(A) leads to the wrong conclusion. We are not trying to prove that the bus driver isn’t at fault; we are trying to prove that she shouldn’t be reprimanded.

Wrong trigger. The police report didn’t say the other driver was completely at fault. It just said that the bus driver was obeying traffic laws, so we can’t activate this conditional statement.

Leads to the wrong conclusion. If the sufficient and necessary conditions were swapped, this would support our conclusion; (B), however, only lets us prove that the coverage should be criticized, not that it shouldn’t.

Wrong trigger. The premises give us no indication of whether the bus driver could have been expected to avoid the accident, so we can’t use this conditional statement.

The premises state that the other driver caused the accident by breaking the law, not the bus driver. (E) tells us this is sufficient to know the bus driver should not be reprimanded, proving our conclusion.