Requirements are statements of the needs, expectations, or conditions that must be met by a solution. Requirements should be clear, complete, consistent, and testable, so that they can be understood, verified, and validated by the stakeholders. If the requirements are not ready for peer review, it means that they have not met these quality criteria, and that they need to be refined or revised. One possible cause of this situation is that the requirements do not provide all of the information needed to define the work, such as the scope, objectives, deliverables, assumptions, constraints, risks, dependencies, etc. This would make it difficult for the peer reviewers to evaluate the feasibility, accuracy, and alignment of the requirements with the business needs and goals. The other options are not likely to cause this problem. Some requirements having not yet been discussed in a work group session is not a reason to delay the peer review, as long as the requirements have been elicited from the relevant sources and documented properly. The requirements’ reference codes not tracing to the attribute numbers in the work breakdown structure is a minor issue that can be easily fixed by updating the reference codes or the work breakdown structure. The requirements documents having not yet received sign-off from the sponsor is not a prerequisite for peer review, as sign-off is usually obtained after the peer review and validation process. References: PMI-PBA® Examination Content Outline, page 13; PMI-PBA® Reference List, page 1, BABOK® Guide v3, page 39.