Answering Statement and Request for Dismissal by Gainesville ..

is that “we are heading for a possible disastrous economic imp act from the rate increases from
the obligations of the PPA. It has never been
about biomass, or global warming, or anything
other than being stuck in a contract that has turned significantly upside down for . . . us.”
10. GRU did not file its Amended Demand with any interest in, or reasonable belief
that it was entitled to, the relief requested in the Amended Demand.
11. Pressuring GREC to renegotiate the terms of the PPA by being named a
respondent in an arbitration proceeding is an improper purpose or motive for filing an arbitration
demand.
12. GRU knew that it was required to comply with certain notice provisions prior to
filing a claim in arbitration.
13. GRU knew that it failed to comply with the PPA’s notice provisions when it filed
its Amended Demand.
14. GRU knew that its Amended Demand, including its request for specific
performance, was groundless under the terms of the PPA.
15. GRU knew that its Amended Demand, includ ing its naming of entities other than
GREC, was groundless under the terms of the PPA.
16. GRU knew that its Amended Demand, including its assertions that there had been
a “change of control,” was groundless under the terms of the PPA.
17. At the time it filed its Amended Demand, GRU knew that Section 27.3 of the
PPA was not triggered due to the lack of any change of control or potential sale of the Facility.
18. As a direct and proximate result of GRU’ s actions in filing the Amended Demand
and in related dealings with GREC, GREC suffered, and continues to suffer, damages in excess
of $50 million.
paragraphs.
Count II: Deceptive and Unfair Acts & Practices
In Violation of the Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act
19. GREC repeats and re-alleges the allega tions contained in all the preceding
A/75508616.1
30