Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
Cir.2000). Examples of BMPs that have been accepted as substitutes for effluent limits include: nutrient management plans for concentrated animal feeding operations, see Waterkeeper All., 399 F.3d at 497, 502, filtration of stormwater runoff from ditches before it enters rivers and streams (by timber companies), and constructing roads with surfacing that minimizes sediment in runoff (by timber companies), see Decker v. Nw. Envtl. Def. Ctr., — U.S. -, 133 S.Ct. 1326, 1338, 185 L.Ed.2d 447 (2013). The narrative standard here is nowhere as specific as any of these examples. Indeed, it requires nothing more of a shipowner than to meet the TBELs. This interpretation is hardly consistent' with the regulations that require WQBELS to ensure compliance. See Auer, 519 U.S. at 461, 117 S.Ct. 905 . Third, EPA claims that WQBEL standards will
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that deference is owed to an agencys interpretation of its own categorical exclusion regulations so long as that interpretation is not plainly erroneous or inconsistent with the regulation
B. holding that an agencys interpretation of its own regulations is controlling unless plainly erroneous or inconsistent with the regulation citation and quotation marks excluded
C. holding that courts should defer to agencys interpretation of its own regulations if not plainly erroneous or inconsistent with the regulation
D. holding that a secretarys interpretation of a departments regulation is controlling unless plainly erroneous or inconsistent with the regulation
E. holding that an agencys interpretation of its own regulations is entitled to deference
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.