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

 It is currently 24 Jun 2018, 19:04

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

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

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

RAGCT 2015 Day 2: Critics of the use of trucks to transport

Author Message
TAGS:

Hide Tags

MBA Section Director
Joined: 19 Mar 2012
Posts: 5181
Location: India
GMAT 1: 760 Q50 V42
GPA: 3.8
WE: Marketing (Non-Profit and Government)
RAGCT 2015 Day 2: Critics of the use of trucks to transport [#permalink]

Show Tags

14 Jul 2015, 11:57
3
16
00:00

Difficulty:

85% (hard)

Question Stats:

55% (02:02) correct 45% (02:31) wrong based on 967 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

Critics of the use of trucks to transport nuclear power plant waste are mistaken in claiming that transportation of such cargo poses an undue risk over that of other transportation methods. For example, Yardow Prefecture allows trucks with a typical gross weight greater than 80,000 pounds to transport nuclear waste and despite the significant number of such journeys, no incidents or handling safety violations have been recorded. It is clear that considering Yardow’s proven safety record, policy­makers
should disregard the critics' concerns and allow trucks to transport nuclear power plant waste as necessary. Which one of the following, if true, most substantially weakens the argument?

A. Transporting nuclear power plant waste by train does not necessarily require trucks to deliver the nuclear waste to a train’s loading depot.

B. The reporting of traffic incidents in Yardow Prefecture was recently transferred to a different regulatory agency.

C. Truck drivers in Yardow Prefecture are required to obtain a specific class of license to drive a truck if the vehicle’s gross weight is greater than 80,000 pounds.

D. The roads used for nuclear waste transport in Yardow Prefecture are restricted to trucks driven by drivers with a certain class of license designated for gross loads exceeding 80,000 pounds, which is over 20,000 pounds greater than the typical gross load.

E. Normal gross truck loads are 60,000 pounds, and for any load greater than 80,000 pounds, two trucks are typically used to transport that load.

Day 2 Question of the Verbal Contest: Race Against the GMAT Club Timer

_________________
Manager
Joined: 31 Aug 2011
Posts: 210
Re: RAGCT 2015 Day 2: Critics of the use of trucks to transport [#permalink]

Show Tags

14 Jul 2015, 14:52
4
First time I eliminated one of two options based on the degree with which they weaken the argument.

A. Transporting nuclear power plant waste by train does not necessarily require trucks to deliver the nuclear waste to a train’s loading depot.
Train is not relevant to argument.

B. The reporting of traffic incidents in Yardow Prefecture was recently transferred to a different regulatory agency.
No info provided about different regulatory agency to link this choice to argument

C. Truck drivers in Yardow Prefecture are required to obtain a specific class of license to drive a truck if the vehicle’s gross weight is greater than 80,000 pounds.
This hints that YP case is an exception and weakens the general claim

D. The roads used for nuclear waste transport in Yardow Prefecture are restricted to trucks driven by drivers with a certain class of license designated for gross loads exceeding 80,000 pounds, which is over 20,000 pounds greater than the typical gross load.
This includes C and adds the roads and difference in weight points so as I said further weakens and the one I selected

E. Normal gross truck loads are 60,000 pounds, and for any load greater than 80,000 pounds, two trucks are typically used to transport that load.
This is on same line - pointing that YP example is an exception but D includes this point also
_________________

If you found my contribution helpful, please click the +1 Kudos button on the left, I kinda need some =)

Intern
Joined: 08 Apr 2013
Posts: 25
Re: RAGCT 2015 Day 2: Critics of the use of trucks to transport [#permalink]

Show Tags

14 Jul 2015, 22:31
1
Great question. Went with D myself. Not eloquent enough to attempt an explanation though
Manager
Joined: 01 Mar 2015
Posts: 58
Location: India
GMAT 1: 690 Q42 V42
Re: RAGCT 2015 Day 2: Critics of the use of trucks to transport [#permalink]

Show Tags

14 Jul 2015, 23:14
1
Narrowed it down to C and D. IMO D...
_________________

In the pursuit of a better GMAT score. You can help me by giving me kudos if you like my post.

Current Student
Joined: 28 Sep 2013
Posts: 104
Location: United States (NC)
Concentration: Operations, Technology
WE: Information Technology (Consulting)
Re: RAGCT 2015 Day 2: Critics of the use of trucks to transport [#permalink]

Show Tags

14 Jul 2015, 23:45
2
apjoshua92 wrote:
Narrowed it down to C and D. IMO D...

Looks like a tough one. Hope I am right. I am between D and E.
_________________

_________________________________

Intern
Joined: 09 Mar 2014
Posts: 5
Re: RAGCT 2015 Day 2: Critics of the use of trucks to transport [#permalink]

Show Tags

14 Jul 2015, 23:52
4
Answer D. Premise: base on safety record in Yardow, they conclude that it's possible to allow the trucks. Weaken by finding something special in Yardow' situation makes it not applicable for all the rest place to use the truck safely to transport nuclear waste.
Intern
Joined: 07 Jul 2015
Posts: 48
Location: India
Concentration: Operations, General Management
GMAT 1: 660 Q47 V35
GMAT 2: 740 Q50 V40
GPA: 3.7
WE: Operations (Manufacturing)
Re: RAGCT 2015 Day 2: Critics of the use of trucks to transport [#permalink]

Show Tags

15 Jul 2015, 00:53
1
Definitely D, it weakens the premise by stating that the roads used are only meant for cargo loads over 80000, which means little traffic on roads, which means less chance of any accidents
Manager
Joined: 31 Jul 2014
Posts: 137
GMAT 1: 630 Q48 V29
Re: RAGCT 2015 Day 2: Critics of the use of trucks to transport [#permalink]

Show Tags

15 Jul 2015, 01:22
1
souvik101990 wrote:

Critics of the use of trucks to transport nuclear power plant waste are mistaken in claiming that transportation of such cargo poses an undue risk over that of other transportation methods. For example, Yardow Prefecture allows trucks with a typical gross weight greater than 80,000 pounds to transport nuclear waste and despite the significant number of such journeys, no incidents or handling safety violations have been recorded. It is clear that considering Yardow’s proven safety record, policy­makers
should disregard the critics' concerns and allow trucks to transport nuclear power plant waste as necessary. Which one of the following, if true, most substantially weakens the argument?

A. Transporting nuclear power plant waste by train does not necessarily require trucks to deliver the nuclear waste to a train’s loading depot.

B. The reporting of traffic incidents in Yardow Prefecture was recently transferred to a different regulatory agency.

C. Truck drivers in Yardow Prefecture are required to obtain a specific class of license to drive a truck if the vehicle’s gross weight is greater than 80,000 pounds.

D. The roads used for nuclear waste transport in Yardow Prefecture are restricted to trucks driven by drivers with a certain class of license designated for gross loads exceeding 80,000 pounds, which is over 20,000 pounds greater than the typical gross load.

E. Normal gross truck loads are 60,000 pounds, and for any load greater than 80,000 pounds, two trucks are typically used to transport that load.

Day 1 Question of the Verbal Contest: Race Against the GMAT Club Timer

I am stuck between C and D

Conclusion : allow trucks to transport nuclear power plant waste as necessary
Evidence: Yardow Prefecture allows trucks with a typical gross weight greater than 80,000 pounds + there are no incidents reported so far

To Weaken : we need to show Yardow Prefecture is a specific case , which may not be applicable to other Prefectures, currently.
C focuses on Trucks in Yardow Prefecture + there are some restrictions to transport weight greater than 80,000 pounds -- it shows Yardow is allowing trucks with some precautions
D focuses on road in Yardow Prefecture + some restrictions to transport weight greater than 80,000 pounds --
But they have not mentioned that trucks will be restricted within Yardow Prefecture only?

I am unable to make out specific difference.
IMO C
Intern
Joined: 13 Nov 2012
Posts: 6
Location: India
GPA: 3.67
WE: Information Technology (Other)
Re: RAGCT 2015 Day 2: Critics of the use of trucks to transport [#permalink]

Show Tags

15 Jul 2015, 03:17
1
its D. gap in the argument is what applies for yardow may not be applicable for other type of trucks.
Intern
Joined: 11 Nov 2014
Posts: 39
Concentration: Technology, Strategy
GMAT 1: 660 Q48 V31
GMAT 2: 720 Q50 V37
GPA: 3.6
WE: Consulting (Consulting)
Re: RAGCT 2015 Day 2: Critics of the use of trucks to transport [#permalink]

Show Tags

15 Jul 2015, 05:16
1
Is this a typical GMAT question? Usually there is only one answer that weakens the argument. In this case, both C and D do that, just D is stronger, I personally have never seen another case like that in any GMAT CR question. If any one has, could he/she be kind to share an example?
Manager
Joined: 10 Feb 2012
Posts: 75
Re: RAGCT 2015 Day 2: Critics of the use of trucks to transport [#permalink]

Show Tags

15 Jul 2015, 06:31
1
option D imho. special roads in yardow =>> not necessarily the same case across.
Intern
Joined: 09 Jun 2015
Posts: 3
Re: RAGCT 2015 Day 2: Critics of the use of trucks to transport [#permalink]

Show Tags

15 Jul 2015, 07:29
1
Something that weakens the argument. The argument isn't about truck drivers or their license . It is about whether transportation via trucks should be continued or not. Hope I am right.
Intern
Joined: 15 Feb 2015
Posts: 1
Re: RAGCT 2015 Day 2: Critics of the use of trucks to transport [#permalink]

Show Tags

15 Jul 2015, 07:51
1
go with D.,
but
B is somewhat interesting - the change of regulatory agency might be implying that safety records made by the previous agency were innacurate. Change in record agency is a big deal )
Intern
Joined: 30 May 2015
Posts: 48
WE: Analyst (Internet and New Media)
Re: RAGCT 2015 Day 2: Critics of the use of trucks to transport [#permalink]

Show Tags

15 Jul 2015, 12:18
1
souvik101990 wrote:
Critics of the use of trucks to transport nuclear power plant waste are mistaken in claiming that transportation of such cargo poses an undue risk over that of other transportation methods. For example, Yardow Prefecture allows trucks with a typical gross weight greater than 80,000 pounds to transport nuclear waste and despite the significant number of such journeys, no incidents or handling safety violations have been recorded. It is clear that considering Yardow’s proven safety record, policy­makers
should disregard the critics' concerns and allow trucks to transport nuclear power plant waste as necessary. Which one of the following, if true, most substantially weakens the argument?

A. Transporting nuclear power plant waste by train does not necessarily require trucks to deliver the nuclear waste to a train’s loading depot.->if it so, then this would explain why transportation by another method would still mean they are taking prev. risk of using truck as the mode of transportation. We are hitting the conclusion (conclusion=>critic's concern on trucks transporting N waste is invalid)

B. The reporting of traffic incidents in Yardow Prefecture was recently transferred to a different regulatory agency.reporting traffic incidents is out of context

C. Truck drivers in Yardow Prefecture are required to obtain a specific class of license to drive a truck if the vehicle’s gross weight is greater than 80,000 pounds.this would strengthen the Argument

D. The roads used for nuclear waste transport in Yardow Prefecture are restricted to trucks driven by drivers with a certain class of license designated for gross loads exceeding 80,000 pounds, which is over 20,000 pounds greater than the typical gross load.This is a strnghtener

E. Normal gross truck loads are 60,000 pounds, and for any load greater than 80,000 pounds, two trucks are typically used to transport that load.Sounds like a strenghtener

My initial ans. was D; but looking back I think I misread it. My silly mistakes are killing me!!!

Rgds,
Dhruva
Intern
Joined: 11 Nov 2014
Posts: 39
Concentration: Technology, Strategy
GMAT 1: 660 Q48 V31
GMAT 2: 720 Q50 V37
GPA: 3.6
WE: Consulting (Consulting)
Re: RAGCT 2015 Day 2: Critics of the use of trucks to transport [#permalink]

Show Tags

15 Jul 2015, 12:40
1
souvik101990 wrote:
A. Transporting nuclear power plant waste by train does not necessarily require trucks to deliver the nuclear waste to a train’s loading depot.->if it so, then this would explain why transportation by another method would still mean they are taking prev. risk of using truck as the mode of transportation. We are hitting the conclusion (conclusion=>critic's concern on trucks transporting N waste is invalid)

I don´t understand your reasoning - the conclusion is that trucks should be allowed to transport waste, based on the observation that YP´s trucks haven´t had incidents, therefore trucks do not pose a risk.
Assumption - YP results represent other trucks
Assumption 2 - YP lacks of incident means that trucks do not pose a threat

How does A weakens your conclusion?

D does that by showing you how YP is different than trucks (in general) in which they possess specific skills to drive trucks in specific roads.
In other words, it´s saying "Hey, do not assume that YP represents the whole data as YP has a specific detail that does not apply to other cases. Therefore, you don´t have the grounds to support the conclusion that truck should be allowed to carry waste"
Intern
Joined: 30 May 2015
Posts: 48
WE: Analyst (Internet and New Media)
Re: RAGCT 2015 Day 2: Critics of the use of trucks to transport [#permalink]

Show Tags

15 Jul 2015, 13:02
2
michaelyb wrote:
souvik101990 wrote:

I don´t understand your reasoning - the conclusion is that trucks should be allowed to transport waste, based on the observation that YP´s trucks haven´t had incidents, therefore trucks do not pose a risk.
Assumption - YP results represent other trucks
Assumption 2 - YP lacks of incident means that trucks do not pose a threat

How does A weakens your conclusion?

D does that by showing you how YP is different than trucks (in general) in which they possess specific skills to drive trucks in specific roads.
In other words, it´s saying "Hey, do not assume that YP represents the whole data as YP has a specific detail that does not apply to other cases. Therefore, you don´t have the grounds to support the conclusion that truck should be allowed to carry waste"

Our goal is to weaken the argument; in other words prove that critics' concerns are valid; which implies any argument that goes to show that transportation of nuclear waste by trucks is a risk

D shows that tuckers do not pose a risk.

Rgds,
Dhruva
Retired Moderator
Status: On a mountain of skulls, in the castle of pain, I sit on a throne of blood.
Joined: 30 Jul 2013
Posts: 351
Re: RAGCT 2015 Day 2: Critics of the use of trucks to transport [#permalink]

Show Tags

15 Jul 2015, 17:01
1
The question was queer to say the least. Awaiting the OA.
Manager
Joined: 31 Jul 2014
Posts: 137
GMAT 1: 630 Q48 V29
Re: RAGCT 2015 Day 2: Critics of the use of trucks to transport [#permalink]

Show Tags

15 Jul 2015, 19:13
1
souvik101990 wrote:
Critics of the use of trucks to transport nuclear power plant waste are mistaken in claiming that transportation of such cargo poses an undue risk over that of other transportation methods. For example, Yardow Prefecture allows trucks with a typical gross weight greater than 80,000 pounds to transport nuclear waste and despite the significant number of such journeys, no incidents or handling safety violations have been recorded. It is clear that considering Yardow’s proven safety record, policy­makers
should disregard the critics' concerns and allow trucks to transport nuclear power plant waste as necessary. Which one of the following, if true, most substantially weakens the argument?

A. Transporting nuclear power plant waste by train does not necessarily require trucks to deliver the nuclear waste to a train’s loading depot.->if it so, then this would explain why transportation by another method would still mean they are taking prev. risk of using truck as the mode of transportation. We are hitting the conclusion (conclusion=>critic's concern on trucks transporting N waste is invalid)

B. The reporting of traffic incidents in Yardow Prefecture was recently transferred to a different regulatory agency.reporting traffic incidents is out of context

C. Truck drivers in Yardow Prefecture are required to obtain a specific class of license to drive a truck if the vehicle’s gross weight is greater than 80,000 pounds.this would strengthen the Argument

D. The roads used for nuclear waste transport in Yardow Prefecture are restricted to trucks driven by drivers with a certain class of license designated for gross loads exceeding 80,000 pounds, which is over 20,000 pounds greater than the typical gross load.This is a strnghtener

E. Normal gross truck loads are 60,000 pounds, and for any load greater than 80,000 pounds, two trucks are typically used to transport that load.Sounds like a strenghtener

My initial ans. was D; but looking back I think I misread it. My silly mistakes are killing me!!!

Rgds,
Dhruva

But how does it prove trains are not at risk? I still don't understand this reasoning

Anupama
Retired Moderator
Joined: 18 Sep 2014
Posts: 1174
Location: India
Re: RAGCT 2015 Day 2: Critics of the use of trucks to transport [#permalink]

Show Tags

15 Jul 2015, 22:27
2
Critics of the use of trucks to transport nuclear power plant waste are mistaken in claiming that transportation of such cargo poses an undue risk over that of other transportation methods. For example, Yardow Prefecture allows trucks with a typical gross weight greater than 80,000 pounds to transport nuclear waste and despite the significant number of such journeys, no incidents or handling safety violations have been recorded. It is clear that considering Yardow’s proven safety record, policy­makers
should disregard the critics' concerns and allow trucks to transport nuclear power plant waste as necessary. Which one of the following, if true, most substantially weakens the argument?

conclusions: Critics claim use of trucks is not safe. They are not correct or mistaken.
weaken pre-thinking: support critics argument.

A. Transporting nuclear power plant waste by train does not necessarily require trucks to deliver the nuclear waste to a train’s loading depot.(No way this supports critics arg instead introduces unnecessary info reg trains)

B. The reporting of traffic incidents in Yardow Prefecture was recently transferred to a different regulatory agency.
(Completely out of scope-recent shift should not affect the info)

C. Truck drivers in Yardow Prefecture are required to obtain a specific class of license to drive a truck if the vehicle’s gross weight is greater than 80,000 pounds.(Does not help in any way since it is not important to what license they possess.)

D. The roads used for nuclear waste transport in Yardow Prefecture are restricted to trucks driven by drivers with a certain class of license designated for gross loads exceeding 80,000 pounds, which is over 20,000 pounds greater than the typical gross load.
(This weakens critics argument since roads are restricted to only trucks possibility of accidents is less.)

E. Normal gross truck loads are 60,000 pounds, and for any load greater than 80,000 pounds, two trucks are typically used to transport that load.(This explains that normally trucks shud carry around 60k but they are carrying more than 80k which is dangerous. Therefore may be critics are right weakening the argument.)
_________________

The only time you can lose is when you give up. Try hard and you will suceed.
Thanks = Kudos. Kudos are appreciated

http://gmatclub.com/forum/rules-for-posting-in-verbal-gmat-forum-134642.html
When you post a question Pls. Provide its source & TAG your questions
Avoid posting from unreliable sources.

My posts
http://gmatclub.com/forum/beauty-of-coordinate-geometry-213760.html#p1649924
http://gmatclub.com/forum/calling-all-march-april-gmat-takers-who-want-to-cross-213154.html
http://gmatclub.com/forum/possessive-pronouns-200496.html
http://gmatclub.com/forum/double-negatives-206717.html
http://gmatclub.com/forum/the-greatest-integer-function-223595.html#p1721773

Intern
Joined: 18 Dec 2014
Posts: 7
Re: RAGCT 2015 Day 2: Critics of the use of trucks to transport [#permalink]

Show Tags

16 Jul 2015, 01:58
2
I thought this way..

Critics of the use of trucks to transport nuclear power plant waste are mistaken in claiming that transportation of such cargo poses an undue risk over that of other transportation methods. For example, Yardow Prefecture allows trucks with a typical gross weight greater than 80,000 pounds to transport nuclear waste and despite the significant number of such journeys, no incidents or handling safety violations have been recorded. It is clear that considering Yardow’s proven safety record, policy­makers
should disregard the critics' concerns and allow trucks to transport nuclear power plant waste as necessary. Which one of the following, if true, most substantially weakens the argument?

A. Transporting nuclear power plant waste by train does not necessarily require trucks to deliver the nuclear waste to a train’s loading depot - because this is eliminating a possibility that trains might have a disadvantage that trucks would be needed in this case for delivering the waste-- .

B. The reporting of traffic incidents in Yardow Prefecture was recently transferred to a different regulatory agency. out of scope

C. Truck drivers in Yardow Prefecture are required to obtain a specific class of license to drive a truck if the vehicle’s gross weight is greater than 80,000 pounds.
- this strengthens by saying that there is a definite possibilty about the report being true and if this can be implemented then all drivers can get the license and trucks would prove as a good means of transport.

D. The roads used for nuclear waste transport in Yardow Prefecture are restricted to trucks driven by drivers with a certain class of license designated for gross loads exceeding 80,000 pounds, which is over 20,000 pounds greater than the typical gross load.-- same as C. this is also giving a strong point to address the validity of the report

E. Normal gross truck loads are 60,000 pounds, and for any load greater than 80,000 pounds, two trucks are typically used to transport that load. - this is out of scope.
Re: RAGCT 2015 Day 2: Critics of the use of trucks to transport   [#permalink] 16 Jul 2015, 01:58

Go to page    1   2    Next  [ 40 posts ]

Display posts from previous: Sort by