Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
the circumstances attending claimant's departure from his job as bank teller, and the reference to his drinking on the job, what evidence there is on this issue suggests that claimant did occasionally decompensate in the work setting. 8 . These are: Organic mental disorders (§ 12.-02); Depressive syndrome (§ 12.04); Anxiety disorders (§ 12.06); Personality disorders (§ 12.08); Peripheral neuropathies (§ 11.14); Liver damage (§ 5.05); Pancreatitis (§ 5.08); and Seizures (§ 11.02 or 11.03). Proof that alcoholism, or any substance addiction disorder, has resulted in conditions that meet or equal any of these listings will establish that the substance addiction disorder is disabling at step three of the sequential evaluation process. But see In re Petition of Sullivan, 904 F.2d at 844-846 . 9 . In response to questioning by the AU, Dr.
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that title automatically vests in the adverse possessor at the end of the statutory period if all the requirements are met
B. holding that once one severe impairment is found the combined effect of all impairments must be considered even if other impairments would not be severe
C. holding that only the severity requirements of the crossreferenced mental impairments must be met while all of the requirements for the crossreferenced physical impairments must be met to prove alcoholism disabling at step three
D. holding that the plaintiffs had not offered sufficient evidence that their claims met the requirements of rule 23a
E. holding that all five elements of  547b must be met
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.