that you that you'd have to have actual knowledge for a reasonable person using reasonable care with and would understand that there would be a violation statute requires that you do just that looking at the plain language of the statute was that they would have actual knowledge of the facts not the fact that they were packing these lithium ion batteries but the fact that they were training on the technical standards of what if any training you know had she received relating to international transferred standards and you know regulations for hazardous the national powered to provide to her it's usually done by a private contractor and she did receive that additional training the problem was the way we see it is that they were under the impression that these that these bad the reason had to be packaged under a different standard than the f a a if you said that they had to be shipped under they were it wasn't like they just put a bid on it and a number of open and and sent them off in the in the mail they did they did what they thought was appropriate under the circumstances because even though these these particular batteries happened to be a little different in physical shape in the rage front of the cells inside the battery th since as as one of the officers testified that that these had previously been been tested because it didn't differ materially according to the statute so they were under the good faith belief that these were these batteries were tested according to the standards they have that they believe in good faith believe they work and ship them according to the packaging protocol that  a discussion of what the intent is in the statutory language now if if the statutory language had meant to have a real you know reasonable that they had knowledge of the facts meant knew or should have known is saying well it's you know you're liable because you should have know who did this have an eleven times it was i did the test there were some there was only if i remember correctly there was only three burners anything it just it was a result of an audit by the f d a came in and audited national powers records and said oh you know by the way you know we we we think you ship these eleven shipments rogge not according to the  hazardous and they're saying you're saying that so knowing in this case doesn't mean when in compass you should have known right i that the statute would have would have said that or if congress had meant th statute and it's defined as having knowledge of the facts and here national power did have knowledge of the facts national power is entire argument is that it didn't believe that it was violating the regulations but that's not the relevant inquiry the statute says listen he defines what it means to act knowingly and it defines that in reference to knowledge of the facts not knowledge of the law meaning that a company does not need to know that it's violating a regulation it doesn't need to act deliberately in order to be liable for a civil penalty and that's the distin here is that the in congress he of national powers argument is illustrated by the structure of the statute itself because the statute authorizes both civil and criminal penalties with deliberate conduct giving rise to civil criminal penalties so ultimately it was not agents of war as in this case impose a civil penalty but the f a a administrator and it's that decision that clearly explains how each of the statutory factors was taken into consideration here for example the agency consider the nature and circumstances  this violation consider the nature of the material ships these are lithium ion batteries which is under our current guidance a minimum wage the agency also took into consideration the culpability of national power here who is a sophisticated shipper who routinely a applied each of the statutory factors here moreover i should point out that the sanction here is well below statutory limits the statute at the time of national power is a violation impose a maximum sanction of fifty thousand dollars per is that the batteries were not tested and every battery that is shipped in transportation must be tested to the un criteria and here the batteries were not tested to that criteria that they couldn't go into the details of some kind of a secret calculation they go through to come up with a even though it's within their was the range yeah it was in the range of what they could do but they wouldn't give us specifics as to how they did that there