The Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA) of 1953, as amended, is the foundational federal law governing the exploration, development, and management of the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) of the United States. North Carolina, like other coastal states, has specific jurisdictional boundaries that extend to the seaward limit of its territorial sea, which is generally considered to be three nautical miles from the coast. Beyond this, federal jurisdiction under OCSLA typically applies. The OCSLA grants the Secretary of the Interior (now delegated to the Secretary of Commerce for certain leasing and management functions related to energy and minerals) authority to administer, regulate, and lease OCS lands for activities such as oil and gas exploration, mineral extraction, and other uses. This includes the authority to grant leases, approve exploration and development plans, and enforce safety and environmental regulations. The State of North Carolina retains jurisdiction over its internal waters, territorial sea, and coastal zone management issues under its own state laws, such as the Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA). However, for activities occurring on the OCS, federal law, primarily OCSLA, supersedes state authority concerning the leasing and development of resources. Therefore, any entity seeking to conduct resource extraction activities on the OCS off the coast of North Carolina would be subject to federal regulations and leasing procedures established under OCSLA, not primarily state law for the leasing and operational aspects on the OCS itself.

The Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA) of 1953, as amended, is the foundational federal law governing the exploration and exploitation of mineral and energy resources on the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS). For states like North Carolina, the OCS begins three nautical miles from the coastline, which is defined by the baseline from which the territorial sea is measured. The Submerged Lands Act of 1953 grants states jurisdiction over their submerged lands, including the seabed and subsoil, out to three nautical miles from the coast. Therefore, any federal leasing and regulation of mineral activities beyond this three-nautical-mile limit falls under the purview of OCSLA, administered by the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) and the Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement (BSEE). North Carolina, like other coastal states, has specific rights and responsibilities concerning its territorial waters, but the OCS is a federal domain. The concept of the continental shelf itself is rooted in international law, particularly the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), which defines the continental shelf as the seabed and subsoil of the submarine areas that extend beyond its territorial sea throughout the natural prolongation of its land territory to the outer edge of the continental margin, or to a distance of 200 nautical miles from the baselines from which the breadth of the territorial sea is measured, where the outer edge of the continental margin does not extend to that distance. However, the OCSLA specifically addresses the U.S. jurisdiction and management of these areas. The question probes the jurisdictional boundary and the governing federal legislation for resource development in the area immediately seaward of North Carolina’s territorial waters.

The North Carolina General Statute §113-129 defines the baseline for state waters as the line of mean low water. This baseline is crucial for determining the extent of state jurisdiction over marine and estuarine resources. When the coastline is irregular, with bays and inlets, the statute further clarifies that the baseline can be established using closing lines across these features. Specifically, for bays and inlets, closing lines are drawn from the mainland to an offshore point or from one offshore point to another, as long as the distance across the mouth of the bay or inlet does not exceed a specified limit, which for North Carolina is generally understood to be 10 nautical miles for historical and customary reasons, aligning with international practice for closing bays. The concept of the baseline is fundamental to defining the territorial sea, contiguous zone, and exclusive economic zone, and in North Carolina, the state’s jurisdiction extends three nautical miles seaward from this established baseline. Therefore, the correct determination of the baseline, especially in areas with significant coastal indentation, is paramount for accurate jurisdictional mapping and resource management under North Carolina law.

The Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA) of 1953, as amended, is the foundational federal law governing the exploration and exploitation of natural resources on the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS). In North Carolina, the state’s jurisdiction extends to the seaward boundary of the territorial sea, which is generally recognized as three nautical miles from the coast. However, the OCSLA explicitly grants the United States jurisdiction over the OCS, extending beyond the territorial sea. Therefore, any activity conducted on the OCS, including the exploration and production of oil and gas, is governed by federal law, specifically OCSLA. This includes regulations promulgated by agencies like the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) and the Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement (BSEE). North Carolina’s regulatory authority over activities within its territorial waters does not extend to the OCS. While the state may have an interest in the economic and environmental impacts of OCS activities, the primary legal framework for these operations is federal. The Submerged Lands Act of 1953 generally grants states ownership of submerged lands within their territorial seas, but the OCSLA carves out the OCS as federal territory for resource management. Consequently, the leasing, permitting, and regulation of activities on the OCS off the coast of North Carolina fall under federal purview, not state law.

The North Carolina General Statute §113-129 defines the baseline for North Carolina’s territorial sea. This statute establishes that the baseline is the mean low water mark along the coast of North Carolina. This baseline is crucial for determining the extent of state jurisdiction over its marine resources, including fisheries and mineral rights, extending out to three nautical miles from this baseline. The concept of the mean low water mark is a geodetic and hydrographic measurement that represents the average position of the low water line. This is a fundamental principle in maritime boundary delimitation, ensuring a consistent and legally recognized edge of the state’s coastal waters. Understanding this baseline is essential for interpreting various provisions related to coastal management, environmental protection, and the exercise of sovereign rights within North Carolina’s maritime domain, as further elaborated in statutes governing coastal fishing, oil and gas leasing, and navigational rights. The correct identification of this baseline is paramount for any legal or administrative action concerning the state’s offshore jurisdiction.

The question pertains to the jurisdiction over submerged lands and resources within North Carolina’s coastal waters. Specifically, it addresses the delineation of state waters and the application of state law concerning the extraction of resources. The Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA) generally extends federal jurisdiction beyond the territorial sea, but state jurisdiction extends to the baseline from which the territorial sea is measured. For North Carolina, this baseline is defined by the Submerged Lands Act of 1953, which grants states ownership and jurisdiction over submerged lands within three nautical miles of their coast. The North Carolina General Statutes, particularly Chapter 113, Article 7, govern the leasing and management of state-owned submerged lands and the resources found therein. Therefore, any activity involving the extraction of minerals from submerged lands within this three-nautical-mile zone falls under North Carolina’s regulatory authority, including the requirement for state leases and adherence to state environmental and conservation laws. The scenario describes a discovery of a significant mineral deposit within this clearly defined state waters area. Consequently, North Carolina’s Department of Environmental Quality (or its equivalent regulatory body responsible for coastal resources) would have the primary authority to regulate the extraction, including the issuance of leases and the collection of royalties, as per state statutes. Federal oversight, under OCSLA, would typically commence beyond the three-nautical-mile limit.

The question probes the jurisdictional reach of North Carolina’s authority over its submerged lands, specifically concerning activities that might impact the coastal environment. North Carolina General Statute §113-129 et seq., particularly the Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA), grants the state broad authority over its estuarine and offshore waters and submerged lands. This authority extends to regulating activities that could potentially harm or alter these areas, even if those activities originate from land-based sources but have a direct and substantial impact on the marine environment. The regulation of dredging, filling, and the discharge of pollutants are prime examples of state oversight. In this scenario, the proposed offshore aquaculture operation, while situated seaward of the immediate shoreline, necessitates permits and compliance with North Carolina’s environmental regulations because the potential impacts, such as nutrient loading, habitat alteration, and the introduction of non-native species, directly affect the state’s coastal waters and ecosystems. The state’s interest in preserving the ecological integrity and economic utility of its coastal zone is paramount. Therefore, any activity that demonstrably affects these state-managed resources falls under its regulatory purview, irrespective of the precise boundary of territorial waters, provided the impact is significant and traceable. The permitting process under CAMA is designed to assess and mitigate such impacts, ensuring that development is compatible with the long-term health of the coastal environment.

North Carolina’s jurisdiction over its coastal waters is primarily defined by its baseline and extends seaward. The baseline, as established by federal law and interpreted by state statutes, forms the starting point for measuring North Carolina’s territorial sea, contiguous zone, and exclusive economic zone. The Submerged Lands Act of 1953 (43 U.S.C. § 1301 et seq.) is a foundational piece of federal legislation that grants states ownership and management rights over submerged lands extending three nautical miles from their coastlines. North Carolina General Statute § 1-45.1 explicitly delineates the state’s territorial waters as extending three nautical miles from the coastline, measured from the baseline. This baseline is generally understood to follow the line of ordinary low water along the coast, but for bays and estuaries, it can be drawn across the mouth of the bay or river if the width does not exceed a specified limit, typically 24 miles for international purposes, though state definitions may vary. The state’s authority over these waters includes regulation of fishing, resource extraction, environmental protection, and navigation. The concept of the “seabed” under these waters is also crucial, as North Carolina retains proprietary rights to the resources found within its submerged lands. Therefore, any activity occurring within these three nautical miles, such as the anchoring of a vessel or the deployment of scientific equipment, falls under the purview of North Carolina law.

The question pertains to the delineation of maritime boundaries in the context of North Carolina’s coastal waters and its interaction with federal jurisdiction. Specifically, it probes the understanding of which governmental entity has primary authority over the management and regulation of submerged lands within a particular distance from the coastline. North Carolina, like other coastal states, has jurisdiction over its territorial sea, which extends seaward from the baseline. The Submerged Lands Act of 1953 is a foundational piece of federal legislation that grants coastal states ownership and management rights over submerged lands and natural resources within their historic boundaries, typically extending three nautical miles from the coast. For North Carolina, this means that the state exercises primary jurisdiction over the seabed and subsoil of the continental shelf within this three-nautical-mile limit, unless specific exceptions or agreements dictate otherwise. Federal authority, such as under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, generally applies beyond this state-controlled zone. Therefore, when considering activities like oil and gas exploration or the establishment of offshore wind farms within this three-nautical-mile limit, the regulatory framework and permitting processes are primarily governed by North Carolina state law and agencies, such as the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality. The question tests the understanding of this division of authority and the legal basis for state control over its adjacent submerged lands.

The question pertains to the jurisdiction over submerged lands and their resources within North Carolina’s coastal waters, specifically focusing on the delineation of state ownership versus federal authority. North Carolina’s territorial sea extends to three nautical miles from its coast. Within this territorial sea, the state exercises sovereignty over the seabed and subsoil. The Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) begins beyond the territorial sea, and jurisdiction over resources on the OCS falls under federal authority, primarily managed by the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) and the Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement (BSEE). The Submerged Lands Act of 1953 (43 U.S.C. § 1301 et seq.) is a foundational piece of federal legislation that confirms and vests in the states the ownership, management, and control of submerged lands and the natural resources of the seabed and subsoil of the continental shelf, appurtenant to the states, within the three-mile limit. Therefore, any exploration or extraction activities for oil and gas within this three-mile zone would be governed by North Carolina state law and regulations, not federal OCS leasing procedures. The scenario describes an oil exploration company operating within this zone. Consequently, the applicable regulatory framework is state-level.

The Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA) of 1953 is a foundational piece of legislation that extends U.S. federal law to the submerged lands of the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS). This act grants the federal government, specifically through the Department of the Interior (now the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement, and the National Marine Fisheries Service, among others), jurisdiction over the OCS. North Carolina, like other coastal states, has its own historical claims and specific legislation concerning its territorial sea and internal waters. However, when activities occur beyond the state’s seaward boundary, typically defined as three nautical miles from the coastline, federal law, as established by OCSLA, becomes the governing authority. OCSLA provides the legal framework for the exploration, development, and production of mineral and other natural resources on the OCS. It also establishes regulatory authority for safety, environmental protection, and the leasing of OCS areas. Therefore, any activity on the OCS offshore North Carolina, such as oil and gas exploration or the installation of renewable energy infrastructure, falls under federal jurisdiction and is regulated by federal statutes and agencies, superseding state law in this domain. The North Carolina General Statutes, such as Chapter 113, Article 3, deal with the state’s management of its coastal resources within its territorial jurisdiction, but these provisions do not extend to the OCS.

The Outer Banks, a chain of barrier islands off the coast of North Carolina, are intrinsically linked to the state’s maritime jurisdiction. North Carolina’s territorial sea extends to 3 nautical miles from its coastline. This jurisdiction is established by federal law, specifically the Submerged Lands Act of 1953 (43 U.S.C. §§ 1301-1315), which confirmed state ownership of submerged lands within this limit. Beyond the territorial sea lies the contiguous zone, extending to 24 nautical miles, and then the exclusive economic zone (EEZ) to 200 nautical miles, both of which are governed by international law, primarily the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), and implemented through U.S. federal legislation. For North Carolina, any activities occurring within the 3-nautical-mile limit, including resource extraction, fishing, and vessel navigation, fall under the purview of state law and regulatory bodies. This includes the management of fisheries, environmental protection, and the regulation of activities impacting coastal resources. Therefore, a vessel operating in the waters immediately adjacent to the Outer Banks, within the defined territorial sea, would be subject to North Carolina’s specific maritime regulations and enforcement.

The North Carolina General Statutes, specifically Chapter 113, Article 16, addresses the management of estuarine and offshore waters. Section 113-132 defines the boundaries of North Carolina’s internal waters and territorial sea. The territorial sea extends three nautical miles seaward from the baseline, which for North Carolina is generally the mean low water line along the coast. Internal waters are those waters on the landward side of the baseline. The question asks about the regulatory authority of the North Carolina Marine Fisheries Commission within the state’s territorial sea. The Marine Fisheries Commission, established under Chapter 113, Article 4, is vested with broad powers to regulate fishing and related activities within North Carolina’s jurisdiction. This jurisdiction, as defined in Chapter 113, Article 16, includes the territorial sea. Therefore, the Commission’s authority extends to the management of all fisheries resources within the three-nautical-mile limit of the territorial sea, encompassing both commercial and recreational fishing activities, as well as the regulation of fishing gear, seasons, and sizes. This authority is derived from the state’s sovereign rights over its territorial waters. The Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA) primarily governs activities on the Outer Continental Shelf, which lies beyond the territorial sea, and federal agencies like NOAA and BOEM have primary jurisdiction there. While there can be cooperative management agreements, the direct regulatory authority within the territorial sea rests with the state.

The North Carolina General Statute §113-174 outlines the regulations concerning the management and protection of marine fisheries within the state’s jurisdiction. Specifically, it addresses the licensing requirements for commercial fishing operations. The statute mandates that any person intending to engage in the taking of fish for commercial purposes must obtain a valid commercial fishing license. This license is issued by the North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries and is subject to various conditions, including adherence to size limits, gear restrictions, and season closures designed to ensure the sustainability of fish populations. The statute also specifies penalties for violations, which can include fines and the revocation of licenses. The question tests the understanding of the fundamental legal requirement for commercial fishing in North Carolina waters, as stipulated by this statute. The correct answer reflects the direct mandate of obtaining a license for commercial fishing activities.

North Carolina’s coastal waters are subject to a complex regulatory framework that balances state sovereignty, federal oversight, and international maritime law. The question probes the jurisdictional authority over activities occurring within the state’s territorial sea, specifically concerning the deployment of unmanned underwater vehicles (UUVs) for scientific research. The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) defines the territorial sea as extending up to 12 nautical miles from the baseline. Within this zone, a coastal state exercises full sovereignty, subject to the right of innocent passage for foreign vessels. However, the deployment of UUVs, particularly for scientific research, can raise questions about the scope of this sovereignty and the application of specific national laws. In the United States, federal legislation often governs activities within the territorial sea, especially those involving national security, environmental protection, or scientific research that could have broader implications. The Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, for instance, grants federal authority over fisheries management within the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), which begins where the territorial sea ends. While not directly applicable to UUV deployment in the territorial sea, it illustrates the federal government’s role in managing maritime resources and activities. More pertinent is the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) purview over marine research and sanctuaries, often requiring permits for activities within protected areas or for research that could impact marine ecosystems. The North Carolina General Statutes, specifically Chapter 113, Article 21, addresses the state’s jurisdiction over its coastal waters and tidelands. This article grants the state authority over the use of its submerged lands and the resources within its territorial sea. However, when activities involve research, especially if funded or directed by federal agencies, or if they have potential national security implications, federal jurisdiction can preempt or at least heavily influence state regulatory authority. The Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA) primarily deals with the federal government’s jurisdiction over the Outer Continental Shelf, but its principles of federal authority in offshore areas are relevant to understanding the interplay between state and federal powers. For scientific research using UUVs, the key consideration is whether such activities fall under a federal permitting regime or require specific state authorization beyond general navigational rights. Given that federal agencies like NOAA often fund and oversee such research, and that UUV technology can have dual-use implications, federal oversight is paramount. Therefore, the most appropriate regulatory body to consult for such an endeavor would be a federal agency responsible for marine science and resource management, or a body tasked with national security oversight if the UUV’s capabilities warrant it. Among the given options, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) is the primary federal agency responsible for promoting the understanding and stewardship of the nation’s oceans, coastal areas, and Great Lakes. Its mandate includes regulating marine research and protecting marine environments, making it the most relevant authority for UUV deployment for scientific purposes within North Carolina’s territorial sea, especially when federal involvement is present.

The Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA) of 1953, as amended, is the foundational federal law governing the exploration, development, and management of mineral and energy resources on the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS). North Carolina, like other coastal states, has specific jurisdictional boundaries and rights related to its submerged lands. The Submerged Lands Act of 1953 granted states title to their tidelands, submerged lands, and natural resources within their boundaries, which extend to three nautical miles offshore. Beyond this three-mile limit, jurisdiction generally falls to the federal government under OCSLA. However, the OCSLA itself contains provisions that allow for cooperative agreements and the sharing of certain revenues with adjacent coastal states for activities occurring on the OCS that directly impact those states. The specific revenue-sharing mechanisms and the extent of state consultation are detailed in various OCSLA amendments and implementing regulations, such as those promulgated by the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM). For offshore wind energy development, which is a significant emerging issue, the Energy Policy Act of 2005 and subsequent executive orders and agency directives have further clarified the federal leasing process and the importance of state input and environmental review, often involving state agencies in permitting and management. North Carolina’s specific approach to offshore energy, including its engagement with federal agencies like BOEM and NOAA, and its legislative efforts to prepare for offshore wind development, are guided by these federal frameworks while also asserting state interests. Therefore, understanding the interplay between the Submerged Lands Act, OCSLA, and specific federal regulations governing energy development is crucial. The question probes the legal basis for federal authority over OCS resources and the mechanisms by which states, like North Carolina, can influence or benefit from these activities. The correct answer identifies the primary federal statute that establishes federal jurisdiction and regulatory authority over the Outer Continental Shelf for resource development, which is the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act.

The question revolves around the concept of “innocent passage” as defined in international maritime law and its specific application within North Carolina’s territorial waters. Innocent passage allows foreign vessels to transit through a coastal state’s territorial sea, provided the passage is not prejudicial to the peace, good order, or security of that state. Article 19 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) outlines activities that would prejudice the peace, good order, or security of a coastal state, including any exercise or practice with weapons of any kind, any act of propaganda, launching, landing or taking on board of any aircraft, any act of espionage, any act of willful and serious pollution, fishing activities, and the carrying out of research or survey activities. North Carolina, as a coastal state, has the right to enact laws and regulations to prevent passage that violates these conditions. Therefore, a vessel engaged in surveying marine life within North Carolina’s territorial sea without prior authorization would be considered to be engaging in an activity prejudicial to the peace, good order, or security of the state, thus infringing upon its sovereign rights and the principles of innocent passage. The Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA) in North Carolina, specifically Chapter 113A of the North Carolina General Statutes, governs the use and protection of the state’s coastal resources, including its territorial waters. While CAMA primarily focuses on land use and development, its provisions extend to activities impacting the coastal environment and resources, which would encompass unauthorized scientific surveys in state waters. The North Carolina Marine Fisheries Commission also has regulatory authority over fishing and marine resource activities within state waters. Any unauthorized research or survey activities that could impact marine resources would fall under their purview. The critical element is the lack of authorization, which transforms an otherwise potentially innocent act into a violation of North Carolina’s jurisdiction over its territorial sea.

The Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) of 1972, as amended, establishes a framework for states to develop and implement comprehensive management programs for their coastal zones. North Carolina’s Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA) is the state’s response to this federal mandate. CAMA aims to protect and manage the state’s coastal resources, which are defined as areas within the state’s jurisdiction that are adjacent to the Atlantic Ocean and are influenced by it. This includes estuarine waters, tidally influenced areas, and coastal wetlands. The Act designates specific areas of environmental concern (AECs) within the coastal zone that are subject to stricter regulations due to their ecological significance, natural hazard vulnerability, or economic importance. Permitting processes, often administered by the North Carolina Division of Coastal Management, are central to CAMA, requiring authorization for development activities within these AECs to ensure consistency with the state’s coastal management objectives. The question tests the understanding of the scope of North Carolina’s CAMA, specifically how it defines its coastal zone in relation to federal law and its own jurisdictional boundaries, emphasizing the interplay between state and federal coastal management efforts.

The Outer Banks, a chain of barrier islands off the coast of North Carolina, are a critical area for understanding state jurisdiction over submerged lands and marine resources. North Carolina’s authority extends to the territorial sea, which is defined by international and federal law. The baseline from which the territorial sea is measured is generally the line of ordinary low water along the coast. For islands like the Outer Banks, this baseline is further complicated by the dynamic nature of the coastline and the presence of inlets and bays. The North Carolina General Statutes, particularly those related to coastal management and marine fisheries, delineate the state’s regulatory powers within these waters. Specifically, the state asserts jurisdiction over the seabed and subsoil out to three nautical miles from the baseline. This jurisdiction encompasses the right to regulate fishing, mineral extraction, and other activities. The question probes the understanding of where North Carolina’s sovereign rights and jurisdiction begin and end in relation to its coastal geography. The correct answer hinges on the precise definition of the baseline and the extent of the territorial sea as recognized by North Carolina law and international maritime conventions, which North Carolina adheres to. The state’s ownership of submerged lands and its regulatory authority are paramount in managing these valuable marine environments.

North Carolina’s coastal waters are governed by a complex interplay of federal and state laws, particularly concerning the management of submerged lands and the resources they contain. The Outer Banks, with its unique geological and ecological characteristics, presents specific challenges for regulatory frameworks. The North Carolina Department of Natural and Cultural Resources, through its Coastal Management Program and other relevant divisions, is tasked with balancing development, conservation, and public access. When considering activities that impact submerged lands, such as the installation of offshore wind energy infrastructure or the dredging for navigation, the state exercises its proprietary rights and regulatory authority. This authority is often exercised through permitting processes that require detailed environmental impact assessments and adherence to specific state statutes designed to protect marine ecosystems and historical resources. The question probes the understanding of which state entity holds the primary responsibility for managing these submerged lands and the associated permitting processes, directly reflecting the state’s sovereign interest in its territorial sea and internal waters. The correct answer identifies the agency vested with this crucial stewardship role.

The question pertains to the enforcement jurisdiction of North Carolina concerning activities within its territorial sea and contiguous zone. The North Carolina General Statute \(N.C. Gen. Stat. § 113-170.1\) grants the Marine Fisheries Commission the authority to adopt rules and regulations for the management, protection, preservation, and enhancement of the marine and estuarine resources of the State. This authority extends to activities occurring within the territorial waters of North Carolina, which extend three nautical miles from the baseline. The Outer Banks, being a chain of barrier islands that form a significant portion of North Carolina’s coastline, are intrinsically linked to the State’s maritime jurisdiction. Therefore, any fishing activity conducted by a vessel within this three-nautical-mile limit is subject to North Carolina’s regulations, including licensing requirements, even if the vessel is registered in another state. The specific details of the vessel’s registration or the origin of its catch are secondary to the location of the fishing activity in determining which jurisdiction’s laws apply. The Marine Patrol, acting under the authority of the Marine Fisheries Commission, has the power to enforce these regulations. The scenario describes a vessel engaged in fishing operations within the territorial waters of North Carolina. Consequently, North Carolina law, specifically the regulations promulgated under Chapter 113 of the General Statutes, would govern the vessel’s activities, including its licensing status. The concept tested here is the territorial jurisdiction of a coastal state over activities within its territorial sea, as established by international law and domestic legislation.

The North Carolina General Statutes, specifically Chapter 113, Article 17, governs the regulation of oyster sanctuaries and the management of oyster resources. The question pertains to the establishment of a new oyster sanctuary. North Carolina law, as outlined in G.S. 113-202.1, requires a public hearing and a resolution by the Board of County Commissioners of the affected county before the designation of an area as an oyster sanctuary. This process ensures local input and consideration of potential impacts on existing uses, such as commercial fishing. The statute provides the framework for designating areas that are suitable for restoration and protection, free from harvesting. The critical element is the procedural requirement for local governmental consent, which is a prerequisite for the state to implement such a designation. Without this resolution, the sanctuary designation is not legally effective under North Carolina law. Therefore, the resolution by the Board of County Commissioners is the decisive factor in the legal establishment of an oyster sanctuary within a county’s jurisdiction, as mandated by state statute.

The North Carolina General Statutes, specifically Chapter 113, Article 1, addresses the jurisdiction and management of the state’s coastal waters and submerged lands. Article 1, Section 113-132 defines “inland waters” as all the tidal waters of North Carolina lying landward of the harbor lines as established or recognized by competent authority. This definition is crucial for determining which regulatory framework applies to activities within these waters. The question revolves around the delineation of these inland waters. While the Outer Banks form a barrier island system that naturally creates sounds and bays landward of them, the legal definition of inland waters in North Carolina is tied to established harbor lines, not solely to geographical features. These harbor lines are often set by federal or state authorities to define navigable channels or port areas. Therefore, any tidal waters lying landward of these officially recognized harbor lines are considered inland waters under North Carolina law. This distinction is vital for licensing, permitting, and enforcement of various activities, including fishing, development, and resource extraction. The concept of “inland waters” in this context is a legal and administrative construct that may not perfectly align with every natural geographic boundary, emphasizing the importance of official delineations.

North Carolina’s coastal waters are subject to a complex regulatory framework that balances state sovereignty, federal authority, and international law principles concerning maritime zones. The state’s jurisdiction extends to the territorial sea, which is generally understood as the belt of sea extending seaward from the coastline. Under the Submerged Lands Act of 1953, the United States relinquished its claims to submerged lands and the waters above them to the states within their historic boundaries. For North Carolina, this typically means jurisdiction extends to three nautical miles from the baseline, which is the mean low water line along the coast. This jurisdiction encompasses the right to regulate activities such as fishing, resource extraction, and navigation within these waters. However, the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS), located beyond the three-nautical-mile limit, falls under federal jurisdiction, governed by laws like the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act. Therefore, when considering activities occurring beyond the immediate coastline but still within the commonly accepted territorial sea, North Carolina law is the primary governing authority for most purposes, unless specific federal preemption applies. The question probes the understanding of this jurisdictional boundary and the primary legal authority within North Carolina’s territorial waters, which are defined by state law and federal enactments that recognize state claims.

The North Carolina General Statute §113-179 addresses the regulation of fishing gear and methods within the state’s waters. Specifically, it empowers the North Carolina Marine Fisheries Commission to adopt rules governing the types of nets, traps, and other fishing devices that may be used, as well as the seasons, sizes, and locations for their deployment. This authority is crucial for managing fish stocks sustainably and preventing overfishing. The statute also outlines penalties for violations, including fines and forfeiture of gear. When considering the use of a specific type of fishing equipment, such as a pound net, the applicable regulations would be those promulgated by the Commission under the authority granted by this statute. These regulations often specify mesh size, net length, lead net configuration, and placement within designated fishing areas to minimize bycatch and protect vulnerable species. The question hinges on identifying the statutory basis for such regulatory authority in North Carolina, which is §113-179.

The North Carolina General Statutes, specifically Chapter 113, Article 4, governs the management and leasing of state-owned submerged lands. When considering the leasing of such lands for activities like aquaculture or renewable energy projects, the State of North Carolina, through its designated agencies such as the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ), must adhere to a rigorous process. This process prioritizes public interest, environmental protection, and the equitable distribution of resources. The leasing authority is vested in the Governor, who typically delegates the operational aspects to DEQ. Lease applications are subject to public notice and comment periods, allowing stakeholders to voice concerns or offer input. Furthermore, any lease granted must not impede navigation, fishing rights, or other traditional uses of the waterways, unless explicitly justified and mitigated. The duration and terms of the lease are determined based on the proposed use, environmental impact assessments, and economic considerations, all within the framework of state law. The statute does not mandate a fixed percentage of revenue to be allocated to local governments for all types of leases; rather, it allows for discretionary allocation based on the specific impact and benefit to the locality. Therefore, the assertion that a mandatory 10% of all lease revenue automatically goes to the county where the submerged land is located is not universally true under North Carolina law.

The Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA) of 1953 is a foundational piece of federal legislation that governs the exploration and exploitation of mineral resources on the U.S. Outer Continental Shelf (OCS). North Carolina, like other coastal states, has specific jurisdictional boundaries defined by federal and state law. The Submerged Lands Act of 1953 generally grants states title to and ownership of submerged lands and natural resources within their seaward boundaries, typically extending to three nautical miles from the coastline. However, the OCSLA specifically asserts federal jurisdiction over the OCS, which begins at the seaward boundary of the states and extends seaward to the edge of the continental shelf. This federal jurisdiction is paramount for all activities on the OCS, including the leasing and regulation of oil and gas exploration. Therefore, when considering the authority to lease submerged lands for hydrocarbon extraction beyond the state’s territorial sea, federal law, specifically the OCSLA administered by the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM), is the controlling authority. North Carolina’s state jurisdiction, as defined by the Submerged Lands Act and its own statutes, is limited to its territorial waters. The question asks about leasing for hydrocarbon extraction beyond the state’s territorial sea, which unequivocally falls under federal jurisdiction.

The North Carolina General Statutes Chapter 113, Article 7, specifically addresses the jurisdiction and management of the State’s estuarine waters and the resources within them. Section 113-132 defines “coastal fishing waters” as all waters within the State where tidal waters are present, excluding fresh water. This definition is crucial for understanding the scope of regulations governing fishing activities. The Outer Banks, being a series of barrier islands along the North Carolina coast, are intrinsically linked to these coastal fishing waters. The management of fisheries within these waters falls under the purview of the North Carolina Marine Fisheries Commission, as established by statute. The question probes the understanding of which governmental entity holds primary authority over the management of marine and estuarine resources within North Carolina’s territorial sea and internal waters, excluding federal waters. The North Carolina Marine Fisheries Commission, operating under the Department of Environmental Quality, is the designated body for this responsibility, as outlined in North Carolina law. This includes setting regulations for fishing seasons, gear types, and catch limits to ensure the sustainability of fish stocks and the protection of marine ecosystems within the state’s jurisdiction. Federal waters, commencing at the seaward boundary of the territorial sea, are managed by federal agencies like the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Fisheries.

The question probes the understanding of North Carolina’s jurisdiction over its submerged lands, specifically concerning the regulatory framework for activities impacting the seabed and subsoil. North Carolina General Statute \(113-131\) establishes the State’s ownership and regulatory authority over lands covered by navigable waters. This authority extends to the protection of the marine and estuarine environment, including the seabed and subsoil. Any activity that involves the removal, disturbance, or alteration of these areas, even if for scientific research, requires a permit or authorization from the relevant state agencies, such as the Division of Coastal Management or the Division of Marine Fisheries, depending on the nature and location of the activity. The purpose of such regulations is to manage the state’s valuable coastal resources sustainably, prevent environmental degradation, and ensure orderly development. Therefore, a permit would be required for any scientific endeavor that necessitates direct interaction with the seabed or subsoil within North Carolina’s territorial waters.

The Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA) of 1953, as amended, is the primary federal statute governing the exploration and exploitation of the natural resources of the outer continental shelf (OCS). For purposes of OCSLA, the OCS is defined as all submerged lands lying seaward of State waters that are under the jurisdiction of the United States and are subject to its national defense and protection. North Carolina’s territorial sea extends three nautical miles from its coastline. Federal jurisdiction under OCSLA begins where state jurisdiction ends. Therefore, the federal government’s jurisdiction under OCSLA for resource development in North Carolina commences at the seaward boundary of North Carolina’s territorial sea, which is three nautical miles from the coast. This boundary is established by state law and recognized by federal law. Activities occurring within this three-nautical-mile limit fall under North Carolina’s jurisdiction, while activities seaward of this limit fall under federal jurisdiction, primarily governed by OCSLA. The question asks about the jurisdictional boundary for resource exploration under federal law, specifically OCSLA, in relation to North Carolina. This means we are looking for the point where federal jurisdiction begins, which is immediately seaward of North Carolina’s state waters.