Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
Veterans Claims (“Veterans Court”) affirming a March 30, 2010 Board of Veterans’ Appeals (“Board”) decision that found there was no clear and unmistakable error (“CUE”) in a September 6, 1973 rating decision (“September 1973 Rating Decision”) that granted total disability resulting from individual unemployability (“TDIU”), effective June 27, 1973. Peterson v. Shinseki, No. 10-2433, 2012 WL 87578, at *1 (Vet.App. Jan. 12, 2012). In February 2006, Mr. Peterson sought to revise the September 1973 Rating Decision on the basis of CUE, and on March 30, 2010, the Board determined that the September 1973 Rating Decision was not the result of CUE. The Veterans Court agreed, reasoning that the alleged error was not outcome-determinative. See Willsey v. Peake, 535 F.3d 1368, 1371 (Fed.Cir.2008)  (citing Russell v. Principi, 3 Vet.App. 310
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that reconsideration may not be based on evidence and legal arguments that could have been presented at the time of the challenged decision
B. holding that the relevant time is the time of the employment decision
C. holding that an error is harmless where it is highly probably that the error did not affect the outcome of the case
D. holding that cue required a showing that the alleged error in the challenged decision would have manifestly changed the outcome at the time it was made
E. recognizing that cue may be based on a showing that there was no evidence before the adjudicator that could have supported a denial of the claim on the merits that is that all of the evidence militated in support of the claim
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.