Landfills go uninvestigated due to underfunding, NC audit says

A North Carolina audit released last month reveals a lack of progress in a program meant to investigate pre-regulatory landfills that could put public health at risk.

The NC Department of Environmental Quality’s Pre-Regulatory Landfill Program was established in 2007 to investigate landfill sites that operated without regulatory oversight before Jan. 1, 1983. North Carolina currently has 688 total old landfill sites that fall into this category.

[Subscribe for FREE to Carolina Public Press’ Daily, Weekend and Election 2026 newsletters.]

Though the program has been around for almost 20 years, it has still never investigated the majority of sites. Leaving these sites sitting unaddressed for years could put public health at risk, since most of these sites sit within 1,000 feet of residential areas such as houses and schools, the audit report said.

The lack of progress points to larger issues including a lack of adequate funding and red tape when it comes to accessing certain sites for investigation, according to the report.

How old landfills program works

Katherine Lucas, public information officer for DEQ’s Division of Waste Management, said the DEQ landfill program was created in 2007, but waste oversight in the state started around the 1930s. It’s been evolving ever since.

The old State Board of Health came up with guidelines that local governments could reference for collecting, transporting and getting rid of garbage in the late 1950s to early 1960s. This board became recognized as the official agency for statewide waste oversight in 1969 when the state’s Solid Waste Disposal Act was passed, and the first solid waste management rules for the state were adopted in 1971, Lucas said.

After being shuffled from agency to agency, the waste management program eventually fell under the jurisdiction of DEQ, where it remains today. In 1982, new state rules were adopted regarding permitting and landfill operations, causing some landfills to close at the time so they wouldn’t have to abide by the new rules. Most of those landfills, as well as any that closed earlier, are considered part of the landfill program, Lucas said.

While landfills now have “highly engineered composite liner systems” and other features that aim to reduce potential impacts to nearby areas and communities, earlier landfills were unlined and didn’t have that kind of technology, nor did they have the same regulations to follow as landfills do now, Lucas said. This makes monitoring them all the more important.

Sites addressed by the program move through four phases: activity pending, investigation, remediation and addressed. Sites in the first phase — while accounted for in the program — haven’t been investigated yet, so the presence or severity of contamination there is unknown. The site is given a “risk priority score” once it enters the program, the report said.

Lucas said these scores help the program prioritize which sites of old landfills to investigate first.

“The risk score is based on several factors, including the presence and number of potential receptors, landfill size, and redevelopment potential,” she said. 

“Specific considerations include whether homes or other occupied structures are located on the landfill; detections in potable wells above North Carolina groundwater standards; the number and proximity of potable wells within 1,000 feet; landfill acreage; and nearby land uses such as residences, schools, daycare facilities and churches.”

The second phase — investigation — is when samples are collected and used for reports on the level of contamination there and appropriate next steps to address it. During the next phase, remediation, those next steps are implemented in a “remedial action plan,” the report said.

Once this plan is successfully carried out, the site enters the last phase: no further action. At this point, though contaminants may still remain, the risks are controlled at an “acceptable risk level,” the report said.

While the program has catalogued 688 sites of former landfills in the state, 534 of them have not yet entered the investigation phase, which is 78% of these sites, the report said.

Meanwhile, only 11% of the old landfills were being investigated as of June 2025, 6% were in remediation and a mere 5% had been fully addressed, the report said.

The risks that these uninvestigated sites pose could be detrimental. At sites that have been investigated, roughly 24% of them were found to have unsafe levels of methane that could lead to explosions, the report said.

Other contaminants discovered at investigated sites include lead — which can cause damage to the nervous system — and trichloroethylene, which can also damage the nervous system and immune system, as well as potentially cause cancer, the report said.

While sites remain untouched, potentially so do these contaminants. Given that 84% of these sites are in close proximity to places like homes, schools, daycares and more, it’s important that they’re addressed to protect public health, the report said.

Larger issues

So why are so many sites of old landfills still uninvestigated? The problem is twofold. 

First, accessing sites for program investigations involves a lot of red tape, the report said.

Most of the sites that the program identified have private owners, meaning the program can’t access the sites without their permission. As a result, investigations often come down to the level of cooperation from site owners, the report said.

“When access is not granted, investigations and cleanup activities can be delayed or prevented,” Lucas said.

The reasons for refusing access may vary by the owner, Lucas said.

“DEQ cannot speak to individual property owners’ decisions or motivations,” she said.

“Reasons likely vary by property and owner. Questions regarding those decisions would be best directed to the property owners themselves.”

The report said 18 sites of old landfills are under investigation with at least one owner who refused access, while nine sites were in remediation that had also faced holdups as of June 2025 because owners wouldn’t sign Land Use Restrictions or Notices of Environmental Contamination. The restrictions dictate what can or can’t be done on a piece of land while the notices inform others of potential contaminants or environmental risks in the area.

Lucas gave Carolina Public Press a similar response when asked why owners would refuse to sign these documents and said “questions regarding those decisions are best directed to the affected property owners.”

There is a way around getting property owners’ permission, but the program hasn’t used it yet. It’s known as the “imminent hazard authority,” the report said.

If the DEQ secretary finds an “imminent hazard” at a site, they can order “any known responsible party to take immediate action to eliminate or correct the condition.” The department itself can also obtain warrants to access the site if owner permission isn’t granted, but it hasn’t exercised this authority yet either, the report said.

Lucas said the program hasn’t used these methods for accessing sites because it hasn’t encountered a situation where it’s necessary yet.

“The program evaluates each site individually and determines the appropriate regulatory approach based on site conditions and the level of risk presented,” she said.

However, these sites of old landfills still need to be investigated. The department is currently reviewing recommendations on improving access, Lucas said.

The other issue slowing down investigations is a lack of adequate funding for the program, the report said.

The program receives funding from the state’s Inactive Hazardous Sites Cleanup Fund, which is made up of half of the proceeds coming from a statewide solid waste disposal tax. Between July 2019 and June 2025, the fund received on average $12.1 million per year, the report said.

After factoring in administrative expenses, that leaves around $10.3 million per year for the program to use. To fully investigate and remediate a site, the average cost is roughly $1.9 million, meaning the program can only remediate five to six sites per year at most, the report said.

With hundreds of former landfills still awaiting investigation, it would take the program roughly 99 years to get through them all and ensure no further action is needed, the report said.

“The challenge identified in the audit is not that the funding source is expected to disappear, but that the available funding is substantially less than what would be needed to address all remaining sites more quickly,” Lucas said.

There could also be more sites out there beyond what the program has already identified, Lucas said.

“When the PRLF Program was established in 2007, DEQ worked with local governments to compile known pre-regulatory landfill locations,” Lucas said.

“While the program maintains the most comprehensive inventory available, DEQ cannot guarantee that every historical disposal site has been identified.”

One factor complicating the funding issue is the rising rates of contractors who conduct these investigations. Hourly rates have increased 29% to 63% for investigation and remediation design and 54% to 96% for remediation oversight over the past decade, the report said.

Another complicating factor is the sheer amount of time these projects at old landfills take. On average, for the 37 sites that have reached the “no further action” status, it took roughly 13 years for them to reach that point after the program was established, the report said.

“Each site requires individually negotiated property access, environmental sampling, laboratory analysis, risk assessment, remedy design, and, where needed, construction of containment or cleanup measures,” the report said.

For these reasons, the auditor recommended that the program explore additional funding sources.

“DEQ is reviewing the recommendations contained in the audit and will evaluate potential options, including those related to program funding, as part of that process,” Lucas told CPP.

The auditor also recommended exploring ways to improve access to privately-owned sites of old landfills, including clarifying under what circumstances the “imminent hazard” authority can be used, developing a plan for sites where access isn’t granted and possibly even prioritizing sites where owners are being more cooperative.

In its response letter, DEQ agreed with the auditor’s findings and recommendations, listing a series of actions it plans to take in the next six months.

“The North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality and the Pre-Regulatory Landfill Program appreciate the efforts of the Office of the State Auditor for their performance audit,” the department wrote.

“We appreciate your staff taking the time to understand how the program functions, for visiting multiple Pre-Regulatory Landfill sites and providing the recommendations.”

Related