Key findings
- Testing is still rare. The tested locations add up to about 9.3% of the state’s 289,586 residences counted in the same data.1 7 places have no results at all.
- High results turn up everywhere. 74 of the 212 towns with at least 20 results had 20% or more of tested locations at or above 4.0 pCi/L.1 The Health Department says high levels have been found in all types of homes in every area of Vermont.3
- The highest shares (calculated): Burke (43%), Newark (42%), Sutton (39%), among towns with at least 20 results.1
- By county: Caledonia County and Orange County had the highest share of elevated results (24%); Franklin County the lowest (9%), counting every town’s results together.1
- Most tested: Burlington has the most results (1,267), and 70 of them (6%) were elevated.1
What these numbers can’t tell you: your home’s level. Neighboring homes can have very different radon levels,2 and the EPA advises against using results from other homes to estimate yours.4 The data count Health Department test kits sent in from each town, so they describe the homes that were tested, not every home. The only way to know is to test your home.
Towns with the highest share of elevated results
Towns with at least 20 results, the threshold the Health Department uses to show a town rate.5
| Town | County | Locations tested | Elevated | Share elevated |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Burke | Caledonia | 63 | 27 | 43% |
| Newark | Caledonia | 38 | 16 | 42% |
| Sutton | Caledonia | 28 | 11 | 39% |
| West Rutland | Rutland | 55 | 21 | 38% |
| Wells | Rutland | 39 | 15 | 38% |
| Danby | Rutland | 60 | 22 | 37% |
| Bristol | Addison | 272 | 99 | 36% |
| Groton | Caledonia | 39 | 14 | 36% |
| Brookfield | Orange | 76 | 25 | 33% |
| Pawlet | Rutland | 73 | 24 | 33% |
| Eden | Lamoille | 30 | 10 | 33% |
| Hartland | Windsor | 110 | 34 | 31% |
| Dorset | Bennington | 101 | 31 | 31% |
| Chittenden | Rutland | 72 | 22 | 31% |
| Middletown Springs | Rutland | 62 | 19 | 31% |
Source: Vermont Department of Health town results; shares calculated by Vermont Radon from the Health Department’s counts.1 Every town is on Radon test results for every Vermont town.
Counties, from highest to lowest share
| County | Locations tested | Elevated | Share elevated (calculated) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Caledonia County | 1,210 | 293 | 24% |
| Orange County | 1,132 | 277 | 24% |
| Grand Isle County | 471 | 99 | 21% |
| Washington County | 3,814 | 786 | 21% |
| Essex County | 161 | 33 | 20% |
| Bennington County | 967 | 181 | 19% |
| Addison County | 1,961 | 309 | 16% |
| Rutland County | 2,074 | 326 | 16% |
| Windsor County | 1,741 | 285 | 16% |
| Lamoille County | 1,088 | 162 | 15% |
| Orleans County | 1,002 | 145 | 14% |
| Windham County | 1,559 | 205 | 13% |
| Chittenden County | 8,191 | 839 | 10% |
| Franklin County | 1,434 | 129 | 9% |
| Vermont | 26,805 | 4,069 | 15% |
County and statewide shares are Vermont Radon’s calculations, adding up the Health Department’s results for every town in the county.1
Using these figures
Reporters, town officials, teachers and real estate professionals are welcome to use these figures. Download every town’s results as CSV or JSON, and see how to cite this data. Please credit the Vermont Department of Health for the results and say that county and statewide totals are Vermont Radon’s calculations.
Questions about the data: hello@vermontradon.com. For health questions, call the Vermont Radon Program at 802-863-7220 or 800-439-8550 (toll-free in Vermont).2
Last reviewed How we source facts
Sources
5 official sources
- Vermont Department of Health. Radon Risk in Vermont: test results by town (map data, JSON). Checked 2026-10-17. ↩
- Vermont Department of Health. Radon in Your Home. Checked 2026-10-17. ↩
- Vermont Department of Health. Testing for Radon in Your Home (fact sheet, July 2025). Checked 2026-10-17. ↩
- U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Home Buyer’s and Seller’s Guide to Radon (EPA 402/K-24/001, March 2024). Checked 2026-10-17. ↩
- Vermont Department of Health. Radon Risk in Vermont (interactive map). Checked 2026-10-17. ↩