--Original query:SELECT * FROM vlo.vids_IdentityMaster WHERE (EmployeeNumber IS NULL OR EmployeeNumber NOT LIKE 'U%') AND(NetworkId > 'A') AND (EmployeeType IN ('E', 'A', 'C')) AND (Location NOT LIKE '%MTMC%') AND (Location NOT LIKE 'RK%') OR (EmployeeNumber IS NULL OR EmployeeNumber NOT LIKE 'U%') AND (NetworkId > 'A') AND (EmployeeType IN ('E', 'A', 'C')) AND (Location NOT LIKE '%MTMC%') AND (EmployeeStatus IN ('T', 'R', 'D')) OR (NetworkId > 'A') AND (EmployeeType IN ('E', 'C')) AND (Location = 'QCQCRF')--Yes, I boiled it down to (I believe) this:SELECT * FROM vlo.vids_IdentityMaster WHERE ((EmployeeNumber IS NULL OR EmployeeNumber NOT LIKE 'U%') AND(NetworkId > 'A') AND (EmployeeType IN ('E', 'A', 'C')) AND (Location NOT LIKE '%MTMC%') AND (Location NOT LIKE 'RK%')) OR ((EmployeeNumber IS NULL OR EmployeeNumber NOT LIKE 'U%') AND (NetworkId > 'A') AND (EmployeeType IN ('E', 'A', 'C')) AND (Location NOT LIKE '%MTMC%') AND (EmployeeStatus IN ('T', 'R', 'D'))) OR ((NetworkId > 'A') AND (EmployeeType IN ('E', 'C')) AND (Location = 'QCQCRF'))--It’s entirely possible that was the original intent. I’m not sure if it’s functioning like that (you may note I added some parenthesis for logic groupings) or if it’s functioning more like this:SELECT * FROM vlo.vids_IdentityMaster WHERE (EmployeeNumber IS NULL OR EmployeeNumber NOT LIKE 'U%') AND (NetworkId > 'A') AND (NetworkId > 'A') AND (EmployeeType IN ('E', 'A', 'C')) AND (EmployeeType IN ('E', 'A', 'C')) AND (Location NOT LIKE '%MTMC%') AND (Location NOT LIKE '%MTMC%') AND (Location NOT LIKE 'RK%') AND (Location = 'QCQCRF') AND (EmployeeStatus IN ('T', 'R', 'D')) AND (EmployeeType IN ('E', 'C')) OR (NetworkId > 'A') OR (EmployeeNumber IS NULL OR EmployeeNumber NOT LIKE 'U%') --In which case, WHAT? That would be simplified down to the whopping:SELECT * FROM vlo.vids_IdentityMaster WHERE(NetworkId > 'A') OR (EmployeeNumber IS NULL OR EmployeeNumber NOT LIKE 'U%') --My testing leads me to believe that MSSQL performs order of operations like the first option, which makes less sense to me syntactically but at least then that huge query isn’t a complete waste. That said, I’m not sure there’s anything wrong with the last option… It pulls in a few more people, but I’m not sure if that’s a bad thing (they may be the people that were missing in the first place). We need to review this whole thing.