Slow evacuations prompt annual fire drills

Magally Zelaya, staff

Twenty-four of 57 U of M buildings received half marks on a rating scale designed to show the shortcomings in the buildings’ fire safety plans, according to the results of the fire drill report prepared by the university’s Environmental Health and Safety Office (EHSO).

The marking scale rates how well the buildings met the requirements for safe evacuation on a scale from zero (extremely poor) to 30 (all requirements met).

Observers appointed by the EHSO rated building evacuations by noting the time taken for evacuation of staff and students, fire warden response, the checking of rooms and closing of doors during fire drills conducted by the EHSO, security services, and the physical plant in November 2007.

More than half of the buildings received less than 20 points.

St. John’s College, Armes, Tier, Drake, Engineering and Technology Complex, and Agriculture Engineering buildings all scored less than 10.

The administration building had the top score of 27.

Paul Richards, the university’s fire marshal, prepared the report in January 2007. He said that students attending classes in buildings that had poor scores are still safe.

“We’re confident that if the students see a fire in a building they’re not going to stay there, they’re going to get out.

“Only thing is, when the fire bells ring, we want it to occur in an orderly [fashion] and as quickly as possible,”he said.

The results also showed that 38.9 per cent of buildings evacuated in the normal time of less than three minutes, while the majority, 53.7 per cent, evacuated in between three and five minutes, and 7.4 per cent of buildings took more than five minutes to evacuate.

The faculties are encouraged to address the components of their fire safety plan that need improving.

Beth Clark, chief budget officer of the Asper School of Business, expects the components of Drake’s fire safety plan to be addressed within the next several weeks.

The Drake Building had a score of seven.

“We’re disappointed that we did not perform better. We have made arrangements with the university’s environmental health and safety office to restructure our fire response team.”

She attributed the poor results to a fire warden system that has been “decimated by retirements [and] transfers,” a lack of training for occupants of the building, a lack of support to keep exits clear during evacuations, and a feeling of safety.

“I don’t think there’s a perception in this building — as there would be in some of the science and engineering buildings — that we’re as likely to be on fire,” she said. “There’s an assumption that it’s probably a false alarm, and therefore, their exit can be more leisurely.”

Clark noted that part of the improvements made to the faculty’s fire safety plan would include education and training, such as announcements, presentations, and signage.

Richards said that education and training are currently offered in the form of pamphlets and orientation sessions.

As a result of the findings, fire drills will now be scheduled regularly each fall. Previously, it was up to the faculties and departments whether or not to hold evacuation drills.

Additionally, the information gathered from the fire drill report will assist the university in the move towards a building emergency response plan, which would include the fire safety plans but also deal with all types of hazards.

“Fire is not the only emergency that you have to deal with,”

said Richards.