Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
at 16) This claim will be tried at the Phase One trial. RELEVANT LAW Under Plaintiffs’ direct operator liability claim that will be tried during Phase One, Plaintiffs must prove that sole agents of Anaconda “manage[d], directed], or eon-duct[ed] operations specifically related to pollution, that is, operations having to do with the leakage or disposal of hazardous waste, or decisions about compliance with environmental regulations.” Bestfoods, 524 U.S. at 66-67, 118 S.Ct. 1876, (document # 1221 at 10) Under the rule of Bestfoods, Plaintiffs must prove their “arranger” liability claim through evidence that Anaconda sole agents arranged for disposal of hazardous substances owned or possessed by Anaconda. See, Transportation Leasing Co. v. California, 861 F.Supp. 931, 941 (C.D.Cal.l993); Raytheon Constructors, Inc. v. Asarco, Inc.,
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that a party that sold a product to another party arranged for disposal of a hazardous substance
B. holding that arranger liability claim requires proof that defendant arranged for the disposal of hazardous substances owned or possessed by defendant
C. holding that a claim for municipal liability under  1983 requires inter alia proof of an underlying constitutional violation
D. holding that potentially liable party could avoid all liability by proving its released hazardous substances did not contribute to response costs
E. holding that fraud claim requires proof that the defendant made a material representation that was false
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.