QUESTION TYPE: Strengthen
CONCLUSION: Manufacturers can’t dilute their waste to bring it below the acceptable level.
REASONING: No reasoning was given.
ANALYSIS: The question is quite specific. It asks us to justify the anti-dilution provision mentioned at the very end. Most of this stimulus is just fluff. The stimulus didn’t give any justification for the rule that stops manufacturers from diluting their waste.
So practically any reason will do. You just have to identify which answer gives us a reason not to dilute waste. Only two answers even mention diluted waste, and only answer C mentions that diluted waste can be harmful, so it’s correct.
- This explains why we should be careful with waste. But the question asks about the anti-dilution provision, and this answer doesn’t address that.
- CORRECT. “Undiluted” in this case refers to waste that has more than 500 parts per million. You wouldn’t bother describing waste as undiluted if it didn’t have a high concentration. This answer shows that diluted waste is still harmful. If you group a bunch of it together (say, by putting it in a dump) then it’s dangerous.
- This reduces the risk of XTX. It doesn’t help explain why we shouldn’t allow the dumping of diluted XTX waste. We need an answer that shows a danger.
- This explains why dump owners won’t accept undiluted waste. But the question asks about a law that prevents us from dumping diluted waste.
- This explains why manufacturers might want to dilute waste. It doesn’t explain why the law prevents them from diluting waste.
Need help with LR? → Sign up hereTry the LSAT Hacks Course
Graeme teaches how to break down arguments, quickly