Location check for E-PRTR facilities: Finland

1 Source data Location check for E-PRTR facilities: Finland Reporting date 2009-06-26 13:19:45 Reportnet identifier Envelope name XML file http://cdr.eionet.europa.eu/fi/eu/eprtrdat/envsivqjg E-PRTR data FI 2007 - v1 E-PRTR_data_FI_2007_-_v1.1.xml Derived data used for this report FI geo checks.xls (table with E-PRTR facility records) FI geo checks.kmz (zipped KML file for viewing with Google Earth) 2 Approach for checking locations of E-PRTR facilities E-PRTR data deliveries contain both postal addresses and geographic coordinates of the actual site of the facilities. In order to verify the reported coordinates for a facility, its address information has been extracted from the XML data file and sent to Google and public geocoding services. Both services are able to convert postal addresses into coordinate values. The returned results are always tagged with a label: address : the Google/ geocoder was able to find coordinates for the exact address street : coordinates for the street name could be found, but for the exact address zip : the geocoder could only return central coordinates for the given zip/postal code city, : the geocoder was only able to return central coordinates for the given city name geocoded : a match could be found by the geocoding service The geocoding depends on both the accuracy and completeness of the facility addresses in the E- PRTR data file and also the level of detail in the geocoder s dataset for a given country. The distance between the reported E-PRTR facility coordinates and the coordinates from the geocoded facility address was then calculated. Distances above a certain limit value were defined to be far according to the following simple evaluation schema: Geocoding Address Street Zip City Distance is far if > 1 km > 3 km > 5 km > 10 km If distances between the reported E-PRTR facility coordinates and geocoded Google/ facility address were less than the distance limits above, an evaluation of near was given. In this context, near or far does necessarily mean correct or wrong. A far evaluation is rather an indication that further evaluation is needed to make a judgement on the correctness of the reported information (address and coordinates) as well as of the results of the geocoding services. The distance evaluation was used in a subsequent visual inspection of selected facility locations with Google Earth. During this step, the main focus was to check those facilities where the distance between the reported facility coordinates and the coordinates from both geocoders were far. Main findings from the geocoding, the distance evaluation and the location checking (with some relevant screenshots for individual facilities) follow. Page 1/12

3 Summary of geocoding results A. Number of facilities for which geocoding was possible either by Google or : Facilities included in E-PRTR reporting: 514 100% Total number of facilities geocoded: 513 99.8% B. Overview of the results from the individual geocoding services as well as the overall highest level of for which coordinates could be obtained for each facility (taking the highest level of from either the Google or geocoding service). Geocoded facilities Geocoding service Total Level of for geocoded facilities Address Street Zip City Not geocoded Facilities (*) Google 459 287 119 40 13 55 89% 56% 23% 8% 3% 11% 501 163 35 33 270 13 97% 32% 7% 6% 53% 3% Highest level of from either Google or 513 334 99 44 36 1 100% 65% 19% 9% 7% 0% (*) Where relevant for your country, a full list of the facility/facilities that could be geocoded is given in Annex 3. 4 Summary of distance evaluation The table below provides an overview of the evaluated consistency between the reported E-PRTR coordinates and the geocoded coordinates derived from the reported E-PRTR addresses. Distance is far for the geocoder returning the highest coordinates Distance for both ( a ) geocoders is far (Case 1) ( b ) Distance of other geocoder is near (Case 2) ( c ) Distance is near for geocoder with highest ( d ) Number of facilities 41 33 439 % of MS facilities 8% 6% 85% ( a ) Includes facilities for which only one geocoder could locate the address and for which the distance is far. ( b ) If relevant for your country, a list of all Case 1 facilities is provided in Annex 1. These facilities are shown as Case 1 facilities in the country-specific KMZ file (see Section 5.1). A limited evaluation of selected Case 1 facilities is given in section 5.3. ( c ) If relevant for your country, a list of all Case 2 facilities is provided in Annex 2. The facilities are shown as Case 2 facilities in the country-specific KMZ file (see Section 5.1). ( d ) Includes facilities for which only one geocoder could locate the address and for which the distance is near. Page 2/12

Box 1. Example evaluation Google Google distance (km) Google distance (evaluation) distance (km) distance (evaluation) Address 4 Far city 5 near The highest level of for which geocoded results could be obtained for this facility was from the Google geocoder, at an address level of. The geocoder provided coordinates at a less detailed city level of. At the highest level of, the distance between the reported E-PRTR coordinates and the coordinates returned by Google is 4 km. The facility was subsequently evaluated as being far (i.e. greater than the 1 km distance threshold for address ) for the Google geocoder returning the highest coordinates, but near for the geocoder (i.e. less than the 10 km distance threshold for city ). The distance of 4 km between the Google geocoded address (based on the exact streetname and building number) and the E-PRTR reported coordinates indicates that there is a rather large inconsistency between the reported address and the reported coordinates. Therefore, the reported geographical information (address and coordinates) for this facility should be checked. This facility is therefore categorised as a Case 2 facility. General recommendation As a first priority, MS should check the reported coordinates of the Case 1 facilities for which the distance for both geocoders is far. As a second priority, MS should also check the reported coordinates of the remaining facilities ( Case 2 ) for which the distance is far (based on the geocoder with the highest ) but where the distance of the other geocoder is near ). 5 Location evaluation and selected spot-checks This section includes information on: the viewing of the information in Google Earth Viewer which allows for a visual comparison of the reported and geocoded coordinates and spot checks of selected facilities for Case 1 and geocoded facilities. 5.1 Screen viewing of results in Google Earth Viewer The tabular results included in the MS-specific xls file (reported and geocoded facility locations, the distances between them and distance evaluation) were converted into a MS-specific KML file which can be loaded into Google Earth Viewer. The KML file presents all reported E-PRTR facilities and their evaluation. The point locations are visualised on the map with small placemarks, where represents the reported E- PRTR coordinates and the balloons with G and Y stand for geocoding results from Google and. Points referring to the same facility are connected with lines. The evaluation results, i.e. far and near distances are shown using different icons (green for near and red for far). In the places list on the left in the Google Earth Viewer, the facilities are sorted with different icons according to the final evaluation: Case 1, Case 2, geocoded and Other facilities. Case 1 facilities - example Page 3/12

Case 2 facilities - example Not geocoded facilities - example Other facilities - example 5.2 Listing of common issues related to Case 1 and Case 2 facilities In the table below, 5 categories are used to group facilities according to the highest geocoding and the distance between reported E-PRTR coordinates and the geocoded coordinates. For each of the groups, a list of common issues which may cause the discrepancies is given and these may help guide your checks of the facilities provided in the Annexes. Group Precision (a) Distance (b) Main issues A Address > 50 km Wrong geocoding (typical for very high distances) Inconsistency between the reported address and the reported coordinates (c) B Address 50 km 1.5 km Inconsistency between the reported address and the reported coordinates (c) C Address 1 km - 1.5km Im of the geocoding Im of the reported coordinates Certain distance between the address location on the street and the centre of the facility (in cases where the facility is at a certain distance from the main road, e.g. a typical case for landfills) Page 4/12

Group Precision (a) Distance (b) Main issues Inconsistency between the reported address and the reported coordinates (c) D Street > 3 km Inconsistency between the reported address and the reported coordinates (c) Long street compared to the distance threshold of 3km Wrong geocoding (typical for very high distances) E Zip or City > 5 km (zip) or > 10 km (city) Large zip or city area compared to the distance threshold of 5km and 10km respectively Wrong geocoding (typical for very high distances) (a) Highest geocoding for the facility (b) Distance between the reported E-PRTR coordinates and the geocoded coordinates (c) Both sets of information point to different locations such as e.g. the E-PRTR coordinates point to the physical location of the industrial facility while the address points to the main office of the parent company, or e.g. a misreporting of the coordinates. 5.3 Selected spot checks for Case 1 facilities (where the distance between the reported E-PRTR coordinates and both geocoded coordinates was far ) The list of all Case 1 facilities is given in Annex 1 (ranked according to and distance between reported and geocoded coordinates). Selected spot-checks (including screen shots) for some Case 1 facilities from your MS are presented below. National ID FacilityName Google Distance Google Distance Group Evaluation (*) 1287 Metso Paper Oy, Jyväskylä, address 159 NA A 1 Paperikoneet -yksikkö geocoded 3029 UPM-Kymmene Wood Oy, UPM, address zip 137.52 73.01 A 1 Joensuun vaneritehdas 1147 Oy Visko Teepak Ab address city 13.25 13.09 B 2/4 2157 Vaskiluodon Voima Oy address address 12.58 12.57 B 2/4 2818 Oras Oy address city 12.05 11.85 B 2/4 100109757 Manupork Oy address address 5.73 5.7 B 2/4 1592 UPM-Kymmene Oyj, Kaukaan address address 3.26 3.27 B 2 tehtaat 13732 Suomen Akkukeräys Oy address address 3.12 3.17 B 2 1300 KAINUUN VOIMA OY, Kajaanin address city 2.8 15.33 B 3 Höyryvoimalaitos 23887 RAUTATYÖ KRÖGER OY, address address 1.88 1.94 B 2 Peittauslaitos Savela 3962 Porin Jätehuolto, Hangassuon address city 1.86 31.61 B 2 kaatopaikka 4196 Perämeren Jätehuolto Oy, address address 1.23 1.16 C 5 Riukkajängän kaatopaikka 100185901 Perämeren Jätehuolto Oy, address address 1.14 1.06 C 5 Jätekeskus Jäkälä 2814 STX Finland Cruise Oy, Rauma address address 1.03 1.01 C 5 27238 AGNICO-EAGLE FINLAND, street city 34.25 35.65 D 2 KITTILÄN KAIVOS 100004650 Napapiirin Residuum Oy, street zip 15.79 15.91 D 2 Kuusiselän kaatopaikka 1864 ASHLAND FINLAND OY, zip city 12.07 12.27 E 7 POLYESTERITUOTANTO 3887 JÄTEKUKKO OY, zip NA 9.61 E 6 Heinälamminrinteen jätekeskus geocoded (*) Evaluation of a potential reason for the facility to have a distance far for all returned geocoding results: 1 = wrong geocoding by geocoding service, 2 = inconsistency between the reported address and the reported PRTR coordinates (address and coordinates are reported for different locations e.g. the address of the head quarters of the company and coordinates are relating to the facility location) 3 = wrong reported address 4 = wrong coordinates (For Finland code 2/4 is used. This code was assigned where there was an indication that the inconsistency was due to wrong coordinates. 5 = im of geocoded coordinates or of the reported coordinates (max 1km) 6 = 5 km for the far evaluation on zip level might be too strict for Finland due to rather big zip areas in Finland 7 = 10 km for the far evaluation on city level might be too strict Finland due to rather big city areas in Finland Page 5/12

Group A facilities Metso Paper Oy, Jyväskylä, Paperikoneet - yksikkö The reported coordinates seem to match with an industrial installation in the municipality of Jyväskylä. The Google Map geocoded coordinates (address ) are at a distance of 159km of the reported coordinates. It seems that Google Map is able to geocode the facility correctly (the streetname is PL, this could contribute to the wrong geocoding). UPM-Kymmene Wood Oy, UPM, Joensuun vaneritehdas The reported coordinates are located in the municipality of Joensu. This corresponds with the reported address. A visual check of the image is possible due to very low resolution of Google Earth in this location. The Google geocoded coordinates (address ) are at a distance of 138km of the reported coordinates. It seems that Google is able to geocode the address correctly. Group B facilities Oy Visko Teepak Ab Google and geocoded coordinates (address ) are at a distance of about 13km of the reported coordinates. Visual checks of the location of the reported and geocoded coordinates is possible due to very low resolution of Google Earth in this location. Therefore two options are possible: 1) reported coordinates are incorrect, 2) the reported address and reported coordinates are consistent (refer to different locations) Vaskiluodon Voima Oy and Google geocoded the facility with address at more than 12km from the reported coordinates which do visually coincide with an industrial facility. Based on the visual check, it could be assumed that the reported coordinates are incorrect. At the other hand, a visual check of the geocoded location was possible due to limited resolution of the Google Earth image at that location. Oras Oy The reported facility coordinates are located in rural area (forest/arable land) and can therefore be assumed to be incorrect. Google locates the facility at a industrial zone 12.05km far with address. The coordinates should be checked and corrected if necessary. Manupork Oy and Google geocoded the facility with address at about 6km from the reported coordinates. Visual checks of the location of the reported and geocoded coordinates is possible due to very low resolution of Google Earth in this location. Therefore two options are possible: 1) reported coordinates are incorrect, 2) the reported address and reported coordinates are consistent (refer to different locations). Page 6/12

UPM-Kymmene Oyj, Kaukaan tehtaat The geocoded and Google coordinates (address ) are at a distance of 3.27 km from the reported coordinates. A clear visual check was possible due to limited resolution of Google Earth at the location. It can be concluded that there is an inconsistency between the reported coordinates and the reported address (they do point to the same location).. Suomen Akkukeräys Oy The reported coordinates are placed close to an industrial site. The gecoded and Google coordinates (address ) are located at a distance > 3km and do also point to a (different) industrial site. Therefore it seems that the reported address and coordinates are consistent (i.e. they refer to facilities at different locations). KAINUUN VOIMA OY, Kajaanin Höyryvoimalaitos The reported coordinates are placed at an industrial facility and therefore appear correct. The gecoded Google coordinates (address ) are located at a distance of 2 km and seem to fall in urban are. Therefore it can be assumed that the reported address does correspond with the location of the facility. RAUTATYÖ KRÖGER OY, Peittauslaitos Savela The reported coordinates are placed at an industrial facility. The gecoded Google and coordinates (address ) are located at a distance of about 2 km. There is clearly an inconsistency between the reported address and reported coordinates (refer to different locations). Possibly the reported address does correspond with the location of the facility. Group C facilities Perämeren Jätehuolto Oy, Riukkajängän kaatopaikka and Perämeren Jätehuolto Oy, Jätekeskus Jäkälä The two facilities are located very closely to each other. The and Google geocoordinates (address ) are located slightly more than 1km from the reported coordinates for the facilities (landfills). From the visual check in Google Earth (with limited resolution), it seems that the difference might be due to 1) rather big site per facility and 2) the location of the facility at a certain distance from the main road. Page 7/12

STX Finland Cruise Oy, Rauma Reported facility and both Google and locations (address ) place the facility around Rauma harbour. The distance might be due to an im of the geocoding, an im of the reported coordinates or both. Group D facilities AGNICO-EAGLE FINLAND, KITTILÄN KAIVOS The geocoded Google coordinates (street ) are at a distance of about 35km from the reported coordinates and are in the centre of Kittilän. There is an inconsistency between the reported address and the reported coordinates, it is however possible to determine which reported information is incorrect (i.e. the address or the coordinates). Napapiirin Residuum Oy, Kuusiselän kaatopaikka The geocoded Google positions (street ) is located at an industrial site. The reported E-PRTR coordinates are at a distance of about 16km. There is therefore clearly an inconsistency between the reported address and the reported coordinates. It is however possible to indicate which information points to the actual facility. Group E facilities ASHLAND FINLAND OY, POLYESTERITUOTANTO The geocoded Google and coordinates (zip and city ) are at a distance of more than 12 km from the reported coordinates. The geocoded position is in the centre of Porvoo. Most probably the reported location and address are consistent and the high difference could be due to rather large defined city areas in Finland. JÄTEKUKKO OY, Heinälamminrinteen jätekeskus The geocoded coordinates (zip ) are at a distance of 9.16 km of the reported coordinates. The geocoded position is in the centre of Kuopio. Most probably the reported location and address are consistent and the high difference could be due to rather large defined areas with a same zip code in Finland. 5.4 Case2 facilities (where the distance between the reported E-PRTR coordinates and the geocoded result with the highest was far and where the distance of the other (less precise) geocoder was near ). No additional evaluation of these facilities has been performed by EEA. Member States should however also check the reported geographical information of the Case 2 facilities. A list of the Case 2 facilities is provided in Annex 2. Page 8/12

5.5 Selected spot checks for non-geocoded facilities NationalID Facility name 23139 M-real Oyj, M-real Äänekoski Board M-real Oyj, M-real Äänekoski Board Neither Google nor could geocode the reported address. The reported coordinates for the installation point to an industrial site in Äänekoski (this corresponds to the address information). The reported coordinates therefore appear correct. 6 Main findings and remarks 514 facilities, of which 1 could be geocoded Geocoding The overall highest level of for which coordinates could be obtained for each facility (taking the highest level of from either the Google or geocoding service) was 65% for the address and 19% for the street. For 7% of the facilities, the highest geocoding was the city level. Location evaluation In total 15% of the facilities have a distance far for the geocoder which returns the highest (Case 1 and Case 2 facilities). The MS should check the geographical information of these facilities Case 1: A preliminary evaluation of 18 Case 1 facilities provided the following information: - For 2 facilities the geocoding service might have returned a false result - For 11 facilities there could be an inconsistency between the reported coordinates and the reported address (reported coordinates or reported address does match with the location of the facility) - For 3 facilities, the geocoded coordinates (address ) are at a distance between 1 and 1.5km. This might be due to an im of the geocoding, an im of the address or a certain distance between the address location on the street and the centre of the facility (in cases where the facility is at a certain distance from the main road, e.g. a typical case for landfills) - For 2 facilities, the highest of the geocoded coordinates was zip or city level. The large distance between geocoded and reported coordinates might in these cases be due to the large zip and city areas in Finland. The distance might therefore exceed the set thresholds of 5 km and 10 km respectively. Case 2: No additional evaluation of these 33 facilities has been performed by EEA. Not geocoded facilities: the reported coordinates for the facility seem to match with an industrial installation General comment concerning the address reporting by Finland The MS has systematically reported the streetname and building number in the field which is foreseen for the streetname. The field for the building number is empty for all the E-PRTR facilities. Page 9/12

Annex 1 List of Case 1 facilities The table below provides a list of all the Case 1 facilities in your MS where the distance between the reported E-PRTR coordinates and the geocoded coordinates from the two geocoding services was far. National ID FacilityName Distance Google Page 10/12 Distance Google 1287 Metso Paper Oy, Jyväskylä, Paperikoneet -yksikkö 159 - address geocoded 3029 UPM-Kymmene Wood Oy, UPM, Joensuun vaneritehdas 137.52 73.01 address zip A 1147 Oy Visko Teepak Ab 13.25 13.09 address city B 2157 Vaskiluodon Voima Oy 12.58 12.57 address address B 2818 Oras Oy 12.05 11.85 address city B 100109757 Manupork Oy 5.73 5.7 address address B Ylä-Savon jätehuolto Oy, Peltomäen 3736 jätteenkäsittelypaikka 4.92 10.85 address city B 1384 OMG Kokkola Chemicals Oy 4.89 5.33 address zip B 22886 Sikala - 4.52 geocoded address B 13349 Rouskis Oy, Korvenmäen jäteasema 3.01 3.99 street address B 1592 UPM-Kymmene Oyj, Kaukaan tehtaat 3.26 3.27 address address B 13732 Suomen Akkukeräys Oy 3.12 3.17 address address B 2003 Myllykoski Paper Oy 3.23 3.09 address address B 22148 Rinti Oy, Broilerkasvattamo, Ylihärmä 3.05 3.16 address address B 1300 KAINUUN VOIMA OY, Kajaanin Höyryvoimalaitos 2.8 15.33 address city B 100061052 Siipikarjan kasvattamo 2.41 2.29 address address B EURENCO Vihtavuori Oy, Nammo Lapua Oy 1607 Vihtavuoren tehdas, Oy Forcit Ab Vihtavuoren tehdas - 2 geocoded address B 100083582 Nassab-Ab 1.93 1.95 address address B 23887 RAUTATYÖ KRÖGER OY, Peittauslaitos Savela 1.88 1.94 address address B 3962 Porin Jätehuolto, Hangassuon kaatopaikka 1.86 31.61 address city B FORTUM POWER AND HEAT OY, INKOON 1239 VOIMALAITOS 1.74 2.19 address address B 4196 Perämeren Jätehuolto Oy, Riukkajängän kaatopaikka 1.23 1.16 address address C 3275 Crown Pakkaus Oy 1.14 1.15 address address C 100185901 Perämeren Jätehuolto Oy, Jätekeskus Jäkälä 1.14 1.06 address address C MONDO MINERALS B.V. Branch Finland, 1848 HORSMANAHON JA PEHMYTKIVEN KAIVOS 1.03 1.46 address address C 2814 STX Finland Cruise Oy, Rauma 1.03 1.01 address address C 14037 Siipikarjan kasvattamo - 1.01 geocoded address C 3836 TALVISALON KAATOPAIKKA, KEURUU 1.01 1.04 address address C 3906 Satakierto Oy, Hallavaaran jätekeskus - 29.55 geocoded city E 11323 Helsingin Energia, Vuosaaren voimalaitokset - 14.42 geocoded city E 27238 AGNICO-EAGLE FINLAND, KITTILÄN KAIVOS 34.25 35.65 street city D 100004650 Napapiirin Residuum Oy, Kuusiselän kaatopaikka 15.79 15.91 street zip D 21322 Oy Snellman Ab, Pietarsaari 107.2 110.68 zip city E 20303 Endomines Oy, Pampalon kultakaivos 41.43 38.88 zip city E 1856 PVO Lämpövoima Oy, Tahkoluodon voimalaitos 18.76 18.61 city zip E 100130413 Ekokem-Palvelu Oy, Peräkorven käsittelykeskus 17.46 17.33 zip city E 27819 SMA MINERAL OY, Röyttän Kalkkitehdas 17.18 19.4 zip city E 4148 Itä-Uudenmaan Jätehuolto Oy, Mömossenin jäteasema (KP) 15.98 16.61 zip city E 2110 Outokumpu Chrome Oy, Outokumpu Stainless Oy, Tornion tehtaat 15.63 18.34 zip city E 1864 ASHLAND FINLAND OY, POLYESTERITUOTANTO 12.07 12.27 zip city E 3887 JÄTEKUKKO OY, Heinälamminrinteen jätekeskus - 9.61 geocoded zip E Group A

Annex 2 List of Case 2 facilities The table below provides a list of all the Case 2 facilities in your MS where the distance is far for the geocoder with the highest coordinates and the distance of the other geocoder is near (Case 2) ( c ). National ID Facility name Distance Google Distance Google Highest 3024 Valio Oy, Joensuun tehdas 323.96 1.24 address city address A 107349 Hansaprint Oy, Artukaisten tehtaat 5.16 4.23 address zip address B 469 Lahti Aqua Oy, Ali-Juhakkalan jätevedenpuhdistamo 4.32 3.34 address zip address B 22149 Siipikarjan kasvattamo 4.2 5.34 address city address B 1148 Ovako Wire Oy Ab, Koverharin terästehdas 3.13 2.96 address city address B 2946 Atria Oy, Nurmon tuotantolaitokset 1.99 1.54 address city address B 24629 Niitynmaan Porsas Oy 1.83 7.83 address city address B 53809 Potra Oy 1.48 5.38 address city address C 13660 Vehmaan Haikara Oy 1.44 5.05 address city address C 1257 Ovako Bar Oy Ab, Imatran terästehdas 1.43 2.36 address city address C 1085 Ovako Wire Oy Ab, Dalsbruk, valssaamo ja satama 0.73 1.43 street address address C 2777 Nordkalk Oyj Abp Paraisten kalkkitehdas ja satama 1.35 1.09 address city address C 100112334 Siipikarjan kasvattamo 1.32 6.67 address city address C 21951 Lakeuden Etappi Oy, Jätehuoltokeskus 1.27 5.28 address city address C 1262 Fortum Power and Heat Oy, JOENSUUN VOIMALAITOS 1.26 2.74 address city address C 2577 Finnsementti Oy, Lappeenrannan sementtitehdas 1.02 3.59 address city address C 3805 Pohjois-Satakunnan Jätteidenkäsittely Oy, Kooninkeitaan kaatopaikka 8.33 9.95 street city street D 2837 Voimavasu Oy Säkylän voimalaitos 6.01 5.64 street city street D 21090 Atria Oy, Kauhajoki 4.82 0.87 street city street D 3967 Merikarvian kunta, Korpimatin kaatopaikka 3.34 2.68 street city street D 14228 Partelan Porsas Oy 3.27 3.99 street city street D 1254 Stora Enso Oyj, Imatran tehtaat 7.67 4.46 zip city zip E 27945 LASSILA & TIKANOJA OYJ, KIERRÄTYSPOLTTOAINELAITOS 7.42 1.73 zip city zip E 2134 Yara Suomi Oy, Uudenkaupungin tehtaat 6.9 4.77 zip city zip E 20744 Oy Alholmens Kraft Ab 6.79 3.17 zip city zip E 1162 Stora Enso Oyj, Heinolan Flutingtehdas 6.7 4.5 zip city zip E 2780 Paroc Oy Ab Paraisten vuorivillatehdas ja Paroc Panel System 6.65 1.98 zip city zip E 13053 Nordkalk Oyj Abp Paraisten kaivos 6.47 1.52 zip city zip E 52325 Laitila Coating Oy 6.41 0.55 zip city zip E 200 HELSINGIN VESI, VIIKINMÄEN JÄTEVEDENPUHDISTAMO, JV+IL+JH, Jätevedenpuhdistamo 1.92 6.32 city zip zip E 1836 Outokumpu Stainless Tubular Products Oy Ab, Jakobstad Works 5.98 2.44 zip city zip E 14415 PIRKANMAAN JÄTEHUOLTO OY, Tarastenjärven jätteenkäsittelykeskus 5.56 7.11 zip city zip E 14754 TUITTULAN PEKONI OY 5.19 6.22 zip city zip E Group Page 11/12

Annex 3 National ID List of facilities that could be geocoded FacilityName 23139 M-real Oyj, M-real Äänekoski Board Page 12/12