Consider the following case study and answer the question that follows: "Hardware maintenance was outsourced by a multinational engineering company. The contract specified that the amount of configuration items $($Cls$)$ impacted would determine priority and, consequently, target resolution times. A printer once broke down and was duly reported. Because it was a single printer, it had the lowest priority and a five$-$day turnaround time. It was not realized, though, that this was a manufacturing laser printer instead of an office one, and that it produced barcodes indicating which spare components were contained in each box. After a day, the production line was shut down and all of the employees were sent home because there was no way to tell which was in the boxes and they could not be packed! Senior management didn't become aware of what was going on and the financial loss until a full day later. Although the outsourcer in this case had complied with the contract, the parties engaged in its negotiation had failed to take prioritizing factors into account beyond a very basic method."Which of the following scenarios could explain why the incident should be classified as a major incident if it could be reclassified after $48$ hours $($from the day the printer failed and was property, reported, to the point where the production line was shut down and senior management realized what was happening$)?$A$.$ There was complete service failure resulting in unavailability of the serviceB. The impact on the business was extremeO a$.$ Only option A is more accurate. b$.$ Both option A and B are accurate.O c$.$ Both option A and B are inaccurate because an incidentcannot be re$-$categorized. d$.$ Only option B is more accurate