F-89 Emergency Action Plan (EAPD) / Fire Safety Director (FSD) Practice Exam

When an EAPD directs occupants to in-building relocate, is it appropriate for them to go to the roof awaiting helicopter rescue?

1. Yes, as it provides a safer location.

2. No, because helicopter rescues are often not viable.

3. Yes, if the roof has a helipad.

4. No, unless there is no other option.

The correct answer is: No, because helicopter rescues are often not viable.

The choice that states it is not appropriate for occupants to go to the roof awaiting helicopter rescue is correct because helicopter rescues are often not viable in emergency situations. Several factors contribute to this unviability, including the specifics of the emergency, weather conditions, and the structural safety of the building. In many cases, especially during fires or other hazardous situations, the roof may not be a safe location due to limited access or potential dangers associated with smoke inhalation or structural damage. Additionally, not all buildings are equipped to safely accommodate a helicopter landing or the evacuation process. Therefore, directing occupants to the roof with the expectation of rescue can lead to increased risk rather than safety. It is critical for an Emergency Action Plan or Fire Safety Director to prioritize safe relocation options within the confines of the building and ensure that occupants are moved to predetermined safe areas that have been assessed for safety rather than relying on unpredictable rescue methods.