Question

Difficulty: MediumInference and Logical Deduction

Read the following passage carefully:

Under the National Urban Infrastructure Modernization Framework, municipal corporations receive central capital subsidies for establishing decentralized rainwater harvesting micro-reservoirs only if these installations are integrated with real-time digital monitoring sensors connected to the state water grid. Commercial establishments operating within designated high-flood-risk zones are mandated to source at least 30 percent of their non-potable water needs from these certified micro-reservoirs. However, the framework explicitly prohibits municipal bodies from levying additional drainage surcharges on commercial properties that successfully meet or exceed this 30 percent non-potable water sourcing threshold. Furthermore, while residential welfare associations are encouraged to voluntarily construct similar micro-reservoirs, their eligibility for municipal tax rebates is strictly contingent upon maintaining zero discharge into municipal storm drains during peak monsoon months, verified through bi-weekly sensor audits.

Based strictly on the information provided in the passage, which of the following statements logically follows as a necessary conclusion?

  1. A commercial establishment in a designated high-flood-risk zone that fulfills 35 percent of its non-potable water requirements through certified micro-reservoirs cannot be subjected to extra municipal drainage surcharges.Answer
  2. B
    Residential welfare associations that maintain zero discharge into storm drains during peak monsoons receive higher financial benefits than commercial establishments.
  3. C
    Commercial establishments operating outside designated high-flood-risk zones are explicitly forbidden from sourcing water from certified micro-reservoirs.
  4. D
    Central capital subsidies are granted to municipal corporations regardless of whether micro-reservoirs are connected to real-time digital monitoring sensors.

Answer

A commercial establishment in a designated high-flood-risk zone that fulfills 35 percent of its non-potable water requirements through certified micro-reservoirs cannot be subjected to extra municipal drainage surcharges.
The passage explicitly dictates that municipal bodies are prohibited from levying additional drainage surcharges on commercial properties that meet or exceed the 30 percent non-potable water sourcing threshold. Sourcing 35 percent exceeds this benchmark, making the protection against extra surcharges a logically necessary fact strictly derived from the text.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the conditions stated for commercial establishments in the passage.
Commercial properties in high-flood-risk zones must source at least 30% of non-potable water needs from micro-reservoirs, and municipal bodies are prohibited from levying additional drainage surcharges if this threshold (30% or more) is met or exceeded.
Establishing the exact rule governing commercial property drainage surcharges.
2
Evaluate the compliance of a commercial establishment sourcing 35 percent non-potable water.
Since 35 percent exceeds the 30 percent threshold, the property qualifies for the prohibition against additional municipal drainage surcharges.
35% is greater than or equal to 30%, satisfying the contractual exemption condition.
3
Deduce the logically necessary conclusion.
The establishment cannot legally be charged supplementary drainage surcharges under the framework.
The conclusion directly follows from the explicit conditional premise in the text without assuming external facts.

Key Concept

Strict Deductive Inference from Conditional Text Premise
Estimated Time:1m 30s
Rate this question