Photograph 2 — Site photograph associated with Arcose Consulting's werk at OMC1, The some vertical sliver of daylight is

visible in the same position relative to the Server rack and window, confirming this is the some foam as Phatograpir 1. The

active rack's side panel is visibly off in this photograph, matching the condition shown in Photograph 3, below.

This matters in two respects. First, it forecloses any argument that Arcose's report describes a different
room, a mock-up, or a genuinely Separate “server room” elsewhere. The photographic record places
Arcose's own consultants inside the real, occupied training room — the exact space BCRTC's written
correspondence (Section 3) misidentified twice, at two different false addresses, in the same week. The
falsification in this record is administrative and evidentiary, not-a matter of Arcose actually visiting the
wrong building.

Second, and more significantly, Photograph 2 shows the side panel off at the time Arcose's own
photography was taken — the same unshielded configuration captured in the worker's Photograph 3. This
resolves, in the worker's favour, the “forensic Catch-22” the worker identified in the March 18, 2026
Formal Notice (Section 6, below): Arcose's own site presence was not limited to a sealed, reassembled
version of the enclosure. Arcose's consultants were looking directly at the missing panel and the
improvised fan cooling — the precise hazard the worker had reported — when their assessment was
conducted. Whatever conclusions Arcose ultimately reached about noise levels being “well below
hazardous,” that conclusion was reached in the physical presence of the unshielded condition, not in
ignorance of it.

000288