A second reference has now recovered and both agree closely. The client is keen to resume the suspended operation immediately. What should determine whether the DPO/Master agrees to resume now?

A. Resume immediately since two references currently agree, regardless of whether the cause is understood

B. Operations should never resume for the remainder of the day regardless of root cause findings

C. Resume only if the client formally indemnifies the operator against any further incident

D. Whether the root cause of the total reference loss has been identified and is understood not to recur imminently, whether reference redundancy is now genuinely restored (not just superficially recovered), and whether the team has had time to properly reset rather than resuming under pressure immediately after an emergency — client urgency should not override these checks

A. Immediately switch to manual joystick control regardless of the remaining references' status

B. Ignore the dropout since two references remain — no action is required

C. Restart the DGNSS 1 receiver immediately without checking the current position solution first

D. Confirm the DP system has automatically excluded DGNSS 1 from the position solution and is now running on the two remaining references (DGNSS 2 and Fanbeam); verify the resulting position solution is stable before doing anything else

A. Increase monitoring vigilance specifically — with only two references, there is no longer a "voting" majority if one of the remaining two starts to disagree, so any divergence between DGNSS 2 and Fanbeam now requires immediate judgement rather than automatic resolution; the DPO should also consider what reference would be left if either of these also fails

B. Nothing changes — two references is operationally identical to three for monitoring purposes

C. Immediately suspend operations regardless of how the two remaining references agree

D. Disable the alarm system since fewer references means fewer expected alarms