This study compared four health risk assessment models and one analytical contaminant transport model used in Finland. In addition, experiments were done on the program linking spatial data to risk assessment. The health risk assessment models evaluated were: RISC-HUMAN developed in the Netherlands, SOILIRISK developed in Finland, the Swedish SNV's program and RISC on behalf of Bp Oil International Ltd. Only the SNV's program can be freely downloaded from the Internet. Golder Associates Ltd has developed a chargeable contaminant transport model called ConSim and a fully functional freeware version entitled Spatial Analysis and Decision Assistance program SADA is available for download on their this web site. At the beginning of the study a review was done on environmental management regulations and guidelines for soil pollution and cleaning needs assessment, ecological risk assessment and contaminant processes and transport modelling. For evaluation of the content of the selected models, the chemical data, landuse scenarios, soil and exposure parameters and result data were described in detail. To determine the differences and similarities of results from risk assessment and contaminant transport models, they were used with input data obtained from three case study test sites. The first test site describes contaminated service station properties, another test site is contaminated with chlorinated organic substances in a landfill area and the final site deals with PAHs and metals at an industrial estate. The input data of the case study test sites was based on real field sites. During the project separate risk assessments were compiled for the real field sites. For the comparison of risk assessment programs, the data of the real field sites was changed somewhat to be more suitable for a comparison of the programs. Risk assessment included evaluation of the uncertainty of the results and outcome of the most significant variables affecting the determination. This study also gathered together information presented in various publications on the different variables influencing the outcome of the risk assessment. New results on key factors effecting the concentration of groundwater were evaluated by sensitivity analysis. The comparison of risk assessment and transport model with data from the case study began by examining interphase mass transfer of contaminants. Results of the case study test site show that with homogeneous chemical properties, interphase mass transfer is similar to the various risk assessment models. The next examination were on migration of contaminants into the outside air, indoor air, groundwater and plants. In summary, the calculated indoor and outdoor concentrations differed less than one order of magnitude, which can be regarded as reasonable. The biggest differences were in the calculation of groundwater concentration. Significantly lower concentrations were obtained by using RISC than the other risk assessment model containing a groundwater migration option or the ConSim model which is designed for the calculation of groundwater transport. SNV's model predicted the highest concentration that deviated from concentrations obtained by RISC, by at most two orders of magnitude, and concentrations calculated by SOILIRISK by less than one order of magnitude. Risk assessment models differ in the final results, making it difficult to compare the results of the models. Most models separately calculate excess risk of cancer for carcinogens and then for non-carcinogenic toxicants a hazard quotient, which is obtained by comparing an estimated exposure to the acceptable dose (RfD, Reference Dose). RISC-HUMAN, however, calculates for all toxicants the hazard quotient. When calculating of the hazard quotient for carcinogens, a value of 1×10-4 is used for the excess life-long risk of cancer. With RISC-HUMAN, it is possible to compare the concentration of contaminant in the air to acceptable concentration. RISC, SNV's model, and RISC-HUMAN calculate a cumulative hazard index, which does not take into account the adverse effect mechanism of contaminant and effects of the target organ, but rather evaluate together all levels of risk. SOILIRISK sets out the main results of the contaminants in concentrations of the percentages calculated in acceptable maximum values. These results also present similarly active contaminants as well as the overall summary, the sum of the different routes of exposure effect. Cancer risk evaluates the effect of the most carcinogenic compounds as a whole. A sensivity assessment was used to evaluate the effect of various parameters on the results of risk assessment models. The contaminant's properties partly effect the assessment of parameter significance. In general, the modelling transport pathway to the receptor in risk assessment models substantially affected the organic carbon content, porosity, hydraulic conductivity and groundwater recharge. The most importance in case of modelling indoor air concentrations is the ventilation rate and pressure difference. The results of the risk assessment model comparison do not in itself give information on how "correct" one of the models calculates. The underlying assumptions and calculation formulas of models can be studied to evaluate how the model is able to take into account, for example soil conditions, building characteristics and other exposure factors under the considered site. The decision to use a particular risk assessment model should always be decided on a case-bycase basis. Selection can be based on results of comparison of risk assessment models described in this report. Risk assessment is usually initiated with relatively simple models, which may be the SNV-model and then if necessary move to more demanding models using more input information and resources.