GMAT Question of the Day - Daily to your Mailbox; hard ones only

It is currently 18 Oct 2019, 01:50

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

Hutonian Government Official: Federal law requires truck drivers to

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:

Hide Tags

Find Similar Topics 
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Joined: 07 Jan 2008
Posts: 284
Hutonian Government Official: Federal law requires truck drivers to  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post Updated on: 30 Jul 2019, 04:37
4
1
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  5% (low)

Question Stats:

84% (01:49) correct 16% (02:08) wrong based on 367 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

Hutonian Government Official: Federal law requires truck drivers to take a long break after driving for ten hours, but truck drivers frequently do not comply. Since the public rest areas along our highways cannot accommodate all the drivers needing a break, we plan to build more rest areas to increase the rate of compliance.

Hutonian Business Representative: But if the parking lots around our businesses are considered, there are more than enough parking places.

Which of the following, if true about Hutonia, would provide a reason for persisting with the government official's plan despite the objection?


(A) Public parking areas are evenly distributed along the highways.

(B) Truck drivers are most likely not to comply with the federal law if the total time required for a trip exceeds ten hours by less than an hour.

(C) In comparison to public rest areas, private parking lots near highways tend to be time-consuming for drivers to reach.

(D) Even when rest areas are available, some truck drivers park in places, such as highway access ramps, where their trucks are likely to cause accidents.

(E) Some public parking areas, particularly those on heavily traveled roads, are substantially larger than others.

Originally posted by lexis on 01 Oct 2008, 01:15.
Last edited by hazelnut on 30 Jul 2019, 04:37, edited 3 times in total.
Renamed the topic and edited the question.
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 05 Jun 2008
Posts: 247
Re: Hutonian Government Official: Federal law requires truck drivers to  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 01 Oct 2008, 01:58
lexis wrote:
Hutonian Government Official: Federal law requires truck drivers to take a long break after driving for ten hours, but truck drivers frequently do not comply. Since the public rest areas along our highways cannot accommodate all the drivers needing a break, we plan to build more rest areas to increase the rate of compliance.

Hutonian Business Representative: But if the parking lots around our businesses are considered, there are more than enough parking places.

Which of the following, if true about Hutonia, would provide a reason for persisting with the government official\'s plan despite the objection?

(A) Public parking areas are evenly distributed along the highways.

(B) Truck drivers are most likely not to comply with the federal law if the total time required for a trip exceeds ten hours by less than an hour.

(C) In comparison to public rest areas, private parking lots near highways tend to be time-consuming for drivers to reach.

(D) Even when rest areas are available, some truck drivers park in places, such as highway access ramps, where their trucks are likely to cause accidents.

(E) Some public parking areas, particularly those on heavily traveled roads, are substantially larger than others.


Only "E" provide a reason for persisting with the government official's plan despite the objection. Hence "E" is the answer.
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 21 Aug 2008
Posts: 140
Re: Hutonian Government Official: Federal law requires truck drivers to  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 01 Oct 2008, 05:47
lexis wrote:
Hutonian Government Official: Federal law requires truck drivers to take a long break after driving for ten hours, but truck drivers frequently do not comply. Since the public rest areas along our highways cannot accommodate all the drivers needing a break, we plan to build more rest areas to increase the rate of compliance.

Hutonian Business Representative: But if the parking lots around our businesses are considered, there are more than enough parking places.

Which of the following, if true about Hutonia, would provide a reason for persisting with the government official\'s plan despite the objection?

(A) Public parking areas are evenly distributed along the highways.

(B) Truck drivers are most likely not to comply with the federal law if the total time required for a trip exceeds ten hours by less than an hour.

(C) In comparison to public rest areas, private parking lots near highways tend to be time-consuming for drivers to reach.

(D) Even when rest areas are available, some truck drivers park in places, such as highway access ramps, where their trucks are likely to cause accidents.

(E) Some public parking areas, particularly those on heavily traveled roads, are substantially larger than others.


I first went to C since it seemed to be clear to me with the reason of "time-consuming" that can be caused by not having a adequate parking lots near highways. But on second thought, I thought B would be better. B means the lack of parking lots actually affected the fact of drivers not complying the law. E is, I think, irrelevant. And the argument is saying that the reason that drivers do not comply the law is not because of the 'time-consuming" approach to the parking lots but because of the lack of parking lots...
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 22 Sep 2008
Posts: 100
Re: Hutonian Government Official: Federal law requires truck drivers to  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 01 Oct 2008, 07:41
1
C is my choice

we need to stick wtih what is given, should not make our assumption.. its clearly says that though parking lots are available truck drives will not go there because its time consuming and more over they do not want to take rest even after 10hours driving(truck drivers frequently do not comply).
Retired Moderator
User avatar
Joined: 18 Jul 2008
Posts: 733
Re: Hutonian Government Official: Federal law requires truck drivers to  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 01 Oct 2008, 10:33
I see your reasoning with B, makes sense, but we have to attack the objection raised by the Business Rep.

That's why I chose C - as this does it.

Richardson wrote:
lexis wrote:
Hutonian Government Official: Federal law requires truck drivers to take a long break after driving for ten hours, but truck drivers frequently do not comply. Since the public rest areas along our highways cannot accommodate all the drivers needing a break, we plan to build more rest areas to increase the rate of compliance.

Hutonian Business Representative: But if the parking lots around our businesses are considered, there are more than enough parking places.

Which of the following, if true about Hutonia, would provide a reason for persisting with the government official\'s plan despite the objection?

(A) Public parking areas are evenly distributed along the highways.

(B) Truck drivers are most likely not to comply with the federal law if the total time required for a trip exceeds ten hours by less than an hour.

(C) In comparison to public rest areas, private parking lots near highways tend to be time-consuming for drivers to reach.

(D) Even when rest areas are available, some truck drivers park in places, such as highway access ramps, where their trucks are likely to cause accidents.

(E) Some public parking areas, particularly those on heavily traveled roads, are substantially larger than others.


I first went to C since it seemed to be clear to me with the reason of "time-consuming" that can be caused by not having a adequate parking lots near highways. But on second thought, I thought B would be better. B means the lack of parking lots actually affected the fact of drivers not complying the law. E is, I think, irrelevant. And the argument is saying that the reason that drivers do not comply the law is not because of the 'time-consuming" approach to the parking lots but because of the lack of parking lots...
VP
VP
User avatar
Joined: 05 Jul 2008
Posts: 1032
Re: Hutonian Government Official: Federal law requires truck drivers to  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 01 Oct 2008, 12:44
Richardson wrote:
lexis wrote:
Hutonian Government Official: Federal law requires truck drivers to take a long break after driving for ten hours, but truck drivers frequently do not comply. Since the public rest areas along our highways cannot accommodate all the drivers needing a break, we plan to build more rest areas to increase the rate of compliance.

Hutonian Business Representative: But if the parking lots around our businesses are considered, there are more than enough parking places.

Which of the following, if true about Hutonia, would provide a reason for persisting with the government official\'s plan despite the objection?

(A) Public parking areas are evenly distributed along the highways.

(B) Truck drivers are most likely not to comply with the federal law if the total time required for a trip exceeds ten hours by less than an hour.

(C) In comparison to public rest areas, private parking lots near highways tend to be time-consuming for drivers to reach.

(D) Even when rest areas are available, some truck drivers park in places, such as highway access ramps, where their trucks are likely to cause accidents.

(E) Some public parking areas, particularly those on heavily traveled roads, are substantially larger than others.


I first went to C since it seemed to be clear to me with the reason of "time-consuming" that can be caused by not having a adequate parking lots near highways. But on second thought, I thought B would be better. B means the lack of parking lots actually affected the fact of drivers not complying the law. E is, I think, irrelevant. And the argument is saying that the reason that drivers do not comply the law is not because of the 'time-consuming" approach to the parking lots but because of the lack of parking lots...


I picked C, but I didn't understand your logic/rationale for B. Would like to hear a better explanation.
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 21 Aug 2008
Posts: 140
Re: Hutonian Government Official: Federal law requires truck drivers to  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 01 Oct 2008, 17:01
icandy wrote:
Richardson wrote:
lexis wrote:
Hutonian Government Official: Federal law requires truck drivers to take a long break after driving for ten hours, but truck drivers frequently do not comply. Since the public rest areas along our highways cannot accommodate all the drivers needing a break, we plan to build more rest areas to increase the rate of compliance.

Hutonian Business Representative: But if the parking lots around our businesses are considered, there are more than enough parking places.

Which of the following, if true about Hutonia, would provide a reason for persisting with the government official\'s plan despite the objection?

(A) Public parking areas are evenly distributed along the highways.

(B) Truck drivers are most likely not to comply with the federal law if the total time required for a trip exceeds ten hours by less than an hour.

(C) In comparison to public rest areas, private parking lots near highways tend to be time-consuming for drivers to reach.

(D) Even when rest areas are available, some truck drivers park in places, such as highway access ramps, where their trucks are likely to cause accidents.

(E) Some public parking areas, particularly those on heavily traveled roads, are substantially larger than others.


I first went to C since it seemed to be clear to me with the reason of "time-consuming" that can be caused by not having a adequate parking lots near highways. But on second thought, I thought B would be better. B means the lack of parking lots actually affected the fact of drivers not complying the law. E is, I think, irrelevant. And the argument is saying that the reason that drivers do not comply the law is not because of the 'time-consuming" approach to the parking lots but because of the lack of parking lots...


I picked C, but I didn't understand your logic/rationale for B. Would like to hear a better explanation.


I see C is wrong but let me just stick to B...
Officer wants to have more rest areas. This is because truck drivers are not taking a rest after driving for 10 hours, the practice that is forced by Fed. law. She also mentioned that the current public couldn't provide enough capacity. Representative said there are enough capacity.

Now, question stem is asking for finding a support for official's argument...what if there are enough places to take a rest for drivers as raised by the representative? Then, the drivers need to find a place to rest. If the total time including the driving exceeds ten hours because of the additional time spent for finding out the resting place, then the drivers are more likly not to comply the regulation. The expression of "less than an hour" seems to provide more support to the choice B. If it is true, then it strenghtens the argument of the officer even after considering the point raised by the representative.

Sorry but this is the best that I can come up with my choice of B.
VP
VP
User avatar
Joined: 05 Jul 2008
Posts: 1032
Re: Hutonian Government Official: Federal law requires truck drivers to  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 01 Oct 2008, 18:51
Richardson wrote:
I see C is wrong but let me just stick to B...
Officer wants to have more rest areas. This is because truck drivers are not taking a rest after driving for 10 hours, the practice that is forced by Fed. law. She also mentioned that the current public couldn't provide enough capacity. Representative said there are enough capacity.

Now, question stem is asking for finding a support for official's argument...what if there are enough places to take a rest for drivers as raised by the representative? Then, the drivers need to find a place to rest. If the total time including the driving exceeds ten hours because of the additional time spent for finding out the resting place, then the drivers are more likly not to comply the regulation. The expression of "less than an hour" seems to provide more support to the choice B. If it is true, then it strenghtens the argument of the officer even after considering the point raised by the representative.

Sorry but this is the best that I can come up with my choice of B.


I am not sure how you arrived at the above bold part. I never felt that the total time includes driving and search for parking.

That said the Q is Which of the following, if true about Hutonia, would provide a reason for persisting with the government official's plan despite the objection?


IMO, C does that by weakening the objection.

No worries. I have been there and felt similar when every one else picked a diff answer.

OP, What is the OA?
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 27 Feb 2014
Posts: 11
Location: India
Concentration: Entrepreneurship, International Business
GMAT 1: 650 Q49 V30
GPA: 3.5
WE: Engineering (Computer Software)
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: Hutonian Government Official: Federal law requires truck drivers to  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 Jan 2015, 07:02
I have one doubt here in the usage of words in the arguement. If we see below

Hutonian Business Representative: But if the parking lots around our businesses are considered.....

Here the talk is about parking places around their businesses which may not necessarily be near highways.

To come to right answer, we have to assume that business also are on highways only and so are the parking lots.

But can we make such assumption to answer this question??
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 18 Jan 2015
Posts: 3
Re: Hutonian Government Official: Federal law requires truck drivers to  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 Jan 2015, 07:30
lexis wrote:
Hutonian Government Official: Federal law requires truck drivers to take a long break after driving for ten hours, but truck drivers frequently do not comply. Since the public rest areas along our highways cannot accommodate all the drivers needing a break, we plan to build more rest areas to increase the rate of compliance.

Hutonian Business Representative: But if the parking lots around our businesses are considered, there are more than enough parking places.

Which of the following, if true about Hutonia, would provide a reason for persisting with the government official\'s plan despite the objection?

(A) Public parking areas are evenly distributed along the highways.

(B) Truck drivers are most likely not to comply with the federal law if the total time required for a trip exceeds ten hours by less than an hour.

(C) In comparison to public rest areas, private parking lots near highways tend to be time-consuming for drivers to reach.

(D) Even when rest areas are available, some truck drivers park in places, such as highway access ramps, where their trucks are likely to cause accidents.

(E) Some public parking areas, particularly those on heavily traveled roads, are substantially larger than others.


I treated this like a weaken question, I wanted to weaken the objection that was raised by the biz reps. To make the governments plan seem more reasonable.

A - This option does not weaken the counter point raised by the biz reps.
B - This has no barring on the issue at hand which is there aren't enough parking lots available. I am not caring about compliance with the law. Just the need for parking lots and how the biz reps attack that need.
C - correct because it weakens the idea of truckers using private lots, therefore enforcing the need for more public areas.
D - This is supporting the opposite of the government. Instead of it being an issue of overcrowding, it's because truckers do not like it.
E - This does not help strengthen the argument or weaken the opposing option.
Non-Human User
User avatar
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 5920
Re: Hutonian Government Official: Federal law requires truck drivers to  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 21 Jan 2019, 05:40
Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.
_________________
GMAT Club Bot
Re: Hutonian Government Official: Federal law requires truck drivers to   [#permalink] 21 Jan 2019, 05:40
Display posts from previous: Sort by

Hutonian Government Official: Federal law requires truck drivers to

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  





Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne