EXHIBIT A West Essex Highlands Inc

In re West Essex Highiands Inc. January 16, 2026 Order Denying Suspension Request Page 4 of 11 could lead to ‘chronic flooding’ for the residents of the five surrounding municipalities. WeCare relies upon the consultant’s report, which concludes “the development will increase the frequency and severity of damage expected during a flood in the adjacent and downstream areas.” Based on that report, WeCare asserts that the Department must suspend the permit under the Flood Hazard Area Control Act Rules, N.J.A.C. 7:13-22.7(a)(L), (4), (5), (), and (8). In its April 2025 review, the consultant cites numerous alleged failures by the Department in issuing the Permit. First, the consultant concludes that the seasonal high water table determination may have been underestimated due to the specific procedures utilized. The application, however, provided site-specific soil testing logs in accordance with Chapter 12 of the Stormwater Management Best Management Practices (BMP) Manual. Based on the review of the provided soil logs, “water seepage” was identified and the Department was able to determine the locations of the seasonal high-water table. The Department typically utilizes this procedure and its decision to do so here is not in error. Next, the consultant claims the applicant did not provide an adequate number of soil testing locations within the footprint of each proposed BMP. But prior to the second submittal of this application, the required soil testing locations were discussed in detail between the applicant’s engineers and Department staff. As a result of those discussions with the Department the applicant conducted additional tests were conducted to more accurately evaluate the nature of the soils on the property to determine compliance with the Stormwater Management Rules. Accordingly, WeCare has failed to demonstrate that the number of soil tests were inadequate to determine , compliance with the Stormwater Management Rules. WeCare’s consultant also claims that the applicant’s groundwater mounding analysis was flawed and may indicate groundwater mound conflicts. The Department finds nothing flawed about the protocol undertaken by the applicant. The applicant provided groundwater mounding