RPTR STATES THAT THE PRESENT LOCATION OF K90'S ASR 9 RADAR DOES NOT ALLOW FOR GOOD COVERAGE SO HDOFS CAN BE DONE IN A TIMELY MANNER BTWN PVD AND K90. RPTR SUGGESTS MOVING THE PRESENT BOUNDARY TO FIX THE PROB.

Narrative

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