I believe that our book is correct, and that Emily's description above is correct as well. You might want to check your math; you may also have been reading Emily's post incorrectly. We are not advocating that 225.5=<x<225.5 (which would be not only strange but also impossible), but rather that 224.5=<x<225.5.
I also happen to think that answer explanation to the OG question you referenced has a major flaw. While D is still the right answer, it extends the range a bit more than is strictly necessary. (It is still the only right answer.) This is because the numerator of the first term could be 285 and the denominator of the second term could be 11.5, WITHOUT compromising the integrity of the answer choice. The values included in the printed answer, of course, only extend the given range, so the rate will of course still fall within the given parameters. This gets the book writers into trouble, however, when they move to explain the answer choice, as they include the numbers as the ACTUAL limits (which they're not). I've written to GMAC about this, but I have not yet received a reply. My hope is that the next edition will fix this error. (The problem, after all, is still a good one; only the explanation needs to be fixed.)
There are other rounding systems out there, of course. There is such a thing as banker's rounding, often used by computer programs. (Info:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rounding#R ... ven_method) However, to the best of my knowledge that system is NOT used by the GMAT, and it does not seem to be relevant here anyways.