READTHEORY.ORG Name Date
Overstepping Authority OVERRULED—The Georgia Supreme Court ruled against a project to deepen a shipping channel in the Kemp River yesterday, stating the Environmental Department acted illegally when it ignored the results of an environmental impact report and granted a permit for the project. A third-party environmental agency had assessed the implications of the project and had found that expanding the depth of the river would most likely result in a decrease in water quality that would adversely affect local wildlife. The Environmental Department pushed aside the recommendation and negotiated with the state government for a permit to continue the project, thereby allowing large container ships to pass through the Kemp River, resulting in increased state trade revenue. Nonprofit group Friends of Georgia’s Waterways obtained a copy of the environmental impact report and quickly sued to stop the project from moving forward. “The Georgia Environmental Department overstepped its authority when it ignored the agency’s assessment,” said attorney Greg Shapiro, who represents Friends of Georgia’s Waterways. “I am pleased that the state’s high court has put an end to the project, which would have endangered hundreds of species that make the Kemp River their home. For example, river otters are a protected species in Georgia. Projects like these could lead to river otters becoming endangered, then extinct. You’d think the Environmental Department would know this and take this into consideration before foolishly giving the go-ahead to such an irresponsible expansion.”
1) Which of the following statements best summarizes the main idea of the passage? A. The Georgia Environmental Department does not give consideration to endangered species. B. The Georgia Supreme Court is more likely than not to rule in favor of nonprofit environmental groups. C. A project to deepen a Georgia River was found to be illegal because it could potentially harm nearby wildlife. D. The Georgia Environmental Department thinks increasing state trade revenue is the most important outcome of any project. E. Third-party agencies’ environmental impact reports may not always accurately predict the outcome of a project.
2) As used in paragraph 2, the word implications most nearly means A. urgency B. criticisms C. objectives D. importance E. consequences
3) Based on the information in the passage, it can be understood that Greg Shapiro A. thinks the Georgia Environmental Department should be abolished B. believes the Georgia Environmental Department has limitless authority C. enjoys working on behalf of environmental rights organizations D. believes river otters would be threatened if the project moves forward E. is against increasing Georgia’s trade revenue
4) This passage would most likely be found in a A. Georgia city newspaper B. Georgia lifestyle magazine C. business magazine D. medical journal E. Georgia tourism guidebook
5) Which of the following statements from the passage best explains why the project should be disallowed? A. "The Georgia Supreme Court ruled against a project to deepen a shipping channel in the Kemp River yesterday, stating the Environmental Department acted illegally when it ignored the results of an environmental impact report and granted a permit for the project." B. "A third-party environmental agency had assessed the implications of the project and had found that expanding the depth of the river would most likely result in a decrease in water quality that would adversely affect local wildlife." C. "Nonprofit group Friends of Georgia’s Waterways obtained a copy of the environmental impact report and quickly sued to stop the project from moving forward." D. "Projects like these could lead to river otters becoming endangered, then extinct." E. "You’d think the Environmental Department would know this and take this into consideration before foolishly giving the go-ahead to such an irresponsible expansion.”
6) What do you think will happen next to the Environmental Department officials who illegally approved the plan? Explain your ideas.
Answers and Explanations 1) C Core Standard: Integration of Knowledge Paragraph 1 establishes that the Georgia Supreme Court put a stop to the state Environmental Department’s plan to expand a shipping channel in the Kemp River, stating, “the Environmental Department acted illegally when it ignored the results of an environmental impact report and granted a permit for the project.” Paragraph 2 provides details about the environmental impact report, which found that “expanding the depth of the river would most likely result in a decrease in water quality that would adversely affect local wildlife,” while paragraph 3 shares the views of an attorney who further explained how local species could be harmed. This lets us know that the main idea of the passage is that a project to deepen a Georgia River was found to be illegal because it could potentially harm nearby wildlife. Therefore, choice (C) is correct.
In paragraph 2, the author states that the Environmental Department ignored the results of an assessment that found that the river expansion project “would most likely result in a decrease in water quality that would adversely affect local wildlife.” In paragraph 3, attorney Greg Shapiro chastises the Environmental Department for its recklessness, stating that the project could endanger species such as the river otter. However, the passage does not provide enough information to support that the Environmental Department had given any thought to endangered species in this situation or in previous situations. Thus, choice (A) is incorrect.
In paragraph 2, the author explains that nonprofit group Friends of Georgia’s Waterways was the organization that sued the Environmental Department to stop the river expansion project from moving forward. Since the Georgia Supreme Court ruled to halt the project, it ruled in favor of the nonprofit organization. However, the passage does not provide any additional information that tells us how the Georgia Supreme Court commonly rules or even what kinds of disputes it hears. Therefore, choice (B) is incorrect.
In paragraph 2, the author states that a permit to continue the project would have allowed large container ships to use the river, “resulting in increased state trade revenue.” While we can infer that this was the main reason the Environmental Department pushed for the project, the passage does not provide any additional information about other Environmental Department projects. Therefore, we cannot know the Environmental Department’s priorities. This means choice (D) is incorrect.
While the Georgia Supreme Court’s decision that “the Environmental Department acted illegally when it ignored the results of an environmental impact report” tells us that third-party agencies’ assessments hold some weight, the passage does not provide information that tells readers how accurate the reports actually are. Therefore, choice (E) is incorrect.
2) E Core Standard: Craft and Structure implications (noun): conclusions that can be drawn from something, even though they are not explicitly stated
In paragraph 2, the author states, “A third-party environmental agency had assessed the implications of the project and had found that expanding the depth of the river would most likely result in a decrease in water quality that would adversely affect local wildlife.” This tells us that the agency was trying to discover the possible outcomes, or conclusions, of the project. Therefore, choice (E) is correct.
In paragraph 2, the author states, “A third-party environmental agency had assessed the implications of the project and had found that expanding the depth of the river would most likely result in a decrease in water quality that would adversely affect local wildlife.” Urgency can mean either importance requiring swift action or an earnest or persistent quality. Reporting the possible outcomes of the project does not indicate that the agency was measuring the urgency of the project. Therefore, choice (A) is incorrect.
In paragraph 2, the author states, “A third-party environmental agency had assessed the implications of the project and had found that expanding the depth of the river would most likely result in a decrease in water quality that would adversely affect local wildlife.” A criticism is an expression of disapproval based on perceived faults. Though the agency found faults with the project, it was looking for outcomes, not faults. Therefore, choice (B) is incorrect.
In paragraph 2, the author states, “A third-party environmental agency had assessed the implications of the project and had found that expanding the depth of the river would most likely result in a decrease in water quality that would adversely affect local wildlife.” An objective is a goal. The goals of the project were already known when the project was proposed. The agency was trying to uncover the unknown outcome. Thus, choice (C) is incorrect.
In paragraph 2, the author states, “A third-party environmental agency had assessed the implications of the project and had found that expanding the depth of the river would most likely result in a decrease in water quality that would adversely affect local wildlife.” Importance means being of great significance or value. The agency was not trying to determine the significance of the project, but instead trying to uncover the outcome. Therefore, choice (D) is incorrect.
3) D Core Standard: Integration of Knowledge In paragraph 3, Greg Shapiro, an attorney for the nonprofit organization that challenged the Georgia Environmental Department’s decision to move forward with the river expansion project, said that the project could have endangered hundreds of species that live in or near the water. As an example, he said, “River otters are a protected species in Georgia. Projects like these could lead to river otters becoming endangered, then extinct.” This statement cements his concern for river otters, making choice (D) correct.
In paragraph 3, Greg Shapiro, an attorney for the nonprofit organization that challenged the Georgia Environmental Department’s decision to move forward with the river expansion project, said that the project could have endangered hundreds of species that live in or near the water. While he chastises the Environmental Department for making a poor decision, he does not make any statement that would lead readers to believe he wants the department to be abolished. Therefore, choice (A) is incorrect.
In paragraph 3, Greg Shapiro, an attorney for the nonprofit organization that challenged the Georgia Environmental Department’s decision to move forward with the river expansion project, saying, “The Georgia Environmental Department overstepped its authority when it ignored the agency’s assessment.” This tells readers he believes there is a cap on the department’s authority. Thus, choice (B) is incorrect.
In paragraph 3, Greg Shapiro, an attorney for the nonprofit organization that challenged the Georgia Environmental Department’s decision to move forward with the river expansion project, said that the project could have endangered hundreds of species that live in or near the water. His anger at the Environmental Department for making a poor decision and his support for threatened animal species could lead readers to believe he enjoys working on behalf of environmental rights groups, but as the group’s attorney, he is paid to represent the organization. Readers have no information as to Greg Shapiro’s true feelings. Therefore, choice (C) is incorrect.
In paragraph 2, the author states that the river expansion project would allow “large container ships to pass through the Kemp River, resulting in increased state trade revenue.” Greg Shapiro’s statements in paragraph 3 tells readers that he is opposed to the project for environmental reasons, but the passage does not provide any information on Greg Shapiro’s opinions on Georgia’s trade system. Thus, choice (E) is incorrect.
4) A Core Standard: Integration of Knowledge The passage opens with a concise, factual statement about a court ruling against a state environmental project. The project is further summarized and the news value of the story is explained paragraph 2, while paragraph 3 contains the opinion of an attorney associated with the case. Through the explanatory tone and evident newsworthiness of the passage, it can be understood that this passage would most likely be found in a journalistic publication. The passage is specifically about an environmental project in Georgia, which would likely be of interest to the state’s long-term residents. This means choice (A) is the correct answer.
Through the explanatory tone and evident newsworthiness of the passage, it can be understood that this passage would most likely be found in a journalistic publication. The passage is specifically about an environmental project in Georgia, but a state lifestyle publication would likely be more focused on features and special events, not legal and environmental news. Therefore, choice (B) is incorrect.
Through the explanatory tone and evident newsworthiness of the passage, it can be understood that this passage would most likely be found in a journalistic publication. However, a business magazine would likely publish stories that have a wide appeal to the industry. While it is possible that the Georgia trade industry might interest a business magazine’s readers, this story’s narrow focus on the state of Georgia, its high court and an environmental project all make this passage an unlikely candidate for a business publication. Thus, choice (C) is incorrect.
Through the explanatory tone and evident newsworthiness of the passage, it can be understood that
this passage would most likely be found in a journalistic publication. However, there are no medical elements to this passage. Therefore, choice (D) is incorrect.
Through the explanatory tone and evident newsworthiness of the passage, it can be understood that this passage would most likely be found in a journalistic publication. The passage is specifically about an environmental project in Georgia, but a state tourism guidebook would likely be more focused on Georgia’s features and special events, not legal and environmental news. Thus, choice (E) is incorrect.
5) B Core Standard: Integration of Knowledge In paragraph 1, the author explains that the Georgia Supreme Court halted a river expansion project and stated that its reasoning behind its decision was that the state’s Environmental Department “ignored the results of an environmental impact report” when it granted a permit for the project to proceed. However, it is not until paragraph 2 that the impact report is explained to readers. "A third-party environmental agency had assessed the implications of the project and had found that expanding the depth of the river would most likely result in a decrease in water quality that would adversely affect local wildlife." This information tells readers that the outcome of the project could negatively affect plants and animals in the region, and that these assessments are important should not be taken lightly, as environmental impact reports have standing with the court. Therefore, choice (B) is correct.
In paragraph 1, the author explains that the Georgia Supreme Court halted a river expansion project and stated that its reasoning behind its decision was that the state’s Environmental Department “ignored the results of an environmental impact report” when it granted a permit for the project to proceed. However, it is not until paragraph 2 that the impact report is explained to readers. The report’s findings show that the outcome of the project could negatively affect plants and animals in the region, which is a reason for halting the project. Thus, choice (A) is incorrect.
The actions of a nonprofit group to stop the project from moving forward were necessary to the demise of the project, but stating that the organization “obtained a copy of the environmental impact report and quickly sued to stop the project from moving forward” does not explain why the project was disallowed, only how the process to halting the project was put in motion. Therefore, choice (C) is incorrect.
In paragraph 3, Greg Shapiro, an attorney for the nonprofit organization that challenged the Georgia Environmental Department’s decision to move forward with the river expansion project, said that the project could have endangered hundreds of species that live in or near the water. As an example, he said, “River otters are a protected species in Georgia. Projects like these could lead to river otters becoming endangered, then extinct.” However, these are just Greg Shapiro’s personal opinions on the project and not a commissioned agency’s findings of a likely outcome. The passage does not provide any information that tells readers that the report specifically said river otters would be threatened. This means choice (D) is incorrect.
In paragraph 3, Greg Shapiro, an attorney for the nonprofit organization that challenged the Georgia Environmental Department’s decision to move forward with the river expansion project, said that the
project could have endangered hundreds of species that live in or near the water. He followed up by saying, “You’d think the Environmental Department would know this and take this into consideration before foolishly giving the go-ahead to such an irresponsible expansion.” However, these are just Greg Shapiro’s personal opinions on the project and not a commissioned agency’s findings of a likely outcome. Additionally, this statement is vague and cannot explain why the project should be halted without the context of the rest of the passage. Therefore, choice (E) is incorrect.
