Uncertainty of measurement or of mean value for the reliable classification of contaminated land

Classification of contaminated land is important for risk assessment and so it is vital to understand and quantify all of the uncertainties that are involved in the assessment of contaminated land. This paper uses a case study to compare two methods for assessing the uncertainty in site investigations (uncertainty of individual measurements, including that from sampling, and uncertainty of the mean value of all measurements within an area) and how the different methods affect the decisions made about a site. Using the ‘uncertainty of the mean value’ there is shown to be no significant possibility of ‘significant harm’ under UK guidance at one particular test site, but if you consider the ‘uncertainty of the measurements’ a significant proportion (50%) of the site is shown to be possibly contaminated. This raises doubts as to whether the current method using ‘uncertainty of the mean’ is sufficiently robust, and suggests that ‘uncertainty of measurement’ information may be preferable, or at least beneficial when used in conjunction.