Owner's Project Requirements, Basis of Design, and Design Review
OPR vs. BOD
The OPR is the owner's written statement of needs, goals, and measurable performance criteria - what the facility must do. The BOD is the design team's response documenting assumptions, codes, calculations, and system selections - how the design meets the OPR. Trap: candidates confuse the two. Remember: OPR = owner's wants/needs; BOD = designer's technical answer. The CxA reviews the BOD for clarity, completeness, and consistency with the OPR, but does not author it.
What makes a good OPR
Strong OPRs contain measurable, testable criteria (e.g., space temperature and humidity ranges, redundancy, efficiency targets, indoor air quality, acoustics, training needs). Vague statements ("comfortable") are a weakness to flag. The OPR should be updated as the project evolves and is the benchmark against which FPT is judged.
Design review
Commissioning design review checks that Cx requirements, testability, and OPR criteria are reflected in the drawings and specifications - not a full code or peer design review. Look for issues that would prevent verification: missing access, no test ports, ambiguous sequences of operation, or absent Cx language in specs.
Rule of thumb
If a criterion cannot be measured or tested, it does not belong in a strong OPR. Every FPT should trace back to an OPR statement or a BOD design intent.
Worked example
Owner states "server room must hold 68–77°F and ≤60% RH." The BOD specifies a redundant cooling system with a sequence of operation. Design review confirms the sequence is testable and the OPR criteria are measurable - a clean traceable chain.