Your answer confirms that the Contractor is obliged to include the effects of non-implemented compensation events on his revised programme. By it’s very nature the non-implemented compensation event is not agreed at this stage and will not be until the Contractor’s assessment is implemented or the PM makes his assessment etc. This will mean the time impact of the CE is not agreed (at present) and therefore the content of the revised programme is open to debate.
Is the PM entitled to reject the revised programme on the grounds of the 3rd bullet point of Clause 32.1 (“how the Contractor plans to deal with any delays”) or would it be more appropriate to accept the revised programme and then adjust the planned Completion when the CE becomes implemented?
Is this bullet point relevant in this situation or is it used to deal specifically with Contractor delays and Defects…theoretically a CE is not a delay because if implemented it will adjust the Completion Date?
Your first question established that yes they should show the effect of non-implemented compensation events on the programme which may well take planned Completion beyond Completion Date. You now ask if this could be rejected due to the third bullet (how Contractor plans to deal with any delays). The answer is no, it cant be rejected for this reason and would not be relevant in this case. Even if this was not a CE and a Contractor delay - they are showing you what they plan to do about it - which is nothing! Not a reason to reject the programme, but will be a reason to charge them delay damages(assuming you have X7) if they now exceed the Completion Date.