A comparison was made between chemical analysis and ocular mineral/rock classification in health-based risk assessment of historical mine waste produced between 1625 and 1975. Large parts of the mine waste are heavily weathered and secondary minerals are abundant. The field was divided into several areas from where composite samples were collected. Seventy-five mine waste samples were selected for chemical analysis (As, Cd, Co, Cr, Cu, Hg, Ni, Pb, V and Zn) and ocular mineral/rock classification (silicate, mica, granite/pegmatite, carbonate, iron oxide ore, sulfide ore, distribution between chalcopyrite, sphalerite and galena and distribution between pyrite and pyrrhotite)._x000D_
The waste has been produced in conjunction with mining a complex sulfidic ore with increasing iron oxide content (mainly magnetite) towards the northern part of the field. Elevated concentrations were found for Cd (average 26 mg/kg dw), Cu (average 3500 mg/kg dw), Pb (average 4100 mg/kg dw) and Zn (average 11 000 mg/kg dw). Large differences between average and median values indicated that the data was not normally distributed, ie the metals occur as discrete minerals (eg chalcopyrite, galena and sphalerite). The ocular classification indicated low carbonate content, chalcopyrite dominating over sphalerite and galena in most samples and an even distribution between pyrite and pyrrhotite._x000D_
Both analytical and ocular mineral/rock classification data were combined into a common matrix that was evaluated using multivariate statistics. Principal component analysis (PCA) showed, for instance, that chromium and vanadium were mostly associated with harder minerals and rocks._x000D_
PCA also indicated that a similar graphical picture could be obtained for chemical data and ocular mineral/rock classification data, respectively._x000D_
The comparison indicates that ocular mineral/rock classification can replace or at least reduce the numbers of chemical analysis in health- based risk assessment of historical mine waste.