| Risks |
| Delivery deadlines may be unreasonable. |
| Late deliveries may result in additional costs to Livermore. |
| Defects in the PPF may have negative consequences. |
| Governmental constraints may inhibit development of PPF. |
| Integration into larger systems may be problematic. |
| The PPF interface may be too difficult to use by developers. |
| The the developers needs may not remain consistent over time. |
| Senior management at Livermore may not approve of the PPF. |
| Documentation for developers may not adequately describe the PPF. |
| Mitigation |
| Careful planning in the design phase will help provide |
| reasonable deadlines for deliverables. |
| Developers intending on using PPF will be updated as to its |
| progress during development so they will be able to plan around the projects progress. |
| The PPF must be thoroughly tested to eliminate defects. |
| Full specification and design of project must be presented |
| and approved of by senior LLNL management before development. |
| Packages which will include the PPF must be carefully studied |
| during design to ensure that there will be no incompatibility issues. |
| Efforts must be directed towards keeping the PPF interface simple. |
| The PPF should provide a basic functionality that will be |
| useful for the life of the KULL project. |
| As stated before, the proposal of the project must pass senior |
| management approval. |
| Each stage of the design and the development process must be |
| fully documented. |