| work Fale BC MEMO

WORKING TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE

Worker name | MARK HOLAND WorkSafeBC | 42647461
claim number

Date 2026-03-18

Regarding Further W emails

Attn

Comments From: mark holand <marktholand@gmail.com>

Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2026 6:46 PM

To: Cassady, Jaylin <Jaylin.Cassady@worksafebc.com>

Subject: Forensic Rebuttal and Evidence Submission - Claim #42647461 - Mark
Holand

A Warning: External sender

Be alert. This email is not from within our organization. Don’t click links or
attachments unless you trust the sender and know they’re safe. Contact the
Technology Support Desk if you’re not sure.

Subject: Forensic Rebuttal and Evidence Submission - Claim #42647461 - Mark
Holand

Dear Jaylin,

Please find attached my finalized Forensic Audit and Rebuttal regarding the noise-
induced injury (TTTS) | sustained at OMC1. This document is the result of over 8
hours of technical analysis and forensic review, conducted to correct the significant
omissions and mischaracterizations found in the employer-provided Arcose report.
As a safety professional with 25 years of industrial experience, | am submitting this
evidence to demonstrate that the employer's sound survey was conducted on an
improperly configured and non-compliant environment. Photographic evidence in
Exhibits A, B, and C proves that the server equipment was operated without its
engineered acoustic housing during the audit, which renders the resulting sound
data scientifically invalid.

Furthermore, the report details a significant methodological failure. The consultant
utilized a TS! SoundPro DL-1 but suppressed the 1/3 Octave spectral data
necessary to identify the hazardous 328Hz mechanical resonance. The audit also
failed to conduct a multi-angle binaural simulation, meaning it ignored the
asymmetric pressure waves and standing waves reflecting off the glass windows
that specifically triggered my injury.

Regarding the regulatory status of the installation, a forensic search of 317
municipal records confirms a total absence of building or electrical permits for the
Fall 2025 OMC1 classroom renovation. While the employer successfully obtained
permits for a separate million-dollar capital project, they bypassed all municipal
oversight and engineering reviews for this specific classroom installation, as
documented in Exhibit G.

Finally, | have included my official Training Course Report in Exhibit H to address
the employer's claims regarding my performance. This record confirms an honors-
level 89.9 percent mid-course average and a 93.3 percent quiz average. These
marks, combined with the instructor’s highly positive narrative, prove that | was a
high-performing trainee who was physically evicted from my role by a hazardous
and unpermitted mechanical environment.

| formally request that WorkSafeBC invalidate the Arcose report and adjudicate this
claim based on these documented engineering failures and my documented safety

68B33 Workers’ Compensation Board of B.C. (RO2/09) Page 1 of 4