Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
contractors. Such decisions are not, of course, wholly immune from review. The Secretary’s discretion, like that of a prosecutor, remains “subject to constitutional constraints,” including those “imposed by the equal protection component of the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment.” Armstrong, 517 U.S. at 464, 116 S.Ct. 1480. Moreover, the Commission retains authority to adjudicate — subject to the appropriate standard of review — whether safety violations have in fact occurred. See 30 U.S.C. §§ 815(d), 823(d). In this case, however, Twentymile has stipulated that the conditions cited by the Secretary constitute violations of safety standards. See ALJ Decision, 25 F.M.S.H.R.C. at 353. We therefore grant the Secretary’s petition for review. The decision , 459-60 (D.C.Cir.2001) ; In re Sealed Case, 131 F.3d 208, 216
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. recognizing that an agencys decision to terminate an employee is presumed correct
B. holding that judicial review of an administrative agencys decision is limited solely to whether given the relevant standard and facts the agencys decision was arbitrary illegal capricious or unreasonable
C. holding icc decision not to investigate nonreviewable
D. holding that the faas decision not to renew an aircraft examiners authority is nonreviewable
E. holding that an agencys decision to reach a settlement is nonreviewable
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.