It is currently 21 Nov 2017, 11:02

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

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

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

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

Hide Tags

Expert Post
1 KUDOS received
MBA Section Director
User avatar
D
Joined: 19 Mar 2012
Posts: 4686

Kudos [?]: 17656 [1], given: 1986

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

New post 14 Jul 2015, 11:57
1
This post received
KUDOS
Expert's post
14
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  85% (hard)

Question Stats:

56% (02:00) correct 44% (02:35) wrong based on 787 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

Image

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
Please make sure to post a brief reply without revealing your solution to enter the contest!
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

_________________

My GMAT Resources
V30-V40: How to do it! | GMATPrep SC | GMATPrep CR | GMATPrep RC | Critical Reasoning Megathread | CR: Numbers and Statistics | CR: Weaken | CR: Strengthen | CR: Assumption | SC: Modifier | SC: Meaning | SC: SV Agreement | RC: Primary Purpose | PS/DS: Numbers and Inequalities | PS/DS: Combinatorics and Coordinates

My MBA Resources
Everything about the MBA Application | Over-Represented MBA woes | Fit Vs Rankings | Low GPA: What you can do | Letter of Recommendation: The Guide | Indian B Schools accepting GMAT score | Why MBA?

My Reviews
Veritas Prep Live Online

Kudos [?]: 17656 [1], given: 1986

4 KUDOS received
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 31 Aug 2011
Posts: 224

Kudos [?]: 262 [4], given: 56

Re: RAGCT 2015 Day 2: Critics of the use of trucks to transport [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 14 Jul 2015, 14:52
4
This post received
KUDOS
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 =)

Kudos [?]: 262 [4], given: 56

1 KUDOS received
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 08 Apr 2013
Posts: 25

Kudos [?]: 13 [1], given: 6

GMAT ToolKit User
Re: RAGCT 2015 Day 2: Critics of the use of trucks to transport [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 14 Jul 2015, 22:31
1
This post received
KUDOS
Great question. Went with D myself. Not eloquent enough to attempt an explanation though

Kudos [?]: 13 [1], given: 6

1 KUDOS received
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 01 Mar 2015
Posts: 61

Kudos [?]: 16 [1], given: 6

Location: India
Concentration: Entrepreneurship, International Business
GMAT 1: 690 Q42 V42
Re: RAGCT 2015 Day 2: Critics of the use of trucks to transport [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 14 Jul 2015, 23:14
1
This post received
KUDOS
Narrowed it down to C and D. IMO D... :roll:
_________________

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

Kudos [?]: 16 [1], given: 6

1 KUDOS received
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 28 Sep 2013
Posts: 106

Kudos [?]: 36 [1], given: 45

Location: United States (NC)
Concentration: Operations, Technology
WE: Information Technology (Consulting)
Reviews Badge
Re: RAGCT 2015 Day 2: Critics of the use of trucks to transport [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 14 Jul 2015, 23:45
1
This post received
KUDOS
apjoshua92 wrote:
Narrowed it down to C and D. IMO D... :roll:


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

_________________________________
Consider Kudos if helpful

Kudos [?]: 36 [1], given: 45

4 KUDOS received
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 09 Mar 2014
Posts: 5

Kudos [?]: 6 [4], given: 14

Reviews Badge
Re: RAGCT 2015 Day 2: Critics of the use of trucks to transport [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 14 Jul 2015, 23:52
4
This post received
KUDOS
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.

Kudos [?]: 6 [4], given: 14

1 KUDOS received
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 07 Jul 2015
Posts: 45

Kudos [?]: 11 [1], given: 20

Location: India
Concentration: Operations, General Management
GMAT 1: 660 Q47 V35
GMAT 2: 740 Q50 V40
GPA: 3.7
WE: Operations (Manufacturing)
Reviews Badge
Re: RAGCT 2015 Day 2: Critics of the use of trucks to transport [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 15 Jul 2015, 00:53
1
This post received
KUDOS
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

Kudos [?]: 11 [1], given: 20

1 KUDOS received
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 31 Jul 2014
Posts: 147

Kudos [?]: 57 [1], given: 373

GMAT 1: 630 Q48 V29
Re: RAGCT 2015 Day 2: Critics of the use of trucks to transport [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 15 Jul 2015, 01:22
1
This post received
KUDOS
souvik101990 wrote:
Image

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
Please make sure to post a brief reply without revealing your solution to enter the contest!


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 :(

Kudos [?]: 57 [1], given: 373

1 KUDOS received
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 13 Nov 2012
Posts: 7

Kudos [?]: 8 [1], given: 1

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

New post 15 Jul 2015, 03:17
1
This post received
KUDOS
its D. gap in the argument is what applies for yardow may not be applicable for other type of trucks.

Kudos [?]: 8 [1], given: 1

1 KUDOS received
Intern
Intern
User avatar
Joined: 11 Nov 2014
Posts: 40

Kudos [?]: 35 [1], given: 28

Concentration: Technology, Strategy
GMAT 1: 660 Q48 V31
GMAT 2: 720 Q50 V37
GPA: 3.6
WE: Consulting (Consulting)
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: RAGCT 2015 Day 2: Critics of the use of trucks to transport [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 15 Jul 2015, 05:16
1
This post received
KUDOS
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?

Kudos [?]: 35 [1], given: 28

1 KUDOS received
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 10 Feb 2012
Posts: 78

Kudos [?]: 14 [1], given: 724

Re: RAGCT 2015 Day 2: Critics of the use of trucks to transport [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 15 Jul 2015, 06:31
1
This post received
KUDOS
option D imho. special roads in yardow =>> not necessarily the same case across.

Kudos [?]: 14 [1], given: 724

1 KUDOS received
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 09 Jun 2015
Posts: 3

Kudos [?]: 2 [1], given: 7

Re: RAGCT 2015 Day 2: Critics of the use of trucks to transport [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 15 Jul 2015, 07:29
1
This post received
KUDOS
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.

Kudos [?]: 2 [1], given: 7

1 KUDOS received
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 15 Feb 2015
Posts: 1

Kudos [?]: 1 [1], given: 11

Re: RAGCT 2015 Day 2: Critics of the use of trucks to transport [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 15 Jul 2015, 07:51
1
This post received
KUDOS
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 )

Kudos [?]: 1 [1], given: 11

1 KUDOS received
Intern
Intern
avatar
S
Joined: 30 May 2015
Posts: 48

Kudos [?]: 33 [1], given: 28

WE: Analyst (Internet and New Media)
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: RAGCT 2015 Day 2: Critics of the use of trucks to transport [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 15 Jul 2015, 12:18
1
This post received
KUDOS
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

Kudos [?]: 33 [1], given: 28

1 KUDOS received
Intern
Intern
User avatar
Joined: 11 Nov 2014
Posts: 40

Kudos [?]: 35 [1], given: 28

Concentration: Technology, Strategy
GMAT 1: 660 Q48 V31
GMAT 2: 720 Q50 V37
GPA: 3.6
WE: Consulting (Consulting)
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: RAGCT 2015 Day 2: Critics of the use of trucks to transport [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 15 Jul 2015, 12:40
1
This post received
KUDOS
narmadadhruv wrote:
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)


narmadadhruv

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"

Kudos [?]: 35 [1], given: 28

2 KUDOS received
Intern
Intern
avatar
S
Joined: 30 May 2015
Posts: 48

Kudos [?]: 33 [2], given: 28

WE: Analyst (Internet and New Media)
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: RAGCT 2015 Day 2: Critics of the use of trucks to transport [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 15 Jul 2015, 13:02
2
This post received
KUDOS
michaelyb wrote:
narmadadhruv wrote:
souvik101990 wrote:
narmadadhruv

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

Kudos [?]: 33 [2], given: 28

1 KUDOS received
Retired Moderator
avatar
Status: On a mountain of skulls, in the castle of pain, I sit on a throne of blood.
Joined: 30 Jul 2013
Posts: 359

Kudos [?]: 212 [1], given: 133

GMAT ToolKit User Reviews Badge CAT Tests
Re: RAGCT 2015 Day 2: Critics of the use of trucks to transport [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 15 Jul 2015, 17:01
1
This post received
KUDOS
The question was queer to say the least. Awaiting the OA.

Kudos [?]: 212 [1], given: 133

1 KUDOS received
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 31 Jul 2014
Posts: 147

Kudos [?]: 57 [1], given: 373

GMAT 1: 630 Q48 V29
Re: RAGCT 2015 Day 2: Critics of the use of trucks to transport [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 15 Jul 2015, 19:13
1
This post received
KUDOS
narmadadhruv wrote:
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

Kudos [?]: 57 [1], given: 373

2 KUDOS received
Retired Moderator
User avatar
S
Joined: 18 Sep 2014
Posts: 1201

Kudos [?]: 895 [2], given: 75

Location: India
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member Reviews Badge
Re: RAGCT 2015 Day 2: Critics of the use of trucks to transport [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 15 Jul 2015, 22:27
2
This post received
KUDOS
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
https://gmatclub.com/forum/improve-reading-habit-233410.html#p1802265

Kudos [?]: 895 [2], given: 75

2 KUDOS received
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 18 Dec 2014
Posts: 7

Kudos [?]: 3 [2], given: 6

Re: RAGCT 2015 Day 2: Critics of the use of trucks to transport [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 16 Jul 2015, 01:58
2
This post received
KUDOS
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.

Kudos [?]: 3 [2], given: 6

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

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

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


GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Terms and Conditions| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

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

Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.