Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
this case, argued that “the sole significance of [roadlessness] is that the [roadless] parcel is potentially eligible for wilderness designation.” Id. at 1077. Because the Forest Service was not required to consider permanent protection for the areas at issue, see id. at 1074 (citing the Washington State Wilderness Act, Pub.L. No. 98-339, 98 Stat. 299 (1984)), the Forest Service maintained that “the fact that a parcel of ... land is roadless is, in itself, immaterial and need not be addressed in NEPA documents.” Id. at 1078. We rejected that argument, observing that roadlessness has environmental significance apart from permanent wilderness preservation and, as a result, “[t]hat the land has been released by Congress for nonwilderness use does not excuse the agency from comp ir.1997) . We review final agency action under §
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding a rod to be final agency action
B. holding it well settled that a final eis or the record of decision issued thereon constitute  final agency action 
C. holding that the rod and eis for a program were final agency action
D. holding that the designation of the rod as final agency action under the apa is generally recognized
E. holding that it appears wellestablished that a final eis or the rod issued thereon constitute the final agency action for purposes of the apa and collecting cases
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.