I02-26

Question

Tsunamis are rare events often accompanied by advance warning. Where horizontal evacuation out of the tsunami inundation zone is neither possible nor practical, a potential solution is vertical evacuation above rising waters into buildings and other structures with the strength and resilience necessary to resist the effects of tsunami waves. A vertical evacuation refuge is a structure or earthen mound designated as a place of refuge in the event of a tsunami, with sufficient height to elevate evacuees above the tsunami inundation depth, designed and constructed to resist tsunami load effects.
        Location of Source       Approximate Warning Time (t)          Far-source-generated tsunami     t > 3 hours         Mid-source-generated tsunami     1 hour < t < 3 hours         Near-source-generated tsunami     t < 1 hour       
The average, healthy person can walk at approximately 4 miles per hour. However, some members of the community may have restricted ambulatory capability due to age, health, or disability. The average pace (ambulatory speed) of a mobility-impaired population can be assumed to be 2 miles per hour.
        Warning Time       Ambulatory Speed       Travel Distance       Maximum Spacing          3 hours     2 miles per hour     6 miles     12 miles         1 hour     2 miles per hour     2 miles     4 miles         1⁄2 hour     2 miles per hour     1 mile     2 miles         1⁄4 hour     2 miles per hour     1⁄2 mile     1 mileThe vertical evacuation refuges illustrated below by number are located some distance inland from the coastal shoreline and each circle has a radius of 4 miles.
  https://gmatclub.org/gmat-focus-tests/resources/import/img/I02-22.pngStructure No. 1 is located adjacent to the harbor and a container terminal. Impact forces from ships, barges, boats, shipping containers, and other waterborne debris have the potential to be very large. Locations with additional sources of large, possibly buoyant, debris increase the chances of impact by one or more waterborne missiles, and increase the potential risk to the structure. 
 
 Structure No. 2 is located off to the side of the harbor and adjacent to a parking lot. This structure would need to be designed for debris consistent with the use of the parking lot and surrounding areas, which could include cars, trucks, and recreational vehicles. 
 
 Structure No. 3 is immediately adjacent to a gas station. In past tsunamis, ignition of flammable chemicals or other floating debris has resulted in significant risk for fire in partially submerged structures. 
 
 Structure No. 4 is adjacent to a waterfront park facility. This location can be ideal, as the potential for waterborne debris can be relatively low. Possible hazards could include debris from park structures, naturally occurring driftwood, or larger logs from downed trees. This area has a higher potential for tourists and visitors unfamiliar with the area and would require additional signage to inform park users what to do and where to go in the event of a tsunami warning. 
 
 Structure No. 5 is adjacent to an emergency response facility. Co-locating at such facilities can provide opportunities for direct supervision by law enforcement and monitoring and support of refuge occupancies by other emergency response personnel. 
 
 Structure No. 6 is intended to aid evacuees in taking advantage of naturally occurring high ground at two locations.

abhimahna · Answer

Official Solution:

The information in tab 2 states that the refuge indicated by structure 3 has in past tsunamis been subject to the ignition of flammable, but that does not directly imply that anything regarding chemical toxicity.
 
At no point in any of the tabs is high surf explicitly mentioned.
 
The information in tab 2 states that the refuge indicated by structure 3 has in past tsunamis been subject to the ignition of flammable, but that does not directly imply that anything regarding chemical toxicity.

Correct answer:

Deficient park signage  "No"

High surf  "No"

Toxic chemicals  "No"

Ami0Trafalgar · Answer

Structure 4 clearly states that "This area has a higher potential for tourists and visitors unfamiliar with the area and would require additional signage to inform park users what to do and where to go in the event of a tsunami warning." 
The information states the need for additional signage which clearly indicates that the current signage is not sufficient.
Thereby implying that the signage is deficient.

Why are they needlessly overcomplicating a statement, by that logic everything can be questioned unless explicitly stated. If i become hyper critical of the language then the explaination says "It is logical that...." and if i use common sense based on the information provided then they become nitpicky about the language.

chetan2u · Answer

Hi,

I won’t disagree with you on complex and convoluted wordings. The quality is a question mark and this is from old set, which is under complete overhaul. 
You will not see these when we update our question bank very soon.

Thank you for your feedback.

Posted from my mobile device

Oppenheimer1945 · Answer

I think this is a  poor-quality  question and I don't agree with the explanation. I honestly won't recommend anyone to take GC mocks for DI. Questions are unnecessarily convoluted, I don't understand why. Also solutions are just justifying some answers.

13blockn · Answer

I think this is a  poor-quality  question and I agree with explanation. It seems like a reasonable inference for deficient park signage being a possible threat given that the details call out they park would require additional signage.

Sai121126 · Answer

I think this is a  poor-quality  question and I don't agree with the explanation.

7seven7 · Answer

Hi  chetan2u

I got this question while giving Focus Mock today. So has this been corrected or did the Mock pick it up randomly even after updating the question bank ?

iamchinu97 · Answer

I think this is a  high-quality  question and the explanation isn't clear enough, please elaborate.

I02-26

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

Location of Source	Approximate Warning Time (t)
Far-source-generated tsunami	t > 3 hours
Mid-source-generated tsunami	1 hour < t < 3 hours
Near-source-generated tsunami	t < 1 hour

Warning Time	Ambulatory Speed	Travel Distance	Maximum Spacing
3 hours	2 miles per hour	6 miles	12 miles
1 hour	2 miles per hour	2 miles	4 miles
1⁄2 hour	2 miles per hour	1 mile	2 miles
1⁄4 hour	2 miles per hour	1⁄2 mile	1 mile