Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
with the adjacent channel, “making it difficult to determine where the ‘water’ ends and the ‘wetland’ begins.” Id. at 742,126 S.Ct. 2208. The plurality explained that “[a]n intermittent, physically remote hydro-logic connection” would be inadequate to meet this prong of its test. See id. 2. Justice Kennedy’s Concurrence Justice Kennedy set forth a different test for analyzing whether the wetlands at issue in Rapanos fell under the jurisdiction of the CWA. Seizing upon language contained in SWANCC, he stated that “the Corps’ jurisdiction over wetlands depends upon the existence of a significant nexus between the wetlands in question and navigable waters in a traditional sense.” Id. at 779, 126 S.Ct. 2208. He fur r.2006), cert. denied, 552 U.S. 948, 128 S.Ct. 375, 169 L.Ed.2d 260 (2007) . In the present case, it is unnecessary for us
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that justice kennedys test provides the controlling rule for determining jurisdiction
B. recognizing that other courts have found the type of test reliable but finding that this particular urinalysis test was unreliable since the lab did not perform a backup test or identify lab test results and state left questions about how probationers diabetes affected the results
C. holding that the ordinary observer test should be the sole test for determining whether a design patent has been infringed
D. holding that jurisdiction exists if either the pluralitys test or kennedys test is met
E. holding that a defendants right to an independent blood alcohol test means the right to a test that is not subject to government manipulation
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.