The reasoning as to why the new proposals should not be considered are based off of the fact that the proposals are very similar to--virtually identical--to those issued by Tsarque Inc., whose pollution has marks it as an "environmental nightmare."
So, it isn't just that the proposals are "virtually identical" that leads the article to conclude that the new proposal does not need to be considered, but it is that the new proposal is "virtually identical" to one written by an environmental nightmare.
We are not contesting whether they are virtually identical. We are given that information as a fact. Further, we know that Tsarque Inc.'s chief is a close fried of the commissioner. So, whether or not one proposal was influenced by another is not at issue here, it is that the commissioner's is virtually identical to the proposal given by Tsarque Inc., which is an "environmental nightmare."
So, answer choice (A) is not the correct answer. We are looking for the answer that shows the error of dismissing a proposal not due to its content but due to its source, i.e. answer choice (C).
Hope that was helpful! Please let us know if you have any other questions
Kweb1016December 14, 2020
I don't even understand what the final sentence is even saying
