An undergraduate degree is necessary for appointment to the executive board. Further, no one with a felony conviction can be appointed to the board. Thus, Murray, an accountant with both a bachelor' s and a master' s degree, cannot be accepted for the position of Executive Administrator, since he has a felony conviction. The argument's conclusion follows logically if which one of the following is assumed? ['An undergraduate degree is not necessary for acceptance for the position of Executive Administrator.', "Anyone with a master's degree and without a felony conviction is eligible for appointment to the executive board.", 'Only candidates eligible for appointment to the executive board can be accepted for the position of Executive Administrator.', 'The felony charge on which Murray was convicted is relevant to the duties of the position of Executive Administrator.']