Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
when its owner has received a specific amount of money. See id. § 422.3, at 385. If article 5.2 is a production payment clause, it would not prevent NL from recovering additional damages if GHR breached the workover agreement. The owner or operator of a gas well must protect the interest of the owner of a production payment or an overriding royalty, particularly in a case such as this, in which the entire reimbursement for NL’s services was to come from the production payment. See id. § 420.1, at 356.1-356.2. If the owner or operator of the gas well does something to diminish the value of the mineral interest, the owner of a production payment or an overriding royalty can sue for damages. See, e.g., Whitson Co. v. Bluff Creek Oil Co., 156 Tex. 139, 146-47, 293 S.W.2d 488, 492 (1956) ; Natural Gas Distrib. Corp. v. Williams, 355
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that medical evidence as to nexus to service expressed as very well might have been although not conclusive suffices to well ground claim
B. holding that the sentence was reasonable in part because it was well below the statutory maximum
C. holding that the operator of an oil well was liable for damages to the owner of an overriding royalty after the operator negligently destroyed the well when it attempted to eliminate excess water that the well was producing
D. holding that a defendants sentence was reasonable in part because it was well below the statutory maximum
E. holding that it is within the power of the legislature to determine that the community should be beautiful as well as healthy spacious as well as clean wellbalanced as well as carefully patrolled
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.