Opinion ID: 176166
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Warning Signs on the Banks of the Yuba River

Text: The discretionary function exception covers decisions by the federal government that are grounded in social, economic, and political policy. United States v. S.A. Empresa de Viacao Aerea Rio Grandense (Varig Airlines), 467 U.S. 797, 814, 104 S.Ct. 2755, 81 L.Ed.2d 660 (1984). The majority concludes that the Corps decision to delay replacing the warning signs is protected by the exception because that decision required the Corps to balance the safety of the public against the safety of its employees. If we assume that balancing competing safety considerations requires policy judgmentand I argue below that it does notthen it follows that the discretionary function exception covers only the Corps' decision to delay replacing the two seasonal signs on the gravel bar in the middle of the river, the buoy anchored to the bottom of the river and the signs on the south bank. To place those signs, Corps employees must drive or wade out into the river, a task that was made dangerous in May 2005 by unusually high water flows on the Yuba River. Douglas Grothe, an employee of the Army Corps of Engineers, indicated in his declaration supporting the Corps' motion for summary judgment that if called as a witness he would testify that he is an employee of the Corps and that among his duties he managed all the recreation areas, including operating and managing the Daguerre Point Dam; that his [s]taff attempted to assess the situation [of the washed-out signs] on May 25 but could not get to the location where the signs had been placed either on the gravel/sand bar or on the south banks of the river because of the high, fast water and dangerous conditions. On May 30, 2005 staff confirmed by visual inspection that the signs were missing and we decided that it was safe for our employees to begin replacing the missing signs. The work to replace those signs began the same day. The fatal accident occurred the previous day, May 29, 2005. Nowhere does the Corps assert that turbulent water made it difficult for employees to post warning signs on the north bank of the river upstream from the damfor example, the permanent signs, such as signs on the dam abutments that say Danger-Keep Back, signs that say Raft Portage, and a sign four miles upstream that says Warning-Submerged Dam 4 Miles Downstream. According to the majority's own analysis, the Corps' decision to delay replacing some of the signs required by the Daguerre Point Dam sign plan involved no choice between competing safety concerns and thus were not covered by the discretionary function exception. This alone requires reversal and a remand.