Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
the court makes no determination that Waste Management — Washington has violated Section 2 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 2, by attempting to monopolize or monopolizing solid waste collection and disposal services at Fairchild AFB, only that Waste Management — Washington may not claim immunity under the “state action” doctrine in the event the court may need to reach that issue in related proceedings or if the Government does not comply with this final judgment. See 28 U.S.C. § 1491(b)(1). In that regard, the court notes that the modus operandi employed by Waste Management — Washington in this case apparently has been tried by an affiliated company in another court without success. See, e.g., Waste Management of North America, Inc. v. Weinberger, 862 F.2d 1393, 1397-98 (9th Cir.1988) . If Waste Management — Washington and its
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that the plaintiffs breach of contract claim was properly a statutory claim under the personnel management act
B. holding that because colorados hazardous waste program was authorized by rcra it became effective pursuant to rcra and the citizen suit provision of section 6972a1a applies
C. holding that the court lacked jurisdiction under the bid protest provisions of section 1491 to enjoin a contracting agencys termination of a contract
D. holding that the puc does not have the authority to regulate or control the management decisions of a utility absent a finding that the management decision would adversely affect the public
E. holding that the court lacked jurisdiction to adjudicate waste management of north americas claim that the el toro marine corps air base was required to award waste management of north america with a waste collection award since it was the only permittee in orange county because the case was not properly initiated as a citizen suit under rcra in addition the united states court of appeals for the ninth circuit held that waste management of north america did not have standing under 31 usc  35512 since it did not file a proper bid protest nor submit a bid
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.