With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". pump. Virtually any government action can be traced back to a policy decision of some kind, but an attenuated tie is not enough to show that conduct is grounded in policy. See Cope v. Scott, 45 F.3d 445, 448-49 (D.C.Cir.1995). Withal, the determination as to where one draws the line between a justification that is too far removed, or too ethereal, or both, and one that is not, is case-specific, and not subject to resolution by the application of mathematically precise formu-lae. In particular, there is no principled basis for superimposing a generalized “safety exception” upon the discretionary function defense. A case-by-case approach is required. Of course, ease-by-ease development has led to some disarray. Compare George v. United States, 735 F.Supp. 1524, 1533-34 (M.D.Ala.1990) (<HOLDING>) with Tippett, 108 F.3d at 1197-99 (holding

A: holding that a government agencys failure to warn about submerged alligators has no policy basis
B: holding that a failure to warn was not a policy judgment
C: holding that fifra preempts state law failure to warn claims
D: holding that the court had no duty to warn defendants about the possibility of deportation as a collateral consequence of conviction
A.