With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". investors in assessing the degree to which a sponsor is exposed to the risk of the securitized assets. A.R. at JA2181 (79 Fed. Reg. at 77616). The Court concludes from the foregoing explanation that the agencies acted appropriately because “the choices made by the [agency] were reasonable and supported by the record.” Am. Trucking Ass’ns v. EPA, 283 F.3d 355, 362 (D.C. Cir. 2002) (quoting Lead Indus. Ass’n v. EPA, 647 F.2d 1130, 1160 (D.C. Cir. 1980)). The agencies reasonably concluded during the rulemaking that using fair value as a means to measure horizontal risk retention provided the agencies with a valid means to ensure consistency across different types of secured transac measure credit risk were inconsistent, see Bus. Roundtable v. SEC, 647 F.3d 1144, 1153-54 (D.C. Cir. 2011) (<HOLDING>). Given that deference to agency decisionmaking

A: holding that the secs discussion of the estimated frequency of shareholder director nominations under its rule was internally inconsistent and therefore arbitrary
B: holding that the medical director of the episode care clinic was primarily engaged in administrative duties and was not performing the duties of an attending physician and was therefore entitled to immunity
C: holding that use of product rule to calculate frequency of occurrence in caucasian and black populations is scientifically valid and that debate concerning ethnic substructures went to weight rather than admissibility of evidence
D: holding without extended discussion that the peti tioners rule 60b motion was an sshp under aedpa
A.