District court jurisdiction

A complainant may bring a de novo action in district court if there is no final order of the Secretary, one year has passed since the filing of the ERA complaint, and there is no showing that the delay was due to the complainant's bad faith. See 24.114(a) for the statutory conditions.

• This provides the right to a whole new (de novo) review by the court rather than limiting the court to reviewing the agency record.
• The district court will have jurisdiction regardless of the monetary amount at issue under this rule.

No — the district court has jurisdiction without regard to the amount in controversy under 24.114(a). See 24.114(a).

• That means a complainant can seek review in federal district court even if the monetary value of the claim is small or uncertain.

The one-year period is measured from the filing date of the original complaint under the Energy Reorganization Act. See 24.114(a).

• Count one year from the date you filed your ERA retaliation complaint with the agency; only after that one-year period (and the other conditions are met) may you file in district court.

A final order of the Secretary prevents the one-year de novo filing right described in 24.114(a); the de novo option applies only if there is no final order of the Secretary. See 24.114(a).

• If the Secretary has issued a final order in the administrative proceeding, the complainant may no longer invoke the one-year de novo filing provision in that form.

A 'de novo' review means the district court will consider the complaint anew, without being bound to defer to the agency's prior findings, when the conditions in 24.114(a) are met. See 24.114(a).

• Practically, this allows the court to hear evidence and legal arguments afresh rather than only reviewing the administrative record for errors.

A complainant must give notice at least fifteen days in advance of filing a complaint in federal court under 24.114(b). See 24.114(b).

• That 15-day notice requirement applies regardless of where the administrative proceeding is pending.

The complainant must file the 15-day notice with the Assistant Secretary, the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ), or the Administrative Review Board (ARB), depending on where the proceeding is pending. See 24.114(b).

• File the notice with whichever of those officials is handling your administrative proceeding at the time.

The 15-day notice must be served on all parties to the proceeding, and a copy must be served on the Regional Administrator, the Assistant Secretary, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, and the Associate Solicitor, Division of Fair Labor Standards, U.S. Department of Labor. See 24.114(b).

• Serving 'all parties to the proceeding' typically means the employer and any other named parties in the administrative case.

The complainant must file and serve a copy of the district court complaint on the same agency officials (Regional Administrator, Assistant Secretary, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, and the Associate Solicitor, Division of Fair Labor Standards) as soon as possible after the district court complaint has been filed. See 24.114(b).

• The regulation does not prescribe a specific deadline beyond 'as soon as possible,' so act promptly to serve those copies after filing in court.

Yes — provided the conditions in 24.114(a) are met (no final order, one year has passed since filing, and no showing of bad faith delay), a complainant may bring a de novo action even if the administrative proceeding is still pending, but the complainant must give the 15-day notice required by 24.114(b). See 24.114(a) and 24.114(b).

• The notice must be filed with the Assistant Secretary, ALJ, or ARB (whichever is handling the proceeding) and served on the listed agency officials and all parties.

The complainant must show there has not been delay due to the bad faith of the complainant; the one-year de novo option applies only when there is no showing of bad-faith delay. See 24.114(a).

• Whether a delay is "due to the bad faith of the complainant" is a factual determination; the regulation conditions the one-year filing right on the absence of such bad-faith delay.