Your Owners Corporation’s Special By-Law has clearly been written around a precautionary approach, that given the problems that so many have experienced after accepting low noise-transmission assurances from self-titled “engineers” as the basis of then consenting to a variety of hard flooring materials, is entirely justified in my opinion.
That Special By-Law obviously enables the Executive Committee to impose the Conditions that you’ve quoted, but IF you’re saying that they’re going to arbitrarily insist on a Report that those Conditions state may be “requested”, then I’d suggest that they’d need some firm justification in order to enforce that.
Our Plan’s Special By-Law (SBL) requires a similarly based Report, but only in circumstances where the Owners Corporation’s Consent to a hard floor has been given on the basis of the best acoustic information available, and then verified complaints of impact-related noise arise from adjacent Lots and the E/C reasonably determines that’s likely to be a Breach (of the SBL); but not arbitrarily “within one month of completion of the works” as yours does!
I don’t often say this (if ever) but if what you’re saying is correct, then after making damn sure that your Lot’s acoustic underlay is adequate, and I’d suggest extended vertically up the margins of the walls (i.e. to the top/surface of the flooring), I’d be going ahead with the works and letting the E/C objectively justify its “request” for a Report – which in the absence of verified complaints by the neighbours I’d simply ignore.
Sure, your O/C can take you to Mediation but in the absence of evidence to support its justification for requiring a Report I can’t see that going to Arbitration or to the point where Orders or Penalties are awarded against you.