Last visit was: 19 Nov 2025, 04:34 It is currently 19 Nov 2025, 04:34
Close
GMAT Club Daily Prep
Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track
Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
User avatar
Sk1003
Joined: 16 Jul 2018
Last visit: 26 Feb 2024
Posts: 14
Own Kudos:
344
 [62]
Given Kudos: 11
Posts: 14
Kudos: 344
 [62]
6
Kudos
Add Kudos
56
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Most Helpful Reply
User avatar
MartyMurray
Joined: 11 Aug 2023
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 1,630
Own Kudos:
6,121
 [15]
Given Kudos: 173
GMAT 1: 800 Q51 V51
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 1: 800 Q51 V51
Posts: 1,630
Kudos: 6,121
 [15]
13
Kudos
Add Kudos
2
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
General Discussion
User avatar
GmatKnightTutor
User avatar
Major Poster
Joined: 31 Jan 2020
Last visit: 01 Nov 2025
Posts: 5,228
Own Kudos:
1,568
 [1]
Given Kudos: 18
Posts: 5,228
Kudos: 1,568
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
Gemmie
Joined: 19 Dec 2021
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 491
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 76
Location: Viet Nam
Concentration: Technology, Economics
GMAT Focus 1: 695 Q87 V84 DI83
GPA: 3.55
GMAT Focus 1: 695 Q87 V84 DI83
Posts: 491
Kudos: 427
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
­The option that most strongly indicates that Centreville had not been unreasonable in deciding not to enforce the antipollution laws is: C. The federal government consistently fines only a small fraction of the municipalities that have failed to enforce federal antipollution laws.

This option implies that the risk of being fined for not enforcing the laws is relatively low, suggesting that Centreville’s decision to avoid antagonizing local industries (and thus potentially prevent their relocation) while accepting the small risk of being fined was a reasonable and strategic choice. This context supports the idea that Centreville's decision was a calculated risk rather than an unreasonable action.­
User avatar
licrolicro
Joined: 29 Mar 2025
Last visit: 27 Sep 2025
Posts: 39
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 12
Posts: 39
Kudos: 6
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Alright, let's tackle this problem step by step. I'm going to break it down to understand which option best indicates that Centreville's decision not to enforce the antipollution laws was reasonable.
Understanding the Scenario

First, let's summarize the given information:

Federal Law Requirement: Federal antipollution laws require local industries to buy expensive new pollution-control equipment.

Centreville's Action: The municipality of Centreville did not enforce these laws.

Reason for Non-Enforcement: Centreville feared that enforcing the laws would antagonize local industries, causing them to relocate to other municipalities.

Consequence: The federal government fined Centreville for not enforcing these laws.

The question asks: Which of the following, if true, indicates most strongly that Centreville had not been unreasonable in deciding not to enforce the antipollution laws?

In other words, we're looking for a statement that supports the idea that Centreville's decision to not enforce the laws was justified or reasonable.
Defining "Reasonable" in This Context

For Centreville's decision to be "reasonable," there should be evidence that:

Enforcing the laws would indeed lead to significant negative consequences (like industries relocating).

The negative consequences of enforcing the laws outweigh the benefits (or the fines are less damaging than losing industries).

There's a valid reason to believe that industries would relocate if the laws were enforced.

Analyzing Each Option

Let's go through each option to see which one best supports Centreville's decision as reasonable.
Option A:

Municipal sewage-treatment plants in general are ill equipped to handle industrial wastes, which contain both chemical and metal pollutants.

This talks about sewage-treatment plants not being able to handle industrial wastes.

It doesn't directly relate to industries relocating due to enforcement of antipollution laws.

It might suggest that enforcing laws is hard, but doesn't support the fear of industries leaving.

Not the best support for Centreville's decision.

Option B:

The antipollution laws require all industries to meet the same standards, regardless of the fact that compliance is far more difficult for some industries than for others.

This points out that the laws are uniformly applied, making it harder for some industries.

It might imply that some industries would find it costly to comply, possibly leading them to relocate.

This could support the idea that enforcing laws might drive industries away.

Potential support, but let's see others.

Option C:

The federal government consistently fines only a small fraction of the municipalities that have failed to enforce federal antipollution laws.

This suggests that many municipalities don't enforce the laws, and few get fined.

It might imply that Centreville thought they wouldn't be fined, but they were.

Doesn't directly support that not enforcing was reasonable due to fear of industries relocating.

Not strongly supporting Centreville's reasonableness.

Option D:

Several nearby municipalities have nonpolluting industries within their municipal boundaries.

Nearby municipalities have industries that don't pollute.

Doesn't directly relate to whether polluting industries would relocate from Centreville.

Maybe implies other places are cleaner, but not clear support for Centreville's decision.

Not strongly relevant.

Option E:

For some polluting industries currently located in Centreville, the cost of relocating to another municipality would be prohibitively high because of new construction that would be required.

This states that for some industries, relocating is very expensive due to new construction costs.

If relocation is too costly, these industries wouldn't move even if laws were enforced.

This contradicts Centreville's fear that industries would relocate if laws were enforced.

Seems to weaken Centreville's reasoning, not support it. Wait, that's the opposite of what we want.

Wait a minute, this seems counter to what we're looking for. We want something that supports that Centreville was reasonable in fearing relocation. Option E suggests that relocation is too costly, meaning industries wouldn't relocate, making Centreville's fear unfounded. So this doesn't support their decision as reasonable.

Hmm, maybe I misread earlier. Let me re-examine Option B.

Re-evaluating Option B:

The antipollution laws require all industries to meet the same standards, regardless of the fact that compliance is far more difficult for some industries than for others.

If compliance is very difficult for some industries, they might choose to relocate rather than bear the high costs of compliance. This directly supports Centreville's fear that enforcing the laws could drive industries away, making their decision not to enforce seem reasonable to avoid economic harm from losing industries.

Comparing with Option E:

Option E suggests industries wouldn't relocate, which undermines Centreville's reasoning. So E is not supporting.

Option B supports that some industries would find compliance very difficult, hence might relocate, justifying Centreville's fear.

Other Options:

A is about sewage plants, not directly about relocation.
C is about fines being rare, not about relocation.
D is about other municipalities having nonpolluting industries, not directly relevant.
Conclusion

Option B most strongly indicates that Centreville's decision was reasonable because it suggests that enforcing the laws would be very difficult for some industries, making relocation a plausible outcome, which aligns with Centreville's concern.

Final Answer: B
Moderators:
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7445 posts
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
234 posts
188 posts