- AIA Claim window
- 21 days after the event, or 21 days after the claimant first recognizes it, whichever is later. AIA A201-2017 §15.1.3.1.
- AIA Claim service
- Valid only by certified or registered mail, or courier with proof of delivery. Email does not serve a Claim. AIA A201-2017 §1.6.2.
- FAR excusable-delay notice
- 10 days' written notice to the Contracting Officer, which the CO may extend. FAR 52.249-10(b)(1).
- FAR Suspension cost cut-off
- No recovery for costs incurred more than 20 days before written notice. FAR 52.242-14(c).
- FAR Changes cost cut-off
- No adjustment under (b) for costs incurred more than 20 days before written notice. FAR 52.243-4(d).
- FAR equitable-adjustment proposal
- Assert the right to adjustment within 30 days of the change order or the (b) notice. FAR 52.243-4(e).
- FAR final-payment backstop
- No proposal or claim after final payment, on either clause. FAR 52.243-4(f) / 52.242-14(c).
- CDA limitation period
- Six years from accrual, when all events fixing liability were known or should have been known. FAR 33.206 / FAR 33.201.
US delay claims run on three stacked clocks, not one, and a claim can be killed by any of them independently of its merits: a 21-day AIA A201-2017 Claim window on private and most institutional work. A set of 10-, 20- and 30-day clauses layered inside FAR fixed-price construction contracts, and, on any federal claim that proceeds under the Contract Disputes Act, a six-year outer limitation from accrual. None of these substitute for the others: a contractor can serve perfect FAR notice and still lose the claim six years later on a CDA accrual argument.
AIA A201-2017: the 21-day window and its service trap
Under §15.1.3.1, a Claim (defined by §15.1.1 to include "a change in the Contract Time," so every time request is a Claim) must be initiated within 21 days after the event giving rise to it, or 21 days after the claimant first recognizes the condition, whichever is later. Notice goes to the other party and to the Initial Decision Maker, copied to the Architect if the Architect is not the IDM. That 21-day rule applies to Claims arising before or during the one-year correction period. §15.1.3.2 governs conditions first arising after it, and drops both the 21-day limit and the IDM referral. Notice there goes to the other party only. The split is real and was new in 2017.
The clock that actually kills claims sits one section earlier. §1.6.2 requires that notice of a Claim (unlike ordinary notices, which may be electronic) be "deemed to have been duly served only if delivered ... by certified or registered mail, or by courier providing proof of delivery." An email that would satisfy every other notice clause in the contract does not serve a Claim. This can waive a meritorious claim despite the owner's actual knowledge of it, and it is one of the most common self-inflicted losses in US construction practice.
FAR: notice, cost cut-offs, and the final-payment backstop
Federal fixed-price construction contracts stack four separate clocks, and they don't all do the same job. The excusable-delay clause requires 10 days' written notice of the causes of delay to the Contracting Officer under FAR 52.249-10(b)(1), but that period is extendable by the CO, and under (b)(2) the CO's findings of fact on the extent of delay, while final and conclusive administratively, remain subject to appeal under the Disputes clause.
The 20-day provisions are a different mechanism entirely: they are cost cut-offs, not entitlement bars. FAR 52.243-4(d) bars recovery under the constructive-change gateway for costs incurred more than 20 days before the written notice, and separately requires the contractor to assert the right to an equitable adjustment within 30 days of the change order or the (b) notice under (e), with no proposal permitted after final payment under (f). FAR 52.242-14(c) runs the same 20-day cost cut-off for Suspension of Work claims, inapplicable to a formal suspension order, and layers on its own hard backstop: the claim must be asserted as soon as practicable after the suspension ends and not later than final payment. Notice early to protect the 20-day window: the cut-off runs backwards from the notice date, so a late notice permanently shrinks recoverable cost even where entitlement is never in doubt.
FAR notice clocks
Administrative, and largely forgiving
FAR notice clocks (10-day, 20-day, 30-day) are administrative and largely forgiving: the CO can extend the 10-day period, and the 20-day provisions only cap recoverable cost rather than extinguish the claim.
The final-payment backstops
Absolute, and unforgiving
The final-payment backstops are absolute: FAR 52.236-2(d) joins 52.243-4(f) and 52.242-14(c) on the same footing: no claim survives final payment under any of the three clauses, regardless of how strong the underlying entitlement is.
A fourth way a claim can die has nothing to do with the calendar at all. In B.L. Harbert International v United States, a general release signed as part of an ordinary bilateral modification barred every delay and extended-overhead claim the contractor later tried to bring, and reservation-of-rights letters sent alongside it did not save the claims, because the release's own language controlled. Every modification that resolves a dispute or adjusts scope deserves the same scrutiny as a notice deadline: a broad release can close off a claim years before its six-year CDA clock would otherwise run out.
The CDA layer: six years, $100,000, and when the clock starts
Above the contract-clause clocks sits the Contract Disputes Act's statutory limitation. A claim must be submitted in writing to the Contracting Officer within six years of accrual under FAR 33.206. Accrual itself is defined by FAR 33.201 as the point when "all events that fix the alleged liability ... were known or should have been known". Monetary damages need not have been incurred yet. Injury suffices. Claims exceeding $100,000 additionally require certification in the prescribed statutory words under FAR 33.207, and a bottom-line delay total without itemized components can fail the related sum-certain requirement.
Two ASBCA decisions in this corpus show how the accrual rule actually bites. In Watts Constructors, LLC, ASBCA 63753 (25 September 2025), the six-year bar killed a delay claim tied to a tardy modification because the contractor knew of the impact when it occurred: accrual runs from the impact, not from the eventual quantification of cost. In Restoration Specialists, LLC, ASBCA 63284 (14 November 2023), the Board held there is no single accrual date for a global delay claim: each delay accrues when the contractor became aware of the government act causing it. That cuts both ways: it protects later delays within a global claim from an accrual date set by an earlier one, but it equally exposes the earliest delays in the same claim to their own six-year bar, calculated separately.
Calendar the CDA date from the impact, not from the claim's eventual quantification, and, for a global or rolling claim, track accrual separately for each discrete government act rather than assuming one filing date covers the whole claim.
Sources et jurisprudence
- AIA A201-2017 §15.1.3: Claims, time limits AIA A201-2017, §15.1.3.1 / §15.1.3.2§15.1.3.1 requires a Claim, including a request for additional Contract Time, to be initiated within 21 days of the event or 21 days after the claimant first recognizes the condition, whichever is later. §15.1.3.2 removes that limit for conditions first arising after the one-year correction period.Secondary/reconstructed: AIA A201-2017 text is not published in this corpus. Clause numbers and section headings are verified, operative wording is reconstructed from converging secondary sources.
- AIA A201-2017 §1.6.2: Claim service requirement AIA A201-2017, §1.6.2Notice of a Claim is deemed duly served only if delivered by certified or registered mail, or by courier providing proof of delivery, unlike ordinary notices under §1.6.1, which may be electronic.Secondary/reconstructed: AIA A201-2017 text is not published in this corpus. Clause numbers and section headings are verified, operative wording is reconstructed from converging secondary sources.
- FAR 52.249-10: Default (Fixed-Price Construction) FAR 52.249-10(b)(1)-(2)Requires 10 days' written notice of the causes of delay to the Contracting Officer, extendable by the CO. The CO then ascertains the facts and extent of delay, with findings final and conclusive subject to appeal under the Disputes clause.Primary for clause number/date only (acquisition.gov). The FAR Overhaul is mid-flight and agencies may incorporate class-deviated text. Always read the clause as awarded in the contract, not the FAR website.Chercher sur acquisition.gov →
- FAR 52.242-14: Suspension of Work FAR 52.242-14(c)Bars recovery for costs incurred more than 20 days before written notice (inapplicable to a formal suspension order), and requires the claim to be asserted as soon as practicable after the suspension ends and not later than final payment.Primary for clause number/date only (acquisition.gov). The FAR Overhaul is mid-flight and agencies may incorporate class-deviated text. Always read the clause as awarded in the contract, not the FAR website.Chercher sur acquisition.gov →
- FAR 52.243-4: Changes FAR 52.243-4(d)-(f)No adjustment for costs incurred more than 20 days before written notice under the constructive-change gateway. The contractor must assert the right to an equitable adjustment within 30 days of the change order or the (b) notice. No proposal after final payment.Primary for clause number/date only (acquisition.gov). The FAR Overhaul is mid-flight and agencies may incorporate class-deviated text. Always read the clause as awarded in the contract, not the FAR website.Chercher sur acquisition.gov →
- FAR 33.206: Contract Disputes Act limitation period FAR 33.206A claim must be submitted in writing to the Contracting Officer within six years of accrual.FAR provision implementing the Contract Disputes Act's six-year limitation. Primary for clause number/date only (acquisition.gov). The statutory architecture is unaffected by the pending FAR Overhaul, but always confirm against the contract as incorporated.Chercher sur acquisition.gov →
- FAR 33.207: Claim certification FAR 33.207Requires certification, in the prescribed statutory words, for claims exceeding $100,000.FAR provision implementing the Contract Disputes Act's certification requirement. Primary for clause number/date only (acquisition.gov). Confirm against the contract as incorporated.Chercher sur acquisition.gov →
- FAR 33.201: Claim accrual FAR 33.201Defines accrual as the point when all events fixing the alleged liability were known or should have been known. Monetary damages need not have been incurred.FAR provision implementing the Contract Disputes Act's accrual rule. Primary for clause number/date only (acquisition.gov). Confirm against the contract as incorporated.Chercher sur acquisition.gov →
- Watts Constructors, LLC ASBCA 63753 (25 September 2025)The CDA six-year bar killed a delay claim about a tardy modification because the contractor knew of the impact when it occurred. Accrual runs from the impact, not from the eventual quantification of cost.Secondary: ASBCA decision reported in the source corpus. Not independently re-verified this pass.Chercher sur ASBCA →
- Restoration Specialists, LLC ASBCA 63284 (14 November 2023)There is no single accrual date for a global delay claim. Each delay accrues when the contractor became aware of the government act causing it, which can both protect and expose different parts of the same claim.Secondary: ASBCA decision reported in the source corpus. Not independently re-verified this pass.Chercher sur ASBCA →
- FAR 52.236-2(d): Differing Site Conditions FAR 52.236-2(d)No claim under the Differing Site Conditions clause is allowed unless the contractor gave the required prompt written notice, and, like the Suspension of Work and Changes clauses, the clause carries its own bar against asserting a claim after final payment.Clause number sourced from acquisition.gov. Primary for clause number only. The RFO is mid-flight. Read the clause as incorporated in the contract, which may carry deviated text, not the FAR website.Chercher sur acquisition.gov →
- B.L. Harbert International v United States COFC No. 22-712 (26 March 2025)A general release executed in a bilateral contract modification barred all of the contractor's delay and extended-overhead claims, and reservation-of-rights letters sent separately did not override the release's plain language.Secondary source. Not independently re-verified this pass.
À propos de ce contenu Le contenu de la bibliothèque est une information générale sur la pratique des réclamations de construction, et non un avis juridique. Le droit à réclamation, les délais et la procédure sont régis par votre propre contrat et par le droit du lieu où les travaux sont exécutés. Révisé le 1 septembre 2026 · Signaler une correction