Which sequence correctly describes the steps in conducting an incident investigation after a diving accident?

• A. Collect facts, interview witnesses, analyze root cause, implement corrective action, and document findings.
• B. Document findings, collect facts, interview witnesses, implement corrective action, analyze root cause.
• C. Interview witnesses, collect facts, document findings, implement corrective action.
• D. Collect facts, implement corrective action, interview witnesses, and document findings.

Answer: (A)

The important idea is to follow an evidence-based, orderly workflow when investigating a diving incident: collect facts, interview witnesses, analyze root causes, implement corrective actions, and document what was found and done. Starting with facts sets a solid, objective picture of what happened—gathering equipment details, scene conditions, timestamps, medical status, and any available data. Then talking to witnesses helps reconstruct the sequence of events from different perspectives, filling gaps that records alone can’t show. With the facts in hand, you analyze to identify root causes rather than just symptoms, so the actions you take address the underlying issues rather than superficial fixes. Implementing corrective actions follows, targeting those root causes and assigning ownership and deadlines to ensure changes actually happen. Finally, documenting findings creates a clear record for accountability, regulatory compliance, and future learning, tying the evidence, analysis, actions, and rationale together.

Other sequences fall short because they move to actions or documentation without first establishing a reliable factual base and understanding of causes. Interviewing before collecting facts can introduce bias, and skipping root-cause analysis means corrective steps may miss underlying problems.