It’s definitely week by week, question by question.

but if it helps the conclusion needs to be expressed as the necessary condition in the answer choice. So when you find the conclusion go to the answer choices and make sure the conclusion is the second idea expressed in the answers.

P→C

Hopefully someone else can jump in to offer their mapping out because I did not map this out.

I eliminated E and B because it says they [have an ER].

Yet, The conclusion states that officer pen “should not” be considered for the award.

It doesn’t say whether or not he should get the award, but whether he should be considered.

And we know that one should be considered if they have an ER.

You may have been confused because ER is written as sufficient condition. But that would ignore the small statement [but not otherwise]

meaning even if they don’t qualify under the second part, if they have an exceptional record, they should still be considered. (I really hope this didn’t confuse you) but that is how I reasoned my way out of E & B.

it wouldn’t make sense for Officer Penn to have an exceptional record. Yet the conclusion states he [should not] be considered..

Is says “of all the fully qualified who work at arvue” but to trigger the principal “none of the fully qualified are currently employed” so B doesn’t cut it.