In cases of unlawful activity involving an affiliate, when can an examination be conducted?

The correct choice is based on the principle that regulatory examinations in the context of unlawful activity are triggered by evidence of wrongdoing. In the case of an affiliate involved in unlawful activities, an examination can be conducted when there is documented evidence of improper conduct. This approach ensures that resources are focused on addressing genuine issues rather than conducting examinations arbitrarily or based solely on speculation.

The rationale behind this is to maintain the integrity of the examination process while allowing regulatory bodies to respond effectively to potential risks. Examinations driven by documented evidence are more likely to uncover useful information and lead to necessary actions, ensuring compliance and protecting consumers from potential harm.

Although there might be other circumstances like random audits that could also lead to examinations, these are not directly tied to instances of unlawful conduct as indicated by documented evidence. Similarly, the idea that an examination should occur only annually, regardless of circumstances, lacks the necessary flexibility to respond promptly to serious violations. Requests from the public could lead to examinations, but without documented evidence, they may not have sufficient basis for initiation. Therefore, the proper framework emphasizes the necessity for evidence before proceeding with an examination.