Examkin

Question

Difficulty: HardPrinciple Questions

The Regional Water Reclamation Board recently revoked an agricultural cooperative's commercial irrigation permit after the cooperative deepened its primary extraction wells. Although the cooperative never exceeded the volumetric water quotas specified in its permit and no explicit statutory provision barred modifying extraction depth, the deeper pumping accelerated saltwater intrusion into the municipal aquifer system. Because protecting potable water reserves is essential to civic welfare, the Board's decision to revoke the permit was entirely justified.

Which one of the following principles, if valid, most helps to justify the Board's revocation of the permit?

  1. A
    A regulatory agency is justified in revoking an operating permit only if the permit holder has violated an explicit statutory restriction set forth in that permit.
  2. B
    Any commercial enterprise whose operational practices inadvertently cause environmental degradation must be subjected to immediate permit cancellation and mandatory financial restitution.
  3. An administrative body is justified in revoking an authorization when the recipient exercises permitted activities in a way that impairs vital public resources, even if that specific operational conduct is not expressly prohibited.Answer
  4. D
    A regulatory oversight board is justified in penalizing an organization whenever that organization exceeds the explicit volumetric quotas established in its governing agreement.
  5. E
    An administrative authority must revoke all commercial permits across an entire district whenever any single operator causes measurable degradation to a shared resource.

Answer

The statement asserting that an administrative body is justified in revoking an authorization when the recipient exercises permitted activities in a way that impairs vital public resources, even if that specific conduct is not expressly prohibited.
The correct principle supplies a general normative rule that directly connects the factual premises (the cooperative exercised permitted rights without violating explicit depth rules, but damaged a critical municipal aquifer) to the conclusion (the Board was justified in revoking the permit). By stating that harm to vital public resources justifies revocation even without an express prohibition, it provides a sufficient logical bridge.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the argument's premises and conclusion to identify the logical gap.
Premises: The cooperative obeyed all volumetric limits and broke no explicit rules regarding well depth, but deepening the wells caused saltwater intrusion into municipal aquifers. Conclusion: The Board was justified in revoking the permit.
Principle-justify questions require bridging the gap between factual premises and a normative conclusion.
2
Determine the necessary conditional bridge required to justify the conclusion.
A rule stating that when permitted actions threaten a critical public resource, an agency is justified in revoking the permit even in the absence of an explicit violation.
The argument assumes that harm to public drinking water reserves overrides the technical compliance with express permit terms.
3
Evaluate the choices to find the principle providing sufficient justification without introducing illicit reversals or overextensions.
The principle validating revocation when permitted actions impair vital public resources despite lack of express prohibition directly entails the conclusion.
It supplies the exact sufficient condition needed to make the argument logically sound.

Key Concept

Principle-Justify / Bridge Assumption
Estimated Time:1m 30s
Rate this question

Topics

Principle Questions

More questions from this topic