C tells us that though expansion is to accommodate private aircrafts but it would benefit all travellers because there will be less delays in flight after congestion
Hope it helps

Option E: This option would be out of scope as it does not affect the argument at all...

Option D: This option would weakens the FAA's argument as it says that the small aircrafts have enough wealth so that they themselves can pay for the expansion.

Option A: This is a good answer choice but it does not give a strong reasoning to the FAA's reccomendation. This answer choice is more of a flashy lights on the New York Street which will draw many customers but unfortunately not the correct answer.

Option B: Overall Volume effect is out of scope as we are not talking about the cost being divided between all the people who are or will be using the airport together. The idea is about the current travelers paying for the small aircrafts and so taking all the cost burden for those small aircrafts. This is also out of scope.

OPtion C: A perfect answer and a good reasoning for the FAA, as it tells that the funding will help the existing aircrafts to not face air traffic because of the current congestion. It says that this is beneficial to the existing aircrafts using the airport. Hence the correct answer is C.



Hope this helps!!!

What I think the question wants from me is to find an answer choice which the FAA can use and safely continue charging more money from people, am I correct in my understanding? pls help.

No... It is not what answer choice demands. You have broaden up the scope of the argument. What the asks is an answer choice which can weaken the argument of author. The assumption that author is taking is that travellers would pay for nothing. So, the correct choice should highlight that travellers are in-fact getting the benefits. So C is the best answer.