>I think you are saying that by changing from Having to Where, the SQL Select will run faster, right? Why, then, the original programmer didn't use Where in the first place? That is, I am concerned that there might be another reason he had "Having" instead of Where and I don't want to break it. Unless you think he was just drinking tequila when writing this code <g>

The Where may be faster because it filters in the first phase nut the result but it's no the point. Why use Having if there're no calculated fields? You don't even need GROUP BY, DISTINCT will do.