STATE OF NEW YORK

SUPREME COURT COUNTY OF JEFFERSON

WIND POWER ETHICS GROUP,

Petitioner-Plaintiff,

- VS - VERIFIED ANSWER
AND OBJECTIONS
PLANNING BOARD OF THE TOWN OF CAPE IN POINT OF
VINCENT, and RICHARD EDSALL, TOM RIENBECK, LAW/AFFIRMATIVE
GEORGE MINGLE, ANDREW BINSLEY and KAREN DEFENSES OF
BOURCY, in their capacities as planning board members RESPONDENT-
DEFENDANT ST.
Respondents-Defendants, LAWRENCE
WINDPOWER, LLC
- and -
Index No. 10-2882
ST. LAWRENCE WINDPOWER, LLC,

Respondent-Defendant.

Respondent-Defendant, St. Lawrence Windpower, LLC (hereinafter

"SLW"), as and for its Verified Answer to the Petition and Complaint, states as follows:

1. Neither admits nor denies the allegations set forth in paragraph 1

which purports to characterize the nature of this proceeding and do not contain factual

contentions to which a responsive pleading is required.

2. Denies the allegations contained in paragraphs 2, 3, 5, 6 and 7 of the

Petition and Complaint.

3. Denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the

allegations contained in paragraph 4 of the Petition and Complaint.

13257148.2
 -2 -

PARTIES

4. Denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the

allegations contained in paragraph 8 of the Petition and Complaint.

5. Denies the allegations contained in paragraphs 9 and 12 of the

Petition and Complaint.

6. Admits the allegations contained in paragraphs 10 and 13.

7. Admits the allegations contained in paragraph 11 to the extent it

alleges that the listed parties were planning board members at the time of the actions

complained of in the Petition and Complaint, and otherwise denies knowledge or

information sufficient to form a belief as to the remaining allegations contained therein.

VENUE

8. Neither admits nor denies the allegations contained in paragraph 14

to the extent it attempts to allege the legal basis for the venue of the within combined

Article 78/Declaratory Judgment proceeding.

EXHAUSTION OF ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDIES

9. Admits the allegations contained in paragraphs 15, 16 and 17 of the

Petition and Complaint.

10. Admits the allegations contained in paragraph 18 to the extent it

alleges WPEG and other individuals, agencies and members of the public submitted

comments during the relevant comment periods, and otherwise denies the remaining

allegations contained therein.

13257148.2
 -3-

II. Admits the allegations contained in paragraph 19 of the Petition and

Complaint to the extent it alleges that the Cape Vincent Planning board adopted a

Findings Statement pursuant to the provisions of the State Environmental Quality Review

Act ("SEQR"), and otherwise denies the remaining allegations contained therein.

12. Denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the

allegations contained in paragraph 20 of the Petition and Complaint.

13. Neither admits nor denies the allegations contained in paragraph 21

of the Petition and Complaint to the extent it purports to characterize the contents of

documents, and respectfully refers this Court to those documents and/or materials upon

which such allegations are purportedly based for the full terms and effects thereof.

14. Denies the allegations contained in paragraph 22 of the Petition and

Complaint.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

15. Neither admits nor denies the allegations contained in paragraph 23

of the Petition and Complaint, as there are no factual allegations to which a responsive

pleading is required.

16. Denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the

allegations contained in paragraphs 24, 25, 28, 30, 34, 38, 39, 40, 53, and 56 of the

Petition and Complaint.

17. Denies the allegations contained in paragraphs 26, 46 and 50 of the

Petition and Complaint.

13257148.2
 -4-

18. Denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the

allegations contained in paragraph 27 of the Petition and Complaint, as "industrial" is an

undefined term.

19. Admits the allegations contained in paragraphs 29, 31, 35, 43, 44

and 51 of the Petition and Complaint.

20. Neither admits nor denies the allegations contained in paragraph 32

of the Petition and Complaint to the extent that paragraph characterizes provisions of law,

rules, regulations and/or court decisions and their effect in this matter, and respectfiilly

refers all issues of law to this Court.

21. Admit the allegations contained in paragraph 33 of the Petition and

Complaint to the extent it alleges that the SLW project is sited in an Agricultural District,

but neither admits nor denies the remaining allegations contained therein to the extent it

characterizes provisions of law, rules, regulations and/or court decisions and their effect

in this matter, and respectfully refers all issues of law to this Court.

22. Admits the allegations contained in paragraph 36 of the Petition and

Complaint to the extent it alleges that the SLW may be required to allow collocation of

the transmission line for the Project, but otherwise denies the allegations contained in

paragraph 36 of the Petition and Complaint.

23. Admits the allegations contained in paragraph 37 of the Petition and

Complaint, but neither admits nor denies the remaining allegations contained therein to

the extent it characterizes the contents of documents, and respectfully refers this Court to

13257148.2
 -5-

those documents and/or materials upon which such allegations are purportedly based for

the full terms and effects thereof.

24. Admits the allegations contained in paragraph 41 of the Petition and

Complaint to the extent it alleges SLW prepared and submitted a Supplemental Draft

Environmental Impact Statement to the Planning Board, but neither admits nor denies the

remaining allegations contained therein to the extent it characterizes the contents of

documents, and respectfully refers this Court to those documents and/or materials upon

which such allegations are purportedly based for the full terms and effects thereof.

25. Neither admits nor denies the allegations contained in paragraphs 42,

45, 47, 48, 49, 52, and 54 of the Petition and Complaint as they characterize the contents

of documents, and respectfully refers this Court to those documents and/or materials

upon which such allegations are purportedly based for the full terms and effects thereof.

26. Admits the allegations contained in paragraph 45 of the Petition and

Complaint to the extent it alleges that comments were submitted by agencies and the

public during the comment period, but neither admits nor denies the remaining

allegations contained therein to the extent it characterizes the contents of documents, and

respectfully refers this Court to those documents and/or materials upon which such

allegations are purportedly based for the full terms and effects thereof.

27. Admits the allegations contained in paragraph 55 of the Petition and

Complaint to the extent it alleges that the Planning Board accepted a Final Environmental

Impact Statement submitted by SLW.

13257148.2
 -6-

28. Admits the allegations contained in paragraph 57 of the Petition and

Complaint to the extent it alleges that the Planning Board adopted a Findings Statement

for the Project in compliance with the requirements of SEQR at its meeting of September

15, 2010, but otherwise denies the allegations contained therein.

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

29. Repeats and realleges the responses interposed to the allegations

contained to paragraphs 1 through 57 of the Petition and Complaint as if fully set forth at

length herein.

30. Denies the allegations contained in paragraphs 59, 63, 64 and 65 of

the Petition and Complaint.

31. Neither admits nor denies the allegations contained in paragraphs 60,

61 and 62 of the Petition and Complaint to the extent those paragraphs characterize

provisions of law, rules, regulations and/or court decisions and their effect in this matter,

and respectffilly refers all issues of law to this Court.

SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION

32. Repeats and realleges the responses interposed to the allegations

contained to paragraphs 1 through 65 as if fully set forth at length herein.

33. Neither admits nor denies the allegations contained in paragraphs 67,

68, 69 and 70 of the Petition and Complaint to the extent those paragraphs characterize

provisions of law, rules, regulations and/or court decisions and their effect in this matter,

and respectfully refers all issues of law to this Court.

13257148.2
 7

34. Admits the allegations contained in paragraphs 71 and 72 of the

Petition and Complaint.

35. Neither admits nor denies the allegations contained in paragraph 73

of the Petition and Complaint as they characterize the contents of documents, and

respectfully refers this Court to those documents and/or materials upon which such

allegations are purportedly based for the terms and effects thereof.

36. Denies the allegations contained in paragraphs 74, 76 and 78 of the

Petition and Complaint.

37. Admits the allegations contained in paragraph 75 of the Petition and

Complaint to the extent it alleges that the Notice of Acceptance of the FEIS appeared in

the September 1, 2010 issue of the Environmental Notice Bulletin.

38. Denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the

allegations contained in paragraph 77 of the Petition and Complaint.

THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION

39. Repeats and realleges the responses interposed to the allegations

contained to paragraphs 1 through 78 as if fully set forth at length herein.

40. Denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the

allegations contained in paragraphs 79, 80, 82 and 83 of the Petition and Complaint.

41. Neither admit nor deny the allegations contained in paragraph 81 of

the Petition and Complaint to the extent it characterizes provisions of law, rules,

regulations and/or court decisions and their effect in this matter, and respectfully refers

all issues of law to this Court.

13257148 2
 -8-

42. Deny the allegations contained in paragraph 84 of the Petition of the

Petition and Complaint.

FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION

43. Repeats and realleges the responses interposed to the allegations

contained to paragraphs 1 through 84 as if fully set forth at length herein.

44. Denies lcnowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the

allegations contained in paragraph 86 of the Petition and Complaint.

45. Neither admit nor deny the allegations contained in paragraph 87 of

the Petition and Complaint to the extent that paragraph characterizes provisions of law,

rules, regulations and/or court decisions and their effect in this matter, and respectfully

refers all issues of law to this Court.

46. Neither admits nor denies the allegations contained in paragraph 88

of the Petition and Complaint to the extent it characterizes the contents of documents, and

respectfully refers this Court to those documents and/or materials upon which such

allegations are purportedly based for the full terms and effects thereof.

47. Denies the allegations contained in paragraph 89 of the Petition and

Complaint.

FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION

48. Repeats and realleges the responses interposed to the allegations

contained to paragraphs 1 through 89 as if fully set forth at length herein.

49. Neither admits nor denies the allegations contained in paragraphs 91

and 92 of the Petition and Complaint to the extent those paragraphs characterize

13257148.2
 9-

provisions of law, rules, regulations and/or court decisions and their effect in this matter,

and respectfiilly refers all issues of law to this Court.

50. Denies the allegations contained in paragraph 93 of the Petition and

Complaint.

SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION

51. Repeats and realleges the responses interposed to the allegations

contained to paragraphs 1 through 93 as if fully set forth at length herein.

52. Neither admits nor denies the allegations contained in paragraphs 94

and 95 of the Petition and Complaint to the extent those paragraphs characterize

provisions of law, rules, regulations and/or court decisions and their effect in this matter,

and respectfully refers all issues of law to this Court.

53. Denies the allegations contained in paragraph 96 and 97 of the

Petition and Complaint.

54. Denies each and every other allegation in the Petition and Complaint

not specifically admitted, controverted or denied.

AS AND FOR A FIRST

OBJECTION IN POINT OF
LAW/AFFIR1VIATIVE DEFENSE

55. The Petition and Complaint fails to state a cause of action upon

which relief can be granted.

11257148.2
 - 10 -

AS AND FOR A SECOND

OBJECTION IN POINT OF
LAW/AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

56. The determination sought to be reviewed has substantial basis in the

record, does not constitute an abuse of discretion, nor was it affected by an error of law,

or arbitrary and capricious.

AS AND FOR A THIRD

OBJECTION IN POINT OF
LAW/AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

57. The Court lacks jurisdiction as to the Declaratory Judgment portions

of the Action/Proceeding.

AS AND FOR A FOURTH

OBJECTION IN POINT OF
LAW/AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

58. Petitioner-Plaintiff lacks capacity to sue.

AS AND FOR A FIFTH

OBJECTION IN POINT OF
LAW/AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

59. The Petition and Complaint fails to establish Petitioner-Plaintiff s

standing to maintain this Action/Proceeding.

13257148.2
 - 11 -

WHEREFORE, Respondent-Defendant St. Lawrence Windpower, LLC

respectfully request an Order dismissing the Petition and Complaint in this proceeding,

together with costs and disbursements, and such other and further relief as to this Court

seems just and proper.

Dated: December 9, 2010 NIXON PEABODY, LLP

Office and Post Office Address

677 Broadway, 10 th Floor
Albany, New York 12207
Tel: (518) 427-2650

Attorneys for Respondent-Defendant

St. Lawrence Windpower, LLC

TO: GARY A. ABRAHAM, ESQ.

Attorneys for Petitioner-Plaintiff
Office and Post Office Address
170 North Second Street
Allegany, New York 14706
Tel: (716) 372-1913

WHITEMAN, OSTERMAN & HANNA LLP

Todd M. Mathes, Esq., of counsel
Attorneys for Respondents-Defendants Planning
Board of the Town of Cape Vincent, et al.
Office and Post Office Address
One Commerce Plaza
Albany, New York 12260
Tel: (518) 487-7600

13257148.2
 VERIFICATION

STATE OF NEW YORK )

COUNTY OF ALBANY )ss:

RUTH E. LEISTENSNIDER, being duly sworn, deposes and says:

1. I am a member of Nixon Peabody, LLP, attorneys for Respondent-

Defendant St. Lawrence Windpower, LLC in the within matter.

2. I have read the foregoing Verified Answer and know the contents

thereof, and the same is true to my own lcnowledge, except to those matters stated to be

upon information and belief, and as to those matters, I believe them to be true.

3. The reason why this verification is made by me and not by

Respondent-Defendant St. Lawrence Windpower, LLC is that Respondent-Defendant

does not have its principal place of business in the County of Albany.

. LEISTENSNIDER

Sworn to before me this gyk

day of December, 2010.

N tary bli
KATHY J. DEYO
Notary Public:, State of New York
Qualified in Greene County
No. 01DE4711583
Commission Expires Dec. 31, az

13257148.2