6 U.S.C. § 701

Definitions

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 6 CasesGoogle Scholar

In this title— 11 See References in Text note below.(1) the term “Administrator” means the Administrator of the Agency;(2) the term “Agency” means the Federal Emergency Management Agency;(3) the term “appropriate committees of Congress” means—(A) the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of the Senate; and(B) those committees of the House of Representatives that the Speaker of the House of Representatives determines appropriate;(4) the term “catastrophic incident” means any natural disaster, act of terrorism, or other man-made disaster that results in extraordinary levels of casualties or damage or disruption severely affecting the population (including mass evacuations), infrastructure, environment, economy, national morale, or government functions in an area;(5) the term “Department” means the Department of Homeland Security;(6) the terms “emergency” and “major disaster” have the meanings given the terms in section 5122 of title 42;(7) the term “emergency management” means the governmental function that coordinates and integrates all activities necessary to build, sustain, and improve the capability to prepare for, protect against, respond to, recover from, or mitigate against threatened or actual natural disasters, acts of terrorism, or other man-made disasters;(8) the term “emergency response provider” has the meaning given the term in section 101 of this title;(9) the term “Federal coordinating officer” means a Federal coordinating officer as described in section 5143 of title 42;(10) the term “individual with a disability” has the meaning given the term in section 12102 of title 42;(11) the terms “local government” and “State” have the meaning given the terms in section 101 of this title;(12) the term “National Incident Management System” means a system to enable effective, efficient, and collaborative incident management;(13) the term “National Response Plan” means the National Response Plan or any successor plan prepared under section 314(a)(6) of this title;(14) the term “Secretary” means the Secretary of Homeland Security;(15) the term “surge capacity” means the ability to rapidly and substantially increase the provision of search and rescue capabilities, food, water, medicine, shelter and housing, medical care, evacuation capacity, staffing (including disaster assistance employees), and other resources necessary to save lives and protect property during a catastrophic incident; and(16) the term “tribal government” means the government of an Indian tribe or authorized tribal organization, or in Alaska a Native village or Alaska Regional Native Corporation.(Pub. L. 109–295, title VI, § 602, Oct. 4, 2006, 120 Stat. 1394.)Editorial NotesReferences in Text

This title, referred to in text, is title VI of Pub. L. 109–295, Oct. 4, 2006, 120 Stat. 1355, known as the Post-Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act of 2006. For complete classification of title VI to the Code, see Short Title note set out below and Tables.

Section 314(a)(6) of this title, referred to in par. (13), was in the original “section 502(a)(6) of the Homeland Security Act 2002” and was translated as meaning section 502 of Pub. L. 107–296 prior to its redesignation as section 504 by Pub. L. 109–295, § 611(8), and not section 506 of Pub. L. 107–296 which was redesignated section 502 by Pub. L. 109–295, § 611(9), and is classified to section 312 of this title, to reflect the probable intent of Congress.

Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesChange of Name

Any reference to the Administrator of the Federal Emergency Management Agency in title VI of Pub. L. 109–295 or an amendment by title VI to be considered to refer and apply to the Director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency until Mar. 31, 2007, see section 612(f)(2) of Pub. L. 109–295, set out as a note under section 313 of this title.

Effective Date

Pub. L. 109–295, title VI, § 614, Oct. 4, 2006, 120 Stat. 1411, provided that:“(a)In General.—Except as provided in subsection (b), this title [see Tables for classification] and the amendments made by this title shall take effect on the date of enactment of this Act [Oct. 4, 2006].“(b)Exceptions.—The following shall take effect on March 31, 2007:“(1) The amendments made by section 611(11) [enacting section 313 of this title].“(2) The amendments made by section 611(12) [amending section 314 of this title].“(3) Sections 505, 507, 508, and 514 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 [sections 315, 317, 318, and 321c of this title], as amended by section 611(13) of this Act.“(4) The amendments made by subsection (a) [sic].“(5) The amendments made by subsection (b)(1) [sic].”

Short Title of 2022 Amendment

Pub. L. 117–263, div. G, title LXXIII, § 7301, Dec. 23, 2022, 136 Stat. 3684, provided that: “This subtitle [subtitle A (§§ 7301–7309) of title LXXIII of div. G of Pub. L. 117–263, enacting part F of subchapter II of this chapter] may be cited as the ‘Global Catastrophic Risk Management Act of 2022’.”

Short Title of 2020 Amendment

Pub. L. 116–272, § 1, Dec. 31, 2020, 134 Stat. 3349, provided that: “This Act [amending section 791 of this title and enacting provisions set out as notes under section 791 of this title] may be cited as the ‘Federal Advance Contracts Enhancement Act’ or the ‘FACE Act’.”

Short Title of 2019 Amendment

Pub. L. 116–64, § 1, Oct. 9, 2019, 133 Stat. 1122, provided that: “This Act [amending section 748 of this title] may be cited as the ‘Terrorist and Foreign Fighter Travel Exercise Act of 2019’.”

Short Title

Pub. L. 109–295, title VI, § 601, Oct. 4, 2006, 120 Stat. 1394, provided that: “This title [see Tables for classification] may be cited as the ‘Post-Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act of 2006’.”

Clarification of Congressional Intent

Pub. L. 110–53, title XXII, § 2202, Aug. 3, 2007, 121 Stat. 541, provided that: “The Federal departments and agencies (including independent agencies) identified under the provisions of this title [enacting provisions set out as notes under section 194 of this title and section 247d–3a of Title 42, The Public Health and Welfare, and amending provisions set out as a note under section 309 of Title 47, Telecommunications] and title III of this Act [enacting sections 579 and 580 of this title and amending sections 194 and 572 of this title] and title VI of Public Law 109–295 [see Short Title note set out above] shall carry out their respective duties and responsibilities in a manner that does not impede the implementation of requirements specified under this title and title III of this Act and title VI of Public Law 109–295. Notwithstanding the obligations under section 1806 of Public Law 109–295 [probably means Pub. L. 107–296; 6 U.S.C. 576], the provisions of this title and title III of this Act and title VI of Public Law 109–295 shall not preclude or obstruct any such department or agency from exercising its other authorities related to emergency communications matters.”

National Weather Service

Pub. L. 109–295, title VI, § 613, Oct. 4, 2006, 120 Stat. 1411, provided that: “Nothing in this title [see Tables for classification] shall alter or otherwise affect the authorities and activities of the National Weather Service to protect life and property, including under the Act of October 1, 1890 (26 Stat. 653-55) [15 U.S.C. 312 et seq.].”

References in Pub. L. 109–295

Pub. L. 109–295, title VI, § 699A, Oct. 4, 2006, 120 Stat. 1463, provided that: “Except as expressly provided otherwise, any reference to ‘this Act’ contained in this title [see Tables for classification] shall be treated as referring only to the provisions of this title.”

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 14 cases, 1970–2017 · leading case: Hancock v. Train, 426 U.S. 167 (1976).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Hancock v. Train, 426 U.S. 167 (1976). “6 U. S. C. § 701 (a) (2); § 304 (a) (2) of the Clean Air Act, as added, 84 Stat.”

Rosner v. United States, 231 F. Supp. 2d 1202 (S.D. Fla. 2002). “” 6 U.S.C. § 701 (b)(1)(G). Accordingly, because the United States Army seized the Gold Train based on military authority exercised, in the field, the Government argues that the APA’s review provisions are not applicable.”

Lee Argabright Norma J. Argabright v. United States, 35 F.3d 472 (9th Cir. 1994). “6 U.S.C. § 701 (a) (1983). In Selman v. United States, 941 F.”

Krichbaum v. Kelley, 844 F. Supp. 1107 (W.D. Va. 1994). “The action, which was brought pursuant to the Administrative Procedure Act, 6 U.S.C. §§ 701 , et seq. (1977 & supp.1992), 2 challenges Supervisor Kelley’s October 28, 1992 decision to implement the Marble Valley Timber Sale.”

McKinney, Gene C. v. White, Thomas A., 291 F.3d 851 (D.C. Cir. 2002). “He maintains that because decisions by the Judge Advocate General under UCMJ Article 69 are reached independently and constitute final binding decisions affecting the rights of individuals, the Judge Advocate General is an “authority” within the meaning of 6 U.”

Tooahnippah v. Hickel, 397 U.S. 598 (1970). “” 6 U. S. C. § 701 (1964 ed., Supp. IV). Earlier in this Term in City of Chicago v.”

Innovative Mgmt. Concepts, Inc. v. United States, 119 Fed. Cl. 240 (Fed. Cl. 2014). “On February 4, 2014, IMC filed a Complaint in the United States Court of Federal Claims, alleging that the December 4, 2013 GAO decision violated the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”), 6 U.S.C. § 701 , and the Competition In Contracting Act (“CICA”), 41 U.”

Oil, Chem. & Atomic Workers Int'l Union v. Richardson, 214 F.3d 1379 (D.C. Cir. 2000). “Because nothing in the statute provides a meaningful standard against which to judge any such agency nonenforcement, we find the claim barred by the preclusion of review in 6 U.S.C. § 701 (a)(2). See Heckler v. Chaney, 470 U.”

Town of Secaucus v. United States Dep't of Transp., 889 F. Supp. 779 (D.N.J. 1995). “12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) on a number of grounds: (i)the federal transit laws do not expressly authorize a private right of action, and none should be implied; (ii) plaintiffs lack standing to pursue any claim under the Administrative Procedure Act, 6 U.S.C. § 701 et seq. (the…”

Ry. Labor Executives' Ass'n v. Nat'l Mediation Bd., 29 F.3d 655 (D.C. Cir. 1994). “Not surprisingly, we have found that the APA did nothing to change that result, noting that § 10 of the APA is expressly inapplicable where “statutes preclude judicial review”, 6 U.S.C. § 701 (a)(1). American Air Export & Import Co.”

Sultaliev v. Rodriguez, 263 F. Supp. 3d 352 (D. Mass. 2017). “4 (B)(1), (Count I) and the Administrative Procedure Act, 6 U.S.C. § 701 et seq., (Count II). Three months later, in February, 2017, defendants moved to dismiss the complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and for faitee to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.”

Singh v. Moyer, 867 F.2d 1035 (7th Cir. 1989). “6 U.S.C. § 701 (b)(1) (1982). Generally, an agency’s action is subject to judicial review if the action is “arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law.”

Show all 14 citing cases →

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.