clearance documents the passenger nights for foreign flag vessels departing from the West Coast to Hawaii on round trip cruise have increased several hundredfold during this period19 See Exhibit A
(c) NCLA Has Incurred Substantial Losses During this Period
Since 2004 NCLA has lost cumulatively more than a quarter ofa billion dollars A principal reason for these losses has been the increase in foreign capacity in this market NCLA has taken significant steps to reduce costs to address the increase in foreign competition but NCLA is at an inherent disadvantage when competing against foreign companies that are not subject to US labor laws US tax laws and other laws Ofcourse the statutory protections of the PVSA are intended to address these very issues That is why Customs immediate action to implement the proposed interpretation is critical for the US flag fleet Regrettably NCLA has already been forced to reduce overall capacity early next year with the withdrawal ofPRIDE OF HAWAlI to another
17 DOT Press Release dated June 72004 see also DOT Press Release dated August 132004 in connection with visit to PRIDE OF ALOHA by US Transportation Secretary Norman Y Mineta 11 Passenger nights (also referred to as passenger capacity days) are calculated by multiplying the number ofpassengers per vessel by the number ofcruise days in each itinerary by the number of cruises This is the unit ofmeasurement employed by MARAn In contrast passenger bed supply (also referred to as passenger capacity) data reflects only the number ofberths per vessel multiplied by the number of cruises and hence understates the market by excluding the full economic value ofthe cruise perfonned 19 In 2003 the total number ofpassenger nights for round-trip West Coast to Hawaii cruises was 303325 which jumped by 353 to 1072329 in 2006 and by 430 to 1304546 from 2003 to 2007 (The 2007 figure is based on MARAD data for six months and a1ll1ualized by published itineraries for the balance of the year)
6
market for operation under foreign flag This move alone will result in the loss ofover 1000 American seafaring jobs
5 Customs Proposed Interpretation is Necessary to Further the Important National Security and Public Policy Objectives Embodied in Federal Law
As Customs has properly noted the increase in foreign competition in the Hawaii trades in contravention of the PVSA pose[s] an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels[] As the operator of these ships NCLA has a vested interest in protecting the jobs ofthe thousands ofAmerican crewmembers and cruise ship service providers who support these vessels NCLA also has an interest in protecting the substantial economic investment it has made to revitalize the US flag passenger vessel fleet But a balancing of interests in the context of Customs enforcement ofexisting law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act requires a much broader focus
The legislative history of the 2003 Act expressly recognized the national security and public policy import ofestablishing a US flag passenger vessel fleet as a means to maintain the countrys preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool of qualified seafarers and as a means to help sustain a fleet ofUS-flag vessels to su~ort
the nations military and maritime industrial base for times ofnational emergency
Congress understood the importance ofestablishing a viable US flag cruise ship fleet as something larger than the vessels themselves These national security and public policy objectives must be weighed in the balance as Customs assesses how best to interpret its rules to give effect to the PVSA and the 2003 Act
6 Customs Should Clarify that the Proposed Interpretation is Limited to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades and Adopt Reasonable Measures to Ensure Sufficient Foreign Content
Since publication ofthe proposed interpretative rule several commenters have observed that the scope of the proposed interpretation is ambiguous because the language of Section VI referencing any cruise itinerary appears broader than the caption Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises and the entire discussion in the published notice which focuses exclusively on US-flag coastwise vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA agrees that the proposed interpretation should be clarified so that its scope is limited to vessels operating roundtrip voyages from US ports that include Hawaii port calls
NCLA supports the concept reflected in the proposed interpretive rule that round trip Hawaii itineraries from US ports on foreign ships must include a material and measurable degree ofoverall foreign port content as compared to US port content
20 149 Congo Rec S1117 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)
7
(a) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is also Consistent with Subsequent Congressional Enactments Modifying the PVSA
As discussed above it is well established that the PVSA was designed toRrotect US-flag vessels from foreign competition in the coastwise and domestic trades 1
Subsequent legislative enactments however have appropriately differentiated among distinct geographic markets and trades including Canada Alaska Puerto Rico and Hawaii based on the existence or non-existence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
In 1938 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers by Canadian passenger vessels on Lake Ontario and the St Lawrence River until such time as passenger service shall be established by vessels of the United States22 Similarly in 1961 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers on Canadian vessels within Alaska or between Alaska and other points in the United States until such time as passenger service is established by vessels ofthe United States23
In 1984 Congress modified the application ofthe PVSA to pennit the transportation ofpassengers between Puerto Rico and other United States ports on foreign-flag vessels24 As with the other statutory exceptions this provision is qualified and expires [o]n a showing that a United States passenger vessel qualified to engage in the coastwise trade is offering or advertising passenger service between a port in Puerto Rico and another port in the United States2S
Congress acted again with respect to the application of the PVSA with the 2003 Act in which it authorized three vessels that did not meet the US-build requirements of the PVSA to operate as modem US-flagged cruise ships in regular service in Hawaii26 The 2003 Act imposes a specific geographic limitation on the operation of any ship documented under this authority to operations only in regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands ofHawaii and shall not transport passengers in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico or the Caribbean Sea except in certain limited circumstances27 As above the limited nature of the 2003 Act is express it is strictly limited to the large ocean-going cruise ships and then only those operating in the regular Hawaii service where there are no US-flag operations28
21 See Act ofJune 19 1886 c 421 sec 8 24 Stat 81 Act of February 171898 c 26 sec 2 30 Stat 248 22 S] Res 174 75th Cong 52 Stat 223 (Alp 251938) codified at46 USC sect 55121(a) 23 See Pub L 87-77 75 Stat 196 (Jun 30 1961) codified at 46 USC sect 55121(b) 24 See Pub L 98-563 98 Stat 2916 (Oct 301984) codified at 46 USC sect 55104(b) 25 46 USC sect 55104(c)(l) see also 46 USC 46 USc sect 55104(cX2)(expiration of exemption upon availability ofa non-coastwise qualified US-flag vessel offering service in the relevant market) 26 149 Congo Rec SI118 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)(statementofSen Inouye) 27 Pub L 108-7 117 Stat 79 (Feb 20 2003) 28 149 Congo Rec S11l9 (dailyed Jan 17 2003Xstatement of Sen Inouye)
8
In each ofthese instances Congress fashioned a narrow exception to the PVSA that differentiated among distinct geographic markets based on the existence or nonshyexistence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
As the federal agency responsible for administering the 2003 Act MARAD requested that Customs act to protect US flag passenger vessel interests in the Hawaii trades29 Limiting the scope ofthe proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades also reflects Customs appreciation of the PVSA in the context of the subsequent Congressional action30 Viewing the Congressional modifications to the PVSA as a whole Congress has specifically and repeatedly differentiated among distinct geographic markets when it has found it necessary and appropriate to do so to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests It is well established that the proper interpretation of a statutory scheme includes consideration ofsubsequent statutes even though the underlying statute itselfhas not been expressly amended31 Accordingly Customs should likewise limit the scope ofthe proposed PVSA interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades because that is the only geographic market as mandated by the 2003 Act in which oceangoing US-flag cruise ships are operating
(b) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Consistent with Public Policy Objectives of the 1985 Rulemaking
In 1985middot Customs liberalized the regulations implementing the PVSA by eliminating certain regulatory prohibitions on foreign flag vessels In the context of the 1985 rulemaking Customs justified a relaxation ofthe regulations on the grounds that it would simplify the administration of the PVSA and would benefit the economy ofcertain American coastwise ports without eroding the statutory protection given to American vessels engaged in solely domestic trade32
Customs thus sought to reconcile US port economic interests with US-flag passenger vessel interests Both of these twin policy objectives are furthered by
29 See 72 Fed Reg 65488 (Nov 21 2007)( MARAn bas asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the ~eratiODS ofcoastwise-qualified cruise ship operators)
See generally FDA v Brown amp Williamson Tobacco Corp 529 US 120 132-133 (2000)(assessing propriety ofagency construction ofFood DIUg and Cosmetics Act and descnbing responsibility of reviewing cowt to assess statutory provisions in the context of subsequent legislative enactments) 31 See Brown amp Williamson 529 US 143 (holding that proper construction ofstatutory provision must necessarily assume that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications ofa later statute This is particularly so where the scope of the earlier statute is broad but the subsequent statutes more specifically address the topic athand) see also United States v Estate ofRomani 523 US 517 530-531 (1998)( holding that a later-enacted statute should control the construction of the federal lien priority statute a specific policy embodied in a later federal statute should control om construction of the [earlier] statute even though it ha[s] not been expressly amended) United States v Fausto 484 US 439453 (1988)(The courts frequently find Congress to have done this - whenever in fact they interpret a statutory text in the light ofsurrounding texts that happen to have been subsequently enacted This classic judicial task of reconciling many laws enacted over time and getting them to make sense in combination necessarily assumes that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications of a later statute) 32 50 Fed Reg 26982 (JuI 11985)
9
limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades
As noted earlier the 2003 Act limits the operation of the NCLA US-flag oceangoing passenger vessels to regular service in Hawaii Because there are no oceangoing US-flag vessels operating in any market other than the Hawaii trades Customs should limit the scope of the proposed interPretation to that market Such a limitation protects US flag passenger vessel interests without prejudicing US port interests In contrast an application of the proposed interpretation to any itinerary would needlessly harm US port interests unrelated to Hawaii without any countervailing benefit to US-flag passenger vessel interests Accordingly limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation is consistent with the public policy objectives of the 1985 rulemaking as well as the 2003 Act
(c) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Also Consistent with Customs Commitment to Revisit the Scope of its Rules to Protect US-Flag Interests
The relaxation ofthe PVSA regulations in 1985 was premised in large part on Customs finding that there was no regular salt water US-flag passenger fleet in operation at that time33 Acknowledging that the relaxed regulations could harm USshyflag interests Customs committed in the preamble ofthe 1985 final rule to immediately reconsider its interpretation if it is ever shown that there is a viable US flag vessel operating in competition with foreign-flag vessels34
Congress enacted the 2003 Act to stimulate the development of a US flag cruise ship industry As noted above the legislative history ofthat Act makes clear that Congress sought to revitalize the US-flag cruise industry as a means to maintain Americas preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool ofqualified seafarers help sustain a fleet of US flag vessels to support our military and a maritime industrial base create thousands of seagoing and shoreside American jobs and stimulate the development ofa US flag cruise ship tourism business with the commensurate benefits to the US tax base the US economy and US employment
Customs is now acting at MARADs request to revisit its interpretation ofthe regulations implementing the PVSA because recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwise-qualified cruise ship operations35 That is to say that the concerns articulated by Customs in the context of the 1985 rulemaking have materialized and US-flag passenger vessel interests are in fact being hanned in the Hawaii trades by foreign competitors
33 50 Fed Reg 26983 34Id
3S 72 Fed Reg 56488 (Nov 21 2007)
I
10
Because the US-flag passenger vessels are limited by statute to regular service in Hawaii limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the
Hawaii trades is consistent with Customs historical commitment to revisit its interpretation ofthe implementing regulations to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests
7 Conclusion
For the reasons stated above NCLA commends the efforts ofCustoms and MARAn to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act as applied to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA respectfully requests Customs to move ahead promptly with p~blicati~nof a final interpretive rule to advance the important national security arid public policy objectives ofthese laws
We greatly appreciate the opportunity to submit these comments
Sincerely
~~~ Alan T Yamamoto Vice President Hawaii Operations
Exhibit A
Ship Name Serenade Of The Seas Departure Port San Diego California Ports of Call San Diego California Kailua Kona Hawaii Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii Hlo Hawaii Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii Ensenada Mexico San Qigo California
2007 Date(s) Oct 05
Sailing Itinerary
Day Port H ~rrive Depart Activity
05-0ct San Diego California 500 PM
06-0ct Cruising
07-0ct Cruising
08-0ct Cruising
09-0ct Cruising
10-0ct Kailua Kona Hawaii 700 AM 900 PM Tendered
11-00t Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 1000 AM Tendered
12middot0ct Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 900 PM Tendered
13-0ct Hilo Hawaii 700 AM 600 PM Docked
14middot0ct Honoulu (Oahu) Hawaii 700 AM Docked
15-0ct Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii 200 AM Docked
6-0ct CrUising
17-0ct Cruising
18-0ct Cruising
19middot0ct Cruising
-7 20-00t
O-Oot
Ensenada ~i1exico
San Deqo California
i 00 ~r1
700 ~M
200 oM D1Jcked ~
Foreign Flag Capacity Growth Foreign flag passenger capacity has changed five-fold on roundtrip Hawaii cruises from the West Coast since enactment of the Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative
1600000
1400000
tn 1200000
J enshyZ
1000000
I shyG) en 800000 s G) tn tn
600000 as D 400000
200000
0 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Year
Source US Maritime Administration (derived from the US Customs and Border Patrol Vessel Entrance and Clearance documents - final 2007 data) 7292008
NCL America Hawaii Economic Contributions
(2004-2008)
bull (in Millions) bull $399 in wages benefits and overtime to US seafarers bull $35 in Federal and State payroll Taxes bull $64 in Government Fees and Taxes to Hawaii bull $28 in wages benefits and overtime to US other employees bull $52 in Port Charges to Hawaii Companies (Stevedores tugs pilots etc) bull $85 in Fuel to Tesoro Hawaii bull $130 for shore excursions to Hawaii tour operators bull $39 for Hawaii hotel rooms and ground transport bull $75 for food grown in Hawaii bull $57 in union fees and levies (incl $32M paid directly by employees) bull $1 in MMD fees to the United States Coast Guard bull $51 for recruitment screening processing and training crew bull $76 advertising and promoting Hawaii as a destination bull $1092
COASTWISE CRUISES INTERPRETIVE RULE RESOLUTION Adopted at the
US Conference of Mayors 76th Annual Meeting
June 20-242008 Miami
WHEREAS the Department of Homeland Securitys Customs and Border Protection (CBP) issued a proposed Interpretive Rule regulating Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises on foreign flagged vessels between US ports of call under the Passenger Vessel Services Act at the request of the United States Maritime Administration and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule would require that a foreign-flagged vessel on a coastwise cruise to call at a foreign port for at least 48 hours with that foreign stop constituting at least 50 percent of the cruise itinerary and allowing passengers to disembark the cruise vessel at the foreign port before continuing the cruise to a US port of call and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule establishes burdensome criteria that are wholly inconsistent with industry practice particularly the 48-hour call at foreign port shyinasmuch as the standard port call is six to eight hours - as well as the requirement that 50 percent of a cruise be spent at the foreign port and
WHEREAS the intent of the proposed Interpretive Rule is to protect the single remaining US flag vessel serving the Inter-Hawaiian Island cruise trade that according to the Hawaii Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism generates more than 4600 jobs and generates nearly $500 million in economic benefits for the state annually and
WHEREAS thousands of members of the International Longshore Workers Union (nWU) are employed at US ports serving cruise ships and whose jobs would be at risk if the proposed Interpretive Rule were implemented and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule is vague as to the breadth of its application ie to coastwise cruises between all United States ports or applied solely to coastwise cruises from West Coast ports to Hawaii and
WHEREAS the Cruise Lines International Association estimates the proposed Interpretive Rule would upend the $17 billion in national cruise industry spending and put at risk more than 300000 jobs generated by the international cruise industry including jobs held by nWU at US ports and the local allied industries supporting the cruise industry and
Executive Order Submissions Under Review
II Reglnfogov Where to ind Federal Regulatory Information -~
Home ] Lnitied Agenda and Regulator) Ilan pound012866 Regulator) Review Jnformalion Collection Review
EO 12866 Regulatory Rlvlw dvanced Search IJitorical RepWI Review Counh Jriter XIL
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA)
Executive Order Submissions Under Review July 25 2008 - _------------____ _shy
Department of Homeland Security
AGENCY DHS-TSA RIN 1652-AA53
TITLE Large Aircraft Security Program Other Aircraft Operator Security Programs and Airport Operator Security Program
STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT Yes RECEIVED DATE 06302008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
AGENCY DHS-USCIS RIN Llti15-AB67 TITLE Changes to Requirements Affecting H-2B Nonimmigrants and Their Employers
STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT No RECEIVED DATE 06092008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
AGENCY DHS-USCBP RIN 1651AA11 TITLE Issuance of a Visa and Authorization for Temporary Admission Into the United States for Certain Nonimmigrant Aliens Afflicted W HIV Infection
STAGE Final Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT No RECEIVED DATE 03042008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
-_RE_V-IE-W-E-X-T-EN-D-E-D---------- _
AGENCY DHS-USCBP RIN 1651-AA76 TITLE Coastwise Transportation of Passengers STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT Yes RECEIVED DATE 07142008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
Disclosure I Accessibility I Privacy Policy I Contact Us
httpwwwreginfogovpublicdoeoReviewSearch 7252008
View Rule Page 11
Shere D find Federal ReguLatory InformciiorlReglnfogov Home J Cnified Agenda al1d Regulatory Plan EO 12866 Regulatory Reyiew Information Collection Reiew
Current rnified Agenda and Regulatory Plan Historical Pnified Agenda and Regulatory Plan Search
View Rule
DHSIUSCBP RIN 1651-AA76 Publication ill Spring 2008
Title llCoastwise Transportation of Passengers
Abstract This interim rule amends the Department of Homeland Securitys (DHS) current regulations relating to the transportation of passengers by non-coastwise-qualified vessels on voyages that begin and end at a US port and stop at intervening US and foreign port(s) Under this interim final rule voyages that begin and end at a US port and stop at a foreign port(s) and at intervening US port(s) where a large USshyflag coastwise-qualified passenger vessel engages in regular service are in violation of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) unless the cumulative length of stay(s) at intervening foreign port(s) is more than 50 percent of the total amount of time spent at the intervening US port(s) and passengers are permitted to go ashore at the foreign port(s) The purpose of this amendment is to ensure that the Congressional purpose in enacting the PVSA which is to preserve the economic benefits of US coastwise trade to US-flag coastwise-qualified vessels is properly implemented
Agency Department of Homeland Security(DHS) Priority Substantive Nonsignificant
KIN Status First time published in the Unified Agenda Agenda Stage of Rulemaking Final Rule Stage
Major No Unfunded Mandates No
CFR Citation -LCER 4J~)(h)(plusmnJ
Legal Authority 5JJSS_30J12lJ-SClt16 J9_lJiCJ 431 9_L1C1plusmn3JJ2JScHJ1J2JSCJ624 L(LlLSc207LIl(gtJfHgt~ _CiQJ _46lSC 6QLQ~
Legal Deadline None
Timetable Action Date FR Cite
Interim Final Action 0510012008
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required No Government Levels Affected None
Federalism No
Included in the Regulatory Plan No
RIN Data Printed in the FR No
Agency Contact Glen E Vereb Chief Entry Procedures and Carriers Branch Department of Homeland Security US Customs and Border Protection Office of Regulations and Rulings 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington DC 20229 Phone202572-8730
Disclosure I Accessibility I Privacy Policy I Contact Us
httpwwwreginfogovpublicdoeAgendaViewRuleruleID=286751 7128120
Federal RegisterVol 72 No 224Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules 65487
SPECULATIVE POSITION LIMITS 1-Continued [In contract units)
Contract
Soybeans and Mini-Soybeans 2
Wheat and Mini-Wheat 2 bullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbull
Soybean Oil
SingleSpot month All monthsmonth
600 8600 13300 600 11100 14500 540 6600 8600
Soybean Meal 720 5500 7100
Minneapolis Grain Exchange
Hard Red Spring Wheat I 600 I 11100 I 14500
New York Board of Trade
Cotton No2 I 300 I 5300 I 7300
Kansas City Board of Trade
Hard Winter Wheat I 600 I 11100 I 14500
1 For purposes of compliance with these limits positions in a futures contract that shares ~ubstantially identical terms with a contract market enumerated herein including a futures contract that is cash-settled based on the settlement price of an enumerated contract market shall be agshygregated with positions in the enumerated contract market
2 For purposes of compliance with these limits positions in the regular-sized and mini-sized contracts shall be aggregated
Issued by the Commission this November 152007 in Washington DC David Stawick Secretary of the Commission [FR Doc E7-22681 Filed 11-20-07 845 amI BILLING CODE 6351-Q1-P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Bureau of Customs and Border Protection
19 CFR Part 4
[USCBP-2007-o098]
Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises
AGENCY Customs and Border Protection Department of Homeland Security ACTION Proposed interpretation solicitation of comments
SUMMARY This document proposes new criteria to be used by Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to determine whether non-coastwise-qualified vessels are in violation ofthe Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) when engaging in cruise itineraries in which passengers board at a US port the vessel calls at several Hawaiian ports and then the vessel proceeds to a foreign port or ports for a brief period before ultimately returning to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their cruise CBP believes these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because it appears that the primary objective of the foreign stop is evasion of the PVSA
DATES Comments must be received on or before December 212007 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT Glen E Vereb Cargo Security Carriers amp Immigration Branch Office of International Trade (202) 572-8730 ADDRESSES You may submit comments identified by docket number by one of the following methods
bull Federal eRulemaking Portal http wwwregulationsgov Follow the instructions for submitting comments
bull Mail Border Security Regulations Branch Office of International Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
I Public Participation
Interested persons are invited to participate in this proposed interpretation by submitting written data views or arguments on all aspects of the proposed interpretation Customs and Border Protection (CBP) also invites comments that relate to the economic environmental or federalism effects that might result from this proposed interpretation Comments that will provide the most assistance to CBP in developing these procedures will reference a specific portion of the proposed interpretation explain the reason for any recommended change and include data information or authority that support such recommended change
Instructions All submissions received must include the agency name and docket number for this proposed
interpretation All comments received will be posted without change to http wwwregulationsgov including any personal information provided
Docket For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received go to http wwwregulationsgov Submitted comments may also be inspected on regular business days between the hours of 9 am and 430 pm at the Office of International Trade Customs and Border Protection 799 9th Street NW 5th Floor Washington DC Arrangements to inspect submitted documents should be made in advance by calling Mr Joseph Clark at (202) 572shy8768
II Background
The maritime cabotage law governing the transportation of passengers was first established by section 8 of the Passenger Vessel Services Act of June 191886 (the PVSA) 24 Stat 81 as amended by section 2 of the Act of February 17 1898 30 Stat 248 formerly codified at 46 USC App 289 (now codified at 46 USC 55103) 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 of $200 (now $300 as promulgated in TD 03-11 pursuant to the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 199028 USC 2461 note) for each passenger so transported and landed
The intent of the maritime cabotage laws including the PVSA was to provide a legal structure that guarantees a coastwise monopoly to
65488 Federal RegisterVol 72 No 224Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules
American shipping and thereby promotes development of the American merchant marine Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 28 (DC Cir 1984) see also The Granada 35 FSupp 892 8931940 AMC 1601 (DC Pa 1940) (stating that the legislative aim of section 289 [now 55102] was the creation of a practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping business for United States ships) In other words the PVSA was enacted to advance the United States merchant marine and fleet by restricting the use of foreign-ownedflagged passenger vessels in United States territorial waters
Passenger vessel transportation between United States ports has historically been viewed to be part of the coastwise trade after the enactment of the PVSA This view is premised on the concepts of continuity of the voyage and whether its intended purpose or objective was coastwise transportation In other words the PVSA was held to be violated if the coastwise movement was continuous or if the purpose of the trip was a coastwise voyage (See 18 OAG 445 September 4 1886 28 OAG 204 February 16 1910 29 OAG 318 February 12 1912 30 OAG 44 February 1 1913 34 OAG 340 December 24 1924 and 36 OAG 352 August 13 1930)
The CBP regulations promulgated pursuant to the PVSA are found at section 480a of title 19 of the Code of Federal Regulations (19 CFR 480a) and are reflective of the above cited Office of the Attorney General decisions These regulations provide among other things that a non-coastwise-qualified vessel which embarks a passenger at a port in the United States embraced within the coastwise laws (a coastwise port) will be deemed to have landed that passenger in violation of the PVSA if the passenger disembarks at a different coastwise port on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a nearby foreign port or ports (as defined in 19 CFR 480a(a)(2) see also 19 CFR 480a(b)(2)) The terms embark and disembark are words of art which are defined as going on board a vessel for the duration of a specific voyage and leaving a vessel at the conclusion of a specific voyage respectively (See 19 CFR 480a(a)(4))
The references in section 480a to nearby foreign ports (defined in 19 CFR 480a(a)(2)) are the results of attempts by CBP to apply an Office of the Attorney Generals opinion dated February 26 1910 (28 OAG 204) In that case a foreign-flag vessel transported 615 passengers on a voyage around the world beginning in New
York and concluding in San Francisco The Attorney General opined that since the primary object of the voyage was to visit various parts of the world on a pleasure tour returning home via California and not to be transported in domestic commerce the transportation was not in violation of the PVSA
The 1910 Attorney Generals opinion was extended to voyages that included foreign ports other than nearby foreign ports (See Treasury Decision (TD) 68shy285 (33 FR 16558) November 14 1968) However voyages solely to one or more coastwise ports have always been considered predominantly coastwise Therefore non-coastwise-qualified vessels engaging in such a voyage where passengers temporarily go ashore at a coastwise port have been deemed to have violated the PVSA
m Current Law and Policy Pursuant to Public Law 109-304 120
Stat 1632 enacted on October 6 2006 Title 46 United States Code was substantially reorganized and recodified Consequently the PVSA is now codified at 46 USC 55103 and provides that no vessel shall transport passengers between ports or places in the United States either directly or by way of a foreign port under a penalty of $300 for each person so transported and landed except one that (1) Is wholly owned by citizens of the United States for purposes of engaging in the coastwise trade and (2) has been issued a certificate of documentation with a coastwise endorsement or is exempt from documentation but would otherwise be eligible for such a certificate and endorsement
In 2003 Congress enacted Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II Section 211 for the purpose of revitalizing the oceangoing US-flag cruise industry in Hawaii (the 2003 Act) Three oceangoing US-flag cruise ships PRIDE OF ALOHA PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAII were documented with coastwise privileges pursuant to the 2003 Act These vessels entered regular service in Hawaii in 2004 2005 and 2006 respectively and pursuant to the express language of the 2003 Act are limited in their operation to providing regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands of Hawaii
The CBP regulations promulgated pursuant to the PVSA are set forth in 19 CFR 480a and have remained unchanged throughout both the recodification of Title 46 of the United States Code and the enactment of the 2003 Act They provide that a violation of the PVSA occurs when passengers embark (board a vessel for the
duration of a voyage) a non-coastwiseshyqualified vessel at one US port and disembark (leave the vessel at the conclusion of a voyage) at a different US port unless they proceed with the vessel to a distant foreign port (Le any port not considered a nearby foreign port which is defined as any port located in North America Central America Bermuda or the West Indies including the Bahamas) Currently these regulations do not contain specific criteria for non-coastwise-qualified vessels on itineraries including US ports and either nearby or distant foreign ports in order for such foreign port calls to be compliant with the PVSA
To reiterate the applicable CBP regulations provide that the PVSA is violated when a non-coastwise-qualified vessel transports a passenger on a voyage solely to one or more coastwise ports and the passenger disembarks or goes ashore temporarily at a coastwise port (19 CFR 480a(b)(1)) Furthermore a violation of the PVSA also occurs when a non-coastwise-qualified vessel transports a passenger on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a nearby foreign port or ports (but no other foreign port) and the passenger disembarks at a coastwise port other than the port of embarkation (19 CFR 480a(b)(2)) However there is no violation of the PVSA when a passenger is on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a distant foreign port or ports (whether or not the voyage includes a nearby foreign port or ports) and the passenger disembarks at a coastwise port provided the passenger has proceeded with the vessel to a distant foreign port (19 CFR 480a(b)(3))
IV Request From MARAD To Provide Guidance
The US Department of Transportation Maritime Administration (MARAD) has requested that CBP take action to ensure enforcement of the PVSA MARAD has asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreignshyflag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwiseshyqualified cruise ship operators
In April of 2007 the operator of the three US-flag cruise vessels operating solely in Hawaii pursuant to the 2003 Act announced their intent to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAIl from the Hawaii market and redeploy her to Europe The operator intends to re-flag the vessel to foreign registry directly resulting in the loss of over 1100 crewmember jobs The primary reason cited for this decision is the rapid increase in foreign-flag competition entering the Hawaii market
Federal Register I Vol 72 No 224 I Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules 65489
from the West Coast This competition is evidenced in published cruise itineraries of foreign-flag carriers offering a variety of round trip cruises that depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period usually in the early morning and ultimately return to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their cruise These cruises are often marketed as Hawaii cruises and except for the brief stop in the nearby foreign port of Ensenada are purely coastwise in nature It is these cruise itineraries that pose an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels that pursuant to the 2003 Act are currently engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands
V Preliminary Notice
In response to MARADs concerns CBP sent letters to two carriers known to operate the itineraries in question as well as to the Cruise Lines International Association Inc stating that CBP believes that these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because it appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA The letters further indicated that CBP is taking steps to publish this position
VI CBPs Proposed Interpretive Rule Accordingly in this document CBP is
proposing to provide that cruise itineraries for non-qualified coastwise vessels which allow passengers to board at a US port call at several Hawaiian ports proceed to a foreign port or ports for a brief period and then ultimately return to the original US port of embarkation for disembarkation are not consistent with the PVSA and the regulations promulgated pursuant thereto Specifically CBP interprets a voyage to be solely to one or more coastwise ports even where it stops at a foreign port unless the stop at the foreign port is a legitimate object of the cruise CBP will presume that a stop at a foreign port is not a legitimate object of the cruise unless
(1) The stop lasts at least 48 hours at the foreign port
(2) The amount of time at the foreign port is more than 50 percent of the total amount of time at the US ports of call and
(3) The passengers are permitted to go ashore temporarily at the foreign port
Accordingly CBP proposes to adopt an interpretive rule under which it will presume that any cruise itinerary that does not include a foreign port call that
satisfies each of these three criteria constitutes coastwise transportation of passengers in violation of 19 CFR 480a(b)(1)
Dated November 16 2007 W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection [FR Doc E7-22788 Filed 11-20-07 845 am] BILLING CODe 9111-14-1
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau
27 CFR Part 9
[Notice No 76]
RIN 1513-AB49
Proposed Establishment of the Leona Valley Viticultural Area (2007R-281 P)
AGENCY Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau Treasury ACTION Notice of proposed rulemaking
SUMMARY The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau proposes to establish the 134 square mile Leona Valley viticultural area in the northeast part of Los Angeles County California We designate viticultural areas to allow vintners to better describe the origin of their wines and to allow consumers to better identify wines they may purchase We invite comments on this proposed addition to our regulations DATES We must receive written comments on or before January 22 2008
ADDRESSES You may send comments on this notice to one of the following addresses
bull httpwwwregulationsgov (Federal e-rulemaking portal follow the instructions for submitting comments) or
bull Director Regulations and Rulings Division Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau PO Box 14412 Washington DC 20044-4412
See the Public Participation section of this notice for specific instructions and requirements for submitting comments and for information on how to request a public hearing
You may view copies of this notice selected supporting materials and any comments we receive about this proposal at httpwwwregulationsgov under Docket No 2007-0066 You also may view copies of this notice all related petitions maps or other supporting materials and any comments we receive about this
proposal by appointment at the TTB Information Resource Center 1310 G Street NW Washington DC 20220 To make an appointment call 202-927shy2400
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT NA Sutton Regulations and Rulings Division Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau 925 Lakeville S1 No 158 Petaluma CA 94952 phone 415shy271-1254 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
Background on Viticultural Areas
TTB Authority Section 105(e) of the Federal Alcohol
Administration Act (FAA Act) 27 USC 205(e) authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to prescribe regulations for the labeling of wine distilled spirits and malt beverages The FAA Act provides that these regulations should among other things prohibit consumer deception and the use of misleading statements on labels and ensure that labels provide the consumer with adequate information as to the identity and quality of the product The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) administers the regulations promulgated under the FAA Act
Part 4 ofthe TTB regulations (27 CFR part 4) allows the establishment of definitive viticultural areas and the use of their names as appellations of origin on wine labels and in wine advertisements Part 9 of the TTB regulations (27 CFR part 9) contains the list of approved viticultural areas
Definition Section 425(e)(1)(i) ofthe TTB
regulations (27 CFR 425(e)(1)(i)) defines a viticultural area for American wine as a delimited grape-growing region distinguishable by geographical features the boundaries of which have been recognized and defined in part 9 of the regulations These designations allow vintners and consumers to attribute a given quality reputation or other characteristic of a wine made from grapes grown in an area to its geographic origin The establishment of viticultural areas allows vintners to describe more accurately the origin of their wines to consumers and helps consumers to identify wines they may purchase Establishment of a viticultural area is neither an approval nor an endorsement by TTB of the wine produced in that area
Requirements Section 425(e)(2) of the TTB
regulations outlines the procedure for proposing an American viticultural area and provides that any interested party
Us Department ofHomelaDd Secmity Washington DC 10229
bull ~
US Customs and Border Protection
AUG 15 2fXJJ
VE5-3-02-QTRRBSTCCCI - ti015502-GG-
Mr leon Sutcliffe Director Port Operations Camivai Cruise Unes Camival Place 3655 NW 87Avenue Miami Aorlda 33178
RE P~nger Vessef Services Ad Coastwise Transportation 46 USC sect 55103 19 CFR sect 480a(b)
Dear Mr Sutcliffe
As you know US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) enforces the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) codified at TItle 46 United States Code section 55103 (46 USC 55103) This statute prohibits non-coastwise-qualifled vessels (ie those vessels not US-buill owned and documented with a coastwise endorsement) from transporting passengers between porls or places within the United States The regUlations promUlgated pursuant to the PVSA are found at TrtJe 19 Code of Federal Regulations section 4808 (19 CFR 4808)
It has come to our attention that passenger vessels of your company are engaging in cruise itineraries that include ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands Two USAlagged coastwise-endorsed passenger vessefs are also currenUy engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of caD wittlin the Hawaiian Islands
As part of your cruise itineraries some of your foreign-flagged vessels depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period and ultimately rebJm to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their endse For example the MS ZAANDAM of Holand America Lines departs San Diego cruises the Hawaiian Islands stops in Ensenada from 800pm to 11 OOpmbull and returns to san Diego CBP believes these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because It appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA -- - - ~~~------
Please be advised that CBP is taking steps to publish this position Should have any questions pertaining to this matter please contact Mr Glen Vereb Chief Cargo Security Carriers and Immigration Branch at (202) 572-8724
Sincerely
F Jl E EST Y LEe A U I 5 I N Gmiddot
December 21 2007
The Honorable W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection co Border Security Regulations Branch Office ofInternational Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229
Re Hawaii Coastwise Cruises (USCBP-2007-0098) Comments in Response to Proposed Interpretation
Dear Commissioner Basham
NCL America Inc1 (NCLA) submits these comments in support ofthe efforts ofCustoms and Border Protection to enforce the Passenger Vessel Services Act and the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative as applied to Hawaii coastwise cruises
1 Introduction and Summary of Position
NCLA operates three large oceangoing US flag cruise ships in Hawaii These ships are documented under US flag and are required to operate in regular service in Hawaii pursuant to the authority of the Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative a 2003 federal statute intended to revitalize the US flag cruise industry and to maximize economic and national security benefits to the United States (the 2003 Act)
NCLA has invested $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships pursuant to the 2003 Act and in direct reliance on the protections of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) and its proper enforcement The PVSA limits the transportation ofpassengers between US ports to coastwise documented US flag ships Its statutory protections recognize that US flag ships have significantly higher operational costs in part because they are subject to more stringent US laws including US labor laws and federal
1 NCL America Inc is a US corporation incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware headquartered in Honolulu Hawaii As a US corporation it is subject to US taxes at both the federal and state level The Chief Executive Officer the Chairman of the Board and all of the Board of Directors of NCL America are US citizens The company is also subject to US labor and employment laws and is required by statute to maintain a workforce comprised primarily ofUS citizens
700 Bishop St SUite 900 I Honolulu HawMi 96813 I Tel 8085273800 Fax 8085273820 I ndcom
2
income tax among others The NCLA ships operating in Hawaii are the only large oceangoing cruise ships operating under US flag In furtherance of the policy goals of the PVSA and the 2003 Act these ships have created over 4000 seafaring jobs all subject to US minimum wage and other labor statutes
Since 2003 there has been a significant increase in capacity in the Hawaii market from foreign flag ships providing cruise service to Hawaii from the West Coast Many of these foreign flag cruises are marketed as Hawaii cruises and consist entirely ofUS ports ofcall with the sole exception of a token stop in Mexico for as little as an hour late at night under circumstances where passengers are not permitted to get offthe ship There are no reported rulings approving these particular foreign flag itineraries
Lower cost foreign competition in the Hawaii market has unfairly hurt NCLAs operations NCLA has incurred substantial losses which have contributed significantly to its decision earlier this year to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAll from US flag and reshydeploy it foreign Unfair foreign competition poses an imminent threat to the remaining US flag passenger vessels operating in the Hawaii trades pursuant to the 2003 Act
As the agency statutorily charged with implementation of the 2003 Act the US Department ofTransportation Maritime Administration (MARAn) is aware of the threat foreign flag Hawaii itineraries pose to the US flag fleet and brought the situation to the attention ofthe US Department ofHomeland Security Bureau ofCustoms and Border Protection (CBP or Customs) Customs determined that the primary object of these itineraries was coastwise and that the Ensenada stop was an evasion of the PVSA
In August 2007 Customs provided written notice to the affected foreign lines and their trade association that the existing itineraries were contrary to the PVSA None of these lines sought advance rulings even after the Customs notice with respect to their Hawaii itineraries pursuant to Customs regulations and many continued to market the itineraries as Hawaii cruises NCLA supports the efforts ofCustoms and MARAD to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act for Hawaii cruises
2 Statutory Authority for Customs Proposed Interpretation
(a) Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA)
Congress passed the PVSA in 1886 to protect the US maritime transportation industry from foreign competition2 Protection is afforded through penalty assessments on foreign vessels transporting passengers between US ports or places directly or by way ofa foreign port 3 As Congress and the courts have recognized coastwise protections for the US maritime transportation industry are only one dimension of the PVSA Operating in conjunction with other coastwise laws and with the US
2 See United States v Honduran SS GRANADA 35 F Supp 892 894 (BD Pa 1940)(citing purpose of PVSA to meet threats to the practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping which was to be preserved for US ships)
46 USc sect 55103 (originally 46 USC App 289)
3
documentation laws the PVSA also enhances military sealift in times ofnational emergency sustains a US merchant marine and supports the US shipbuilding and repair industry4
(b) Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative (the 2003 Act)
Over the past decade Congress has sought to reinforce the goals of the PVSA by providing mechanisms to revitalize the oceangoing US flag cruise fleet particularly in Hawaii The Project America legislation enacted in 1997 authorized among other things the re~flagging ofone existing cruise ship contingent on the operator contracting for the construction oftwo new oceangoing cruise shipss Following the default of the operator under the original contract Congress enacted the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative for the purpose ofrecovering economic and national security benefits to the United States bull 6 These same goals of the original PVSA were expressly referenced in the legislative history of the 2003 Act which emphasized that these ships will be assets available in time ofnational emergency and will significantly expand the pool ofqualified seafarers upon which the US Department ofDefense relies to crew non-combatant vessels
The 2003 Act authorizes the US documentation ofthree cruise ships for operation in regular service in Hawaii subject to certain conditions including a prohibition on operating in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico and the Caribbean Sea and a requirement that all vessel repair work be undertaken in the United States MARAD is charged with implementation of the 2003 Act
3 Customs Implementation of PVSA
(a) Regulations
The current regulations implementing the PVSA were published by Customs in 19858 The growth of the foreign flag cruise industry in North America and in particular the development of the Alaska cruise market led to an effort in 1984 to amend the thenshyexisting regulations to increase the ease of administration and operational flexibility The effort to change the regulation had support from US port interests who saw benefit in the potential increase in the number ofUS ports that foreign vessels could call and was opposed by proponents ofpotential US flag projects as detrimental to efforts to revitalize the US fleet 9 The preamble to the 1985 rule emphasized that it was of paramount importance to consider the primary object ofpassengers in taking a
4 See American Hawaii Cruises v Skinner 713 F Supp 452 457 (DDC 1989) (recognizing the contribution of the PVSA and the Jones Act in helping to secure national defense by maintaining a merchant marine oftbe best equipped and most suitable types ofvessels sufficient to serve in time of war or national emergency) see also Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 30 (DC Cir 1984) Wirth Ltd v SIS Acadia Forest 537 F2d 1272 1281 n32 (5th Cir 1976) S Public Law 105-56 Section 8109 (111 Stat 1203 1244) (Oct 81997 ) 6 Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II General Provisions - Department ofCommerce Section 211 (117 Stat 1179) (Feb 20 2003) 1 149 Cong Rec S1118 (dailyed Jan 17 2003(statement ofSenator Inouye) 8 19 CFR sect 480a 950 Fed Reg 26981 (July I 1985)
4
voyage10 a concept which is reinforced elsewhere in Customs regulations11 In its analysis of the comments received at the time Customs accepted the view ofport interests that the modified rule would help their business but did so recognizing the absence ofa regular salt water US flag passenger fleet Customs acknowledged the potential harm to prospective efforts to revitalize the US flag passenger fleet and expressly cautioned that if it were ever shown that coastwise qualified vessels in competition with foreign vessels were in fact hurt by the modified Customs regulation then Customs would immediately reconsider its position12
(b) Customs Rulings
Given the significant penalties associated with violating the PVSA13 Customs regulations expressly provide a mechanism for the owner or charterer of a foreign vessel or any other interested person to request an advisory ruling as to whether a contemplated voyage would be considered in violation of the PVSA14 Customs regulations provide that vessel operators can rely on these ruling letters only to the extent that the facts and circumstances are identical to those in the ruling letter IS
Notwithstanding the fact that several foreign cruise lines offer Hawaii itineraries originating in a US mainland port and calling at Hawaii ports with a token intervening stop in Mexico there are no reported rulings expressly approving such an itinerary for these foreign cruise lines 16
4 The Cruise Industry in Hawaii
(a) NCL America Returns US flag to the Oceangoing Passenger Fleet
Pursuant to the requirements ofthe 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative NCLA agreed to promote US-flag cruising enhance military sealift capacity and expand the US maritime labor base No other major cruise line had ever undertaken such a commitment to the US flag and the public policy objectives Congress sought to achieve under the PVSA or the 2003 Act Introduction ofPRIDE OF ALOHA in 2004 was a significant development in the maritime industry because it marked the restoration ofthe
10 Id at 26983 11 Customs Regulations include a provision on the effect ofruling letters and with respect to carrier rulings the applicable regulation refers to rulings setting forth a determination as to whether or not the primary object of a contemplated voyage is coastwise transportation in violation of46 USC sect 289 [pYSA codified at 46 USC sect55103] 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 12 50 Fed Reg at 26983 13 A modem cruise ship with 2400 passengers for example would be subject to a fine of$720OOO per cruise based on the statutory penalty of$300 for each passenger transported in violation of the Act 14 19 CFR sect 480a(d) IS 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 16 There is one older reported mling involving a request to drop the Ensenada port call from a Los AngeleslHawaiiLos Angeles itinerary which Customs held would violate the PYSA In dicta Customs acknowledged that the itinerary could be in compliance if the Ensenada call were not dropped but did not address the issue ofwhether a one hour service call where no passengers depart the vessel would be sufficient The carrier that obtained that ruling has since left the Hawaii market See Customs Ruling HQ 114078 re Crystal Hannony (Nov 4 1997)
5
us flag to the oceangoing cruise industry A contemporaneous press release from the Us Department ofTransportation reported that the three US-flag cruise ships to be introduced pursuant to the 2003 Act were expected to create more than 20000 US jobs generate more than $825 million ofexpenditures in the US economy and create nearly $360 million in federal tax revenue by the end of 200717 In 2005 the PRIDE OF AMERICA was introduced and in 2006 the third vessel PRIDE OF HAWAll was introduced to Hawaii Both the PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAIl offer 7shyday inter-island Hawaii itineraries whereas PRIDE OF ALOHA operates on 7 and 10 day cruises exclusively among the islands ofHawaii as well as 11 day cruises that include a foreign port call at Fanning Island To date NCLA has invested over $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships in furtherance ofthe policy objectives of the PVSA and the 2003 Act These ships employ over 4000 seafarers and generate hundreds ofmillions of dollars in benefits for Hawaii and the nation
(b) Significant Increase in Foreign Flag Capacity Since 2003
The most significant change in the Hawaii cruise market since 2003 has been the dramatic increase in capacity A significant portion ofthis capacity increase is directly attributable to NCLAs fulfillment ofthe Congressional mandate in the 2003 Act However foreign-flag operations in the Hawaii market as measured in passenger nights18 have skyrocketed Based on MARAn data derived from the US Customs Border Patrol Vessel Entrance and Clearance documents the passenger nights for foreign flag vessels departing from the West Coast to Hawaii on round trip cruise have increased several hundredfold during this period19 See Exhibit A
(c) NCLA Has Incurred Substantial Losses During this Period
Since 2004 NCLA has lost cumulatively more than a quarter ofa billion dollars A principal reason for these losses has been the increase in foreign capacity in this market NCLA has taken significant steps to reduce costs to address the increase in foreign competition but NCLA is at an inherent disadvantage when competing against foreign companies that are not subject to US labor laws US tax laws and other laws Ofcourse the statutory protections of the PVSA are intended to address these very issues That is why Customs immediate action to implement the proposed interpretation is critical for the US flag fleet Regrettably NCLA has already been forced to reduce overall capacity early next year with the withdrawal ofPRIDE OF HAWAlI to another
17 DOT Press Release dated June 72004 see also DOT Press Release dated August 132004 in connection with visit to PRIDE OF ALOHA by US Transportation Secretary Norman Y Mineta 11 Passenger nights (also referred to as passenger capacity days) are calculated by multiplying the number ofpassengers per vessel by the number ofcruise days in each itinerary by the number of cruises This is the unit ofmeasurement employed by MARAn In contrast passenger bed supply (also referred to as passenger capacity) data reflects only the number ofberths per vessel multiplied by the number of cruises and hence understates the market by excluding the full economic value ofthe cruise perfonned 19 In 2003 the total number ofpassenger nights for round-trip West Coast to Hawaii cruises was 303325 which jumped by 353 to 1072329 in 2006 and by 430 to 1304546 from 2003 to 2007 (The 2007 figure is based on MARAD data for six months and a1ll1ualized by published itineraries for the balance of the year)
6
market for operation under foreign flag This move alone will result in the loss ofover 1000 American seafaring jobs
5 Customs Proposed Interpretation is Necessary to Further the Important National Security and Public Policy Objectives Embodied in Federal Law
As Customs has properly noted the increase in foreign competition in the Hawaii trades in contravention of the PVSA pose[s] an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels[] As the operator of these ships NCLA has a vested interest in protecting the jobs ofthe thousands ofAmerican crewmembers and cruise ship service providers who support these vessels NCLA also has an interest in protecting the substantial economic investment it has made to revitalize the US flag passenger vessel fleet But a balancing of interests in the context of Customs enforcement ofexisting law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act requires a much broader focus
The legislative history of the 2003 Act expressly recognized the national security and public policy import ofestablishing a US flag passenger vessel fleet as a means to maintain the countrys preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool of qualified seafarers and as a means to help sustain a fleet ofUS-flag vessels to su~ort
the nations military and maritime industrial base for times ofnational emergency
Congress understood the importance ofestablishing a viable US flag cruise ship fleet as something larger than the vessels themselves These national security and public policy objectives must be weighed in the balance as Customs assesses how best to interpret its rules to give effect to the PVSA and the 2003 Act
6 Customs Should Clarify that the Proposed Interpretation is Limited to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades and Adopt Reasonable Measures to Ensure Sufficient Foreign Content
Since publication ofthe proposed interpretative rule several commenters have observed that the scope of the proposed interpretation is ambiguous because the language of Section VI referencing any cruise itinerary appears broader than the caption Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises and the entire discussion in the published notice which focuses exclusively on US-flag coastwise vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA agrees that the proposed interpretation should be clarified so that its scope is limited to vessels operating roundtrip voyages from US ports that include Hawaii port calls
NCLA supports the concept reflected in the proposed interpretive rule that round trip Hawaii itineraries from US ports on foreign ships must include a material and measurable degree ofoverall foreign port content as compared to US port content
20 149 Congo Rec S1117 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)
7
(a) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is also Consistent with Subsequent Congressional Enactments Modifying the PVSA
As discussed above it is well established that the PVSA was designed toRrotect US-flag vessels from foreign competition in the coastwise and domestic trades 1
Subsequent legislative enactments however have appropriately differentiated among distinct geographic markets and trades including Canada Alaska Puerto Rico and Hawaii based on the existence or non-existence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
In 1938 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers by Canadian passenger vessels on Lake Ontario and the St Lawrence River until such time as passenger service shall be established by vessels of the United States22 Similarly in 1961 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers on Canadian vessels within Alaska or between Alaska and other points in the United States until such time as passenger service is established by vessels ofthe United States23
In 1984 Congress modified the application ofthe PVSA to pennit the transportation ofpassengers between Puerto Rico and other United States ports on foreign-flag vessels24 As with the other statutory exceptions this provision is qualified and expires [o]n a showing that a United States passenger vessel qualified to engage in the coastwise trade is offering or advertising passenger service between a port in Puerto Rico and another port in the United States2S
Congress acted again with respect to the application of the PVSA with the 2003 Act in which it authorized three vessels that did not meet the US-build requirements of the PVSA to operate as modem US-flagged cruise ships in regular service in Hawaii26 The 2003 Act imposes a specific geographic limitation on the operation of any ship documented under this authority to operations only in regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands ofHawaii and shall not transport passengers in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico or the Caribbean Sea except in certain limited circumstances27 As above the limited nature of the 2003 Act is express it is strictly limited to the large ocean-going cruise ships and then only those operating in the regular Hawaii service where there are no US-flag operations28
21 See Act ofJune 19 1886 c 421 sec 8 24 Stat 81 Act of February 171898 c 26 sec 2 30 Stat 248 22 S] Res 174 75th Cong 52 Stat 223 (Alp 251938) codified at46 USC sect 55121(a) 23 See Pub L 87-77 75 Stat 196 (Jun 30 1961) codified at 46 USC sect 55121(b) 24 See Pub L 98-563 98 Stat 2916 (Oct 301984) codified at 46 USC sect 55104(b) 25 46 USC sect 55104(c)(l) see also 46 USC 46 USc sect 55104(cX2)(expiration of exemption upon availability ofa non-coastwise qualified US-flag vessel offering service in the relevant market) 26 149 Congo Rec SI118 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)(statementofSen Inouye) 27 Pub L 108-7 117 Stat 79 (Feb 20 2003) 28 149 Congo Rec S11l9 (dailyed Jan 17 2003Xstatement of Sen Inouye)
8
In each ofthese instances Congress fashioned a narrow exception to the PVSA that differentiated among distinct geographic markets based on the existence or nonshyexistence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
As the federal agency responsible for administering the 2003 Act MARAD requested that Customs act to protect US flag passenger vessel interests in the Hawaii trades29 Limiting the scope ofthe proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades also reflects Customs appreciation of the PVSA in the context of the subsequent Congressional action30 Viewing the Congressional modifications to the PVSA as a whole Congress has specifically and repeatedly differentiated among distinct geographic markets when it has found it necessary and appropriate to do so to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests It is well established that the proper interpretation of a statutory scheme includes consideration ofsubsequent statutes even though the underlying statute itselfhas not been expressly amended31 Accordingly Customs should likewise limit the scope ofthe proposed PVSA interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades because that is the only geographic market as mandated by the 2003 Act in which oceangoing US-flag cruise ships are operating
(b) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Consistent with Public Policy Objectives of the 1985 Rulemaking
In 1985middot Customs liberalized the regulations implementing the PVSA by eliminating certain regulatory prohibitions on foreign flag vessels In the context of the 1985 rulemaking Customs justified a relaxation ofthe regulations on the grounds that it would simplify the administration of the PVSA and would benefit the economy ofcertain American coastwise ports without eroding the statutory protection given to American vessels engaged in solely domestic trade32
Customs thus sought to reconcile US port economic interests with US-flag passenger vessel interests Both of these twin policy objectives are furthered by
29 See 72 Fed Reg 65488 (Nov 21 2007)( MARAn bas asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the ~eratiODS ofcoastwise-qualified cruise ship operators)
See generally FDA v Brown amp Williamson Tobacco Corp 529 US 120 132-133 (2000)(assessing propriety ofagency construction ofFood DIUg and Cosmetics Act and descnbing responsibility of reviewing cowt to assess statutory provisions in the context of subsequent legislative enactments) 31 See Brown amp Williamson 529 US 143 (holding that proper construction ofstatutory provision must necessarily assume that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications ofa later statute This is particularly so where the scope of the earlier statute is broad but the subsequent statutes more specifically address the topic athand) see also United States v Estate ofRomani 523 US 517 530-531 (1998)( holding that a later-enacted statute should control the construction of the federal lien priority statute a specific policy embodied in a later federal statute should control om construction of the [earlier] statute even though it ha[s] not been expressly amended) United States v Fausto 484 US 439453 (1988)(The courts frequently find Congress to have done this - whenever in fact they interpret a statutory text in the light ofsurrounding texts that happen to have been subsequently enacted This classic judicial task of reconciling many laws enacted over time and getting them to make sense in combination necessarily assumes that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications of a later statute) 32 50 Fed Reg 26982 (JuI 11985)
9
limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades
As noted earlier the 2003 Act limits the operation of the NCLA US-flag oceangoing passenger vessels to regular service in Hawaii Because there are no oceangoing US-flag vessels operating in any market other than the Hawaii trades Customs should limit the scope of the proposed interPretation to that market Such a limitation protects US flag passenger vessel interests without prejudicing US port interests In contrast an application of the proposed interpretation to any itinerary would needlessly harm US port interests unrelated to Hawaii without any countervailing benefit to US-flag passenger vessel interests Accordingly limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation is consistent with the public policy objectives of the 1985 rulemaking as well as the 2003 Act
(c) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Also Consistent with Customs Commitment to Revisit the Scope of its Rules to Protect US-Flag Interests
The relaxation ofthe PVSA regulations in 1985 was premised in large part on Customs finding that there was no regular salt water US-flag passenger fleet in operation at that time33 Acknowledging that the relaxed regulations could harm USshyflag interests Customs committed in the preamble ofthe 1985 final rule to immediately reconsider its interpretation if it is ever shown that there is a viable US flag vessel operating in competition with foreign-flag vessels34
Congress enacted the 2003 Act to stimulate the development of a US flag cruise ship industry As noted above the legislative history ofthat Act makes clear that Congress sought to revitalize the US-flag cruise industry as a means to maintain Americas preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool ofqualified seafarers help sustain a fleet of US flag vessels to support our military and a maritime industrial base create thousands of seagoing and shoreside American jobs and stimulate the development ofa US flag cruise ship tourism business with the commensurate benefits to the US tax base the US economy and US employment
Customs is now acting at MARADs request to revisit its interpretation ofthe regulations implementing the PVSA because recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwise-qualified cruise ship operations35 That is to say that the concerns articulated by Customs in the context of the 1985 rulemaking have materialized and US-flag passenger vessel interests are in fact being hanned in the Hawaii trades by foreign competitors
33 50 Fed Reg 26983 34Id
3S 72 Fed Reg 56488 (Nov 21 2007)
I
10
Because the US-flag passenger vessels are limited by statute to regular service in Hawaii limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the
Hawaii trades is consistent with Customs historical commitment to revisit its interpretation ofthe implementing regulations to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests
7 Conclusion
For the reasons stated above NCLA commends the efforts ofCustoms and MARAn to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act as applied to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA respectfully requests Customs to move ahead promptly with p~blicati~nof a final interpretive rule to advance the important national security arid public policy objectives ofthese laws
We greatly appreciate the opportunity to submit these comments
Sincerely
~~~ Alan T Yamamoto Vice President Hawaii Operations
Exhibit A
Ship Name Serenade Of The Seas Departure Port San Diego California Ports of Call San Diego California Kailua Kona Hawaii Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii Hlo Hawaii Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii Ensenada Mexico San Qigo California
2007 Date(s) Oct 05
Sailing Itinerary
Day Port H ~rrive Depart Activity
05-0ct San Diego California 500 PM
06-0ct Cruising
07-0ct Cruising
08-0ct Cruising
09-0ct Cruising
10-0ct Kailua Kona Hawaii 700 AM 900 PM Tendered
11-00t Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 1000 AM Tendered
12middot0ct Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 900 PM Tendered
13-0ct Hilo Hawaii 700 AM 600 PM Docked
14middot0ct Honoulu (Oahu) Hawaii 700 AM Docked
15-0ct Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii 200 AM Docked
6-0ct CrUising
17-0ct Cruising
18-0ct Cruising
19middot0ct Cruising
-7 20-00t
O-Oot
Ensenada ~i1exico
San Deqo California
i 00 ~r1
700 ~M
200 oM D1Jcked ~
NCL America Hawaii Economic Contributions
(2004-2008)
bull (in Millions) bull $399 in wages benefits and overtime to US seafarers bull $35 in Federal and State payroll Taxes bull $64 in Government Fees and Taxes to Hawaii bull $28 in wages benefits and overtime to US other employees bull $52 in Port Charges to Hawaii Companies (Stevedores tugs pilots etc) bull $85 in Fuel to Tesoro Hawaii bull $130 for shore excursions to Hawaii tour operators bull $39 for Hawaii hotel rooms and ground transport bull $75 for food grown in Hawaii bull $57 in union fees and levies (incl $32M paid directly by employees) bull $1 in MMD fees to the United States Coast Guard bull $51 for recruitment screening processing and training crew bull $76 advertising and promoting Hawaii as a destination bull $1092
COASTWISE CRUISES INTERPRETIVE RULE RESOLUTION Adopted at the
US Conference of Mayors 76th Annual Meeting
June 20-242008 Miami
WHEREAS the Department of Homeland Securitys Customs and Border Protection (CBP) issued a proposed Interpretive Rule regulating Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises on foreign flagged vessels between US ports of call under the Passenger Vessel Services Act at the request of the United States Maritime Administration and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule would require that a foreign-flagged vessel on a coastwise cruise to call at a foreign port for at least 48 hours with that foreign stop constituting at least 50 percent of the cruise itinerary and allowing passengers to disembark the cruise vessel at the foreign port before continuing the cruise to a US port of call and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule establishes burdensome criteria that are wholly inconsistent with industry practice particularly the 48-hour call at foreign port shyinasmuch as the standard port call is six to eight hours - as well as the requirement that 50 percent of a cruise be spent at the foreign port and
WHEREAS the intent of the proposed Interpretive Rule is to protect the single remaining US flag vessel serving the Inter-Hawaiian Island cruise trade that according to the Hawaii Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism generates more than 4600 jobs and generates nearly $500 million in economic benefits for the state annually and
WHEREAS thousands of members of the International Longshore Workers Union (nWU) are employed at US ports serving cruise ships and whose jobs would be at risk if the proposed Interpretive Rule were implemented and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule is vague as to the breadth of its application ie to coastwise cruises between all United States ports or applied solely to coastwise cruises from West Coast ports to Hawaii and
WHEREAS the Cruise Lines International Association estimates the proposed Interpretive Rule would upend the $17 billion in national cruise industry spending and put at risk more than 300000 jobs generated by the international cruise industry including jobs held by nWU at US ports and the local allied industries supporting the cruise industry and
Executive Order Submissions Under Review
II Reglnfogov Where to ind Federal Regulatory Information -~
Home ] Lnitied Agenda and Regulator) Ilan pound012866 Regulator) Review Jnformalion Collection Review
EO 12866 Regulatory Rlvlw dvanced Search IJitorical RepWI Review Counh Jriter XIL
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA)
Executive Order Submissions Under Review July 25 2008 - _------------____ _shy
Department of Homeland Security
AGENCY DHS-TSA RIN 1652-AA53
TITLE Large Aircraft Security Program Other Aircraft Operator Security Programs and Airport Operator Security Program
STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT Yes RECEIVED DATE 06302008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
AGENCY DHS-USCIS RIN Llti15-AB67 TITLE Changes to Requirements Affecting H-2B Nonimmigrants and Their Employers
STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT No RECEIVED DATE 06092008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
AGENCY DHS-USCBP RIN 1651AA11 TITLE Issuance of a Visa and Authorization for Temporary Admission Into the United States for Certain Nonimmigrant Aliens Afflicted W HIV Infection
STAGE Final Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT No RECEIVED DATE 03042008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
-_RE_V-IE-W-E-X-T-EN-D-E-D---------- _
AGENCY DHS-USCBP RIN 1651-AA76 TITLE Coastwise Transportation of Passengers STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT Yes RECEIVED DATE 07142008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
Disclosure I Accessibility I Privacy Policy I Contact Us
httpwwwreginfogovpublicdoeoReviewSearch 7252008
View Rule Page 11
Shere D find Federal ReguLatory InformciiorlReglnfogov Home J Cnified Agenda al1d Regulatory Plan EO 12866 Regulatory Reyiew Information Collection Reiew
Current rnified Agenda and Regulatory Plan Historical Pnified Agenda and Regulatory Plan Search
View Rule
DHSIUSCBP RIN 1651-AA76 Publication ill Spring 2008
Title llCoastwise Transportation of Passengers
Abstract This interim rule amends the Department of Homeland Securitys (DHS) current regulations relating to the transportation of passengers by non-coastwise-qualified vessels on voyages that begin and end at a US port and stop at intervening US and foreign port(s) Under this interim final rule voyages that begin and end at a US port and stop at a foreign port(s) and at intervening US port(s) where a large USshyflag coastwise-qualified passenger vessel engages in regular service are in violation of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) unless the cumulative length of stay(s) at intervening foreign port(s) is more than 50 percent of the total amount of time spent at the intervening US port(s) and passengers are permitted to go ashore at the foreign port(s) The purpose of this amendment is to ensure that the Congressional purpose in enacting the PVSA which is to preserve the economic benefits of US coastwise trade to US-flag coastwise-qualified vessels is properly implemented
Agency Department of Homeland Security(DHS) Priority Substantive Nonsignificant
KIN Status First time published in the Unified Agenda Agenda Stage of Rulemaking Final Rule Stage
Major No Unfunded Mandates No
CFR Citation -LCER 4J~)(h)(plusmnJ
Legal Authority 5JJSS_30J12lJ-SClt16 J9_lJiCJ 431 9_L1C1plusmn3JJ2JScHJ1J2JSCJ624 L(LlLSc207LIl(gtJfHgt~ _CiQJ _46lSC 6QLQ~
Legal Deadline None
Timetable Action Date FR Cite
Interim Final Action 0510012008
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required No Government Levels Affected None
Federalism No
Included in the Regulatory Plan No
RIN Data Printed in the FR No
Agency Contact Glen E Vereb Chief Entry Procedures and Carriers Branch Department of Homeland Security US Customs and Border Protection Office of Regulations and Rulings 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington DC 20229 Phone202572-8730
Disclosure I Accessibility I Privacy Policy I Contact Us
httpwwwreginfogovpublicdoeAgendaViewRuleruleID=286751 7128120
Federal RegisterVol 72 No 224Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules 65487
SPECULATIVE POSITION LIMITS 1-Continued [In contract units)
Contract
Soybeans and Mini-Soybeans 2
Wheat and Mini-Wheat 2 bullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbull
Soybean Oil
SingleSpot month All monthsmonth
600 8600 13300 600 11100 14500 540 6600 8600
Soybean Meal 720 5500 7100
Minneapolis Grain Exchange
Hard Red Spring Wheat I 600 I 11100 I 14500
New York Board of Trade
Cotton No2 I 300 I 5300 I 7300
Kansas City Board of Trade
Hard Winter Wheat I 600 I 11100 I 14500
1 For purposes of compliance with these limits positions in a futures contract that shares ~ubstantially identical terms with a contract market enumerated herein including a futures contract that is cash-settled based on the settlement price of an enumerated contract market shall be agshygregated with positions in the enumerated contract market
2 For purposes of compliance with these limits positions in the regular-sized and mini-sized contracts shall be aggregated
Issued by the Commission this November 152007 in Washington DC David Stawick Secretary of the Commission [FR Doc E7-22681 Filed 11-20-07 845 amI BILLING CODE 6351-Q1-P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Bureau of Customs and Border Protection
19 CFR Part 4
[USCBP-2007-o098]
Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises
AGENCY Customs and Border Protection Department of Homeland Security ACTION Proposed interpretation solicitation of comments
SUMMARY This document proposes new criteria to be used by Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to determine whether non-coastwise-qualified vessels are in violation ofthe Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) when engaging in cruise itineraries in which passengers board at a US port the vessel calls at several Hawaiian ports and then the vessel proceeds to a foreign port or ports for a brief period before ultimately returning to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their cruise CBP believes these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because it appears that the primary objective of the foreign stop is evasion of the PVSA
DATES Comments must be received on or before December 212007 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT Glen E Vereb Cargo Security Carriers amp Immigration Branch Office of International Trade (202) 572-8730 ADDRESSES You may submit comments identified by docket number by one of the following methods
bull Federal eRulemaking Portal http wwwregulationsgov Follow the instructions for submitting comments
bull Mail Border Security Regulations Branch Office of International Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
I Public Participation
Interested persons are invited to participate in this proposed interpretation by submitting written data views or arguments on all aspects of the proposed interpretation Customs and Border Protection (CBP) also invites comments that relate to the economic environmental or federalism effects that might result from this proposed interpretation Comments that will provide the most assistance to CBP in developing these procedures will reference a specific portion of the proposed interpretation explain the reason for any recommended change and include data information or authority that support such recommended change
Instructions All submissions received must include the agency name and docket number for this proposed
interpretation All comments received will be posted without change to http wwwregulationsgov including any personal information provided
Docket For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received go to http wwwregulationsgov Submitted comments may also be inspected on regular business days between the hours of 9 am and 430 pm at the Office of International Trade Customs and Border Protection 799 9th Street NW 5th Floor Washington DC Arrangements to inspect submitted documents should be made in advance by calling Mr Joseph Clark at (202) 572shy8768
II Background
The maritime cabotage law governing the transportation of passengers was first established by section 8 of the Passenger Vessel Services Act of June 191886 (the PVSA) 24 Stat 81 as amended by section 2 of the Act of February 17 1898 30 Stat 248 formerly codified at 46 USC App 289 (now codified at 46 USC 55103) 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 of $200 (now $300 as promulgated in TD 03-11 pursuant to the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 199028 USC 2461 note) for each passenger so transported and landed
The intent of the maritime cabotage laws including the PVSA was to provide a legal structure that guarantees a coastwise monopoly to
65488 Federal RegisterVol 72 No 224Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules
American shipping and thereby promotes development of the American merchant marine Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 28 (DC Cir 1984) see also The Granada 35 FSupp 892 8931940 AMC 1601 (DC Pa 1940) (stating that the legislative aim of section 289 [now 55102] was the creation of a practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping business for United States ships) In other words the PVSA was enacted to advance the United States merchant marine and fleet by restricting the use of foreign-ownedflagged passenger vessels in United States territorial waters
Passenger vessel transportation between United States ports has historically been viewed to be part of the coastwise trade after the enactment of the PVSA This view is premised on the concepts of continuity of the voyage and whether its intended purpose or objective was coastwise transportation In other words the PVSA was held to be violated if the coastwise movement was continuous or if the purpose of the trip was a coastwise voyage (See 18 OAG 445 September 4 1886 28 OAG 204 February 16 1910 29 OAG 318 February 12 1912 30 OAG 44 February 1 1913 34 OAG 340 December 24 1924 and 36 OAG 352 August 13 1930)
The CBP regulations promulgated pursuant to the PVSA are found at section 480a of title 19 of the Code of Federal Regulations (19 CFR 480a) and are reflective of the above cited Office of the Attorney General decisions These regulations provide among other things that a non-coastwise-qualified vessel which embarks a passenger at a port in the United States embraced within the coastwise laws (a coastwise port) will be deemed to have landed that passenger in violation of the PVSA if the passenger disembarks at a different coastwise port on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a nearby foreign port or ports (as defined in 19 CFR 480a(a)(2) see also 19 CFR 480a(b)(2)) The terms embark and disembark are words of art which are defined as going on board a vessel for the duration of a specific voyage and leaving a vessel at the conclusion of a specific voyage respectively (See 19 CFR 480a(a)(4))
The references in section 480a to nearby foreign ports (defined in 19 CFR 480a(a)(2)) are the results of attempts by CBP to apply an Office of the Attorney Generals opinion dated February 26 1910 (28 OAG 204) In that case a foreign-flag vessel transported 615 passengers on a voyage around the world beginning in New
York and concluding in San Francisco The Attorney General opined that since the primary object of the voyage was to visit various parts of the world on a pleasure tour returning home via California and not to be transported in domestic commerce the transportation was not in violation of the PVSA
The 1910 Attorney Generals opinion was extended to voyages that included foreign ports other than nearby foreign ports (See Treasury Decision (TD) 68shy285 (33 FR 16558) November 14 1968) However voyages solely to one or more coastwise ports have always been considered predominantly coastwise Therefore non-coastwise-qualified vessels engaging in such a voyage where passengers temporarily go ashore at a coastwise port have been deemed to have violated the PVSA
m Current Law and Policy Pursuant to Public Law 109-304 120
Stat 1632 enacted on October 6 2006 Title 46 United States Code was substantially reorganized and recodified Consequently the PVSA is now codified at 46 USC 55103 and provides that no vessel shall transport passengers between ports or places in the United States either directly or by way of a foreign port under a penalty of $300 for each person so transported and landed except one that (1) Is wholly owned by citizens of the United States for purposes of engaging in the coastwise trade and (2) has been issued a certificate of documentation with a coastwise endorsement or is exempt from documentation but would otherwise be eligible for such a certificate and endorsement
In 2003 Congress enacted Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II Section 211 for the purpose of revitalizing the oceangoing US-flag cruise industry in Hawaii (the 2003 Act) Three oceangoing US-flag cruise ships PRIDE OF ALOHA PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAII were documented with coastwise privileges pursuant to the 2003 Act These vessels entered regular service in Hawaii in 2004 2005 and 2006 respectively and pursuant to the express language of the 2003 Act are limited in their operation to providing regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands of Hawaii
The CBP regulations promulgated pursuant to the PVSA are set forth in 19 CFR 480a and have remained unchanged throughout both the recodification of Title 46 of the United States Code and the enactment of the 2003 Act They provide that a violation of the PVSA occurs when passengers embark (board a vessel for the
duration of a voyage) a non-coastwiseshyqualified vessel at one US port and disembark (leave the vessel at the conclusion of a voyage) at a different US port unless they proceed with the vessel to a distant foreign port (Le any port not considered a nearby foreign port which is defined as any port located in North America Central America Bermuda or the West Indies including the Bahamas) Currently these regulations do not contain specific criteria for non-coastwise-qualified vessels on itineraries including US ports and either nearby or distant foreign ports in order for such foreign port calls to be compliant with the PVSA
To reiterate the applicable CBP regulations provide that the PVSA is violated when a non-coastwise-qualified vessel transports a passenger on a voyage solely to one or more coastwise ports and the passenger disembarks or goes ashore temporarily at a coastwise port (19 CFR 480a(b)(1)) Furthermore a violation of the PVSA also occurs when a non-coastwise-qualified vessel transports a passenger on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a nearby foreign port or ports (but no other foreign port) and the passenger disembarks at a coastwise port other than the port of embarkation (19 CFR 480a(b)(2)) However there is no violation of the PVSA when a passenger is on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a distant foreign port or ports (whether or not the voyage includes a nearby foreign port or ports) and the passenger disembarks at a coastwise port provided the passenger has proceeded with the vessel to a distant foreign port (19 CFR 480a(b)(3))
IV Request From MARAD To Provide Guidance
The US Department of Transportation Maritime Administration (MARAD) has requested that CBP take action to ensure enforcement of the PVSA MARAD has asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreignshyflag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwiseshyqualified cruise ship operators
In April of 2007 the operator of the three US-flag cruise vessels operating solely in Hawaii pursuant to the 2003 Act announced their intent to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAIl from the Hawaii market and redeploy her to Europe The operator intends to re-flag the vessel to foreign registry directly resulting in the loss of over 1100 crewmember jobs The primary reason cited for this decision is the rapid increase in foreign-flag competition entering the Hawaii market
Federal Register I Vol 72 No 224 I Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules 65489
from the West Coast This competition is evidenced in published cruise itineraries of foreign-flag carriers offering a variety of round trip cruises that depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period usually in the early morning and ultimately return to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their cruise These cruises are often marketed as Hawaii cruises and except for the brief stop in the nearby foreign port of Ensenada are purely coastwise in nature It is these cruise itineraries that pose an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels that pursuant to the 2003 Act are currently engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands
V Preliminary Notice
In response to MARADs concerns CBP sent letters to two carriers known to operate the itineraries in question as well as to the Cruise Lines International Association Inc stating that CBP believes that these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because it appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA The letters further indicated that CBP is taking steps to publish this position
VI CBPs Proposed Interpretive Rule Accordingly in this document CBP is
proposing to provide that cruise itineraries for non-qualified coastwise vessels which allow passengers to board at a US port call at several Hawaiian ports proceed to a foreign port or ports for a brief period and then ultimately return to the original US port of embarkation for disembarkation are not consistent with the PVSA and the regulations promulgated pursuant thereto Specifically CBP interprets a voyage to be solely to one or more coastwise ports even where it stops at a foreign port unless the stop at the foreign port is a legitimate object of the cruise CBP will presume that a stop at a foreign port is not a legitimate object of the cruise unless
(1) The stop lasts at least 48 hours at the foreign port
(2) The amount of time at the foreign port is more than 50 percent of the total amount of time at the US ports of call and
(3) The passengers are permitted to go ashore temporarily at the foreign port
Accordingly CBP proposes to adopt an interpretive rule under which it will presume that any cruise itinerary that does not include a foreign port call that
satisfies each of these three criteria constitutes coastwise transportation of passengers in violation of 19 CFR 480a(b)(1)
Dated November 16 2007 W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection [FR Doc E7-22788 Filed 11-20-07 845 am] BILLING CODe 9111-14-1
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau
27 CFR Part 9
[Notice No 76]
RIN 1513-AB49
Proposed Establishment of the Leona Valley Viticultural Area (2007R-281 P)
AGENCY Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau Treasury ACTION Notice of proposed rulemaking
SUMMARY The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau proposes to establish the 134 square mile Leona Valley viticultural area in the northeast part of Los Angeles County California We designate viticultural areas to allow vintners to better describe the origin of their wines and to allow consumers to better identify wines they may purchase We invite comments on this proposed addition to our regulations DATES We must receive written comments on or before January 22 2008
ADDRESSES You may send comments on this notice to one of the following addresses
bull httpwwwregulationsgov (Federal e-rulemaking portal follow the instructions for submitting comments) or
bull Director Regulations and Rulings Division Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau PO Box 14412 Washington DC 20044-4412
See the Public Participation section of this notice for specific instructions and requirements for submitting comments and for information on how to request a public hearing
You may view copies of this notice selected supporting materials and any comments we receive about this proposal at httpwwwregulationsgov under Docket No 2007-0066 You also may view copies of this notice all related petitions maps or other supporting materials and any comments we receive about this
proposal by appointment at the TTB Information Resource Center 1310 G Street NW Washington DC 20220 To make an appointment call 202-927shy2400
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT NA Sutton Regulations and Rulings Division Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau 925 Lakeville S1 No 158 Petaluma CA 94952 phone 415shy271-1254 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
Background on Viticultural Areas
TTB Authority Section 105(e) of the Federal Alcohol
Administration Act (FAA Act) 27 USC 205(e) authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to prescribe regulations for the labeling of wine distilled spirits and malt beverages The FAA Act provides that these regulations should among other things prohibit consumer deception and the use of misleading statements on labels and ensure that labels provide the consumer with adequate information as to the identity and quality of the product The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) administers the regulations promulgated under the FAA Act
Part 4 ofthe TTB regulations (27 CFR part 4) allows the establishment of definitive viticultural areas and the use of their names as appellations of origin on wine labels and in wine advertisements Part 9 of the TTB regulations (27 CFR part 9) contains the list of approved viticultural areas
Definition Section 425(e)(1)(i) ofthe TTB
regulations (27 CFR 425(e)(1)(i)) defines a viticultural area for American wine as a delimited grape-growing region distinguishable by geographical features the boundaries of which have been recognized and defined in part 9 of the regulations These designations allow vintners and consumers to attribute a given quality reputation or other characteristic of a wine made from grapes grown in an area to its geographic origin The establishment of viticultural areas allows vintners to describe more accurately the origin of their wines to consumers and helps consumers to identify wines they may purchase Establishment of a viticultural area is neither an approval nor an endorsement by TTB of the wine produced in that area
Requirements Section 425(e)(2) of the TTB
regulations outlines the procedure for proposing an American viticultural area and provides that any interested party
Us Department ofHomelaDd Secmity Washington DC 10229
bull ~
US Customs and Border Protection
AUG 15 2fXJJ
VE5-3-02-QTRRBSTCCCI - ti015502-GG-
Mr leon Sutcliffe Director Port Operations Camivai Cruise Unes Camival Place 3655 NW 87Avenue Miami Aorlda 33178
RE P~nger Vessef Services Ad Coastwise Transportation 46 USC sect 55103 19 CFR sect 480a(b)
Dear Mr Sutcliffe
As you know US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) enforces the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) codified at TItle 46 United States Code section 55103 (46 USC 55103) This statute prohibits non-coastwise-qualifled vessels (ie those vessels not US-buill owned and documented with a coastwise endorsement) from transporting passengers between porls or places within the United States The regUlations promUlgated pursuant to the PVSA are found at TrtJe 19 Code of Federal Regulations section 4808 (19 CFR 4808)
It has come to our attention that passenger vessels of your company are engaging in cruise itineraries that include ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands Two USAlagged coastwise-endorsed passenger vessefs are also currenUy engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of caD wittlin the Hawaiian Islands
As part of your cruise itineraries some of your foreign-flagged vessels depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period and ultimately rebJm to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their endse For example the MS ZAANDAM of Holand America Lines departs San Diego cruises the Hawaiian Islands stops in Ensenada from 800pm to 11 OOpmbull and returns to san Diego CBP believes these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because It appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA -- - - ~~~------
Please be advised that CBP is taking steps to publish this position Should have any questions pertaining to this matter please contact Mr Glen Vereb Chief Cargo Security Carriers and Immigration Branch at (202) 572-8724
Sincerely
F Jl E EST Y LEe A U I 5 I N Gmiddot
December 21 2007
The Honorable W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection co Border Security Regulations Branch Office ofInternational Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229
Re Hawaii Coastwise Cruises (USCBP-2007-0098) Comments in Response to Proposed Interpretation
Dear Commissioner Basham
NCL America Inc1 (NCLA) submits these comments in support ofthe efforts ofCustoms and Border Protection to enforce the Passenger Vessel Services Act and the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative as applied to Hawaii coastwise cruises
1 Introduction and Summary of Position
NCLA operates three large oceangoing US flag cruise ships in Hawaii These ships are documented under US flag and are required to operate in regular service in Hawaii pursuant to the authority of the Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative a 2003 federal statute intended to revitalize the US flag cruise industry and to maximize economic and national security benefits to the United States (the 2003 Act)
NCLA has invested $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships pursuant to the 2003 Act and in direct reliance on the protections of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) and its proper enforcement The PVSA limits the transportation ofpassengers between US ports to coastwise documented US flag ships Its statutory protections recognize that US flag ships have significantly higher operational costs in part because they are subject to more stringent US laws including US labor laws and federal
1 NCL America Inc is a US corporation incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware headquartered in Honolulu Hawaii As a US corporation it is subject to US taxes at both the federal and state level The Chief Executive Officer the Chairman of the Board and all of the Board of Directors of NCL America are US citizens The company is also subject to US labor and employment laws and is required by statute to maintain a workforce comprised primarily ofUS citizens
700 Bishop St SUite 900 I Honolulu HawMi 96813 I Tel 8085273800 Fax 8085273820 I ndcom
2
income tax among others The NCLA ships operating in Hawaii are the only large oceangoing cruise ships operating under US flag In furtherance of the policy goals of the PVSA and the 2003 Act these ships have created over 4000 seafaring jobs all subject to US minimum wage and other labor statutes
Since 2003 there has been a significant increase in capacity in the Hawaii market from foreign flag ships providing cruise service to Hawaii from the West Coast Many of these foreign flag cruises are marketed as Hawaii cruises and consist entirely ofUS ports ofcall with the sole exception of a token stop in Mexico for as little as an hour late at night under circumstances where passengers are not permitted to get offthe ship There are no reported rulings approving these particular foreign flag itineraries
Lower cost foreign competition in the Hawaii market has unfairly hurt NCLAs operations NCLA has incurred substantial losses which have contributed significantly to its decision earlier this year to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAll from US flag and reshydeploy it foreign Unfair foreign competition poses an imminent threat to the remaining US flag passenger vessels operating in the Hawaii trades pursuant to the 2003 Act
As the agency statutorily charged with implementation of the 2003 Act the US Department ofTransportation Maritime Administration (MARAn) is aware of the threat foreign flag Hawaii itineraries pose to the US flag fleet and brought the situation to the attention ofthe US Department ofHomeland Security Bureau ofCustoms and Border Protection (CBP or Customs) Customs determined that the primary object of these itineraries was coastwise and that the Ensenada stop was an evasion of the PVSA
In August 2007 Customs provided written notice to the affected foreign lines and their trade association that the existing itineraries were contrary to the PVSA None of these lines sought advance rulings even after the Customs notice with respect to their Hawaii itineraries pursuant to Customs regulations and many continued to market the itineraries as Hawaii cruises NCLA supports the efforts ofCustoms and MARAD to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act for Hawaii cruises
2 Statutory Authority for Customs Proposed Interpretation
(a) Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA)
Congress passed the PVSA in 1886 to protect the US maritime transportation industry from foreign competition2 Protection is afforded through penalty assessments on foreign vessels transporting passengers between US ports or places directly or by way ofa foreign port 3 As Congress and the courts have recognized coastwise protections for the US maritime transportation industry are only one dimension of the PVSA Operating in conjunction with other coastwise laws and with the US
2 See United States v Honduran SS GRANADA 35 F Supp 892 894 (BD Pa 1940)(citing purpose of PVSA to meet threats to the practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping which was to be preserved for US ships)
46 USc sect 55103 (originally 46 USC App 289)
3
documentation laws the PVSA also enhances military sealift in times ofnational emergency sustains a US merchant marine and supports the US shipbuilding and repair industry4
(b) Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative (the 2003 Act)
Over the past decade Congress has sought to reinforce the goals of the PVSA by providing mechanisms to revitalize the oceangoing US flag cruise fleet particularly in Hawaii The Project America legislation enacted in 1997 authorized among other things the re~flagging ofone existing cruise ship contingent on the operator contracting for the construction oftwo new oceangoing cruise shipss Following the default of the operator under the original contract Congress enacted the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative for the purpose ofrecovering economic and national security benefits to the United States bull 6 These same goals of the original PVSA were expressly referenced in the legislative history of the 2003 Act which emphasized that these ships will be assets available in time ofnational emergency and will significantly expand the pool ofqualified seafarers upon which the US Department ofDefense relies to crew non-combatant vessels
The 2003 Act authorizes the US documentation ofthree cruise ships for operation in regular service in Hawaii subject to certain conditions including a prohibition on operating in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico and the Caribbean Sea and a requirement that all vessel repair work be undertaken in the United States MARAD is charged with implementation of the 2003 Act
3 Customs Implementation of PVSA
(a) Regulations
The current regulations implementing the PVSA were published by Customs in 19858 The growth of the foreign flag cruise industry in North America and in particular the development of the Alaska cruise market led to an effort in 1984 to amend the thenshyexisting regulations to increase the ease of administration and operational flexibility The effort to change the regulation had support from US port interests who saw benefit in the potential increase in the number ofUS ports that foreign vessels could call and was opposed by proponents ofpotential US flag projects as detrimental to efforts to revitalize the US fleet 9 The preamble to the 1985 rule emphasized that it was of paramount importance to consider the primary object ofpassengers in taking a
4 See American Hawaii Cruises v Skinner 713 F Supp 452 457 (DDC 1989) (recognizing the contribution of the PVSA and the Jones Act in helping to secure national defense by maintaining a merchant marine oftbe best equipped and most suitable types ofvessels sufficient to serve in time of war or national emergency) see also Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 30 (DC Cir 1984) Wirth Ltd v SIS Acadia Forest 537 F2d 1272 1281 n32 (5th Cir 1976) S Public Law 105-56 Section 8109 (111 Stat 1203 1244) (Oct 81997 ) 6 Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II General Provisions - Department ofCommerce Section 211 (117 Stat 1179) (Feb 20 2003) 1 149 Cong Rec S1118 (dailyed Jan 17 2003(statement ofSenator Inouye) 8 19 CFR sect 480a 950 Fed Reg 26981 (July I 1985)
4
voyage10 a concept which is reinforced elsewhere in Customs regulations11 In its analysis of the comments received at the time Customs accepted the view ofport interests that the modified rule would help their business but did so recognizing the absence ofa regular salt water US flag passenger fleet Customs acknowledged the potential harm to prospective efforts to revitalize the US flag passenger fleet and expressly cautioned that if it were ever shown that coastwise qualified vessels in competition with foreign vessels were in fact hurt by the modified Customs regulation then Customs would immediately reconsider its position12
(b) Customs Rulings
Given the significant penalties associated with violating the PVSA13 Customs regulations expressly provide a mechanism for the owner or charterer of a foreign vessel or any other interested person to request an advisory ruling as to whether a contemplated voyage would be considered in violation of the PVSA14 Customs regulations provide that vessel operators can rely on these ruling letters only to the extent that the facts and circumstances are identical to those in the ruling letter IS
Notwithstanding the fact that several foreign cruise lines offer Hawaii itineraries originating in a US mainland port and calling at Hawaii ports with a token intervening stop in Mexico there are no reported rulings expressly approving such an itinerary for these foreign cruise lines 16
4 The Cruise Industry in Hawaii
(a) NCL America Returns US flag to the Oceangoing Passenger Fleet
Pursuant to the requirements ofthe 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative NCLA agreed to promote US-flag cruising enhance military sealift capacity and expand the US maritime labor base No other major cruise line had ever undertaken such a commitment to the US flag and the public policy objectives Congress sought to achieve under the PVSA or the 2003 Act Introduction ofPRIDE OF ALOHA in 2004 was a significant development in the maritime industry because it marked the restoration ofthe
10 Id at 26983 11 Customs Regulations include a provision on the effect ofruling letters and with respect to carrier rulings the applicable regulation refers to rulings setting forth a determination as to whether or not the primary object of a contemplated voyage is coastwise transportation in violation of46 USC sect 289 [pYSA codified at 46 USC sect55103] 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 12 50 Fed Reg at 26983 13 A modem cruise ship with 2400 passengers for example would be subject to a fine of$720OOO per cruise based on the statutory penalty of$300 for each passenger transported in violation of the Act 14 19 CFR sect 480a(d) IS 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 16 There is one older reported mling involving a request to drop the Ensenada port call from a Los AngeleslHawaiiLos Angeles itinerary which Customs held would violate the PYSA In dicta Customs acknowledged that the itinerary could be in compliance if the Ensenada call were not dropped but did not address the issue ofwhether a one hour service call where no passengers depart the vessel would be sufficient The carrier that obtained that ruling has since left the Hawaii market See Customs Ruling HQ 114078 re Crystal Hannony (Nov 4 1997)
5
us flag to the oceangoing cruise industry A contemporaneous press release from the Us Department ofTransportation reported that the three US-flag cruise ships to be introduced pursuant to the 2003 Act were expected to create more than 20000 US jobs generate more than $825 million ofexpenditures in the US economy and create nearly $360 million in federal tax revenue by the end of 200717 In 2005 the PRIDE OF AMERICA was introduced and in 2006 the third vessel PRIDE OF HAWAll was introduced to Hawaii Both the PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAIl offer 7shyday inter-island Hawaii itineraries whereas PRIDE OF ALOHA operates on 7 and 10 day cruises exclusively among the islands ofHawaii as well as 11 day cruises that include a foreign port call at Fanning Island To date NCLA has invested over $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships in furtherance ofthe policy objectives of the PVSA and the 2003 Act These ships employ over 4000 seafarers and generate hundreds ofmillions of dollars in benefits for Hawaii and the nation
(b) Significant Increase in Foreign Flag Capacity Since 2003
The most significant change in the Hawaii cruise market since 2003 has been the dramatic increase in capacity A significant portion ofthis capacity increase is directly attributable to NCLAs fulfillment ofthe Congressional mandate in the 2003 Act However foreign-flag operations in the Hawaii market as measured in passenger nights18 have skyrocketed Based on MARAn data derived from the US Customs Border Patrol Vessel Entrance and Clearance documents the passenger nights for foreign flag vessels departing from the West Coast to Hawaii on round trip cruise have increased several hundredfold during this period19 See Exhibit A
(c) NCLA Has Incurred Substantial Losses During this Period
Since 2004 NCLA has lost cumulatively more than a quarter ofa billion dollars A principal reason for these losses has been the increase in foreign capacity in this market NCLA has taken significant steps to reduce costs to address the increase in foreign competition but NCLA is at an inherent disadvantage when competing against foreign companies that are not subject to US labor laws US tax laws and other laws Ofcourse the statutory protections of the PVSA are intended to address these very issues That is why Customs immediate action to implement the proposed interpretation is critical for the US flag fleet Regrettably NCLA has already been forced to reduce overall capacity early next year with the withdrawal ofPRIDE OF HAWAlI to another
17 DOT Press Release dated June 72004 see also DOT Press Release dated August 132004 in connection with visit to PRIDE OF ALOHA by US Transportation Secretary Norman Y Mineta 11 Passenger nights (also referred to as passenger capacity days) are calculated by multiplying the number ofpassengers per vessel by the number ofcruise days in each itinerary by the number of cruises This is the unit ofmeasurement employed by MARAn In contrast passenger bed supply (also referred to as passenger capacity) data reflects only the number ofberths per vessel multiplied by the number of cruises and hence understates the market by excluding the full economic value ofthe cruise perfonned 19 In 2003 the total number ofpassenger nights for round-trip West Coast to Hawaii cruises was 303325 which jumped by 353 to 1072329 in 2006 and by 430 to 1304546 from 2003 to 2007 (The 2007 figure is based on MARAD data for six months and a1ll1ualized by published itineraries for the balance of the year)
6
market for operation under foreign flag This move alone will result in the loss ofover 1000 American seafaring jobs
5 Customs Proposed Interpretation is Necessary to Further the Important National Security and Public Policy Objectives Embodied in Federal Law
As Customs has properly noted the increase in foreign competition in the Hawaii trades in contravention of the PVSA pose[s] an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels[] As the operator of these ships NCLA has a vested interest in protecting the jobs ofthe thousands ofAmerican crewmembers and cruise ship service providers who support these vessels NCLA also has an interest in protecting the substantial economic investment it has made to revitalize the US flag passenger vessel fleet But a balancing of interests in the context of Customs enforcement ofexisting law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act requires a much broader focus
The legislative history of the 2003 Act expressly recognized the national security and public policy import ofestablishing a US flag passenger vessel fleet as a means to maintain the countrys preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool of qualified seafarers and as a means to help sustain a fleet ofUS-flag vessels to su~ort
the nations military and maritime industrial base for times ofnational emergency
Congress understood the importance ofestablishing a viable US flag cruise ship fleet as something larger than the vessels themselves These national security and public policy objectives must be weighed in the balance as Customs assesses how best to interpret its rules to give effect to the PVSA and the 2003 Act
6 Customs Should Clarify that the Proposed Interpretation is Limited to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades and Adopt Reasonable Measures to Ensure Sufficient Foreign Content
Since publication ofthe proposed interpretative rule several commenters have observed that the scope of the proposed interpretation is ambiguous because the language of Section VI referencing any cruise itinerary appears broader than the caption Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises and the entire discussion in the published notice which focuses exclusively on US-flag coastwise vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA agrees that the proposed interpretation should be clarified so that its scope is limited to vessels operating roundtrip voyages from US ports that include Hawaii port calls
NCLA supports the concept reflected in the proposed interpretive rule that round trip Hawaii itineraries from US ports on foreign ships must include a material and measurable degree ofoverall foreign port content as compared to US port content
20 149 Congo Rec S1117 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)
7
(a) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is also Consistent with Subsequent Congressional Enactments Modifying the PVSA
As discussed above it is well established that the PVSA was designed toRrotect US-flag vessels from foreign competition in the coastwise and domestic trades 1
Subsequent legislative enactments however have appropriately differentiated among distinct geographic markets and trades including Canada Alaska Puerto Rico and Hawaii based on the existence or non-existence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
In 1938 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers by Canadian passenger vessels on Lake Ontario and the St Lawrence River until such time as passenger service shall be established by vessels of the United States22 Similarly in 1961 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers on Canadian vessels within Alaska or between Alaska and other points in the United States until such time as passenger service is established by vessels ofthe United States23
In 1984 Congress modified the application ofthe PVSA to pennit the transportation ofpassengers between Puerto Rico and other United States ports on foreign-flag vessels24 As with the other statutory exceptions this provision is qualified and expires [o]n a showing that a United States passenger vessel qualified to engage in the coastwise trade is offering or advertising passenger service between a port in Puerto Rico and another port in the United States2S
Congress acted again with respect to the application of the PVSA with the 2003 Act in which it authorized three vessels that did not meet the US-build requirements of the PVSA to operate as modem US-flagged cruise ships in regular service in Hawaii26 The 2003 Act imposes a specific geographic limitation on the operation of any ship documented under this authority to operations only in regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands ofHawaii and shall not transport passengers in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico or the Caribbean Sea except in certain limited circumstances27 As above the limited nature of the 2003 Act is express it is strictly limited to the large ocean-going cruise ships and then only those operating in the regular Hawaii service where there are no US-flag operations28
21 See Act ofJune 19 1886 c 421 sec 8 24 Stat 81 Act of February 171898 c 26 sec 2 30 Stat 248 22 S] Res 174 75th Cong 52 Stat 223 (Alp 251938) codified at46 USC sect 55121(a) 23 See Pub L 87-77 75 Stat 196 (Jun 30 1961) codified at 46 USC sect 55121(b) 24 See Pub L 98-563 98 Stat 2916 (Oct 301984) codified at 46 USC sect 55104(b) 25 46 USC sect 55104(c)(l) see also 46 USC 46 USc sect 55104(cX2)(expiration of exemption upon availability ofa non-coastwise qualified US-flag vessel offering service in the relevant market) 26 149 Congo Rec SI118 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)(statementofSen Inouye) 27 Pub L 108-7 117 Stat 79 (Feb 20 2003) 28 149 Congo Rec S11l9 (dailyed Jan 17 2003Xstatement of Sen Inouye)
8
In each ofthese instances Congress fashioned a narrow exception to the PVSA that differentiated among distinct geographic markets based on the existence or nonshyexistence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
As the federal agency responsible for administering the 2003 Act MARAD requested that Customs act to protect US flag passenger vessel interests in the Hawaii trades29 Limiting the scope ofthe proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades also reflects Customs appreciation of the PVSA in the context of the subsequent Congressional action30 Viewing the Congressional modifications to the PVSA as a whole Congress has specifically and repeatedly differentiated among distinct geographic markets when it has found it necessary and appropriate to do so to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests It is well established that the proper interpretation of a statutory scheme includes consideration ofsubsequent statutes even though the underlying statute itselfhas not been expressly amended31 Accordingly Customs should likewise limit the scope ofthe proposed PVSA interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades because that is the only geographic market as mandated by the 2003 Act in which oceangoing US-flag cruise ships are operating
(b) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Consistent with Public Policy Objectives of the 1985 Rulemaking
In 1985middot Customs liberalized the regulations implementing the PVSA by eliminating certain regulatory prohibitions on foreign flag vessels In the context of the 1985 rulemaking Customs justified a relaxation ofthe regulations on the grounds that it would simplify the administration of the PVSA and would benefit the economy ofcertain American coastwise ports without eroding the statutory protection given to American vessels engaged in solely domestic trade32
Customs thus sought to reconcile US port economic interests with US-flag passenger vessel interests Both of these twin policy objectives are furthered by
29 See 72 Fed Reg 65488 (Nov 21 2007)( MARAn bas asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the ~eratiODS ofcoastwise-qualified cruise ship operators)
See generally FDA v Brown amp Williamson Tobacco Corp 529 US 120 132-133 (2000)(assessing propriety ofagency construction ofFood DIUg and Cosmetics Act and descnbing responsibility of reviewing cowt to assess statutory provisions in the context of subsequent legislative enactments) 31 See Brown amp Williamson 529 US 143 (holding that proper construction ofstatutory provision must necessarily assume that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications ofa later statute This is particularly so where the scope of the earlier statute is broad but the subsequent statutes more specifically address the topic athand) see also United States v Estate ofRomani 523 US 517 530-531 (1998)( holding that a later-enacted statute should control the construction of the federal lien priority statute a specific policy embodied in a later federal statute should control om construction of the [earlier] statute even though it ha[s] not been expressly amended) United States v Fausto 484 US 439453 (1988)(The courts frequently find Congress to have done this - whenever in fact they interpret a statutory text in the light ofsurrounding texts that happen to have been subsequently enacted This classic judicial task of reconciling many laws enacted over time and getting them to make sense in combination necessarily assumes that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications of a later statute) 32 50 Fed Reg 26982 (JuI 11985)
9
limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades
As noted earlier the 2003 Act limits the operation of the NCLA US-flag oceangoing passenger vessels to regular service in Hawaii Because there are no oceangoing US-flag vessels operating in any market other than the Hawaii trades Customs should limit the scope of the proposed interPretation to that market Such a limitation protects US flag passenger vessel interests without prejudicing US port interests In contrast an application of the proposed interpretation to any itinerary would needlessly harm US port interests unrelated to Hawaii without any countervailing benefit to US-flag passenger vessel interests Accordingly limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation is consistent with the public policy objectives of the 1985 rulemaking as well as the 2003 Act
(c) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Also Consistent with Customs Commitment to Revisit the Scope of its Rules to Protect US-Flag Interests
The relaxation ofthe PVSA regulations in 1985 was premised in large part on Customs finding that there was no regular salt water US-flag passenger fleet in operation at that time33 Acknowledging that the relaxed regulations could harm USshyflag interests Customs committed in the preamble ofthe 1985 final rule to immediately reconsider its interpretation if it is ever shown that there is a viable US flag vessel operating in competition with foreign-flag vessels34
Congress enacted the 2003 Act to stimulate the development of a US flag cruise ship industry As noted above the legislative history ofthat Act makes clear that Congress sought to revitalize the US-flag cruise industry as a means to maintain Americas preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool ofqualified seafarers help sustain a fleet of US flag vessels to support our military and a maritime industrial base create thousands of seagoing and shoreside American jobs and stimulate the development ofa US flag cruise ship tourism business with the commensurate benefits to the US tax base the US economy and US employment
Customs is now acting at MARADs request to revisit its interpretation ofthe regulations implementing the PVSA because recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwise-qualified cruise ship operations35 That is to say that the concerns articulated by Customs in the context of the 1985 rulemaking have materialized and US-flag passenger vessel interests are in fact being hanned in the Hawaii trades by foreign competitors
33 50 Fed Reg 26983 34Id
3S 72 Fed Reg 56488 (Nov 21 2007)
I
10
Because the US-flag passenger vessels are limited by statute to regular service in Hawaii limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the
Hawaii trades is consistent with Customs historical commitment to revisit its interpretation ofthe implementing regulations to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests
7 Conclusion
For the reasons stated above NCLA commends the efforts ofCustoms and MARAn to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act as applied to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA respectfully requests Customs to move ahead promptly with p~blicati~nof a final interpretive rule to advance the important national security arid public policy objectives ofthese laws
We greatly appreciate the opportunity to submit these comments
Sincerely
~~~ Alan T Yamamoto Vice President Hawaii Operations
Exhibit A
Ship Name Serenade Of The Seas Departure Port San Diego California Ports of Call San Diego California Kailua Kona Hawaii Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii Hlo Hawaii Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii Ensenada Mexico San Qigo California
2007 Date(s) Oct 05
Sailing Itinerary
Day Port H ~rrive Depart Activity
05-0ct San Diego California 500 PM
06-0ct Cruising
07-0ct Cruising
08-0ct Cruising
09-0ct Cruising
10-0ct Kailua Kona Hawaii 700 AM 900 PM Tendered
11-00t Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 1000 AM Tendered
12middot0ct Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 900 PM Tendered
13-0ct Hilo Hawaii 700 AM 600 PM Docked
14middot0ct Honoulu (Oahu) Hawaii 700 AM Docked
15-0ct Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii 200 AM Docked
6-0ct CrUising
17-0ct Cruising
18-0ct Cruising
19middot0ct Cruising
-7 20-00t
O-Oot
Ensenada ~i1exico
San Deqo California
i 00 ~r1
700 ~M
200 oM D1Jcked ~
COASTWISE CRUISES INTERPRETIVE RULE RESOLUTION Adopted at the
US Conference of Mayors 76th Annual Meeting
June 20-242008 Miami
WHEREAS the Department of Homeland Securitys Customs and Border Protection (CBP) issued a proposed Interpretive Rule regulating Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises on foreign flagged vessels between US ports of call under the Passenger Vessel Services Act at the request of the United States Maritime Administration and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule would require that a foreign-flagged vessel on a coastwise cruise to call at a foreign port for at least 48 hours with that foreign stop constituting at least 50 percent of the cruise itinerary and allowing passengers to disembark the cruise vessel at the foreign port before continuing the cruise to a US port of call and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule establishes burdensome criteria that are wholly inconsistent with industry practice particularly the 48-hour call at foreign port shyinasmuch as the standard port call is six to eight hours - as well as the requirement that 50 percent of a cruise be spent at the foreign port and
WHEREAS the intent of the proposed Interpretive Rule is to protect the single remaining US flag vessel serving the Inter-Hawaiian Island cruise trade that according to the Hawaii Department of Business Economic Development and Tourism generates more than 4600 jobs and generates nearly $500 million in economic benefits for the state annually and
WHEREAS thousands of members of the International Longshore Workers Union (nWU) are employed at US ports serving cruise ships and whose jobs would be at risk if the proposed Interpretive Rule were implemented and
WHEREAS the proposed Interpretive Rule is vague as to the breadth of its application ie to coastwise cruises between all United States ports or applied solely to coastwise cruises from West Coast ports to Hawaii and
WHEREAS the Cruise Lines International Association estimates the proposed Interpretive Rule would upend the $17 billion in national cruise industry spending and put at risk more than 300000 jobs generated by the international cruise industry including jobs held by nWU at US ports and the local allied industries supporting the cruise industry and
Executive Order Submissions Under Review
II Reglnfogov Where to ind Federal Regulatory Information -~
Home ] Lnitied Agenda and Regulator) Ilan pound012866 Regulator) Review Jnformalion Collection Review
EO 12866 Regulatory Rlvlw dvanced Search IJitorical RepWI Review Counh Jriter XIL
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA)
Executive Order Submissions Under Review July 25 2008 - _------------____ _shy
Department of Homeland Security
AGENCY DHS-TSA RIN 1652-AA53
TITLE Large Aircraft Security Program Other Aircraft Operator Security Programs and Airport Operator Security Program
STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT Yes RECEIVED DATE 06302008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
AGENCY DHS-USCIS RIN Llti15-AB67 TITLE Changes to Requirements Affecting H-2B Nonimmigrants and Their Employers
STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT No RECEIVED DATE 06092008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
AGENCY DHS-USCBP RIN 1651AA11 TITLE Issuance of a Visa and Authorization for Temporary Admission Into the United States for Certain Nonimmigrant Aliens Afflicted W HIV Infection
STAGE Final Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT No RECEIVED DATE 03042008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
-_RE_V-IE-W-E-X-T-EN-D-E-D---------- _
AGENCY DHS-USCBP RIN 1651-AA76 TITLE Coastwise Transportation of Passengers STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT Yes RECEIVED DATE 07142008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
Disclosure I Accessibility I Privacy Policy I Contact Us
httpwwwreginfogovpublicdoeoReviewSearch 7252008
View Rule Page 11
Shere D find Federal ReguLatory InformciiorlReglnfogov Home J Cnified Agenda al1d Regulatory Plan EO 12866 Regulatory Reyiew Information Collection Reiew
Current rnified Agenda and Regulatory Plan Historical Pnified Agenda and Regulatory Plan Search
View Rule
DHSIUSCBP RIN 1651-AA76 Publication ill Spring 2008
Title llCoastwise Transportation of Passengers
Abstract This interim rule amends the Department of Homeland Securitys (DHS) current regulations relating to the transportation of passengers by non-coastwise-qualified vessels on voyages that begin and end at a US port and stop at intervening US and foreign port(s) Under this interim final rule voyages that begin and end at a US port and stop at a foreign port(s) and at intervening US port(s) where a large USshyflag coastwise-qualified passenger vessel engages in regular service are in violation of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) unless the cumulative length of stay(s) at intervening foreign port(s) is more than 50 percent of the total amount of time spent at the intervening US port(s) and passengers are permitted to go ashore at the foreign port(s) The purpose of this amendment is to ensure that the Congressional purpose in enacting the PVSA which is to preserve the economic benefits of US coastwise trade to US-flag coastwise-qualified vessels is properly implemented
Agency Department of Homeland Security(DHS) Priority Substantive Nonsignificant
KIN Status First time published in the Unified Agenda Agenda Stage of Rulemaking Final Rule Stage
Major No Unfunded Mandates No
CFR Citation -LCER 4J~)(h)(plusmnJ
Legal Authority 5JJSS_30J12lJ-SClt16 J9_lJiCJ 431 9_L1C1plusmn3JJ2JScHJ1J2JSCJ624 L(LlLSc207LIl(gtJfHgt~ _CiQJ _46lSC 6QLQ~
Legal Deadline None
Timetable Action Date FR Cite
Interim Final Action 0510012008
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required No Government Levels Affected None
Federalism No
Included in the Regulatory Plan No
RIN Data Printed in the FR No
Agency Contact Glen E Vereb Chief Entry Procedures and Carriers Branch Department of Homeland Security US Customs and Border Protection Office of Regulations and Rulings 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington DC 20229 Phone202572-8730
Disclosure I Accessibility I Privacy Policy I Contact Us
httpwwwreginfogovpublicdoeAgendaViewRuleruleID=286751 7128120
Federal RegisterVol 72 No 224Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules 65487
SPECULATIVE POSITION LIMITS 1-Continued [In contract units)
Contract
Soybeans and Mini-Soybeans 2
Wheat and Mini-Wheat 2 bullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbull
Soybean Oil
SingleSpot month All monthsmonth
600 8600 13300 600 11100 14500 540 6600 8600
Soybean Meal 720 5500 7100
Minneapolis Grain Exchange
Hard Red Spring Wheat I 600 I 11100 I 14500
New York Board of Trade
Cotton No2 I 300 I 5300 I 7300
Kansas City Board of Trade
Hard Winter Wheat I 600 I 11100 I 14500
1 For purposes of compliance with these limits positions in a futures contract that shares ~ubstantially identical terms with a contract market enumerated herein including a futures contract that is cash-settled based on the settlement price of an enumerated contract market shall be agshygregated with positions in the enumerated contract market
2 For purposes of compliance with these limits positions in the regular-sized and mini-sized contracts shall be aggregated
Issued by the Commission this November 152007 in Washington DC David Stawick Secretary of the Commission [FR Doc E7-22681 Filed 11-20-07 845 amI BILLING CODE 6351-Q1-P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Bureau of Customs and Border Protection
19 CFR Part 4
[USCBP-2007-o098]
Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises
AGENCY Customs and Border Protection Department of Homeland Security ACTION Proposed interpretation solicitation of comments
SUMMARY This document proposes new criteria to be used by Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to determine whether non-coastwise-qualified vessels are in violation ofthe Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) when engaging in cruise itineraries in which passengers board at a US port the vessel calls at several Hawaiian ports and then the vessel proceeds to a foreign port or ports for a brief period before ultimately returning to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their cruise CBP believes these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because it appears that the primary objective of the foreign stop is evasion of the PVSA
DATES Comments must be received on or before December 212007 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT Glen E Vereb Cargo Security Carriers amp Immigration Branch Office of International Trade (202) 572-8730 ADDRESSES You may submit comments identified by docket number by one of the following methods
bull Federal eRulemaking Portal http wwwregulationsgov Follow the instructions for submitting comments
bull Mail Border Security Regulations Branch Office of International Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
I Public Participation
Interested persons are invited to participate in this proposed interpretation by submitting written data views or arguments on all aspects of the proposed interpretation Customs and Border Protection (CBP) also invites comments that relate to the economic environmental or federalism effects that might result from this proposed interpretation Comments that will provide the most assistance to CBP in developing these procedures will reference a specific portion of the proposed interpretation explain the reason for any recommended change and include data information or authority that support such recommended change
Instructions All submissions received must include the agency name and docket number for this proposed
interpretation All comments received will be posted without change to http wwwregulationsgov including any personal information provided
Docket For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received go to http wwwregulationsgov Submitted comments may also be inspected on regular business days between the hours of 9 am and 430 pm at the Office of International Trade Customs and Border Protection 799 9th Street NW 5th Floor Washington DC Arrangements to inspect submitted documents should be made in advance by calling Mr Joseph Clark at (202) 572shy8768
II Background
The maritime cabotage law governing the transportation of passengers was first established by section 8 of the Passenger Vessel Services Act of June 191886 (the PVSA) 24 Stat 81 as amended by section 2 of the Act of February 17 1898 30 Stat 248 formerly codified at 46 USC App 289 (now codified at 46 USC 55103) 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 of $200 (now $300 as promulgated in TD 03-11 pursuant to the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 199028 USC 2461 note) for each passenger so transported and landed
The intent of the maritime cabotage laws including the PVSA was to provide a legal structure that guarantees a coastwise monopoly to
65488 Federal RegisterVol 72 No 224Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules
American shipping and thereby promotes development of the American merchant marine Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 28 (DC Cir 1984) see also The Granada 35 FSupp 892 8931940 AMC 1601 (DC Pa 1940) (stating that the legislative aim of section 289 [now 55102] was the creation of a practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping business for United States ships) In other words the PVSA was enacted to advance the United States merchant marine and fleet by restricting the use of foreign-ownedflagged passenger vessels in United States territorial waters
Passenger vessel transportation between United States ports has historically been viewed to be part of the coastwise trade after the enactment of the PVSA This view is premised on the concepts of continuity of the voyage and whether its intended purpose or objective was coastwise transportation In other words the PVSA was held to be violated if the coastwise movement was continuous or if the purpose of the trip was a coastwise voyage (See 18 OAG 445 September 4 1886 28 OAG 204 February 16 1910 29 OAG 318 February 12 1912 30 OAG 44 February 1 1913 34 OAG 340 December 24 1924 and 36 OAG 352 August 13 1930)
The CBP regulations promulgated pursuant to the PVSA are found at section 480a of title 19 of the Code of Federal Regulations (19 CFR 480a) and are reflective of the above cited Office of the Attorney General decisions These regulations provide among other things that a non-coastwise-qualified vessel which embarks a passenger at a port in the United States embraced within the coastwise laws (a coastwise port) will be deemed to have landed that passenger in violation of the PVSA if the passenger disembarks at a different coastwise port on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a nearby foreign port or ports (as defined in 19 CFR 480a(a)(2) see also 19 CFR 480a(b)(2)) The terms embark and disembark are words of art which are defined as going on board a vessel for the duration of a specific voyage and leaving a vessel at the conclusion of a specific voyage respectively (See 19 CFR 480a(a)(4))
The references in section 480a to nearby foreign ports (defined in 19 CFR 480a(a)(2)) are the results of attempts by CBP to apply an Office of the Attorney Generals opinion dated February 26 1910 (28 OAG 204) In that case a foreign-flag vessel transported 615 passengers on a voyage around the world beginning in New
York and concluding in San Francisco The Attorney General opined that since the primary object of the voyage was to visit various parts of the world on a pleasure tour returning home via California and not to be transported in domestic commerce the transportation was not in violation of the PVSA
The 1910 Attorney Generals opinion was extended to voyages that included foreign ports other than nearby foreign ports (See Treasury Decision (TD) 68shy285 (33 FR 16558) November 14 1968) However voyages solely to one or more coastwise ports have always been considered predominantly coastwise Therefore non-coastwise-qualified vessels engaging in such a voyage where passengers temporarily go ashore at a coastwise port have been deemed to have violated the PVSA
m Current Law and Policy Pursuant to Public Law 109-304 120
Stat 1632 enacted on October 6 2006 Title 46 United States Code was substantially reorganized and recodified Consequently the PVSA is now codified at 46 USC 55103 and provides that no vessel shall transport passengers between ports or places in the United States either directly or by way of a foreign port under a penalty of $300 for each person so transported and landed except one that (1) Is wholly owned by citizens of the United States for purposes of engaging in the coastwise trade and (2) has been issued a certificate of documentation with a coastwise endorsement or is exempt from documentation but would otherwise be eligible for such a certificate and endorsement
In 2003 Congress enacted Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II Section 211 for the purpose of revitalizing the oceangoing US-flag cruise industry in Hawaii (the 2003 Act) Three oceangoing US-flag cruise ships PRIDE OF ALOHA PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAII were documented with coastwise privileges pursuant to the 2003 Act These vessels entered regular service in Hawaii in 2004 2005 and 2006 respectively and pursuant to the express language of the 2003 Act are limited in their operation to providing regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands of Hawaii
The CBP regulations promulgated pursuant to the PVSA are set forth in 19 CFR 480a and have remained unchanged throughout both the recodification of Title 46 of the United States Code and the enactment of the 2003 Act They provide that a violation of the PVSA occurs when passengers embark (board a vessel for the
duration of a voyage) a non-coastwiseshyqualified vessel at one US port and disembark (leave the vessel at the conclusion of a voyage) at a different US port unless they proceed with the vessel to a distant foreign port (Le any port not considered a nearby foreign port which is defined as any port located in North America Central America Bermuda or the West Indies including the Bahamas) Currently these regulations do not contain specific criteria for non-coastwise-qualified vessels on itineraries including US ports and either nearby or distant foreign ports in order for such foreign port calls to be compliant with the PVSA
To reiterate the applicable CBP regulations provide that the PVSA is violated when a non-coastwise-qualified vessel transports a passenger on a voyage solely to one or more coastwise ports and the passenger disembarks or goes ashore temporarily at a coastwise port (19 CFR 480a(b)(1)) Furthermore a violation of the PVSA also occurs when a non-coastwise-qualified vessel transports a passenger on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a nearby foreign port or ports (but no other foreign port) and the passenger disembarks at a coastwise port other than the port of embarkation (19 CFR 480a(b)(2)) However there is no violation of the PVSA when a passenger is on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a distant foreign port or ports (whether or not the voyage includes a nearby foreign port or ports) and the passenger disembarks at a coastwise port provided the passenger has proceeded with the vessel to a distant foreign port (19 CFR 480a(b)(3))
IV Request From MARAD To Provide Guidance
The US Department of Transportation Maritime Administration (MARAD) has requested that CBP take action to ensure enforcement of the PVSA MARAD has asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreignshyflag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwiseshyqualified cruise ship operators
In April of 2007 the operator of the three US-flag cruise vessels operating solely in Hawaii pursuant to the 2003 Act announced their intent to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAIl from the Hawaii market and redeploy her to Europe The operator intends to re-flag the vessel to foreign registry directly resulting in the loss of over 1100 crewmember jobs The primary reason cited for this decision is the rapid increase in foreign-flag competition entering the Hawaii market
Federal Register I Vol 72 No 224 I Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules 65489
from the West Coast This competition is evidenced in published cruise itineraries of foreign-flag carriers offering a variety of round trip cruises that depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period usually in the early morning and ultimately return to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their cruise These cruises are often marketed as Hawaii cruises and except for the brief stop in the nearby foreign port of Ensenada are purely coastwise in nature It is these cruise itineraries that pose an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels that pursuant to the 2003 Act are currently engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands
V Preliminary Notice
In response to MARADs concerns CBP sent letters to two carriers known to operate the itineraries in question as well as to the Cruise Lines International Association Inc stating that CBP believes that these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because it appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA The letters further indicated that CBP is taking steps to publish this position
VI CBPs Proposed Interpretive Rule Accordingly in this document CBP is
proposing to provide that cruise itineraries for non-qualified coastwise vessels which allow passengers to board at a US port call at several Hawaiian ports proceed to a foreign port or ports for a brief period and then ultimately return to the original US port of embarkation for disembarkation are not consistent with the PVSA and the regulations promulgated pursuant thereto Specifically CBP interprets a voyage to be solely to one or more coastwise ports even where it stops at a foreign port unless the stop at the foreign port is a legitimate object of the cruise CBP will presume that a stop at a foreign port is not a legitimate object of the cruise unless
(1) The stop lasts at least 48 hours at the foreign port
(2) The amount of time at the foreign port is more than 50 percent of the total amount of time at the US ports of call and
(3) The passengers are permitted to go ashore temporarily at the foreign port
Accordingly CBP proposes to adopt an interpretive rule under which it will presume that any cruise itinerary that does not include a foreign port call that
satisfies each of these three criteria constitutes coastwise transportation of passengers in violation of 19 CFR 480a(b)(1)
Dated November 16 2007 W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection [FR Doc E7-22788 Filed 11-20-07 845 am] BILLING CODe 9111-14-1
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau
27 CFR Part 9
[Notice No 76]
RIN 1513-AB49
Proposed Establishment of the Leona Valley Viticultural Area (2007R-281 P)
AGENCY Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau Treasury ACTION Notice of proposed rulemaking
SUMMARY The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau proposes to establish the 134 square mile Leona Valley viticultural area in the northeast part of Los Angeles County California We designate viticultural areas to allow vintners to better describe the origin of their wines and to allow consumers to better identify wines they may purchase We invite comments on this proposed addition to our regulations DATES We must receive written comments on or before January 22 2008
ADDRESSES You may send comments on this notice to one of the following addresses
bull httpwwwregulationsgov (Federal e-rulemaking portal follow the instructions for submitting comments) or
bull Director Regulations and Rulings Division Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau PO Box 14412 Washington DC 20044-4412
See the Public Participation section of this notice for specific instructions and requirements for submitting comments and for information on how to request a public hearing
You may view copies of this notice selected supporting materials and any comments we receive about this proposal at httpwwwregulationsgov under Docket No 2007-0066 You also may view copies of this notice all related petitions maps or other supporting materials and any comments we receive about this
proposal by appointment at the TTB Information Resource Center 1310 G Street NW Washington DC 20220 To make an appointment call 202-927shy2400
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT NA Sutton Regulations and Rulings Division Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau 925 Lakeville S1 No 158 Petaluma CA 94952 phone 415shy271-1254 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
Background on Viticultural Areas
TTB Authority Section 105(e) of the Federal Alcohol
Administration Act (FAA Act) 27 USC 205(e) authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to prescribe regulations for the labeling of wine distilled spirits and malt beverages The FAA Act provides that these regulations should among other things prohibit consumer deception and the use of misleading statements on labels and ensure that labels provide the consumer with adequate information as to the identity and quality of the product The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) administers the regulations promulgated under the FAA Act
Part 4 ofthe TTB regulations (27 CFR part 4) allows the establishment of definitive viticultural areas and the use of their names as appellations of origin on wine labels and in wine advertisements Part 9 of the TTB regulations (27 CFR part 9) contains the list of approved viticultural areas
Definition Section 425(e)(1)(i) ofthe TTB
regulations (27 CFR 425(e)(1)(i)) defines a viticultural area for American wine as a delimited grape-growing region distinguishable by geographical features the boundaries of which have been recognized and defined in part 9 of the regulations These designations allow vintners and consumers to attribute a given quality reputation or other characteristic of a wine made from grapes grown in an area to its geographic origin The establishment of viticultural areas allows vintners to describe more accurately the origin of their wines to consumers and helps consumers to identify wines they may purchase Establishment of a viticultural area is neither an approval nor an endorsement by TTB of the wine produced in that area
Requirements Section 425(e)(2) of the TTB
regulations outlines the procedure for proposing an American viticultural area and provides that any interested party
Us Department ofHomelaDd Secmity Washington DC 10229
bull ~
US Customs and Border Protection
AUG 15 2fXJJ
VE5-3-02-QTRRBSTCCCI - ti015502-GG-
Mr leon Sutcliffe Director Port Operations Camivai Cruise Unes Camival Place 3655 NW 87Avenue Miami Aorlda 33178
RE P~nger Vessef Services Ad Coastwise Transportation 46 USC sect 55103 19 CFR sect 480a(b)
Dear Mr Sutcliffe
As you know US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) enforces the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) codified at TItle 46 United States Code section 55103 (46 USC 55103) This statute prohibits non-coastwise-qualifled vessels (ie those vessels not US-buill owned and documented with a coastwise endorsement) from transporting passengers between porls or places within the United States The regUlations promUlgated pursuant to the PVSA are found at TrtJe 19 Code of Federal Regulations section 4808 (19 CFR 4808)
It has come to our attention that passenger vessels of your company are engaging in cruise itineraries that include ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands Two USAlagged coastwise-endorsed passenger vessefs are also currenUy engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of caD wittlin the Hawaiian Islands
As part of your cruise itineraries some of your foreign-flagged vessels depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period and ultimately rebJm to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their endse For example the MS ZAANDAM of Holand America Lines departs San Diego cruises the Hawaiian Islands stops in Ensenada from 800pm to 11 OOpmbull and returns to san Diego CBP believes these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because It appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA -- - - ~~~------
Please be advised that CBP is taking steps to publish this position Should have any questions pertaining to this matter please contact Mr Glen Vereb Chief Cargo Security Carriers and Immigration Branch at (202) 572-8724
Sincerely
F Jl E EST Y LEe A U I 5 I N Gmiddot
December 21 2007
The Honorable W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection co Border Security Regulations Branch Office ofInternational Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229
Re Hawaii Coastwise Cruises (USCBP-2007-0098) Comments in Response to Proposed Interpretation
Dear Commissioner Basham
NCL America Inc1 (NCLA) submits these comments in support ofthe efforts ofCustoms and Border Protection to enforce the Passenger Vessel Services Act and the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative as applied to Hawaii coastwise cruises
1 Introduction and Summary of Position
NCLA operates three large oceangoing US flag cruise ships in Hawaii These ships are documented under US flag and are required to operate in regular service in Hawaii pursuant to the authority of the Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative a 2003 federal statute intended to revitalize the US flag cruise industry and to maximize economic and national security benefits to the United States (the 2003 Act)
NCLA has invested $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships pursuant to the 2003 Act and in direct reliance on the protections of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) and its proper enforcement The PVSA limits the transportation ofpassengers between US ports to coastwise documented US flag ships Its statutory protections recognize that US flag ships have significantly higher operational costs in part because they are subject to more stringent US laws including US labor laws and federal
1 NCL America Inc is a US corporation incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware headquartered in Honolulu Hawaii As a US corporation it is subject to US taxes at both the federal and state level The Chief Executive Officer the Chairman of the Board and all of the Board of Directors of NCL America are US citizens The company is also subject to US labor and employment laws and is required by statute to maintain a workforce comprised primarily ofUS citizens
700 Bishop St SUite 900 I Honolulu HawMi 96813 I Tel 8085273800 Fax 8085273820 I ndcom
2
income tax among others The NCLA ships operating in Hawaii are the only large oceangoing cruise ships operating under US flag In furtherance of the policy goals of the PVSA and the 2003 Act these ships have created over 4000 seafaring jobs all subject to US minimum wage and other labor statutes
Since 2003 there has been a significant increase in capacity in the Hawaii market from foreign flag ships providing cruise service to Hawaii from the West Coast Many of these foreign flag cruises are marketed as Hawaii cruises and consist entirely ofUS ports ofcall with the sole exception of a token stop in Mexico for as little as an hour late at night under circumstances where passengers are not permitted to get offthe ship There are no reported rulings approving these particular foreign flag itineraries
Lower cost foreign competition in the Hawaii market has unfairly hurt NCLAs operations NCLA has incurred substantial losses which have contributed significantly to its decision earlier this year to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAll from US flag and reshydeploy it foreign Unfair foreign competition poses an imminent threat to the remaining US flag passenger vessels operating in the Hawaii trades pursuant to the 2003 Act
As the agency statutorily charged with implementation of the 2003 Act the US Department ofTransportation Maritime Administration (MARAn) is aware of the threat foreign flag Hawaii itineraries pose to the US flag fleet and brought the situation to the attention ofthe US Department ofHomeland Security Bureau ofCustoms and Border Protection (CBP or Customs) Customs determined that the primary object of these itineraries was coastwise and that the Ensenada stop was an evasion of the PVSA
In August 2007 Customs provided written notice to the affected foreign lines and their trade association that the existing itineraries were contrary to the PVSA None of these lines sought advance rulings even after the Customs notice with respect to their Hawaii itineraries pursuant to Customs regulations and many continued to market the itineraries as Hawaii cruises NCLA supports the efforts ofCustoms and MARAD to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act for Hawaii cruises
2 Statutory Authority for Customs Proposed Interpretation
(a) Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA)
Congress passed the PVSA in 1886 to protect the US maritime transportation industry from foreign competition2 Protection is afforded through penalty assessments on foreign vessels transporting passengers between US ports or places directly or by way ofa foreign port 3 As Congress and the courts have recognized coastwise protections for the US maritime transportation industry are only one dimension of the PVSA Operating in conjunction with other coastwise laws and with the US
2 See United States v Honduran SS GRANADA 35 F Supp 892 894 (BD Pa 1940)(citing purpose of PVSA to meet threats to the practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping which was to be preserved for US ships)
46 USc sect 55103 (originally 46 USC App 289)
3
documentation laws the PVSA also enhances military sealift in times ofnational emergency sustains a US merchant marine and supports the US shipbuilding and repair industry4
(b) Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative (the 2003 Act)
Over the past decade Congress has sought to reinforce the goals of the PVSA by providing mechanisms to revitalize the oceangoing US flag cruise fleet particularly in Hawaii The Project America legislation enacted in 1997 authorized among other things the re~flagging ofone existing cruise ship contingent on the operator contracting for the construction oftwo new oceangoing cruise shipss Following the default of the operator under the original contract Congress enacted the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative for the purpose ofrecovering economic and national security benefits to the United States bull 6 These same goals of the original PVSA were expressly referenced in the legislative history of the 2003 Act which emphasized that these ships will be assets available in time ofnational emergency and will significantly expand the pool ofqualified seafarers upon which the US Department ofDefense relies to crew non-combatant vessels
The 2003 Act authorizes the US documentation ofthree cruise ships for operation in regular service in Hawaii subject to certain conditions including a prohibition on operating in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico and the Caribbean Sea and a requirement that all vessel repair work be undertaken in the United States MARAD is charged with implementation of the 2003 Act
3 Customs Implementation of PVSA
(a) Regulations
The current regulations implementing the PVSA were published by Customs in 19858 The growth of the foreign flag cruise industry in North America and in particular the development of the Alaska cruise market led to an effort in 1984 to amend the thenshyexisting regulations to increase the ease of administration and operational flexibility The effort to change the regulation had support from US port interests who saw benefit in the potential increase in the number ofUS ports that foreign vessels could call and was opposed by proponents ofpotential US flag projects as detrimental to efforts to revitalize the US fleet 9 The preamble to the 1985 rule emphasized that it was of paramount importance to consider the primary object ofpassengers in taking a
4 See American Hawaii Cruises v Skinner 713 F Supp 452 457 (DDC 1989) (recognizing the contribution of the PVSA and the Jones Act in helping to secure national defense by maintaining a merchant marine oftbe best equipped and most suitable types ofvessels sufficient to serve in time of war or national emergency) see also Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 30 (DC Cir 1984) Wirth Ltd v SIS Acadia Forest 537 F2d 1272 1281 n32 (5th Cir 1976) S Public Law 105-56 Section 8109 (111 Stat 1203 1244) (Oct 81997 ) 6 Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II General Provisions - Department ofCommerce Section 211 (117 Stat 1179) (Feb 20 2003) 1 149 Cong Rec S1118 (dailyed Jan 17 2003(statement ofSenator Inouye) 8 19 CFR sect 480a 950 Fed Reg 26981 (July I 1985)
4
voyage10 a concept which is reinforced elsewhere in Customs regulations11 In its analysis of the comments received at the time Customs accepted the view ofport interests that the modified rule would help their business but did so recognizing the absence ofa regular salt water US flag passenger fleet Customs acknowledged the potential harm to prospective efforts to revitalize the US flag passenger fleet and expressly cautioned that if it were ever shown that coastwise qualified vessels in competition with foreign vessels were in fact hurt by the modified Customs regulation then Customs would immediately reconsider its position12
(b) Customs Rulings
Given the significant penalties associated with violating the PVSA13 Customs regulations expressly provide a mechanism for the owner or charterer of a foreign vessel or any other interested person to request an advisory ruling as to whether a contemplated voyage would be considered in violation of the PVSA14 Customs regulations provide that vessel operators can rely on these ruling letters only to the extent that the facts and circumstances are identical to those in the ruling letter IS
Notwithstanding the fact that several foreign cruise lines offer Hawaii itineraries originating in a US mainland port and calling at Hawaii ports with a token intervening stop in Mexico there are no reported rulings expressly approving such an itinerary for these foreign cruise lines 16
4 The Cruise Industry in Hawaii
(a) NCL America Returns US flag to the Oceangoing Passenger Fleet
Pursuant to the requirements ofthe 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative NCLA agreed to promote US-flag cruising enhance military sealift capacity and expand the US maritime labor base No other major cruise line had ever undertaken such a commitment to the US flag and the public policy objectives Congress sought to achieve under the PVSA or the 2003 Act Introduction ofPRIDE OF ALOHA in 2004 was a significant development in the maritime industry because it marked the restoration ofthe
10 Id at 26983 11 Customs Regulations include a provision on the effect ofruling letters and with respect to carrier rulings the applicable regulation refers to rulings setting forth a determination as to whether or not the primary object of a contemplated voyage is coastwise transportation in violation of46 USC sect 289 [pYSA codified at 46 USC sect55103] 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 12 50 Fed Reg at 26983 13 A modem cruise ship with 2400 passengers for example would be subject to a fine of$720OOO per cruise based on the statutory penalty of$300 for each passenger transported in violation of the Act 14 19 CFR sect 480a(d) IS 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 16 There is one older reported mling involving a request to drop the Ensenada port call from a Los AngeleslHawaiiLos Angeles itinerary which Customs held would violate the PYSA In dicta Customs acknowledged that the itinerary could be in compliance if the Ensenada call were not dropped but did not address the issue ofwhether a one hour service call where no passengers depart the vessel would be sufficient The carrier that obtained that ruling has since left the Hawaii market See Customs Ruling HQ 114078 re Crystal Hannony (Nov 4 1997)
5
us flag to the oceangoing cruise industry A contemporaneous press release from the Us Department ofTransportation reported that the three US-flag cruise ships to be introduced pursuant to the 2003 Act were expected to create more than 20000 US jobs generate more than $825 million ofexpenditures in the US economy and create nearly $360 million in federal tax revenue by the end of 200717 In 2005 the PRIDE OF AMERICA was introduced and in 2006 the third vessel PRIDE OF HAWAll was introduced to Hawaii Both the PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAIl offer 7shyday inter-island Hawaii itineraries whereas PRIDE OF ALOHA operates on 7 and 10 day cruises exclusively among the islands ofHawaii as well as 11 day cruises that include a foreign port call at Fanning Island To date NCLA has invested over $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships in furtherance ofthe policy objectives of the PVSA and the 2003 Act These ships employ over 4000 seafarers and generate hundreds ofmillions of dollars in benefits for Hawaii and the nation
(b) Significant Increase in Foreign Flag Capacity Since 2003
The most significant change in the Hawaii cruise market since 2003 has been the dramatic increase in capacity A significant portion ofthis capacity increase is directly attributable to NCLAs fulfillment ofthe Congressional mandate in the 2003 Act However foreign-flag operations in the Hawaii market as measured in passenger nights18 have skyrocketed Based on MARAn data derived from the US Customs Border Patrol Vessel Entrance and Clearance documents the passenger nights for foreign flag vessels departing from the West Coast to Hawaii on round trip cruise have increased several hundredfold during this period19 See Exhibit A
(c) NCLA Has Incurred Substantial Losses During this Period
Since 2004 NCLA has lost cumulatively more than a quarter ofa billion dollars A principal reason for these losses has been the increase in foreign capacity in this market NCLA has taken significant steps to reduce costs to address the increase in foreign competition but NCLA is at an inherent disadvantage when competing against foreign companies that are not subject to US labor laws US tax laws and other laws Ofcourse the statutory protections of the PVSA are intended to address these very issues That is why Customs immediate action to implement the proposed interpretation is critical for the US flag fleet Regrettably NCLA has already been forced to reduce overall capacity early next year with the withdrawal ofPRIDE OF HAWAlI to another
17 DOT Press Release dated June 72004 see also DOT Press Release dated August 132004 in connection with visit to PRIDE OF ALOHA by US Transportation Secretary Norman Y Mineta 11 Passenger nights (also referred to as passenger capacity days) are calculated by multiplying the number ofpassengers per vessel by the number ofcruise days in each itinerary by the number of cruises This is the unit ofmeasurement employed by MARAn In contrast passenger bed supply (also referred to as passenger capacity) data reflects only the number ofberths per vessel multiplied by the number of cruises and hence understates the market by excluding the full economic value ofthe cruise perfonned 19 In 2003 the total number ofpassenger nights for round-trip West Coast to Hawaii cruises was 303325 which jumped by 353 to 1072329 in 2006 and by 430 to 1304546 from 2003 to 2007 (The 2007 figure is based on MARAD data for six months and a1ll1ualized by published itineraries for the balance of the year)
6
market for operation under foreign flag This move alone will result in the loss ofover 1000 American seafaring jobs
5 Customs Proposed Interpretation is Necessary to Further the Important National Security and Public Policy Objectives Embodied in Federal Law
As Customs has properly noted the increase in foreign competition in the Hawaii trades in contravention of the PVSA pose[s] an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels[] As the operator of these ships NCLA has a vested interest in protecting the jobs ofthe thousands ofAmerican crewmembers and cruise ship service providers who support these vessels NCLA also has an interest in protecting the substantial economic investment it has made to revitalize the US flag passenger vessel fleet But a balancing of interests in the context of Customs enforcement ofexisting law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act requires a much broader focus
The legislative history of the 2003 Act expressly recognized the national security and public policy import ofestablishing a US flag passenger vessel fleet as a means to maintain the countrys preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool of qualified seafarers and as a means to help sustain a fleet ofUS-flag vessels to su~ort
the nations military and maritime industrial base for times ofnational emergency
Congress understood the importance ofestablishing a viable US flag cruise ship fleet as something larger than the vessels themselves These national security and public policy objectives must be weighed in the balance as Customs assesses how best to interpret its rules to give effect to the PVSA and the 2003 Act
6 Customs Should Clarify that the Proposed Interpretation is Limited to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades and Adopt Reasonable Measures to Ensure Sufficient Foreign Content
Since publication ofthe proposed interpretative rule several commenters have observed that the scope of the proposed interpretation is ambiguous because the language of Section VI referencing any cruise itinerary appears broader than the caption Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises and the entire discussion in the published notice which focuses exclusively on US-flag coastwise vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA agrees that the proposed interpretation should be clarified so that its scope is limited to vessels operating roundtrip voyages from US ports that include Hawaii port calls
NCLA supports the concept reflected in the proposed interpretive rule that round trip Hawaii itineraries from US ports on foreign ships must include a material and measurable degree ofoverall foreign port content as compared to US port content
20 149 Congo Rec S1117 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)
7
(a) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is also Consistent with Subsequent Congressional Enactments Modifying the PVSA
As discussed above it is well established that the PVSA was designed toRrotect US-flag vessels from foreign competition in the coastwise and domestic trades 1
Subsequent legislative enactments however have appropriately differentiated among distinct geographic markets and trades including Canada Alaska Puerto Rico and Hawaii based on the existence or non-existence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
In 1938 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers by Canadian passenger vessels on Lake Ontario and the St Lawrence River until such time as passenger service shall be established by vessels of the United States22 Similarly in 1961 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers on Canadian vessels within Alaska or between Alaska and other points in the United States until such time as passenger service is established by vessels ofthe United States23
In 1984 Congress modified the application ofthe PVSA to pennit the transportation ofpassengers between Puerto Rico and other United States ports on foreign-flag vessels24 As with the other statutory exceptions this provision is qualified and expires [o]n a showing that a United States passenger vessel qualified to engage in the coastwise trade is offering or advertising passenger service between a port in Puerto Rico and another port in the United States2S
Congress acted again with respect to the application of the PVSA with the 2003 Act in which it authorized three vessels that did not meet the US-build requirements of the PVSA to operate as modem US-flagged cruise ships in regular service in Hawaii26 The 2003 Act imposes a specific geographic limitation on the operation of any ship documented under this authority to operations only in regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands ofHawaii and shall not transport passengers in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico or the Caribbean Sea except in certain limited circumstances27 As above the limited nature of the 2003 Act is express it is strictly limited to the large ocean-going cruise ships and then only those operating in the regular Hawaii service where there are no US-flag operations28
21 See Act ofJune 19 1886 c 421 sec 8 24 Stat 81 Act of February 171898 c 26 sec 2 30 Stat 248 22 S] Res 174 75th Cong 52 Stat 223 (Alp 251938) codified at46 USC sect 55121(a) 23 See Pub L 87-77 75 Stat 196 (Jun 30 1961) codified at 46 USC sect 55121(b) 24 See Pub L 98-563 98 Stat 2916 (Oct 301984) codified at 46 USC sect 55104(b) 25 46 USC sect 55104(c)(l) see also 46 USC 46 USc sect 55104(cX2)(expiration of exemption upon availability ofa non-coastwise qualified US-flag vessel offering service in the relevant market) 26 149 Congo Rec SI118 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)(statementofSen Inouye) 27 Pub L 108-7 117 Stat 79 (Feb 20 2003) 28 149 Congo Rec S11l9 (dailyed Jan 17 2003Xstatement of Sen Inouye)
8
In each ofthese instances Congress fashioned a narrow exception to the PVSA that differentiated among distinct geographic markets based on the existence or nonshyexistence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
As the federal agency responsible for administering the 2003 Act MARAD requested that Customs act to protect US flag passenger vessel interests in the Hawaii trades29 Limiting the scope ofthe proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades also reflects Customs appreciation of the PVSA in the context of the subsequent Congressional action30 Viewing the Congressional modifications to the PVSA as a whole Congress has specifically and repeatedly differentiated among distinct geographic markets when it has found it necessary and appropriate to do so to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests It is well established that the proper interpretation of a statutory scheme includes consideration ofsubsequent statutes even though the underlying statute itselfhas not been expressly amended31 Accordingly Customs should likewise limit the scope ofthe proposed PVSA interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades because that is the only geographic market as mandated by the 2003 Act in which oceangoing US-flag cruise ships are operating
(b) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Consistent with Public Policy Objectives of the 1985 Rulemaking
In 1985middot Customs liberalized the regulations implementing the PVSA by eliminating certain regulatory prohibitions on foreign flag vessels In the context of the 1985 rulemaking Customs justified a relaxation ofthe regulations on the grounds that it would simplify the administration of the PVSA and would benefit the economy ofcertain American coastwise ports without eroding the statutory protection given to American vessels engaged in solely domestic trade32
Customs thus sought to reconcile US port economic interests with US-flag passenger vessel interests Both of these twin policy objectives are furthered by
29 See 72 Fed Reg 65488 (Nov 21 2007)( MARAn bas asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the ~eratiODS ofcoastwise-qualified cruise ship operators)
See generally FDA v Brown amp Williamson Tobacco Corp 529 US 120 132-133 (2000)(assessing propriety ofagency construction ofFood DIUg and Cosmetics Act and descnbing responsibility of reviewing cowt to assess statutory provisions in the context of subsequent legislative enactments) 31 See Brown amp Williamson 529 US 143 (holding that proper construction ofstatutory provision must necessarily assume that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications ofa later statute This is particularly so where the scope of the earlier statute is broad but the subsequent statutes more specifically address the topic athand) see also United States v Estate ofRomani 523 US 517 530-531 (1998)( holding that a later-enacted statute should control the construction of the federal lien priority statute a specific policy embodied in a later federal statute should control om construction of the [earlier] statute even though it ha[s] not been expressly amended) United States v Fausto 484 US 439453 (1988)(The courts frequently find Congress to have done this - whenever in fact they interpret a statutory text in the light ofsurrounding texts that happen to have been subsequently enacted This classic judicial task of reconciling many laws enacted over time and getting them to make sense in combination necessarily assumes that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications of a later statute) 32 50 Fed Reg 26982 (JuI 11985)
9
limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades
As noted earlier the 2003 Act limits the operation of the NCLA US-flag oceangoing passenger vessels to regular service in Hawaii Because there are no oceangoing US-flag vessels operating in any market other than the Hawaii trades Customs should limit the scope of the proposed interPretation to that market Such a limitation protects US flag passenger vessel interests without prejudicing US port interests In contrast an application of the proposed interpretation to any itinerary would needlessly harm US port interests unrelated to Hawaii without any countervailing benefit to US-flag passenger vessel interests Accordingly limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation is consistent with the public policy objectives of the 1985 rulemaking as well as the 2003 Act
(c) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Also Consistent with Customs Commitment to Revisit the Scope of its Rules to Protect US-Flag Interests
The relaxation ofthe PVSA regulations in 1985 was premised in large part on Customs finding that there was no regular salt water US-flag passenger fleet in operation at that time33 Acknowledging that the relaxed regulations could harm USshyflag interests Customs committed in the preamble ofthe 1985 final rule to immediately reconsider its interpretation if it is ever shown that there is a viable US flag vessel operating in competition with foreign-flag vessels34
Congress enacted the 2003 Act to stimulate the development of a US flag cruise ship industry As noted above the legislative history ofthat Act makes clear that Congress sought to revitalize the US-flag cruise industry as a means to maintain Americas preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool ofqualified seafarers help sustain a fleet of US flag vessels to support our military and a maritime industrial base create thousands of seagoing and shoreside American jobs and stimulate the development ofa US flag cruise ship tourism business with the commensurate benefits to the US tax base the US economy and US employment
Customs is now acting at MARADs request to revisit its interpretation ofthe regulations implementing the PVSA because recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwise-qualified cruise ship operations35 That is to say that the concerns articulated by Customs in the context of the 1985 rulemaking have materialized and US-flag passenger vessel interests are in fact being hanned in the Hawaii trades by foreign competitors
33 50 Fed Reg 26983 34Id
3S 72 Fed Reg 56488 (Nov 21 2007)
I
10
Because the US-flag passenger vessels are limited by statute to regular service in Hawaii limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the
Hawaii trades is consistent with Customs historical commitment to revisit its interpretation ofthe implementing regulations to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests
7 Conclusion
For the reasons stated above NCLA commends the efforts ofCustoms and MARAn to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act as applied to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA respectfully requests Customs to move ahead promptly with p~blicati~nof a final interpretive rule to advance the important national security arid public policy objectives ofthese laws
We greatly appreciate the opportunity to submit these comments
Sincerely
~~~ Alan T Yamamoto Vice President Hawaii Operations
Exhibit A
Ship Name Serenade Of The Seas Departure Port San Diego California Ports of Call San Diego California Kailua Kona Hawaii Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii Hlo Hawaii Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii Ensenada Mexico San Qigo California
2007 Date(s) Oct 05
Sailing Itinerary
Day Port H ~rrive Depart Activity
05-0ct San Diego California 500 PM
06-0ct Cruising
07-0ct Cruising
08-0ct Cruising
09-0ct Cruising
10-0ct Kailua Kona Hawaii 700 AM 900 PM Tendered
11-00t Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 1000 AM Tendered
12middot0ct Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 900 PM Tendered
13-0ct Hilo Hawaii 700 AM 600 PM Docked
14middot0ct Honoulu (Oahu) Hawaii 700 AM Docked
15-0ct Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii 200 AM Docked
6-0ct CrUising
17-0ct Cruising
18-0ct Cruising
19middot0ct Cruising
-7 20-00t
O-Oot
Ensenada ~i1exico
San Deqo California
i 00 ~r1
700 ~M
200 oM D1Jcked ~
Executive Order Submissions Under Review
II Reglnfogov Where to ind Federal Regulatory Information -~
Home ] Lnitied Agenda and Regulator) Ilan pound012866 Regulator) Review Jnformalion Collection Review
EO 12866 Regulatory Rlvlw dvanced Search IJitorical RepWI Review Counh Jriter XIL
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA)
Executive Order Submissions Under Review July 25 2008 - _------------____ _shy
Department of Homeland Security
AGENCY DHS-TSA RIN 1652-AA53
TITLE Large Aircraft Security Program Other Aircraft Operator Security Programs and Airport Operator Security Program
STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT Yes RECEIVED DATE 06302008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
AGENCY DHS-USCIS RIN Llti15-AB67 TITLE Changes to Requirements Affecting H-2B Nonimmigrants and Their Employers
STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT No RECEIVED DATE 06092008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
AGENCY DHS-USCBP RIN 1651AA11 TITLE Issuance of a Visa and Authorization for Temporary Admission Into the United States for Certain Nonimmigrant Aliens Afflicted W HIV Infection
STAGE Final Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT No RECEIVED DATE 03042008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
-_RE_V-IE-W-E-X-T-EN-D-E-D---------- _
AGENCY DHS-USCBP RIN 1651-AA76 TITLE Coastwise Transportation of Passengers STAGE Proposed Rule ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT Yes RECEIVED DATE 07142008 LEGAL DEADLINE None
Disclosure I Accessibility I Privacy Policy I Contact Us
httpwwwreginfogovpublicdoeoReviewSearch 7252008
View Rule Page 11
Shere D find Federal ReguLatory InformciiorlReglnfogov Home J Cnified Agenda al1d Regulatory Plan EO 12866 Regulatory Reyiew Information Collection Reiew
Current rnified Agenda and Regulatory Plan Historical Pnified Agenda and Regulatory Plan Search
View Rule
DHSIUSCBP RIN 1651-AA76 Publication ill Spring 2008
Title llCoastwise Transportation of Passengers
Abstract This interim rule amends the Department of Homeland Securitys (DHS) current regulations relating to the transportation of passengers by non-coastwise-qualified vessels on voyages that begin and end at a US port and stop at intervening US and foreign port(s) Under this interim final rule voyages that begin and end at a US port and stop at a foreign port(s) and at intervening US port(s) where a large USshyflag coastwise-qualified passenger vessel engages in regular service are in violation of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) unless the cumulative length of stay(s) at intervening foreign port(s) is more than 50 percent of the total amount of time spent at the intervening US port(s) and passengers are permitted to go ashore at the foreign port(s) The purpose of this amendment is to ensure that the Congressional purpose in enacting the PVSA which is to preserve the economic benefits of US coastwise trade to US-flag coastwise-qualified vessels is properly implemented
Agency Department of Homeland Security(DHS) Priority Substantive Nonsignificant
KIN Status First time published in the Unified Agenda Agenda Stage of Rulemaking Final Rule Stage
Major No Unfunded Mandates No
CFR Citation -LCER 4J~)(h)(plusmnJ
Legal Authority 5JJSS_30J12lJ-SClt16 J9_lJiCJ 431 9_L1C1plusmn3JJ2JScHJ1J2JSCJ624 L(LlLSc207LIl(gtJfHgt~ _CiQJ _46lSC 6QLQ~
Legal Deadline None
Timetable Action Date FR Cite
Interim Final Action 0510012008
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required No Government Levels Affected None
Federalism No
Included in the Regulatory Plan No
RIN Data Printed in the FR No
Agency Contact Glen E Vereb Chief Entry Procedures and Carriers Branch Department of Homeland Security US Customs and Border Protection Office of Regulations and Rulings 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington DC 20229 Phone202572-8730
Disclosure I Accessibility I Privacy Policy I Contact Us
httpwwwreginfogovpublicdoeAgendaViewRuleruleID=286751 7128120
Federal RegisterVol 72 No 224Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules 65487
SPECULATIVE POSITION LIMITS 1-Continued [In contract units)
Contract
Soybeans and Mini-Soybeans 2
Wheat and Mini-Wheat 2 bullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbull
Soybean Oil
SingleSpot month All monthsmonth
600 8600 13300 600 11100 14500 540 6600 8600
Soybean Meal 720 5500 7100
Minneapolis Grain Exchange
Hard Red Spring Wheat I 600 I 11100 I 14500
New York Board of Trade
Cotton No2 I 300 I 5300 I 7300
Kansas City Board of Trade
Hard Winter Wheat I 600 I 11100 I 14500
1 For purposes of compliance with these limits positions in a futures contract that shares ~ubstantially identical terms with a contract market enumerated herein including a futures contract that is cash-settled based on the settlement price of an enumerated contract market shall be agshygregated with positions in the enumerated contract market
2 For purposes of compliance with these limits positions in the regular-sized and mini-sized contracts shall be aggregated
Issued by the Commission this November 152007 in Washington DC David Stawick Secretary of the Commission [FR Doc E7-22681 Filed 11-20-07 845 amI BILLING CODE 6351-Q1-P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Bureau of Customs and Border Protection
19 CFR Part 4
[USCBP-2007-o098]
Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises
AGENCY Customs and Border Protection Department of Homeland Security ACTION Proposed interpretation solicitation of comments
SUMMARY This document proposes new criteria to be used by Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to determine whether non-coastwise-qualified vessels are in violation ofthe Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) when engaging in cruise itineraries in which passengers board at a US port the vessel calls at several Hawaiian ports and then the vessel proceeds to a foreign port or ports for a brief period before ultimately returning to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their cruise CBP believes these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because it appears that the primary objective of the foreign stop is evasion of the PVSA
DATES Comments must be received on or before December 212007 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT Glen E Vereb Cargo Security Carriers amp Immigration Branch Office of International Trade (202) 572-8730 ADDRESSES You may submit comments identified by docket number by one of the following methods
bull Federal eRulemaking Portal http wwwregulationsgov Follow the instructions for submitting comments
bull Mail Border Security Regulations Branch Office of International Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
I Public Participation
Interested persons are invited to participate in this proposed interpretation by submitting written data views or arguments on all aspects of the proposed interpretation Customs and Border Protection (CBP) also invites comments that relate to the economic environmental or federalism effects that might result from this proposed interpretation Comments that will provide the most assistance to CBP in developing these procedures will reference a specific portion of the proposed interpretation explain the reason for any recommended change and include data information or authority that support such recommended change
Instructions All submissions received must include the agency name and docket number for this proposed
interpretation All comments received will be posted without change to http wwwregulationsgov including any personal information provided
Docket For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received go to http wwwregulationsgov Submitted comments may also be inspected on regular business days between the hours of 9 am and 430 pm at the Office of International Trade Customs and Border Protection 799 9th Street NW 5th Floor Washington DC Arrangements to inspect submitted documents should be made in advance by calling Mr Joseph Clark at (202) 572shy8768
II Background
The maritime cabotage law governing the transportation of passengers was first established by section 8 of the Passenger Vessel Services Act of June 191886 (the PVSA) 24 Stat 81 as amended by section 2 of the Act of February 17 1898 30 Stat 248 formerly codified at 46 USC App 289 (now codified at 46 USC 55103) 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 of $200 (now $300 as promulgated in TD 03-11 pursuant to the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 199028 USC 2461 note) for each passenger so transported and landed
The intent of the maritime cabotage laws including the PVSA was to provide a legal structure that guarantees a coastwise monopoly to
65488 Federal RegisterVol 72 No 224Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules
American shipping and thereby promotes development of the American merchant marine Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 28 (DC Cir 1984) see also The Granada 35 FSupp 892 8931940 AMC 1601 (DC Pa 1940) (stating that the legislative aim of section 289 [now 55102] was the creation of a practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping business for United States ships) In other words the PVSA was enacted to advance the United States merchant marine and fleet by restricting the use of foreign-ownedflagged passenger vessels in United States territorial waters
Passenger vessel transportation between United States ports has historically been viewed to be part of the coastwise trade after the enactment of the PVSA This view is premised on the concepts of continuity of the voyage and whether its intended purpose or objective was coastwise transportation In other words the PVSA was held to be violated if the coastwise movement was continuous or if the purpose of the trip was a coastwise voyage (See 18 OAG 445 September 4 1886 28 OAG 204 February 16 1910 29 OAG 318 February 12 1912 30 OAG 44 February 1 1913 34 OAG 340 December 24 1924 and 36 OAG 352 August 13 1930)
The CBP regulations promulgated pursuant to the PVSA are found at section 480a of title 19 of the Code of Federal Regulations (19 CFR 480a) and are reflective of the above cited Office of the Attorney General decisions These regulations provide among other things that a non-coastwise-qualified vessel which embarks a passenger at a port in the United States embraced within the coastwise laws (a coastwise port) will be deemed to have landed that passenger in violation of the PVSA if the passenger disembarks at a different coastwise port on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a nearby foreign port or ports (as defined in 19 CFR 480a(a)(2) see also 19 CFR 480a(b)(2)) The terms embark and disembark are words of art which are defined as going on board a vessel for the duration of a specific voyage and leaving a vessel at the conclusion of a specific voyage respectively (See 19 CFR 480a(a)(4))
The references in section 480a to nearby foreign ports (defined in 19 CFR 480a(a)(2)) are the results of attempts by CBP to apply an Office of the Attorney Generals opinion dated February 26 1910 (28 OAG 204) In that case a foreign-flag vessel transported 615 passengers on a voyage around the world beginning in New
York and concluding in San Francisco The Attorney General opined that since the primary object of the voyage was to visit various parts of the world on a pleasure tour returning home via California and not to be transported in domestic commerce the transportation was not in violation of the PVSA
The 1910 Attorney Generals opinion was extended to voyages that included foreign ports other than nearby foreign ports (See Treasury Decision (TD) 68shy285 (33 FR 16558) November 14 1968) However voyages solely to one or more coastwise ports have always been considered predominantly coastwise Therefore non-coastwise-qualified vessels engaging in such a voyage where passengers temporarily go ashore at a coastwise port have been deemed to have violated the PVSA
m Current Law and Policy Pursuant to Public Law 109-304 120
Stat 1632 enacted on October 6 2006 Title 46 United States Code was substantially reorganized and recodified Consequently the PVSA is now codified at 46 USC 55103 and provides that no vessel shall transport passengers between ports or places in the United States either directly or by way of a foreign port under a penalty of $300 for each person so transported and landed except one that (1) Is wholly owned by citizens of the United States for purposes of engaging in the coastwise trade and (2) has been issued a certificate of documentation with a coastwise endorsement or is exempt from documentation but would otherwise be eligible for such a certificate and endorsement
In 2003 Congress enacted Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II Section 211 for the purpose of revitalizing the oceangoing US-flag cruise industry in Hawaii (the 2003 Act) Three oceangoing US-flag cruise ships PRIDE OF ALOHA PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAII were documented with coastwise privileges pursuant to the 2003 Act These vessels entered regular service in Hawaii in 2004 2005 and 2006 respectively and pursuant to the express language of the 2003 Act are limited in their operation to providing regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands of Hawaii
The CBP regulations promulgated pursuant to the PVSA are set forth in 19 CFR 480a and have remained unchanged throughout both the recodification of Title 46 of the United States Code and the enactment of the 2003 Act They provide that a violation of the PVSA occurs when passengers embark (board a vessel for the
duration of a voyage) a non-coastwiseshyqualified vessel at one US port and disembark (leave the vessel at the conclusion of a voyage) at a different US port unless they proceed with the vessel to a distant foreign port (Le any port not considered a nearby foreign port which is defined as any port located in North America Central America Bermuda or the West Indies including the Bahamas) Currently these regulations do not contain specific criteria for non-coastwise-qualified vessels on itineraries including US ports and either nearby or distant foreign ports in order for such foreign port calls to be compliant with the PVSA
To reiterate the applicable CBP regulations provide that the PVSA is violated when a non-coastwise-qualified vessel transports a passenger on a voyage solely to one or more coastwise ports and the passenger disembarks or goes ashore temporarily at a coastwise port (19 CFR 480a(b)(1)) Furthermore a violation of the PVSA also occurs when a non-coastwise-qualified vessel transports a passenger on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a nearby foreign port or ports (but no other foreign port) and the passenger disembarks at a coastwise port other than the port of embarkation (19 CFR 480a(b)(2)) However there is no violation of the PVSA when a passenger is on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a distant foreign port or ports (whether or not the voyage includes a nearby foreign port or ports) and the passenger disembarks at a coastwise port provided the passenger has proceeded with the vessel to a distant foreign port (19 CFR 480a(b)(3))
IV Request From MARAD To Provide Guidance
The US Department of Transportation Maritime Administration (MARAD) has requested that CBP take action to ensure enforcement of the PVSA MARAD has asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreignshyflag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwiseshyqualified cruise ship operators
In April of 2007 the operator of the three US-flag cruise vessels operating solely in Hawaii pursuant to the 2003 Act announced their intent to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAIl from the Hawaii market and redeploy her to Europe The operator intends to re-flag the vessel to foreign registry directly resulting in the loss of over 1100 crewmember jobs The primary reason cited for this decision is the rapid increase in foreign-flag competition entering the Hawaii market
Federal Register I Vol 72 No 224 I Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules 65489
from the West Coast This competition is evidenced in published cruise itineraries of foreign-flag carriers offering a variety of round trip cruises that depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period usually in the early morning and ultimately return to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their cruise These cruises are often marketed as Hawaii cruises and except for the brief stop in the nearby foreign port of Ensenada are purely coastwise in nature It is these cruise itineraries that pose an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels that pursuant to the 2003 Act are currently engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands
V Preliminary Notice
In response to MARADs concerns CBP sent letters to two carriers known to operate the itineraries in question as well as to the Cruise Lines International Association Inc stating that CBP believes that these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because it appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA The letters further indicated that CBP is taking steps to publish this position
VI CBPs Proposed Interpretive Rule Accordingly in this document CBP is
proposing to provide that cruise itineraries for non-qualified coastwise vessels which allow passengers to board at a US port call at several Hawaiian ports proceed to a foreign port or ports for a brief period and then ultimately return to the original US port of embarkation for disembarkation are not consistent with the PVSA and the regulations promulgated pursuant thereto Specifically CBP interprets a voyage to be solely to one or more coastwise ports even where it stops at a foreign port unless the stop at the foreign port is a legitimate object of the cruise CBP will presume that a stop at a foreign port is not a legitimate object of the cruise unless
(1) The stop lasts at least 48 hours at the foreign port
(2) The amount of time at the foreign port is more than 50 percent of the total amount of time at the US ports of call and
(3) The passengers are permitted to go ashore temporarily at the foreign port
Accordingly CBP proposes to adopt an interpretive rule under which it will presume that any cruise itinerary that does not include a foreign port call that
satisfies each of these three criteria constitutes coastwise transportation of passengers in violation of 19 CFR 480a(b)(1)
Dated November 16 2007 W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection [FR Doc E7-22788 Filed 11-20-07 845 am] BILLING CODe 9111-14-1
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau
27 CFR Part 9
[Notice No 76]
RIN 1513-AB49
Proposed Establishment of the Leona Valley Viticultural Area (2007R-281 P)
AGENCY Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau Treasury ACTION Notice of proposed rulemaking
SUMMARY The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau proposes to establish the 134 square mile Leona Valley viticultural area in the northeast part of Los Angeles County California We designate viticultural areas to allow vintners to better describe the origin of their wines and to allow consumers to better identify wines they may purchase We invite comments on this proposed addition to our regulations DATES We must receive written comments on or before January 22 2008
ADDRESSES You may send comments on this notice to one of the following addresses
bull httpwwwregulationsgov (Federal e-rulemaking portal follow the instructions for submitting comments) or
bull Director Regulations and Rulings Division Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau PO Box 14412 Washington DC 20044-4412
See the Public Participation section of this notice for specific instructions and requirements for submitting comments and for information on how to request a public hearing
You may view copies of this notice selected supporting materials and any comments we receive about this proposal at httpwwwregulationsgov under Docket No 2007-0066 You also may view copies of this notice all related petitions maps or other supporting materials and any comments we receive about this
proposal by appointment at the TTB Information Resource Center 1310 G Street NW Washington DC 20220 To make an appointment call 202-927shy2400
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT NA Sutton Regulations and Rulings Division Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau 925 Lakeville S1 No 158 Petaluma CA 94952 phone 415shy271-1254 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
Background on Viticultural Areas
TTB Authority Section 105(e) of the Federal Alcohol
Administration Act (FAA Act) 27 USC 205(e) authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to prescribe regulations for the labeling of wine distilled spirits and malt beverages The FAA Act provides that these regulations should among other things prohibit consumer deception and the use of misleading statements on labels and ensure that labels provide the consumer with adequate information as to the identity and quality of the product The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) administers the regulations promulgated under the FAA Act
Part 4 ofthe TTB regulations (27 CFR part 4) allows the establishment of definitive viticultural areas and the use of their names as appellations of origin on wine labels and in wine advertisements Part 9 of the TTB regulations (27 CFR part 9) contains the list of approved viticultural areas
Definition Section 425(e)(1)(i) ofthe TTB
regulations (27 CFR 425(e)(1)(i)) defines a viticultural area for American wine as a delimited grape-growing region distinguishable by geographical features the boundaries of which have been recognized and defined in part 9 of the regulations These designations allow vintners and consumers to attribute a given quality reputation or other characteristic of a wine made from grapes grown in an area to its geographic origin The establishment of viticultural areas allows vintners to describe more accurately the origin of their wines to consumers and helps consumers to identify wines they may purchase Establishment of a viticultural area is neither an approval nor an endorsement by TTB of the wine produced in that area
Requirements Section 425(e)(2) of the TTB
regulations outlines the procedure for proposing an American viticultural area and provides that any interested party
Us Department ofHomelaDd Secmity Washington DC 10229
bull ~
US Customs and Border Protection
AUG 15 2fXJJ
VE5-3-02-QTRRBSTCCCI - ti015502-GG-
Mr leon Sutcliffe Director Port Operations Camivai Cruise Unes Camival Place 3655 NW 87Avenue Miami Aorlda 33178
RE P~nger Vessef Services Ad Coastwise Transportation 46 USC sect 55103 19 CFR sect 480a(b)
Dear Mr Sutcliffe
As you know US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) enforces the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) codified at TItle 46 United States Code section 55103 (46 USC 55103) This statute prohibits non-coastwise-qualifled vessels (ie those vessels not US-buill owned and documented with a coastwise endorsement) from transporting passengers between porls or places within the United States The regUlations promUlgated pursuant to the PVSA are found at TrtJe 19 Code of Federal Regulations section 4808 (19 CFR 4808)
It has come to our attention that passenger vessels of your company are engaging in cruise itineraries that include ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands Two USAlagged coastwise-endorsed passenger vessefs are also currenUy engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of caD wittlin the Hawaiian Islands
As part of your cruise itineraries some of your foreign-flagged vessels depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period and ultimately rebJm to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their endse For example the MS ZAANDAM of Holand America Lines departs San Diego cruises the Hawaiian Islands stops in Ensenada from 800pm to 11 OOpmbull and returns to san Diego CBP believes these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because It appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA -- - - ~~~------
Please be advised that CBP is taking steps to publish this position Should have any questions pertaining to this matter please contact Mr Glen Vereb Chief Cargo Security Carriers and Immigration Branch at (202) 572-8724
Sincerely
F Jl E EST Y LEe A U I 5 I N Gmiddot
December 21 2007
The Honorable W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection co Border Security Regulations Branch Office ofInternational Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229
Re Hawaii Coastwise Cruises (USCBP-2007-0098) Comments in Response to Proposed Interpretation
Dear Commissioner Basham
NCL America Inc1 (NCLA) submits these comments in support ofthe efforts ofCustoms and Border Protection to enforce the Passenger Vessel Services Act and the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative as applied to Hawaii coastwise cruises
1 Introduction and Summary of Position
NCLA operates three large oceangoing US flag cruise ships in Hawaii These ships are documented under US flag and are required to operate in regular service in Hawaii pursuant to the authority of the Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative a 2003 federal statute intended to revitalize the US flag cruise industry and to maximize economic and national security benefits to the United States (the 2003 Act)
NCLA has invested $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships pursuant to the 2003 Act and in direct reliance on the protections of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) and its proper enforcement The PVSA limits the transportation ofpassengers between US ports to coastwise documented US flag ships Its statutory protections recognize that US flag ships have significantly higher operational costs in part because they are subject to more stringent US laws including US labor laws and federal
1 NCL America Inc is a US corporation incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware headquartered in Honolulu Hawaii As a US corporation it is subject to US taxes at both the federal and state level The Chief Executive Officer the Chairman of the Board and all of the Board of Directors of NCL America are US citizens The company is also subject to US labor and employment laws and is required by statute to maintain a workforce comprised primarily ofUS citizens
700 Bishop St SUite 900 I Honolulu HawMi 96813 I Tel 8085273800 Fax 8085273820 I ndcom
2
income tax among others The NCLA ships operating in Hawaii are the only large oceangoing cruise ships operating under US flag In furtherance of the policy goals of the PVSA and the 2003 Act these ships have created over 4000 seafaring jobs all subject to US minimum wage and other labor statutes
Since 2003 there has been a significant increase in capacity in the Hawaii market from foreign flag ships providing cruise service to Hawaii from the West Coast Many of these foreign flag cruises are marketed as Hawaii cruises and consist entirely ofUS ports ofcall with the sole exception of a token stop in Mexico for as little as an hour late at night under circumstances where passengers are not permitted to get offthe ship There are no reported rulings approving these particular foreign flag itineraries
Lower cost foreign competition in the Hawaii market has unfairly hurt NCLAs operations NCLA has incurred substantial losses which have contributed significantly to its decision earlier this year to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAll from US flag and reshydeploy it foreign Unfair foreign competition poses an imminent threat to the remaining US flag passenger vessels operating in the Hawaii trades pursuant to the 2003 Act
As the agency statutorily charged with implementation of the 2003 Act the US Department ofTransportation Maritime Administration (MARAn) is aware of the threat foreign flag Hawaii itineraries pose to the US flag fleet and brought the situation to the attention ofthe US Department ofHomeland Security Bureau ofCustoms and Border Protection (CBP or Customs) Customs determined that the primary object of these itineraries was coastwise and that the Ensenada stop was an evasion of the PVSA
In August 2007 Customs provided written notice to the affected foreign lines and their trade association that the existing itineraries were contrary to the PVSA None of these lines sought advance rulings even after the Customs notice with respect to their Hawaii itineraries pursuant to Customs regulations and many continued to market the itineraries as Hawaii cruises NCLA supports the efforts ofCustoms and MARAD to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act for Hawaii cruises
2 Statutory Authority for Customs Proposed Interpretation
(a) Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA)
Congress passed the PVSA in 1886 to protect the US maritime transportation industry from foreign competition2 Protection is afforded through penalty assessments on foreign vessels transporting passengers between US ports or places directly or by way ofa foreign port 3 As Congress and the courts have recognized coastwise protections for the US maritime transportation industry are only one dimension of the PVSA Operating in conjunction with other coastwise laws and with the US
2 See United States v Honduran SS GRANADA 35 F Supp 892 894 (BD Pa 1940)(citing purpose of PVSA to meet threats to the practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping which was to be preserved for US ships)
46 USc sect 55103 (originally 46 USC App 289)
3
documentation laws the PVSA also enhances military sealift in times ofnational emergency sustains a US merchant marine and supports the US shipbuilding and repair industry4
(b) Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative (the 2003 Act)
Over the past decade Congress has sought to reinforce the goals of the PVSA by providing mechanisms to revitalize the oceangoing US flag cruise fleet particularly in Hawaii The Project America legislation enacted in 1997 authorized among other things the re~flagging ofone existing cruise ship contingent on the operator contracting for the construction oftwo new oceangoing cruise shipss Following the default of the operator under the original contract Congress enacted the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative for the purpose ofrecovering economic and national security benefits to the United States bull 6 These same goals of the original PVSA were expressly referenced in the legislative history of the 2003 Act which emphasized that these ships will be assets available in time ofnational emergency and will significantly expand the pool ofqualified seafarers upon which the US Department ofDefense relies to crew non-combatant vessels
The 2003 Act authorizes the US documentation ofthree cruise ships for operation in regular service in Hawaii subject to certain conditions including a prohibition on operating in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico and the Caribbean Sea and a requirement that all vessel repair work be undertaken in the United States MARAD is charged with implementation of the 2003 Act
3 Customs Implementation of PVSA
(a) Regulations
The current regulations implementing the PVSA were published by Customs in 19858 The growth of the foreign flag cruise industry in North America and in particular the development of the Alaska cruise market led to an effort in 1984 to amend the thenshyexisting regulations to increase the ease of administration and operational flexibility The effort to change the regulation had support from US port interests who saw benefit in the potential increase in the number ofUS ports that foreign vessels could call and was opposed by proponents ofpotential US flag projects as detrimental to efforts to revitalize the US fleet 9 The preamble to the 1985 rule emphasized that it was of paramount importance to consider the primary object ofpassengers in taking a
4 See American Hawaii Cruises v Skinner 713 F Supp 452 457 (DDC 1989) (recognizing the contribution of the PVSA and the Jones Act in helping to secure national defense by maintaining a merchant marine oftbe best equipped and most suitable types ofvessels sufficient to serve in time of war or national emergency) see also Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 30 (DC Cir 1984) Wirth Ltd v SIS Acadia Forest 537 F2d 1272 1281 n32 (5th Cir 1976) S Public Law 105-56 Section 8109 (111 Stat 1203 1244) (Oct 81997 ) 6 Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II General Provisions - Department ofCommerce Section 211 (117 Stat 1179) (Feb 20 2003) 1 149 Cong Rec S1118 (dailyed Jan 17 2003(statement ofSenator Inouye) 8 19 CFR sect 480a 950 Fed Reg 26981 (July I 1985)
4
voyage10 a concept which is reinforced elsewhere in Customs regulations11 In its analysis of the comments received at the time Customs accepted the view ofport interests that the modified rule would help their business but did so recognizing the absence ofa regular salt water US flag passenger fleet Customs acknowledged the potential harm to prospective efforts to revitalize the US flag passenger fleet and expressly cautioned that if it were ever shown that coastwise qualified vessels in competition with foreign vessels were in fact hurt by the modified Customs regulation then Customs would immediately reconsider its position12
(b) Customs Rulings
Given the significant penalties associated with violating the PVSA13 Customs regulations expressly provide a mechanism for the owner or charterer of a foreign vessel or any other interested person to request an advisory ruling as to whether a contemplated voyage would be considered in violation of the PVSA14 Customs regulations provide that vessel operators can rely on these ruling letters only to the extent that the facts and circumstances are identical to those in the ruling letter IS
Notwithstanding the fact that several foreign cruise lines offer Hawaii itineraries originating in a US mainland port and calling at Hawaii ports with a token intervening stop in Mexico there are no reported rulings expressly approving such an itinerary for these foreign cruise lines 16
4 The Cruise Industry in Hawaii
(a) NCL America Returns US flag to the Oceangoing Passenger Fleet
Pursuant to the requirements ofthe 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative NCLA agreed to promote US-flag cruising enhance military sealift capacity and expand the US maritime labor base No other major cruise line had ever undertaken such a commitment to the US flag and the public policy objectives Congress sought to achieve under the PVSA or the 2003 Act Introduction ofPRIDE OF ALOHA in 2004 was a significant development in the maritime industry because it marked the restoration ofthe
10 Id at 26983 11 Customs Regulations include a provision on the effect ofruling letters and with respect to carrier rulings the applicable regulation refers to rulings setting forth a determination as to whether or not the primary object of a contemplated voyage is coastwise transportation in violation of46 USC sect 289 [pYSA codified at 46 USC sect55103] 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 12 50 Fed Reg at 26983 13 A modem cruise ship with 2400 passengers for example would be subject to a fine of$720OOO per cruise based on the statutory penalty of$300 for each passenger transported in violation of the Act 14 19 CFR sect 480a(d) IS 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 16 There is one older reported mling involving a request to drop the Ensenada port call from a Los AngeleslHawaiiLos Angeles itinerary which Customs held would violate the PYSA In dicta Customs acknowledged that the itinerary could be in compliance if the Ensenada call were not dropped but did not address the issue ofwhether a one hour service call where no passengers depart the vessel would be sufficient The carrier that obtained that ruling has since left the Hawaii market See Customs Ruling HQ 114078 re Crystal Hannony (Nov 4 1997)
5
us flag to the oceangoing cruise industry A contemporaneous press release from the Us Department ofTransportation reported that the three US-flag cruise ships to be introduced pursuant to the 2003 Act were expected to create more than 20000 US jobs generate more than $825 million ofexpenditures in the US economy and create nearly $360 million in federal tax revenue by the end of 200717 In 2005 the PRIDE OF AMERICA was introduced and in 2006 the third vessel PRIDE OF HAWAll was introduced to Hawaii Both the PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAIl offer 7shyday inter-island Hawaii itineraries whereas PRIDE OF ALOHA operates on 7 and 10 day cruises exclusively among the islands ofHawaii as well as 11 day cruises that include a foreign port call at Fanning Island To date NCLA has invested over $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships in furtherance ofthe policy objectives of the PVSA and the 2003 Act These ships employ over 4000 seafarers and generate hundreds ofmillions of dollars in benefits for Hawaii and the nation
(b) Significant Increase in Foreign Flag Capacity Since 2003
The most significant change in the Hawaii cruise market since 2003 has been the dramatic increase in capacity A significant portion ofthis capacity increase is directly attributable to NCLAs fulfillment ofthe Congressional mandate in the 2003 Act However foreign-flag operations in the Hawaii market as measured in passenger nights18 have skyrocketed Based on MARAn data derived from the US Customs Border Patrol Vessel Entrance and Clearance documents the passenger nights for foreign flag vessels departing from the West Coast to Hawaii on round trip cruise have increased several hundredfold during this period19 See Exhibit A
(c) NCLA Has Incurred Substantial Losses During this Period
Since 2004 NCLA has lost cumulatively more than a quarter ofa billion dollars A principal reason for these losses has been the increase in foreign capacity in this market NCLA has taken significant steps to reduce costs to address the increase in foreign competition but NCLA is at an inherent disadvantage when competing against foreign companies that are not subject to US labor laws US tax laws and other laws Ofcourse the statutory protections of the PVSA are intended to address these very issues That is why Customs immediate action to implement the proposed interpretation is critical for the US flag fleet Regrettably NCLA has already been forced to reduce overall capacity early next year with the withdrawal ofPRIDE OF HAWAlI to another
17 DOT Press Release dated June 72004 see also DOT Press Release dated August 132004 in connection with visit to PRIDE OF ALOHA by US Transportation Secretary Norman Y Mineta 11 Passenger nights (also referred to as passenger capacity days) are calculated by multiplying the number ofpassengers per vessel by the number ofcruise days in each itinerary by the number of cruises This is the unit ofmeasurement employed by MARAn In contrast passenger bed supply (also referred to as passenger capacity) data reflects only the number ofberths per vessel multiplied by the number of cruises and hence understates the market by excluding the full economic value ofthe cruise perfonned 19 In 2003 the total number ofpassenger nights for round-trip West Coast to Hawaii cruises was 303325 which jumped by 353 to 1072329 in 2006 and by 430 to 1304546 from 2003 to 2007 (The 2007 figure is based on MARAD data for six months and a1ll1ualized by published itineraries for the balance of the year)
6
market for operation under foreign flag This move alone will result in the loss ofover 1000 American seafaring jobs
5 Customs Proposed Interpretation is Necessary to Further the Important National Security and Public Policy Objectives Embodied in Federal Law
As Customs has properly noted the increase in foreign competition in the Hawaii trades in contravention of the PVSA pose[s] an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels[] As the operator of these ships NCLA has a vested interest in protecting the jobs ofthe thousands ofAmerican crewmembers and cruise ship service providers who support these vessels NCLA also has an interest in protecting the substantial economic investment it has made to revitalize the US flag passenger vessel fleet But a balancing of interests in the context of Customs enforcement ofexisting law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act requires a much broader focus
The legislative history of the 2003 Act expressly recognized the national security and public policy import ofestablishing a US flag passenger vessel fleet as a means to maintain the countrys preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool of qualified seafarers and as a means to help sustain a fleet ofUS-flag vessels to su~ort
the nations military and maritime industrial base for times ofnational emergency
Congress understood the importance ofestablishing a viable US flag cruise ship fleet as something larger than the vessels themselves These national security and public policy objectives must be weighed in the balance as Customs assesses how best to interpret its rules to give effect to the PVSA and the 2003 Act
6 Customs Should Clarify that the Proposed Interpretation is Limited to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades and Adopt Reasonable Measures to Ensure Sufficient Foreign Content
Since publication ofthe proposed interpretative rule several commenters have observed that the scope of the proposed interpretation is ambiguous because the language of Section VI referencing any cruise itinerary appears broader than the caption Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises and the entire discussion in the published notice which focuses exclusively on US-flag coastwise vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA agrees that the proposed interpretation should be clarified so that its scope is limited to vessels operating roundtrip voyages from US ports that include Hawaii port calls
NCLA supports the concept reflected in the proposed interpretive rule that round trip Hawaii itineraries from US ports on foreign ships must include a material and measurable degree ofoverall foreign port content as compared to US port content
20 149 Congo Rec S1117 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)
7
(a) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is also Consistent with Subsequent Congressional Enactments Modifying the PVSA
As discussed above it is well established that the PVSA was designed toRrotect US-flag vessels from foreign competition in the coastwise and domestic trades 1
Subsequent legislative enactments however have appropriately differentiated among distinct geographic markets and trades including Canada Alaska Puerto Rico and Hawaii based on the existence or non-existence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
In 1938 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers by Canadian passenger vessels on Lake Ontario and the St Lawrence River until such time as passenger service shall be established by vessels of the United States22 Similarly in 1961 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers on Canadian vessels within Alaska or between Alaska and other points in the United States until such time as passenger service is established by vessels ofthe United States23
In 1984 Congress modified the application ofthe PVSA to pennit the transportation ofpassengers between Puerto Rico and other United States ports on foreign-flag vessels24 As with the other statutory exceptions this provision is qualified and expires [o]n a showing that a United States passenger vessel qualified to engage in the coastwise trade is offering or advertising passenger service between a port in Puerto Rico and another port in the United States2S
Congress acted again with respect to the application of the PVSA with the 2003 Act in which it authorized three vessels that did not meet the US-build requirements of the PVSA to operate as modem US-flagged cruise ships in regular service in Hawaii26 The 2003 Act imposes a specific geographic limitation on the operation of any ship documented under this authority to operations only in regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands ofHawaii and shall not transport passengers in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico or the Caribbean Sea except in certain limited circumstances27 As above the limited nature of the 2003 Act is express it is strictly limited to the large ocean-going cruise ships and then only those operating in the regular Hawaii service where there are no US-flag operations28
21 See Act ofJune 19 1886 c 421 sec 8 24 Stat 81 Act of February 171898 c 26 sec 2 30 Stat 248 22 S] Res 174 75th Cong 52 Stat 223 (Alp 251938) codified at46 USC sect 55121(a) 23 See Pub L 87-77 75 Stat 196 (Jun 30 1961) codified at 46 USC sect 55121(b) 24 See Pub L 98-563 98 Stat 2916 (Oct 301984) codified at 46 USC sect 55104(b) 25 46 USC sect 55104(c)(l) see also 46 USC 46 USc sect 55104(cX2)(expiration of exemption upon availability ofa non-coastwise qualified US-flag vessel offering service in the relevant market) 26 149 Congo Rec SI118 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)(statementofSen Inouye) 27 Pub L 108-7 117 Stat 79 (Feb 20 2003) 28 149 Congo Rec S11l9 (dailyed Jan 17 2003Xstatement of Sen Inouye)
8
In each ofthese instances Congress fashioned a narrow exception to the PVSA that differentiated among distinct geographic markets based on the existence or nonshyexistence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
As the federal agency responsible for administering the 2003 Act MARAD requested that Customs act to protect US flag passenger vessel interests in the Hawaii trades29 Limiting the scope ofthe proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades also reflects Customs appreciation of the PVSA in the context of the subsequent Congressional action30 Viewing the Congressional modifications to the PVSA as a whole Congress has specifically and repeatedly differentiated among distinct geographic markets when it has found it necessary and appropriate to do so to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests It is well established that the proper interpretation of a statutory scheme includes consideration ofsubsequent statutes even though the underlying statute itselfhas not been expressly amended31 Accordingly Customs should likewise limit the scope ofthe proposed PVSA interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades because that is the only geographic market as mandated by the 2003 Act in which oceangoing US-flag cruise ships are operating
(b) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Consistent with Public Policy Objectives of the 1985 Rulemaking
In 1985middot Customs liberalized the regulations implementing the PVSA by eliminating certain regulatory prohibitions on foreign flag vessels In the context of the 1985 rulemaking Customs justified a relaxation ofthe regulations on the grounds that it would simplify the administration of the PVSA and would benefit the economy ofcertain American coastwise ports without eroding the statutory protection given to American vessels engaged in solely domestic trade32
Customs thus sought to reconcile US port economic interests with US-flag passenger vessel interests Both of these twin policy objectives are furthered by
29 See 72 Fed Reg 65488 (Nov 21 2007)( MARAn bas asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the ~eratiODS ofcoastwise-qualified cruise ship operators)
See generally FDA v Brown amp Williamson Tobacco Corp 529 US 120 132-133 (2000)(assessing propriety ofagency construction ofFood DIUg and Cosmetics Act and descnbing responsibility of reviewing cowt to assess statutory provisions in the context of subsequent legislative enactments) 31 See Brown amp Williamson 529 US 143 (holding that proper construction ofstatutory provision must necessarily assume that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications ofa later statute This is particularly so where the scope of the earlier statute is broad but the subsequent statutes more specifically address the topic athand) see also United States v Estate ofRomani 523 US 517 530-531 (1998)( holding that a later-enacted statute should control the construction of the federal lien priority statute a specific policy embodied in a later federal statute should control om construction of the [earlier] statute even though it ha[s] not been expressly amended) United States v Fausto 484 US 439453 (1988)(The courts frequently find Congress to have done this - whenever in fact they interpret a statutory text in the light ofsurrounding texts that happen to have been subsequently enacted This classic judicial task of reconciling many laws enacted over time and getting them to make sense in combination necessarily assumes that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications of a later statute) 32 50 Fed Reg 26982 (JuI 11985)
9
limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades
As noted earlier the 2003 Act limits the operation of the NCLA US-flag oceangoing passenger vessels to regular service in Hawaii Because there are no oceangoing US-flag vessels operating in any market other than the Hawaii trades Customs should limit the scope of the proposed interPretation to that market Such a limitation protects US flag passenger vessel interests without prejudicing US port interests In contrast an application of the proposed interpretation to any itinerary would needlessly harm US port interests unrelated to Hawaii without any countervailing benefit to US-flag passenger vessel interests Accordingly limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation is consistent with the public policy objectives of the 1985 rulemaking as well as the 2003 Act
(c) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Also Consistent with Customs Commitment to Revisit the Scope of its Rules to Protect US-Flag Interests
The relaxation ofthe PVSA regulations in 1985 was premised in large part on Customs finding that there was no regular salt water US-flag passenger fleet in operation at that time33 Acknowledging that the relaxed regulations could harm USshyflag interests Customs committed in the preamble ofthe 1985 final rule to immediately reconsider its interpretation if it is ever shown that there is a viable US flag vessel operating in competition with foreign-flag vessels34
Congress enacted the 2003 Act to stimulate the development of a US flag cruise ship industry As noted above the legislative history ofthat Act makes clear that Congress sought to revitalize the US-flag cruise industry as a means to maintain Americas preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool ofqualified seafarers help sustain a fleet of US flag vessels to support our military and a maritime industrial base create thousands of seagoing and shoreside American jobs and stimulate the development ofa US flag cruise ship tourism business with the commensurate benefits to the US tax base the US economy and US employment
Customs is now acting at MARADs request to revisit its interpretation ofthe regulations implementing the PVSA because recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwise-qualified cruise ship operations35 That is to say that the concerns articulated by Customs in the context of the 1985 rulemaking have materialized and US-flag passenger vessel interests are in fact being hanned in the Hawaii trades by foreign competitors
33 50 Fed Reg 26983 34Id
3S 72 Fed Reg 56488 (Nov 21 2007)
I
10
Because the US-flag passenger vessels are limited by statute to regular service in Hawaii limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the
Hawaii trades is consistent with Customs historical commitment to revisit its interpretation ofthe implementing regulations to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests
7 Conclusion
For the reasons stated above NCLA commends the efforts ofCustoms and MARAn to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act as applied to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA respectfully requests Customs to move ahead promptly with p~blicati~nof a final interpretive rule to advance the important national security arid public policy objectives ofthese laws
We greatly appreciate the opportunity to submit these comments
Sincerely
~~~ Alan T Yamamoto Vice President Hawaii Operations
Exhibit A
Ship Name Serenade Of The Seas Departure Port San Diego California Ports of Call San Diego California Kailua Kona Hawaii Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii Hlo Hawaii Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii Ensenada Mexico San Qigo California
2007 Date(s) Oct 05
Sailing Itinerary
Day Port H ~rrive Depart Activity
05-0ct San Diego California 500 PM
06-0ct Cruising
07-0ct Cruising
08-0ct Cruising
09-0ct Cruising
10-0ct Kailua Kona Hawaii 700 AM 900 PM Tendered
11-00t Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 1000 AM Tendered
12middot0ct Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 900 PM Tendered
13-0ct Hilo Hawaii 700 AM 600 PM Docked
14middot0ct Honoulu (Oahu) Hawaii 700 AM Docked
15-0ct Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii 200 AM Docked
6-0ct CrUising
17-0ct Cruising
18-0ct Cruising
19middot0ct Cruising
-7 20-00t
O-Oot
Ensenada ~i1exico
San Deqo California
i 00 ~r1
700 ~M
200 oM D1Jcked ~
View Rule Page 11
Shere D find Federal ReguLatory InformciiorlReglnfogov Home J Cnified Agenda al1d Regulatory Plan EO 12866 Regulatory Reyiew Information Collection Reiew
Current rnified Agenda and Regulatory Plan Historical Pnified Agenda and Regulatory Plan Search
View Rule
DHSIUSCBP RIN 1651-AA76 Publication ill Spring 2008
Title llCoastwise Transportation of Passengers
Abstract This interim rule amends the Department of Homeland Securitys (DHS) current regulations relating to the transportation of passengers by non-coastwise-qualified vessels on voyages that begin and end at a US port and stop at intervening US and foreign port(s) Under this interim final rule voyages that begin and end at a US port and stop at a foreign port(s) and at intervening US port(s) where a large USshyflag coastwise-qualified passenger vessel engages in regular service are in violation of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) unless the cumulative length of stay(s) at intervening foreign port(s) is more than 50 percent of the total amount of time spent at the intervening US port(s) and passengers are permitted to go ashore at the foreign port(s) The purpose of this amendment is to ensure that the Congressional purpose in enacting the PVSA which is to preserve the economic benefits of US coastwise trade to US-flag coastwise-qualified vessels is properly implemented
Agency Department of Homeland Security(DHS) Priority Substantive Nonsignificant
KIN Status First time published in the Unified Agenda Agenda Stage of Rulemaking Final Rule Stage
Major No Unfunded Mandates No
CFR Citation -LCER 4J~)(h)(plusmnJ
Legal Authority 5JJSS_30J12lJ-SClt16 J9_lJiCJ 431 9_L1C1plusmn3JJ2JScHJ1J2JSCJ624 L(LlLSc207LIl(gtJfHgt~ _CiQJ _46lSC 6QLQ~
Legal Deadline None
Timetable Action Date FR Cite
Interim Final Action 0510012008
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis Required No Government Levels Affected None
Federalism No
Included in the Regulatory Plan No
RIN Data Printed in the FR No
Agency Contact Glen E Vereb Chief Entry Procedures and Carriers Branch Department of Homeland Security US Customs and Border Protection Office of Regulations and Rulings 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington DC 20229 Phone202572-8730
Disclosure I Accessibility I Privacy Policy I Contact Us
httpwwwreginfogovpublicdoeAgendaViewRuleruleID=286751 7128120
Federal RegisterVol 72 No 224Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules 65487
SPECULATIVE POSITION LIMITS 1-Continued [In contract units)
Contract
Soybeans and Mini-Soybeans 2
Wheat and Mini-Wheat 2 bullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbull
Soybean Oil
SingleSpot month All monthsmonth
600 8600 13300 600 11100 14500 540 6600 8600
Soybean Meal 720 5500 7100
Minneapolis Grain Exchange
Hard Red Spring Wheat I 600 I 11100 I 14500
New York Board of Trade
Cotton No2 I 300 I 5300 I 7300
Kansas City Board of Trade
Hard Winter Wheat I 600 I 11100 I 14500
1 For purposes of compliance with these limits positions in a futures contract that shares ~ubstantially identical terms with a contract market enumerated herein including a futures contract that is cash-settled based on the settlement price of an enumerated contract market shall be agshygregated with positions in the enumerated contract market
2 For purposes of compliance with these limits positions in the regular-sized and mini-sized contracts shall be aggregated
Issued by the Commission this November 152007 in Washington DC David Stawick Secretary of the Commission [FR Doc E7-22681 Filed 11-20-07 845 amI BILLING CODE 6351-Q1-P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Bureau of Customs and Border Protection
19 CFR Part 4
[USCBP-2007-o098]
Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises
AGENCY Customs and Border Protection Department of Homeland Security ACTION Proposed interpretation solicitation of comments
SUMMARY This document proposes new criteria to be used by Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to determine whether non-coastwise-qualified vessels are in violation ofthe Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) when engaging in cruise itineraries in which passengers board at a US port the vessel calls at several Hawaiian ports and then the vessel proceeds to a foreign port or ports for a brief period before ultimately returning to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their cruise CBP believes these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because it appears that the primary objective of the foreign stop is evasion of the PVSA
DATES Comments must be received on or before December 212007 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT Glen E Vereb Cargo Security Carriers amp Immigration Branch Office of International Trade (202) 572-8730 ADDRESSES You may submit comments identified by docket number by one of the following methods
bull Federal eRulemaking Portal http wwwregulationsgov Follow the instructions for submitting comments
bull Mail Border Security Regulations Branch Office of International Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
I Public Participation
Interested persons are invited to participate in this proposed interpretation by submitting written data views or arguments on all aspects of the proposed interpretation Customs and Border Protection (CBP) also invites comments that relate to the economic environmental or federalism effects that might result from this proposed interpretation Comments that will provide the most assistance to CBP in developing these procedures will reference a specific portion of the proposed interpretation explain the reason for any recommended change and include data information or authority that support such recommended change
Instructions All submissions received must include the agency name and docket number for this proposed
interpretation All comments received will be posted without change to http wwwregulationsgov including any personal information provided
Docket For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received go to http wwwregulationsgov Submitted comments may also be inspected on regular business days between the hours of 9 am and 430 pm at the Office of International Trade Customs and Border Protection 799 9th Street NW 5th Floor Washington DC Arrangements to inspect submitted documents should be made in advance by calling Mr Joseph Clark at (202) 572shy8768
II Background
The maritime cabotage law governing the transportation of passengers was first established by section 8 of the Passenger Vessel Services Act of June 191886 (the PVSA) 24 Stat 81 as amended by section 2 of the Act of February 17 1898 30 Stat 248 formerly codified at 46 USC App 289 (now codified at 46 USC 55103) 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 of $200 (now $300 as promulgated in TD 03-11 pursuant to the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 199028 USC 2461 note) for each passenger so transported and landed
The intent of the maritime cabotage laws including the PVSA was to provide a legal structure that guarantees a coastwise monopoly to
65488 Federal RegisterVol 72 No 224Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules
American shipping and thereby promotes development of the American merchant marine Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 28 (DC Cir 1984) see also The Granada 35 FSupp 892 8931940 AMC 1601 (DC Pa 1940) (stating that the legislative aim of section 289 [now 55102] was the creation of a practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping business for United States ships) In other words the PVSA was enacted to advance the United States merchant marine and fleet by restricting the use of foreign-ownedflagged passenger vessels in United States territorial waters
Passenger vessel transportation between United States ports has historically been viewed to be part of the coastwise trade after the enactment of the PVSA This view is premised on the concepts of continuity of the voyage and whether its intended purpose or objective was coastwise transportation In other words the PVSA was held to be violated if the coastwise movement was continuous or if the purpose of the trip was a coastwise voyage (See 18 OAG 445 September 4 1886 28 OAG 204 February 16 1910 29 OAG 318 February 12 1912 30 OAG 44 February 1 1913 34 OAG 340 December 24 1924 and 36 OAG 352 August 13 1930)
The CBP regulations promulgated pursuant to the PVSA are found at section 480a of title 19 of the Code of Federal Regulations (19 CFR 480a) and are reflective of the above cited Office of the Attorney General decisions These regulations provide among other things that a non-coastwise-qualified vessel which embarks a passenger at a port in the United States embraced within the coastwise laws (a coastwise port) will be deemed to have landed that passenger in violation of the PVSA if the passenger disembarks at a different coastwise port on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a nearby foreign port or ports (as defined in 19 CFR 480a(a)(2) see also 19 CFR 480a(b)(2)) The terms embark and disembark are words of art which are defined as going on board a vessel for the duration of a specific voyage and leaving a vessel at the conclusion of a specific voyage respectively (See 19 CFR 480a(a)(4))
The references in section 480a to nearby foreign ports (defined in 19 CFR 480a(a)(2)) are the results of attempts by CBP to apply an Office of the Attorney Generals opinion dated February 26 1910 (28 OAG 204) In that case a foreign-flag vessel transported 615 passengers on a voyage around the world beginning in New
York and concluding in San Francisco The Attorney General opined that since the primary object of the voyage was to visit various parts of the world on a pleasure tour returning home via California and not to be transported in domestic commerce the transportation was not in violation of the PVSA
The 1910 Attorney Generals opinion was extended to voyages that included foreign ports other than nearby foreign ports (See Treasury Decision (TD) 68shy285 (33 FR 16558) November 14 1968) However voyages solely to one or more coastwise ports have always been considered predominantly coastwise Therefore non-coastwise-qualified vessels engaging in such a voyage where passengers temporarily go ashore at a coastwise port have been deemed to have violated the PVSA
m Current Law and Policy Pursuant to Public Law 109-304 120
Stat 1632 enacted on October 6 2006 Title 46 United States Code was substantially reorganized and recodified Consequently the PVSA is now codified at 46 USC 55103 and provides that no vessel shall transport passengers between ports or places in the United States either directly or by way of a foreign port under a penalty of $300 for each person so transported and landed except one that (1) Is wholly owned by citizens of the United States for purposes of engaging in the coastwise trade and (2) has been issued a certificate of documentation with a coastwise endorsement or is exempt from documentation but would otherwise be eligible for such a certificate and endorsement
In 2003 Congress enacted Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II Section 211 for the purpose of revitalizing the oceangoing US-flag cruise industry in Hawaii (the 2003 Act) Three oceangoing US-flag cruise ships PRIDE OF ALOHA PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAII were documented with coastwise privileges pursuant to the 2003 Act These vessels entered regular service in Hawaii in 2004 2005 and 2006 respectively and pursuant to the express language of the 2003 Act are limited in their operation to providing regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands of Hawaii
The CBP regulations promulgated pursuant to the PVSA are set forth in 19 CFR 480a and have remained unchanged throughout both the recodification of Title 46 of the United States Code and the enactment of the 2003 Act They provide that a violation of the PVSA occurs when passengers embark (board a vessel for the
duration of a voyage) a non-coastwiseshyqualified vessel at one US port and disembark (leave the vessel at the conclusion of a voyage) at a different US port unless they proceed with the vessel to a distant foreign port (Le any port not considered a nearby foreign port which is defined as any port located in North America Central America Bermuda or the West Indies including the Bahamas) Currently these regulations do not contain specific criteria for non-coastwise-qualified vessels on itineraries including US ports and either nearby or distant foreign ports in order for such foreign port calls to be compliant with the PVSA
To reiterate the applicable CBP regulations provide that the PVSA is violated when a non-coastwise-qualified vessel transports a passenger on a voyage solely to one or more coastwise ports and the passenger disembarks or goes ashore temporarily at a coastwise port (19 CFR 480a(b)(1)) Furthermore a violation of the PVSA also occurs when a non-coastwise-qualified vessel transports a passenger on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a nearby foreign port or ports (but no other foreign port) and the passenger disembarks at a coastwise port other than the port of embarkation (19 CFR 480a(b)(2)) However there is no violation of the PVSA when a passenger is on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a distant foreign port or ports (whether or not the voyage includes a nearby foreign port or ports) and the passenger disembarks at a coastwise port provided the passenger has proceeded with the vessel to a distant foreign port (19 CFR 480a(b)(3))
IV Request From MARAD To Provide Guidance
The US Department of Transportation Maritime Administration (MARAD) has requested that CBP take action to ensure enforcement of the PVSA MARAD has asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreignshyflag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwiseshyqualified cruise ship operators
In April of 2007 the operator of the three US-flag cruise vessels operating solely in Hawaii pursuant to the 2003 Act announced their intent to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAIl from the Hawaii market and redeploy her to Europe The operator intends to re-flag the vessel to foreign registry directly resulting in the loss of over 1100 crewmember jobs The primary reason cited for this decision is the rapid increase in foreign-flag competition entering the Hawaii market
Federal Register I Vol 72 No 224 I Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules 65489
from the West Coast This competition is evidenced in published cruise itineraries of foreign-flag carriers offering a variety of round trip cruises that depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period usually in the early morning and ultimately return to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their cruise These cruises are often marketed as Hawaii cruises and except for the brief stop in the nearby foreign port of Ensenada are purely coastwise in nature It is these cruise itineraries that pose an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels that pursuant to the 2003 Act are currently engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands
V Preliminary Notice
In response to MARADs concerns CBP sent letters to two carriers known to operate the itineraries in question as well as to the Cruise Lines International Association Inc stating that CBP believes that these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because it appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA The letters further indicated that CBP is taking steps to publish this position
VI CBPs Proposed Interpretive Rule Accordingly in this document CBP is
proposing to provide that cruise itineraries for non-qualified coastwise vessels which allow passengers to board at a US port call at several Hawaiian ports proceed to a foreign port or ports for a brief period and then ultimately return to the original US port of embarkation for disembarkation are not consistent with the PVSA and the regulations promulgated pursuant thereto Specifically CBP interprets a voyage to be solely to one or more coastwise ports even where it stops at a foreign port unless the stop at the foreign port is a legitimate object of the cruise CBP will presume that a stop at a foreign port is not a legitimate object of the cruise unless
(1) The stop lasts at least 48 hours at the foreign port
(2) The amount of time at the foreign port is more than 50 percent of the total amount of time at the US ports of call and
(3) The passengers are permitted to go ashore temporarily at the foreign port
Accordingly CBP proposes to adopt an interpretive rule under which it will presume that any cruise itinerary that does not include a foreign port call that
satisfies each of these three criteria constitutes coastwise transportation of passengers in violation of 19 CFR 480a(b)(1)
Dated November 16 2007 W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection [FR Doc E7-22788 Filed 11-20-07 845 am] BILLING CODe 9111-14-1
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau
27 CFR Part 9
[Notice No 76]
RIN 1513-AB49
Proposed Establishment of the Leona Valley Viticultural Area (2007R-281 P)
AGENCY Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau Treasury ACTION Notice of proposed rulemaking
SUMMARY The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau proposes to establish the 134 square mile Leona Valley viticultural area in the northeast part of Los Angeles County California We designate viticultural areas to allow vintners to better describe the origin of their wines and to allow consumers to better identify wines they may purchase We invite comments on this proposed addition to our regulations DATES We must receive written comments on or before January 22 2008
ADDRESSES You may send comments on this notice to one of the following addresses
bull httpwwwregulationsgov (Federal e-rulemaking portal follow the instructions for submitting comments) or
bull Director Regulations and Rulings Division Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau PO Box 14412 Washington DC 20044-4412
See the Public Participation section of this notice for specific instructions and requirements for submitting comments and for information on how to request a public hearing
You may view copies of this notice selected supporting materials and any comments we receive about this proposal at httpwwwregulationsgov under Docket No 2007-0066 You also may view copies of this notice all related petitions maps or other supporting materials and any comments we receive about this
proposal by appointment at the TTB Information Resource Center 1310 G Street NW Washington DC 20220 To make an appointment call 202-927shy2400
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT NA Sutton Regulations and Rulings Division Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau 925 Lakeville S1 No 158 Petaluma CA 94952 phone 415shy271-1254 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
Background on Viticultural Areas
TTB Authority Section 105(e) of the Federal Alcohol
Administration Act (FAA Act) 27 USC 205(e) authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to prescribe regulations for the labeling of wine distilled spirits and malt beverages The FAA Act provides that these regulations should among other things prohibit consumer deception and the use of misleading statements on labels and ensure that labels provide the consumer with adequate information as to the identity and quality of the product The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) administers the regulations promulgated under the FAA Act
Part 4 ofthe TTB regulations (27 CFR part 4) allows the establishment of definitive viticultural areas and the use of their names as appellations of origin on wine labels and in wine advertisements Part 9 of the TTB regulations (27 CFR part 9) contains the list of approved viticultural areas
Definition Section 425(e)(1)(i) ofthe TTB
regulations (27 CFR 425(e)(1)(i)) defines a viticultural area for American wine as a delimited grape-growing region distinguishable by geographical features the boundaries of which have been recognized and defined in part 9 of the regulations These designations allow vintners and consumers to attribute a given quality reputation or other characteristic of a wine made from grapes grown in an area to its geographic origin The establishment of viticultural areas allows vintners to describe more accurately the origin of their wines to consumers and helps consumers to identify wines they may purchase Establishment of a viticultural area is neither an approval nor an endorsement by TTB of the wine produced in that area
Requirements Section 425(e)(2) of the TTB
regulations outlines the procedure for proposing an American viticultural area and provides that any interested party
Us Department ofHomelaDd Secmity Washington DC 10229
bull ~
US Customs and Border Protection
AUG 15 2fXJJ
VE5-3-02-QTRRBSTCCCI - ti015502-GG-
Mr leon Sutcliffe Director Port Operations Camivai Cruise Unes Camival Place 3655 NW 87Avenue Miami Aorlda 33178
RE P~nger Vessef Services Ad Coastwise Transportation 46 USC sect 55103 19 CFR sect 480a(b)
Dear Mr Sutcliffe
As you know US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) enforces the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) codified at TItle 46 United States Code section 55103 (46 USC 55103) This statute prohibits non-coastwise-qualifled vessels (ie those vessels not US-buill owned and documented with a coastwise endorsement) from transporting passengers between porls or places within the United States The regUlations promUlgated pursuant to the PVSA are found at TrtJe 19 Code of Federal Regulations section 4808 (19 CFR 4808)
It has come to our attention that passenger vessels of your company are engaging in cruise itineraries that include ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands Two USAlagged coastwise-endorsed passenger vessefs are also currenUy engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of caD wittlin the Hawaiian Islands
As part of your cruise itineraries some of your foreign-flagged vessels depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period and ultimately rebJm to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their endse For example the MS ZAANDAM of Holand America Lines departs San Diego cruises the Hawaiian Islands stops in Ensenada from 800pm to 11 OOpmbull and returns to san Diego CBP believes these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because It appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA -- - - ~~~------
Please be advised that CBP is taking steps to publish this position Should have any questions pertaining to this matter please contact Mr Glen Vereb Chief Cargo Security Carriers and Immigration Branch at (202) 572-8724
Sincerely
F Jl E EST Y LEe A U I 5 I N Gmiddot
December 21 2007
The Honorable W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection co Border Security Regulations Branch Office ofInternational Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229
Re Hawaii Coastwise Cruises (USCBP-2007-0098) Comments in Response to Proposed Interpretation
Dear Commissioner Basham
NCL America Inc1 (NCLA) submits these comments in support ofthe efforts ofCustoms and Border Protection to enforce the Passenger Vessel Services Act and the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative as applied to Hawaii coastwise cruises
1 Introduction and Summary of Position
NCLA operates three large oceangoing US flag cruise ships in Hawaii These ships are documented under US flag and are required to operate in regular service in Hawaii pursuant to the authority of the Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative a 2003 federal statute intended to revitalize the US flag cruise industry and to maximize economic and national security benefits to the United States (the 2003 Act)
NCLA has invested $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships pursuant to the 2003 Act and in direct reliance on the protections of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) and its proper enforcement The PVSA limits the transportation ofpassengers between US ports to coastwise documented US flag ships Its statutory protections recognize that US flag ships have significantly higher operational costs in part because they are subject to more stringent US laws including US labor laws and federal
1 NCL America Inc is a US corporation incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware headquartered in Honolulu Hawaii As a US corporation it is subject to US taxes at both the federal and state level The Chief Executive Officer the Chairman of the Board and all of the Board of Directors of NCL America are US citizens The company is also subject to US labor and employment laws and is required by statute to maintain a workforce comprised primarily ofUS citizens
700 Bishop St SUite 900 I Honolulu HawMi 96813 I Tel 8085273800 Fax 8085273820 I ndcom
2
income tax among others The NCLA ships operating in Hawaii are the only large oceangoing cruise ships operating under US flag In furtherance of the policy goals of the PVSA and the 2003 Act these ships have created over 4000 seafaring jobs all subject to US minimum wage and other labor statutes
Since 2003 there has been a significant increase in capacity in the Hawaii market from foreign flag ships providing cruise service to Hawaii from the West Coast Many of these foreign flag cruises are marketed as Hawaii cruises and consist entirely ofUS ports ofcall with the sole exception of a token stop in Mexico for as little as an hour late at night under circumstances where passengers are not permitted to get offthe ship There are no reported rulings approving these particular foreign flag itineraries
Lower cost foreign competition in the Hawaii market has unfairly hurt NCLAs operations NCLA has incurred substantial losses which have contributed significantly to its decision earlier this year to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAll from US flag and reshydeploy it foreign Unfair foreign competition poses an imminent threat to the remaining US flag passenger vessels operating in the Hawaii trades pursuant to the 2003 Act
As the agency statutorily charged with implementation of the 2003 Act the US Department ofTransportation Maritime Administration (MARAn) is aware of the threat foreign flag Hawaii itineraries pose to the US flag fleet and brought the situation to the attention ofthe US Department ofHomeland Security Bureau ofCustoms and Border Protection (CBP or Customs) Customs determined that the primary object of these itineraries was coastwise and that the Ensenada stop was an evasion of the PVSA
In August 2007 Customs provided written notice to the affected foreign lines and their trade association that the existing itineraries were contrary to the PVSA None of these lines sought advance rulings even after the Customs notice with respect to their Hawaii itineraries pursuant to Customs regulations and many continued to market the itineraries as Hawaii cruises NCLA supports the efforts ofCustoms and MARAD to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act for Hawaii cruises
2 Statutory Authority for Customs Proposed Interpretation
(a) Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA)
Congress passed the PVSA in 1886 to protect the US maritime transportation industry from foreign competition2 Protection is afforded through penalty assessments on foreign vessels transporting passengers between US ports or places directly or by way ofa foreign port 3 As Congress and the courts have recognized coastwise protections for the US maritime transportation industry are only one dimension of the PVSA Operating in conjunction with other coastwise laws and with the US
2 See United States v Honduran SS GRANADA 35 F Supp 892 894 (BD Pa 1940)(citing purpose of PVSA to meet threats to the practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping which was to be preserved for US ships)
46 USc sect 55103 (originally 46 USC App 289)
3
documentation laws the PVSA also enhances military sealift in times ofnational emergency sustains a US merchant marine and supports the US shipbuilding and repair industry4
(b) Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative (the 2003 Act)
Over the past decade Congress has sought to reinforce the goals of the PVSA by providing mechanisms to revitalize the oceangoing US flag cruise fleet particularly in Hawaii The Project America legislation enacted in 1997 authorized among other things the re~flagging ofone existing cruise ship contingent on the operator contracting for the construction oftwo new oceangoing cruise shipss Following the default of the operator under the original contract Congress enacted the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative for the purpose ofrecovering economic and national security benefits to the United States bull 6 These same goals of the original PVSA were expressly referenced in the legislative history of the 2003 Act which emphasized that these ships will be assets available in time ofnational emergency and will significantly expand the pool ofqualified seafarers upon which the US Department ofDefense relies to crew non-combatant vessels
The 2003 Act authorizes the US documentation ofthree cruise ships for operation in regular service in Hawaii subject to certain conditions including a prohibition on operating in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico and the Caribbean Sea and a requirement that all vessel repair work be undertaken in the United States MARAD is charged with implementation of the 2003 Act
3 Customs Implementation of PVSA
(a) Regulations
The current regulations implementing the PVSA were published by Customs in 19858 The growth of the foreign flag cruise industry in North America and in particular the development of the Alaska cruise market led to an effort in 1984 to amend the thenshyexisting regulations to increase the ease of administration and operational flexibility The effort to change the regulation had support from US port interests who saw benefit in the potential increase in the number ofUS ports that foreign vessels could call and was opposed by proponents ofpotential US flag projects as detrimental to efforts to revitalize the US fleet 9 The preamble to the 1985 rule emphasized that it was of paramount importance to consider the primary object ofpassengers in taking a
4 See American Hawaii Cruises v Skinner 713 F Supp 452 457 (DDC 1989) (recognizing the contribution of the PVSA and the Jones Act in helping to secure national defense by maintaining a merchant marine oftbe best equipped and most suitable types ofvessels sufficient to serve in time of war or national emergency) see also Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 30 (DC Cir 1984) Wirth Ltd v SIS Acadia Forest 537 F2d 1272 1281 n32 (5th Cir 1976) S Public Law 105-56 Section 8109 (111 Stat 1203 1244) (Oct 81997 ) 6 Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II General Provisions - Department ofCommerce Section 211 (117 Stat 1179) (Feb 20 2003) 1 149 Cong Rec S1118 (dailyed Jan 17 2003(statement ofSenator Inouye) 8 19 CFR sect 480a 950 Fed Reg 26981 (July I 1985)
4
voyage10 a concept which is reinforced elsewhere in Customs regulations11 In its analysis of the comments received at the time Customs accepted the view ofport interests that the modified rule would help their business but did so recognizing the absence ofa regular salt water US flag passenger fleet Customs acknowledged the potential harm to prospective efforts to revitalize the US flag passenger fleet and expressly cautioned that if it were ever shown that coastwise qualified vessels in competition with foreign vessels were in fact hurt by the modified Customs regulation then Customs would immediately reconsider its position12
(b) Customs Rulings
Given the significant penalties associated with violating the PVSA13 Customs regulations expressly provide a mechanism for the owner or charterer of a foreign vessel or any other interested person to request an advisory ruling as to whether a contemplated voyage would be considered in violation of the PVSA14 Customs regulations provide that vessel operators can rely on these ruling letters only to the extent that the facts and circumstances are identical to those in the ruling letter IS
Notwithstanding the fact that several foreign cruise lines offer Hawaii itineraries originating in a US mainland port and calling at Hawaii ports with a token intervening stop in Mexico there are no reported rulings expressly approving such an itinerary for these foreign cruise lines 16
4 The Cruise Industry in Hawaii
(a) NCL America Returns US flag to the Oceangoing Passenger Fleet
Pursuant to the requirements ofthe 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative NCLA agreed to promote US-flag cruising enhance military sealift capacity and expand the US maritime labor base No other major cruise line had ever undertaken such a commitment to the US flag and the public policy objectives Congress sought to achieve under the PVSA or the 2003 Act Introduction ofPRIDE OF ALOHA in 2004 was a significant development in the maritime industry because it marked the restoration ofthe
10 Id at 26983 11 Customs Regulations include a provision on the effect ofruling letters and with respect to carrier rulings the applicable regulation refers to rulings setting forth a determination as to whether or not the primary object of a contemplated voyage is coastwise transportation in violation of46 USC sect 289 [pYSA codified at 46 USC sect55103] 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 12 50 Fed Reg at 26983 13 A modem cruise ship with 2400 passengers for example would be subject to a fine of$720OOO per cruise based on the statutory penalty of$300 for each passenger transported in violation of the Act 14 19 CFR sect 480a(d) IS 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 16 There is one older reported mling involving a request to drop the Ensenada port call from a Los AngeleslHawaiiLos Angeles itinerary which Customs held would violate the PYSA In dicta Customs acknowledged that the itinerary could be in compliance if the Ensenada call were not dropped but did not address the issue ofwhether a one hour service call where no passengers depart the vessel would be sufficient The carrier that obtained that ruling has since left the Hawaii market See Customs Ruling HQ 114078 re Crystal Hannony (Nov 4 1997)
5
us flag to the oceangoing cruise industry A contemporaneous press release from the Us Department ofTransportation reported that the three US-flag cruise ships to be introduced pursuant to the 2003 Act were expected to create more than 20000 US jobs generate more than $825 million ofexpenditures in the US economy and create nearly $360 million in federal tax revenue by the end of 200717 In 2005 the PRIDE OF AMERICA was introduced and in 2006 the third vessel PRIDE OF HAWAll was introduced to Hawaii Both the PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAIl offer 7shyday inter-island Hawaii itineraries whereas PRIDE OF ALOHA operates on 7 and 10 day cruises exclusively among the islands ofHawaii as well as 11 day cruises that include a foreign port call at Fanning Island To date NCLA has invested over $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships in furtherance ofthe policy objectives of the PVSA and the 2003 Act These ships employ over 4000 seafarers and generate hundreds ofmillions of dollars in benefits for Hawaii and the nation
(b) Significant Increase in Foreign Flag Capacity Since 2003
The most significant change in the Hawaii cruise market since 2003 has been the dramatic increase in capacity A significant portion ofthis capacity increase is directly attributable to NCLAs fulfillment ofthe Congressional mandate in the 2003 Act However foreign-flag operations in the Hawaii market as measured in passenger nights18 have skyrocketed Based on MARAn data derived from the US Customs Border Patrol Vessel Entrance and Clearance documents the passenger nights for foreign flag vessels departing from the West Coast to Hawaii on round trip cruise have increased several hundredfold during this period19 See Exhibit A
(c) NCLA Has Incurred Substantial Losses During this Period
Since 2004 NCLA has lost cumulatively more than a quarter ofa billion dollars A principal reason for these losses has been the increase in foreign capacity in this market NCLA has taken significant steps to reduce costs to address the increase in foreign competition but NCLA is at an inherent disadvantage when competing against foreign companies that are not subject to US labor laws US tax laws and other laws Ofcourse the statutory protections of the PVSA are intended to address these very issues That is why Customs immediate action to implement the proposed interpretation is critical for the US flag fleet Regrettably NCLA has already been forced to reduce overall capacity early next year with the withdrawal ofPRIDE OF HAWAlI to another
17 DOT Press Release dated June 72004 see also DOT Press Release dated August 132004 in connection with visit to PRIDE OF ALOHA by US Transportation Secretary Norman Y Mineta 11 Passenger nights (also referred to as passenger capacity days) are calculated by multiplying the number ofpassengers per vessel by the number ofcruise days in each itinerary by the number of cruises This is the unit ofmeasurement employed by MARAn In contrast passenger bed supply (also referred to as passenger capacity) data reflects only the number ofberths per vessel multiplied by the number of cruises and hence understates the market by excluding the full economic value ofthe cruise perfonned 19 In 2003 the total number ofpassenger nights for round-trip West Coast to Hawaii cruises was 303325 which jumped by 353 to 1072329 in 2006 and by 430 to 1304546 from 2003 to 2007 (The 2007 figure is based on MARAD data for six months and a1ll1ualized by published itineraries for the balance of the year)
6
market for operation under foreign flag This move alone will result in the loss ofover 1000 American seafaring jobs
5 Customs Proposed Interpretation is Necessary to Further the Important National Security and Public Policy Objectives Embodied in Federal Law
As Customs has properly noted the increase in foreign competition in the Hawaii trades in contravention of the PVSA pose[s] an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels[] As the operator of these ships NCLA has a vested interest in protecting the jobs ofthe thousands ofAmerican crewmembers and cruise ship service providers who support these vessels NCLA also has an interest in protecting the substantial economic investment it has made to revitalize the US flag passenger vessel fleet But a balancing of interests in the context of Customs enforcement ofexisting law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act requires a much broader focus
The legislative history of the 2003 Act expressly recognized the national security and public policy import ofestablishing a US flag passenger vessel fleet as a means to maintain the countrys preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool of qualified seafarers and as a means to help sustain a fleet ofUS-flag vessels to su~ort
the nations military and maritime industrial base for times ofnational emergency
Congress understood the importance ofestablishing a viable US flag cruise ship fleet as something larger than the vessels themselves These national security and public policy objectives must be weighed in the balance as Customs assesses how best to interpret its rules to give effect to the PVSA and the 2003 Act
6 Customs Should Clarify that the Proposed Interpretation is Limited to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades and Adopt Reasonable Measures to Ensure Sufficient Foreign Content
Since publication ofthe proposed interpretative rule several commenters have observed that the scope of the proposed interpretation is ambiguous because the language of Section VI referencing any cruise itinerary appears broader than the caption Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises and the entire discussion in the published notice which focuses exclusively on US-flag coastwise vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA agrees that the proposed interpretation should be clarified so that its scope is limited to vessels operating roundtrip voyages from US ports that include Hawaii port calls
NCLA supports the concept reflected in the proposed interpretive rule that round trip Hawaii itineraries from US ports on foreign ships must include a material and measurable degree ofoverall foreign port content as compared to US port content
20 149 Congo Rec S1117 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)
7
(a) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is also Consistent with Subsequent Congressional Enactments Modifying the PVSA
As discussed above it is well established that the PVSA was designed toRrotect US-flag vessels from foreign competition in the coastwise and domestic trades 1
Subsequent legislative enactments however have appropriately differentiated among distinct geographic markets and trades including Canada Alaska Puerto Rico and Hawaii based on the existence or non-existence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
In 1938 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers by Canadian passenger vessels on Lake Ontario and the St Lawrence River until such time as passenger service shall be established by vessels of the United States22 Similarly in 1961 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers on Canadian vessels within Alaska or between Alaska and other points in the United States until such time as passenger service is established by vessels ofthe United States23
In 1984 Congress modified the application ofthe PVSA to pennit the transportation ofpassengers between Puerto Rico and other United States ports on foreign-flag vessels24 As with the other statutory exceptions this provision is qualified and expires [o]n a showing that a United States passenger vessel qualified to engage in the coastwise trade is offering or advertising passenger service between a port in Puerto Rico and another port in the United States2S
Congress acted again with respect to the application of the PVSA with the 2003 Act in which it authorized three vessels that did not meet the US-build requirements of the PVSA to operate as modem US-flagged cruise ships in regular service in Hawaii26 The 2003 Act imposes a specific geographic limitation on the operation of any ship documented under this authority to operations only in regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands ofHawaii and shall not transport passengers in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico or the Caribbean Sea except in certain limited circumstances27 As above the limited nature of the 2003 Act is express it is strictly limited to the large ocean-going cruise ships and then only those operating in the regular Hawaii service where there are no US-flag operations28
21 See Act ofJune 19 1886 c 421 sec 8 24 Stat 81 Act of February 171898 c 26 sec 2 30 Stat 248 22 S] Res 174 75th Cong 52 Stat 223 (Alp 251938) codified at46 USC sect 55121(a) 23 See Pub L 87-77 75 Stat 196 (Jun 30 1961) codified at 46 USC sect 55121(b) 24 See Pub L 98-563 98 Stat 2916 (Oct 301984) codified at 46 USC sect 55104(b) 25 46 USC sect 55104(c)(l) see also 46 USC 46 USc sect 55104(cX2)(expiration of exemption upon availability ofa non-coastwise qualified US-flag vessel offering service in the relevant market) 26 149 Congo Rec SI118 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)(statementofSen Inouye) 27 Pub L 108-7 117 Stat 79 (Feb 20 2003) 28 149 Congo Rec S11l9 (dailyed Jan 17 2003Xstatement of Sen Inouye)
8
In each ofthese instances Congress fashioned a narrow exception to the PVSA that differentiated among distinct geographic markets based on the existence or nonshyexistence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
As the federal agency responsible for administering the 2003 Act MARAD requested that Customs act to protect US flag passenger vessel interests in the Hawaii trades29 Limiting the scope ofthe proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades also reflects Customs appreciation of the PVSA in the context of the subsequent Congressional action30 Viewing the Congressional modifications to the PVSA as a whole Congress has specifically and repeatedly differentiated among distinct geographic markets when it has found it necessary and appropriate to do so to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests It is well established that the proper interpretation of a statutory scheme includes consideration ofsubsequent statutes even though the underlying statute itselfhas not been expressly amended31 Accordingly Customs should likewise limit the scope ofthe proposed PVSA interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades because that is the only geographic market as mandated by the 2003 Act in which oceangoing US-flag cruise ships are operating
(b) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Consistent with Public Policy Objectives of the 1985 Rulemaking
In 1985middot Customs liberalized the regulations implementing the PVSA by eliminating certain regulatory prohibitions on foreign flag vessels In the context of the 1985 rulemaking Customs justified a relaxation ofthe regulations on the grounds that it would simplify the administration of the PVSA and would benefit the economy ofcertain American coastwise ports without eroding the statutory protection given to American vessels engaged in solely domestic trade32
Customs thus sought to reconcile US port economic interests with US-flag passenger vessel interests Both of these twin policy objectives are furthered by
29 See 72 Fed Reg 65488 (Nov 21 2007)( MARAn bas asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the ~eratiODS ofcoastwise-qualified cruise ship operators)
See generally FDA v Brown amp Williamson Tobacco Corp 529 US 120 132-133 (2000)(assessing propriety ofagency construction ofFood DIUg and Cosmetics Act and descnbing responsibility of reviewing cowt to assess statutory provisions in the context of subsequent legislative enactments) 31 See Brown amp Williamson 529 US 143 (holding that proper construction ofstatutory provision must necessarily assume that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications ofa later statute This is particularly so where the scope of the earlier statute is broad but the subsequent statutes more specifically address the topic athand) see also United States v Estate ofRomani 523 US 517 530-531 (1998)( holding that a later-enacted statute should control the construction of the federal lien priority statute a specific policy embodied in a later federal statute should control om construction of the [earlier] statute even though it ha[s] not been expressly amended) United States v Fausto 484 US 439453 (1988)(The courts frequently find Congress to have done this - whenever in fact they interpret a statutory text in the light ofsurrounding texts that happen to have been subsequently enacted This classic judicial task of reconciling many laws enacted over time and getting them to make sense in combination necessarily assumes that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications of a later statute) 32 50 Fed Reg 26982 (JuI 11985)
9
limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades
As noted earlier the 2003 Act limits the operation of the NCLA US-flag oceangoing passenger vessels to regular service in Hawaii Because there are no oceangoing US-flag vessels operating in any market other than the Hawaii trades Customs should limit the scope of the proposed interPretation to that market Such a limitation protects US flag passenger vessel interests without prejudicing US port interests In contrast an application of the proposed interpretation to any itinerary would needlessly harm US port interests unrelated to Hawaii without any countervailing benefit to US-flag passenger vessel interests Accordingly limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation is consistent with the public policy objectives of the 1985 rulemaking as well as the 2003 Act
(c) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Also Consistent with Customs Commitment to Revisit the Scope of its Rules to Protect US-Flag Interests
The relaxation ofthe PVSA regulations in 1985 was premised in large part on Customs finding that there was no regular salt water US-flag passenger fleet in operation at that time33 Acknowledging that the relaxed regulations could harm USshyflag interests Customs committed in the preamble ofthe 1985 final rule to immediately reconsider its interpretation if it is ever shown that there is a viable US flag vessel operating in competition with foreign-flag vessels34
Congress enacted the 2003 Act to stimulate the development of a US flag cruise ship industry As noted above the legislative history ofthat Act makes clear that Congress sought to revitalize the US-flag cruise industry as a means to maintain Americas preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool ofqualified seafarers help sustain a fleet of US flag vessels to support our military and a maritime industrial base create thousands of seagoing and shoreside American jobs and stimulate the development ofa US flag cruise ship tourism business with the commensurate benefits to the US tax base the US economy and US employment
Customs is now acting at MARADs request to revisit its interpretation ofthe regulations implementing the PVSA because recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwise-qualified cruise ship operations35 That is to say that the concerns articulated by Customs in the context of the 1985 rulemaking have materialized and US-flag passenger vessel interests are in fact being hanned in the Hawaii trades by foreign competitors
33 50 Fed Reg 26983 34Id
3S 72 Fed Reg 56488 (Nov 21 2007)
I
10
Because the US-flag passenger vessels are limited by statute to regular service in Hawaii limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the
Hawaii trades is consistent with Customs historical commitment to revisit its interpretation ofthe implementing regulations to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests
7 Conclusion
For the reasons stated above NCLA commends the efforts ofCustoms and MARAn to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act as applied to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA respectfully requests Customs to move ahead promptly with p~blicati~nof a final interpretive rule to advance the important national security arid public policy objectives ofthese laws
We greatly appreciate the opportunity to submit these comments
Sincerely
~~~ Alan T Yamamoto Vice President Hawaii Operations
Exhibit A
Ship Name Serenade Of The Seas Departure Port San Diego California Ports of Call San Diego California Kailua Kona Hawaii Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii Hlo Hawaii Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii Ensenada Mexico San Qigo California
2007 Date(s) Oct 05
Sailing Itinerary
Day Port H ~rrive Depart Activity
05-0ct San Diego California 500 PM
06-0ct Cruising
07-0ct Cruising
08-0ct Cruising
09-0ct Cruising
10-0ct Kailua Kona Hawaii 700 AM 900 PM Tendered
11-00t Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 1000 AM Tendered
12middot0ct Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 900 PM Tendered
13-0ct Hilo Hawaii 700 AM 600 PM Docked
14middot0ct Honoulu (Oahu) Hawaii 700 AM Docked
15-0ct Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii 200 AM Docked
6-0ct CrUising
17-0ct Cruising
18-0ct Cruising
19middot0ct Cruising
-7 20-00t
O-Oot
Ensenada ~i1exico
San Deqo California
i 00 ~r1
700 ~M
200 oM D1Jcked ~
Federal RegisterVol 72 No 224Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules 65487
SPECULATIVE POSITION LIMITS 1-Continued [In contract units)
Contract
Soybeans and Mini-Soybeans 2
Wheat and Mini-Wheat 2 bullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbullbull
Soybean Oil
SingleSpot month All monthsmonth
600 8600 13300 600 11100 14500 540 6600 8600
Soybean Meal 720 5500 7100
Minneapolis Grain Exchange
Hard Red Spring Wheat I 600 I 11100 I 14500
New York Board of Trade
Cotton No2 I 300 I 5300 I 7300
Kansas City Board of Trade
Hard Winter Wheat I 600 I 11100 I 14500
1 For purposes of compliance with these limits positions in a futures contract that shares ~ubstantially identical terms with a contract market enumerated herein including a futures contract that is cash-settled based on the settlement price of an enumerated contract market shall be agshygregated with positions in the enumerated contract market
2 For purposes of compliance with these limits positions in the regular-sized and mini-sized contracts shall be aggregated
Issued by the Commission this November 152007 in Washington DC David Stawick Secretary of the Commission [FR Doc E7-22681 Filed 11-20-07 845 amI BILLING CODE 6351-Q1-P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Bureau of Customs and Border Protection
19 CFR Part 4
[USCBP-2007-o098]
Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises
AGENCY Customs and Border Protection Department of Homeland Security ACTION Proposed interpretation solicitation of comments
SUMMARY This document proposes new criteria to be used by Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to determine whether non-coastwise-qualified vessels are in violation ofthe Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) when engaging in cruise itineraries in which passengers board at a US port the vessel calls at several Hawaiian ports and then the vessel proceeds to a foreign port or ports for a brief period before ultimately returning to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their cruise CBP believes these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because it appears that the primary objective of the foreign stop is evasion of the PVSA
DATES Comments must be received on or before December 212007 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT Glen E Vereb Cargo Security Carriers amp Immigration Branch Office of International Trade (202) 572-8730 ADDRESSES You may submit comments identified by docket number by one of the following methods
bull Federal eRulemaking Portal http wwwregulationsgov Follow the instructions for submitting comments
bull Mail Border Security Regulations Branch Office of International Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
I Public Participation
Interested persons are invited to participate in this proposed interpretation by submitting written data views or arguments on all aspects of the proposed interpretation Customs and Border Protection (CBP) also invites comments that relate to the economic environmental or federalism effects that might result from this proposed interpretation Comments that will provide the most assistance to CBP in developing these procedures will reference a specific portion of the proposed interpretation explain the reason for any recommended change and include data information or authority that support such recommended change
Instructions All submissions received must include the agency name and docket number for this proposed
interpretation All comments received will be posted without change to http wwwregulationsgov including any personal information provided
Docket For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received go to http wwwregulationsgov Submitted comments may also be inspected on regular business days between the hours of 9 am and 430 pm at the Office of International Trade Customs and Border Protection 799 9th Street NW 5th Floor Washington DC Arrangements to inspect submitted documents should be made in advance by calling Mr Joseph Clark at (202) 572shy8768
II Background
The maritime cabotage law governing the transportation of passengers was first established by section 8 of the Passenger Vessel Services Act of June 191886 (the PVSA) 24 Stat 81 as amended by section 2 of the Act of February 17 1898 30 Stat 248 formerly codified at 46 USC App 289 (now codified at 46 USC 55103) 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 of $200 (now $300 as promulgated in TD 03-11 pursuant to the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 199028 USC 2461 note) for each passenger so transported and landed
The intent of the maritime cabotage laws including the PVSA was to provide a legal structure that guarantees a coastwise monopoly to
65488 Federal RegisterVol 72 No 224Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules
American shipping and thereby promotes development of the American merchant marine Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 28 (DC Cir 1984) see also The Granada 35 FSupp 892 8931940 AMC 1601 (DC Pa 1940) (stating that the legislative aim of section 289 [now 55102] was the creation of a practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping business for United States ships) In other words the PVSA was enacted to advance the United States merchant marine and fleet by restricting the use of foreign-ownedflagged passenger vessels in United States territorial waters
Passenger vessel transportation between United States ports has historically been viewed to be part of the coastwise trade after the enactment of the PVSA This view is premised on the concepts of continuity of the voyage and whether its intended purpose or objective was coastwise transportation In other words the PVSA was held to be violated if the coastwise movement was continuous or if the purpose of the trip was a coastwise voyage (See 18 OAG 445 September 4 1886 28 OAG 204 February 16 1910 29 OAG 318 February 12 1912 30 OAG 44 February 1 1913 34 OAG 340 December 24 1924 and 36 OAG 352 August 13 1930)
The CBP regulations promulgated pursuant to the PVSA are found at section 480a of title 19 of the Code of Federal Regulations (19 CFR 480a) and are reflective of the above cited Office of the Attorney General decisions These regulations provide among other things that a non-coastwise-qualified vessel which embarks a passenger at a port in the United States embraced within the coastwise laws (a coastwise port) will be deemed to have landed that passenger in violation of the PVSA if the passenger disembarks at a different coastwise port on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a nearby foreign port or ports (as defined in 19 CFR 480a(a)(2) see also 19 CFR 480a(b)(2)) The terms embark and disembark are words of art which are defined as going on board a vessel for the duration of a specific voyage and leaving a vessel at the conclusion of a specific voyage respectively (See 19 CFR 480a(a)(4))
The references in section 480a to nearby foreign ports (defined in 19 CFR 480a(a)(2)) are the results of attempts by CBP to apply an Office of the Attorney Generals opinion dated February 26 1910 (28 OAG 204) In that case a foreign-flag vessel transported 615 passengers on a voyage around the world beginning in New
York and concluding in San Francisco The Attorney General opined that since the primary object of the voyage was to visit various parts of the world on a pleasure tour returning home via California and not to be transported in domestic commerce the transportation was not in violation of the PVSA
The 1910 Attorney Generals opinion was extended to voyages that included foreign ports other than nearby foreign ports (See Treasury Decision (TD) 68shy285 (33 FR 16558) November 14 1968) However voyages solely to one or more coastwise ports have always been considered predominantly coastwise Therefore non-coastwise-qualified vessels engaging in such a voyage where passengers temporarily go ashore at a coastwise port have been deemed to have violated the PVSA
m Current Law and Policy Pursuant to Public Law 109-304 120
Stat 1632 enacted on October 6 2006 Title 46 United States Code was substantially reorganized and recodified Consequently the PVSA is now codified at 46 USC 55103 and provides that no vessel shall transport passengers between ports or places in the United States either directly or by way of a foreign port under a penalty of $300 for each person so transported and landed except one that (1) Is wholly owned by citizens of the United States for purposes of engaging in the coastwise trade and (2) has been issued a certificate of documentation with a coastwise endorsement or is exempt from documentation but would otherwise be eligible for such a certificate and endorsement
In 2003 Congress enacted Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II Section 211 for the purpose of revitalizing the oceangoing US-flag cruise industry in Hawaii (the 2003 Act) Three oceangoing US-flag cruise ships PRIDE OF ALOHA PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAII were documented with coastwise privileges pursuant to the 2003 Act These vessels entered regular service in Hawaii in 2004 2005 and 2006 respectively and pursuant to the express language of the 2003 Act are limited in their operation to providing regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands of Hawaii
The CBP regulations promulgated pursuant to the PVSA are set forth in 19 CFR 480a and have remained unchanged throughout both the recodification of Title 46 of the United States Code and the enactment of the 2003 Act They provide that a violation of the PVSA occurs when passengers embark (board a vessel for the
duration of a voyage) a non-coastwiseshyqualified vessel at one US port and disembark (leave the vessel at the conclusion of a voyage) at a different US port unless they proceed with the vessel to a distant foreign port (Le any port not considered a nearby foreign port which is defined as any port located in North America Central America Bermuda or the West Indies including the Bahamas) Currently these regulations do not contain specific criteria for non-coastwise-qualified vessels on itineraries including US ports and either nearby or distant foreign ports in order for such foreign port calls to be compliant with the PVSA
To reiterate the applicable CBP regulations provide that the PVSA is violated when a non-coastwise-qualified vessel transports a passenger on a voyage solely to one or more coastwise ports and the passenger disembarks or goes ashore temporarily at a coastwise port (19 CFR 480a(b)(1)) Furthermore a violation of the PVSA also occurs when a non-coastwise-qualified vessel transports a passenger on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a nearby foreign port or ports (but no other foreign port) and the passenger disembarks at a coastwise port other than the port of embarkation (19 CFR 480a(b)(2)) However there is no violation of the PVSA when a passenger is on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a distant foreign port or ports (whether or not the voyage includes a nearby foreign port or ports) and the passenger disembarks at a coastwise port provided the passenger has proceeded with the vessel to a distant foreign port (19 CFR 480a(b)(3))
IV Request From MARAD To Provide Guidance
The US Department of Transportation Maritime Administration (MARAD) has requested that CBP take action to ensure enforcement of the PVSA MARAD has asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreignshyflag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwiseshyqualified cruise ship operators
In April of 2007 the operator of the three US-flag cruise vessels operating solely in Hawaii pursuant to the 2003 Act announced their intent to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAIl from the Hawaii market and redeploy her to Europe The operator intends to re-flag the vessel to foreign registry directly resulting in the loss of over 1100 crewmember jobs The primary reason cited for this decision is the rapid increase in foreign-flag competition entering the Hawaii market
Federal Register I Vol 72 No 224 I Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules 65489
from the West Coast This competition is evidenced in published cruise itineraries of foreign-flag carriers offering a variety of round trip cruises that depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period usually in the early morning and ultimately return to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their cruise These cruises are often marketed as Hawaii cruises and except for the brief stop in the nearby foreign port of Ensenada are purely coastwise in nature It is these cruise itineraries that pose an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels that pursuant to the 2003 Act are currently engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands
V Preliminary Notice
In response to MARADs concerns CBP sent letters to two carriers known to operate the itineraries in question as well as to the Cruise Lines International Association Inc stating that CBP believes that these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because it appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA The letters further indicated that CBP is taking steps to publish this position
VI CBPs Proposed Interpretive Rule Accordingly in this document CBP is
proposing to provide that cruise itineraries for non-qualified coastwise vessels which allow passengers to board at a US port call at several Hawaiian ports proceed to a foreign port or ports for a brief period and then ultimately return to the original US port of embarkation for disembarkation are not consistent with the PVSA and the regulations promulgated pursuant thereto Specifically CBP interprets a voyage to be solely to one or more coastwise ports even where it stops at a foreign port unless the stop at the foreign port is a legitimate object of the cruise CBP will presume that a stop at a foreign port is not a legitimate object of the cruise unless
(1) The stop lasts at least 48 hours at the foreign port
(2) The amount of time at the foreign port is more than 50 percent of the total amount of time at the US ports of call and
(3) The passengers are permitted to go ashore temporarily at the foreign port
Accordingly CBP proposes to adopt an interpretive rule under which it will presume that any cruise itinerary that does not include a foreign port call that
satisfies each of these three criteria constitutes coastwise transportation of passengers in violation of 19 CFR 480a(b)(1)
Dated November 16 2007 W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection [FR Doc E7-22788 Filed 11-20-07 845 am] BILLING CODe 9111-14-1
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau
27 CFR Part 9
[Notice No 76]
RIN 1513-AB49
Proposed Establishment of the Leona Valley Viticultural Area (2007R-281 P)
AGENCY Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau Treasury ACTION Notice of proposed rulemaking
SUMMARY The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau proposes to establish the 134 square mile Leona Valley viticultural area in the northeast part of Los Angeles County California We designate viticultural areas to allow vintners to better describe the origin of their wines and to allow consumers to better identify wines they may purchase We invite comments on this proposed addition to our regulations DATES We must receive written comments on or before January 22 2008
ADDRESSES You may send comments on this notice to one of the following addresses
bull httpwwwregulationsgov (Federal e-rulemaking portal follow the instructions for submitting comments) or
bull Director Regulations and Rulings Division Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau PO Box 14412 Washington DC 20044-4412
See the Public Participation section of this notice for specific instructions and requirements for submitting comments and for information on how to request a public hearing
You may view copies of this notice selected supporting materials and any comments we receive about this proposal at httpwwwregulationsgov under Docket No 2007-0066 You also may view copies of this notice all related petitions maps or other supporting materials and any comments we receive about this
proposal by appointment at the TTB Information Resource Center 1310 G Street NW Washington DC 20220 To make an appointment call 202-927shy2400
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT NA Sutton Regulations and Rulings Division Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau 925 Lakeville S1 No 158 Petaluma CA 94952 phone 415shy271-1254 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
Background on Viticultural Areas
TTB Authority Section 105(e) of the Federal Alcohol
Administration Act (FAA Act) 27 USC 205(e) authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to prescribe regulations for the labeling of wine distilled spirits and malt beverages The FAA Act provides that these regulations should among other things prohibit consumer deception and the use of misleading statements on labels and ensure that labels provide the consumer with adequate information as to the identity and quality of the product The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) administers the regulations promulgated under the FAA Act
Part 4 ofthe TTB regulations (27 CFR part 4) allows the establishment of definitive viticultural areas and the use of their names as appellations of origin on wine labels and in wine advertisements Part 9 of the TTB regulations (27 CFR part 9) contains the list of approved viticultural areas
Definition Section 425(e)(1)(i) ofthe TTB
regulations (27 CFR 425(e)(1)(i)) defines a viticultural area for American wine as a delimited grape-growing region distinguishable by geographical features the boundaries of which have been recognized and defined in part 9 of the regulations These designations allow vintners and consumers to attribute a given quality reputation or other characteristic of a wine made from grapes grown in an area to its geographic origin The establishment of viticultural areas allows vintners to describe more accurately the origin of their wines to consumers and helps consumers to identify wines they may purchase Establishment of a viticultural area is neither an approval nor an endorsement by TTB of the wine produced in that area
Requirements Section 425(e)(2) of the TTB
regulations outlines the procedure for proposing an American viticultural area and provides that any interested party
Us Department ofHomelaDd Secmity Washington DC 10229
bull ~
US Customs and Border Protection
AUG 15 2fXJJ
VE5-3-02-QTRRBSTCCCI - ti015502-GG-
Mr leon Sutcliffe Director Port Operations Camivai Cruise Unes Camival Place 3655 NW 87Avenue Miami Aorlda 33178
RE P~nger Vessef Services Ad Coastwise Transportation 46 USC sect 55103 19 CFR sect 480a(b)
Dear Mr Sutcliffe
As you know US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) enforces the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) codified at TItle 46 United States Code section 55103 (46 USC 55103) This statute prohibits non-coastwise-qualifled vessels (ie those vessels not US-buill owned and documented with a coastwise endorsement) from transporting passengers between porls or places within the United States The regUlations promUlgated pursuant to the PVSA are found at TrtJe 19 Code of Federal Regulations section 4808 (19 CFR 4808)
It has come to our attention that passenger vessels of your company are engaging in cruise itineraries that include ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands Two USAlagged coastwise-endorsed passenger vessefs are also currenUy engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of caD wittlin the Hawaiian Islands
As part of your cruise itineraries some of your foreign-flagged vessels depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period and ultimately rebJm to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their endse For example the MS ZAANDAM of Holand America Lines departs San Diego cruises the Hawaiian Islands stops in Ensenada from 800pm to 11 OOpmbull and returns to san Diego CBP believes these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because It appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA -- - - ~~~------
Please be advised that CBP is taking steps to publish this position Should have any questions pertaining to this matter please contact Mr Glen Vereb Chief Cargo Security Carriers and Immigration Branch at (202) 572-8724
Sincerely
F Jl E EST Y LEe A U I 5 I N Gmiddot
December 21 2007
The Honorable W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection co Border Security Regulations Branch Office ofInternational Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229
Re Hawaii Coastwise Cruises (USCBP-2007-0098) Comments in Response to Proposed Interpretation
Dear Commissioner Basham
NCL America Inc1 (NCLA) submits these comments in support ofthe efforts ofCustoms and Border Protection to enforce the Passenger Vessel Services Act and the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative as applied to Hawaii coastwise cruises
1 Introduction and Summary of Position
NCLA operates three large oceangoing US flag cruise ships in Hawaii These ships are documented under US flag and are required to operate in regular service in Hawaii pursuant to the authority of the Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative a 2003 federal statute intended to revitalize the US flag cruise industry and to maximize economic and national security benefits to the United States (the 2003 Act)
NCLA has invested $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships pursuant to the 2003 Act and in direct reliance on the protections of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) and its proper enforcement The PVSA limits the transportation ofpassengers between US ports to coastwise documented US flag ships Its statutory protections recognize that US flag ships have significantly higher operational costs in part because they are subject to more stringent US laws including US labor laws and federal
1 NCL America Inc is a US corporation incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware headquartered in Honolulu Hawaii As a US corporation it is subject to US taxes at both the federal and state level The Chief Executive Officer the Chairman of the Board and all of the Board of Directors of NCL America are US citizens The company is also subject to US labor and employment laws and is required by statute to maintain a workforce comprised primarily ofUS citizens
700 Bishop St SUite 900 I Honolulu HawMi 96813 I Tel 8085273800 Fax 8085273820 I ndcom
2
income tax among others The NCLA ships operating in Hawaii are the only large oceangoing cruise ships operating under US flag In furtherance of the policy goals of the PVSA and the 2003 Act these ships have created over 4000 seafaring jobs all subject to US minimum wage and other labor statutes
Since 2003 there has been a significant increase in capacity in the Hawaii market from foreign flag ships providing cruise service to Hawaii from the West Coast Many of these foreign flag cruises are marketed as Hawaii cruises and consist entirely ofUS ports ofcall with the sole exception of a token stop in Mexico for as little as an hour late at night under circumstances where passengers are not permitted to get offthe ship There are no reported rulings approving these particular foreign flag itineraries
Lower cost foreign competition in the Hawaii market has unfairly hurt NCLAs operations NCLA has incurred substantial losses which have contributed significantly to its decision earlier this year to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAll from US flag and reshydeploy it foreign Unfair foreign competition poses an imminent threat to the remaining US flag passenger vessels operating in the Hawaii trades pursuant to the 2003 Act
As the agency statutorily charged with implementation of the 2003 Act the US Department ofTransportation Maritime Administration (MARAn) is aware of the threat foreign flag Hawaii itineraries pose to the US flag fleet and brought the situation to the attention ofthe US Department ofHomeland Security Bureau ofCustoms and Border Protection (CBP or Customs) Customs determined that the primary object of these itineraries was coastwise and that the Ensenada stop was an evasion of the PVSA
In August 2007 Customs provided written notice to the affected foreign lines and their trade association that the existing itineraries were contrary to the PVSA None of these lines sought advance rulings even after the Customs notice with respect to their Hawaii itineraries pursuant to Customs regulations and many continued to market the itineraries as Hawaii cruises NCLA supports the efforts ofCustoms and MARAD to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act for Hawaii cruises
2 Statutory Authority for Customs Proposed Interpretation
(a) Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA)
Congress passed the PVSA in 1886 to protect the US maritime transportation industry from foreign competition2 Protection is afforded through penalty assessments on foreign vessels transporting passengers between US ports or places directly or by way ofa foreign port 3 As Congress and the courts have recognized coastwise protections for the US maritime transportation industry are only one dimension of the PVSA Operating in conjunction with other coastwise laws and with the US
2 See United States v Honduran SS GRANADA 35 F Supp 892 894 (BD Pa 1940)(citing purpose of PVSA to meet threats to the practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping which was to be preserved for US ships)
46 USc sect 55103 (originally 46 USC App 289)
3
documentation laws the PVSA also enhances military sealift in times ofnational emergency sustains a US merchant marine and supports the US shipbuilding and repair industry4
(b) Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative (the 2003 Act)
Over the past decade Congress has sought to reinforce the goals of the PVSA by providing mechanisms to revitalize the oceangoing US flag cruise fleet particularly in Hawaii The Project America legislation enacted in 1997 authorized among other things the re~flagging ofone existing cruise ship contingent on the operator contracting for the construction oftwo new oceangoing cruise shipss Following the default of the operator under the original contract Congress enacted the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative for the purpose ofrecovering economic and national security benefits to the United States bull 6 These same goals of the original PVSA were expressly referenced in the legislative history of the 2003 Act which emphasized that these ships will be assets available in time ofnational emergency and will significantly expand the pool ofqualified seafarers upon which the US Department ofDefense relies to crew non-combatant vessels
The 2003 Act authorizes the US documentation ofthree cruise ships for operation in regular service in Hawaii subject to certain conditions including a prohibition on operating in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico and the Caribbean Sea and a requirement that all vessel repair work be undertaken in the United States MARAD is charged with implementation of the 2003 Act
3 Customs Implementation of PVSA
(a) Regulations
The current regulations implementing the PVSA were published by Customs in 19858 The growth of the foreign flag cruise industry in North America and in particular the development of the Alaska cruise market led to an effort in 1984 to amend the thenshyexisting regulations to increase the ease of administration and operational flexibility The effort to change the regulation had support from US port interests who saw benefit in the potential increase in the number ofUS ports that foreign vessels could call and was opposed by proponents ofpotential US flag projects as detrimental to efforts to revitalize the US fleet 9 The preamble to the 1985 rule emphasized that it was of paramount importance to consider the primary object ofpassengers in taking a
4 See American Hawaii Cruises v Skinner 713 F Supp 452 457 (DDC 1989) (recognizing the contribution of the PVSA and the Jones Act in helping to secure national defense by maintaining a merchant marine oftbe best equipped and most suitable types ofvessels sufficient to serve in time of war or national emergency) see also Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 30 (DC Cir 1984) Wirth Ltd v SIS Acadia Forest 537 F2d 1272 1281 n32 (5th Cir 1976) S Public Law 105-56 Section 8109 (111 Stat 1203 1244) (Oct 81997 ) 6 Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II General Provisions - Department ofCommerce Section 211 (117 Stat 1179) (Feb 20 2003) 1 149 Cong Rec S1118 (dailyed Jan 17 2003(statement ofSenator Inouye) 8 19 CFR sect 480a 950 Fed Reg 26981 (July I 1985)
4
voyage10 a concept which is reinforced elsewhere in Customs regulations11 In its analysis of the comments received at the time Customs accepted the view ofport interests that the modified rule would help their business but did so recognizing the absence ofa regular salt water US flag passenger fleet Customs acknowledged the potential harm to prospective efforts to revitalize the US flag passenger fleet and expressly cautioned that if it were ever shown that coastwise qualified vessels in competition with foreign vessels were in fact hurt by the modified Customs regulation then Customs would immediately reconsider its position12
(b) Customs Rulings
Given the significant penalties associated with violating the PVSA13 Customs regulations expressly provide a mechanism for the owner or charterer of a foreign vessel or any other interested person to request an advisory ruling as to whether a contemplated voyage would be considered in violation of the PVSA14 Customs regulations provide that vessel operators can rely on these ruling letters only to the extent that the facts and circumstances are identical to those in the ruling letter IS
Notwithstanding the fact that several foreign cruise lines offer Hawaii itineraries originating in a US mainland port and calling at Hawaii ports with a token intervening stop in Mexico there are no reported rulings expressly approving such an itinerary for these foreign cruise lines 16
4 The Cruise Industry in Hawaii
(a) NCL America Returns US flag to the Oceangoing Passenger Fleet
Pursuant to the requirements ofthe 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative NCLA agreed to promote US-flag cruising enhance military sealift capacity and expand the US maritime labor base No other major cruise line had ever undertaken such a commitment to the US flag and the public policy objectives Congress sought to achieve under the PVSA or the 2003 Act Introduction ofPRIDE OF ALOHA in 2004 was a significant development in the maritime industry because it marked the restoration ofthe
10 Id at 26983 11 Customs Regulations include a provision on the effect ofruling letters and with respect to carrier rulings the applicable regulation refers to rulings setting forth a determination as to whether or not the primary object of a contemplated voyage is coastwise transportation in violation of46 USC sect 289 [pYSA codified at 46 USC sect55103] 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 12 50 Fed Reg at 26983 13 A modem cruise ship with 2400 passengers for example would be subject to a fine of$720OOO per cruise based on the statutory penalty of$300 for each passenger transported in violation of the Act 14 19 CFR sect 480a(d) IS 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 16 There is one older reported mling involving a request to drop the Ensenada port call from a Los AngeleslHawaiiLos Angeles itinerary which Customs held would violate the PYSA In dicta Customs acknowledged that the itinerary could be in compliance if the Ensenada call were not dropped but did not address the issue ofwhether a one hour service call where no passengers depart the vessel would be sufficient The carrier that obtained that ruling has since left the Hawaii market See Customs Ruling HQ 114078 re Crystal Hannony (Nov 4 1997)
5
us flag to the oceangoing cruise industry A contemporaneous press release from the Us Department ofTransportation reported that the three US-flag cruise ships to be introduced pursuant to the 2003 Act were expected to create more than 20000 US jobs generate more than $825 million ofexpenditures in the US economy and create nearly $360 million in federal tax revenue by the end of 200717 In 2005 the PRIDE OF AMERICA was introduced and in 2006 the third vessel PRIDE OF HAWAll was introduced to Hawaii Both the PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAIl offer 7shyday inter-island Hawaii itineraries whereas PRIDE OF ALOHA operates on 7 and 10 day cruises exclusively among the islands ofHawaii as well as 11 day cruises that include a foreign port call at Fanning Island To date NCLA has invested over $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships in furtherance ofthe policy objectives of the PVSA and the 2003 Act These ships employ over 4000 seafarers and generate hundreds ofmillions of dollars in benefits for Hawaii and the nation
(b) Significant Increase in Foreign Flag Capacity Since 2003
The most significant change in the Hawaii cruise market since 2003 has been the dramatic increase in capacity A significant portion ofthis capacity increase is directly attributable to NCLAs fulfillment ofthe Congressional mandate in the 2003 Act However foreign-flag operations in the Hawaii market as measured in passenger nights18 have skyrocketed Based on MARAn data derived from the US Customs Border Patrol Vessel Entrance and Clearance documents the passenger nights for foreign flag vessels departing from the West Coast to Hawaii on round trip cruise have increased several hundredfold during this period19 See Exhibit A
(c) NCLA Has Incurred Substantial Losses During this Period
Since 2004 NCLA has lost cumulatively more than a quarter ofa billion dollars A principal reason for these losses has been the increase in foreign capacity in this market NCLA has taken significant steps to reduce costs to address the increase in foreign competition but NCLA is at an inherent disadvantage when competing against foreign companies that are not subject to US labor laws US tax laws and other laws Ofcourse the statutory protections of the PVSA are intended to address these very issues That is why Customs immediate action to implement the proposed interpretation is critical for the US flag fleet Regrettably NCLA has already been forced to reduce overall capacity early next year with the withdrawal ofPRIDE OF HAWAlI to another
17 DOT Press Release dated June 72004 see also DOT Press Release dated August 132004 in connection with visit to PRIDE OF ALOHA by US Transportation Secretary Norman Y Mineta 11 Passenger nights (also referred to as passenger capacity days) are calculated by multiplying the number ofpassengers per vessel by the number ofcruise days in each itinerary by the number of cruises This is the unit ofmeasurement employed by MARAn In contrast passenger bed supply (also referred to as passenger capacity) data reflects only the number ofberths per vessel multiplied by the number of cruises and hence understates the market by excluding the full economic value ofthe cruise perfonned 19 In 2003 the total number ofpassenger nights for round-trip West Coast to Hawaii cruises was 303325 which jumped by 353 to 1072329 in 2006 and by 430 to 1304546 from 2003 to 2007 (The 2007 figure is based on MARAD data for six months and a1ll1ualized by published itineraries for the balance of the year)
6
market for operation under foreign flag This move alone will result in the loss ofover 1000 American seafaring jobs
5 Customs Proposed Interpretation is Necessary to Further the Important National Security and Public Policy Objectives Embodied in Federal Law
As Customs has properly noted the increase in foreign competition in the Hawaii trades in contravention of the PVSA pose[s] an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels[] As the operator of these ships NCLA has a vested interest in protecting the jobs ofthe thousands ofAmerican crewmembers and cruise ship service providers who support these vessels NCLA also has an interest in protecting the substantial economic investment it has made to revitalize the US flag passenger vessel fleet But a balancing of interests in the context of Customs enforcement ofexisting law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act requires a much broader focus
The legislative history of the 2003 Act expressly recognized the national security and public policy import ofestablishing a US flag passenger vessel fleet as a means to maintain the countrys preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool of qualified seafarers and as a means to help sustain a fleet ofUS-flag vessels to su~ort
the nations military and maritime industrial base for times ofnational emergency
Congress understood the importance ofestablishing a viable US flag cruise ship fleet as something larger than the vessels themselves These national security and public policy objectives must be weighed in the balance as Customs assesses how best to interpret its rules to give effect to the PVSA and the 2003 Act
6 Customs Should Clarify that the Proposed Interpretation is Limited to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades and Adopt Reasonable Measures to Ensure Sufficient Foreign Content
Since publication ofthe proposed interpretative rule several commenters have observed that the scope of the proposed interpretation is ambiguous because the language of Section VI referencing any cruise itinerary appears broader than the caption Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises and the entire discussion in the published notice which focuses exclusively on US-flag coastwise vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA agrees that the proposed interpretation should be clarified so that its scope is limited to vessels operating roundtrip voyages from US ports that include Hawaii port calls
NCLA supports the concept reflected in the proposed interpretive rule that round trip Hawaii itineraries from US ports on foreign ships must include a material and measurable degree ofoverall foreign port content as compared to US port content
20 149 Congo Rec S1117 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)
7
(a) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is also Consistent with Subsequent Congressional Enactments Modifying the PVSA
As discussed above it is well established that the PVSA was designed toRrotect US-flag vessels from foreign competition in the coastwise and domestic trades 1
Subsequent legislative enactments however have appropriately differentiated among distinct geographic markets and trades including Canada Alaska Puerto Rico and Hawaii based on the existence or non-existence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
In 1938 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers by Canadian passenger vessels on Lake Ontario and the St Lawrence River until such time as passenger service shall be established by vessels of the United States22 Similarly in 1961 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers on Canadian vessels within Alaska or between Alaska and other points in the United States until such time as passenger service is established by vessels ofthe United States23
In 1984 Congress modified the application ofthe PVSA to pennit the transportation ofpassengers between Puerto Rico and other United States ports on foreign-flag vessels24 As with the other statutory exceptions this provision is qualified and expires [o]n a showing that a United States passenger vessel qualified to engage in the coastwise trade is offering or advertising passenger service between a port in Puerto Rico and another port in the United States2S
Congress acted again with respect to the application of the PVSA with the 2003 Act in which it authorized three vessels that did not meet the US-build requirements of the PVSA to operate as modem US-flagged cruise ships in regular service in Hawaii26 The 2003 Act imposes a specific geographic limitation on the operation of any ship documented under this authority to operations only in regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands ofHawaii and shall not transport passengers in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico or the Caribbean Sea except in certain limited circumstances27 As above the limited nature of the 2003 Act is express it is strictly limited to the large ocean-going cruise ships and then only those operating in the regular Hawaii service where there are no US-flag operations28
21 See Act ofJune 19 1886 c 421 sec 8 24 Stat 81 Act of February 171898 c 26 sec 2 30 Stat 248 22 S] Res 174 75th Cong 52 Stat 223 (Alp 251938) codified at46 USC sect 55121(a) 23 See Pub L 87-77 75 Stat 196 (Jun 30 1961) codified at 46 USC sect 55121(b) 24 See Pub L 98-563 98 Stat 2916 (Oct 301984) codified at 46 USC sect 55104(b) 25 46 USC sect 55104(c)(l) see also 46 USC 46 USc sect 55104(cX2)(expiration of exemption upon availability ofa non-coastwise qualified US-flag vessel offering service in the relevant market) 26 149 Congo Rec SI118 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)(statementofSen Inouye) 27 Pub L 108-7 117 Stat 79 (Feb 20 2003) 28 149 Congo Rec S11l9 (dailyed Jan 17 2003Xstatement of Sen Inouye)
8
In each ofthese instances Congress fashioned a narrow exception to the PVSA that differentiated among distinct geographic markets based on the existence or nonshyexistence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
As the federal agency responsible for administering the 2003 Act MARAD requested that Customs act to protect US flag passenger vessel interests in the Hawaii trades29 Limiting the scope ofthe proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades also reflects Customs appreciation of the PVSA in the context of the subsequent Congressional action30 Viewing the Congressional modifications to the PVSA as a whole Congress has specifically and repeatedly differentiated among distinct geographic markets when it has found it necessary and appropriate to do so to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests It is well established that the proper interpretation of a statutory scheme includes consideration ofsubsequent statutes even though the underlying statute itselfhas not been expressly amended31 Accordingly Customs should likewise limit the scope ofthe proposed PVSA interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades because that is the only geographic market as mandated by the 2003 Act in which oceangoing US-flag cruise ships are operating
(b) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Consistent with Public Policy Objectives of the 1985 Rulemaking
In 1985middot Customs liberalized the regulations implementing the PVSA by eliminating certain regulatory prohibitions on foreign flag vessels In the context of the 1985 rulemaking Customs justified a relaxation ofthe regulations on the grounds that it would simplify the administration of the PVSA and would benefit the economy ofcertain American coastwise ports without eroding the statutory protection given to American vessels engaged in solely domestic trade32
Customs thus sought to reconcile US port economic interests with US-flag passenger vessel interests Both of these twin policy objectives are furthered by
29 See 72 Fed Reg 65488 (Nov 21 2007)( MARAn bas asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the ~eratiODS ofcoastwise-qualified cruise ship operators)
See generally FDA v Brown amp Williamson Tobacco Corp 529 US 120 132-133 (2000)(assessing propriety ofagency construction ofFood DIUg and Cosmetics Act and descnbing responsibility of reviewing cowt to assess statutory provisions in the context of subsequent legislative enactments) 31 See Brown amp Williamson 529 US 143 (holding that proper construction ofstatutory provision must necessarily assume that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications ofa later statute This is particularly so where the scope of the earlier statute is broad but the subsequent statutes more specifically address the topic athand) see also United States v Estate ofRomani 523 US 517 530-531 (1998)( holding that a later-enacted statute should control the construction of the federal lien priority statute a specific policy embodied in a later federal statute should control om construction of the [earlier] statute even though it ha[s] not been expressly amended) United States v Fausto 484 US 439453 (1988)(The courts frequently find Congress to have done this - whenever in fact they interpret a statutory text in the light ofsurrounding texts that happen to have been subsequently enacted This classic judicial task of reconciling many laws enacted over time and getting them to make sense in combination necessarily assumes that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications of a later statute) 32 50 Fed Reg 26982 (JuI 11985)
9
limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades
As noted earlier the 2003 Act limits the operation of the NCLA US-flag oceangoing passenger vessels to regular service in Hawaii Because there are no oceangoing US-flag vessels operating in any market other than the Hawaii trades Customs should limit the scope of the proposed interPretation to that market Such a limitation protects US flag passenger vessel interests without prejudicing US port interests In contrast an application of the proposed interpretation to any itinerary would needlessly harm US port interests unrelated to Hawaii without any countervailing benefit to US-flag passenger vessel interests Accordingly limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation is consistent with the public policy objectives of the 1985 rulemaking as well as the 2003 Act
(c) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Also Consistent with Customs Commitment to Revisit the Scope of its Rules to Protect US-Flag Interests
The relaxation ofthe PVSA regulations in 1985 was premised in large part on Customs finding that there was no regular salt water US-flag passenger fleet in operation at that time33 Acknowledging that the relaxed regulations could harm USshyflag interests Customs committed in the preamble ofthe 1985 final rule to immediately reconsider its interpretation if it is ever shown that there is a viable US flag vessel operating in competition with foreign-flag vessels34
Congress enacted the 2003 Act to stimulate the development of a US flag cruise ship industry As noted above the legislative history ofthat Act makes clear that Congress sought to revitalize the US-flag cruise industry as a means to maintain Americas preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool ofqualified seafarers help sustain a fleet of US flag vessels to support our military and a maritime industrial base create thousands of seagoing and shoreside American jobs and stimulate the development ofa US flag cruise ship tourism business with the commensurate benefits to the US tax base the US economy and US employment
Customs is now acting at MARADs request to revisit its interpretation ofthe regulations implementing the PVSA because recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwise-qualified cruise ship operations35 That is to say that the concerns articulated by Customs in the context of the 1985 rulemaking have materialized and US-flag passenger vessel interests are in fact being hanned in the Hawaii trades by foreign competitors
33 50 Fed Reg 26983 34Id
3S 72 Fed Reg 56488 (Nov 21 2007)
I
10
Because the US-flag passenger vessels are limited by statute to regular service in Hawaii limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the
Hawaii trades is consistent with Customs historical commitment to revisit its interpretation ofthe implementing regulations to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests
7 Conclusion
For the reasons stated above NCLA commends the efforts ofCustoms and MARAn to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act as applied to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA respectfully requests Customs to move ahead promptly with p~blicati~nof a final interpretive rule to advance the important national security arid public policy objectives ofthese laws
We greatly appreciate the opportunity to submit these comments
Sincerely
~~~ Alan T Yamamoto Vice President Hawaii Operations
Exhibit A
Ship Name Serenade Of The Seas Departure Port San Diego California Ports of Call San Diego California Kailua Kona Hawaii Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii Hlo Hawaii Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii Ensenada Mexico San Qigo California
2007 Date(s) Oct 05
Sailing Itinerary
Day Port H ~rrive Depart Activity
05-0ct San Diego California 500 PM
06-0ct Cruising
07-0ct Cruising
08-0ct Cruising
09-0ct Cruising
10-0ct Kailua Kona Hawaii 700 AM 900 PM Tendered
11-00t Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 1000 AM Tendered
12middot0ct Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 900 PM Tendered
13-0ct Hilo Hawaii 700 AM 600 PM Docked
14middot0ct Honoulu (Oahu) Hawaii 700 AM Docked
15-0ct Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii 200 AM Docked
6-0ct CrUising
17-0ct Cruising
18-0ct Cruising
19middot0ct Cruising
-7 20-00t
O-Oot
Ensenada ~i1exico
San Deqo California
i 00 ~r1
700 ~M
200 oM D1Jcked ~
65488 Federal RegisterVol 72 No 224Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules
American shipping and thereby promotes development of the American merchant marine Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 28 (DC Cir 1984) see also The Granada 35 FSupp 892 8931940 AMC 1601 (DC Pa 1940) (stating that the legislative aim of section 289 [now 55102] was the creation of a practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping business for United States ships) In other words the PVSA was enacted to advance the United States merchant marine and fleet by restricting the use of foreign-ownedflagged passenger vessels in United States territorial waters
Passenger vessel transportation between United States ports has historically been viewed to be part of the coastwise trade after the enactment of the PVSA This view is premised on the concepts of continuity of the voyage and whether its intended purpose or objective was coastwise transportation In other words the PVSA was held to be violated if the coastwise movement was continuous or if the purpose of the trip was a coastwise voyage (See 18 OAG 445 September 4 1886 28 OAG 204 February 16 1910 29 OAG 318 February 12 1912 30 OAG 44 February 1 1913 34 OAG 340 December 24 1924 and 36 OAG 352 August 13 1930)
The CBP regulations promulgated pursuant to the PVSA are found at section 480a of title 19 of the Code of Federal Regulations (19 CFR 480a) and are reflective of the above cited Office of the Attorney General decisions These regulations provide among other things that a non-coastwise-qualified vessel which embarks a passenger at a port in the United States embraced within the coastwise laws (a coastwise port) will be deemed to have landed that passenger in violation of the PVSA if the passenger disembarks at a different coastwise port on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a nearby foreign port or ports (as defined in 19 CFR 480a(a)(2) see also 19 CFR 480a(b)(2)) The terms embark and disembark are words of art which are defined as going on board a vessel for the duration of a specific voyage and leaving a vessel at the conclusion of a specific voyage respectively (See 19 CFR 480a(a)(4))
The references in section 480a to nearby foreign ports (defined in 19 CFR 480a(a)(2)) are the results of attempts by CBP to apply an Office of the Attorney Generals opinion dated February 26 1910 (28 OAG 204) In that case a foreign-flag vessel transported 615 passengers on a voyage around the world beginning in New
York and concluding in San Francisco The Attorney General opined that since the primary object of the voyage was to visit various parts of the world on a pleasure tour returning home via California and not to be transported in domestic commerce the transportation was not in violation of the PVSA
The 1910 Attorney Generals opinion was extended to voyages that included foreign ports other than nearby foreign ports (See Treasury Decision (TD) 68shy285 (33 FR 16558) November 14 1968) However voyages solely to one or more coastwise ports have always been considered predominantly coastwise Therefore non-coastwise-qualified vessels engaging in such a voyage where passengers temporarily go ashore at a coastwise port have been deemed to have violated the PVSA
m Current Law and Policy Pursuant to Public Law 109-304 120
Stat 1632 enacted on October 6 2006 Title 46 United States Code was substantially reorganized and recodified Consequently the PVSA is now codified at 46 USC 55103 and provides that no vessel shall transport passengers between ports or places in the United States either directly or by way of a foreign port under a penalty of $300 for each person so transported and landed except one that (1) Is wholly owned by citizens of the United States for purposes of engaging in the coastwise trade and (2) has been issued a certificate of documentation with a coastwise endorsement or is exempt from documentation but would otherwise be eligible for such a certificate and endorsement
In 2003 Congress enacted Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II Section 211 for the purpose of revitalizing the oceangoing US-flag cruise industry in Hawaii (the 2003 Act) Three oceangoing US-flag cruise ships PRIDE OF ALOHA PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAII were documented with coastwise privileges pursuant to the 2003 Act These vessels entered regular service in Hawaii in 2004 2005 and 2006 respectively and pursuant to the express language of the 2003 Act are limited in their operation to providing regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands of Hawaii
The CBP regulations promulgated pursuant to the PVSA are set forth in 19 CFR 480a and have remained unchanged throughout both the recodification of Title 46 of the United States Code and the enactment of the 2003 Act They provide that a violation of the PVSA occurs when passengers embark (board a vessel for the
duration of a voyage) a non-coastwiseshyqualified vessel at one US port and disembark (leave the vessel at the conclusion of a voyage) at a different US port unless they proceed with the vessel to a distant foreign port (Le any port not considered a nearby foreign port which is defined as any port located in North America Central America Bermuda or the West Indies including the Bahamas) Currently these regulations do not contain specific criteria for non-coastwise-qualified vessels on itineraries including US ports and either nearby or distant foreign ports in order for such foreign port calls to be compliant with the PVSA
To reiterate the applicable CBP regulations provide that the PVSA is violated when a non-coastwise-qualified vessel transports a passenger on a voyage solely to one or more coastwise ports and the passenger disembarks or goes ashore temporarily at a coastwise port (19 CFR 480a(b)(1)) Furthermore a violation of the PVSA also occurs when a non-coastwise-qualified vessel transports a passenger on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a nearby foreign port or ports (but no other foreign port) and the passenger disembarks at a coastwise port other than the port of embarkation (19 CFR 480a(b)(2)) However there is no violation of the PVSA when a passenger is on a voyage to one or more coastwise ports and a distant foreign port or ports (whether or not the voyage includes a nearby foreign port or ports) and the passenger disembarks at a coastwise port provided the passenger has proceeded with the vessel to a distant foreign port (19 CFR 480a(b)(3))
IV Request From MARAD To Provide Guidance
The US Department of Transportation Maritime Administration (MARAD) has requested that CBP take action to ensure enforcement of the PVSA MARAD has asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreignshyflag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwiseshyqualified cruise ship operators
In April of 2007 the operator of the three US-flag cruise vessels operating solely in Hawaii pursuant to the 2003 Act announced their intent to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAIl from the Hawaii market and redeploy her to Europe The operator intends to re-flag the vessel to foreign registry directly resulting in the loss of over 1100 crewmember jobs The primary reason cited for this decision is the rapid increase in foreign-flag competition entering the Hawaii market
Federal Register I Vol 72 No 224 I Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules 65489
from the West Coast This competition is evidenced in published cruise itineraries of foreign-flag carriers offering a variety of round trip cruises that depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period usually in the early morning and ultimately return to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their cruise These cruises are often marketed as Hawaii cruises and except for the brief stop in the nearby foreign port of Ensenada are purely coastwise in nature It is these cruise itineraries that pose an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels that pursuant to the 2003 Act are currently engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands
V Preliminary Notice
In response to MARADs concerns CBP sent letters to two carriers known to operate the itineraries in question as well as to the Cruise Lines International Association Inc stating that CBP believes that these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because it appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA The letters further indicated that CBP is taking steps to publish this position
VI CBPs Proposed Interpretive Rule Accordingly in this document CBP is
proposing to provide that cruise itineraries for non-qualified coastwise vessels which allow passengers to board at a US port call at several Hawaiian ports proceed to a foreign port or ports for a brief period and then ultimately return to the original US port of embarkation for disembarkation are not consistent with the PVSA and the regulations promulgated pursuant thereto Specifically CBP interprets a voyage to be solely to one or more coastwise ports even where it stops at a foreign port unless the stop at the foreign port is a legitimate object of the cruise CBP will presume that a stop at a foreign port is not a legitimate object of the cruise unless
(1) The stop lasts at least 48 hours at the foreign port
(2) The amount of time at the foreign port is more than 50 percent of the total amount of time at the US ports of call and
(3) The passengers are permitted to go ashore temporarily at the foreign port
Accordingly CBP proposes to adopt an interpretive rule under which it will presume that any cruise itinerary that does not include a foreign port call that
satisfies each of these three criteria constitutes coastwise transportation of passengers in violation of 19 CFR 480a(b)(1)
Dated November 16 2007 W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection [FR Doc E7-22788 Filed 11-20-07 845 am] BILLING CODe 9111-14-1
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau
27 CFR Part 9
[Notice No 76]
RIN 1513-AB49
Proposed Establishment of the Leona Valley Viticultural Area (2007R-281 P)
AGENCY Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau Treasury ACTION Notice of proposed rulemaking
SUMMARY The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau proposes to establish the 134 square mile Leona Valley viticultural area in the northeast part of Los Angeles County California We designate viticultural areas to allow vintners to better describe the origin of their wines and to allow consumers to better identify wines they may purchase We invite comments on this proposed addition to our regulations DATES We must receive written comments on or before January 22 2008
ADDRESSES You may send comments on this notice to one of the following addresses
bull httpwwwregulationsgov (Federal e-rulemaking portal follow the instructions for submitting comments) or
bull Director Regulations and Rulings Division Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau PO Box 14412 Washington DC 20044-4412
See the Public Participation section of this notice for specific instructions and requirements for submitting comments and for information on how to request a public hearing
You may view copies of this notice selected supporting materials and any comments we receive about this proposal at httpwwwregulationsgov under Docket No 2007-0066 You also may view copies of this notice all related petitions maps or other supporting materials and any comments we receive about this
proposal by appointment at the TTB Information Resource Center 1310 G Street NW Washington DC 20220 To make an appointment call 202-927shy2400
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT NA Sutton Regulations and Rulings Division Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau 925 Lakeville S1 No 158 Petaluma CA 94952 phone 415shy271-1254 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
Background on Viticultural Areas
TTB Authority Section 105(e) of the Federal Alcohol
Administration Act (FAA Act) 27 USC 205(e) authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to prescribe regulations for the labeling of wine distilled spirits and malt beverages The FAA Act provides that these regulations should among other things prohibit consumer deception and the use of misleading statements on labels and ensure that labels provide the consumer with adequate information as to the identity and quality of the product The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) administers the regulations promulgated under the FAA Act
Part 4 ofthe TTB regulations (27 CFR part 4) allows the establishment of definitive viticultural areas and the use of their names as appellations of origin on wine labels and in wine advertisements Part 9 of the TTB regulations (27 CFR part 9) contains the list of approved viticultural areas
Definition Section 425(e)(1)(i) ofthe TTB
regulations (27 CFR 425(e)(1)(i)) defines a viticultural area for American wine as a delimited grape-growing region distinguishable by geographical features the boundaries of which have been recognized and defined in part 9 of the regulations These designations allow vintners and consumers to attribute a given quality reputation or other characteristic of a wine made from grapes grown in an area to its geographic origin The establishment of viticultural areas allows vintners to describe more accurately the origin of their wines to consumers and helps consumers to identify wines they may purchase Establishment of a viticultural area is neither an approval nor an endorsement by TTB of the wine produced in that area
Requirements Section 425(e)(2) of the TTB
regulations outlines the procedure for proposing an American viticultural area and provides that any interested party
Us Department ofHomelaDd Secmity Washington DC 10229
bull ~
US Customs and Border Protection
AUG 15 2fXJJ
VE5-3-02-QTRRBSTCCCI - ti015502-GG-
Mr leon Sutcliffe Director Port Operations Camivai Cruise Unes Camival Place 3655 NW 87Avenue Miami Aorlda 33178
RE P~nger Vessef Services Ad Coastwise Transportation 46 USC sect 55103 19 CFR sect 480a(b)
Dear Mr Sutcliffe
As you know US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) enforces the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) codified at TItle 46 United States Code section 55103 (46 USC 55103) This statute prohibits non-coastwise-qualifled vessels (ie those vessels not US-buill owned and documented with a coastwise endorsement) from transporting passengers between porls or places within the United States The regUlations promUlgated pursuant to the PVSA are found at TrtJe 19 Code of Federal Regulations section 4808 (19 CFR 4808)
It has come to our attention that passenger vessels of your company are engaging in cruise itineraries that include ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands Two USAlagged coastwise-endorsed passenger vessefs are also currenUy engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of caD wittlin the Hawaiian Islands
As part of your cruise itineraries some of your foreign-flagged vessels depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period and ultimately rebJm to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their endse For example the MS ZAANDAM of Holand America Lines departs San Diego cruises the Hawaiian Islands stops in Ensenada from 800pm to 11 OOpmbull and returns to san Diego CBP believes these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because It appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA -- - - ~~~------
Please be advised that CBP is taking steps to publish this position Should have any questions pertaining to this matter please contact Mr Glen Vereb Chief Cargo Security Carriers and Immigration Branch at (202) 572-8724
Sincerely
F Jl E EST Y LEe A U I 5 I N Gmiddot
December 21 2007
The Honorable W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection co Border Security Regulations Branch Office ofInternational Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229
Re Hawaii Coastwise Cruises (USCBP-2007-0098) Comments in Response to Proposed Interpretation
Dear Commissioner Basham
NCL America Inc1 (NCLA) submits these comments in support ofthe efforts ofCustoms and Border Protection to enforce the Passenger Vessel Services Act and the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative as applied to Hawaii coastwise cruises
1 Introduction and Summary of Position
NCLA operates three large oceangoing US flag cruise ships in Hawaii These ships are documented under US flag and are required to operate in regular service in Hawaii pursuant to the authority of the Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative a 2003 federal statute intended to revitalize the US flag cruise industry and to maximize economic and national security benefits to the United States (the 2003 Act)
NCLA has invested $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships pursuant to the 2003 Act and in direct reliance on the protections of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) and its proper enforcement The PVSA limits the transportation ofpassengers between US ports to coastwise documented US flag ships Its statutory protections recognize that US flag ships have significantly higher operational costs in part because they are subject to more stringent US laws including US labor laws and federal
1 NCL America Inc is a US corporation incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware headquartered in Honolulu Hawaii As a US corporation it is subject to US taxes at both the federal and state level The Chief Executive Officer the Chairman of the Board and all of the Board of Directors of NCL America are US citizens The company is also subject to US labor and employment laws and is required by statute to maintain a workforce comprised primarily ofUS citizens
700 Bishop St SUite 900 I Honolulu HawMi 96813 I Tel 8085273800 Fax 8085273820 I ndcom
2
income tax among others The NCLA ships operating in Hawaii are the only large oceangoing cruise ships operating under US flag In furtherance of the policy goals of the PVSA and the 2003 Act these ships have created over 4000 seafaring jobs all subject to US minimum wage and other labor statutes
Since 2003 there has been a significant increase in capacity in the Hawaii market from foreign flag ships providing cruise service to Hawaii from the West Coast Many of these foreign flag cruises are marketed as Hawaii cruises and consist entirely ofUS ports ofcall with the sole exception of a token stop in Mexico for as little as an hour late at night under circumstances where passengers are not permitted to get offthe ship There are no reported rulings approving these particular foreign flag itineraries
Lower cost foreign competition in the Hawaii market has unfairly hurt NCLAs operations NCLA has incurred substantial losses which have contributed significantly to its decision earlier this year to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAll from US flag and reshydeploy it foreign Unfair foreign competition poses an imminent threat to the remaining US flag passenger vessels operating in the Hawaii trades pursuant to the 2003 Act
As the agency statutorily charged with implementation of the 2003 Act the US Department ofTransportation Maritime Administration (MARAn) is aware of the threat foreign flag Hawaii itineraries pose to the US flag fleet and brought the situation to the attention ofthe US Department ofHomeland Security Bureau ofCustoms and Border Protection (CBP or Customs) Customs determined that the primary object of these itineraries was coastwise and that the Ensenada stop was an evasion of the PVSA
In August 2007 Customs provided written notice to the affected foreign lines and their trade association that the existing itineraries were contrary to the PVSA None of these lines sought advance rulings even after the Customs notice with respect to their Hawaii itineraries pursuant to Customs regulations and many continued to market the itineraries as Hawaii cruises NCLA supports the efforts ofCustoms and MARAD to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act for Hawaii cruises
2 Statutory Authority for Customs Proposed Interpretation
(a) Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA)
Congress passed the PVSA in 1886 to protect the US maritime transportation industry from foreign competition2 Protection is afforded through penalty assessments on foreign vessels transporting passengers between US ports or places directly or by way ofa foreign port 3 As Congress and the courts have recognized coastwise protections for the US maritime transportation industry are only one dimension of the PVSA Operating in conjunction with other coastwise laws and with the US
2 See United States v Honduran SS GRANADA 35 F Supp 892 894 (BD Pa 1940)(citing purpose of PVSA to meet threats to the practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping which was to be preserved for US ships)
46 USc sect 55103 (originally 46 USC App 289)
3
documentation laws the PVSA also enhances military sealift in times ofnational emergency sustains a US merchant marine and supports the US shipbuilding and repair industry4
(b) Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative (the 2003 Act)
Over the past decade Congress has sought to reinforce the goals of the PVSA by providing mechanisms to revitalize the oceangoing US flag cruise fleet particularly in Hawaii The Project America legislation enacted in 1997 authorized among other things the re~flagging ofone existing cruise ship contingent on the operator contracting for the construction oftwo new oceangoing cruise shipss Following the default of the operator under the original contract Congress enacted the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative for the purpose ofrecovering economic and national security benefits to the United States bull 6 These same goals of the original PVSA were expressly referenced in the legislative history of the 2003 Act which emphasized that these ships will be assets available in time ofnational emergency and will significantly expand the pool ofqualified seafarers upon which the US Department ofDefense relies to crew non-combatant vessels
The 2003 Act authorizes the US documentation ofthree cruise ships for operation in regular service in Hawaii subject to certain conditions including a prohibition on operating in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico and the Caribbean Sea and a requirement that all vessel repair work be undertaken in the United States MARAD is charged with implementation of the 2003 Act
3 Customs Implementation of PVSA
(a) Regulations
The current regulations implementing the PVSA were published by Customs in 19858 The growth of the foreign flag cruise industry in North America and in particular the development of the Alaska cruise market led to an effort in 1984 to amend the thenshyexisting regulations to increase the ease of administration and operational flexibility The effort to change the regulation had support from US port interests who saw benefit in the potential increase in the number ofUS ports that foreign vessels could call and was opposed by proponents ofpotential US flag projects as detrimental to efforts to revitalize the US fleet 9 The preamble to the 1985 rule emphasized that it was of paramount importance to consider the primary object ofpassengers in taking a
4 See American Hawaii Cruises v Skinner 713 F Supp 452 457 (DDC 1989) (recognizing the contribution of the PVSA and the Jones Act in helping to secure national defense by maintaining a merchant marine oftbe best equipped and most suitable types ofvessels sufficient to serve in time of war or national emergency) see also Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 30 (DC Cir 1984) Wirth Ltd v SIS Acadia Forest 537 F2d 1272 1281 n32 (5th Cir 1976) S Public Law 105-56 Section 8109 (111 Stat 1203 1244) (Oct 81997 ) 6 Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II General Provisions - Department ofCommerce Section 211 (117 Stat 1179) (Feb 20 2003) 1 149 Cong Rec S1118 (dailyed Jan 17 2003(statement ofSenator Inouye) 8 19 CFR sect 480a 950 Fed Reg 26981 (July I 1985)
4
voyage10 a concept which is reinforced elsewhere in Customs regulations11 In its analysis of the comments received at the time Customs accepted the view ofport interests that the modified rule would help their business but did so recognizing the absence ofa regular salt water US flag passenger fleet Customs acknowledged the potential harm to prospective efforts to revitalize the US flag passenger fleet and expressly cautioned that if it were ever shown that coastwise qualified vessels in competition with foreign vessels were in fact hurt by the modified Customs regulation then Customs would immediately reconsider its position12
(b) Customs Rulings
Given the significant penalties associated with violating the PVSA13 Customs regulations expressly provide a mechanism for the owner or charterer of a foreign vessel or any other interested person to request an advisory ruling as to whether a contemplated voyage would be considered in violation of the PVSA14 Customs regulations provide that vessel operators can rely on these ruling letters only to the extent that the facts and circumstances are identical to those in the ruling letter IS
Notwithstanding the fact that several foreign cruise lines offer Hawaii itineraries originating in a US mainland port and calling at Hawaii ports with a token intervening stop in Mexico there are no reported rulings expressly approving such an itinerary for these foreign cruise lines 16
4 The Cruise Industry in Hawaii
(a) NCL America Returns US flag to the Oceangoing Passenger Fleet
Pursuant to the requirements ofthe 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative NCLA agreed to promote US-flag cruising enhance military sealift capacity and expand the US maritime labor base No other major cruise line had ever undertaken such a commitment to the US flag and the public policy objectives Congress sought to achieve under the PVSA or the 2003 Act Introduction ofPRIDE OF ALOHA in 2004 was a significant development in the maritime industry because it marked the restoration ofthe
10 Id at 26983 11 Customs Regulations include a provision on the effect ofruling letters and with respect to carrier rulings the applicable regulation refers to rulings setting forth a determination as to whether or not the primary object of a contemplated voyage is coastwise transportation in violation of46 USC sect 289 [pYSA codified at 46 USC sect55103] 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 12 50 Fed Reg at 26983 13 A modem cruise ship with 2400 passengers for example would be subject to a fine of$720OOO per cruise based on the statutory penalty of$300 for each passenger transported in violation of the Act 14 19 CFR sect 480a(d) IS 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 16 There is one older reported mling involving a request to drop the Ensenada port call from a Los AngeleslHawaiiLos Angeles itinerary which Customs held would violate the PYSA In dicta Customs acknowledged that the itinerary could be in compliance if the Ensenada call were not dropped but did not address the issue ofwhether a one hour service call where no passengers depart the vessel would be sufficient The carrier that obtained that ruling has since left the Hawaii market See Customs Ruling HQ 114078 re Crystal Hannony (Nov 4 1997)
5
us flag to the oceangoing cruise industry A contemporaneous press release from the Us Department ofTransportation reported that the three US-flag cruise ships to be introduced pursuant to the 2003 Act were expected to create more than 20000 US jobs generate more than $825 million ofexpenditures in the US economy and create nearly $360 million in federal tax revenue by the end of 200717 In 2005 the PRIDE OF AMERICA was introduced and in 2006 the third vessel PRIDE OF HAWAll was introduced to Hawaii Both the PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAIl offer 7shyday inter-island Hawaii itineraries whereas PRIDE OF ALOHA operates on 7 and 10 day cruises exclusively among the islands ofHawaii as well as 11 day cruises that include a foreign port call at Fanning Island To date NCLA has invested over $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships in furtherance ofthe policy objectives of the PVSA and the 2003 Act These ships employ over 4000 seafarers and generate hundreds ofmillions of dollars in benefits for Hawaii and the nation
(b) Significant Increase in Foreign Flag Capacity Since 2003
The most significant change in the Hawaii cruise market since 2003 has been the dramatic increase in capacity A significant portion ofthis capacity increase is directly attributable to NCLAs fulfillment ofthe Congressional mandate in the 2003 Act However foreign-flag operations in the Hawaii market as measured in passenger nights18 have skyrocketed Based on MARAn data derived from the US Customs Border Patrol Vessel Entrance and Clearance documents the passenger nights for foreign flag vessels departing from the West Coast to Hawaii on round trip cruise have increased several hundredfold during this period19 See Exhibit A
(c) NCLA Has Incurred Substantial Losses During this Period
Since 2004 NCLA has lost cumulatively more than a quarter ofa billion dollars A principal reason for these losses has been the increase in foreign capacity in this market NCLA has taken significant steps to reduce costs to address the increase in foreign competition but NCLA is at an inherent disadvantage when competing against foreign companies that are not subject to US labor laws US tax laws and other laws Ofcourse the statutory protections of the PVSA are intended to address these very issues That is why Customs immediate action to implement the proposed interpretation is critical for the US flag fleet Regrettably NCLA has already been forced to reduce overall capacity early next year with the withdrawal ofPRIDE OF HAWAlI to another
17 DOT Press Release dated June 72004 see also DOT Press Release dated August 132004 in connection with visit to PRIDE OF ALOHA by US Transportation Secretary Norman Y Mineta 11 Passenger nights (also referred to as passenger capacity days) are calculated by multiplying the number ofpassengers per vessel by the number ofcruise days in each itinerary by the number of cruises This is the unit ofmeasurement employed by MARAn In contrast passenger bed supply (also referred to as passenger capacity) data reflects only the number ofberths per vessel multiplied by the number of cruises and hence understates the market by excluding the full economic value ofthe cruise perfonned 19 In 2003 the total number ofpassenger nights for round-trip West Coast to Hawaii cruises was 303325 which jumped by 353 to 1072329 in 2006 and by 430 to 1304546 from 2003 to 2007 (The 2007 figure is based on MARAD data for six months and a1ll1ualized by published itineraries for the balance of the year)
6
market for operation under foreign flag This move alone will result in the loss ofover 1000 American seafaring jobs
5 Customs Proposed Interpretation is Necessary to Further the Important National Security and Public Policy Objectives Embodied in Federal Law
As Customs has properly noted the increase in foreign competition in the Hawaii trades in contravention of the PVSA pose[s] an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels[] As the operator of these ships NCLA has a vested interest in protecting the jobs ofthe thousands ofAmerican crewmembers and cruise ship service providers who support these vessels NCLA also has an interest in protecting the substantial economic investment it has made to revitalize the US flag passenger vessel fleet But a balancing of interests in the context of Customs enforcement ofexisting law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act requires a much broader focus
The legislative history of the 2003 Act expressly recognized the national security and public policy import ofestablishing a US flag passenger vessel fleet as a means to maintain the countrys preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool of qualified seafarers and as a means to help sustain a fleet ofUS-flag vessels to su~ort
the nations military and maritime industrial base for times ofnational emergency
Congress understood the importance ofestablishing a viable US flag cruise ship fleet as something larger than the vessels themselves These national security and public policy objectives must be weighed in the balance as Customs assesses how best to interpret its rules to give effect to the PVSA and the 2003 Act
6 Customs Should Clarify that the Proposed Interpretation is Limited to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades and Adopt Reasonable Measures to Ensure Sufficient Foreign Content
Since publication ofthe proposed interpretative rule several commenters have observed that the scope of the proposed interpretation is ambiguous because the language of Section VI referencing any cruise itinerary appears broader than the caption Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises and the entire discussion in the published notice which focuses exclusively on US-flag coastwise vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA agrees that the proposed interpretation should be clarified so that its scope is limited to vessels operating roundtrip voyages from US ports that include Hawaii port calls
NCLA supports the concept reflected in the proposed interpretive rule that round trip Hawaii itineraries from US ports on foreign ships must include a material and measurable degree ofoverall foreign port content as compared to US port content
20 149 Congo Rec S1117 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)
7
(a) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is also Consistent with Subsequent Congressional Enactments Modifying the PVSA
As discussed above it is well established that the PVSA was designed toRrotect US-flag vessels from foreign competition in the coastwise and domestic trades 1
Subsequent legislative enactments however have appropriately differentiated among distinct geographic markets and trades including Canada Alaska Puerto Rico and Hawaii based on the existence or non-existence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
In 1938 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers by Canadian passenger vessels on Lake Ontario and the St Lawrence River until such time as passenger service shall be established by vessels of the United States22 Similarly in 1961 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers on Canadian vessels within Alaska or between Alaska and other points in the United States until such time as passenger service is established by vessels ofthe United States23
In 1984 Congress modified the application ofthe PVSA to pennit the transportation ofpassengers between Puerto Rico and other United States ports on foreign-flag vessels24 As with the other statutory exceptions this provision is qualified and expires [o]n a showing that a United States passenger vessel qualified to engage in the coastwise trade is offering or advertising passenger service between a port in Puerto Rico and another port in the United States2S
Congress acted again with respect to the application of the PVSA with the 2003 Act in which it authorized three vessels that did not meet the US-build requirements of the PVSA to operate as modem US-flagged cruise ships in regular service in Hawaii26 The 2003 Act imposes a specific geographic limitation on the operation of any ship documented under this authority to operations only in regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands ofHawaii and shall not transport passengers in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico or the Caribbean Sea except in certain limited circumstances27 As above the limited nature of the 2003 Act is express it is strictly limited to the large ocean-going cruise ships and then only those operating in the regular Hawaii service where there are no US-flag operations28
21 See Act ofJune 19 1886 c 421 sec 8 24 Stat 81 Act of February 171898 c 26 sec 2 30 Stat 248 22 S] Res 174 75th Cong 52 Stat 223 (Alp 251938) codified at46 USC sect 55121(a) 23 See Pub L 87-77 75 Stat 196 (Jun 30 1961) codified at 46 USC sect 55121(b) 24 See Pub L 98-563 98 Stat 2916 (Oct 301984) codified at 46 USC sect 55104(b) 25 46 USC sect 55104(c)(l) see also 46 USC 46 USc sect 55104(cX2)(expiration of exemption upon availability ofa non-coastwise qualified US-flag vessel offering service in the relevant market) 26 149 Congo Rec SI118 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)(statementofSen Inouye) 27 Pub L 108-7 117 Stat 79 (Feb 20 2003) 28 149 Congo Rec S11l9 (dailyed Jan 17 2003Xstatement of Sen Inouye)
8
In each ofthese instances Congress fashioned a narrow exception to the PVSA that differentiated among distinct geographic markets based on the existence or nonshyexistence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
As the federal agency responsible for administering the 2003 Act MARAD requested that Customs act to protect US flag passenger vessel interests in the Hawaii trades29 Limiting the scope ofthe proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades also reflects Customs appreciation of the PVSA in the context of the subsequent Congressional action30 Viewing the Congressional modifications to the PVSA as a whole Congress has specifically and repeatedly differentiated among distinct geographic markets when it has found it necessary and appropriate to do so to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests It is well established that the proper interpretation of a statutory scheme includes consideration ofsubsequent statutes even though the underlying statute itselfhas not been expressly amended31 Accordingly Customs should likewise limit the scope ofthe proposed PVSA interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades because that is the only geographic market as mandated by the 2003 Act in which oceangoing US-flag cruise ships are operating
(b) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Consistent with Public Policy Objectives of the 1985 Rulemaking
In 1985middot Customs liberalized the regulations implementing the PVSA by eliminating certain regulatory prohibitions on foreign flag vessels In the context of the 1985 rulemaking Customs justified a relaxation ofthe regulations on the grounds that it would simplify the administration of the PVSA and would benefit the economy ofcertain American coastwise ports without eroding the statutory protection given to American vessels engaged in solely domestic trade32
Customs thus sought to reconcile US port economic interests with US-flag passenger vessel interests Both of these twin policy objectives are furthered by
29 See 72 Fed Reg 65488 (Nov 21 2007)( MARAn bas asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the ~eratiODS ofcoastwise-qualified cruise ship operators)
See generally FDA v Brown amp Williamson Tobacco Corp 529 US 120 132-133 (2000)(assessing propriety ofagency construction ofFood DIUg and Cosmetics Act and descnbing responsibility of reviewing cowt to assess statutory provisions in the context of subsequent legislative enactments) 31 See Brown amp Williamson 529 US 143 (holding that proper construction ofstatutory provision must necessarily assume that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications ofa later statute This is particularly so where the scope of the earlier statute is broad but the subsequent statutes more specifically address the topic athand) see also United States v Estate ofRomani 523 US 517 530-531 (1998)( holding that a later-enacted statute should control the construction of the federal lien priority statute a specific policy embodied in a later federal statute should control om construction of the [earlier] statute even though it ha[s] not been expressly amended) United States v Fausto 484 US 439453 (1988)(The courts frequently find Congress to have done this - whenever in fact they interpret a statutory text in the light ofsurrounding texts that happen to have been subsequently enacted This classic judicial task of reconciling many laws enacted over time and getting them to make sense in combination necessarily assumes that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications of a later statute) 32 50 Fed Reg 26982 (JuI 11985)
9
limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades
As noted earlier the 2003 Act limits the operation of the NCLA US-flag oceangoing passenger vessels to regular service in Hawaii Because there are no oceangoing US-flag vessels operating in any market other than the Hawaii trades Customs should limit the scope of the proposed interPretation to that market Such a limitation protects US flag passenger vessel interests without prejudicing US port interests In contrast an application of the proposed interpretation to any itinerary would needlessly harm US port interests unrelated to Hawaii without any countervailing benefit to US-flag passenger vessel interests Accordingly limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation is consistent with the public policy objectives of the 1985 rulemaking as well as the 2003 Act
(c) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Also Consistent with Customs Commitment to Revisit the Scope of its Rules to Protect US-Flag Interests
The relaxation ofthe PVSA regulations in 1985 was premised in large part on Customs finding that there was no regular salt water US-flag passenger fleet in operation at that time33 Acknowledging that the relaxed regulations could harm USshyflag interests Customs committed in the preamble ofthe 1985 final rule to immediately reconsider its interpretation if it is ever shown that there is a viable US flag vessel operating in competition with foreign-flag vessels34
Congress enacted the 2003 Act to stimulate the development of a US flag cruise ship industry As noted above the legislative history ofthat Act makes clear that Congress sought to revitalize the US-flag cruise industry as a means to maintain Americas preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool ofqualified seafarers help sustain a fleet of US flag vessels to support our military and a maritime industrial base create thousands of seagoing and shoreside American jobs and stimulate the development ofa US flag cruise ship tourism business with the commensurate benefits to the US tax base the US economy and US employment
Customs is now acting at MARADs request to revisit its interpretation ofthe regulations implementing the PVSA because recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwise-qualified cruise ship operations35 That is to say that the concerns articulated by Customs in the context of the 1985 rulemaking have materialized and US-flag passenger vessel interests are in fact being hanned in the Hawaii trades by foreign competitors
33 50 Fed Reg 26983 34Id
3S 72 Fed Reg 56488 (Nov 21 2007)
I
10
Because the US-flag passenger vessels are limited by statute to regular service in Hawaii limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the
Hawaii trades is consistent with Customs historical commitment to revisit its interpretation ofthe implementing regulations to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests
7 Conclusion
For the reasons stated above NCLA commends the efforts ofCustoms and MARAn to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act as applied to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA respectfully requests Customs to move ahead promptly with p~blicati~nof a final interpretive rule to advance the important national security arid public policy objectives ofthese laws
We greatly appreciate the opportunity to submit these comments
Sincerely
~~~ Alan T Yamamoto Vice President Hawaii Operations
Exhibit A
Ship Name Serenade Of The Seas Departure Port San Diego California Ports of Call San Diego California Kailua Kona Hawaii Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii Hlo Hawaii Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii Ensenada Mexico San Qigo California
2007 Date(s) Oct 05
Sailing Itinerary
Day Port H ~rrive Depart Activity
05-0ct San Diego California 500 PM
06-0ct Cruising
07-0ct Cruising
08-0ct Cruising
09-0ct Cruising
10-0ct Kailua Kona Hawaii 700 AM 900 PM Tendered
11-00t Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 1000 AM Tendered
12middot0ct Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 900 PM Tendered
13-0ct Hilo Hawaii 700 AM 600 PM Docked
14middot0ct Honoulu (Oahu) Hawaii 700 AM Docked
15-0ct Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii 200 AM Docked
6-0ct CrUising
17-0ct Cruising
18-0ct Cruising
19middot0ct Cruising
-7 20-00t
O-Oot
Ensenada ~i1exico
San Deqo California
i 00 ~r1
700 ~M
200 oM D1Jcked ~
Federal Register I Vol 72 No 224 I Wednesday November 21 2007Proposed Rules 65489
from the West Coast This competition is evidenced in published cruise itineraries of foreign-flag carriers offering a variety of round trip cruises that depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period usually in the early morning and ultimately return to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their cruise These cruises are often marketed as Hawaii cruises and except for the brief stop in the nearby foreign port of Ensenada are purely coastwise in nature It is these cruise itineraries that pose an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels that pursuant to the 2003 Act are currently engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands
V Preliminary Notice
In response to MARADs concerns CBP sent letters to two carriers known to operate the itineraries in question as well as to the Cruise Lines International Association Inc stating that CBP believes that these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because it appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA The letters further indicated that CBP is taking steps to publish this position
VI CBPs Proposed Interpretive Rule Accordingly in this document CBP is
proposing to provide that cruise itineraries for non-qualified coastwise vessels which allow passengers to board at a US port call at several Hawaiian ports proceed to a foreign port or ports for a brief period and then ultimately return to the original US port of embarkation for disembarkation are not consistent with the PVSA and the regulations promulgated pursuant thereto Specifically CBP interprets a voyage to be solely to one or more coastwise ports even where it stops at a foreign port unless the stop at the foreign port is a legitimate object of the cruise CBP will presume that a stop at a foreign port is not a legitimate object of the cruise unless
(1) The stop lasts at least 48 hours at the foreign port
(2) The amount of time at the foreign port is more than 50 percent of the total amount of time at the US ports of call and
(3) The passengers are permitted to go ashore temporarily at the foreign port
Accordingly CBP proposes to adopt an interpretive rule under which it will presume that any cruise itinerary that does not include a foreign port call that
satisfies each of these three criteria constitutes coastwise transportation of passengers in violation of 19 CFR 480a(b)(1)
Dated November 16 2007 W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection [FR Doc E7-22788 Filed 11-20-07 845 am] BILLING CODe 9111-14-1
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau
27 CFR Part 9
[Notice No 76]
RIN 1513-AB49
Proposed Establishment of the Leona Valley Viticultural Area (2007R-281 P)
AGENCY Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau Treasury ACTION Notice of proposed rulemaking
SUMMARY The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau proposes to establish the 134 square mile Leona Valley viticultural area in the northeast part of Los Angeles County California We designate viticultural areas to allow vintners to better describe the origin of their wines and to allow consumers to better identify wines they may purchase We invite comments on this proposed addition to our regulations DATES We must receive written comments on or before January 22 2008
ADDRESSES You may send comments on this notice to one of the following addresses
bull httpwwwregulationsgov (Federal e-rulemaking portal follow the instructions for submitting comments) or
bull Director Regulations and Rulings Division Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau PO Box 14412 Washington DC 20044-4412
See the Public Participation section of this notice for specific instructions and requirements for submitting comments and for information on how to request a public hearing
You may view copies of this notice selected supporting materials and any comments we receive about this proposal at httpwwwregulationsgov under Docket No 2007-0066 You also may view copies of this notice all related petitions maps or other supporting materials and any comments we receive about this
proposal by appointment at the TTB Information Resource Center 1310 G Street NW Washington DC 20220 To make an appointment call 202-927shy2400
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT NA Sutton Regulations and Rulings Division Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau 925 Lakeville S1 No 158 Petaluma CA 94952 phone 415shy271-1254 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
Background on Viticultural Areas
TTB Authority Section 105(e) of the Federal Alcohol
Administration Act (FAA Act) 27 USC 205(e) authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to prescribe regulations for the labeling of wine distilled spirits and malt beverages The FAA Act provides that these regulations should among other things prohibit consumer deception and the use of misleading statements on labels and ensure that labels provide the consumer with adequate information as to the identity and quality of the product The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) administers the regulations promulgated under the FAA Act
Part 4 ofthe TTB regulations (27 CFR part 4) allows the establishment of definitive viticultural areas and the use of their names as appellations of origin on wine labels and in wine advertisements Part 9 of the TTB regulations (27 CFR part 9) contains the list of approved viticultural areas
Definition Section 425(e)(1)(i) ofthe TTB
regulations (27 CFR 425(e)(1)(i)) defines a viticultural area for American wine as a delimited grape-growing region distinguishable by geographical features the boundaries of which have been recognized and defined in part 9 of the regulations These designations allow vintners and consumers to attribute a given quality reputation or other characteristic of a wine made from grapes grown in an area to its geographic origin The establishment of viticultural areas allows vintners to describe more accurately the origin of their wines to consumers and helps consumers to identify wines they may purchase Establishment of a viticultural area is neither an approval nor an endorsement by TTB of the wine produced in that area
Requirements Section 425(e)(2) of the TTB
regulations outlines the procedure for proposing an American viticultural area and provides that any interested party
Us Department ofHomelaDd Secmity Washington DC 10229
bull ~
US Customs and Border Protection
AUG 15 2fXJJ
VE5-3-02-QTRRBSTCCCI - ti015502-GG-
Mr leon Sutcliffe Director Port Operations Camivai Cruise Unes Camival Place 3655 NW 87Avenue Miami Aorlda 33178
RE P~nger Vessef Services Ad Coastwise Transportation 46 USC sect 55103 19 CFR sect 480a(b)
Dear Mr Sutcliffe
As you know US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) enforces the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) codified at TItle 46 United States Code section 55103 (46 USC 55103) This statute prohibits non-coastwise-qualifled vessels (ie those vessels not US-buill owned and documented with a coastwise endorsement) from transporting passengers between porls or places within the United States The regUlations promUlgated pursuant to the PVSA are found at TrtJe 19 Code of Federal Regulations section 4808 (19 CFR 4808)
It has come to our attention that passenger vessels of your company are engaging in cruise itineraries that include ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands Two USAlagged coastwise-endorsed passenger vessefs are also currenUy engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of caD wittlin the Hawaiian Islands
As part of your cruise itineraries some of your foreign-flagged vessels depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period and ultimately rebJm to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their endse For example the MS ZAANDAM of Holand America Lines departs San Diego cruises the Hawaiian Islands stops in Ensenada from 800pm to 11 OOpmbull and returns to san Diego CBP believes these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because It appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA -- - - ~~~------
Please be advised that CBP is taking steps to publish this position Should have any questions pertaining to this matter please contact Mr Glen Vereb Chief Cargo Security Carriers and Immigration Branch at (202) 572-8724
Sincerely
F Jl E EST Y LEe A U I 5 I N Gmiddot
December 21 2007
The Honorable W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection co Border Security Regulations Branch Office ofInternational Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229
Re Hawaii Coastwise Cruises (USCBP-2007-0098) Comments in Response to Proposed Interpretation
Dear Commissioner Basham
NCL America Inc1 (NCLA) submits these comments in support ofthe efforts ofCustoms and Border Protection to enforce the Passenger Vessel Services Act and the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative as applied to Hawaii coastwise cruises
1 Introduction and Summary of Position
NCLA operates three large oceangoing US flag cruise ships in Hawaii These ships are documented under US flag and are required to operate in regular service in Hawaii pursuant to the authority of the Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative a 2003 federal statute intended to revitalize the US flag cruise industry and to maximize economic and national security benefits to the United States (the 2003 Act)
NCLA has invested $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships pursuant to the 2003 Act and in direct reliance on the protections of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) and its proper enforcement The PVSA limits the transportation ofpassengers between US ports to coastwise documented US flag ships Its statutory protections recognize that US flag ships have significantly higher operational costs in part because they are subject to more stringent US laws including US labor laws and federal
1 NCL America Inc is a US corporation incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware headquartered in Honolulu Hawaii As a US corporation it is subject to US taxes at both the federal and state level The Chief Executive Officer the Chairman of the Board and all of the Board of Directors of NCL America are US citizens The company is also subject to US labor and employment laws and is required by statute to maintain a workforce comprised primarily ofUS citizens
700 Bishop St SUite 900 I Honolulu HawMi 96813 I Tel 8085273800 Fax 8085273820 I ndcom
2
income tax among others The NCLA ships operating in Hawaii are the only large oceangoing cruise ships operating under US flag In furtherance of the policy goals of the PVSA and the 2003 Act these ships have created over 4000 seafaring jobs all subject to US minimum wage and other labor statutes
Since 2003 there has been a significant increase in capacity in the Hawaii market from foreign flag ships providing cruise service to Hawaii from the West Coast Many of these foreign flag cruises are marketed as Hawaii cruises and consist entirely ofUS ports ofcall with the sole exception of a token stop in Mexico for as little as an hour late at night under circumstances where passengers are not permitted to get offthe ship There are no reported rulings approving these particular foreign flag itineraries
Lower cost foreign competition in the Hawaii market has unfairly hurt NCLAs operations NCLA has incurred substantial losses which have contributed significantly to its decision earlier this year to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAll from US flag and reshydeploy it foreign Unfair foreign competition poses an imminent threat to the remaining US flag passenger vessels operating in the Hawaii trades pursuant to the 2003 Act
As the agency statutorily charged with implementation of the 2003 Act the US Department ofTransportation Maritime Administration (MARAn) is aware of the threat foreign flag Hawaii itineraries pose to the US flag fleet and brought the situation to the attention ofthe US Department ofHomeland Security Bureau ofCustoms and Border Protection (CBP or Customs) Customs determined that the primary object of these itineraries was coastwise and that the Ensenada stop was an evasion of the PVSA
In August 2007 Customs provided written notice to the affected foreign lines and their trade association that the existing itineraries were contrary to the PVSA None of these lines sought advance rulings even after the Customs notice with respect to their Hawaii itineraries pursuant to Customs regulations and many continued to market the itineraries as Hawaii cruises NCLA supports the efforts ofCustoms and MARAD to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act for Hawaii cruises
2 Statutory Authority for Customs Proposed Interpretation
(a) Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA)
Congress passed the PVSA in 1886 to protect the US maritime transportation industry from foreign competition2 Protection is afforded through penalty assessments on foreign vessels transporting passengers between US ports or places directly or by way ofa foreign port 3 As Congress and the courts have recognized coastwise protections for the US maritime transportation industry are only one dimension of the PVSA Operating in conjunction with other coastwise laws and with the US
2 See United States v Honduran SS GRANADA 35 F Supp 892 894 (BD Pa 1940)(citing purpose of PVSA to meet threats to the practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping which was to be preserved for US ships)
46 USc sect 55103 (originally 46 USC App 289)
3
documentation laws the PVSA also enhances military sealift in times ofnational emergency sustains a US merchant marine and supports the US shipbuilding and repair industry4
(b) Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative (the 2003 Act)
Over the past decade Congress has sought to reinforce the goals of the PVSA by providing mechanisms to revitalize the oceangoing US flag cruise fleet particularly in Hawaii The Project America legislation enacted in 1997 authorized among other things the re~flagging ofone existing cruise ship contingent on the operator contracting for the construction oftwo new oceangoing cruise shipss Following the default of the operator under the original contract Congress enacted the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative for the purpose ofrecovering economic and national security benefits to the United States bull 6 These same goals of the original PVSA were expressly referenced in the legislative history of the 2003 Act which emphasized that these ships will be assets available in time ofnational emergency and will significantly expand the pool ofqualified seafarers upon which the US Department ofDefense relies to crew non-combatant vessels
The 2003 Act authorizes the US documentation ofthree cruise ships for operation in regular service in Hawaii subject to certain conditions including a prohibition on operating in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico and the Caribbean Sea and a requirement that all vessel repair work be undertaken in the United States MARAD is charged with implementation of the 2003 Act
3 Customs Implementation of PVSA
(a) Regulations
The current regulations implementing the PVSA were published by Customs in 19858 The growth of the foreign flag cruise industry in North America and in particular the development of the Alaska cruise market led to an effort in 1984 to amend the thenshyexisting regulations to increase the ease of administration and operational flexibility The effort to change the regulation had support from US port interests who saw benefit in the potential increase in the number ofUS ports that foreign vessels could call and was opposed by proponents ofpotential US flag projects as detrimental to efforts to revitalize the US fleet 9 The preamble to the 1985 rule emphasized that it was of paramount importance to consider the primary object ofpassengers in taking a
4 See American Hawaii Cruises v Skinner 713 F Supp 452 457 (DDC 1989) (recognizing the contribution of the PVSA and the Jones Act in helping to secure national defense by maintaining a merchant marine oftbe best equipped and most suitable types ofvessels sufficient to serve in time of war or national emergency) see also Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 30 (DC Cir 1984) Wirth Ltd v SIS Acadia Forest 537 F2d 1272 1281 n32 (5th Cir 1976) S Public Law 105-56 Section 8109 (111 Stat 1203 1244) (Oct 81997 ) 6 Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II General Provisions - Department ofCommerce Section 211 (117 Stat 1179) (Feb 20 2003) 1 149 Cong Rec S1118 (dailyed Jan 17 2003(statement ofSenator Inouye) 8 19 CFR sect 480a 950 Fed Reg 26981 (July I 1985)
4
voyage10 a concept which is reinforced elsewhere in Customs regulations11 In its analysis of the comments received at the time Customs accepted the view ofport interests that the modified rule would help their business but did so recognizing the absence ofa regular salt water US flag passenger fleet Customs acknowledged the potential harm to prospective efforts to revitalize the US flag passenger fleet and expressly cautioned that if it were ever shown that coastwise qualified vessels in competition with foreign vessels were in fact hurt by the modified Customs regulation then Customs would immediately reconsider its position12
(b) Customs Rulings
Given the significant penalties associated with violating the PVSA13 Customs regulations expressly provide a mechanism for the owner or charterer of a foreign vessel or any other interested person to request an advisory ruling as to whether a contemplated voyage would be considered in violation of the PVSA14 Customs regulations provide that vessel operators can rely on these ruling letters only to the extent that the facts and circumstances are identical to those in the ruling letter IS
Notwithstanding the fact that several foreign cruise lines offer Hawaii itineraries originating in a US mainland port and calling at Hawaii ports with a token intervening stop in Mexico there are no reported rulings expressly approving such an itinerary for these foreign cruise lines 16
4 The Cruise Industry in Hawaii
(a) NCL America Returns US flag to the Oceangoing Passenger Fleet
Pursuant to the requirements ofthe 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative NCLA agreed to promote US-flag cruising enhance military sealift capacity and expand the US maritime labor base No other major cruise line had ever undertaken such a commitment to the US flag and the public policy objectives Congress sought to achieve under the PVSA or the 2003 Act Introduction ofPRIDE OF ALOHA in 2004 was a significant development in the maritime industry because it marked the restoration ofthe
10 Id at 26983 11 Customs Regulations include a provision on the effect ofruling letters and with respect to carrier rulings the applicable regulation refers to rulings setting forth a determination as to whether or not the primary object of a contemplated voyage is coastwise transportation in violation of46 USC sect 289 [pYSA codified at 46 USC sect55103] 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 12 50 Fed Reg at 26983 13 A modem cruise ship with 2400 passengers for example would be subject to a fine of$720OOO per cruise based on the statutory penalty of$300 for each passenger transported in violation of the Act 14 19 CFR sect 480a(d) IS 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 16 There is one older reported mling involving a request to drop the Ensenada port call from a Los AngeleslHawaiiLos Angeles itinerary which Customs held would violate the PYSA In dicta Customs acknowledged that the itinerary could be in compliance if the Ensenada call were not dropped but did not address the issue ofwhether a one hour service call where no passengers depart the vessel would be sufficient The carrier that obtained that ruling has since left the Hawaii market See Customs Ruling HQ 114078 re Crystal Hannony (Nov 4 1997)
5
us flag to the oceangoing cruise industry A contemporaneous press release from the Us Department ofTransportation reported that the three US-flag cruise ships to be introduced pursuant to the 2003 Act were expected to create more than 20000 US jobs generate more than $825 million ofexpenditures in the US economy and create nearly $360 million in federal tax revenue by the end of 200717 In 2005 the PRIDE OF AMERICA was introduced and in 2006 the third vessel PRIDE OF HAWAll was introduced to Hawaii Both the PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAIl offer 7shyday inter-island Hawaii itineraries whereas PRIDE OF ALOHA operates on 7 and 10 day cruises exclusively among the islands ofHawaii as well as 11 day cruises that include a foreign port call at Fanning Island To date NCLA has invested over $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships in furtherance ofthe policy objectives of the PVSA and the 2003 Act These ships employ over 4000 seafarers and generate hundreds ofmillions of dollars in benefits for Hawaii and the nation
(b) Significant Increase in Foreign Flag Capacity Since 2003
The most significant change in the Hawaii cruise market since 2003 has been the dramatic increase in capacity A significant portion ofthis capacity increase is directly attributable to NCLAs fulfillment ofthe Congressional mandate in the 2003 Act However foreign-flag operations in the Hawaii market as measured in passenger nights18 have skyrocketed Based on MARAn data derived from the US Customs Border Patrol Vessel Entrance and Clearance documents the passenger nights for foreign flag vessels departing from the West Coast to Hawaii on round trip cruise have increased several hundredfold during this period19 See Exhibit A
(c) NCLA Has Incurred Substantial Losses During this Period
Since 2004 NCLA has lost cumulatively more than a quarter ofa billion dollars A principal reason for these losses has been the increase in foreign capacity in this market NCLA has taken significant steps to reduce costs to address the increase in foreign competition but NCLA is at an inherent disadvantage when competing against foreign companies that are not subject to US labor laws US tax laws and other laws Ofcourse the statutory protections of the PVSA are intended to address these very issues That is why Customs immediate action to implement the proposed interpretation is critical for the US flag fleet Regrettably NCLA has already been forced to reduce overall capacity early next year with the withdrawal ofPRIDE OF HAWAlI to another
17 DOT Press Release dated June 72004 see also DOT Press Release dated August 132004 in connection with visit to PRIDE OF ALOHA by US Transportation Secretary Norman Y Mineta 11 Passenger nights (also referred to as passenger capacity days) are calculated by multiplying the number ofpassengers per vessel by the number ofcruise days in each itinerary by the number of cruises This is the unit ofmeasurement employed by MARAn In contrast passenger bed supply (also referred to as passenger capacity) data reflects only the number ofberths per vessel multiplied by the number of cruises and hence understates the market by excluding the full economic value ofthe cruise perfonned 19 In 2003 the total number ofpassenger nights for round-trip West Coast to Hawaii cruises was 303325 which jumped by 353 to 1072329 in 2006 and by 430 to 1304546 from 2003 to 2007 (The 2007 figure is based on MARAD data for six months and a1ll1ualized by published itineraries for the balance of the year)
6
market for operation under foreign flag This move alone will result in the loss ofover 1000 American seafaring jobs
5 Customs Proposed Interpretation is Necessary to Further the Important National Security and Public Policy Objectives Embodied in Federal Law
As Customs has properly noted the increase in foreign competition in the Hawaii trades in contravention of the PVSA pose[s] an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels[] As the operator of these ships NCLA has a vested interest in protecting the jobs ofthe thousands ofAmerican crewmembers and cruise ship service providers who support these vessels NCLA also has an interest in protecting the substantial economic investment it has made to revitalize the US flag passenger vessel fleet But a balancing of interests in the context of Customs enforcement ofexisting law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act requires a much broader focus
The legislative history of the 2003 Act expressly recognized the national security and public policy import ofestablishing a US flag passenger vessel fleet as a means to maintain the countrys preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool of qualified seafarers and as a means to help sustain a fleet ofUS-flag vessels to su~ort
the nations military and maritime industrial base for times ofnational emergency
Congress understood the importance ofestablishing a viable US flag cruise ship fleet as something larger than the vessels themselves These national security and public policy objectives must be weighed in the balance as Customs assesses how best to interpret its rules to give effect to the PVSA and the 2003 Act
6 Customs Should Clarify that the Proposed Interpretation is Limited to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades and Adopt Reasonable Measures to Ensure Sufficient Foreign Content
Since publication ofthe proposed interpretative rule several commenters have observed that the scope of the proposed interpretation is ambiguous because the language of Section VI referencing any cruise itinerary appears broader than the caption Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises and the entire discussion in the published notice which focuses exclusively on US-flag coastwise vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA agrees that the proposed interpretation should be clarified so that its scope is limited to vessels operating roundtrip voyages from US ports that include Hawaii port calls
NCLA supports the concept reflected in the proposed interpretive rule that round trip Hawaii itineraries from US ports on foreign ships must include a material and measurable degree ofoverall foreign port content as compared to US port content
20 149 Congo Rec S1117 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)
7
(a) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is also Consistent with Subsequent Congressional Enactments Modifying the PVSA
As discussed above it is well established that the PVSA was designed toRrotect US-flag vessels from foreign competition in the coastwise and domestic trades 1
Subsequent legislative enactments however have appropriately differentiated among distinct geographic markets and trades including Canada Alaska Puerto Rico and Hawaii based on the existence or non-existence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
In 1938 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers by Canadian passenger vessels on Lake Ontario and the St Lawrence River until such time as passenger service shall be established by vessels of the United States22 Similarly in 1961 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers on Canadian vessels within Alaska or between Alaska and other points in the United States until such time as passenger service is established by vessels ofthe United States23
In 1984 Congress modified the application ofthe PVSA to pennit the transportation ofpassengers between Puerto Rico and other United States ports on foreign-flag vessels24 As with the other statutory exceptions this provision is qualified and expires [o]n a showing that a United States passenger vessel qualified to engage in the coastwise trade is offering or advertising passenger service between a port in Puerto Rico and another port in the United States2S
Congress acted again with respect to the application of the PVSA with the 2003 Act in which it authorized three vessels that did not meet the US-build requirements of the PVSA to operate as modem US-flagged cruise ships in regular service in Hawaii26 The 2003 Act imposes a specific geographic limitation on the operation of any ship documented under this authority to operations only in regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands ofHawaii and shall not transport passengers in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico or the Caribbean Sea except in certain limited circumstances27 As above the limited nature of the 2003 Act is express it is strictly limited to the large ocean-going cruise ships and then only those operating in the regular Hawaii service where there are no US-flag operations28
21 See Act ofJune 19 1886 c 421 sec 8 24 Stat 81 Act of February 171898 c 26 sec 2 30 Stat 248 22 S] Res 174 75th Cong 52 Stat 223 (Alp 251938) codified at46 USC sect 55121(a) 23 See Pub L 87-77 75 Stat 196 (Jun 30 1961) codified at 46 USC sect 55121(b) 24 See Pub L 98-563 98 Stat 2916 (Oct 301984) codified at 46 USC sect 55104(b) 25 46 USC sect 55104(c)(l) see also 46 USC 46 USc sect 55104(cX2)(expiration of exemption upon availability ofa non-coastwise qualified US-flag vessel offering service in the relevant market) 26 149 Congo Rec SI118 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)(statementofSen Inouye) 27 Pub L 108-7 117 Stat 79 (Feb 20 2003) 28 149 Congo Rec S11l9 (dailyed Jan 17 2003Xstatement of Sen Inouye)
8
In each ofthese instances Congress fashioned a narrow exception to the PVSA that differentiated among distinct geographic markets based on the existence or nonshyexistence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
As the federal agency responsible for administering the 2003 Act MARAD requested that Customs act to protect US flag passenger vessel interests in the Hawaii trades29 Limiting the scope ofthe proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades also reflects Customs appreciation of the PVSA in the context of the subsequent Congressional action30 Viewing the Congressional modifications to the PVSA as a whole Congress has specifically and repeatedly differentiated among distinct geographic markets when it has found it necessary and appropriate to do so to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests It is well established that the proper interpretation of a statutory scheme includes consideration ofsubsequent statutes even though the underlying statute itselfhas not been expressly amended31 Accordingly Customs should likewise limit the scope ofthe proposed PVSA interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades because that is the only geographic market as mandated by the 2003 Act in which oceangoing US-flag cruise ships are operating
(b) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Consistent with Public Policy Objectives of the 1985 Rulemaking
In 1985middot Customs liberalized the regulations implementing the PVSA by eliminating certain regulatory prohibitions on foreign flag vessels In the context of the 1985 rulemaking Customs justified a relaxation ofthe regulations on the grounds that it would simplify the administration of the PVSA and would benefit the economy ofcertain American coastwise ports without eroding the statutory protection given to American vessels engaged in solely domestic trade32
Customs thus sought to reconcile US port economic interests with US-flag passenger vessel interests Both of these twin policy objectives are furthered by
29 See 72 Fed Reg 65488 (Nov 21 2007)( MARAn bas asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the ~eratiODS ofcoastwise-qualified cruise ship operators)
See generally FDA v Brown amp Williamson Tobacco Corp 529 US 120 132-133 (2000)(assessing propriety ofagency construction ofFood DIUg and Cosmetics Act and descnbing responsibility of reviewing cowt to assess statutory provisions in the context of subsequent legislative enactments) 31 See Brown amp Williamson 529 US 143 (holding that proper construction ofstatutory provision must necessarily assume that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications ofa later statute This is particularly so where the scope of the earlier statute is broad but the subsequent statutes more specifically address the topic athand) see also United States v Estate ofRomani 523 US 517 530-531 (1998)( holding that a later-enacted statute should control the construction of the federal lien priority statute a specific policy embodied in a later federal statute should control om construction of the [earlier] statute even though it ha[s] not been expressly amended) United States v Fausto 484 US 439453 (1988)(The courts frequently find Congress to have done this - whenever in fact they interpret a statutory text in the light ofsurrounding texts that happen to have been subsequently enacted This classic judicial task of reconciling many laws enacted over time and getting them to make sense in combination necessarily assumes that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications of a later statute) 32 50 Fed Reg 26982 (JuI 11985)
9
limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades
As noted earlier the 2003 Act limits the operation of the NCLA US-flag oceangoing passenger vessels to regular service in Hawaii Because there are no oceangoing US-flag vessels operating in any market other than the Hawaii trades Customs should limit the scope of the proposed interPretation to that market Such a limitation protects US flag passenger vessel interests without prejudicing US port interests In contrast an application of the proposed interpretation to any itinerary would needlessly harm US port interests unrelated to Hawaii without any countervailing benefit to US-flag passenger vessel interests Accordingly limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation is consistent with the public policy objectives of the 1985 rulemaking as well as the 2003 Act
(c) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Also Consistent with Customs Commitment to Revisit the Scope of its Rules to Protect US-Flag Interests
The relaxation ofthe PVSA regulations in 1985 was premised in large part on Customs finding that there was no regular salt water US-flag passenger fleet in operation at that time33 Acknowledging that the relaxed regulations could harm USshyflag interests Customs committed in the preamble ofthe 1985 final rule to immediately reconsider its interpretation if it is ever shown that there is a viable US flag vessel operating in competition with foreign-flag vessels34
Congress enacted the 2003 Act to stimulate the development of a US flag cruise ship industry As noted above the legislative history ofthat Act makes clear that Congress sought to revitalize the US-flag cruise industry as a means to maintain Americas preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool ofqualified seafarers help sustain a fleet of US flag vessels to support our military and a maritime industrial base create thousands of seagoing and shoreside American jobs and stimulate the development ofa US flag cruise ship tourism business with the commensurate benefits to the US tax base the US economy and US employment
Customs is now acting at MARADs request to revisit its interpretation ofthe regulations implementing the PVSA because recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwise-qualified cruise ship operations35 That is to say that the concerns articulated by Customs in the context of the 1985 rulemaking have materialized and US-flag passenger vessel interests are in fact being hanned in the Hawaii trades by foreign competitors
33 50 Fed Reg 26983 34Id
3S 72 Fed Reg 56488 (Nov 21 2007)
I
10
Because the US-flag passenger vessels are limited by statute to regular service in Hawaii limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the
Hawaii trades is consistent with Customs historical commitment to revisit its interpretation ofthe implementing regulations to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests
7 Conclusion
For the reasons stated above NCLA commends the efforts ofCustoms and MARAn to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act as applied to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA respectfully requests Customs to move ahead promptly with p~blicati~nof a final interpretive rule to advance the important national security arid public policy objectives ofthese laws
We greatly appreciate the opportunity to submit these comments
Sincerely
~~~ Alan T Yamamoto Vice President Hawaii Operations
Exhibit A
Ship Name Serenade Of The Seas Departure Port San Diego California Ports of Call San Diego California Kailua Kona Hawaii Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii Hlo Hawaii Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii Ensenada Mexico San Qigo California
2007 Date(s) Oct 05
Sailing Itinerary
Day Port H ~rrive Depart Activity
05-0ct San Diego California 500 PM
06-0ct Cruising
07-0ct Cruising
08-0ct Cruising
09-0ct Cruising
10-0ct Kailua Kona Hawaii 700 AM 900 PM Tendered
11-00t Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 1000 AM Tendered
12middot0ct Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 900 PM Tendered
13-0ct Hilo Hawaii 700 AM 600 PM Docked
14middot0ct Honoulu (Oahu) Hawaii 700 AM Docked
15-0ct Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii 200 AM Docked
6-0ct CrUising
17-0ct Cruising
18-0ct Cruising
19middot0ct Cruising
-7 20-00t
O-Oot
Ensenada ~i1exico
San Deqo California
i 00 ~r1
700 ~M
200 oM D1Jcked ~
Us Department ofHomelaDd Secmity Washington DC 10229
bull ~
US Customs and Border Protection
AUG 15 2fXJJ
VE5-3-02-QTRRBSTCCCI - ti015502-GG-
Mr leon Sutcliffe Director Port Operations Camivai Cruise Unes Camival Place 3655 NW 87Avenue Miami Aorlda 33178
RE P~nger Vessef Services Ad Coastwise Transportation 46 USC sect 55103 19 CFR sect 480a(b)
Dear Mr Sutcliffe
As you know US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) enforces the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) codified at TItle 46 United States Code section 55103 (46 USC 55103) This statute prohibits non-coastwise-qualifled vessels (ie those vessels not US-buill owned and documented with a coastwise endorsement) from transporting passengers between porls or places within the United States The regUlations promUlgated pursuant to the PVSA are found at TrtJe 19 Code of Federal Regulations section 4808 (19 CFR 4808)
It has come to our attention that passenger vessels of your company are engaging in cruise itineraries that include ports of call within the Hawaiian Islands Two USAlagged coastwise-endorsed passenger vessefs are also currenUy engaging in cruise itineraries that include only ports of caD wittlin the Hawaiian Islands
As part of your cruise itineraries some of your foreign-flagged vessels depart from a US port call at several Hawaiian ports then proceed to Ensenada Mexico for a brief period and ultimately rebJm to the original US port of embarkation where the passengers disembark to complete their endse For example the MS ZAANDAM of Holand America Lines departs San Diego cruises the Hawaiian Islands stops in Ensenada from 800pm to 11 OOpmbull and returns to san Diego CBP believes these itineraries are contrary to the PVSA because It appears that the primary objective of the Ensenada stop is evasion of the PVSA -- - - ~~~------
Please be advised that CBP is taking steps to publish this position Should have any questions pertaining to this matter please contact Mr Glen Vereb Chief Cargo Security Carriers and Immigration Branch at (202) 572-8724
Sincerely
F Jl E EST Y LEe A U I 5 I N Gmiddot
December 21 2007
The Honorable W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection co Border Security Regulations Branch Office ofInternational Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229
Re Hawaii Coastwise Cruises (USCBP-2007-0098) Comments in Response to Proposed Interpretation
Dear Commissioner Basham
NCL America Inc1 (NCLA) submits these comments in support ofthe efforts ofCustoms and Border Protection to enforce the Passenger Vessel Services Act and the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative as applied to Hawaii coastwise cruises
1 Introduction and Summary of Position
NCLA operates three large oceangoing US flag cruise ships in Hawaii These ships are documented under US flag and are required to operate in regular service in Hawaii pursuant to the authority of the Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative a 2003 federal statute intended to revitalize the US flag cruise industry and to maximize economic and national security benefits to the United States (the 2003 Act)
NCLA has invested $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships pursuant to the 2003 Act and in direct reliance on the protections of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) and its proper enforcement The PVSA limits the transportation ofpassengers between US ports to coastwise documented US flag ships Its statutory protections recognize that US flag ships have significantly higher operational costs in part because they are subject to more stringent US laws including US labor laws and federal
1 NCL America Inc is a US corporation incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware headquartered in Honolulu Hawaii As a US corporation it is subject to US taxes at both the federal and state level The Chief Executive Officer the Chairman of the Board and all of the Board of Directors of NCL America are US citizens The company is also subject to US labor and employment laws and is required by statute to maintain a workforce comprised primarily ofUS citizens
700 Bishop St SUite 900 I Honolulu HawMi 96813 I Tel 8085273800 Fax 8085273820 I ndcom
2
income tax among others The NCLA ships operating in Hawaii are the only large oceangoing cruise ships operating under US flag In furtherance of the policy goals of the PVSA and the 2003 Act these ships have created over 4000 seafaring jobs all subject to US minimum wage and other labor statutes
Since 2003 there has been a significant increase in capacity in the Hawaii market from foreign flag ships providing cruise service to Hawaii from the West Coast Many of these foreign flag cruises are marketed as Hawaii cruises and consist entirely ofUS ports ofcall with the sole exception of a token stop in Mexico for as little as an hour late at night under circumstances where passengers are not permitted to get offthe ship There are no reported rulings approving these particular foreign flag itineraries
Lower cost foreign competition in the Hawaii market has unfairly hurt NCLAs operations NCLA has incurred substantial losses which have contributed significantly to its decision earlier this year to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAll from US flag and reshydeploy it foreign Unfair foreign competition poses an imminent threat to the remaining US flag passenger vessels operating in the Hawaii trades pursuant to the 2003 Act
As the agency statutorily charged with implementation of the 2003 Act the US Department ofTransportation Maritime Administration (MARAn) is aware of the threat foreign flag Hawaii itineraries pose to the US flag fleet and brought the situation to the attention ofthe US Department ofHomeland Security Bureau ofCustoms and Border Protection (CBP or Customs) Customs determined that the primary object of these itineraries was coastwise and that the Ensenada stop was an evasion of the PVSA
In August 2007 Customs provided written notice to the affected foreign lines and their trade association that the existing itineraries were contrary to the PVSA None of these lines sought advance rulings even after the Customs notice with respect to their Hawaii itineraries pursuant to Customs regulations and many continued to market the itineraries as Hawaii cruises NCLA supports the efforts ofCustoms and MARAD to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act for Hawaii cruises
2 Statutory Authority for Customs Proposed Interpretation
(a) Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA)
Congress passed the PVSA in 1886 to protect the US maritime transportation industry from foreign competition2 Protection is afforded through penalty assessments on foreign vessels transporting passengers between US ports or places directly or by way ofa foreign port 3 As Congress and the courts have recognized coastwise protections for the US maritime transportation industry are only one dimension of the PVSA Operating in conjunction with other coastwise laws and with the US
2 See United States v Honduran SS GRANADA 35 F Supp 892 894 (BD Pa 1940)(citing purpose of PVSA to meet threats to the practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping which was to be preserved for US ships)
46 USc sect 55103 (originally 46 USC App 289)
3
documentation laws the PVSA also enhances military sealift in times ofnational emergency sustains a US merchant marine and supports the US shipbuilding and repair industry4
(b) Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative (the 2003 Act)
Over the past decade Congress has sought to reinforce the goals of the PVSA by providing mechanisms to revitalize the oceangoing US flag cruise fleet particularly in Hawaii The Project America legislation enacted in 1997 authorized among other things the re~flagging ofone existing cruise ship contingent on the operator contracting for the construction oftwo new oceangoing cruise shipss Following the default of the operator under the original contract Congress enacted the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative for the purpose ofrecovering economic and national security benefits to the United States bull 6 These same goals of the original PVSA were expressly referenced in the legislative history of the 2003 Act which emphasized that these ships will be assets available in time ofnational emergency and will significantly expand the pool ofqualified seafarers upon which the US Department ofDefense relies to crew non-combatant vessels
The 2003 Act authorizes the US documentation ofthree cruise ships for operation in regular service in Hawaii subject to certain conditions including a prohibition on operating in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico and the Caribbean Sea and a requirement that all vessel repair work be undertaken in the United States MARAD is charged with implementation of the 2003 Act
3 Customs Implementation of PVSA
(a) Regulations
The current regulations implementing the PVSA were published by Customs in 19858 The growth of the foreign flag cruise industry in North America and in particular the development of the Alaska cruise market led to an effort in 1984 to amend the thenshyexisting regulations to increase the ease of administration and operational flexibility The effort to change the regulation had support from US port interests who saw benefit in the potential increase in the number ofUS ports that foreign vessels could call and was opposed by proponents ofpotential US flag projects as detrimental to efforts to revitalize the US fleet 9 The preamble to the 1985 rule emphasized that it was of paramount importance to consider the primary object ofpassengers in taking a
4 See American Hawaii Cruises v Skinner 713 F Supp 452 457 (DDC 1989) (recognizing the contribution of the PVSA and the Jones Act in helping to secure national defense by maintaining a merchant marine oftbe best equipped and most suitable types ofvessels sufficient to serve in time of war or national emergency) see also Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 30 (DC Cir 1984) Wirth Ltd v SIS Acadia Forest 537 F2d 1272 1281 n32 (5th Cir 1976) S Public Law 105-56 Section 8109 (111 Stat 1203 1244) (Oct 81997 ) 6 Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II General Provisions - Department ofCommerce Section 211 (117 Stat 1179) (Feb 20 2003) 1 149 Cong Rec S1118 (dailyed Jan 17 2003(statement ofSenator Inouye) 8 19 CFR sect 480a 950 Fed Reg 26981 (July I 1985)
4
voyage10 a concept which is reinforced elsewhere in Customs regulations11 In its analysis of the comments received at the time Customs accepted the view ofport interests that the modified rule would help their business but did so recognizing the absence ofa regular salt water US flag passenger fleet Customs acknowledged the potential harm to prospective efforts to revitalize the US flag passenger fleet and expressly cautioned that if it were ever shown that coastwise qualified vessels in competition with foreign vessels were in fact hurt by the modified Customs regulation then Customs would immediately reconsider its position12
(b) Customs Rulings
Given the significant penalties associated with violating the PVSA13 Customs regulations expressly provide a mechanism for the owner or charterer of a foreign vessel or any other interested person to request an advisory ruling as to whether a contemplated voyage would be considered in violation of the PVSA14 Customs regulations provide that vessel operators can rely on these ruling letters only to the extent that the facts and circumstances are identical to those in the ruling letter IS
Notwithstanding the fact that several foreign cruise lines offer Hawaii itineraries originating in a US mainland port and calling at Hawaii ports with a token intervening stop in Mexico there are no reported rulings expressly approving such an itinerary for these foreign cruise lines 16
4 The Cruise Industry in Hawaii
(a) NCL America Returns US flag to the Oceangoing Passenger Fleet
Pursuant to the requirements ofthe 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative NCLA agreed to promote US-flag cruising enhance military sealift capacity and expand the US maritime labor base No other major cruise line had ever undertaken such a commitment to the US flag and the public policy objectives Congress sought to achieve under the PVSA or the 2003 Act Introduction ofPRIDE OF ALOHA in 2004 was a significant development in the maritime industry because it marked the restoration ofthe
10 Id at 26983 11 Customs Regulations include a provision on the effect ofruling letters and with respect to carrier rulings the applicable regulation refers to rulings setting forth a determination as to whether or not the primary object of a contemplated voyage is coastwise transportation in violation of46 USC sect 289 [pYSA codified at 46 USC sect55103] 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 12 50 Fed Reg at 26983 13 A modem cruise ship with 2400 passengers for example would be subject to a fine of$720OOO per cruise based on the statutory penalty of$300 for each passenger transported in violation of the Act 14 19 CFR sect 480a(d) IS 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 16 There is one older reported mling involving a request to drop the Ensenada port call from a Los AngeleslHawaiiLos Angeles itinerary which Customs held would violate the PYSA In dicta Customs acknowledged that the itinerary could be in compliance if the Ensenada call were not dropped but did not address the issue ofwhether a one hour service call where no passengers depart the vessel would be sufficient The carrier that obtained that ruling has since left the Hawaii market See Customs Ruling HQ 114078 re Crystal Hannony (Nov 4 1997)
5
us flag to the oceangoing cruise industry A contemporaneous press release from the Us Department ofTransportation reported that the three US-flag cruise ships to be introduced pursuant to the 2003 Act were expected to create more than 20000 US jobs generate more than $825 million ofexpenditures in the US economy and create nearly $360 million in federal tax revenue by the end of 200717 In 2005 the PRIDE OF AMERICA was introduced and in 2006 the third vessel PRIDE OF HAWAll was introduced to Hawaii Both the PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAIl offer 7shyday inter-island Hawaii itineraries whereas PRIDE OF ALOHA operates on 7 and 10 day cruises exclusively among the islands ofHawaii as well as 11 day cruises that include a foreign port call at Fanning Island To date NCLA has invested over $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships in furtherance ofthe policy objectives of the PVSA and the 2003 Act These ships employ over 4000 seafarers and generate hundreds ofmillions of dollars in benefits for Hawaii and the nation
(b) Significant Increase in Foreign Flag Capacity Since 2003
The most significant change in the Hawaii cruise market since 2003 has been the dramatic increase in capacity A significant portion ofthis capacity increase is directly attributable to NCLAs fulfillment ofthe Congressional mandate in the 2003 Act However foreign-flag operations in the Hawaii market as measured in passenger nights18 have skyrocketed Based on MARAn data derived from the US Customs Border Patrol Vessel Entrance and Clearance documents the passenger nights for foreign flag vessels departing from the West Coast to Hawaii on round trip cruise have increased several hundredfold during this period19 See Exhibit A
(c) NCLA Has Incurred Substantial Losses During this Period
Since 2004 NCLA has lost cumulatively more than a quarter ofa billion dollars A principal reason for these losses has been the increase in foreign capacity in this market NCLA has taken significant steps to reduce costs to address the increase in foreign competition but NCLA is at an inherent disadvantage when competing against foreign companies that are not subject to US labor laws US tax laws and other laws Ofcourse the statutory protections of the PVSA are intended to address these very issues That is why Customs immediate action to implement the proposed interpretation is critical for the US flag fleet Regrettably NCLA has already been forced to reduce overall capacity early next year with the withdrawal ofPRIDE OF HAWAlI to another
17 DOT Press Release dated June 72004 see also DOT Press Release dated August 132004 in connection with visit to PRIDE OF ALOHA by US Transportation Secretary Norman Y Mineta 11 Passenger nights (also referred to as passenger capacity days) are calculated by multiplying the number ofpassengers per vessel by the number ofcruise days in each itinerary by the number of cruises This is the unit ofmeasurement employed by MARAn In contrast passenger bed supply (also referred to as passenger capacity) data reflects only the number ofberths per vessel multiplied by the number of cruises and hence understates the market by excluding the full economic value ofthe cruise perfonned 19 In 2003 the total number ofpassenger nights for round-trip West Coast to Hawaii cruises was 303325 which jumped by 353 to 1072329 in 2006 and by 430 to 1304546 from 2003 to 2007 (The 2007 figure is based on MARAD data for six months and a1ll1ualized by published itineraries for the balance of the year)
6
market for operation under foreign flag This move alone will result in the loss ofover 1000 American seafaring jobs
5 Customs Proposed Interpretation is Necessary to Further the Important National Security and Public Policy Objectives Embodied in Federal Law
As Customs has properly noted the increase in foreign competition in the Hawaii trades in contravention of the PVSA pose[s] an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels[] As the operator of these ships NCLA has a vested interest in protecting the jobs ofthe thousands ofAmerican crewmembers and cruise ship service providers who support these vessels NCLA also has an interest in protecting the substantial economic investment it has made to revitalize the US flag passenger vessel fleet But a balancing of interests in the context of Customs enforcement ofexisting law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act requires a much broader focus
The legislative history of the 2003 Act expressly recognized the national security and public policy import ofestablishing a US flag passenger vessel fleet as a means to maintain the countrys preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool of qualified seafarers and as a means to help sustain a fleet ofUS-flag vessels to su~ort
the nations military and maritime industrial base for times ofnational emergency
Congress understood the importance ofestablishing a viable US flag cruise ship fleet as something larger than the vessels themselves These national security and public policy objectives must be weighed in the balance as Customs assesses how best to interpret its rules to give effect to the PVSA and the 2003 Act
6 Customs Should Clarify that the Proposed Interpretation is Limited to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades and Adopt Reasonable Measures to Ensure Sufficient Foreign Content
Since publication ofthe proposed interpretative rule several commenters have observed that the scope of the proposed interpretation is ambiguous because the language of Section VI referencing any cruise itinerary appears broader than the caption Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises and the entire discussion in the published notice which focuses exclusively on US-flag coastwise vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA agrees that the proposed interpretation should be clarified so that its scope is limited to vessels operating roundtrip voyages from US ports that include Hawaii port calls
NCLA supports the concept reflected in the proposed interpretive rule that round trip Hawaii itineraries from US ports on foreign ships must include a material and measurable degree ofoverall foreign port content as compared to US port content
20 149 Congo Rec S1117 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)
7
(a) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is also Consistent with Subsequent Congressional Enactments Modifying the PVSA
As discussed above it is well established that the PVSA was designed toRrotect US-flag vessels from foreign competition in the coastwise and domestic trades 1
Subsequent legislative enactments however have appropriately differentiated among distinct geographic markets and trades including Canada Alaska Puerto Rico and Hawaii based on the existence or non-existence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
In 1938 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers by Canadian passenger vessels on Lake Ontario and the St Lawrence River until such time as passenger service shall be established by vessels of the United States22 Similarly in 1961 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers on Canadian vessels within Alaska or between Alaska and other points in the United States until such time as passenger service is established by vessels ofthe United States23
In 1984 Congress modified the application ofthe PVSA to pennit the transportation ofpassengers between Puerto Rico and other United States ports on foreign-flag vessels24 As with the other statutory exceptions this provision is qualified and expires [o]n a showing that a United States passenger vessel qualified to engage in the coastwise trade is offering or advertising passenger service between a port in Puerto Rico and another port in the United States2S
Congress acted again with respect to the application of the PVSA with the 2003 Act in which it authorized three vessels that did not meet the US-build requirements of the PVSA to operate as modem US-flagged cruise ships in regular service in Hawaii26 The 2003 Act imposes a specific geographic limitation on the operation of any ship documented under this authority to operations only in regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands ofHawaii and shall not transport passengers in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico or the Caribbean Sea except in certain limited circumstances27 As above the limited nature of the 2003 Act is express it is strictly limited to the large ocean-going cruise ships and then only those operating in the regular Hawaii service where there are no US-flag operations28
21 See Act ofJune 19 1886 c 421 sec 8 24 Stat 81 Act of February 171898 c 26 sec 2 30 Stat 248 22 S] Res 174 75th Cong 52 Stat 223 (Alp 251938) codified at46 USC sect 55121(a) 23 See Pub L 87-77 75 Stat 196 (Jun 30 1961) codified at 46 USC sect 55121(b) 24 See Pub L 98-563 98 Stat 2916 (Oct 301984) codified at 46 USC sect 55104(b) 25 46 USC sect 55104(c)(l) see also 46 USC 46 USc sect 55104(cX2)(expiration of exemption upon availability ofa non-coastwise qualified US-flag vessel offering service in the relevant market) 26 149 Congo Rec SI118 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)(statementofSen Inouye) 27 Pub L 108-7 117 Stat 79 (Feb 20 2003) 28 149 Congo Rec S11l9 (dailyed Jan 17 2003Xstatement of Sen Inouye)
8
In each ofthese instances Congress fashioned a narrow exception to the PVSA that differentiated among distinct geographic markets based on the existence or nonshyexistence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
As the federal agency responsible for administering the 2003 Act MARAD requested that Customs act to protect US flag passenger vessel interests in the Hawaii trades29 Limiting the scope ofthe proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades also reflects Customs appreciation of the PVSA in the context of the subsequent Congressional action30 Viewing the Congressional modifications to the PVSA as a whole Congress has specifically and repeatedly differentiated among distinct geographic markets when it has found it necessary and appropriate to do so to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests It is well established that the proper interpretation of a statutory scheme includes consideration ofsubsequent statutes even though the underlying statute itselfhas not been expressly amended31 Accordingly Customs should likewise limit the scope ofthe proposed PVSA interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades because that is the only geographic market as mandated by the 2003 Act in which oceangoing US-flag cruise ships are operating
(b) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Consistent with Public Policy Objectives of the 1985 Rulemaking
In 1985middot Customs liberalized the regulations implementing the PVSA by eliminating certain regulatory prohibitions on foreign flag vessels In the context of the 1985 rulemaking Customs justified a relaxation ofthe regulations on the grounds that it would simplify the administration of the PVSA and would benefit the economy ofcertain American coastwise ports without eroding the statutory protection given to American vessels engaged in solely domestic trade32
Customs thus sought to reconcile US port economic interests with US-flag passenger vessel interests Both of these twin policy objectives are furthered by
29 See 72 Fed Reg 65488 (Nov 21 2007)( MARAn bas asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the ~eratiODS ofcoastwise-qualified cruise ship operators)
See generally FDA v Brown amp Williamson Tobacco Corp 529 US 120 132-133 (2000)(assessing propriety ofagency construction ofFood DIUg and Cosmetics Act and descnbing responsibility of reviewing cowt to assess statutory provisions in the context of subsequent legislative enactments) 31 See Brown amp Williamson 529 US 143 (holding that proper construction ofstatutory provision must necessarily assume that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications ofa later statute This is particularly so where the scope of the earlier statute is broad but the subsequent statutes more specifically address the topic athand) see also United States v Estate ofRomani 523 US 517 530-531 (1998)( holding that a later-enacted statute should control the construction of the federal lien priority statute a specific policy embodied in a later federal statute should control om construction of the [earlier] statute even though it ha[s] not been expressly amended) United States v Fausto 484 US 439453 (1988)(The courts frequently find Congress to have done this - whenever in fact they interpret a statutory text in the light ofsurrounding texts that happen to have been subsequently enacted This classic judicial task of reconciling many laws enacted over time and getting them to make sense in combination necessarily assumes that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications of a later statute) 32 50 Fed Reg 26982 (JuI 11985)
9
limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades
As noted earlier the 2003 Act limits the operation of the NCLA US-flag oceangoing passenger vessels to regular service in Hawaii Because there are no oceangoing US-flag vessels operating in any market other than the Hawaii trades Customs should limit the scope of the proposed interPretation to that market Such a limitation protects US flag passenger vessel interests without prejudicing US port interests In contrast an application of the proposed interpretation to any itinerary would needlessly harm US port interests unrelated to Hawaii without any countervailing benefit to US-flag passenger vessel interests Accordingly limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation is consistent with the public policy objectives of the 1985 rulemaking as well as the 2003 Act
(c) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Also Consistent with Customs Commitment to Revisit the Scope of its Rules to Protect US-Flag Interests
The relaxation ofthe PVSA regulations in 1985 was premised in large part on Customs finding that there was no regular salt water US-flag passenger fleet in operation at that time33 Acknowledging that the relaxed regulations could harm USshyflag interests Customs committed in the preamble ofthe 1985 final rule to immediately reconsider its interpretation if it is ever shown that there is a viable US flag vessel operating in competition with foreign-flag vessels34
Congress enacted the 2003 Act to stimulate the development of a US flag cruise ship industry As noted above the legislative history ofthat Act makes clear that Congress sought to revitalize the US-flag cruise industry as a means to maintain Americas preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool ofqualified seafarers help sustain a fleet of US flag vessels to support our military and a maritime industrial base create thousands of seagoing and shoreside American jobs and stimulate the development ofa US flag cruise ship tourism business with the commensurate benefits to the US tax base the US economy and US employment
Customs is now acting at MARADs request to revisit its interpretation ofthe regulations implementing the PVSA because recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwise-qualified cruise ship operations35 That is to say that the concerns articulated by Customs in the context of the 1985 rulemaking have materialized and US-flag passenger vessel interests are in fact being hanned in the Hawaii trades by foreign competitors
33 50 Fed Reg 26983 34Id
3S 72 Fed Reg 56488 (Nov 21 2007)
I
10
Because the US-flag passenger vessels are limited by statute to regular service in Hawaii limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the
Hawaii trades is consistent with Customs historical commitment to revisit its interpretation ofthe implementing regulations to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests
7 Conclusion
For the reasons stated above NCLA commends the efforts ofCustoms and MARAn to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act as applied to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA respectfully requests Customs to move ahead promptly with p~blicati~nof a final interpretive rule to advance the important national security arid public policy objectives ofthese laws
We greatly appreciate the opportunity to submit these comments
Sincerely
~~~ Alan T Yamamoto Vice President Hawaii Operations
Exhibit A
Ship Name Serenade Of The Seas Departure Port San Diego California Ports of Call San Diego California Kailua Kona Hawaii Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii Hlo Hawaii Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii Ensenada Mexico San Qigo California
2007 Date(s) Oct 05
Sailing Itinerary
Day Port H ~rrive Depart Activity
05-0ct San Diego California 500 PM
06-0ct Cruising
07-0ct Cruising
08-0ct Cruising
09-0ct Cruising
10-0ct Kailua Kona Hawaii 700 AM 900 PM Tendered
11-00t Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 1000 AM Tendered
12middot0ct Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 900 PM Tendered
13-0ct Hilo Hawaii 700 AM 600 PM Docked
14middot0ct Honoulu (Oahu) Hawaii 700 AM Docked
15-0ct Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii 200 AM Docked
6-0ct CrUising
17-0ct Cruising
18-0ct Cruising
19middot0ct Cruising
-7 20-00t
O-Oot
Ensenada ~i1exico
San Deqo California
i 00 ~r1
700 ~M
200 oM D1Jcked ~
Please be advised that CBP is taking steps to publish this position Should have any questions pertaining to this matter please contact Mr Glen Vereb Chief Cargo Security Carriers and Immigration Branch at (202) 572-8724
Sincerely
F Jl E EST Y LEe A U I 5 I N Gmiddot
December 21 2007
The Honorable W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection co Border Security Regulations Branch Office ofInternational Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229
Re Hawaii Coastwise Cruises (USCBP-2007-0098) Comments in Response to Proposed Interpretation
Dear Commissioner Basham
NCL America Inc1 (NCLA) submits these comments in support ofthe efforts ofCustoms and Border Protection to enforce the Passenger Vessel Services Act and the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative as applied to Hawaii coastwise cruises
1 Introduction and Summary of Position
NCLA operates three large oceangoing US flag cruise ships in Hawaii These ships are documented under US flag and are required to operate in regular service in Hawaii pursuant to the authority of the Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative a 2003 federal statute intended to revitalize the US flag cruise industry and to maximize economic and national security benefits to the United States (the 2003 Act)
NCLA has invested $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships pursuant to the 2003 Act and in direct reliance on the protections of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) and its proper enforcement The PVSA limits the transportation ofpassengers between US ports to coastwise documented US flag ships Its statutory protections recognize that US flag ships have significantly higher operational costs in part because they are subject to more stringent US laws including US labor laws and federal
1 NCL America Inc is a US corporation incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware headquartered in Honolulu Hawaii As a US corporation it is subject to US taxes at both the federal and state level The Chief Executive Officer the Chairman of the Board and all of the Board of Directors of NCL America are US citizens The company is also subject to US labor and employment laws and is required by statute to maintain a workforce comprised primarily ofUS citizens
700 Bishop St SUite 900 I Honolulu HawMi 96813 I Tel 8085273800 Fax 8085273820 I ndcom
2
income tax among others The NCLA ships operating in Hawaii are the only large oceangoing cruise ships operating under US flag In furtherance of the policy goals of the PVSA and the 2003 Act these ships have created over 4000 seafaring jobs all subject to US minimum wage and other labor statutes
Since 2003 there has been a significant increase in capacity in the Hawaii market from foreign flag ships providing cruise service to Hawaii from the West Coast Many of these foreign flag cruises are marketed as Hawaii cruises and consist entirely ofUS ports ofcall with the sole exception of a token stop in Mexico for as little as an hour late at night under circumstances where passengers are not permitted to get offthe ship There are no reported rulings approving these particular foreign flag itineraries
Lower cost foreign competition in the Hawaii market has unfairly hurt NCLAs operations NCLA has incurred substantial losses which have contributed significantly to its decision earlier this year to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAll from US flag and reshydeploy it foreign Unfair foreign competition poses an imminent threat to the remaining US flag passenger vessels operating in the Hawaii trades pursuant to the 2003 Act
As the agency statutorily charged with implementation of the 2003 Act the US Department ofTransportation Maritime Administration (MARAn) is aware of the threat foreign flag Hawaii itineraries pose to the US flag fleet and brought the situation to the attention ofthe US Department ofHomeland Security Bureau ofCustoms and Border Protection (CBP or Customs) Customs determined that the primary object of these itineraries was coastwise and that the Ensenada stop was an evasion of the PVSA
In August 2007 Customs provided written notice to the affected foreign lines and their trade association that the existing itineraries were contrary to the PVSA None of these lines sought advance rulings even after the Customs notice with respect to their Hawaii itineraries pursuant to Customs regulations and many continued to market the itineraries as Hawaii cruises NCLA supports the efforts ofCustoms and MARAD to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act for Hawaii cruises
2 Statutory Authority for Customs Proposed Interpretation
(a) Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA)
Congress passed the PVSA in 1886 to protect the US maritime transportation industry from foreign competition2 Protection is afforded through penalty assessments on foreign vessels transporting passengers between US ports or places directly or by way ofa foreign port 3 As Congress and the courts have recognized coastwise protections for the US maritime transportation industry are only one dimension of the PVSA Operating in conjunction with other coastwise laws and with the US
2 See United States v Honduran SS GRANADA 35 F Supp 892 894 (BD Pa 1940)(citing purpose of PVSA to meet threats to the practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping which was to be preserved for US ships)
46 USc sect 55103 (originally 46 USC App 289)
3
documentation laws the PVSA also enhances military sealift in times ofnational emergency sustains a US merchant marine and supports the US shipbuilding and repair industry4
(b) Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative (the 2003 Act)
Over the past decade Congress has sought to reinforce the goals of the PVSA by providing mechanisms to revitalize the oceangoing US flag cruise fleet particularly in Hawaii The Project America legislation enacted in 1997 authorized among other things the re~flagging ofone existing cruise ship contingent on the operator contracting for the construction oftwo new oceangoing cruise shipss Following the default of the operator under the original contract Congress enacted the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative for the purpose ofrecovering economic and national security benefits to the United States bull 6 These same goals of the original PVSA were expressly referenced in the legislative history of the 2003 Act which emphasized that these ships will be assets available in time ofnational emergency and will significantly expand the pool ofqualified seafarers upon which the US Department ofDefense relies to crew non-combatant vessels
The 2003 Act authorizes the US documentation ofthree cruise ships for operation in regular service in Hawaii subject to certain conditions including a prohibition on operating in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico and the Caribbean Sea and a requirement that all vessel repair work be undertaken in the United States MARAD is charged with implementation of the 2003 Act
3 Customs Implementation of PVSA
(a) Regulations
The current regulations implementing the PVSA were published by Customs in 19858 The growth of the foreign flag cruise industry in North America and in particular the development of the Alaska cruise market led to an effort in 1984 to amend the thenshyexisting regulations to increase the ease of administration and operational flexibility The effort to change the regulation had support from US port interests who saw benefit in the potential increase in the number ofUS ports that foreign vessels could call and was opposed by proponents ofpotential US flag projects as detrimental to efforts to revitalize the US fleet 9 The preamble to the 1985 rule emphasized that it was of paramount importance to consider the primary object ofpassengers in taking a
4 See American Hawaii Cruises v Skinner 713 F Supp 452 457 (DDC 1989) (recognizing the contribution of the PVSA and the Jones Act in helping to secure national defense by maintaining a merchant marine oftbe best equipped and most suitable types ofvessels sufficient to serve in time of war or national emergency) see also Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 30 (DC Cir 1984) Wirth Ltd v SIS Acadia Forest 537 F2d 1272 1281 n32 (5th Cir 1976) S Public Law 105-56 Section 8109 (111 Stat 1203 1244) (Oct 81997 ) 6 Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II General Provisions - Department ofCommerce Section 211 (117 Stat 1179) (Feb 20 2003) 1 149 Cong Rec S1118 (dailyed Jan 17 2003(statement ofSenator Inouye) 8 19 CFR sect 480a 950 Fed Reg 26981 (July I 1985)
4
voyage10 a concept which is reinforced elsewhere in Customs regulations11 In its analysis of the comments received at the time Customs accepted the view ofport interests that the modified rule would help their business but did so recognizing the absence ofa regular salt water US flag passenger fleet Customs acknowledged the potential harm to prospective efforts to revitalize the US flag passenger fleet and expressly cautioned that if it were ever shown that coastwise qualified vessels in competition with foreign vessels were in fact hurt by the modified Customs regulation then Customs would immediately reconsider its position12
(b) Customs Rulings
Given the significant penalties associated with violating the PVSA13 Customs regulations expressly provide a mechanism for the owner or charterer of a foreign vessel or any other interested person to request an advisory ruling as to whether a contemplated voyage would be considered in violation of the PVSA14 Customs regulations provide that vessel operators can rely on these ruling letters only to the extent that the facts and circumstances are identical to those in the ruling letter IS
Notwithstanding the fact that several foreign cruise lines offer Hawaii itineraries originating in a US mainland port and calling at Hawaii ports with a token intervening stop in Mexico there are no reported rulings expressly approving such an itinerary for these foreign cruise lines 16
4 The Cruise Industry in Hawaii
(a) NCL America Returns US flag to the Oceangoing Passenger Fleet
Pursuant to the requirements ofthe 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative NCLA agreed to promote US-flag cruising enhance military sealift capacity and expand the US maritime labor base No other major cruise line had ever undertaken such a commitment to the US flag and the public policy objectives Congress sought to achieve under the PVSA or the 2003 Act Introduction ofPRIDE OF ALOHA in 2004 was a significant development in the maritime industry because it marked the restoration ofthe
10 Id at 26983 11 Customs Regulations include a provision on the effect ofruling letters and with respect to carrier rulings the applicable regulation refers to rulings setting forth a determination as to whether or not the primary object of a contemplated voyage is coastwise transportation in violation of46 USC sect 289 [pYSA codified at 46 USC sect55103] 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 12 50 Fed Reg at 26983 13 A modem cruise ship with 2400 passengers for example would be subject to a fine of$720OOO per cruise based on the statutory penalty of$300 for each passenger transported in violation of the Act 14 19 CFR sect 480a(d) IS 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 16 There is one older reported mling involving a request to drop the Ensenada port call from a Los AngeleslHawaiiLos Angeles itinerary which Customs held would violate the PYSA In dicta Customs acknowledged that the itinerary could be in compliance if the Ensenada call were not dropped but did not address the issue ofwhether a one hour service call where no passengers depart the vessel would be sufficient The carrier that obtained that ruling has since left the Hawaii market See Customs Ruling HQ 114078 re Crystal Hannony (Nov 4 1997)
5
us flag to the oceangoing cruise industry A contemporaneous press release from the Us Department ofTransportation reported that the three US-flag cruise ships to be introduced pursuant to the 2003 Act were expected to create more than 20000 US jobs generate more than $825 million ofexpenditures in the US economy and create nearly $360 million in federal tax revenue by the end of 200717 In 2005 the PRIDE OF AMERICA was introduced and in 2006 the third vessel PRIDE OF HAWAll was introduced to Hawaii Both the PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAIl offer 7shyday inter-island Hawaii itineraries whereas PRIDE OF ALOHA operates on 7 and 10 day cruises exclusively among the islands ofHawaii as well as 11 day cruises that include a foreign port call at Fanning Island To date NCLA has invested over $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships in furtherance ofthe policy objectives of the PVSA and the 2003 Act These ships employ over 4000 seafarers and generate hundreds ofmillions of dollars in benefits for Hawaii and the nation
(b) Significant Increase in Foreign Flag Capacity Since 2003
The most significant change in the Hawaii cruise market since 2003 has been the dramatic increase in capacity A significant portion ofthis capacity increase is directly attributable to NCLAs fulfillment ofthe Congressional mandate in the 2003 Act However foreign-flag operations in the Hawaii market as measured in passenger nights18 have skyrocketed Based on MARAn data derived from the US Customs Border Patrol Vessel Entrance and Clearance documents the passenger nights for foreign flag vessels departing from the West Coast to Hawaii on round trip cruise have increased several hundredfold during this period19 See Exhibit A
(c) NCLA Has Incurred Substantial Losses During this Period
Since 2004 NCLA has lost cumulatively more than a quarter ofa billion dollars A principal reason for these losses has been the increase in foreign capacity in this market NCLA has taken significant steps to reduce costs to address the increase in foreign competition but NCLA is at an inherent disadvantage when competing against foreign companies that are not subject to US labor laws US tax laws and other laws Ofcourse the statutory protections of the PVSA are intended to address these very issues That is why Customs immediate action to implement the proposed interpretation is critical for the US flag fleet Regrettably NCLA has already been forced to reduce overall capacity early next year with the withdrawal ofPRIDE OF HAWAlI to another
17 DOT Press Release dated June 72004 see also DOT Press Release dated August 132004 in connection with visit to PRIDE OF ALOHA by US Transportation Secretary Norman Y Mineta 11 Passenger nights (also referred to as passenger capacity days) are calculated by multiplying the number ofpassengers per vessel by the number ofcruise days in each itinerary by the number of cruises This is the unit ofmeasurement employed by MARAn In contrast passenger bed supply (also referred to as passenger capacity) data reflects only the number ofberths per vessel multiplied by the number of cruises and hence understates the market by excluding the full economic value ofthe cruise perfonned 19 In 2003 the total number ofpassenger nights for round-trip West Coast to Hawaii cruises was 303325 which jumped by 353 to 1072329 in 2006 and by 430 to 1304546 from 2003 to 2007 (The 2007 figure is based on MARAD data for six months and a1ll1ualized by published itineraries for the balance of the year)
6
market for operation under foreign flag This move alone will result in the loss ofover 1000 American seafaring jobs
5 Customs Proposed Interpretation is Necessary to Further the Important National Security and Public Policy Objectives Embodied in Federal Law
As Customs has properly noted the increase in foreign competition in the Hawaii trades in contravention of the PVSA pose[s] an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels[] As the operator of these ships NCLA has a vested interest in protecting the jobs ofthe thousands ofAmerican crewmembers and cruise ship service providers who support these vessels NCLA also has an interest in protecting the substantial economic investment it has made to revitalize the US flag passenger vessel fleet But a balancing of interests in the context of Customs enforcement ofexisting law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act requires a much broader focus
The legislative history of the 2003 Act expressly recognized the national security and public policy import ofestablishing a US flag passenger vessel fleet as a means to maintain the countrys preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool of qualified seafarers and as a means to help sustain a fleet ofUS-flag vessels to su~ort
the nations military and maritime industrial base for times ofnational emergency
Congress understood the importance ofestablishing a viable US flag cruise ship fleet as something larger than the vessels themselves These national security and public policy objectives must be weighed in the balance as Customs assesses how best to interpret its rules to give effect to the PVSA and the 2003 Act
6 Customs Should Clarify that the Proposed Interpretation is Limited to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades and Adopt Reasonable Measures to Ensure Sufficient Foreign Content
Since publication ofthe proposed interpretative rule several commenters have observed that the scope of the proposed interpretation is ambiguous because the language of Section VI referencing any cruise itinerary appears broader than the caption Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises and the entire discussion in the published notice which focuses exclusively on US-flag coastwise vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA agrees that the proposed interpretation should be clarified so that its scope is limited to vessels operating roundtrip voyages from US ports that include Hawaii port calls
NCLA supports the concept reflected in the proposed interpretive rule that round trip Hawaii itineraries from US ports on foreign ships must include a material and measurable degree ofoverall foreign port content as compared to US port content
20 149 Congo Rec S1117 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)
7
(a) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is also Consistent with Subsequent Congressional Enactments Modifying the PVSA
As discussed above it is well established that the PVSA was designed toRrotect US-flag vessels from foreign competition in the coastwise and domestic trades 1
Subsequent legislative enactments however have appropriately differentiated among distinct geographic markets and trades including Canada Alaska Puerto Rico and Hawaii based on the existence or non-existence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
In 1938 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers by Canadian passenger vessels on Lake Ontario and the St Lawrence River until such time as passenger service shall be established by vessels of the United States22 Similarly in 1961 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers on Canadian vessels within Alaska or between Alaska and other points in the United States until such time as passenger service is established by vessels ofthe United States23
In 1984 Congress modified the application ofthe PVSA to pennit the transportation ofpassengers between Puerto Rico and other United States ports on foreign-flag vessels24 As with the other statutory exceptions this provision is qualified and expires [o]n a showing that a United States passenger vessel qualified to engage in the coastwise trade is offering or advertising passenger service between a port in Puerto Rico and another port in the United States2S
Congress acted again with respect to the application of the PVSA with the 2003 Act in which it authorized three vessels that did not meet the US-build requirements of the PVSA to operate as modem US-flagged cruise ships in regular service in Hawaii26 The 2003 Act imposes a specific geographic limitation on the operation of any ship documented under this authority to operations only in regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands ofHawaii and shall not transport passengers in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico or the Caribbean Sea except in certain limited circumstances27 As above the limited nature of the 2003 Act is express it is strictly limited to the large ocean-going cruise ships and then only those operating in the regular Hawaii service where there are no US-flag operations28
21 See Act ofJune 19 1886 c 421 sec 8 24 Stat 81 Act of February 171898 c 26 sec 2 30 Stat 248 22 S] Res 174 75th Cong 52 Stat 223 (Alp 251938) codified at46 USC sect 55121(a) 23 See Pub L 87-77 75 Stat 196 (Jun 30 1961) codified at 46 USC sect 55121(b) 24 See Pub L 98-563 98 Stat 2916 (Oct 301984) codified at 46 USC sect 55104(b) 25 46 USC sect 55104(c)(l) see also 46 USC 46 USc sect 55104(cX2)(expiration of exemption upon availability ofa non-coastwise qualified US-flag vessel offering service in the relevant market) 26 149 Congo Rec SI118 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)(statementofSen Inouye) 27 Pub L 108-7 117 Stat 79 (Feb 20 2003) 28 149 Congo Rec S11l9 (dailyed Jan 17 2003Xstatement of Sen Inouye)
8
In each ofthese instances Congress fashioned a narrow exception to the PVSA that differentiated among distinct geographic markets based on the existence or nonshyexistence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
As the federal agency responsible for administering the 2003 Act MARAD requested that Customs act to protect US flag passenger vessel interests in the Hawaii trades29 Limiting the scope ofthe proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades also reflects Customs appreciation of the PVSA in the context of the subsequent Congressional action30 Viewing the Congressional modifications to the PVSA as a whole Congress has specifically and repeatedly differentiated among distinct geographic markets when it has found it necessary and appropriate to do so to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests It is well established that the proper interpretation of a statutory scheme includes consideration ofsubsequent statutes even though the underlying statute itselfhas not been expressly amended31 Accordingly Customs should likewise limit the scope ofthe proposed PVSA interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades because that is the only geographic market as mandated by the 2003 Act in which oceangoing US-flag cruise ships are operating
(b) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Consistent with Public Policy Objectives of the 1985 Rulemaking
In 1985middot Customs liberalized the regulations implementing the PVSA by eliminating certain regulatory prohibitions on foreign flag vessels In the context of the 1985 rulemaking Customs justified a relaxation ofthe regulations on the grounds that it would simplify the administration of the PVSA and would benefit the economy ofcertain American coastwise ports without eroding the statutory protection given to American vessels engaged in solely domestic trade32
Customs thus sought to reconcile US port economic interests with US-flag passenger vessel interests Both of these twin policy objectives are furthered by
29 See 72 Fed Reg 65488 (Nov 21 2007)( MARAn bas asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the ~eratiODS ofcoastwise-qualified cruise ship operators)
See generally FDA v Brown amp Williamson Tobacco Corp 529 US 120 132-133 (2000)(assessing propriety ofagency construction ofFood DIUg and Cosmetics Act and descnbing responsibility of reviewing cowt to assess statutory provisions in the context of subsequent legislative enactments) 31 See Brown amp Williamson 529 US 143 (holding that proper construction ofstatutory provision must necessarily assume that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications ofa later statute This is particularly so where the scope of the earlier statute is broad but the subsequent statutes more specifically address the topic athand) see also United States v Estate ofRomani 523 US 517 530-531 (1998)( holding that a later-enacted statute should control the construction of the federal lien priority statute a specific policy embodied in a later federal statute should control om construction of the [earlier] statute even though it ha[s] not been expressly amended) United States v Fausto 484 US 439453 (1988)(The courts frequently find Congress to have done this - whenever in fact they interpret a statutory text in the light ofsurrounding texts that happen to have been subsequently enacted This classic judicial task of reconciling many laws enacted over time and getting them to make sense in combination necessarily assumes that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications of a later statute) 32 50 Fed Reg 26982 (JuI 11985)
9
limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades
As noted earlier the 2003 Act limits the operation of the NCLA US-flag oceangoing passenger vessels to regular service in Hawaii Because there are no oceangoing US-flag vessels operating in any market other than the Hawaii trades Customs should limit the scope of the proposed interPretation to that market Such a limitation protects US flag passenger vessel interests without prejudicing US port interests In contrast an application of the proposed interpretation to any itinerary would needlessly harm US port interests unrelated to Hawaii without any countervailing benefit to US-flag passenger vessel interests Accordingly limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation is consistent with the public policy objectives of the 1985 rulemaking as well as the 2003 Act
(c) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Also Consistent with Customs Commitment to Revisit the Scope of its Rules to Protect US-Flag Interests
The relaxation ofthe PVSA regulations in 1985 was premised in large part on Customs finding that there was no regular salt water US-flag passenger fleet in operation at that time33 Acknowledging that the relaxed regulations could harm USshyflag interests Customs committed in the preamble ofthe 1985 final rule to immediately reconsider its interpretation if it is ever shown that there is a viable US flag vessel operating in competition with foreign-flag vessels34
Congress enacted the 2003 Act to stimulate the development of a US flag cruise ship industry As noted above the legislative history ofthat Act makes clear that Congress sought to revitalize the US-flag cruise industry as a means to maintain Americas preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool ofqualified seafarers help sustain a fleet of US flag vessels to support our military and a maritime industrial base create thousands of seagoing and shoreside American jobs and stimulate the development ofa US flag cruise ship tourism business with the commensurate benefits to the US tax base the US economy and US employment
Customs is now acting at MARADs request to revisit its interpretation ofthe regulations implementing the PVSA because recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwise-qualified cruise ship operations35 That is to say that the concerns articulated by Customs in the context of the 1985 rulemaking have materialized and US-flag passenger vessel interests are in fact being hanned in the Hawaii trades by foreign competitors
33 50 Fed Reg 26983 34Id
3S 72 Fed Reg 56488 (Nov 21 2007)
I
10
Because the US-flag passenger vessels are limited by statute to regular service in Hawaii limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the
Hawaii trades is consistent with Customs historical commitment to revisit its interpretation ofthe implementing regulations to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests
7 Conclusion
For the reasons stated above NCLA commends the efforts ofCustoms and MARAn to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act as applied to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA respectfully requests Customs to move ahead promptly with p~blicati~nof a final interpretive rule to advance the important national security arid public policy objectives ofthese laws
We greatly appreciate the opportunity to submit these comments
Sincerely
~~~ Alan T Yamamoto Vice President Hawaii Operations
Exhibit A
Ship Name Serenade Of The Seas Departure Port San Diego California Ports of Call San Diego California Kailua Kona Hawaii Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii Hlo Hawaii Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii Ensenada Mexico San Qigo California
2007 Date(s) Oct 05
Sailing Itinerary
Day Port H ~rrive Depart Activity
05-0ct San Diego California 500 PM
06-0ct Cruising
07-0ct Cruising
08-0ct Cruising
09-0ct Cruising
10-0ct Kailua Kona Hawaii 700 AM 900 PM Tendered
11-00t Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 1000 AM Tendered
12middot0ct Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 900 PM Tendered
13-0ct Hilo Hawaii 700 AM 600 PM Docked
14middot0ct Honoulu (Oahu) Hawaii 700 AM Docked
15-0ct Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii 200 AM Docked
6-0ct CrUising
17-0ct Cruising
18-0ct Cruising
19middot0ct Cruising
-7 20-00t
O-Oot
Ensenada ~i1exico
San Deqo California
i 00 ~r1
700 ~M
200 oM D1Jcked ~
F Jl E EST Y LEe A U I 5 I N Gmiddot
December 21 2007
The Honorable W Ralph Basham Commissioner Customs and Border Protection co Border Security Regulations Branch Office ofInternational Trade Customs and Border Protection 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW (Mint Annex) Washington DC 20229
Re Hawaii Coastwise Cruises (USCBP-2007-0098) Comments in Response to Proposed Interpretation
Dear Commissioner Basham
NCL America Inc1 (NCLA) submits these comments in support ofthe efforts ofCustoms and Border Protection to enforce the Passenger Vessel Services Act and the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative as applied to Hawaii coastwise cruises
1 Introduction and Summary of Position
NCLA operates three large oceangoing US flag cruise ships in Hawaii These ships are documented under US flag and are required to operate in regular service in Hawaii pursuant to the authority of the Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative a 2003 federal statute intended to revitalize the US flag cruise industry and to maximize economic and national security benefits to the United States (the 2003 Act)
NCLA has invested $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships pursuant to the 2003 Act and in direct reliance on the protections of the Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA) and its proper enforcement The PVSA limits the transportation ofpassengers between US ports to coastwise documented US flag ships Its statutory protections recognize that US flag ships have significantly higher operational costs in part because they are subject to more stringent US laws including US labor laws and federal
1 NCL America Inc is a US corporation incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware headquartered in Honolulu Hawaii As a US corporation it is subject to US taxes at both the federal and state level The Chief Executive Officer the Chairman of the Board and all of the Board of Directors of NCL America are US citizens The company is also subject to US labor and employment laws and is required by statute to maintain a workforce comprised primarily ofUS citizens
700 Bishop St SUite 900 I Honolulu HawMi 96813 I Tel 8085273800 Fax 8085273820 I ndcom
2
income tax among others The NCLA ships operating in Hawaii are the only large oceangoing cruise ships operating under US flag In furtherance of the policy goals of the PVSA and the 2003 Act these ships have created over 4000 seafaring jobs all subject to US minimum wage and other labor statutes
Since 2003 there has been a significant increase in capacity in the Hawaii market from foreign flag ships providing cruise service to Hawaii from the West Coast Many of these foreign flag cruises are marketed as Hawaii cruises and consist entirely ofUS ports ofcall with the sole exception of a token stop in Mexico for as little as an hour late at night under circumstances where passengers are not permitted to get offthe ship There are no reported rulings approving these particular foreign flag itineraries
Lower cost foreign competition in the Hawaii market has unfairly hurt NCLAs operations NCLA has incurred substantial losses which have contributed significantly to its decision earlier this year to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAll from US flag and reshydeploy it foreign Unfair foreign competition poses an imminent threat to the remaining US flag passenger vessels operating in the Hawaii trades pursuant to the 2003 Act
As the agency statutorily charged with implementation of the 2003 Act the US Department ofTransportation Maritime Administration (MARAn) is aware of the threat foreign flag Hawaii itineraries pose to the US flag fleet and brought the situation to the attention ofthe US Department ofHomeland Security Bureau ofCustoms and Border Protection (CBP or Customs) Customs determined that the primary object of these itineraries was coastwise and that the Ensenada stop was an evasion of the PVSA
In August 2007 Customs provided written notice to the affected foreign lines and their trade association that the existing itineraries were contrary to the PVSA None of these lines sought advance rulings even after the Customs notice with respect to their Hawaii itineraries pursuant to Customs regulations and many continued to market the itineraries as Hawaii cruises NCLA supports the efforts ofCustoms and MARAD to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act for Hawaii cruises
2 Statutory Authority for Customs Proposed Interpretation
(a) Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA)
Congress passed the PVSA in 1886 to protect the US maritime transportation industry from foreign competition2 Protection is afforded through penalty assessments on foreign vessels transporting passengers between US ports or places directly or by way ofa foreign port 3 As Congress and the courts have recognized coastwise protections for the US maritime transportation industry are only one dimension of the PVSA Operating in conjunction with other coastwise laws and with the US
2 See United States v Honduran SS GRANADA 35 F Supp 892 894 (BD Pa 1940)(citing purpose of PVSA to meet threats to the practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping which was to be preserved for US ships)
46 USc sect 55103 (originally 46 USC App 289)
3
documentation laws the PVSA also enhances military sealift in times ofnational emergency sustains a US merchant marine and supports the US shipbuilding and repair industry4
(b) Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative (the 2003 Act)
Over the past decade Congress has sought to reinforce the goals of the PVSA by providing mechanisms to revitalize the oceangoing US flag cruise fleet particularly in Hawaii The Project America legislation enacted in 1997 authorized among other things the re~flagging ofone existing cruise ship contingent on the operator contracting for the construction oftwo new oceangoing cruise shipss Following the default of the operator under the original contract Congress enacted the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative for the purpose ofrecovering economic and national security benefits to the United States bull 6 These same goals of the original PVSA were expressly referenced in the legislative history of the 2003 Act which emphasized that these ships will be assets available in time ofnational emergency and will significantly expand the pool ofqualified seafarers upon which the US Department ofDefense relies to crew non-combatant vessels
The 2003 Act authorizes the US documentation ofthree cruise ships for operation in regular service in Hawaii subject to certain conditions including a prohibition on operating in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico and the Caribbean Sea and a requirement that all vessel repair work be undertaken in the United States MARAD is charged with implementation of the 2003 Act
3 Customs Implementation of PVSA
(a) Regulations
The current regulations implementing the PVSA were published by Customs in 19858 The growth of the foreign flag cruise industry in North America and in particular the development of the Alaska cruise market led to an effort in 1984 to amend the thenshyexisting regulations to increase the ease of administration and operational flexibility The effort to change the regulation had support from US port interests who saw benefit in the potential increase in the number ofUS ports that foreign vessels could call and was opposed by proponents ofpotential US flag projects as detrimental to efforts to revitalize the US fleet 9 The preamble to the 1985 rule emphasized that it was of paramount importance to consider the primary object ofpassengers in taking a
4 See American Hawaii Cruises v Skinner 713 F Supp 452 457 (DDC 1989) (recognizing the contribution of the PVSA and the Jones Act in helping to secure national defense by maintaining a merchant marine oftbe best equipped and most suitable types ofvessels sufficient to serve in time of war or national emergency) see also Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 30 (DC Cir 1984) Wirth Ltd v SIS Acadia Forest 537 F2d 1272 1281 n32 (5th Cir 1976) S Public Law 105-56 Section 8109 (111 Stat 1203 1244) (Oct 81997 ) 6 Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II General Provisions - Department ofCommerce Section 211 (117 Stat 1179) (Feb 20 2003) 1 149 Cong Rec S1118 (dailyed Jan 17 2003(statement ofSenator Inouye) 8 19 CFR sect 480a 950 Fed Reg 26981 (July I 1985)
4
voyage10 a concept which is reinforced elsewhere in Customs regulations11 In its analysis of the comments received at the time Customs accepted the view ofport interests that the modified rule would help their business but did so recognizing the absence ofa regular salt water US flag passenger fleet Customs acknowledged the potential harm to prospective efforts to revitalize the US flag passenger fleet and expressly cautioned that if it were ever shown that coastwise qualified vessels in competition with foreign vessels were in fact hurt by the modified Customs regulation then Customs would immediately reconsider its position12
(b) Customs Rulings
Given the significant penalties associated with violating the PVSA13 Customs regulations expressly provide a mechanism for the owner or charterer of a foreign vessel or any other interested person to request an advisory ruling as to whether a contemplated voyage would be considered in violation of the PVSA14 Customs regulations provide that vessel operators can rely on these ruling letters only to the extent that the facts and circumstances are identical to those in the ruling letter IS
Notwithstanding the fact that several foreign cruise lines offer Hawaii itineraries originating in a US mainland port and calling at Hawaii ports with a token intervening stop in Mexico there are no reported rulings expressly approving such an itinerary for these foreign cruise lines 16
4 The Cruise Industry in Hawaii
(a) NCL America Returns US flag to the Oceangoing Passenger Fleet
Pursuant to the requirements ofthe 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative NCLA agreed to promote US-flag cruising enhance military sealift capacity and expand the US maritime labor base No other major cruise line had ever undertaken such a commitment to the US flag and the public policy objectives Congress sought to achieve under the PVSA or the 2003 Act Introduction ofPRIDE OF ALOHA in 2004 was a significant development in the maritime industry because it marked the restoration ofthe
10 Id at 26983 11 Customs Regulations include a provision on the effect ofruling letters and with respect to carrier rulings the applicable regulation refers to rulings setting forth a determination as to whether or not the primary object of a contemplated voyage is coastwise transportation in violation of46 USC sect 289 [pYSA codified at 46 USC sect55103] 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 12 50 Fed Reg at 26983 13 A modem cruise ship with 2400 passengers for example would be subject to a fine of$720OOO per cruise based on the statutory penalty of$300 for each passenger transported in violation of the Act 14 19 CFR sect 480a(d) IS 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 16 There is one older reported mling involving a request to drop the Ensenada port call from a Los AngeleslHawaiiLos Angeles itinerary which Customs held would violate the PYSA In dicta Customs acknowledged that the itinerary could be in compliance if the Ensenada call were not dropped but did not address the issue ofwhether a one hour service call where no passengers depart the vessel would be sufficient The carrier that obtained that ruling has since left the Hawaii market See Customs Ruling HQ 114078 re Crystal Hannony (Nov 4 1997)
5
us flag to the oceangoing cruise industry A contemporaneous press release from the Us Department ofTransportation reported that the three US-flag cruise ships to be introduced pursuant to the 2003 Act were expected to create more than 20000 US jobs generate more than $825 million ofexpenditures in the US economy and create nearly $360 million in federal tax revenue by the end of 200717 In 2005 the PRIDE OF AMERICA was introduced and in 2006 the third vessel PRIDE OF HAWAll was introduced to Hawaii Both the PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAIl offer 7shyday inter-island Hawaii itineraries whereas PRIDE OF ALOHA operates on 7 and 10 day cruises exclusively among the islands ofHawaii as well as 11 day cruises that include a foreign port call at Fanning Island To date NCLA has invested over $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships in furtherance ofthe policy objectives of the PVSA and the 2003 Act These ships employ over 4000 seafarers and generate hundreds ofmillions of dollars in benefits for Hawaii and the nation
(b) Significant Increase in Foreign Flag Capacity Since 2003
The most significant change in the Hawaii cruise market since 2003 has been the dramatic increase in capacity A significant portion ofthis capacity increase is directly attributable to NCLAs fulfillment ofthe Congressional mandate in the 2003 Act However foreign-flag operations in the Hawaii market as measured in passenger nights18 have skyrocketed Based on MARAn data derived from the US Customs Border Patrol Vessel Entrance and Clearance documents the passenger nights for foreign flag vessels departing from the West Coast to Hawaii on round trip cruise have increased several hundredfold during this period19 See Exhibit A
(c) NCLA Has Incurred Substantial Losses During this Period
Since 2004 NCLA has lost cumulatively more than a quarter ofa billion dollars A principal reason for these losses has been the increase in foreign capacity in this market NCLA has taken significant steps to reduce costs to address the increase in foreign competition but NCLA is at an inherent disadvantage when competing against foreign companies that are not subject to US labor laws US tax laws and other laws Ofcourse the statutory protections of the PVSA are intended to address these very issues That is why Customs immediate action to implement the proposed interpretation is critical for the US flag fleet Regrettably NCLA has already been forced to reduce overall capacity early next year with the withdrawal ofPRIDE OF HAWAlI to another
17 DOT Press Release dated June 72004 see also DOT Press Release dated August 132004 in connection with visit to PRIDE OF ALOHA by US Transportation Secretary Norman Y Mineta 11 Passenger nights (also referred to as passenger capacity days) are calculated by multiplying the number ofpassengers per vessel by the number ofcruise days in each itinerary by the number of cruises This is the unit ofmeasurement employed by MARAn In contrast passenger bed supply (also referred to as passenger capacity) data reflects only the number ofberths per vessel multiplied by the number of cruises and hence understates the market by excluding the full economic value ofthe cruise perfonned 19 In 2003 the total number ofpassenger nights for round-trip West Coast to Hawaii cruises was 303325 which jumped by 353 to 1072329 in 2006 and by 430 to 1304546 from 2003 to 2007 (The 2007 figure is based on MARAD data for six months and a1ll1ualized by published itineraries for the balance of the year)
6
market for operation under foreign flag This move alone will result in the loss ofover 1000 American seafaring jobs
5 Customs Proposed Interpretation is Necessary to Further the Important National Security and Public Policy Objectives Embodied in Federal Law
As Customs has properly noted the increase in foreign competition in the Hawaii trades in contravention of the PVSA pose[s] an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels[] As the operator of these ships NCLA has a vested interest in protecting the jobs ofthe thousands ofAmerican crewmembers and cruise ship service providers who support these vessels NCLA also has an interest in protecting the substantial economic investment it has made to revitalize the US flag passenger vessel fleet But a balancing of interests in the context of Customs enforcement ofexisting law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act requires a much broader focus
The legislative history of the 2003 Act expressly recognized the national security and public policy import ofestablishing a US flag passenger vessel fleet as a means to maintain the countrys preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool of qualified seafarers and as a means to help sustain a fleet ofUS-flag vessels to su~ort
the nations military and maritime industrial base for times ofnational emergency
Congress understood the importance ofestablishing a viable US flag cruise ship fleet as something larger than the vessels themselves These national security and public policy objectives must be weighed in the balance as Customs assesses how best to interpret its rules to give effect to the PVSA and the 2003 Act
6 Customs Should Clarify that the Proposed Interpretation is Limited to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades and Adopt Reasonable Measures to Ensure Sufficient Foreign Content
Since publication ofthe proposed interpretative rule several commenters have observed that the scope of the proposed interpretation is ambiguous because the language of Section VI referencing any cruise itinerary appears broader than the caption Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises and the entire discussion in the published notice which focuses exclusively on US-flag coastwise vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA agrees that the proposed interpretation should be clarified so that its scope is limited to vessels operating roundtrip voyages from US ports that include Hawaii port calls
NCLA supports the concept reflected in the proposed interpretive rule that round trip Hawaii itineraries from US ports on foreign ships must include a material and measurable degree ofoverall foreign port content as compared to US port content
20 149 Congo Rec S1117 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)
7
(a) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is also Consistent with Subsequent Congressional Enactments Modifying the PVSA
As discussed above it is well established that the PVSA was designed toRrotect US-flag vessels from foreign competition in the coastwise and domestic trades 1
Subsequent legislative enactments however have appropriately differentiated among distinct geographic markets and trades including Canada Alaska Puerto Rico and Hawaii based on the existence or non-existence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
In 1938 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers by Canadian passenger vessels on Lake Ontario and the St Lawrence River until such time as passenger service shall be established by vessels of the United States22 Similarly in 1961 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers on Canadian vessels within Alaska or between Alaska and other points in the United States until such time as passenger service is established by vessels ofthe United States23
In 1984 Congress modified the application ofthe PVSA to pennit the transportation ofpassengers between Puerto Rico and other United States ports on foreign-flag vessels24 As with the other statutory exceptions this provision is qualified and expires [o]n a showing that a United States passenger vessel qualified to engage in the coastwise trade is offering or advertising passenger service between a port in Puerto Rico and another port in the United States2S
Congress acted again with respect to the application of the PVSA with the 2003 Act in which it authorized three vessels that did not meet the US-build requirements of the PVSA to operate as modem US-flagged cruise ships in regular service in Hawaii26 The 2003 Act imposes a specific geographic limitation on the operation of any ship documented under this authority to operations only in regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands ofHawaii and shall not transport passengers in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico or the Caribbean Sea except in certain limited circumstances27 As above the limited nature of the 2003 Act is express it is strictly limited to the large ocean-going cruise ships and then only those operating in the regular Hawaii service where there are no US-flag operations28
21 See Act ofJune 19 1886 c 421 sec 8 24 Stat 81 Act of February 171898 c 26 sec 2 30 Stat 248 22 S] Res 174 75th Cong 52 Stat 223 (Alp 251938) codified at46 USC sect 55121(a) 23 See Pub L 87-77 75 Stat 196 (Jun 30 1961) codified at 46 USC sect 55121(b) 24 See Pub L 98-563 98 Stat 2916 (Oct 301984) codified at 46 USC sect 55104(b) 25 46 USC sect 55104(c)(l) see also 46 USC 46 USc sect 55104(cX2)(expiration of exemption upon availability ofa non-coastwise qualified US-flag vessel offering service in the relevant market) 26 149 Congo Rec SI118 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)(statementofSen Inouye) 27 Pub L 108-7 117 Stat 79 (Feb 20 2003) 28 149 Congo Rec S11l9 (dailyed Jan 17 2003Xstatement of Sen Inouye)
8
In each ofthese instances Congress fashioned a narrow exception to the PVSA that differentiated among distinct geographic markets based on the existence or nonshyexistence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
As the federal agency responsible for administering the 2003 Act MARAD requested that Customs act to protect US flag passenger vessel interests in the Hawaii trades29 Limiting the scope ofthe proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades also reflects Customs appreciation of the PVSA in the context of the subsequent Congressional action30 Viewing the Congressional modifications to the PVSA as a whole Congress has specifically and repeatedly differentiated among distinct geographic markets when it has found it necessary and appropriate to do so to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests It is well established that the proper interpretation of a statutory scheme includes consideration ofsubsequent statutes even though the underlying statute itselfhas not been expressly amended31 Accordingly Customs should likewise limit the scope ofthe proposed PVSA interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades because that is the only geographic market as mandated by the 2003 Act in which oceangoing US-flag cruise ships are operating
(b) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Consistent with Public Policy Objectives of the 1985 Rulemaking
In 1985middot Customs liberalized the regulations implementing the PVSA by eliminating certain regulatory prohibitions on foreign flag vessels In the context of the 1985 rulemaking Customs justified a relaxation ofthe regulations on the grounds that it would simplify the administration of the PVSA and would benefit the economy ofcertain American coastwise ports without eroding the statutory protection given to American vessels engaged in solely domestic trade32
Customs thus sought to reconcile US port economic interests with US-flag passenger vessel interests Both of these twin policy objectives are furthered by
29 See 72 Fed Reg 65488 (Nov 21 2007)( MARAn bas asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the ~eratiODS ofcoastwise-qualified cruise ship operators)
See generally FDA v Brown amp Williamson Tobacco Corp 529 US 120 132-133 (2000)(assessing propriety ofagency construction ofFood DIUg and Cosmetics Act and descnbing responsibility of reviewing cowt to assess statutory provisions in the context of subsequent legislative enactments) 31 See Brown amp Williamson 529 US 143 (holding that proper construction ofstatutory provision must necessarily assume that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications ofa later statute This is particularly so where the scope of the earlier statute is broad but the subsequent statutes more specifically address the topic athand) see also United States v Estate ofRomani 523 US 517 530-531 (1998)( holding that a later-enacted statute should control the construction of the federal lien priority statute a specific policy embodied in a later federal statute should control om construction of the [earlier] statute even though it ha[s] not been expressly amended) United States v Fausto 484 US 439453 (1988)(The courts frequently find Congress to have done this - whenever in fact they interpret a statutory text in the light ofsurrounding texts that happen to have been subsequently enacted This classic judicial task of reconciling many laws enacted over time and getting them to make sense in combination necessarily assumes that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications of a later statute) 32 50 Fed Reg 26982 (JuI 11985)
9
limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades
As noted earlier the 2003 Act limits the operation of the NCLA US-flag oceangoing passenger vessels to regular service in Hawaii Because there are no oceangoing US-flag vessels operating in any market other than the Hawaii trades Customs should limit the scope of the proposed interPretation to that market Such a limitation protects US flag passenger vessel interests without prejudicing US port interests In contrast an application of the proposed interpretation to any itinerary would needlessly harm US port interests unrelated to Hawaii without any countervailing benefit to US-flag passenger vessel interests Accordingly limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation is consistent with the public policy objectives of the 1985 rulemaking as well as the 2003 Act
(c) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Also Consistent with Customs Commitment to Revisit the Scope of its Rules to Protect US-Flag Interests
The relaxation ofthe PVSA regulations in 1985 was premised in large part on Customs finding that there was no regular salt water US-flag passenger fleet in operation at that time33 Acknowledging that the relaxed regulations could harm USshyflag interests Customs committed in the preamble ofthe 1985 final rule to immediately reconsider its interpretation if it is ever shown that there is a viable US flag vessel operating in competition with foreign-flag vessels34
Congress enacted the 2003 Act to stimulate the development of a US flag cruise ship industry As noted above the legislative history ofthat Act makes clear that Congress sought to revitalize the US-flag cruise industry as a means to maintain Americas preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool ofqualified seafarers help sustain a fleet of US flag vessels to support our military and a maritime industrial base create thousands of seagoing and shoreside American jobs and stimulate the development ofa US flag cruise ship tourism business with the commensurate benefits to the US tax base the US economy and US employment
Customs is now acting at MARADs request to revisit its interpretation ofthe regulations implementing the PVSA because recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwise-qualified cruise ship operations35 That is to say that the concerns articulated by Customs in the context of the 1985 rulemaking have materialized and US-flag passenger vessel interests are in fact being hanned in the Hawaii trades by foreign competitors
33 50 Fed Reg 26983 34Id
3S 72 Fed Reg 56488 (Nov 21 2007)
I
10
Because the US-flag passenger vessels are limited by statute to regular service in Hawaii limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the
Hawaii trades is consistent with Customs historical commitment to revisit its interpretation ofthe implementing regulations to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests
7 Conclusion
For the reasons stated above NCLA commends the efforts ofCustoms and MARAn to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act as applied to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA respectfully requests Customs to move ahead promptly with p~blicati~nof a final interpretive rule to advance the important national security arid public policy objectives ofthese laws
We greatly appreciate the opportunity to submit these comments
Sincerely
~~~ Alan T Yamamoto Vice President Hawaii Operations
Exhibit A
Ship Name Serenade Of The Seas Departure Port San Diego California Ports of Call San Diego California Kailua Kona Hawaii Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii Hlo Hawaii Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii Ensenada Mexico San Qigo California
2007 Date(s) Oct 05
Sailing Itinerary
Day Port H ~rrive Depart Activity
05-0ct San Diego California 500 PM
06-0ct Cruising
07-0ct Cruising
08-0ct Cruising
09-0ct Cruising
10-0ct Kailua Kona Hawaii 700 AM 900 PM Tendered
11-00t Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 1000 AM Tendered
12middot0ct Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 900 PM Tendered
13-0ct Hilo Hawaii 700 AM 600 PM Docked
14middot0ct Honoulu (Oahu) Hawaii 700 AM Docked
15-0ct Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii 200 AM Docked
6-0ct CrUising
17-0ct Cruising
18-0ct Cruising
19middot0ct Cruising
-7 20-00t
O-Oot
Ensenada ~i1exico
San Deqo California
i 00 ~r1
700 ~M
200 oM D1Jcked ~
2
income tax among others The NCLA ships operating in Hawaii are the only large oceangoing cruise ships operating under US flag In furtherance of the policy goals of the PVSA and the 2003 Act these ships have created over 4000 seafaring jobs all subject to US minimum wage and other labor statutes
Since 2003 there has been a significant increase in capacity in the Hawaii market from foreign flag ships providing cruise service to Hawaii from the West Coast Many of these foreign flag cruises are marketed as Hawaii cruises and consist entirely ofUS ports ofcall with the sole exception of a token stop in Mexico for as little as an hour late at night under circumstances where passengers are not permitted to get offthe ship There are no reported rulings approving these particular foreign flag itineraries
Lower cost foreign competition in the Hawaii market has unfairly hurt NCLAs operations NCLA has incurred substantial losses which have contributed significantly to its decision earlier this year to withdraw the PRIDE OF HAWAll from US flag and reshydeploy it foreign Unfair foreign competition poses an imminent threat to the remaining US flag passenger vessels operating in the Hawaii trades pursuant to the 2003 Act
As the agency statutorily charged with implementation of the 2003 Act the US Department ofTransportation Maritime Administration (MARAn) is aware of the threat foreign flag Hawaii itineraries pose to the US flag fleet and brought the situation to the attention ofthe US Department ofHomeland Security Bureau ofCustoms and Border Protection (CBP or Customs) Customs determined that the primary object of these itineraries was coastwise and that the Ensenada stop was an evasion of the PVSA
In August 2007 Customs provided written notice to the affected foreign lines and their trade association that the existing itineraries were contrary to the PVSA None of these lines sought advance rulings even after the Customs notice with respect to their Hawaii itineraries pursuant to Customs regulations and many continued to market the itineraries as Hawaii cruises NCLA supports the efforts ofCustoms and MARAD to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act for Hawaii cruises
2 Statutory Authority for Customs Proposed Interpretation
(a) Passenger Vessel Services Act (PVSA)
Congress passed the PVSA in 1886 to protect the US maritime transportation industry from foreign competition2 Protection is afforded through penalty assessments on foreign vessels transporting passengers between US ports or places directly or by way ofa foreign port 3 As Congress and the courts have recognized coastwise protections for the US maritime transportation industry are only one dimension of the PVSA Operating in conjunction with other coastwise laws and with the US
2 See United States v Honduran SS GRANADA 35 F Supp 892 894 (BD Pa 1940)(citing purpose of PVSA to meet threats to the practical monopoly of coastwise and domestic shipping which was to be preserved for US ships)
46 USc sect 55103 (originally 46 USC App 289)
3
documentation laws the PVSA also enhances military sealift in times ofnational emergency sustains a US merchant marine and supports the US shipbuilding and repair industry4
(b) Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative (the 2003 Act)
Over the past decade Congress has sought to reinforce the goals of the PVSA by providing mechanisms to revitalize the oceangoing US flag cruise fleet particularly in Hawaii The Project America legislation enacted in 1997 authorized among other things the re~flagging ofone existing cruise ship contingent on the operator contracting for the construction oftwo new oceangoing cruise shipss Following the default of the operator under the original contract Congress enacted the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative for the purpose ofrecovering economic and national security benefits to the United States bull 6 These same goals of the original PVSA were expressly referenced in the legislative history of the 2003 Act which emphasized that these ships will be assets available in time ofnational emergency and will significantly expand the pool ofqualified seafarers upon which the US Department ofDefense relies to crew non-combatant vessels
The 2003 Act authorizes the US documentation ofthree cruise ships for operation in regular service in Hawaii subject to certain conditions including a prohibition on operating in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico and the Caribbean Sea and a requirement that all vessel repair work be undertaken in the United States MARAD is charged with implementation of the 2003 Act
3 Customs Implementation of PVSA
(a) Regulations
The current regulations implementing the PVSA were published by Customs in 19858 The growth of the foreign flag cruise industry in North America and in particular the development of the Alaska cruise market led to an effort in 1984 to amend the thenshyexisting regulations to increase the ease of administration and operational flexibility The effort to change the regulation had support from US port interests who saw benefit in the potential increase in the number ofUS ports that foreign vessels could call and was opposed by proponents ofpotential US flag projects as detrimental to efforts to revitalize the US fleet 9 The preamble to the 1985 rule emphasized that it was of paramount importance to consider the primary object ofpassengers in taking a
4 See American Hawaii Cruises v Skinner 713 F Supp 452 457 (DDC 1989) (recognizing the contribution of the PVSA and the Jones Act in helping to secure national defense by maintaining a merchant marine oftbe best equipped and most suitable types ofvessels sufficient to serve in time of war or national emergency) see also Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 30 (DC Cir 1984) Wirth Ltd v SIS Acadia Forest 537 F2d 1272 1281 n32 (5th Cir 1976) S Public Law 105-56 Section 8109 (111 Stat 1203 1244) (Oct 81997 ) 6 Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II General Provisions - Department ofCommerce Section 211 (117 Stat 1179) (Feb 20 2003) 1 149 Cong Rec S1118 (dailyed Jan 17 2003(statement ofSenator Inouye) 8 19 CFR sect 480a 950 Fed Reg 26981 (July I 1985)
4
voyage10 a concept which is reinforced elsewhere in Customs regulations11 In its analysis of the comments received at the time Customs accepted the view ofport interests that the modified rule would help their business but did so recognizing the absence ofa regular salt water US flag passenger fleet Customs acknowledged the potential harm to prospective efforts to revitalize the US flag passenger fleet and expressly cautioned that if it were ever shown that coastwise qualified vessels in competition with foreign vessels were in fact hurt by the modified Customs regulation then Customs would immediately reconsider its position12
(b) Customs Rulings
Given the significant penalties associated with violating the PVSA13 Customs regulations expressly provide a mechanism for the owner or charterer of a foreign vessel or any other interested person to request an advisory ruling as to whether a contemplated voyage would be considered in violation of the PVSA14 Customs regulations provide that vessel operators can rely on these ruling letters only to the extent that the facts and circumstances are identical to those in the ruling letter IS
Notwithstanding the fact that several foreign cruise lines offer Hawaii itineraries originating in a US mainland port and calling at Hawaii ports with a token intervening stop in Mexico there are no reported rulings expressly approving such an itinerary for these foreign cruise lines 16
4 The Cruise Industry in Hawaii
(a) NCL America Returns US flag to the Oceangoing Passenger Fleet
Pursuant to the requirements ofthe 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative NCLA agreed to promote US-flag cruising enhance military sealift capacity and expand the US maritime labor base No other major cruise line had ever undertaken such a commitment to the US flag and the public policy objectives Congress sought to achieve under the PVSA or the 2003 Act Introduction ofPRIDE OF ALOHA in 2004 was a significant development in the maritime industry because it marked the restoration ofthe
10 Id at 26983 11 Customs Regulations include a provision on the effect ofruling letters and with respect to carrier rulings the applicable regulation refers to rulings setting forth a determination as to whether or not the primary object of a contemplated voyage is coastwise transportation in violation of46 USC sect 289 [pYSA codified at 46 USC sect55103] 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 12 50 Fed Reg at 26983 13 A modem cruise ship with 2400 passengers for example would be subject to a fine of$720OOO per cruise based on the statutory penalty of$300 for each passenger transported in violation of the Act 14 19 CFR sect 480a(d) IS 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 16 There is one older reported mling involving a request to drop the Ensenada port call from a Los AngeleslHawaiiLos Angeles itinerary which Customs held would violate the PYSA In dicta Customs acknowledged that the itinerary could be in compliance if the Ensenada call were not dropped but did not address the issue ofwhether a one hour service call where no passengers depart the vessel would be sufficient The carrier that obtained that ruling has since left the Hawaii market See Customs Ruling HQ 114078 re Crystal Hannony (Nov 4 1997)
5
us flag to the oceangoing cruise industry A contemporaneous press release from the Us Department ofTransportation reported that the three US-flag cruise ships to be introduced pursuant to the 2003 Act were expected to create more than 20000 US jobs generate more than $825 million ofexpenditures in the US economy and create nearly $360 million in federal tax revenue by the end of 200717 In 2005 the PRIDE OF AMERICA was introduced and in 2006 the third vessel PRIDE OF HAWAll was introduced to Hawaii Both the PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAIl offer 7shyday inter-island Hawaii itineraries whereas PRIDE OF ALOHA operates on 7 and 10 day cruises exclusively among the islands ofHawaii as well as 11 day cruises that include a foreign port call at Fanning Island To date NCLA has invested over $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships in furtherance ofthe policy objectives of the PVSA and the 2003 Act These ships employ over 4000 seafarers and generate hundreds ofmillions of dollars in benefits for Hawaii and the nation
(b) Significant Increase in Foreign Flag Capacity Since 2003
The most significant change in the Hawaii cruise market since 2003 has been the dramatic increase in capacity A significant portion ofthis capacity increase is directly attributable to NCLAs fulfillment ofthe Congressional mandate in the 2003 Act However foreign-flag operations in the Hawaii market as measured in passenger nights18 have skyrocketed Based on MARAn data derived from the US Customs Border Patrol Vessel Entrance and Clearance documents the passenger nights for foreign flag vessels departing from the West Coast to Hawaii on round trip cruise have increased several hundredfold during this period19 See Exhibit A
(c) NCLA Has Incurred Substantial Losses During this Period
Since 2004 NCLA has lost cumulatively more than a quarter ofa billion dollars A principal reason for these losses has been the increase in foreign capacity in this market NCLA has taken significant steps to reduce costs to address the increase in foreign competition but NCLA is at an inherent disadvantage when competing against foreign companies that are not subject to US labor laws US tax laws and other laws Ofcourse the statutory protections of the PVSA are intended to address these very issues That is why Customs immediate action to implement the proposed interpretation is critical for the US flag fleet Regrettably NCLA has already been forced to reduce overall capacity early next year with the withdrawal ofPRIDE OF HAWAlI to another
17 DOT Press Release dated June 72004 see also DOT Press Release dated August 132004 in connection with visit to PRIDE OF ALOHA by US Transportation Secretary Norman Y Mineta 11 Passenger nights (also referred to as passenger capacity days) are calculated by multiplying the number ofpassengers per vessel by the number ofcruise days in each itinerary by the number of cruises This is the unit ofmeasurement employed by MARAn In contrast passenger bed supply (also referred to as passenger capacity) data reflects only the number ofberths per vessel multiplied by the number of cruises and hence understates the market by excluding the full economic value ofthe cruise perfonned 19 In 2003 the total number ofpassenger nights for round-trip West Coast to Hawaii cruises was 303325 which jumped by 353 to 1072329 in 2006 and by 430 to 1304546 from 2003 to 2007 (The 2007 figure is based on MARAD data for six months and a1ll1ualized by published itineraries for the balance of the year)
6
market for operation under foreign flag This move alone will result in the loss ofover 1000 American seafaring jobs
5 Customs Proposed Interpretation is Necessary to Further the Important National Security and Public Policy Objectives Embodied in Federal Law
As Customs has properly noted the increase in foreign competition in the Hawaii trades in contravention of the PVSA pose[s] an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels[] As the operator of these ships NCLA has a vested interest in protecting the jobs ofthe thousands ofAmerican crewmembers and cruise ship service providers who support these vessels NCLA also has an interest in protecting the substantial economic investment it has made to revitalize the US flag passenger vessel fleet But a balancing of interests in the context of Customs enforcement ofexisting law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act requires a much broader focus
The legislative history of the 2003 Act expressly recognized the national security and public policy import ofestablishing a US flag passenger vessel fleet as a means to maintain the countrys preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool of qualified seafarers and as a means to help sustain a fleet ofUS-flag vessels to su~ort
the nations military and maritime industrial base for times ofnational emergency
Congress understood the importance ofestablishing a viable US flag cruise ship fleet as something larger than the vessels themselves These national security and public policy objectives must be weighed in the balance as Customs assesses how best to interpret its rules to give effect to the PVSA and the 2003 Act
6 Customs Should Clarify that the Proposed Interpretation is Limited to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades and Adopt Reasonable Measures to Ensure Sufficient Foreign Content
Since publication ofthe proposed interpretative rule several commenters have observed that the scope of the proposed interpretation is ambiguous because the language of Section VI referencing any cruise itinerary appears broader than the caption Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises and the entire discussion in the published notice which focuses exclusively on US-flag coastwise vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA agrees that the proposed interpretation should be clarified so that its scope is limited to vessels operating roundtrip voyages from US ports that include Hawaii port calls
NCLA supports the concept reflected in the proposed interpretive rule that round trip Hawaii itineraries from US ports on foreign ships must include a material and measurable degree ofoverall foreign port content as compared to US port content
20 149 Congo Rec S1117 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)
7
(a) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is also Consistent with Subsequent Congressional Enactments Modifying the PVSA
As discussed above it is well established that the PVSA was designed toRrotect US-flag vessels from foreign competition in the coastwise and domestic trades 1
Subsequent legislative enactments however have appropriately differentiated among distinct geographic markets and trades including Canada Alaska Puerto Rico and Hawaii based on the existence or non-existence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
In 1938 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers by Canadian passenger vessels on Lake Ontario and the St Lawrence River until such time as passenger service shall be established by vessels of the United States22 Similarly in 1961 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers on Canadian vessels within Alaska or between Alaska and other points in the United States until such time as passenger service is established by vessels ofthe United States23
In 1984 Congress modified the application ofthe PVSA to pennit the transportation ofpassengers between Puerto Rico and other United States ports on foreign-flag vessels24 As with the other statutory exceptions this provision is qualified and expires [o]n a showing that a United States passenger vessel qualified to engage in the coastwise trade is offering or advertising passenger service between a port in Puerto Rico and another port in the United States2S
Congress acted again with respect to the application of the PVSA with the 2003 Act in which it authorized three vessels that did not meet the US-build requirements of the PVSA to operate as modem US-flagged cruise ships in regular service in Hawaii26 The 2003 Act imposes a specific geographic limitation on the operation of any ship documented under this authority to operations only in regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands ofHawaii and shall not transport passengers in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico or the Caribbean Sea except in certain limited circumstances27 As above the limited nature of the 2003 Act is express it is strictly limited to the large ocean-going cruise ships and then only those operating in the regular Hawaii service where there are no US-flag operations28
21 See Act ofJune 19 1886 c 421 sec 8 24 Stat 81 Act of February 171898 c 26 sec 2 30 Stat 248 22 S] Res 174 75th Cong 52 Stat 223 (Alp 251938) codified at46 USC sect 55121(a) 23 See Pub L 87-77 75 Stat 196 (Jun 30 1961) codified at 46 USC sect 55121(b) 24 See Pub L 98-563 98 Stat 2916 (Oct 301984) codified at 46 USC sect 55104(b) 25 46 USC sect 55104(c)(l) see also 46 USC 46 USc sect 55104(cX2)(expiration of exemption upon availability ofa non-coastwise qualified US-flag vessel offering service in the relevant market) 26 149 Congo Rec SI118 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)(statementofSen Inouye) 27 Pub L 108-7 117 Stat 79 (Feb 20 2003) 28 149 Congo Rec S11l9 (dailyed Jan 17 2003Xstatement of Sen Inouye)
8
In each ofthese instances Congress fashioned a narrow exception to the PVSA that differentiated among distinct geographic markets based on the existence or nonshyexistence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
As the federal agency responsible for administering the 2003 Act MARAD requested that Customs act to protect US flag passenger vessel interests in the Hawaii trades29 Limiting the scope ofthe proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades also reflects Customs appreciation of the PVSA in the context of the subsequent Congressional action30 Viewing the Congressional modifications to the PVSA as a whole Congress has specifically and repeatedly differentiated among distinct geographic markets when it has found it necessary and appropriate to do so to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests It is well established that the proper interpretation of a statutory scheme includes consideration ofsubsequent statutes even though the underlying statute itselfhas not been expressly amended31 Accordingly Customs should likewise limit the scope ofthe proposed PVSA interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades because that is the only geographic market as mandated by the 2003 Act in which oceangoing US-flag cruise ships are operating
(b) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Consistent with Public Policy Objectives of the 1985 Rulemaking
In 1985middot Customs liberalized the regulations implementing the PVSA by eliminating certain regulatory prohibitions on foreign flag vessels In the context of the 1985 rulemaking Customs justified a relaxation ofthe regulations on the grounds that it would simplify the administration of the PVSA and would benefit the economy ofcertain American coastwise ports without eroding the statutory protection given to American vessels engaged in solely domestic trade32
Customs thus sought to reconcile US port economic interests with US-flag passenger vessel interests Both of these twin policy objectives are furthered by
29 See 72 Fed Reg 65488 (Nov 21 2007)( MARAn bas asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the ~eratiODS ofcoastwise-qualified cruise ship operators)
See generally FDA v Brown amp Williamson Tobacco Corp 529 US 120 132-133 (2000)(assessing propriety ofagency construction ofFood DIUg and Cosmetics Act and descnbing responsibility of reviewing cowt to assess statutory provisions in the context of subsequent legislative enactments) 31 See Brown amp Williamson 529 US 143 (holding that proper construction ofstatutory provision must necessarily assume that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications ofa later statute This is particularly so where the scope of the earlier statute is broad but the subsequent statutes more specifically address the topic athand) see also United States v Estate ofRomani 523 US 517 530-531 (1998)( holding that a later-enacted statute should control the construction of the federal lien priority statute a specific policy embodied in a later federal statute should control om construction of the [earlier] statute even though it ha[s] not been expressly amended) United States v Fausto 484 US 439453 (1988)(The courts frequently find Congress to have done this - whenever in fact they interpret a statutory text in the light ofsurrounding texts that happen to have been subsequently enacted This classic judicial task of reconciling many laws enacted over time and getting them to make sense in combination necessarily assumes that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications of a later statute) 32 50 Fed Reg 26982 (JuI 11985)
9
limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades
As noted earlier the 2003 Act limits the operation of the NCLA US-flag oceangoing passenger vessels to regular service in Hawaii Because there are no oceangoing US-flag vessels operating in any market other than the Hawaii trades Customs should limit the scope of the proposed interPretation to that market Such a limitation protects US flag passenger vessel interests without prejudicing US port interests In contrast an application of the proposed interpretation to any itinerary would needlessly harm US port interests unrelated to Hawaii without any countervailing benefit to US-flag passenger vessel interests Accordingly limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation is consistent with the public policy objectives of the 1985 rulemaking as well as the 2003 Act
(c) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Also Consistent with Customs Commitment to Revisit the Scope of its Rules to Protect US-Flag Interests
The relaxation ofthe PVSA regulations in 1985 was premised in large part on Customs finding that there was no regular salt water US-flag passenger fleet in operation at that time33 Acknowledging that the relaxed regulations could harm USshyflag interests Customs committed in the preamble ofthe 1985 final rule to immediately reconsider its interpretation if it is ever shown that there is a viable US flag vessel operating in competition with foreign-flag vessels34
Congress enacted the 2003 Act to stimulate the development of a US flag cruise ship industry As noted above the legislative history ofthat Act makes clear that Congress sought to revitalize the US-flag cruise industry as a means to maintain Americas preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool ofqualified seafarers help sustain a fleet of US flag vessels to support our military and a maritime industrial base create thousands of seagoing and shoreside American jobs and stimulate the development ofa US flag cruise ship tourism business with the commensurate benefits to the US tax base the US economy and US employment
Customs is now acting at MARADs request to revisit its interpretation ofthe regulations implementing the PVSA because recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwise-qualified cruise ship operations35 That is to say that the concerns articulated by Customs in the context of the 1985 rulemaking have materialized and US-flag passenger vessel interests are in fact being hanned in the Hawaii trades by foreign competitors
33 50 Fed Reg 26983 34Id
3S 72 Fed Reg 56488 (Nov 21 2007)
I
10
Because the US-flag passenger vessels are limited by statute to regular service in Hawaii limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the
Hawaii trades is consistent with Customs historical commitment to revisit its interpretation ofthe implementing regulations to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests
7 Conclusion
For the reasons stated above NCLA commends the efforts ofCustoms and MARAn to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act as applied to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA respectfully requests Customs to move ahead promptly with p~blicati~nof a final interpretive rule to advance the important national security arid public policy objectives ofthese laws
We greatly appreciate the opportunity to submit these comments
Sincerely
~~~ Alan T Yamamoto Vice President Hawaii Operations
Exhibit A
Ship Name Serenade Of The Seas Departure Port San Diego California Ports of Call San Diego California Kailua Kona Hawaii Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii Hlo Hawaii Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii Ensenada Mexico San Qigo California
2007 Date(s) Oct 05
Sailing Itinerary
Day Port H ~rrive Depart Activity
05-0ct San Diego California 500 PM
06-0ct Cruising
07-0ct Cruising
08-0ct Cruising
09-0ct Cruising
10-0ct Kailua Kona Hawaii 700 AM 900 PM Tendered
11-00t Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 1000 AM Tendered
12middot0ct Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 900 PM Tendered
13-0ct Hilo Hawaii 700 AM 600 PM Docked
14middot0ct Honoulu (Oahu) Hawaii 700 AM Docked
15-0ct Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii 200 AM Docked
6-0ct CrUising
17-0ct Cruising
18-0ct Cruising
19middot0ct Cruising
-7 20-00t
O-Oot
Ensenada ~i1exico
San Deqo California
i 00 ~r1
700 ~M
200 oM D1Jcked ~
3
documentation laws the PVSA also enhances military sealift in times ofnational emergency sustains a US merchant marine and supports the US shipbuilding and repair industry4
(b) Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative (the 2003 Act)
Over the past decade Congress has sought to reinforce the goals of the PVSA by providing mechanisms to revitalize the oceangoing US flag cruise fleet particularly in Hawaii The Project America legislation enacted in 1997 authorized among other things the re~flagging ofone existing cruise ship contingent on the operator contracting for the construction oftwo new oceangoing cruise shipss Following the default of the operator under the original contract Congress enacted the 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative for the purpose ofrecovering economic and national security benefits to the United States bull 6 These same goals of the original PVSA were expressly referenced in the legislative history of the 2003 Act which emphasized that these ships will be assets available in time ofnational emergency and will significantly expand the pool ofqualified seafarers upon which the US Department ofDefense relies to crew non-combatant vessels
The 2003 Act authorizes the US documentation ofthree cruise ships for operation in regular service in Hawaii subject to certain conditions including a prohibition on operating in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico and the Caribbean Sea and a requirement that all vessel repair work be undertaken in the United States MARAD is charged with implementation of the 2003 Act
3 Customs Implementation of PVSA
(a) Regulations
The current regulations implementing the PVSA were published by Customs in 19858 The growth of the foreign flag cruise industry in North America and in particular the development of the Alaska cruise market led to an effort in 1984 to amend the thenshyexisting regulations to increase the ease of administration and operational flexibility The effort to change the regulation had support from US port interests who saw benefit in the potential increase in the number ofUS ports that foreign vessels could call and was opposed by proponents ofpotential US flag projects as detrimental to efforts to revitalize the US fleet 9 The preamble to the 1985 rule emphasized that it was of paramount importance to consider the primary object ofpassengers in taking a
4 See American Hawaii Cruises v Skinner 713 F Supp 452 457 (DDC 1989) (recognizing the contribution of the PVSA and the Jones Act in helping to secure national defense by maintaining a merchant marine oftbe best equipped and most suitable types ofvessels sufficient to serve in time of war or national emergency) see also Autolog Corp v Regan 731 F2d 25 30 (DC Cir 1984) Wirth Ltd v SIS Acadia Forest 537 F2d 1272 1281 n32 (5th Cir 1976) S Public Law 105-56 Section 8109 (111 Stat 1203 1244) (Oct 81997 ) 6 Public Law 108-7 Division B Title II General Provisions - Department ofCommerce Section 211 (117 Stat 1179) (Feb 20 2003) 1 149 Cong Rec S1118 (dailyed Jan 17 2003(statement ofSenator Inouye) 8 19 CFR sect 480a 950 Fed Reg 26981 (July I 1985)
4
voyage10 a concept which is reinforced elsewhere in Customs regulations11 In its analysis of the comments received at the time Customs accepted the view ofport interests that the modified rule would help their business but did so recognizing the absence ofa regular salt water US flag passenger fleet Customs acknowledged the potential harm to prospective efforts to revitalize the US flag passenger fleet and expressly cautioned that if it were ever shown that coastwise qualified vessels in competition with foreign vessels were in fact hurt by the modified Customs regulation then Customs would immediately reconsider its position12
(b) Customs Rulings
Given the significant penalties associated with violating the PVSA13 Customs regulations expressly provide a mechanism for the owner or charterer of a foreign vessel or any other interested person to request an advisory ruling as to whether a contemplated voyage would be considered in violation of the PVSA14 Customs regulations provide that vessel operators can rely on these ruling letters only to the extent that the facts and circumstances are identical to those in the ruling letter IS
Notwithstanding the fact that several foreign cruise lines offer Hawaii itineraries originating in a US mainland port and calling at Hawaii ports with a token intervening stop in Mexico there are no reported rulings expressly approving such an itinerary for these foreign cruise lines 16
4 The Cruise Industry in Hawaii
(a) NCL America Returns US flag to the Oceangoing Passenger Fleet
Pursuant to the requirements ofthe 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative NCLA agreed to promote US-flag cruising enhance military sealift capacity and expand the US maritime labor base No other major cruise line had ever undertaken such a commitment to the US flag and the public policy objectives Congress sought to achieve under the PVSA or the 2003 Act Introduction ofPRIDE OF ALOHA in 2004 was a significant development in the maritime industry because it marked the restoration ofthe
10 Id at 26983 11 Customs Regulations include a provision on the effect ofruling letters and with respect to carrier rulings the applicable regulation refers to rulings setting forth a determination as to whether or not the primary object of a contemplated voyage is coastwise transportation in violation of46 USC sect 289 [pYSA codified at 46 USC sect55103] 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 12 50 Fed Reg at 26983 13 A modem cruise ship with 2400 passengers for example would be subject to a fine of$720OOO per cruise based on the statutory penalty of$300 for each passenger transported in violation of the Act 14 19 CFR sect 480a(d) IS 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 16 There is one older reported mling involving a request to drop the Ensenada port call from a Los AngeleslHawaiiLos Angeles itinerary which Customs held would violate the PYSA In dicta Customs acknowledged that the itinerary could be in compliance if the Ensenada call were not dropped but did not address the issue ofwhether a one hour service call where no passengers depart the vessel would be sufficient The carrier that obtained that ruling has since left the Hawaii market See Customs Ruling HQ 114078 re Crystal Hannony (Nov 4 1997)
5
us flag to the oceangoing cruise industry A contemporaneous press release from the Us Department ofTransportation reported that the three US-flag cruise ships to be introduced pursuant to the 2003 Act were expected to create more than 20000 US jobs generate more than $825 million ofexpenditures in the US economy and create nearly $360 million in federal tax revenue by the end of 200717 In 2005 the PRIDE OF AMERICA was introduced and in 2006 the third vessel PRIDE OF HAWAll was introduced to Hawaii Both the PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAIl offer 7shyday inter-island Hawaii itineraries whereas PRIDE OF ALOHA operates on 7 and 10 day cruises exclusively among the islands ofHawaii as well as 11 day cruises that include a foreign port call at Fanning Island To date NCLA has invested over $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships in furtherance ofthe policy objectives of the PVSA and the 2003 Act These ships employ over 4000 seafarers and generate hundreds ofmillions of dollars in benefits for Hawaii and the nation
(b) Significant Increase in Foreign Flag Capacity Since 2003
The most significant change in the Hawaii cruise market since 2003 has been the dramatic increase in capacity A significant portion ofthis capacity increase is directly attributable to NCLAs fulfillment ofthe Congressional mandate in the 2003 Act However foreign-flag operations in the Hawaii market as measured in passenger nights18 have skyrocketed Based on MARAn data derived from the US Customs Border Patrol Vessel Entrance and Clearance documents the passenger nights for foreign flag vessels departing from the West Coast to Hawaii on round trip cruise have increased several hundredfold during this period19 See Exhibit A
(c) NCLA Has Incurred Substantial Losses During this Period
Since 2004 NCLA has lost cumulatively more than a quarter ofa billion dollars A principal reason for these losses has been the increase in foreign capacity in this market NCLA has taken significant steps to reduce costs to address the increase in foreign competition but NCLA is at an inherent disadvantage when competing against foreign companies that are not subject to US labor laws US tax laws and other laws Ofcourse the statutory protections of the PVSA are intended to address these very issues That is why Customs immediate action to implement the proposed interpretation is critical for the US flag fleet Regrettably NCLA has already been forced to reduce overall capacity early next year with the withdrawal ofPRIDE OF HAWAlI to another
17 DOT Press Release dated June 72004 see also DOT Press Release dated August 132004 in connection with visit to PRIDE OF ALOHA by US Transportation Secretary Norman Y Mineta 11 Passenger nights (also referred to as passenger capacity days) are calculated by multiplying the number ofpassengers per vessel by the number ofcruise days in each itinerary by the number of cruises This is the unit ofmeasurement employed by MARAn In contrast passenger bed supply (also referred to as passenger capacity) data reflects only the number ofberths per vessel multiplied by the number of cruises and hence understates the market by excluding the full economic value ofthe cruise perfonned 19 In 2003 the total number ofpassenger nights for round-trip West Coast to Hawaii cruises was 303325 which jumped by 353 to 1072329 in 2006 and by 430 to 1304546 from 2003 to 2007 (The 2007 figure is based on MARAD data for six months and a1ll1ualized by published itineraries for the balance of the year)
6
market for operation under foreign flag This move alone will result in the loss ofover 1000 American seafaring jobs
5 Customs Proposed Interpretation is Necessary to Further the Important National Security and Public Policy Objectives Embodied in Federal Law
As Customs has properly noted the increase in foreign competition in the Hawaii trades in contravention of the PVSA pose[s] an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels[] As the operator of these ships NCLA has a vested interest in protecting the jobs ofthe thousands ofAmerican crewmembers and cruise ship service providers who support these vessels NCLA also has an interest in protecting the substantial economic investment it has made to revitalize the US flag passenger vessel fleet But a balancing of interests in the context of Customs enforcement ofexisting law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act requires a much broader focus
The legislative history of the 2003 Act expressly recognized the national security and public policy import ofestablishing a US flag passenger vessel fleet as a means to maintain the countrys preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool of qualified seafarers and as a means to help sustain a fleet ofUS-flag vessels to su~ort
the nations military and maritime industrial base for times ofnational emergency
Congress understood the importance ofestablishing a viable US flag cruise ship fleet as something larger than the vessels themselves These national security and public policy objectives must be weighed in the balance as Customs assesses how best to interpret its rules to give effect to the PVSA and the 2003 Act
6 Customs Should Clarify that the Proposed Interpretation is Limited to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades and Adopt Reasonable Measures to Ensure Sufficient Foreign Content
Since publication ofthe proposed interpretative rule several commenters have observed that the scope of the proposed interpretation is ambiguous because the language of Section VI referencing any cruise itinerary appears broader than the caption Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises and the entire discussion in the published notice which focuses exclusively on US-flag coastwise vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA agrees that the proposed interpretation should be clarified so that its scope is limited to vessels operating roundtrip voyages from US ports that include Hawaii port calls
NCLA supports the concept reflected in the proposed interpretive rule that round trip Hawaii itineraries from US ports on foreign ships must include a material and measurable degree ofoverall foreign port content as compared to US port content
20 149 Congo Rec S1117 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)
7
(a) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is also Consistent with Subsequent Congressional Enactments Modifying the PVSA
As discussed above it is well established that the PVSA was designed toRrotect US-flag vessels from foreign competition in the coastwise and domestic trades 1
Subsequent legislative enactments however have appropriately differentiated among distinct geographic markets and trades including Canada Alaska Puerto Rico and Hawaii based on the existence or non-existence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
In 1938 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers by Canadian passenger vessels on Lake Ontario and the St Lawrence River until such time as passenger service shall be established by vessels of the United States22 Similarly in 1961 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers on Canadian vessels within Alaska or between Alaska and other points in the United States until such time as passenger service is established by vessels ofthe United States23
In 1984 Congress modified the application ofthe PVSA to pennit the transportation ofpassengers between Puerto Rico and other United States ports on foreign-flag vessels24 As with the other statutory exceptions this provision is qualified and expires [o]n a showing that a United States passenger vessel qualified to engage in the coastwise trade is offering or advertising passenger service between a port in Puerto Rico and another port in the United States2S
Congress acted again with respect to the application of the PVSA with the 2003 Act in which it authorized three vessels that did not meet the US-build requirements of the PVSA to operate as modem US-flagged cruise ships in regular service in Hawaii26 The 2003 Act imposes a specific geographic limitation on the operation of any ship documented under this authority to operations only in regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands ofHawaii and shall not transport passengers in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico or the Caribbean Sea except in certain limited circumstances27 As above the limited nature of the 2003 Act is express it is strictly limited to the large ocean-going cruise ships and then only those operating in the regular Hawaii service where there are no US-flag operations28
21 See Act ofJune 19 1886 c 421 sec 8 24 Stat 81 Act of February 171898 c 26 sec 2 30 Stat 248 22 S] Res 174 75th Cong 52 Stat 223 (Alp 251938) codified at46 USC sect 55121(a) 23 See Pub L 87-77 75 Stat 196 (Jun 30 1961) codified at 46 USC sect 55121(b) 24 See Pub L 98-563 98 Stat 2916 (Oct 301984) codified at 46 USC sect 55104(b) 25 46 USC sect 55104(c)(l) see also 46 USC 46 USc sect 55104(cX2)(expiration of exemption upon availability ofa non-coastwise qualified US-flag vessel offering service in the relevant market) 26 149 Congo Rec SI118 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)(statementofSen Inouye) 27 Pub L 108-7 117 Stat 79 (Feb 20 2003) 28 149 Congo Rec S11l9 (dailyed Jan 17 2003Xstatement of Sen Inouye)
8
In each ofthese instances Congress fashioned a narrow exception to the PVSA that differentiated among distinct geographic markets based on the existence or nonshyexistence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
As the federal agency responsible for administering the 2003 Act MARAD requested that Customs act to protect US flag passenger vessel interests in the Hawaii trades29 Limiting the scope ofthe proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades also reflects Customs appreciation of the PVSA in the context of the subsequent Congressional action30 Viewing the Congressional modifications to the PVSA as a whole Congress has specifically and repeatedly differentiated among distinct geographic markets when it has found it necessary and appropriate to do so to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests It is well established that the proper interpretation of a statutory scheme includes consideration ofsubsequent statutes even though the underlying statute itselfhas not been expressly amended31 Accordingly Customs should likewise limit the scope ofthe proposed PVSA interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades because that is the only geographic market as mandated by the 2003 Act in which oceangoing US-flag cruise ships are operating
(b) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Consistent with Public Policy Objectives of the 1985 Rulemaking
In 1985middot Customs liberalized the regulations implementing the PVSA by eliminating certain regulatory prohibitions on foreign flag vessels In the context of the 1985 rulemaking Customs justified a relaxation ofthe regulations on the grounds that it would simplify the administration of the PVSA and would benefit the economy ofcertain American coastwise ports without eroding the statutory protection given to American vessels engaged in solely domestic trade32
Customs thus sought to reconcile US port economic interests with US-flag passenger vessel interests Both of these twin policy objectives are furthered by
29 See 72 Fed Reg 65488 (Nov 21 2007)( MARAn bas asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the ~eratiODS ofcoastwise-qualified cruise ship operators)
See generally FDA v Brown amp Williamson Tobacco Corp 529 US 120 132-133 (2000)(assessing propriety ofagency construction ofFood DIUg and Cosmetics Act and descnbing responsibility of reviewing cowt to assess statutory provisions in the context of subsequent legislative enactments) 31 See Brown amp Williamson 529 US 143 (holding that proper construction ofstatutory provision must necessarily assume that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications ofa later statute This is particularly so where the scope of the earlier statute is broad but the subsequent statutes more specifically address the topic athand) see also United States v Estate ofRomani 523 US 517 530-531 (1998)( holding that a later-enacted statute should control the construction of the federal lien priority statute a specific policy embodied in a later federal statute should control om construction of the [earlier] statute even though it ha[s] not been expressly amended) United States v Fausto 484 US 439453 (1988)(The courts frequently find Congress to have done this - whenever in fact they interpret a statutory text in the light ofsurrounding texts that happen to have been subsequently enacted This classic judicial task of reconciling many laws enacted over time and getting them to make sense in combination necessarily assumes that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications of a later statute) 32 50 Fed Reg 26982 (JuI 11985)
9
limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades
As noted earlier the 2003 Act limits the operation of the NCLA US-flag oceangoing passenger vessels to regular service in Hawaii Because there are no oceangoing US-flag vessels operating in any market other than the Hawaii trades Customs should limit the scope of the proposed interPretation to that market Such a limitation protects US flag passenger vessel interests without prejudicing US port interests In contrast an application of the proposed interpretation to any itinerary would needlessly harm US port interests unrelated to Hawaii without any countervailing benefit to US-flag passenger vessel interests Accordingly limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation is consistent with the public policy objectives of the 1985 rulemaking as well as the 2003 Act
(c) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Also Consistent with Customs Commitment to Revisit the Scope of its Rules to Protect US-Flag Interests
The relaxation ofthe PVSA regulations in 1985 was premised in large part on Customs finding that there was no regular salt water US-flag passenger fleet in operation at that time33 Acknowledging that the relaxed regulations could harm USshyflag interests Customs committed in the preamble ofthe 1985 final rule to immediately reconsider its interpretation if it is ever shown that there is a viable US flag vessel operating in competition with foreign-flag vessels34
Congress enacted the 2003 Act to stimulate the development of a US flag cruise ship industry As noted above the legislative history ofthat Act makes clear that Congress sought to revitalize the US-flag cruise industry as a means to maintain Americas preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool ofqualified seafarers help sustain a fleet of US flag vessels to support our military and a maritime industrial base create thousands of seagoing and shoreside American jobs and stimulate the development ofa US flag cruise ship tourism business with the commensurate benefits to the US tax base the US economy and US employment
Customs is now acting at MARADs request to revisit its interpretation ofthe regulations implementing the PVSA because recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwise-qualified cruise ship operations35 That is to say that the concerns articulated by Customs in the context of the 1985 rulemaking have materialized and US-flag passenger vessel interests are in fact being hanned in the Hawaii trades by foreign competitors
33 50 Fed Reg 26983 34Id
3S 72 Fed Reg 56488 (Nov 21 2007)
I
10
Because the US-flag passenger vessels are limited by statute to regular service in Hawaii limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the
Hawaii trades is consistent with Customs historical commitment to revisit its interpretation ofthe implementing regulations to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests
7 Conclusion
For the reasons stated above NCLA commends the efforts ofCustoms and MARAn to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act as applied to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA respectfully requests Customs to move ahead promptly with p~blicati~nof a final interpretive rule to advance the important national security arid public policy objectives ofthese laws
We greatly appreciate the opportunity to submit these comments
Sincerely
~~~ Alan T Yamamoto Vice President Hawaii Operations
Exhibit A
Ship Name Serenade Of The Seas Departure Port San Diego California Ports of Call San Diego California Kailua Kona Hawaii Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii Hlo Hawaii Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii Ensenada Mexico San Qigo California
2007 Date(s) Oct 05
Sailing Itinerary
Day Port H ~rrive Depart Activity
05-0ct San Diego California 500 PM
06-0ct Cruising
07-0ct Cruising
08-0ct Cruising
09-0ct Cruising
10-0ct Kailua Kona Hawaii 700 AM 900 PM Tendered
11-00t Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 1000 AM Tendered
12middot0ct Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 900 PM Tendered
13-0ct Hilo Hawaii 700 AM 600 PM Docked
14middot0ct Honoulu (Oahu) Hawaii 700 AM Docked
15-0ct Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii 200 AM Docked
6-0ct CrUising
17-0ct Cruising
18-0ct Cruising
19middot0ct Cruising
-7 20-00t
O-Oot
Ensenada ~i1exico
San Deqo California
i 00 ~r1
700 ~M
200 oM D1Jcked ~
4
voyage10 a concept which is reinforced elsewhere in Customs regulations11 In its analysis of the comments received at the time Customs accepted the view ofport interests that the modified rule would help their business but did so recognizing the absence ofa regular salt water US flag passenger fleet Customs acknowledged the potential harm to prospective efforts to revitalize the US flag passenger fleet and expressly cautioned that if it were ever shown that coastwise qualified vessels in competition with foreign vessels were in fact hurt by the modified Customs regulation then Customs would immediately reconsider its position12
(b) Customs Rulings
Given the significant penalties associated with violating the PVSA13 Customs regulations expressly provide a mechanism for the owner or charterer of a foreign vessel or any other interested person to request an advisory ruling as to whether a contemplated voyage would be considered in violation of the PVSA14 Customs regulations provide that vessel operators can rely on these ruling letters only to the extent that the facts and circumstances are identical to those in the ruling letter IS
Notwithstanding the fact that several foreign cruise lines offer Hawaii itineraries originating in a US mainland port and calling at Hawaii ports with a token intervening stop in Mexico there are no reported rulings expressly approving such an itinerary for these foreign cruise lines 16
4 The Cruise Industry in Hawaii
(a) NCL America Returns US flag to the Oceangoing Passenger Fleet
Pursuant to the requirements ofthe 2003 Hawaii Cruise Ship Initiative NCLA agreed to promote US-flag cruising enhance military sealift capacity and expand the US maritime labor base No other major cruise line had ever undertaken such a commitment to the US flag and the public policy objectives Congress sought to achieve under the PVSA or the 2003 Act Introduction ofPRIDE OF ALOHA in 2004 was a significant development in the maritime industry because it marked the restoration ofthe
10 Id at 26983 11 Customs Regulations include a provision on the effect ofruling letters and with respect to carrier rulings the applicable regulation refers to rulings setting forth a determination as to whether or not the primary object of a contemplated voyage is coastwise transportation in violation of46 USC sect 289 [pYSA codified at 46 USC sect55103] 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 12 50 Fed Reg at 26983 13 A modem cruise ship with 2400 passengers for example would be subject to a fine of$720OOO per cruise based on the statutory penalty of$300 for each passenger transported in violation of the Act 14 19 CFR sect 480a(d) IS 19 CFR sect In9(b)(4) 16 There is one older reported mling involving a request to drop the Ensenada port call from a Los AngeleslHawaiiLos Angeles itinerary which Customs held would violate the PYSA In dicta Customs acknowledged that the itinerary could be in compliance if the Ensenada call were not dropped but did not address the issue ofwhether a one hour service call where no passengers depart the vessel would be sufficient The carrier that obtained that ruling has since left the Hawaii market See Customs Ruling HQ 114078 re Crystal Hannony (Nov 4 1997)
5
us flag to the oceangoing cruise industry A contemporaneous press release from the Us Department ofTransportation reported that the three US-flag cruise ships to be introduced pursuant to the 2003 Act were expected to create more than 20000 US jobs generate more than $825 million ofexpenditures in the US economy and create nearly $360 million in federal tax revenue by the end of 200717 In 2005 the PRIDE OF AMERICA was introduced and in 2006 the third vessel PRIDE OF HAWAll was introduced to Hawaii Both the PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAIl offer 7shyday inter-island Hawaii itineraries whereas PRIDE OF ALOHA operates on 7 and 10 day cruises exclusively among the islands ofHawaii as well as 11 day cruises that include a foreign port call at Fanning Island To date NCLA has invested over $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships in furtherance ofthe policy objectives of the PVSA and the 2003 Act These ships employ over 4000 seafarers and generate hundreds ofmillions of dollars in benefits for Hawaii and the nation
(b) Significant Increase in Foreign Flag Capacity Since 2003
The most significant change in the Hawaii cruise market since 2003 has been the dramatic increase in capacity A significant portion ofthis capacity increase is directly attributable to NCLAs fulfillment ofthe Congressional mandate in the 2003 Act However foreign-flag operations in the Hawaii market as measured in passenger nights18 have skyrocketed Based on MARAn data derived from the US Customs Border Patrol Vessel Entrance and Clearance documents the passenger nights for foreign flag vessels departing from the West Coast to Hawaii on round trip cruise have increased several hundredfold during this period19 See Exhibit A
(c) NCLA Has Incurred Substantial Losses During this Period
Since 2004 NCLA has lost cumulatively more than a quarter ofa billion dollars A principal reason for these losses has been the increase in foreign capacity in this market NCLA has taken significant steps to reduce costs to address the increase in foreign competition but NCLA is at an inherent disadvantage when competing against foreign companies that are not subject to US labor laws US tax laws and other laws Ofcourse the statutory protections of the PVSA are intended to address these very issues That is why Customs immediate action to implement the proposed interpretation is critical for the US flag fleet Regrettably NCLA has already been forced to reduce overall capacity early next year with the withdrawal ofPRIDE OF HAWAlI to another
17 DOT Press Release dated June 72004 see also DOT Press Release dated August 132004 in connection with visit to PRIDE OF ALOHA by US Transportation Secretary Norman Y Mineta 11 Passenger nights (also referred to as passenger capacity days) are calculated by multiplying the number ofpassengers per vessel by the number ofcruise days in each itinerary by the number of cruises This is the unit ofmeasurement employed by MARAn In contrast passenger bed supply (also referred to as passenger capacity) data reflects only the number ofberths per vessel multiplied by the number of cruises and hence understates the market by excluding the full economic value ofthe cruise perfonned 19 In 2003 the total number ofpassenger nights for round-trip West Coast to Hawaii cruises was 303325 which jumped by 353 to 1072329 in 2006 and by 430 to 1304546 from 2003 to 2007 (The 2007 figure is based on MARAD data for six months and a1ll1ualized by published itineraries for the balance of the year)
6
market for operation under foreign flag This move alone will result in the loss ofover 1000 American seafaring jobs
5 Customs Proposed Interpretation is Necessary to Further the Important National Security and Public Policy Objectives Embodied in Federal Law
As Customs has properly noted the increase in foreign competition in the Hawaii trades in contravention of the PVSA pose[s] an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels[] As the operator of these ships NCLA has a vested interest in protecting the jobs ofthe thousands ofAmerican crewmembers and cruise ship service providers who support these vessels NCLA also has an interest in protecting the substantial economic investment it has made to revitalize the US flag passenger vessel fleet But a balancing of interests in the context of Customs enforcement ofexisting law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act requires a much broader focus
The legislative history of the 2003 Act expressly recognized the national security and public policy import ofestablishing a US flag passenger vessel fleet as a means to maintain the countrys preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool of qualified seafarers and as a means to help sustain a fleet ofUS-flag vessels to su~ort
the nations military and maritime industrial base for times ofnational emergency
Congress understood the importance ofestablishing a viable US flag cruise ship fleet as something larger than the vessels themselves These national security and public policy objectives must be weighed in the balance as Customs assesses how best to interpret its rules to give effect to the PVSA and the 2003 Act
6 Customs Should Clarify that the Proposed Interpretation is Limited to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades and Adopt Reasonable Measures to Ensure Sufficient Foreign Content
Since publication ofthe proposed interpretative rule several commenters have observed that the scope of the proposed interpretation is ambiguous because the language of Section VI referencing any cruise itinerary appears broader than the caption Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises and the entire discussion in the published notice which focuses exclusively on US-flag coastwise vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA agrees that the proposed interpretation should be clarified so that its scope is limited to vessels operating roundtrip voyages from US ports that include Hawaii port calls
NCLA supports the concept reflected in the proposed interpretive rule that round trip Hawaii itineraries from US ports on foreign ships must include a material and measurable degree ofoverall foreign port content as compared to US port content
20 149 Congo Rec S1117 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)
7
(a) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is also Consistent with Subsequent Congressional Enactments Modifying the PVSA
As discussed above it is well established that the PVSA was designed toRrotect US-flag vessels from foreign competition in the coastwise and domestic trades 1
Subsequent legislative enactments however have appropriately differentiated among distinct geographic markets and trades including Canada Alaska Puerto Rico and Hawaii based on the existence or non-existence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
In 1938 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers by Canadian passenger vessels on Lake Ontario and the St Lawrence River until such time as passenger service shall be established by vessels of the United States22 Similarly in 1961 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers on Canadian vessels within Alaska or between Alaska and other points in the United States until such time as passenger service is established by vessels ofthe United States23
In 1984 Congress modified the application ofthe PVSA to pennit the transportation ofpassengers between Puerto Rico and other United States ports on foreign-flag vessels24 As with the other statutory exceptions this provision is qualified and expires [o]n a showing that a United States passenger vessel qualified to engage in the coastwise trade is offering or advertising passenger service between a port in Puerto Rico and another port in the United States2S
Congress acted again with respect to the application of the PVSA with the 2003 Act in which it authorized three vessels that did not meet the US-build requirements of the PVSA to operate as modem US-flagged cruise ships in regular service in Hawaii26 The 2003 Act imposes a specific geographic limitation on the operation of any ship documented under this authority to operations only in regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands ofHawaii and shall not transport passengers in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico or the Caribbean Sea except in certain limited circumstances27 As above the limited nature of the 2003 Act is express it is strictly limited to the large ocean-going cruise ships and then only those operating in the regular Hawaii service where there are no US-flag operations28
21 See Act ofJune 19 1886 c 421 sec 8 24 Stat 81 Act of February 171898 c 26 sec 2 30 Stat 248 22 S] Res 174 75th Cong 52 Stat 223 (Alp 251938) codified at46 USC sect 55121(a) 23 See Pub L 87-77 75 Stat 196 (Jun 30 1961) codified at 46 USC sect 55121(b) 24 See Pub L 98-563 98 Stat 2916 (Oct 301984) codified at 46 USC sect 55104(b) 25 46 USC sect 55104(c)(l) see also 46 USC 46 USc sect 55104(cX2)(expiration of exemption upon availability ofa non-coastwise qualified US-flag vessel offering service in the relevant market) 26 149 Congo Rec SI118 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)(statementofSen Inouye) 27 Pub L 108-7 117 Stat 79 (Feb 20 2003) 28 149 Congo Rec S11l9 (dailyed Jan 17 2003Xstatement of Sen Inouye)
8
In each ofthese instances Congress fashioned a narrow exception to the PVSA that differentiated among distinct geographic markets based on the existence or nonshyexistence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
As the federal agency responsible for administering the 2003 Act MARAD requested that Customs act to protect US flag passenger vessel interests in the Hawaii trades29 Limiting the scope ofthe proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades also reflects Customs appreciation of the PVSA in the context of the subsequent Congressional action30 Viewing the Congressional modifications to the PVSA as a whole Congress has specifically and repeatedly differentiated among distinct geographic markets when it has found it necessary and appropriate to do so to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests It is well established that the proper interpretation of a statutory scheme includes consideration ofsubsequent statutes even though the underlying statute itselfhas not been expressly amended31 Accordingly Customs should likewise limit the scope ofthe proposed PVSA interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades because that is the only geographic market as mandated by the 2003 Act in which oceangoing US-flag cruise ships are operating
(b) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Consistent with Public Policy Objectives of the 1985 Rulemaking
In 1985middot Customs liberalized the regulations implementing the PVSA by eliminating certain regulatory prohibitions on foreign flag vessels In the context of the 1985 rulemaking Customs justified a relaxation ofthe regulations on the grounds that it would simplify the administration of the PVSA and would benefit the economy ofcertain American coastwise ports without eroding the statutory protection given to American vessels engaged in solely domestic trade32
Customs thus sought to reconcile US port economic interests with US-flag passenger vessel interests Both of these twin policy objectives are furthered by
29 See 72 Fed Reg 65488 (Nov 21 2007)( MARAn bas asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the ~eratiODS ofcoastwise-qualified cruise ship operators)
See generally FDA v Brown amp Williamson Tobacco Corp 529 US 120 132-133 (2000)(assessing propriety ofagency construction ofFood DIUg and Cosmetics Act and descnbing responsibility of reviewing cowt to assess statutory provisions in the context of subsequent legislative enactments) 31 See Brown amp Williamson 529 US 143 (holding that proper construction ofstatutory provision must necessarily assume that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications ofa later statute This is particularly so where the scope of the earlier statute is broad but the subsequent statutes more specifically address the topic athand) see also United States v Estate ofRomani 523 US 517 530-531 (1998)( holding that a later-enacted statute should control the construction of the federal lien priority statute a specific policy embodied in a later federal statute should control om construction of the [earlier] statute even though it ha[s] not been expressly amended) United States v Fausto 484 US 439453 (1988)(The courts frequently find Congress to have done this - whenever in fact they interpret a statutory text in the light ofsurrounding texts that happen to have been subsequently enacted This classic judicial task of reconciling many laws enacted over time and getting them to make sense in combination necessarily assumes that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications of a later statute) 32 50 Fed Reg 26982 (JuI 11985)
9
limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades
As noted earlier the 2003 Act limits the operation of the NCLA US-flag oceangoing passenger vessels to regular service in Hawaii Because there are no oceangoing US-flag vessels operating in any market other than the Hawaii trades Customs should limit the scope of the proposed interPretation to that market Such a limitation protects US flag passenger vessel interests without prejudicing US port interests In contrast an application of the proposed interpretation to any itinerary would needlessly harm US port interests unrelated to Hawaii without any countervailing benefit to US-flag passenger vessel interests Accordingly limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation is consistent with the public policy objectives of the 1985 rulemaking as well as the 2003 Act
(c) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Also Consistent with Customs Commitment to Revisit the Scope of its Rules to Protect US-Flag Interests
The relaxation ofthe PVSA regulations in 1985 was premised in large part on Customs finding that there was no regular salt water US-flag passenger fleet in operation at that time33 Acknowledging that the relaxed regulations could harm USshyflag interests Customs committed in the preamble ofthe 1985 final rule to immediately reconsider its interpretation if it is ever shown that there is a viable US flag vessel operating in competition with foreign-flag vessels34
Congress enacted the 2003 Act to stimulate the development of a US flag cruise ship industry As noted above the legislative history ofthat Act makes clear that Congress sought to revitalize the US-flag cruise industry as a means to maintain Americas preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool ofqualified seafarers help sustain a fleet of US flag vessels to support our military and a maritime industrial base create thousands of seagoing and shoreside American jobs and stimulate the development ofa US flag cruise ship tourism business with the commensurate benefits to the US tax base the US economy and US employment
Customs is now acting at MARADs request to revisit its interpretation ofthe regulations implementing the PVSA because recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwise-qualified cruise ship operations35 That is to say that the concerns articulated by Customs in the context of the 1985 rulemaking have materialized and US-flag passenger vessel interests are in fact being hanned in the Hawaii trades by foreign competitors
33 50 Fed Reg 26983 34Id
3S 72 Fed Reg 56488 (Nov 21 2007)
I
10
Because the US-flag passenger vessels are limited by statute to regular service in Hawaii limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the
Hawaii trades is consistent with Customs historical commitment to revisit its interpretation ofthe implementing regulations to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests
7 Conclusion
For the reasons stated above NCLA commends the efforts ofCustoms and MARAn to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act as applied to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA respectfully requests Customs to move ahead promptly with p~blicati~nof a final interpretive rule to advance the important national security arid public policy objectives ofthese laws
We greatly appreciate the opportunity to submit these comments
Sincerely
~~~ Alan T Yamamoto Vice President Hawaii Operations
Exhibit A
Ship Name Serenade Of The Seas Departure Port San Diego California Ports of Call San Diego California Kailua Kona Hawaii Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii Hlo Hawaii Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii Ensenada Mexico San Qigo California
2007 Date(s) Oct 05
Sailing Itinerary
Day Port H ~rrive Depart Activity
05-0ct San Diego California 500 PM
06-0ct Cruising
07-0ct Cruising
08-0ct Cruising
09-0ct Cruising
10-0ct Kailua Kona Hawaii 700 AM 900 PM Tendered
11-00t Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 1000 AM Tendered
12middot0ct Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 900 PM Tendered
13-0ct Hilo Hawaii 700 AM 600 PM Docked
14middot0ct Honoulu (Oahu) Hawaii 700 AM Docked
15-0ct Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii 200 AM Docked
6-0ct CrUising
17-0ct Cruising
18-0ct Cruising
19middot0ct Cruising
-7 20-00t
O-Oot
Ensenada ~i1exico
San Deqo California
i 00 ~r1
700 ~M
200 oM D1Jcked ~
5
us flag to the oceangoing cruise industry A contemporaneous press release from the Us Department ofTransportation reported that the three US-flag cruise ships to be introduced pursuant to the 2003 Act were expected to create more than 20000 US jobs generate more than $825 million ofexpenditures in the US economy and create nearly $360 million in federal tax revenue by the end of 200717 In 2005 the PRIDE OF AMERICA was introduced and in 2006 the third vessel PRIDE OF HAWAll was introduced to Hawaii Both the PRIDE OF AMERICA and PRIDE OF HAWAIl offer 7shyday inter-island Hawaii itineraries whereas PRIDE OF ALOHA operates on 7 and 10 day cruises exclusively among the islands ofHawaii as well as 11 day cruises that include a foreign port call at Fanning Island To date NCLA has invested over $13 billion in this fleet ofUS flag ships in furtherance ofthe policy objectives of the PVSA and the 2003 Act These ships employ over 4000 seafarers and generate hundreds ofmillions of dollars in benefits for Hawaii and the nation
(b) Significant Increase in Foreign Flag Capacity Since 2003
The most significant change in the Hawaii cruise market since 2003 has been the dramatic increase in capacity A significant portion ofthis capacity increase is directly attributable to NCLAs fulfillment ofthe Congressional mandate in the 2003 Act However foreign-flag operations in the Hawaii market as measured in passenger nights18 have skyrocketed Based on MARAn data derived from the US Customs Border Patrol Vessel Entrance and Clearance documents the passenger nights for foreign flag vessels departing from the West Coast to Hawaii on round trip cruise have increased several hundredfold during this period19 See Exhibit A
(c) NCLA Has Incurred Substantial Losses During this Period
Since 2004 NCLA has lost cumulatively more than a quarter ofa billion dollars A principal reason for these losses has been the increase in foreign capacity in this market NCLA has taken significant steps to reduce costs to address the increase in foreign competition but NCLA is at an inherent disadvantage when competing against foreign companies that are not subject to US labor laws US tax laws and other laws Ofcourse the statutory protections of the PVSA are intended to address these very issues That is why Customs immediate action to implement the proposed interpretation is critical for the US flag fleet Regrettably NCLA has already been forced to reduce overall capacity early next year with the withdrawal ofPRIDE OF HAWAlI to another
17 DOT Press Release dated June 72004 see also DOT Press Release dated August 132004 in connection with visit to PRIDE OF ALOHA by US Transportation Secretary Norman Y Mineta 11 Passenger nights (also referred to as passenger capacity days) are calculated by multiplying the number ofpassengers per vessel by the number ofcruise days in each itinerary by the number of cruises This is the unit ofmeasurement employed by MARAn In contrast passenger bed supply (also referred to as passenger capacity) data reflects only the number ofberths per vessel multiplied by the number of cruises and hence understates the market by excluding the full economic value ofthe cruise perfonned 19 In 2003 the total number ofpassenger nights for round-trip West Coast to Hawaii cruises was 303325 which jumped by 353 to 1072329 in 2006 and by 430 to 1304546 from 2003 to 2007 (The 2007 figure is based on MARAD data for six months and a1ll1ualized by published itineraries for the balance of the year)
6
market for operation under foreign flag This move alone will result in the loss ofover 1000 American seafaring jobs
5 Customs Proposed Interpretation is Necessary to Further the Important National Security and Public Policy Objectives Embodied in Federal Law
As Customs has properly noted the increase in foreign competition in the Hawaii trades in contravention of the PVSA pose[s] an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels[] As the operator of these ships NCLA has a vested interest in protecting the jobs ofthe thousands ofAmerican crewmembers and cruise ship service providers who support these vessels NCLA also has an interest in protecting the substantial economic investment it has made to revitalize the US flag passenger vessel fleet But a balancing of interests in the context of Customs enforcement ofexisting law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act requires a much broader focus
The legislative history of the 2003 Act expressly recognized the national security and public policy import ofestablishing a US flag passenger vessel fleet as a means to maintain the countrys preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool of qualified seafarers and as a means to help sustain a fleet ofUS-flag vessels to su~ort
the nations military and maritime industrial base for times ofnational emergency
Congress understood the importance ofestablishing a viable US flag cruise ship fleet as something larger than the vessels themselves These national security and public policy objectives must be weighed in the balance as Customs assesses how best to interpret its rules to give effect to the PVSA and the 2003 Act
6 Customs Should Clarify that the Proposed Interpretation is Limited to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades and Adopt Reasonable Measures to Ensure Sufficient Foreign Content
Since publication ofthe proposed interpretative rule several commenters have observed that the scope of the proposed interpretation is ambiguous because the language of Section VI referencing any cruise itinerary appears broader than the caption Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises and the entire discussion in the published notice which focuses exclusively on US-flag coastwise vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA agrees that the proposed interpretation should be clarified so that its scope is limited to vessels operating roundtrip voyages from US ports that include Hawaii port calls
NCLA supports the concept reflected in the proposed interpretive rule that round trip Hawaii itineraries from US ports on foreign ships must include a material and measurable degree ofoverall foreign port content as compared to US port content
20 149 Congo Rec S1117 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)
7
(a) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is also Consistent with Subsequent Congressional Enactments Modifying the PVSA
As discussed above it is well established that the PVSA was designed toRrotect US-flag vessels from foreign competition in the coastwise and domestic trades 1
Subsequent legislative enactments however have appropriately differentiated among distinct geographic markets and trades including Canada Alaska Puerto Rico and Hawaii based on the existence or non-existence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
In 1938 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers by Canadian passenger vessels on Lake Ontario and the St Lawrence River until such time as passenger service shall be established by vessels of the United States22 Similarly in 1961 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers on Canadian vessels within Alaska or between Alaska and other points in the United States until such time as passenger service is established by vessels ofthe United States23
In 1984 Congress modified the application ofthe PVSA to pennit the transportation ofpassengers between Puerto Rico and other United States ports on foreign-flag vessels24 As with the other statutory exceptions this provision is qualified and expires [o]n a showing that a United States passenger vessel qualified to engage in the coastwise trade is offering or advertising passenger service between a port in Puerto Rico and another port in the United States2S
Congress acted again with respect to the application of the PVSA with the 2003 Act in which it authorized three vessels that did not meet the US-build requirements of the PVSA to operate as modem US-flagged cruise ships in regular service in Hawaii26 The 2003 Act imposes a specific geographic limitation on the operation of any ship documented under this authority to operations only in regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands ofHawaii and shall not transport passengers in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico or the Caribbean Sea except in certain limited circumstances27 As above the limited nature of the 2003 Act is express it is strictly limited to the large ocean-going cruise ships and then only those operating in the regular Hawaii service where there are no US-flag operations28
21 See Act ofJune 19 1886 c 421 sec 8 24 Stat 81 Act of February 171898 c 26 sec 2 30 Stat 248 22 S] Res 174 75th Cong 52 Stat 223 (Alp 251938) codified at46 USC sect 55121(a) 23 See Pub L 87-77 75 Stat 196 (Jun 30 1961) codified at 46 USC sect 55121(b) 24 See Pub L 98-563 98 Stat 2916 (Oct 301984) codified at 46 USC sect 55104(b) 25 46 USC sect 55104(c)(l) see also 46 USC 46 USc sect 55104(cX2)(expiration of exemption upon availability ofa non-coastwise qualified US-flag vessel offering service in the relevant market) 26 149 Congo Rec SI118 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)(statementofSen Inouye) 27 Pub L 108-7 117 Stat 79 (Feb 20 2003) 28 149 Congo Rec S11l9 (dailyed Jan 17 2003Xstatement of Sen Inouye)
8
In each ofthese instances Congress fashioned a narrow exception to the PVSA that differentiated among distinct geographic markets based on the existence or nonshyexistence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
As the federal agency responsible for administering the 2003 Act MARAD requested that Customs act to protect US flag passenger vessel interests in the Hawaii trades29 Limiting the scope ofthe proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades also reflects Customs appreciation of the PVSA in the context of the subsequent Congressional action30 Viewing the Congressional modifications to the PVSA as a whole Congress has specifically and repeatedly differentiated among distinct geographic markets when it has found it necessary and appropriate to do so to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests It is well established that the proper interpretation of a statutory scheme includes consideration ofsubsequent statutes even though the underlying statute itselfhas not been expressly amended31 Accordingly Customs should likewise limit the scope ofthe proposed PVSA interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades because that is the only geographic market as mandated by the 2003 Act in which oceangoing US-flag cruise ships are operating
(b) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Consistent with Public Policy Objectives of the 1985 Rulemaking
In 1985middot Customs liberalized the regulations implementing the PVSA by eliminating certain regulatory prohibitions on foreign flag vessels In the context of the 1985 rulemaking Customs justified a relaxation ofthe regulations on the grounds that it would simplify the administration of the PVSA and would benefit the economy ofcertain American coastwise ports without eroding the statutory protection given to American vessels engaged in solely domestic trade32
Customs thus sought to reconcile US port economic interests with US-flag passenger vessel interests Both of these twin policy objectives are furthered by
29 See 72 Fed Reg 65488 (Nov 21 2007)( MARAn bas asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the ~eratiODS ofcoastwise-qualified cruise ship operators)
See generally FDA v Brown amp Williamson Tobacco Corp 529 US 120 132-133 (2000)(assessing propriety ofagency construction ofFood DIUg and Cosmetics Act and descnbing responsibility of reviewing cowt to assess statutory provisions in the context of subsequent legislative enactments) 31 See Brown amp Williamson 529 US 143 (holding that proper construction ofstatutory provision must necessarily assume that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications ofa later statute This is particularly so where the scope of the earlier statute is broad but the subsequent statutes more specifically address the topic athand) see also United States v Estate ofRomani 523 US 517 530-531 (1998)( holding that a later-enacted statute should control the construction of the federal lien priority statute a specific policy embodied in a later federal statute should control om construction of the [earlier] statute even though it ha[s] not been expressly amended) United States v Fausto 484 US 439453 (1988)(The courts frequently find Congress to have done this - whenever in fact they interpret a statutory text in the light ofsurrounding texts that happen to have been subsequently enacted This classic judicial task of reconciling many laws enacted over time and getting them to make sense in combination necessarily assumes that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications of a later statute) 32 50 Fed Reg 26982 (JuI 11985)
9
limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades
As noted earlier the 2003 Act limits the operation of the NCLA US-flag oceangoing passenger vessels to regular service in Hawaii Because there are no oceangoing US-flag vessels operating in any market other than the Hawaii trades Customs should limit the scope of the proposed interPretation to that market Such a limitation protects US flag passenger vessel interests without prejudicing US port interests In contrast an application of the proposed interpretation to any itinerary would needlessly harm US port interests unrelated to Hawaii without any countervailing benefit to US-flag passenger vessel interests Accordingly limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation is consistent with the public policy objectives of the 1985 rulemaking as well as the 2003 Act
(c) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Also Consistent with Customs Commitment to Revisit the Scope of its Rules to Protect US-Flag Interests
The relaxation ofthe PVSA regulations in 1985 was premised in large part on Customs finding that there was no regular salt water US-flag passenger fleet in operation at that time33 Acknowledging that the relaxed regulations could harm USshyflag interests Customs committed in the preamble ofthe 1985 final rule to immediately reconsider its interpretation if it is ever shown that there is a viable US flag vessel operating in competition with foreign-flag vessels34
Congress enacted the 2003 Act to stimulate the development of a US flag cruise ship industry As noted above the legislative history ofthat Act makes clear that Congress sought to revitalize the US-flag cruise industry as a means to maintain Americas preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool ofqualified seafarers help sustain a fleet of US flag vessels to support our military and a maritime industrial base create thousands of seagoing and shoreside American jobs and stimulate the development ofa US flag cruise ship tourism business with the commensurate benefits to the US tax base the US economy and US employment
Customs is now acting at MARADs request to revisit its interpretation ofthe regulations implementing the PVSA because recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwise-qualified cruise ship operations35 That is to say that the concerns articulated by Customs in the context of the 1985 rulemaking have materialized and US-flag passenger vessel interests are in fact being hanned in the Hawaii trades by foreign competitors
33 50 Fed Reg 26983 34Id
3S 72 Fed Reg 56488 (Nov 21 2007)
I
10
Because the US-flag passenger vessels are limited by statute to regular service in Hawaii limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the
Hawaii trades is consistent with Customs historical commitment to revisit its interpretation ofthe implementing regulations to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests
7 Conclusion
For the reasons stated above NCLA commends the efforts ofCustoms and MARAn to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act as applied to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA respectfully requests Customs to move ahead promptly with p~blicati~nof a final interpretive rule to advance the important national security arid public policy objectives ofthese laws
We greatly appreciate the opportunity to submit these comments
Sincerely
~~~ Alan T Yamamoto Vice President Hawaii Operations
Exhibit A
Ship Name Serenade Of The Seas Departure Port San Diego California Ports of Call San Diego California Kailua Kona Hawaii Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii Hlo Hawaii Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii Ensenada Mexico San Qigo California
2007 Date(s) Oct 05
Sailing Itinerary
Day Port H ~rrive Depart Activity
05-0ct San Diego California 500 PM
06-0ct Cruising
07-0ct Cruising
08-0ct Cruising
09-0ct Cruising
10-0ct Kailua Kona Hawaii 700 AM 900 PM Tendered
11-00t Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 1000 AM Tendered
12middot0ct Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 900 PM Tendered
13-0ct Hilo Hawaii 700 AM 600 PM Docked
14middot0ct Honoulu (Oahu) Hawaii 700 AM Docked
15-0ct Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii 200 AM Docked
6-0ct CrUising
17-0ct Cruising
18-0ct Cruising
19middot0ct Cruising
-7 20-00t
O-Oot
Ensenada ~i1exico
San Deqo California
i 00 ~r1
700 ~M
200 oM D1Jcked ~
6
market for operation under foreign flag This move alone will result in the loss ofover 1000 American seafaring jobs
5 Customs Proposed Interpretation is Necessary to Further the Important National Security and Public Policy Objectives Embodied in Federal Law
As Customs has properly noted the increase in foreign competition in the Hawaii trades in contravention of the PVSA pose[s] an imminent threat to the two remaining US-flagged coastwise endorsed passenger vessels[] As the operator of these ships NCLA has a vested interest in protecting the jobs ofthe thousands ofAmerican crewmembers and cruise ship service providers who support these vessels NCLA also has an interest in protecting the substantial economic investment it has made to revitalize the US flag passenger vessel fleet But a balancing of interests in the context of Customs enforcement ofexisting law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act requires a much broader focus
The legislative history of the 2003 Act expressly recognized the national security and public policy import ofestablishing a US flag passenger vessel fleet as a means to maintain the countrys preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool of qualified seafarers and as a means to help sustain a fleet ofUS-flag vessels to su~ort
the nations military and maritime industrial base for times ofnational emergency
Congress understood the importance ofestablishing a viable US flag cruise ship fleet as something larger than the vessels themselves These national security and public policy objectives must be weighed in the balance as Customs assesses how best to interpret its rules to give effect to the PVSA and the 2003 Act
6 Customs Should Clarify that the Proposed Interpretation is Limited to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades and Adopt Reasonable Measures to Ensure Sufficient Foreign Content
Since publication ofthe proposed interpretative rule several commenters have observed that the scope of the proposed interpretation is ambiguous because the language of Section VI referencing any cruise itinerary appears broader than the caption Hawaiian Coastwise Cruises and the entire discussion in the published notice which focuses exclusively on US-flag coastwise vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA agrees that the proposed interpretation should be clarified so that its scope is limited to vessels operating roundtrip voyages from US ports that include Hawaii port calls
NCLA supports the concept reflected in the proposed interpretive rule that round trip Hawaii itineraries from US ports on foreign ships must include a material and measurable degree ofoverall foreign port content as compared to US port content
20 149 Congo Rec S1117 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)
7
(a) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is also Consistent with Subsequent Congressional Enactments Modifying the PVSA
As discussed above it is well established that the PVSA was designed toRrotect US-flag vessels from foreign competition in the coastwise and domestic trades 1
Subsequent legislative enactments however have appropriately differentiated among distinct geographic markets and trades including Canada Alaska Puerto Rico and Hawaii based on the existence or non-existence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
In 1938 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers by Canadian passenger vessels on Lake Ontario and the St Lawrence River until such time as passenger service shall be established by vessels of the United States22 Similarly in 1961 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers on Canadian vessels within Alaska or between Alaska and other points in the United States until such time as passenger service is established by vessels ofthe United States23
In 1984 Congress modified the application ofthe PVSA to pennit the transportation ofpassengers between Puerto Rico and other United States ports on foreign-flag vessels24 As with the other statutory exceptions this provision is qualified and expires [o]n a showing that a United States passenger vessel qualified to engage in the coastwise trade is offering or advertising passenger service between a port in Puerto Rico and another port in the United States2S
Congress acted again with respect to the application of the PVSA with the 2003 Act in which it authorized three vessels that did not meet the US-build requirements of the PVSA to operate as modem US-flagged cruise ships in regular service in Hawaii26 The 2003 Act imposes a specific geographic limitation on the operation of any ship documented under this authority to operations only in regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands ofHawaii and shall not transport passengers in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico or the Caribbean Sea except in certain limited circumstances27 As above the limited nature of the 2003 Act is express it is strictly limited to the large ocean-going cruise ships and then only those operating in the regular Hawaii service where there are no US-flag operations28
21 See Act ofJune 19 1886 c 421 sec 8 24 Stat 81 Act of February 171898 c 26 sec 2 30 Stat 248 22 S] Res 174 75th Cong 52 Stat 223 (Alp 251938) codified at46 USC sect 55121(a) 23 See Pub L 87-77 75 Stat 196 (Jun 30 1961) codified at 46 USC sect 55121(b) 24 See Pub L 98-563 98 Stat 2916 (Oct 301984) codified at 46 USC sect 55104(b) 25 46 USC sect 55104(c)(l) see also 46 USC 46 USc sect 55104(cX2)(expiration of exemption upon availability ofa non-coastwise qualified US-flag vessel offering service in the relevant market) 26 149 Congo Rec SI118 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)(statementofSen Inouye) 27 Pub L 108-7 117 Stat 79 (Feb 20 2003) 28 149 Congo Rec S11l9 (dailyed Jan 17 2003Xstatement of Sen Inouye)
8
In each ofthese instances Congress fashioned a narrow exception to the PVSA that differentiated among distinct geographic markets based on the existence or nonshyexistence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
As the federal agency responsible for administering the 2003 Act MARAD requested that Customs act to protect US flag passenger vessel interests in the Hawaii trades29 Limiting the scope ofthe proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades also reflects Customs appreciation of the PVSA in the context of the subsequent Congressional action30 Viewing the Congressional modifications to the PVSA as a whole Congress has specifically and repeatedly differentiated among distinct geographic markets when it has found it necessary and appropriate to do so to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests It is well established that the proper interpretation of a statutory scheme includes consideration ofsubsequent statutes even though the underlying statute itselfhas not been expressly amended31 Accordingly Customs should likewise limit the scope ofthe proposed PVSA interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades because that is the only geographic market as mandated by the 2003 Act in which oceangoing US-flag cruise ships are operating
(b) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Consistent with Public Policy Objectives of the 1985 Rulemaking
In 1985middot Customs liberalized the regulations implementing the PVSA by eliminating certain regulatory prohibitions on foreign flag vessels In the context of the 1985 rulemaking Customs justified a relaxation ofthe regulations on the grounds that it would simplify the administration of the PVSA and would benefit the economy ofcertain American coastwise ports without eroding the statutory protection given to American vessels engaged in solely domestic trade32
Customs thus sought to reconcile US port economic interests with US-flag passenger vessel interests Both of these twin policy objectives are furthered by
29 See 72 Fed Reg 65488 (Nov 21 2007)( MARAn bas asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the ~eratiODS ofcoastwise-qualified cruise ship operators)
See generally FDA v Brown amp Williamson Tobacco Corp 529 US 120 132-133 (2000)(assessing propriety ofagency construction ofFood DIUg and Cosmetics Act and descnbing responsibility of reviewing cowt to assess statutory provisions in the context of subsequent legislative enactments) 31 See Brown amp Williamson 529 US 143 (holding that proper construction ofstatutory provision must necessarily assume that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications ofa later statute This is particularly so where the scope of the earlier statute is broad but the subsequent statutes more specifically address the topic athand) see also United States v Estate ofRomani 523 US 517 530-531 (1998)( holding that a later-enacted statute should control the construction of the federal lien priority statute a specific policy embodied in a later federal statute should control om construction of the [earlier] statute even though it ha[s] not been expressly amended) United States v Fausto 484 US 439453 (1988)(The courts frequently find Congress to have done this - whenever in fact they interpret a statutory text in the light ofsurrounding texts that happen to have been subsequently enacted This classic judicial task of reconciling many laws enacted over time and getting them to make sense in combination necessarily assumes that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications of a later statute) 32 50 Fed Reg 26982 (JuI 11985)
9
limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades
As noted earlier the 2003 Act limits the operation of the NCLA US-flag oceangoing passenger vessels to regular service in Hawaii Because there are no oceangoing US-flag vessels operating in any market other than the Hawaii trades Customs should limit the scope of the proposed interPretation to that market Such a limitation protects US flag passenger vessel interests without prejudicing US port interests In contrast an application of the proposed interpretation to any itinerary would needlessly harm US port interests unrelated to Hawaii without any countervailing benefit to US-flag passenger vessel interests Accordingly limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation is consistent with the public policy objectives of the 1985 rulemaking as well as the 2003 Act
(c) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Also Consistent with Customs Commitment to Revisit the Scope of its Rules to Protect US-Flag Interests
The relaxation ofthe PVSA regulations in 1985 was premised in large part on Customs finding that there was no regular salt water US-flag passenger fleet in operation at that time33 Acknowledging that the relaxed regulations could harm USshyflag interests Customs committed in the preamble ofthe 1985 final rule to immediately reconsider its interpretation if it is ever shown that there is a viable US flag vessel operating in competition with foreign-flag vessels34
Congress enacted the 2003 Act to stimulate the development of a US flag cruise ship industry As noted above the legislative history ofthat Act makes clear that Congress sought to revitalize the US-flag cruise industry as a means to maintain Americas preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool ofqualified seafarers help sustain a fleet of US flag vessels to support our military and a maritime industrial base create thousands of seagoing and shoreside American jobs and stimulate the development ofa US flag cruise ship tourism business with the commensurate benefits to the US tax base the US economy and US employment
Customs is now acting at MARADs request to revisit its interpretation ofthe regulations implementing the PVSA because recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwise-qualified cruise ship operations35 That is to say that the concerns articulated by Customs in the context of the 1985 rulemaking have materialized and US-flag passenger vessel interests are in fact being hanned in the Hawaii trades by foreign competitors
33 50 Fed Reg 26983 34Id
3S 72 Fed Reg 56488 (Nov 21 2007)
I
10
Because the US-flag passenger vessels are limited by statute to regular service in Hawaii limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the
Hawaii trades is consistent with Customs historical commitment to revisit its interpretation ofthe implementing regulations to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests
7 Conclusion
For the reasons stated above NCLA commends the efforts ofCustoms and MARAn to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act as applied to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA respectfully requests Customs to move ahead promptly with p~blicati~nof a final interpretive rule to advance the important national security arid public policy objectives ofthese laws
We greatly appreciate the opportunity to submit these comments
Sincerely
~~~ Alan T Yamamoto Vice President Hawaii Operations
Exhibit A
Ship Name Serenade Of The Seas Departure Port San Diego California Ports of Call San Diego California Kailua Kona Hawaii Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii Hlo Hawaii Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii Ensenada Mexico San Qigo California
2007 Date(s) Oct 05
Sailing Itinerary
Day Port H ~rrive Depart Activity
05-0ct San Diego California 500 PM
06-0ct Cruising
07-0ct Cruising
08-0ct Cruising
09-0ct Cruising
10-0ct Kailua Kona Hawaii 700 AM 900 PM Tendered
11-00t Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 1000 AM Tendered
12middot0ct Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 900 PM Tendered
13-0ct Hilo Hawaii 700 AM 600 PM Docked
14middot0ct Honoulu (Oahu) Hawaii 700 AM Docked
15-0ct Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii 200 AM Docked
6-0ct CrUising
17-0ct Cruising
18-0ct Cruising
19middot0ct Cruising
-7 20-00t
O-Oot
Ensenada ~i1exico
San Deqo California
i 00 ~r1
700 ~M
200 oM D1Jcked ~
7
(a) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is also Consistent with Subsequent Congressional Enactments Modifying the PVSA
As discussed above it is well established that the PVSA was designed toRrotect US-flag vessels from foreign competition in the coastwise and domestic trades 1
Subsequent legislative enactments however have appropriately differentiated among distinct geographic markets and trades including Canada Alaska Puerto Rico and Hawaii based on the existence or non-existence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
In 1938 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers by Canadian passenger vessels on Lake Ontario and the St Lawrence River until such time as passenger service shall be established by vessels of the United States22 Similarly in 1961 Congress modified the application of the PVSA to permit the transportation ofpassengers on Canadian vessels within Alaska or between Alaska and other points in the United States until such time as passenger service is established by vessels ofthe United States23
In 1984 Congress modified the application ofthe PVSA to pennit the transportation ofpassengers between Puerto Rico and other United States ports on foreign-flag vessels24 As with the other statutory exceptions this provision is qualified and expires [o]n a showing that a United States passenger vessel qualified to engage in the coastwise trade is offering or advertising passenger service between a port in Puerto Rico and another port in the United States2S
Congress acted again with respect to the application of the PVSA with the 2003 Act in which it authorized three vessels that did not meet the US-build requirements of the PVSA to operate as modem US-flagged cruise ships in regular service in Hawaii26 The 2003 Act imposes a specific geographic limitation on the operation of any ship documented under this authority to operations only in regular service transporting passengers between or among the islands ofHawaii and shall not transport passengers in revenue service to ports in Alaska the GulfofMexico or the Caribbean Sea except in certain limited circumstances27 As above the limited nature of the 2003 Act is express it is strictly limited to the large ocean-going cruise ships and then only those operating in the regular Hawaii service where there are no US-flag operations28
21 See Act ofJune 19 1886 c 421 sec 8 24 Stat 81 Act of February 171898 c 26 sec 2 30 Stat 248 22 S] Res 174 75th Cong 52 Stat 223 (Alp 251938) codified at46 USC sect 55121(a) 23 See Pub L 87-77 75 Stat 196 (Jun 30 1961) codified at 46 USC sect 55121(b) 24 See Pub L 98-563 98 Stat 2916 (Oct 301984) codified at 46 USC sect 55104(b) 25 46 USC sect 55104(c)(l) see also 46 USC 46 USc sect 55104(cX2)(expiration of exemption upon availability ofa non-coastwise qualified US-flag vessel offering service in the relevant market) 26 149 Congo Rec SI118 (daily ed Jan 17 2003)(statementofSen Inouye) 27 Pub L 108-7 117 Stat 79 (Feb 20 2003) 28 149 Congo Rec S11l9 (dailyed Jan 17 2003Xstatement of Sen Inouye)
8
In each ofthese instances Congress fashioned a narrow exception to the PVSA that differentiated among distinct geographic markets based on the existence or nonshyexistence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
As the federal agency responsible for administering the 2003 Act MARAD requested that Customs act to protect US flag passenger vessel interests in the Hawaii trades29 Limiting the scope ofthe proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades also reflects Customs appreciation of the PVSA in the context of the subsequent Congressional action30 Viewing the Congressional modifications to the PVSA as a whole Congress has specifically and repeatedly differentiated among distinct geographic markets when it has found it necessary and appropriate to do so to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests It is well established that the proper interpretation of a statutory scheme includes consideration ofsubsequent statutes even though the underlying statute itselfhas not been expressly amended31 Accordingly Customs should likewise limit the scope ofthe proposed PVSA interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades because that is the only geographic market as mandated by the 2003 Act in which oceangoing US-flag cruise ships are operating
(b) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Consistent with Public Policy Objectives of the 1985 Rulemaking
In 1985middot Customs liberalized the regulations implementing the PVSA by eliminating certain regulatory prohibitions on foreign flag vessels In the context of the 1985 rulemaking Customs justified a relaxation ofthe regulations on the grounds that it would simplify the administration of the PVSA and would benefit the economy ofcertain American coastwise ports without eroding the statutory protection given to American vessels engaged in solely domestic trade32
Customs thus sought to reconcile US port economic interests with US-flag passenger vessel interests Both of these twin policy objectives are furthered by
29 See 72 Fed Reg 65488 (Nov 21 2007)( MARAn bas asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the ~eratiODS ofcoastwise-qualified cruise ship operators)
See generally FDA v Brown amp Williamson Tobacco Corp 529 US 120 132-133 (2000)(assessing propriety ofagency construction ofFood DIUg and Cosmetics Act and descnbing responsibility of reviewing cowt to assess statutory provisions in the context of subsequent legislative enactments) 31 See Brown amp Williamson 529 US 143 (holding that proper construction ofstatutory provision must necessarily assume that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications ofa later statute This is particularly so where the scope of the earlier statute is broad but the subsequent statutes more specifically address the topic athand) see also United States v Estate ofRomani 523 US 517 530-531 (1998)( holding that a later-enacted statute should control the construction of the federal lien priority statute a specific policy embodied in a later federal statute should control om construction of the [earlier] statute even though it ha[s] not been expressly amended) United States v Fausto 484 US 439453 (1988)(The courts frequently find Congress to have done this - whenever in fact they interpret a statutory text in the light ofsurrounding texts that happen to have been subsequently enacted This classic judicial task of reconciling many laws enacted over time and getting them to make sense in combination necessarily assumes that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications of a later statute) 32 50 Fed Reg 26982 (JuI 11985)
9
limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades
As noted earlier the 2003 Act limits the operation of the NCLA US-flag oceangoing passenger vessels to regular service in Hawaii Because there are no oceangoing US-flag vessels operating in any market other than the Hawaii trades Customs should limit the scope of the proposed interPretation to that market Such a limitation protects US flag passenger vessel interests without prejudicing US port interests In contrast an application of the proposed interpretation to any itinerary would needlessly harm US port interests unrelated to Hawaii without any countervailing benefit to US-flag passenger vessel interests Accordingly limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation is consistent with the public policy objectives of the 1985 rulemaking as well as the 2003 Act
(c) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Also Consistent with Customs Commitment to Revisit the Scope of its Rules to Protect US-Flag Interests
The relaxation ofthe PVSA regulations in 1985 was premised in large part on Customs finding that there was no regular salt water US-flag passenger fleet in operation at that time33 Acknowledging that the relaxed regulations could harm USshyflag interests Customs committed in the preamble ofthe 1985 final rule to immediately reconsider its interpretation if it is ever shown that there is a viable US flag vessel operating in competition with foreign-flag vessels34
Congress enacted the 2003 Act to stimulate the development of a US flag cruise ship industry As noted above the legislative history ofthat Act makes clear that Congress sought to revitalize the US-flag cruise industry as a means to maintain Americas preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool ofqualified seafarers help sustain a fleet of US flag vessels to support our military and a maritime industrial base create thousands of seagoing and shoreside American jobs and stimulate the development ofa US flag cruise ship tourism business with the commensurate benefits to the US tax base the US economy and US employment
Customs is now acting at MARADs request to revisit its interpretation ofthe regulations implementing the PVSA because recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwise-qualified cruise ship operations35 That is to say that the concerns articulated by Customs in the context of the 1985 rulemaking have materialized and US-flag passenger vessel interests are in fact being hanned in the Hawaii trades by foreign competitors
33 50 Fed Reg 26983 34Id
3S 72 Fed Reg 56488 (Nov 21 2007)
I
10
Because the US-flag passenger vessels are limited by statute to regular service in Hawaii limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the
Hawaii trades is consistent with Customs historical commitment to revisit its interpretation ofthe implementing regulations to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests
7 Conclusion
For the reasons stated above NCLA commends the efforts ofCustoms and MARAn to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act as applied to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA respectfully requests Customs to move ahead promptly with p~blicati~nof a final interpretive rule to advance the important national security arid public policy objectives ofthese laws
We greatly appreciate the opportunity to submit these comments
Sincerely
~~~ Alan T Yamamoto Vice President Hawaii Operations
Exhibit A
Ship Name Serenade Of The Seas Departure Port San Diego California Ports of Call San Diego California Kailua Kona Hawaii Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii Hlo Hawaii Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii Ensenada Mexico San Qigo California
2007 Date(s) Oct 05
Sailing Itinerary
Day Port H ~rrive Depart Activity
05-0ct San Diego California 500 PM
06-0ct Cruising
07-0ct Cruising
08-0ct Cruising
09-0ct Cruising
10-0ct Kailua Kona Hawaii 700 AM 900 PM Tendered
11-00t Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 1000 AM Tendered
12middot0ct Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 900 PM Tendered
13-0ct Hilo Hawaii 700 AM 600 PM Docked
14middot0ct Honoulu (Oahu) Hawaii 700 AM Docked
15-0ct Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii 200 AM Docked
6-0ct CrUising
17-0ct Cruising
18-0ct Cruising
19middot0ct Cruising
-7 20-00t
O-Oot
Ensenada ~i1exico
San Deqo California
i 00 ~r1
700 ~M
200 oM D1Jcked ~
8
In each ofthese instances Congress fashioned a narrow exception to the PVSA that differentiated among distinct geographic markets based on the existence or nonshyexistence ofUS-flag passenger vessel service
As the federal agency responsible for administering the 2003 Act MARAD requested that Customs act to protect US flag passenger vessel interests in the Hawaii trades29 Limiting the scope ofthe proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades also reflects Customs appreciation of the PVSA in the context of the subsequent Congressional action30 Viewing the Congressional modifications to the PVSA as a whole Congress has specifically and repeatedly differentiated among distinct geographic markets when it has found it necessary and appropriate to do so to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests It is well established that the proper interpretation of a statutory scheme includes consideration ofsubsequent statutes even though the underlying statute itselfhas not been expressly amended31 Accordingly Customs should likewise limit the scope ofthe proposed PVSA interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades because that is the only geographic market as mandated by the 2003 Act in which oceangoing US-flag cruise ships are operating
(b) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Consistent with Public Policy Objectives of the 1985 Rulemaking
In 1985middot Customs liberalized the regulations implementing the PVSA by eliminating certain regulatory prohibitions on foreign flag vessels In the context of the 1985 rulemaking Customs justified a relaxation ofthe regulations on the grounds that it would simplify the administration of the PVSA and would benefit the economy ofcertain American coastwise ports without eroding the statutory protection given to American vessels engaged in solely domestic trade32
Customs thus sought to reconcile US port economic interests with US-flag passenger vessel interests Both of these twin policy objectives are furthered by
29 See 72 Fed Reg 65488 (Nov 21 2007)( MARAn bas asked CBP to address the recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands that are imposing economic hardship on the ~eratiODS ofcoastwise-qualified cruise ship operators)
See generally FDA v Brown amp Williamson Tobacco Corp 529 US 120 132-133 (2000)(assessing propriety ofagency construction ofFood DIUg and Cosmetics Act and descnbing responsibility of reviewing cowt to assess statutory provisions in the context of subsequent legislative enactments) 31 See Brown amp Williamson 529 US 143 (holding that proper construction ofstatutory provision must necessarily assume that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications ofa later statute This is particularly so where the scope of the earlier statute is broad but the subsequent statutes more specifically address the topic athand) see also United States v Estate ofRomani 523 US 517 530-531 (1998)( holding that a later-enacted statute should control the construction of the federal lien priority statute a specific policy embodied in a later federal statute should control om construction of the [earlier] statute even though it ha[s] not been expressly amended) United States v Fausto 484 US 439453 (1988)(The courts frequently find Congress to have done this - whenever in fact they interpret a statutory text in the light ofsurrounding texts that happen to have been subsequently enacted This classic judicial task of reconciling many laws enacted over time and getting them to make sense in combination necessarily assumes that the implications of a statute may be altered by the implications of a later statute) 32 50 Fed Reg 26982 (JuI 11985)
9
limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades
As noted earlier the 2003 Act limits the operation of the NCLA US-flag oceangoing passenger vessels to regular service in Hawaii Because there are no oceangoing US-flag vessels operating in any market other than the Hawaii trades Customs should limit the scope of the proposed interPretation to that market Such a limitation protects US flag passenger vessel interests without prejudicing US port interests In contrast an application of the proposed interpretation to any itinerary would needlessly harm US port interests unrelated to Hawaii without any countervailing benefit to US-flag passenger vessel interests Accordingly limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation is consistent with the public policy objectives of the 1985 rulemaking as well as the 2003 Act
(c) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Also Consistent with Customs Commitment to Revisit the Scope of its Rules to Protect US-Flag Interests
The relaxation ofthe PVSA regulations in 1985 was premised in large part on Customs finding that there was no regular salt water US-flag passenger fleet in operation at that time33 Acknowledging that the relaxed regulations could harm USshyflag interests Customs committed in the preamble ofthe 1985 final rule to immediately reconsider its interpretation if it is ever shown that there is a viable US flag vessel operating in competition with foreign-flag vessels34
Congress enacted the 2003 Act to stimulate the development of a US flag cruise ship industry As noted above the legislative history ofthat Act makes clear that Congress sought to revitalize the US-flag cruise industry as a means to maintain Americas preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool ofqualified seafarers help sustain a fleet of US flag vessels to support our military and a maritime industrial base create thousands of seagoing and shoreside American jobs and stimulate the development ofa US flag cruise ship tourism business with the commensurate benefits to the US tax base the US economy and US employment
Customs is now acting at MARADs request to revisit its interpretation ofthe regulations implementing the PVSA because recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwise-qualified cruise ship operations35 That is to say that the concerns articulated by Customs in the context of the 1985 rulemaking have materialized and US-flag passenger vessel interests are in fact being hanned in the Hawaii trades by foreign competitors
33 50 Fed Reg 26983 34Id
3S 72 Fed Reg 56488 (Nov 21 2007)
I
10
Because the US-flag passenger vessels are limited by statute to regular service in Hawaii limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the
Hawaii trades is consistent with Customs historical commitment to revisit its interpretation ofthe implementing regulations to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests
7 Conclusion
For the reasons stated above NCLA commends the efforts ofCustoms and MARAn to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act as applied to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA respectfully requests Customs to move ahead promptly with p~blicati~nof a final interpretive rule to advance the important national security arid public policy objectives ofthese laws
We greatly appreciate the opportunity to submit these comments
Sincerely
~~~ Alan T Yamamoto Vice President Hawaii Operations
Exhibit A
Ship Name Serenade Of The Seas Departure Port San Diego California Ports of Call San Diego California Kailua Kona Hawaii Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii Hlo Hawaii Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii Ensenada Mexico San Qigo California
2007 Date(s) Oct 05
Sailing Itinerary
Day Port H ~rrive Depart Activity
05-0ct San Diego California 500 PM
06-0ct Cruising
07-0ct Cruising
08-0ct Cruising
09-0ct Cruising
10-0ct Kailua Kona Hawaii 700 AM 900 PM Tendered
11-00t Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 1000 AM Tendered
12middot0ct Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 900 PM Tendered
13-0ct Hilo Hawaii 700 AM 600 PM Docked
14middot0ct Honoulu (Oahu) Hawaii 700 AM Docked
15-0ct Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii 200 AM Docked
6-0ct CrUising
17-0ct Cruising
18-0ct Cruising
19middot0ct Cruising
-7 20-00t
O-Oot
Ensenada ~i1exico
San Deqo California
i 00 ~r1
700 ~M
200 oM D1Jcked ~
9
limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades
As noted earlier the 2003 Act limits the operation of the NCLA US-flag oceangoing passenger vessels to regular service in Hawaii Because there are no oceangoing US-flag vessels operating in any market other than the Hawaii trades Customs should limit the scope of the proposed interPretation to that market Such a limitation protects US flag passenger vessel interests without prejudicing US port interests In contrast an application of the proposed interpretation to any itinerary would needlessly harm US port interests unrelated to Hawaii without any countervailing benefit to US-flag passenger vessel interests Accordingly limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation is consistent with the public policy objectives of the 1985 rulemaking as well as the 2003 Act
(c) Limiting the Scope of the Proposed Interpretation to Vessels Operating in the Hawaii Trades is Also Consistent with Customs Commitment to Revisit the Scope of its Rules to Protect US-Flag Interests
The relaxation ofthe PVSA regulations in 1985 was premised in large part on Customs finding that there was no regular salt water US-flag passenger fleet in operation at that time33 Acknowledging that the relaxed regulations could harm USshyflag interests Customs committed in the preamble ofthe 1985 final rule to immediately reconsider its interpretation if it is ever shown that there is a viable US flag vessel operating in competition with foreign-flag vessels34
Congress enacted the 2003 Act to stimulate the development of a US flag cruise ship industry As noted above the legislative history ofthat Act makes clear that Congress sought to revitalize the US-flag cruise industry as a means to maintain Americas preparedness for a national emergency by developing a pool ofqualified seafarers help sustain a fleet of US flag vessels to support our military and a maritime industrial base create thousands of seagoing and shoreside American jobs and stimulate the development ofa US flag cruise ship tourism business with the commensurate benefits to the US tax base the US economy and US employment
Customs is now acting at MARADs request to revisit its interpretation ofthe regulations implementing the PVSA because recent activities of foreign-flag passenger vessels in the Hawaiian Islands are imposing economic hardship on the operations of coastwise-qualified cruise ship operations35 That is to say that the concerns articulated by Customs in the context of the 1985 rulemaking have materialized and US-flag passenger vessel interests are in fact being hanned in the Hawaii trades by foreign competitors
33 50 Fed Reg 26983 34Id
3S 72 Fed Reg 56488 (Nov 21 2007)
I
10
Because the US-flag passenger vessels are limited by statute to regular service in Hawaii limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the
Hawaii trades is consistent with Customs historical commitment to revisit its interpretation ofthe implementing regulations to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests
7 Conclusion
For the reasons stated above NCLA commends the efforts ofCustoms and MARAn to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act as applied to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA respectfully requests Customs to move ahead promptly with p~blicati~nof a final interpretive rule to advance the important national security arid public policy objectives ofthese laws
We greatly appreciate the opportunity to submit these comments
Sincerely
~~~ Alan T Yamamoto Vice President Hawaii Operations
Exhibit A
Ship Name Serenade Of The Seas Departure Port San Diego California Ports of Call San Diego California Kailua Kona Hawaii Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii Hlo Hawaii Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii Ensenada Mexico San Qigo California
2007 Date(s) Oct 05
Sailing Itinerary
Day Port H ~rrive Depart Activity
05-0ct San Diego California 500 PM
06-0ct Cruising
07-0ct Cruising
08-0ct Cruising
09-0ct Cruising
10-0ct Kailua Kona Hawaii 700 AM 900 PM Tendered
11-00t Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 1000 AM Tendered
12middot0ct Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 900 PM Tendered
13-0ct Hilo Hawaii 700 AM 600 PM Docked
14middot0ct Honoulu (Oahu) Hawaii 700 AM Docked
15-0ct Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii 200 AM Docked
6-0ct CrUising
17-0ct Cruising
18-0ct Cruising
19middot0ct Cruising
-7 20-00t
O-Oot
Ensenada ~i1exico
San Deqo California
i 00 ~r1
700 ~M
200 oM D1Jcked ~
I
10
Because the US-flag passenger vessels are limited by statute to regular service in Hawaii limiting the scope of the proposed interpretation to vessels operating in the
Hawaii trades is consistent with Customs historical commitment to revisit its interpretation ofthe implementing regulations to protect US-flag passenger vessel interests
7 Conclusion
For the reasons stated above NCLA commends the efforts ofCustoms and MARAn to enforce existing law in furtherance of the PVSA and the 2003 Act as applied to vessels operating in the Hawaii trades NCLA respectfully requests Customs to move ahead promptly with p~blicati~nof a final interpretive rule to advance the important national security arid public policy objectives ofthese laws
We greatly appreciate the opportunity to submit these comments
Sincerely
~~~ Alan T Yamamoto Vice President Hawaii Operations
Exhibit A
Ship Name Serenade Of The Seas Departure Port San Diego California Ports of Call San Diego California Kailua Kona Hawaii Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii Hlo Hawaii Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii Ensenada Mexico San Qigo California
2007 Date(s) Oct 05
Sailing Itinerary
Day Port H ~rrive Depart Activity
05-0ct San Diego California 500 PM
06-0ct Cruising
07-0ct Cruising
08-0ct Cruising
09-0ct Cruising
10-0ct Kailua Kona Hawaii 700 AM 900 PM Tendered
11-00t Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 1000 AM Tendered
12middot0ct Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 900 PM Tendered
13-0ct Hilo Hawaii 700 AM 600 PM Docked
14middot0ct Honoulu (Oahu) Hawaii 700 AM Docked
15-0ct Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii 200 AM Docked
6-0ct CrUising
17-0ct Cruising
18-0ct Cruising
19middot0ct Cruising
-7 20-00t
O-Oot
Ensenada ~i1exico
San Deqo California
i 00 ~r1
700 ~M
200 oM D1Jcked ~
Ship Name Serenade Of The Seas Departure Port San Diego California Ports of Call San Diego California Kailua Kona Hawaii Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii Hlo Hawaii Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii Ensenada Mexico San Qigo California
2007 Date(s) Oct 05
Sailing Itinerary
Day Port H ~rrive Depart Activity
05-0ct San Diego California 500 PM
06-0ct Cruising
07-0ct Cruising
08-0ct Cruising
09-0ct Cruising
10-0ct Kailua Kona Hawaii 700 AM 900 PM Tendered
11-00t Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 1000 AM Tendered
12middot0ct Lahaina (Maui) Hawaii 900 PM Tendered
13-0ct Hilo Hawaii 700 AM 600 PM Docked
14middot0ct Honoulu (Oahu) Hawaii 700 AM Docked
15-0ct Honolulu (Oahu) Hawaii 200 AM Docked
6-0ct CrUising
17-0ct Cruising
18-0ct Cruising
19middot0ct Cruising
-7 20-00t
O-Oot
Ensenada ~i1exico
San Deqo California
i 00 ~r1
700 ~M
200 oM D1Jcked ~