Iowa Admin. Code r. 567-54.8
If a complainant accepts compensation from a permittee for settlement of a well interference conflict, any future complaint by the complainant against the same permittee will not be considered unless: a significant change in the permitted withdrawal occurs; the permittee utilized simplified test pumping procedures or other less than optimal verification methods, as described in Bulletin No. 23; or the permittee provided compensation to resolve less than the estimated worst-case well interference. A complainant who accepts compensation from an applicant is still eligible for compensation if subsequent well interference is proven to be greater than that resolved in the original settlement.
If a previous complaint was dismissed or settled without compensation, a new complaint must include justification for reconsideration. Justification may include a significant change in withdrawals by the suspect permittee or water level measurements from the complainant's well which indicate more well interference than found in the previous complaint. A physical change to withdrawal facilities may be considered a significant change to a permitted use (e.g., moving the withdrawal location, installing a new well, or installing a higher-capacity pump).
A complaint which was dismissed due to failure to cooperate, as provided in rule 54.3(455B), will be reconsidered when the required cooperation is demonstrated. However, it will be treated as a new complaint.
Iowa Admin. Code r. 567-54.8