EXHIBIT A West Essex Highlands Inc

In re West Essex Highlands Inc. January 16, 2026 Order Denying Suspension Request Page Sof 11 analyses for each BMP proposed for infiltration, in accordance with the Stormwater Management BMP Manual, and proposed to utilize soil replacement for BMPs proposed in areas where soils did not have the minimum requisite soil permeability. The Department reviewed the stormwater management design and groundwater mounding analyses with this design methodology in mind and determined that no adverse impacts will result in reference to groundwater mounds associated with the proposed infiltration BMPs. The consultant also noted that a change in stormwater runoff could result in damage to existing wetlands. The Department reviewed this change and concluded that the applicant demonstrated compliance with the requirements for stormwater runoff quantity, stormwater runoff quality, and groundwater recharge. The stormwater quantity analysis specifically included standards to control the impacts of the change in flow, volume, and timing of runoff as a result of a major development. The project was subsequently reviewed by Department staff for compliance with the Freshwater Wetlands Rules and staff determined that the application met rule requirements. Additionally, the consultant alleged the existing time of concentrations (“TC”) were incorrectly calculated. But, the applicant computed TC calculations with the McCuen-Spiess criteria, which is the most up fo date concentration calculation guidance provided by the National Engineering Handbook, and required by the Department. For existing conditions, the Permittee utilized a sheet flow length of 100 feet, as outlined and recommended length for existing site conditions in Chapter 5 of the Stormwater Management BMP Manual protocols. As such, the Department concludes the TC was calculated in accordance with the New Jersey Stormwater Best Management Practices Manual. Finally, the consultant disagrees with other design choices for the project but does not allege that these designs are contrary to any regulatory requirement. Therefore, these design