Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
abrasions and his November 2010 C & P examination that mentioned the presence of a scar on his buttocks. The Secretary argues that the Board (1) addressed the evidence of record concerning whether Mr. Johnson’s service-connected skin condition resulted in scarring, and (2) provided an adequate statement of reasons and bases for concluding that it did not. The Secretary notes that the Board found that Mr. Johnson’s disability involved hyperpigmentation, pruitis, and dryness, but not scarring. The Secretary also notes that, although mild abrasions were observed on Mr. Johnson’s November 2013 C & P examination report, the examiner did not find scarring. Moreover, the Secretary contends that the scar noted on Mr. Johnson’s buttocks in his November 20 .3d 1560, 1564 (Fed.Cir. 1995) ; Meeks v. West, 12 Vet.App. 352, 354 (1999)
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that all parts of a statute must be construed together without according undue importance to a single or isolated portion
B. holding that a statute should not be construed so as to invalidate other parts of the same statute
C. holding that if a document is facially clear it will be construed according to its language
D. holding that all parts of the same statute dealing with the same subject are to be construed together as a whole    and individual expressions be accorded only that meaning which other modifying provisions and the clear intent and purpose of the act will permit internal citations omitted
E. holding that a statute should where possible be construed according to its plain meaning and as a whole giving meaning to all its parts
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.