ConsensusDocs 200 Weather Delays, Explained

ConsensusDocs 200 is the industry-coalition alternative to AIA A201, and its weather language is close enough to lull you and different enough to hurt you. The substance is familiar. The clock is a week shorter.

The entitlement: §6.3.1

Section 6.3.1 provides that a contractor delayed in the commencement or progress of the Work by any cause beyond its control is entitled to an equitable extension of the Contract Time. Among the listed examples of such causes: adverse weather conditions not reasonably anticipated.

Two words in that phrase carry the weight.

The consequence is the same as under every other form: the clause is meaningless without a baseline. "Reasonably anticipated" is a comparison, and you supply the thing being compared against. See unusually severe weather: what actually counts for how that number gets built.

The two-stage clock: §8.4

This is the provision most likely to cost you a legitimate claim, because it is shorter than A201's and split in two:

StageDeadlineWhat is due
Claim14 days from the eventThe claim itself — notice that you are seeking time and/or cost relief
Documentation21 days after thatThe supporting analysis and evidence

Section 6.3.3 additionally requires written notice of a delay to the owner, and obliges both parties to mitigate its effect.

The split is a gift if you use it as intended. You are not required to have your weather analysis finished in fourteen days — you are required to have claimed in fourteen days. Subs routinely miss the first deadline while assembling material that was never due until the second.

Practical rule: file the claim on the rain event, not on the finished exhibit. Fourteen days from the first unworkable day, in writing, identifying the dates and affected activities. Then use the following three weeks for the baseline comparison and daily-log package.

The mutual duty to mitigate

The obligation in §6.3.3 running to both parties is a real difference from the AIA approach, and it is worth remembering when an owner pushes back. If the owner refused a reasonable resequencing, declined access that would have let weather-independent work proceed, or sat on a decision during the delay period, that is relevant to the mitigation question rather than merely unhelpful.

It cuts at you too. Document what you did do — crews redeployed to weather-independent scope, dewatering, protection measures. A delay record that shows a site simply stopped is weaker than one showing a contractor working the problem.

ConsensusDocs 200 vs AIA A201 on weather

ConsensusDocs 200AIA A201-2017
TestAdverse weather not reasonably anticipated (§6.3.1)Abnormal for the period, not reasonably anticipatable, adverse schedule effect (§15.1.6.2)
RemedyEquitable extension of Contract TimeExtension of Contract Time (§8.3)
MoneyGenerally noGenerally no
Claim deadline14 days, +21 to document (§8.4)21 days (§15.1.3)
MitigationMutual duty (§6.3.3)Primarily on the claimant

The headline: the tests are near-identical and the deadlines are not. A sub who runs A201 habits on a ConsensusDocs job is a week late before starting. If you work under both forms, the safe operating rule is to treat every weather event as if the 14-day clock applies.

What proves the claim

Same evidence stack regardless of which form you are under:

  1. The baseline — what should reasonably have been anticipated at this location in this month, from the nearest official station over a 10-year window.
  2. The actuals — measured precipitation for the period, from that same station.
  3. The unworkable days — including the drying tail after the rain stops, which is where earthwork claims are won and where documentation is usually thinnest. See jobsite soil drying time.
  4. The schedule impact — the affected activities and their position on the critical path.
  5. Timely notice — inside 14 days, in writing.

A full walkthrough is in how to document a weather delay claim.

Establish what was reasonably anticipated

Ilystics generates a 10-year NOAA baseline and USDA soil drying analysis for your exact jobsite — the comparison §6.3.1 asks for, in a form you can attach. Free, no account.

Generate a Free Exhibit

Already in a dispute? Request a $249 Claim Report for the actual-vs-baseline analysis.

Ilystics provides weather and soil analysis, not legal advice. References are to the ConsensusDocs 200 Standard Agreement and General Conditions Between Owner and Constructor and to AIA Document A201-2017, and are provided for general orientation only. ConsensusDocs documents are revised periodically and section numbering varies by edition — verify the citations against the executed version of your contract, and note that negotiated amendments and supplementary conditions control over the standard text. Consult your attorney or claims consultant on entitlement.

Frequently asked questions

What does ConsensusDocs 200 say about weather delays?

Section 6.3.1 entitles the contractor to an equitable extension of the Contract Time when delayed by causes beyond its control, and lists adverse weather conditions not reasonably anticipated among the examples. The test is expectation-based: the question is what a contractor should have anticipated for that place and season, not whether the weather was dramatic.

How long do I have to submit a weather claim under ConsensusDocs 200?

Two stages. Section 8.4 requires the claim be submitted within 14 days of the event giving rise to it, with supporting documentation due 21 days after that. Section 6.3.3 separately requires written notice of the delay itself. The short first deadline is for the claim; the analysis belongs in the second stage.

How is ConsensusDocs 200 different from AIA A201 on weather?

The substance is close — both grant time rather than money for weather worse than anticipated. The differences are procedural and tonal: ConsensusDocs uses a 14-day claim window against A201's 21 days, frames the remedy as an "equitable extension," and imposes a mutual duty to mitigate delay rather than putting the burden entirely on the contractor.

Does ConsensusDocs 200 pay for weather delays?

The base weather entitlement is time, not money — the same excusable but non-compensable treatment found in A201 and the FAR. Cost relief generally requires a different cause, such as an owner-caused delay concurrent with the weather, or a negotiated amendment to the standard language.