Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
which are not subject to the Commission’s jurisdiction, to open their service territories to competition in the sale of electric generation services, and “confirmed” the authority of the Commission to similarly open the service territories of public service corporations. We reject the Cooperatives’ contention. ¶ 56 Article 15, Section 3 directs the Commission to prescribe just and reasonable rates for services without regard to market structure. Thus, even assuming the legislature is exclusively empowered to implement competition, if the contested rules are reasonably necessary steps in ratemaking within the competitive market, the Commission possesses plenary authority to enact them. Woods, 171 Ariz. at 294, 830 P.2d at 815; see also U.S. West I, 197 Ariz. at 24, ¶ 30, 3 P.3d at 944 . If not, the Commission was only authorized to
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that because the fcc is authorized to promulgate binding legal rules and it issued the order under review in the exercise of that authority its interpretation of the communications act was entitled to chevron deference
B. holding that question involving procedure required of workers compensation agency to promulgate valid rules was of general public interest
C. holding statutory authority of commission to promulgate rules to interpret law does not impose affirmative rulemaking requirement
D. recognizing the inherent common law authority of courts to promulgate rules of practice and procedure
E. holding some competitive rules clearly related to ratemaking power and thus within commissions constitutional authority to promulgate
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.