With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". decisions of lower courts.” Id. at 36, 38. Once the parties have authorized the arbitrator to give meaning to the language of that agreement, “a [trial] court should not reject an award on the ground that the arbitrator misread the contract.” Id. (citing United Steelworkers of Am. v. Enterprise Wheel & Car Corp., 363 U.S. 593, 599, 80 S. Ct. 1358, 4 L. Ed. 2d 1424 (1960)). A contrary conclusion undermines the strong federal policy favoring arbitration by permitting trial judges to substitute their opinion for those of the arbitrators. See id. at 36 (“The federal policy of settling labor disputes by arbitration would be undermined if courts had the final say on the merits of the awards.” (citing Enterprise Wheel & Car Corp., 363 U.S. at 596)); accord United Industrial, 64 V.I. at 326 (<HOLDING>). Section 10 of the FAA furthers this policy by

A: recognizing the supreme court of the united states confirmed that in creating the faa congress principal purpose was ensuring that private arbitration agreements are enforced according to their terms  quoting volt info scis inc v bd of trustees of leland stanford junior univ 489 us 468 478 109 s ct 1248 103 l ed 2d 488 1989
B: holding that arbitration clauses as contractual agreements must be enforced to their terms
C: holding that almendareztorres v united states 523 us 224 118 s ct 1219 140 l ed 2d 350 1998 expressly held that a prior conviction need not be proved to a jury and the united states supreme court has not held otherwise since
D: holding that may is still controlling in north carolina in light of united states v pataneus 159 l ed 2d 667 124 s ct 2620 2004 in which the us supreme court held that the fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine did not apply to physical evidence discovered as a result of statements made by the defendant when no miranda warning was given
A.