NC Radon Data
Radon Map
The following map shows the highest level of radon measured in each county. Data for this map was obtained from two test kit companies (Air Chek and Alpha Energy) and one company that leases continuous monitors.
- Red shade: A county with at least one radon building test that measured at or above 4 picoCuries per Liter of air
- Orange shade: A county with at least one radon building test that measured between 2 to 3.9 picoCuries per Liter of air
NOTE: Radon data should not be used to predict whether a particular building or site will have elevated radon levels. Radon levels are highly site specific. The only way to know the radon level in a building is to conduct a radon test.
The content of this map was updated on August 6, 2025.
Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System Data
2015 BRFSS Data Set - Do you know what radon gas is?
- 18.8% of Black Males surveyed replied yes
- 18% of Black Females surveyed replied yes
- 30.4% White males surveyed replied yes
- 27% of White females surveyed replied yes
- 13.8% of Hispanics surveyed replied yes
2019 BRFSS Data Set - Do you know what radon gas is?
- 36.5% of Black Males surveyed replied yes
- 38.1% of Black Females surveyed replied yes
- 70.9% of White males surveyed replied yes
- 60.4% of White females surveyed replied yes
- 14% of Hispanics surveyed replied yes
Own v. Rent Home
- 63.1% of those who own their home replied yes
- 31.5% of those who rent their home replied yes
Income Level
- 26.2% of those with an annual income of $15,000 or less replied yes
- 33.3% of those with an annual income of $15,000 to $24,999 replied yes
- 47.9% of those with an annual income of $25,000 to $34,999 replied yes
- 53.3% of those with an annual income of $35,000 to $49,999 replied yes
- 60.8% of those with an annual income of $50,000 to $74,999 replied yes
- 73.7% of those with an annual income of $75,000 or more replied yes
BRFSS Data: Have you tested your home for radon? Responses from Current Smokers in 2015 and 2019
Data collected by the North Carolina Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System reports that in both 2015 and 2019 only 20.1 percent of current smokers surveyed have tested their homes for radon.
https://schs.dph.ncdhhs.gov/data/brfss/2015/nc/risk/radontst.html
https://schs.dph.ncdhhs.gov/data/brfss/2019/nc/risk/radontst.html
Radon In NC Schools Testing Data 1989-1993
NC School Radon Data Set
Based on the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) conclusion that ". . . Schools may be a significant source of radon exposure for children and staff . . ." The Environmental Team of NC Radiation Protection Program (NCRP) conducted a pilot radon survey in 20 North Carolina schools during the summer of 1989 and again in the winter of 1990. The results of 400 measurements indicate that the radon levels in school classrooms are similar to regional radon levels found in residential surveys.
EPA has a specific testing strategy for schools If you test a school for radon you should follow these guidelines: test all frequently used rooms on and below the ground level - Because radon levels in schools have been found to vary significantly from room to room; test all frequently-occupied rooms in contact with the ground; and conduct tests in the cooler months of the year.
In 1990 and 1991, the North Carolina Department of Public Instruction (DPI) assisted many schools in North Carolina with purchasing radon canisters for the purpose of measuring classrooms in individual schools. However, test results were never compiled statewide by DPI. Individual schools' test results were retained by each school.
In 1997, North Carolina Radiation Protection (NCRP) retrieved most of the survey data from this previous project. In the spring of 1998, NCRP assisted with radon testing in an additional 35 school districts which had no test data. Five schools per district were tested.
Currently, survey data has been compiled from 1,102 schools, with 23,448 classrooms tested in 94 counties (at least one school per county) out of 100 counties in North Carolina.
The average radon level tested is: 1.79 pCi/l.
Based on NCRP analysis, approximately 11% of these tested classrooms had radon concentrations greater than 4 pCi/l.
Following is a summary of the data collected from those schools.
| State | County | # Shools Tested | # Rooms Tested | # of Rooms >4 pCi/l | Minimum Level Recorded at a School | Maximum Level Recorded at a School | County Radon Average | County Radon Median |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NC | Almance | 3 | 44 | 7 | 0 | 9.5 | 1.6 | 0.8 |
| NC | Alexander | 10 | 50 | 1 | 0.3 | 4.5 | 1.5 | 1.4 |
| NC | Alleghany | 4 | 99 | 13 | 0 | 7.4 | 1.8 | 1.1 |
| NC | Anson | 1 | 4 | 0 | 0.5 | 0.7 | 0.6 | 0.6 |
| NC | Ashe | 8 | 289 | 10 | 0 | 7 | 1.3 | 0.9 |
| NC | Avery | 9 | 45 | 2 | 0.3 | 5.9 | 1 | 0.6 |
| NC | Beaufort | 16 | 314 | 2 | 0 | 4.7 | 0.8 | 0.5 |
| NC | Bertie | No data | No data | No data | No data | No data | No data | No data |
| NC | Bladen | 11 | 44 | 0 | 0 | 2.4 | 0.7 | 0.6 |
| NC | Brunswick | 11 | 10 | 0 | 0 | 0.3 | 0.2 | 0 |
| NC | Buncombe | 43 | 1788 | 188 | 0.2 | 22.2 | 1.8 | 1 |
| NC | Burke | 26 | 435 | 9 | 0 | 7.4 | 1.2 | 1 |
| NC | Cabarrus | 14 | 75 | 0 | 0 | 2.9 | 0.9 | 0.8 |
| NC | Caldwell | 24 | 786 | 171 | 0 | 15.3 | 2.4 | 1.8 |
| NC | Camden | 3 | 18 | 0 | 0.2 | 2.5 | 1 | |
| NC | Cateret | No data | No data | No data | No data | No data | No data | No data |
| NC | Caswell | 8 | 80 | 41 | 0 | 64.1 | 6.8 | 4.2 |
| NC | Catawba | 43 | 1645 | 238 | 0 | 16.8 | 2 | 1.4 |
| NC | Chatham | 14 | 520 | 7 | 0 | 7.8 | 0.9 | 0.6 |
| NC | Cherokee | 12 | 43 | 0 | 0.3 | 2.4 | 1.1 | 0.9 |
| NC | Chowan | 4 | 19 | 0 | 0.3 | 1.6 | 0.6 | 0.6 |
| NC | Clay | 1 | 20 | 3 | 0.5 | 5.4 | 2 | 1.5 |
| NC | Cleveland | 16 | 93 | 16 | 0.3 | 18 | 2.3 | 1.4 |
| NC | Columbus | 19 | 71 | 1 | 0 | 4.4 | 0.6 | 0.3 |
| NC | Craven | 5 | 24 | 0 | 0.3 | 1.1 | 0.5 | 0.3 |
| NC | Cumberland | 67 | 2456 | 117 | 0 | 10.1 | 1.2 | 0.8 |
| NC | Currituck | 5 | 25 | 0 | 0.3 | 1.3 | 0.4 | 0.3 |
| NC | Dare | No data | No data | No data | No data | No data | No data | No data |
| NC | Davidson | 38 | 38 | 0 | 0.3 | 3.8 | 1.3 | 0.9 |
| NC | Davie | 12 | 210 | 44 | 0 | 26.8 | 2.9 | 2.2 |
| NC | Duplin | 2 | 292 | 5 | 0 | 6.2 | 0.8 | 0.6 |
| NC | Durham | 13 | 35 | 1 | 0 | 9.3 | 0.5 | 0 |
| NC | Edgecombe | 6 | 250 | 33 | 0 | 10 | 1.7 | 1.3 |
| NC | Forsyth | 49 | 2348 | 444 | 0 | 105 | 2.9 | 1.8 |
| NC | Franklin | 5 | 25 | 1 | 0.3 | 4.2 | 1.9 | 1.9 |
| NC | Gaston | 55 | 1803 | 123 | 0 | 17.7 | 1.5 | 1.1 |
| NC | Gates | 6 | 138 | 0 | 0.2 | 1.8 | 0.5 | 0.3 |
| NC | Graham | 2 | 39 | 13 | 0 | 15 | 2.9 | 0.6 |
| NC | Granville | 5 | 25 | 0 | 0.3 | 3.7 | 1.1 | 0.7 |
| NC | Greene | 6 | 142 | 0 | 0 | 3.9 | 0.7 | 0.5 |
| NC | Guilford | 15 | 155 | 1 | 0 | 5.6 | 0.6 | 0.4 |
| NC | Halifax | 9 | 160 | 6 | 0 | 11.1 | 1.4 | 1.3 |
| NC | Harnett | 20 | 88 | 0 | 0.3 | 4 | 0.8 | 0.5 |
| NC | Haywood | 14 | 51 | 0 | 0.3 | 3.4 | 1.1 | 0.8 |
| NC | Henderson | 4 | 100 | 16 | 0 | 7.8 | 1.9 | 1.5 |
| NC | Hertford | 7 | 262 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0.4 | 0.2 |
| NC | Hoke | 7 | 347 | 0 | 0.2 | 3 | 0.9 | 1 |
| NC | Hyde | No data | No data | No data | No data | No data | No data | No data |
| NC | Iredell | 27 | 245 | 15 | 0 | 11.9 | 1.5 | 1.2 |
| NC | Jackson | 6 | 30 | 0 | 0.3 | 2.8 | 0.9 | 0.7 |
| NC | Johnson | 28 | 949 | 1 | 0.3 | 4.1 | 1.2 | 0.3 |
| NC | Jones | 3 | 35 | 4 | 0 | 6.4 | 1.3 | 0.5 |
| NC | Lee | 5 | 25 | 0 | 0.3 | 1.4 | 0.6 | 0.5 |
| NC | Lenoir | 18 | 274 | 8 | 0 | 23.5 | 1.2 | 0.9 |
| NC | Lincoln | 1 | 99 | 42 | 0.3 | 66.5 | 6.2 | 2.5 |
| NC | Macon | 11 | 82 | 16 | 0.5 | 16.3 | 2.9 | 2.3 |
| NC | Madison | 8 | 36 | 0 | 0.3 | 1.8 | 0.9 | 0.8 |
| NC | Martin | 5 | 25 | 0 | 0.3 | 1.9 | 0.6 | 0.6 |
| NC | Mcdowell | 13 | 725 | 253 | 0 | 32.9 | 3.9 | 2.5 |
| NC | Mecklenburg | 1 | 54 | 4 | 0 | 6.6 | 1.1 | 0.9 |
| NC | Mitchell | 7 | 35 | 0 | 0.3 | 1.6 | 0.5 | 0.3 |
| NC | Montgomery | 8 | 129 | 14 | 0 | 9.2 | 1.1 | 0 |
| NC | Moore | 6 | 25 | 0 | 0.3 | 2.8 | 0.9 | 0.7 |
| NC | Nash | 6 | 31 | 0 | 0.3 | 3.6 | 1.1 | 0.8 |
| NC | New Hanover | 5 | 24 | 0 | 0.3 | 0.8 | 0.4 | 0.3 |
| NC | Northampton | 4 | 62 | 3 | 0 | 6.6 | 1.5 | 1.4 |
| NC | Onslow | 1 | 19 | 0 | 0 | 3.6 | 0.9 | 0.8 |
| NC | Orange | 13 | 378 | 60 | 0 | 14.3 | 1.8 | 0.8 |
| NC | Pamlico | 3 | 20 | 0 | 0.3 | 0.8 | 0.4 | 0.3 |
| NC | Pasquotank | 1 | 20 | 0 | 0 | 0.7 | 0.1 | 0 |
| NC | Pender | 5 | 25 | 0 | 0.3 | 1.1 | 0.4 | 0.3 |
| NC | Perquimans | 4 | 40 | 0 | 0 | 1.8 | 0.6 | 0.6 |
| NC | Persons | 8 | 32 | 0 | 0.6 | 3.2 | 0.8 | 0.6 |
| NC | Pitt | 4 | 21 | No data | No data | No data | No data | No data |
| NC | Polk | No data | No data | No data | No data | No data | No data | No data |
| NC | Randolph | 14 | 274 | 10 | 0 | 7.8 | 1.2 | 0.9 |
| NC | Richmond | 5 | 25 | 0 | 0.3 | 2 | 0.8 | 0.6 |
| NC | Robeson | 1 | 12 | 0 | 0 | 2.8 | 1.3 | 1.3 |
| NC | Rockingham | 21 | 475 | 58 | 0 | 21.6 | 2 | 1.2 |
| NC | Rowan | 28 | 179 | 18 | 0 | 26.5 | 2.1 | 1.5 |
| NC | Rutherford | 5 | 25 | 0 | 0.3 | 2.7 | 1.1 | 1 |
| NC | Sampson | 11 | 72 | 1 | 0 | 4.9 | 0.9 | 0.5 |
| NC | Scotland | 1 | 79 | 0 | 0.3 | 3.9 | 1 | 0.9 |
| NC | Stanly | 5 | 25 | 0 | 0.3 | 2.6 | 0.9 | 0.8 |
| NC | Stokes | 15 | 211 | 42 | 0 | 11.4 | 2.3 | 1.6 |
| NC | Surry | 13 | 154 | 68 | 0 | 13.1 | 4.3 | 3.3 |
| NC | Swain | 4 | 24 | 1 | 0.3 | 5.7 | 1.2 | 1.1 |
| NC | Transylvania | 11 | 271 | 38 | 0 | 15.1 | 2.3 | 1.8 |
| NC | Tyrrell | 1 | 54 | 2 | 0.3 | 7.9 | 0.7 | 0.3 |
| NC | Union | 4 | 153 | 3 | 0 | 13.7 | 1 | 0.7 |
| NC | Vance | 16 | 425 | 36 | 0 | 13.2 | 1.3 | 0.4 |
| NC | Wake | 18 | 323 | 19 | 0 | 12.4 | 1.5 | 1.1 |
| NC | Warren | 1 | 38 | 8 | 0.7 | 48.4 | 4.9 | 1.3 |
| NC | Washington | 5 | 25 | 0 | 0.3 | 1.6 | 0.7 | 0.6 |
| NC | Watauga | 9 | 44 | 3 | 0.3 | 10.4 | 1.6 | 1.1 |
| NC | Wayne | 26 | 178 | 0 | 0.5 | 2.9 | 1 | 0.8 |
| NC | Wilkes | 19 | 786 | 163 | 0 | 11.6 | 2.1 | 1.2 |
| NC | Wilson | 1 | 20 | 0 | 0 | 2.2 | 1 | 1 |
| NC | Yadkin | 14 | 385 | 97 | 0 | 23.6 | 3.1 | 2.1 |
| NC | Yancey | 10 | 286 | 7 | 0 | 7.9 | 1.1 | 0.8 |
Related Published Research
Radon, Smoking, and Lung Cancer: The Need to Refocus Radon Control Policy
Effects of radon mitigation versus smoking cessation in reducing radon-related risk of lung cancer
Survey of Radon Testing and Mitigation by Wisconsin Residents, Landlords, and School Districts