With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". 13.414(a) of the Water Code provided that “any utility or affiliated interest that knowingly violates [chapter 13 of the Water Code] ... is subject to a civil penalty” of up to $5,000 a day. Act of May 26, 1985, 69th Leg., R.S., ch. 795, § 3.005, 1985 Tex. Gen. Laws 2789, 2802 (emphasis added). The Water Code does not define “knowingly,” and we have never interpreted the term as it is used in section 13.414(a); however, “ ‘unless the text of a statute dictates a different result, the term “knowingly” merely requires proof of knowledge of the facts,’” and not knowledge of the law. United States v. Ho, 311 F.3d 589, 605 (5th Cir.2002) (quoting Bryan v. United States, 524 U.S. 184, 193, 118 S.Ct. 1939, 141 L.Ed.2d 197 (1998)); see also Osterberg v. Peca, 12 S.W.3d 31, 38 (Tex.2000) (<HOLDING>). Our Penal Code recognizes this principle in

A: holding defendants were fiduciaries because they had discretion to determine the extent of the companys annual contribution to the plan and whether the contribution would be made in  stock or cash
B: holding as a general proposition that ignorance of the law is not a defense to a statutes violation the term knowingly in the election code refers only to a persons knowledge of the act of making or accepting a contribution and not to whether the contribution violated the election code
C: holding that the use of the word knowingly did not evince a legislative intent to earve out an exception to the general rule that ignorance of the law is no excuse
D: recognizing a right to contribution
B.