The key word is all.
Every store managed by $M$ must satisfy at least one of the two allowed conditions.
Therefore, the outer structure must be:
$\forall S$ and the condition applies only when
$S.\mathrm{MANAGER}=M.\mathrm{NAME}$.
This gives,
$(S\in \mathrm{Stores}\land S.\mathrm{MANAGER}=M.\mathrm{NAME})\Rightarrow(\mathrm{NailSale}(S)\lor \mathrm{PowerSale}(S))$
Inside $\mathrm{NailSale}$ and $\mathrm{PowerSale}$, existential tuple variables are used because the query requires the existence of an appropriate sale/product tuple.
So the quantifier pattern is conceptually:
$\forall \mathrm{Store}$
followed by
$\exists \mathrm{Sale},\exists \mathrm{Product}$
inside each permitted alternative.
B requires only one qualifying store.
C incorrectly requires every managed store to satisfy both conditions.
D imposes the sales condition on every store in the database, including stores not managed by $M$.
Therefore,
Answer : $\boxed{\mathrm{A}}$