we determine if substantial evidence exists to support the agency’s decision by considering whether there is relevant evidence in the entire record which a reasonable mind might accept in support of the agency’s ruling. Dale, ¶22, 188 P.3d at 561. Findings of fact are supported by substantial evidence if, from the evidence preserved in the record, we can discern a rational premise for those findings. Bush v. State ex rel. Wyoming Workers’ Comp. Div., 2005 WY 120, ¶ 5, 120 P.3d 176, 179 (Wyo.2005) (citations omitted). [¶ 10] If, in the course of its decision making process, the agency disregards certain evidence and explains its reasons for doing so based upon determinations of credibility or other factors contained in the record, its decision will be sus 32 P.2d 750, 754 (Wyo.1997) (<HOLDING>), overruled on other grounds in Torres v. State
holding that  707b does not violate the equal protection guarantees of the fourteenth and fifth amendments of the united states constitution and rejecting debtors voidforvagueness argument holding that the constitutional rights in a termination proceeding  are derived from the due process clause of the fourteenth amendment of the united states constitution and not the sixth amendment holding that because the due process clause in the federal constitution is applicable to the states under the fourteenth amendment the right is also guaranteed to defendants pursuant to the identical provision in article i section 5 of the hawaii constitution holding that central assessment by the unit method of valuation did not violate the equal protection clause of the united states constitution or the uniform operation of laws provision in the utah constitution holding the exclusion did not violate the equal protection clause of the wyoming constitution or the fourteenth amendment to the united states constitution