Wait, is the correct answer 'All of the above'? Because that's usually how these trick questions work, right? *chuckles* Nah, just kidding. I'm going with B, it's the only one that sounds logical to me.
I'm leaning towards B as well. It just makes sense that the associated PM records can be created for the Master PM, regardless of whether it has a specific asset attached. Gotta love these maintenance questions, they really make you think!
C can't be right, 90 days seems way too short for PM records. Those should stick around for at least a year, if not longer. Maybe they're trying to trick us with that one.
Hmm, I was going to say D, but now I'm second-guessing myself. I thought the associated records could only be tied to the asset location, not the asset itself. This is a tricky one!
I'm pretty sure it's B. The question says 'Master Preventative Maintenance (PM) records', so the associated PM records should be able to be created for the Master PM itself, even if it doesn't have a specific asset attached to it.
Abel
24 days agoOlive
4 days agoErnestine
28 days agoMammie
1 months agoOna
18 hours agoLucy
14 days agoElena
28 days agoShad
1 months agoEden
2 months agoJacqueline
28 days agoRegenia
29 days agoLaquita
2 months agoJeffrey
2 months agoLaquita
2 months ago