Sentence Correction

2. A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduced the amount of phosphates that municipalities had been allowed to dump into the Great Lakes.
(A) reduced the amount of phosphates that municipalities had been allowed to dump
(B) reduced the phosphate amount that municipalities had been dumping
(C) reduces the phosphate amount municipalities have been allowed to dump
(D) reduced the amount of phosphates that municipalities are allowed to dump
(E) reduces the amount of phosphates allowed for dumping by municipalities

I thought answer was D but turns out that the answer is A. why?

rajeshvellanki wrote:2. A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduced the amount of phosphates that municipalities had been allowed to dump into the Great Lakes.
(A) reduced the amount of phosphates that municipalities had been allowed to dump
(B) reduced the phosphate amount that municipalities had been dumping
(C) reduces the phosphate amount municipalities have been allowed to dump
(D) reduced the amount of phosphates that municipalities are allowed to dump
(E) reduces the amount of phosphates allowed for dumping by municipalities

I thought answer was D but turns out that the answer is A. why?

Classic case of past perfect tense. The 1972 agreement did something
to prevent what was happening prior to 1972.

The 2 events here are in the past but to indicate relative time, you have
to use "had + verb" to denote the prior event. Hence A.

D uses "are allowed" which is in the present tense and hence incorrect.

This is an OG question numbered 62. And there they r saying that D is correct?
Can someone please explain??
Actually many ques. in this 1000 SC collection are from OG.

Yikes, goof up in my earlier post. I had misunderstood what the sentence
was trying to say :-(. Another entry to my error log.

The action of dumping continues into the present and so the best verb to
denote this action is "are allowed".

If the municipalities had been allowed to dump x and then the
agreement reduced it to y, then would "had been" be an appropriate
verb to use?

It depends on the action verb.

Sorry, however the reason to use 'are allowed' is still not clear.

'Had been allowed' refers to the amount of phosphates allowed previous to the 1972 agreement. Isnt it? Or 'had been allowed' can be replaced with 'were allowed'.

Why is present tense used in the case?

The Act is an ongoing, living document - it doesn't apply retroactively, it's always in effect.

If we were to use the verb "had been allowed", then we'd only be speaking about what they were allowed to do in the past. By using "are allowed", we recognize that the Act continues to govern what people are allowed to do today.

Actually the author is pointing at a past agreement which is effective in present as well. so a present tense to indicate that the muncipalities are still allowed to dump...

so whats the final verdict (A) or (D)

Its D

but i think, we cant infer the information whether the agreement still allows muncipalities to dump...! We need to get the info from the question only which explicitly states that "municipalities had been allowed" . then why we are opting for D. pls explain..and if we have any other examples pls share the same

rajeshvellanki wrote:2. A 1972 agreement between Canada and the United States reduced the amount of phosphates that municipalities had been allowed to dump into the Great Lakes.
(A) reduced the amount of phosphates that municipalities had been allowed to dump
(B) reduced the phosphate amount that municipalities had been dumping
(C) reduces the phosphate amount municipalities have been allowed to dump
(D) reduced the amount of phosphates that municipalities are allowed to dump
(E) reduces the amount of phosphates allowed for dumping by municipalities

I thought answer was D but turns out that the answer is A. why?

I find,

choice A speaks: some amount of phosphate dumping was allowed before 1972 but then one agreement came into force to reduce the amount of phosphate dumping.

Choice D speaks:
One agreement in 1972 came into force and by that very agreement the amount of phosphate dumping was brought down and that still continues.

Choice D appears logical. Otherwise we have to address who allowed dumping before 1972 as choice A speaks about.

I agree with jayhawk on why A is correct.

Its a case of perfect past tense.
When there are 2 actions/events in the past, we need to find out the sequence of events.

1st event: will always take past perfect tense (Had+Past Participle) HAD BEEN ALLOWED

2nd event: Will always take simple past form of the verb REDUCED

OA is D but this one is REALLY confusing and I just scored a V45 in my GMAT Prep with 100% accuracy in SC.

It makes complete sense to think that the amount of phosphates municipalities HAD BEEN ALLOWED to dump (i.e. before the agreement was in place) was reduced by the agreement. Prior to the agreement, they were allowed to dump X (hence, the HAD BEEN ALLOWED to dump) and after the agreement, they were allowed to dump Y.

In my opinion A is the correct answer.