>>I needed to have the user change the repair types, that would make sense. But since those are set in stone, it really isn't necessary.
>
>Famous last words. :)
>
>Seriously, eliminating repeating columns does sound like a lot of work, but it can pay off even if the number of columns doesn't change. If you're able to handle things in a generic way, you find yourself doing one job when the spec changes instead of six (in your case).
>
>Of course, that doesn't mean it makes sense to do that at this point.

To change the repair cycle would require massive reprogramming anyway, so adding another "repeating column" would be the least of my worries. :)

-Michelle