U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey

Scientific Investigations Report 2007–5266

Prepared in cooperation with the Montgomery Water Works and Sanitary Sewer Board

Occurrence of Selected Pharmaceuticals, Personal-Care 

Products, Organic Wastewater Compounds, and 

Pesticides in the Lower Tallapoosa River Watershed 

near Montgomery, Alabama, 2005
Cover photograph. The Tallapoosa River below Tallassee, Alabama.
Occurrence of Selected Pharmaceuticals, 

Personal-Care Products, Organic 

Wastewater Compounds, and Pesticides 

in the Lower Tallapoosa River Watershed 

near Montgomery, Alabama, 2005

By Carolyn J. Oblinger, Amy C. Gill, Ann K. McPherson, Michael T. Meyer, and 

Edward T. Furlong

Prepared in cooperation with the Montgomery Water Works and 

Sanitary Sewer Board

Scientific Investigations Report 2007–5266

U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey
U.S. Department of the Interior

DIRK KEMPTHORNE, Secretary

U.S. Geological Survey

Mark D. Myers, Director

U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2007

For product and ordering information:

World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod

Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS

For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living resources, 

natural hazards, and the environment:

World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov

Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS

Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the 

U.S. Government.

Although this report is in the public domain, permission must be secured from the individual copyright owners to 

reproduce any copyrighted materials contained within this report.

Suggested citation:

Oblinger, C.J., Gill, A.C., McPherson, A.K., Meyer, M.T., and Furlong, E.T., 2007, Occurrence of selected pharmaceuticals, personal-care products, organic wastewater compounds, and pesticides in the lower Tallapoosa River watershed 

near Montgomery, Alabama, 2005: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2007-5266, 23 p.
iii

Contents

Abstract ..........................................................................................................................................................1

Introduction.....................................................................................................................................................1

Description of the Study Area .....................................................................................................................2

Methods...........................................................................................................................................................5

Analytical Methods...............................................................................................................................5

Quality Control ......................................................................................................................................9

Pharmaceuticals, Personal-Care Products, Organic Wastewater Compounds, and Pesticides...10

Summary........................................................................................................................................................21

References Cited..........................................................................................................................................22

Figures

1. Map showing location of the study area and sampling sites in the 

lower Tallapoosa River watershed, Alabama, 2005 ................................................................3

2–3. Graphs showing—

 2. The number of detections of 32 organic compounds at sites in the lower 

Tallapoosa River watershed, Alabama, April 25–28 and October 24–26, 2005..........10

 3. Summary of compounds detected in concentrations greater than the 

laboratory reporting level and at estimated concentrations summarized 

by the total concentration in the sample and number of compounds in the 

sample collected from the lower Tallapoosa River watershed, Alabama, 2005 .......12

4. Maps showing total concentrations of all compounds detected above 

and below the laboratory reporting level in samples collected during a 

high base-flow period in April and a low base-flow period in October 

in the lower Tallapoosa River watershed, Alabama, 2005 ...................................................13

5. Graphs showing the sum of detected concentrations by type of compound 

including compounds detected at concentrations above the laboratory reporting 

level and estimated below the laboratory reporting level from samples collected 

during a high base-flow period in April and a low base-flow period in 

October in the lower Tallapoosa River watershed, Alabama, 2005....................................18

Tables

1. Sampled sites in the lower Tallapoosa River watershed, Alabama, 2005...........................4

2. Reporting levels for compounds analyzed in stream samples collected 

from the lower Tallapoosa River watershed, Alabama, 2005 ................................................6

3. Summary of recoveries of fortified compounds for each 

analytical method used in this study .........................................................................................9

4. Compounds detected at measured and estimated concentrations 

in the lower Tallapoosa River watershed, Alabama, 2005 ...................................................11

5. Organic compounds detected in the lower Tallapoosa River watershed, 

April 25–28 and October 24–26, 2005 .......................................................................................15

6. Concentrations of compounds, which indicate human activity, detected 

in the lower Tallapoosa River watershed, Alabama, 2005 ...................................................20

7. Comparison of pharmaceuticals, personal-care products, organic wastewater 

compounds, and pesticides detected in samples from three watersheds 

in Alabama between 2000 and 2005.........................................................................................21
iv

Conversion Factors, Horizontal Datum, 

and Abbreviations and Acronyms

Inch/Pound to SI

Multiply By To obtain

Length

mile (mi) 1.609 kilometer (km)

SI to Inch/Pound

Multiply By To obtain

Length

centimeter (cm) 0.3937 inch (in.)

kilometer (km) 0.6214 mile (mi)

Area

square kilometer (km2) 0.3861 square mile (mi2

)

Flow rate

cubic meter per second (m3/s) 70.07 acre-foot per day (acre-ft/d) 

cubic meter per second (m3/s) 35.31 cubic foot per second (ft3/s)

Temperature in degrees Celsius (°C) may be converted to degrees Fahrenheit (°F) as follows:

°F=(1.8×°C)+32

Temperature in degrees Fahrenheit (°F) may be converted to degrees Celsius (°C) as follows:

°C=(°F-32)/1.8

Horizontal coordinate information is referenced to the North American Datum of 1983 (NAD 83).

Concentrations of chemical constituents in water are given either in milligrams per liter (mg/L) 

or micrograms per liter (μg/L).

Abbreviations and Acronyms

AHTN 6-Acetyl-1,1,2,4,4,7-hexamethyltetraline

CIAT 2-Chloro-4-isopropylamino-6-amino-s-triazine

DCPA Dimethyl tetrachloroterephthalate

DEET N,N-diethyl-m-toluamide

HHCB 1,3,4,6,7,8-Hexahydro-4,6,6,7,8,8-hexamethylcyclopenta(g)-2-benzopyran

LRL Laboratory reporting level

LT-MDL Long-term method-detection level

MDL Method detection level

NWQL National Water Quality Laboratory

OGRL Organic Geochemistry Research Laboratory

OWCs Organic wastewater compounds
Abstract 

Synthetic and natural organic compounds derived from 

agricultural operations, residential development, and treated 

and untreated sanitary and industrial wastewater discharges 

can contribute contaminants to surface and ground waters. 

To determine the occurrence of these compounds in the lower 

Tallapoosa River watershed, Alabama, new laboratory methods were used that can detect human and veterinary antibiotics; pharmaceuticals; and compounds found in personal-care 

products, food additives, detergents and their metabolites, 

plasticizers, and other industrial and household products in 

the environment. Well-established methods for detecting 

47 pesticides and 19 pesticide degradates also were used. 

In all, 186 different compounds were analyzed by using four 

analytical methods.

The lower Tallapoosa River serves as the water-supply 

source for more than 100,000 customers of the Montgomery 

Water Works and Sanitary Sewer Board. Source-water protection is a high priority for the Board, which is responsible for 

providing safe drinking water. The U.S. Geological Survey, in 

cooperation with the Montgomery Water Works and Sanitary 

Sewer Board, conducted this study to provide baseline data 

that could be used to assess the effects of agriculture and 

residential development on the occurrence of selected organic 

compounds in the lower Tallapoosa River watershed. 

Twenty samples were collected at 10 sites on the Tallapoosa River and its tributaries. Ten samples were collected in 

April 2005 during high base streamflow, and 10 samples were 

collected in October 2005 when base streamflow was low. 

Thirty-two of 186 compounds were detected in the lower 

Tallapoosa River watershed. Thirteen compounds, including atrazine, 2-chloro-4-isopropylamino-6-amino-s-triazine 

(CIAT), hexazinone, metalaxyl, metolachlor, prometryn, 

prometon, simazine, azithromycin, oxytetracycline, sulfamethoxazole, trimethoprim, and tylosin, had measurable concentrations above their laboratory reporting levels. Concentrations 

were estimated for an additional 19 compounds that were 

detected below their laboratory reporting levels. 

The two most frequently detected compounds were the 

pesticides atrazine (19 of 20 samples) and simazine (13 of 

20 samples). Tylosin, a veterinary antibiotic, was detected 

in 8 of 20 samples. Other compounds frequently detected at 

very low concentrations included CIAT and hexazinone (a 

degradate of atrazine and a pesticide, respectively); camphor 

(derived from personal-care products or flavorants), paracresol (various uses including solvent, wood preservative, and 

in household cleaning products), and N,N-diethyl-m-toluamide 

(DEET, an insect repellent). 

Introduction

Synthetic and natural organic compounds derived from 

agricultural operations, residential development, and treated 

and untreated sanitary and industrial wastewater discharges 

can contribute contaminants to surface and ground waters. 

Such compounds include pesticides, human and veterinary 

antibiotics and pharmaceuticals, and some of the degradates 

of these compounds. Also included are a group of compounds, 

collectively referred to as organic wastewater compounds 

(OWCs), that are present in sanitary waste or are disposed in 

wastewater and include compounds found in personal-care 

products (for example, fragrances, lotions, soaps, and sunscreen products), food additives, detergents and their metabolites, plastics, and other industrial and household products.

Recent studies in which new laboratory analytical 

methods were used to detect low concentrations of these 

compounds have provided information about their occurrence 

in surface and ground water in the United States (Kolpin and 

others, 2002; Wilkison and others, 2002; Galloway and others, 

2005; Zimmerman, 2005). The greatest concentrations and 

numbers of detections of antibiotics, pharmaceuticals, and 

OWCs generally are associated with receiving waters for public sanitary wastewater and industrial wastewater discharges, 

on-site sanitary wastewater systems, and confined-animal 

feeding operations. 

Occurrence of Selected Pharmaceuticals, Personal-Care

Products, Organic Wastewater Compounds, and Pesticides

in the Lower Tallapoosa River Watershed near 

Montgomery, Alabama, 2005

By Carolyn J. Oblinger, Amy C. Gill, Ann K. McPherson, Michael T. Meyer, and Edward T. Furlong
2 Occurrence of Pharmaceuticals, Personal-Care Products, OWCs, and Pesticides in the Lower Tallapoosa River 

Pesticides associated with agriculture, lawn care and 

landscaping, and household use generally are released to the 

environment directly upon application (Gilliom and others, 

2006). Antibiotics and other pharmaceuticals and their degradates can be released to surface and ground waters directly 

in animal waste, as with veterinary medicines, or indirectly 

from human waste processed in public sanitary wastewater 

discharges or in septic system leachates. Until recently, a common recommendation to American households was to dispose 

of unused pharmaceuticals by flushing them in the toilet. 

OWCs, such as steroids, compounds found in personal-care 

products, food additives, insect repellents, and detergents and 

their metabolites, also are in human waste or wastewater collected by sewage-treatment systems or septic systems before 

being discharged to surface drainage or ground water. 

These compounds can persist in natural systems where 

they can have long-term effects on stream biota. When the 

natural system is used as a water supply, human health may be 

affected (Wilde and others, 2000). One area of concern with 

respect to health effects is the ability of some of these compounds to disrupt the normal function of the endocrine system 

of both humans and wildlife, resulting in developmental and 

reproductive abnormalities. A variety of chemicals have been 

shown to disrupt the endocrine systems of animals in laboratory studies, and evidence suggests that endocrine systems of 

certain fish and wildlife have been affected by chemical contaminants (Jobling and others, 1998; Keith, 1998; Lintelmann 

and others, 2003). 

The lower Tallapoosa River watershed supports agriculture and residential development. Agriculture land uses 

include row crops and livestock production including intense 

animal-feeding operations. Agriculture land uses potentially 

contribute contaminants, such as agricultural pesticides, veterinary antibiotics, and feed supplements into surface and ground 

waters in the watershed. Residential land uses potentially contribute contaminants to streams and ground water through the 

discharge of OWCs, such as pharmaceuticals, personal-care 

products, steroids, industrial compounds, and detergents, in 

wastewater from septic systems and the delivery of pesticides 

in stormwater runoff. Treated sanitary wastewater effluents 

from municipalities and industrial wastewater effluents are 

discharged directly into the lower Tallapoosa River system and 

may contribute low-level contaminants that are not removed 

by treatment processes. The water quality of tributaries to 

the Tallapoosa River is directly influenced by the amount of 

agricultural activity and residential development within each 

tributary watershed. 

The lower Tallapoosa River is the water-supply source 

for more than 100,000 customers of the Montgomery Water 

Works and Sanitary Sewer Board (hereafter referred to as 

the Board). Source-water protection is a high priority for 

the Board, which is responsible for providing safe drinking 

water to citizens in the Montgomery, Alabama, area. The U.S. 

Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with the Board, 

designed this study to determine if agricultural and residential development in the lower Tallapoosa River watershed are 

adversely affecting water resources used to supply Montgomery with drinking water. 

This report presents the results of analyses of 20 stream 

samples collected at 10 sites on the lower Tallapoosa River 

and its tributaries to determine the occurrence of selected 

classes of organic compounds in the lower Tallapoosa River 

watershed. Ten samples were collected in April 2005 when 

base streamflow was relatively high, although no recent stormwater runoff had occurred, and 10 samples were collected 

in October 2005 when base streamflow was low. Samples 

were analyzed for a total of 186 organic compounds by using 

four different laboratory methods. Included were analyses 

for pesticides and pesticide degradates, polycyclic aromatic 

hydrocarbons, fire retardants, byproducts of human and animal 

metabolism (steroids), compounds contained in personal-care 

products and detergents, and commonly used prescription and 

nonprescription pharmaceuticals.

Description of the Study Area

The lower Tallapoosa River watershed in east-central Alabama is the area of the Tallapoosa River basin between Martin 

Dam and the confluence of the Tallapoosa and Coosa Rivers 

(fig. 1). The lower Tallapoosa River watershed drains approximately 4,400 square kilometers (km2

) and encompasses large 

portions of Tallapoosa, Lee, Macon, Bullock, Elmore, and 

Montgomery Counties in Alabama. Yates and Thurlow Dams 

impound the Tallapoosa River in the upper portion of the lower 

Tallapoosa River watershed, which has resulted in the formation of two large reservoirs. No additional impoundments 

are on the Tallapoosa River below Thurlow Dam at Tallassee 

(CH2M Hill, 2005). 

The Montgomery Water Works and Sanitary Sewer 

Board produces 60 percent of the finished water for the city 

of Montgomery from water withdrawn from the Tallapoosa 

River (Montgomery Water Works and Sanitary Sewer Board, 

2006). The Board routinely monitors several sites in the lower 

Tallapoosa River watershed below Thurlow Dam as part of an 

ongoing source-water protection program. Sampling locations for this study were selected from the Board’s established 

monitoring sites (table 1; fig. 1). Samples were collected 

near the mouths of seven tributaries—Brensen Branch (BRE) 

and Harwell Mill (HAR), Chubbehatchee (CHU), Goodwater (GDW), Calebee (CAL), Cubahatchee (CUB), and Line 

(LIN) Creeks. In addition to these monitoring sites, three 

locations were sampled on the Tallapoosa River—below Tallassee (TAL-1), below the confluence with Uphapee Creek 

near Tuskegee (TAL-2), and at the Montgomery Water Works 

intake (TAL-3, table 1; fig. 1). Goodwater Creek was used as 

a control site because it is mostly forested and was expected to 

have relatively few sources of contamination.
Description of the Study Area 

3

ELLI M R

RC

EE K

OJ

NH S

SNO

KEERC

C ALEBEE

CREEK

BU G

HA LLCR

UHC

EE H

CT

AHEBB

RC

KEE

NERB

B

NES

HCN

AR

CUBAHATCH E E

CREEK LINE

CREEK

COOSA RIVER Auburn

Shorter

Milstead

Tuskegee

Eclectic

Tallassee

Montgomery

Union Springs

WIND CREEK

HC

WE AC

AL

CREEK

SOUGAH ATCHEE CREE K

UP P AH EE CREEK

O P INTLOCCO CREEK

OLD TO WN CREEK

LOBK CI K EE

CREEK

TALLAPOOSA R IVER

TUM KEEHATCHEE CRE EK

PANTHER CREEK

C HOCTAFAULA

CREE K

BUGHALL

CREEK

STON E CREEK

SL AUGHTER CREEK

CHANNAHAT CHEE CREEK

LINE

CREEK

UP P AH EE CREEK

OLD TOWN CREE

SOUGAHATCHEE

CREEK

TALLAPOOSA

RIVER

GDW

CAL

CHU

BRE

HAR

LIN

TAL-3

TAL-2 TAL-1

CUB

86° 85°30'

32°15'32°45'

0 7 14 MILES

0 7 14 KILOMETERS

Yates Dam

Martin Dam

Thurlow Dam

85 § ̈¦

231 £¤ 80 £¤

 29 £¤

 82 £¤

280 £¤

Lake Martin

HA

LLE W

R

M

LLI

ERC

KE

GOODWATER CREEK

WALLAH ATC HE E

CREEK

K

#

BASIN BOUNDARY

EXPLANATION

 DAM

SAMPLING SITE AND SITE LABEL—See table 1 for full site names

MUNICIPAL WASTEWATER  TREATMENT FACILITY

MUNICIPALITY REPRESENTED BY SIZE LIN

 LOCATION OF STUDY AREA

 IN BULLOCK1, ELMORE2, LEE3, 

RUSSELL4, MACON5, MONTGOMERY6, 

AND TALLAPOOSA7

1

 COUNTIES, ALABAMA

2 3

4 5

6

7

Dams

Base from U.S. Geological Survey digital data, 1:100,000Hydrography from U.S. Environmental Protection AgencyReach File 1, 1:500,000

Figure 1. Location of the study area and sampling sites in the lower Tallapoosa River watershed, Alabama, 2005.
4 Occurrence of Pharmaceuticals, Personal-Care Products, OWCs, and Pesticides in the Lower Tallapoosa River 

The climate in the study area is temperate; the mean 

annual temperature is approximately 18 degrees Celsius (°C; 

Southeast Regional Climate Center, 2006). Most precipitation occurs as rain. Mean annual rainfall at Milstead (Macon 

County), which is centrally located in the watershed, was 

134.6 centimeters (cm) for 1971–2000. For the same time 

period, the highest mean monthly rainfall occurred in March 

(17.04 cm), and the lowest mean monthly rainfall occurred in 

October (6.71 cm) (Southeast Regional Climate Center, 2006). 

Stream samples were collected for this investigation during periods in the spring and fall when little surface rainfall 

runoff was expected. Base-flow conditions were selected to 

minimize dilution from rainfall and thereby maximize detection of contaminants in the stream from ground-water or 

continuous discharge sources. During the 12 days prior to 

sampling, which began on April 25, 2005, the only significant 

rainfall was 1.65 cm on April 22 at the Milstead precipitation 

station (National Climatic Data Center, 2006). An additional 

2.13 cm of rainfall was recorded at Milstead on April 26–27, 

which contributed some runoff to streams sampled on those 

days. No rainfall was recorded from October 9 through the fall 

sampling period (October 24–26, 2005). 

Sapp and Emplaincourt (1975), Kidd (1987, 1989), 

and Scott and others (1987) provide geologic descriptions 

and a delineation of the physiographic provinces within the 

Tallapoosa River watershed. The watershed lies within the 

Piedmont and Coastal Plain Physiographic Provinces. A small 

portion of the northern extent of the watershed in Tallapoosa 

and Lee Counties is within the Southern Piedmont Upland 

Physiographic District, which is characterized by rolling 

topography with outcrops of igneous and metamorphic rocks 

(Copeland, 1968; Kidd, 1989). Most of the watershed is within 

four physiographic districts (Fall Line Hills, Black Prairie, 

Chunnenuggee Hills, and the deltaic Alluvial Plain) of the East 

Gulf Section of the Coastal Plain Physiographic Province, 

which is characterized by low-gradient, hilly belts formed by 

variable erosion of sedimentary rocks of the Mesozoic and 

Cenozoic eras (Copeland, 1968). 

Southward-flowing tributaries to the Tallapoosa River 

(including Brensen Branch and Harwell Mill, Chubbehatchee, 

and Goodwater Creeks) from Elmore County and westwardflowing Calebee and Uphapee Creeks in Macon County generally drain sand, gravel, clay, and silt from the Fall Line Hills 

and Alluvial Plain Districts (Geological Survey of Alabama, 

2006). Line Creek and the headwaters of Cubahatchee Creek 

flow northward to the Tallapoosa through chalk, marl, and clay 

in the Chunnenuggee Hills and Black Prairie Physiographic 

Districts before reaching the sandier Alluvial Plain District 

along the Tallapoosa River.

Land use in the watershed is dominated by forests, pastures, and cultivated crops. Surface mining of sand and gravel 

is another common land use in the alluvial deposits along the 

river. Almost 20 percent of the watershed is used for agriculture, including extensive areas of row crops along the Tallapoosa River. Urban land use in the lower Tallapoosa River 

watershed accounts for only about 3 percent of the entire land 

area, and almost 50 percent of the urban land use is identified 

as residential (CH2M Hill, 2005). Below Thurlow Dam, lowto medium-intensity developed areas are concentrated around 

the municipalities of Tallassee, Tuskegee, and the east side 

of Montgomery (fig. 1; CH2M Hill, 2005; Multi-Resolution 

Land Characteristics Consortium, 2006). The drainage area 

of Goodwater Creek is predominantly mixed forest, and 

is considered by the Board to be representative of nearbackground conditions.

Table 1. Sampled sites in the lower Tallapoosa River watershed, Alabama, 2005.

[USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; km2, square kilometers; m3/s, cubic meters per second; —, no data]

Site label 

(fig. 1)

USGS site 

number Site name Drainage area, in km2

Sampled discharge, in m3/s

April 2005 October 2005

TAL-1 02418500 Tallapoosa River below Tallassee, Ala. 8,630 — —

TAL-2 02419305 Tallapoosa River near Tuskegee, Ala. 9,750 — —

CAL 02419640 Calebee Creek near Shorter, Ala. 392 2.4 0.45

CUB 02419670 Cubahatchee Creek near Shorter, Ala. 316 1.2 .15

GDW 02419700 Goodwater Creek near Ware, Ala. 29.6 .51 .05

LIN 02419800 Line Creek near Shorter, Ala. 799 6.6 .08

CHU 02419840 Chubbehatchee Creek near Ware, Ala. 160 2.2 .22

BRE 02419865 Brensen Branch near Ware, Ala. 13.4 .26 .08

TAL-3 02419890 Tallapoosa River near Montgomery, Ala. 12,050 259 147

HAR 02419892 Harwell Mill Creek near Montgomery, Ala. 28.5 .51 .16
Methods 5

Discharge from centralized wastewater-treatment systems 

and septic systems may contribute wastewater contaminants 

to streams in the study area. Septic systems commonly are 

used for sewage treatment and disposal in rural areas, and the 

effluent may contain contaminants derived from household 

wastes (Conn and others, 2006). In addition, centralized wastewater systems are designed to remove or limit the discharge 

of excessive nutrients, but their efficiency in removing many 

organic compounds is not known. 

Several wastewater-treatment system outfalls are located 

in the study area. Most of these are small facilities, but four 

major municipal facilities have outfalls in the watershed 

(fig. 1). The city of Tallassee discharges wastewater effluent to the Tallapoosa River downstream from the city. The 

city of Tuskegee has two effluent discharges, one located on 

Calebee Creek and one on the Tallapoosa River downstream 

from the mouth of Uphapee Creek (Alabama Department of 

Environmental Management, written commun., 2006; U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 2006a, 2006b). The city of 

Auburn’s H.C. Morgan sewage treatment plant discharges to a 

tributary of Chewacla Creek. 

Discharge from an unidentified pipe was noted on Cubahatchee Creek directly downstream from U.S. Highway 80 

during the spring sampling event, but not during the fall sampling event. The location of the pipe did not match location 

information from the Alabama Department of Environmental Management permitted discharges in the area (Alabama 

Department of Environmental Management, written commun., 

2006), and the source of the discharge is not known.

Methods

Samples were collected according to standard USGS 

field sample collection procedures (U.S. Geological Survey, 

variously dated). The two Tallapoosa River main-stem sites at 

the upstream end of the study area (TAL-1 and TAL-2; fig. 1) 

were sampled from a boat at a minimum of three locations in 

the river cross section by using a US DH-95 depth-integrating 

sampler fitted with a Teflon bottle and nozzle (Wilde and others, 1999; Lane and others, 2003), and samples were composited. The Tallapoosa main-stem site at the downstream end of 

the study area (TAL-3; fig. 1) was sampled from the catwalk 

next to the water-supply intake by using a weighted bottle 

sampler fitted with a baked brown-glass bottle to collect a grab 

sample. Tributary sites were wadeable and were sampled at a 

minimum of 10 locations in the stream cross section by using 

a US DH-81 depth-integrating sampler fitted with a Teflon 

bottle and nozzle except when stream depth was very low, in 

which case no nozzle was used and the sample was collected 

directly into a Teflon bottle. Stream cross-section sub-samples 

were first composited and then split by using a Teflon cone 

splitter (Wilde and others, 2004, p. 27).

Samples were processed onsite and prepared for shipment 

to a laboratory for analysis. Each sample was filtered through 

a 0.7-micron nominal-pore-size, glass-fiber filter that had been 

pretreated by baking at 450 °C and rinsed and preconditioned 

by filtering 100 milliliters (mL) of sample water through the 

filter. Samples for analysis of antibiotics were shipped on ice 

overnight to the USGS Kansas Water Science Center’s Organic 

Geochemistry Research Laboratory (OGRL). The remaining 

samples were shipped on ice overnight to the USGS National 

Water Quality Laboratory (NWQL) in Lakewood, Colorado, 

for analysis. 

Special equipment-preparation and sample-processing 

precautions were taken to prevent contamination of equipment and samples with pharmaceuticals, including antibiotics, 

personal-care products, and other commonly used substances 

that could affect sample integrity (Wilde and others, 2004). 

Thus, on the days of sampling, personnel avoided use of caffeine and insect repellents. 

Analytical Methods

Four analytical methods were used to determine concentrations of the compounds of interest (table 2). These four 

methods were: (1) the OGRL’s method for analysis of selected 

antibiotics (Meyer and others, 2007), (2) a NWQL method for 

analysis of common-use pesticides and pesticide degradates 

(Zaugg and others, 1995; Lindley and others, 1996; Sandstrom 

and others, 2001; Madsen and others, 2003), (3) a NWQL 

method for analysis of commonly prescribed pharmaceuticals (Cahill and others, 2004), and (4) the NWQL method 

for analysis of a variety of OWCs associated with human 

and industrial wastes including personal-care products, food 

additives, byproducts of metabolism, and pesticides (Zaugg 

and others, 2002). Ten compounds analyzed by the fourth 

method also were analyzed by one of the other three methods 

used. The analytical methods for pharmaceutical and antibiotic compounds were in development at the time of this study. 

A few compounds determined by these methods produced 

highly variable results. These results are footnoted where 

presented herein.

Analytical results from the USGS NWQL were censored to the laboratory reporting level (LRL) determined 

independently for each compound based on the long-term 

method-detection level (LT-MDL; Childress and others, 1999; 

table 2). The LRL is established to minimize the probability 

of reporting false-positive and false-negative results. The 

LT-MDL is statistically derived based on long-term, repeated 

measurements of very low-level known concentrations of each 

compound and is the lowest concentration that will minimize 

the probability of a false-positive result (that is, reporting an 

analyte to be present when it is not). When a compound is 

detected below the LRL, the concentration is reported as an 

estimate to indicate the greater uncertainty associated with that 

measurement compared to concentrations measured above the 

LRL. Moreover, at very low concentrations that are less than 

the LRL established by the NWQL, it is much more likely that 

a compound that is present in a sample will not be detected (a 

false-negative result).
6 Occurrence of Pharmaceuticals, Personal-Care Products, OWCs, and Pesticides in the Lower Tallapoosa River 

Table 2. Reporting levels for compounds analyzed in stream samples collected from the lower Tallapoosa River 

watershed, Alabama, 2005.—Continued

[μg/L, micrograms per liter; Shaded and bold compounds were detected in concentrations above the reporting level; bold compounds were 

detected below the reporting level and concentrations were estimated; A, Kansas Organic Geochemistry Research Laboratory method for 

antibiotics; Ph, National Water Quality Laboratory method for pharmaceuticals; W, National Water Quality Laboratory method for organic 

wastewater compounds; Pe, National Water Quality Laboratory method for pesticides; AHTN, 6-acetyl-1,1,2,4,4,7-hexamethyltetraline; 

DEET, N,N-diethyl-m-toluamide; HHCB, 1,3,4,6,7,8-hexahydro-4,6,6,7,8,8-hexamethyl-cyclopenta(g)-2-benzopyran; CIAT, 2-chloro-4-

isopropylamino-6-amino-s-triazine; DCPA, dimethyl tetrachloroterephthalate]

Compound name Reporting levela

(μg/L) Method Compound name Reporting levela(μg/L) Method

Antibiotics and degradates

Amoxicillin 0.010 A Sarafloxacin 0.005 A

Ampicillin 0.010 A Sulfachloropyridazine 0.005 A

Azithromycinb 0.005 A Sulfadiazine 0.005 A

Azithromycinb, c 0.0022 Ph Sulfadimethoxine 0.005 A

Carbadox 0.005 A Sulfamerazine 0.005 A

Cefotaxime 0.010 A Sulfamethazine 0.005 A

Chlorotetracycline 0.010 A Sulfamethoxazolea, b 0.005 A

Ciproflaxacin 0.005 A Sulfamethoxazoleb, d 0.0321

0.024

Ph

Clinafloxacin 0.005 A Sulfathiazole 0.005 A

Cloxacillin 0.010 A Tetracycline 0.010 A

Doxycycline 0.010 A Alpha apo-oxytetracyclinee 0.010 A

Erythromycinb 0.005 A Anhydro-chlorotetracyclinee 0.010 A

Erythromycinb, c 0.0046 Ph Anhydro-tetracyclinee 0.010 A

Erythromycin-H2O 0.005 A Beta apo-oxytetracyclinee 0.010 A

Flumequine 0.005 A Demeclocyclinee 0.010 A

Lincomycin 0.005 A Epi-anhydro-chlorotetracyclinee 0.010 A

Lomefloxacin 0.005 A Epi-anhydro-tetracyclinee 0.010 A

Minocycline 0.010 A Epi-chlorotetracyclinee 0.010 A

Norfloxacin 0.005 A Epi-iso-chlorotetracyclinee 0.010 A

Ofloxacin 0.005 A Epi-oxytetracyclinee 0.010 A

Ormetoprim 0.005 A Epi-tetracyclinee 0.010 A

Oxacillin 0.010 A Iso-chlorotetracyclinee 0.010 A

Oxolinic Acid 0.005 A Trimethoprimb 0.005 A

Oxytetracycline 0.010 A Trimethoprimb 0.0063

0.020

Ph

Penicillin G 0.010 A Tylosin 0.005 A

Penicillin V 0.010 A Virginiamycin 0.005 A

Roxithromycin 0.005 A

Detergents and detergent metabolites

4-Cumylphenol 1 W 4-Octylphenol monoethoxylate 1 W

4-n-Octylphenol 1 W 4-tert-Octylphenol 1 W

4-Nonylphenol diethoxylate 5 W para-Nonylphenol 5 W

4-Octylphenol diethoxylate 1 W

Personal-care products including fragrances and flavors

3-Methyl-1H-indole 1 W Indole 0.5 W

3-tert-Butyl-4-hydroxyanisole 5 W Isoborneol 0.5 W

Acetophenone 0.5 W Isoquinoline 0.5 W

AHTN 0.5 W Menthol 0.5 W

Benzophenone 0.5 W Methyl salicylate 0.5 W

Camphor 0.5 W Phenol 0.5 W

d-Limonene 0.5 W Triclosan 1.0 W

HHCB 0.5 W Triethyl citrate 0.5 W
Methods 7

Table 2. Reporting levels for compounds analyzed in stream samples collected from the lower Tallapoosa River 

watershed, Alabama, 2005.—Continued

[μg/L, micrograms per liter; Shaded and bold compounds were detected in concentrations above the reporting level; bold compounds were 

detected below the reporting level and concentrations were estimated; A, Kansas Organic Geochemistry Research Laboratory method for 

antibiotics; Ph, National Water Quality Laboratory method for pharmaceuticals; W, National Water Quality Laboratory method for organic 

wastewater compounds; Pe, National Water Quality Laboratory method for pesticides; AHTN, 6-acetyl-1,1,2,4,4,7-hexamethyltetraline; 

DEET, N,N-diethyl-m-toluamide; HHCB, 1,3,4,6,7,8-hexahydro-4,6,6,7,8,8-hexamethyl-cyclopenta(g)-2-benzopyran; CIAT, 2-chloro-4-

isopropylamino-6-amino-s-triazine; DCPA, dimethyl tetrachloroterephthalate]

Compound name Reporting levela

(μg/L) Method Compound name Reporting levela(μg/L) Method

Industrial compounds and disinfectants

5-Methyl-1H-benzotriazole 2 W Tri(2-butoxyethyl) phosphate 0.5 W

9,10-Anthraquinone 0.5 W Tri(2-chloroethyl) phosphate 0.5 W

Carbazole 0.5 W Tri(dichloroisopropyl) phosphate 0.5 W

Isophorone 0.5 W Tributyl phosphate 0.5 W

Isopropylbenzene 0.5 W Triphenyl phosphate 0.5 W

para-Cresol 1 W Tetrachloroethylene 0.5 W

Phenanthrene 0.5 W Tribromomethane 0.5 W

Pyrene 0.5 W

Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons

1-Methylnaphthalene 0.5 W Benzo[a]pyrene 0.5 W

2,6-Dimethylnaphthalene 0.5 W Fluoranthene 0.5 W

2-Methylnaphthalene 0.5 W Naphthalene 0.5 W

Anthracene 0.5 W

Insect repellents, pesticides, and degradates

1,4-Dichlorobenzene 0.5 W Fenamiphos sulfoxide 0.039 Pe

2,6-Diethylanilinee 0.006 Pe Fipronil 0.016 Pe

2-Chloro-2’,6’-diethylacetanilidee 0.005 Pe Desulfinyl fipronile 0.012 Pe

2-Ethyl-6-methylanilinee 0.004 Pe Desulfinylfipronil amidee 0.029 Pe

3,4-Dichloroanilinee 0.004 Pe Fipronil sulfidee 0.013 Pe

4-Chloro-2-methylphenole 0.006 Pe Fipronil sulfonee 0.024 Pe

Acetochlor 0.006 Pe Fonofos 0.003 Pe

Alachlor 0.005 Pe Hexazinone 0.013 Pe

Atrazine 0.007 Pe Iprodione 0.538 Pe

CIATc, e 0.006 Pe Isofenphos 0.003 Pe

Azinphos-methyl 0.05 Pe Malathion 0.027 Pe

Azinphos-methyl oxygen analoge 0.07 Pe Malaoxone 0.030 Pe

Benfluralin 0.01 Pe Metalaxyl 0.5 W

Bromacil 0.5 W Metalaxyl 0.005 Pe

Carbarylb 1 W Methidathion 0.006 Pe

Carbarylb 0.041 Pe Methyl parathion 0.015 Pe

1-Naphthole 0.088 Pe Methyl paraoxone 0.030 Pe

Chlorpyrifosb 0.5 W Metolachlorb 0.5 W

Chlorpyrifosb 0.005 Pe Metolachlorb 0.006 Pe

Chlorpyrifos oxygen analoge 0.056 Pe Metribuzin 0.006 Pe

cis-Permethrin 0.006 Pe Myclobutanil 0.008 Pe

Cyfluthrin 0.027 Pe Pendimethalin 0.022 Pe

Cypermethrin 0.009 Pe Phorate 0.011 Pe

DCPA 0.003 Pe Phorate oxygen analoge 0.105 Pe

DEET 0.5 W Phosmet 0.008 Pe
8 Occurrence of Pharmaceuticals, Personal-Care Products, OWCs, and Pesticides in the Lower Tallapoosa River 

Table 2. Reporting levels for compounds analyzed in stream samples collected from the lower Tallapoosa River 

watershed, Alabama, 2005.—Continued

[μg/L, micrograms per liter; Shaded and bold compounds were detected in concentrations above the reporting level; bold compounds were 

detected below the reporting level and concentrations were estimated; A, Kansas Organic Geochemistry Research Laboratory method for 

antibiotics; Ph, National Water Quality Laboratory method for pharmaceuticals; W, National Water Quality Laboratory method for organic 

wastewater compounds; Pe, National Water Quality Laboratory method for pesticides; AHTN, 6-acetyl-1,1,2,4,4,7-hexamethyltetraline; 

DEET, N,N-diethyl-m-toluamide; HHCB, 1,3,4,6,7,8-hexahydro-4,6,6,7,8,8-hexamethyl-cyclopenta(g)-2-benzopyran; CIAT, 2-chloro-4-

isopropylamino-6-amino-s-triazine; DCPA, dimethyl tetrachloroterephthalate]

Compound name Reporting levela

(μg/L) Method Compound name Reporting levela(μg/L) Method

Insect repellents, pesticides, and degradates—Continued

Diazinonb 0.005 Pe Phosmet oxygen analoge 0.051 Pe

Diazinonb 0.5 W Prometonb 0.5 W

Diazinon oxygen analoge 0.006 Pe Prometonb 0.01 Pe

Dichlorvos 0.012 Pe Prometryn 0.005 Pe

Dicrotophos 0.084 Pe Propyzamide 0.004 Pe

Dieldrin 0.009 Pe Simazine 0.005 Pe

Dimethoate 0.006 Pe Tebuthiuron 0.016 Pe

Ethion 0.004 Pe Terbufos 0.017 Pe

Ethion monoxon 0.002 Pe Terbufos oxygen analog sulfonee 0.068 Pe

Fenamiphos 0.029 Pe Terbuthylazine 0.010 Pe

Fenamiphos sulfone 0.049 Pe Trifluralin 0.009 Pe

Pharmaceuticals and degradates

Acetaminophen 0.0180

0.024

Ph Diphenhydramined 0.0074

0.023

Ph

Caffeineb 0.5 W Fluoxetined 0.0072

0.016

Ph

Caffeineb 0.008 

0.5

Ph Furosemide MDL Ph

1,7-dimethylxanthinee 0.0722 

0.021

Ph Gemfibrozild 0.0064 Ph

Carbamazapine 0.0054 

0.018

Ph Ibuprofend 0.0208 Ph

Cimetidined 0.0061 Ph Metforminc MDL Ph

Codeine 0.0076

0.022

Ph Miconazolec 0.0088 Ph

Cotinineb 0.0068

0.028

1.0

Ph Ranitidined 0.0064

0.025

Ph

Cotinineb 1 W Salbutamol 0.0115

0.014

Ph

Dehydronifedipinee 0.0077

0.022

Ph Thiabendazole 0.0054

0.025

Ph

Diltiazemd 0.0079

0.018

Ph Warfarin 0.0059

0.019

Ph

Steroids and stanols

3-beta-Coprostanol 2 W beta-Stigmastanol 2 W

beta-Sitosterol 2 W Cholesterol 2 W

a For some compounds, reporting levels changed depending on when the sample was analyzed.

b Compound was analyzed using more than one method.

c Compound is highly variable; concentrations are reported as detections or non-detections.

d

 Results are highly variable; concentrations are reported as estimates.

e

 Degradation product.
Methods 9

Because of the uncertainty associated with false-negative 

results at concentrations less than the LRL, only detections 

that were greater than the reporting level were used to compare the occurrence of compounds among sites in this study. 

All of the reported results, including estimated results, were 

used in this study to assess the types of compounds present in 

the study area and the frequency of occurrence basinwide.

Samples shipped to the OGRL were analyzed for five 

classes of antibiotics using three online solid-phase extraction 

methods and liquid chromatography and mass spectrometry or 

liquid chromatography and mass spectrometry-mass spectrometry (Meyer and others, 2007). The reporting levels for data 

from this laboratory were set at laboratory-determined method 

detection levels (MDL; table 2). No estimated concentrations 

are reported below the MDL.

Quality Control 

During each sampling round, a replicate sample, blank 

sample, and fortified sample were collected to determine the 

reproducibility of results, whether contamination occurred 

during any part of the sample collection and analysis process, and the percentage of recovery of target compounds in 

native water—the target compounds being those compounds 

analyzed for this study. A total of six quality-control samples 

were processed and analyzed, including two field blanks, two 

replicate samples, and two fortified samples. A third replicate 

sample was analyzed for only a few selected antibiotics.

Blank samples consisted of commercially produced 

deionized water certified as free of organic compounds. These 

blank water samples received the same treatment and processing as environmental samples. Blank water was passed through 

the sampling and sample-processing equipment, collected 

into the same type of sample bottles used for environmental 

samples, and shipped to the laboratory in the same coolers. 

Replicate samples were produced by collecting a large 

sample volume and splitting the sample into two or more 

independent, but theoretically identical samples. Each fortified sample was produced by splitting the sample and adding 

known concentrations of target compounds to one of the split 

samples. The percentage of fortified target compound that 

was recovered by the analytical method was determined by 

comparing results from the fortified sample with results from 

the replicate environmental sample.

With three exceptions, analyses of blank samples produced no detections. Phenol was detected below the LRL in 

both field blanks (0.13 and 0.12 microgram per liter [μg/L]), 

and benzophenone was detected below the LRL in one field 

blank (0.01 μg/L). The LRL for phenol and benzophenone 

are each 0.5 μg/L. Phenol is a well-known chronic laboratory 

contaminant because it is used in the laboratory as a solvent. 

Benzophenone is used in personal-care products and soaps as 

an agent to prevent ultraviolet light from degrading perfumes. 

All of the phenol and benzophenone detections in environmental samples were estimated concentrations below the LRL 

similar to concentrations in blank samples. Thus, all concentrations below the LRL (0.5 μg/L) were assumed to be the 

result of contamination.

One laboratory preparation blank, associated with all of 

the samples for this study, contained a detectable concentration of diphenhydramine (0.0094 μg/L). Because of this, the 

laboratory recensored diphenhydramine results to a new LRL 

that was 10 times the concentration in the blank (0.09 μg/L). 

No concentrations for diphenhydramine were greater than this 

adjusted laboratory reporting level.

Recoveries were calculated for samples fortified, in the 

field or laboratory, with known concentrations of the target 

compounds (table 3). The percentage of recovery of fortified 

compounds indicates the effect of the sample matrix on the 

performance of the analytical method. Recoveries for the antibiotic method ranged from 20 to 291 percent, and the mean 

recovery was 104 percent. Recoveries for the pharmaceutical 

method ranged from 6 to 104 percent, and the mean recovery 

was 56 percent. Recoveries for the OWC method ranged from 

12 percent to 180 percent, and the mean recovery was 91 percent. Recoveries for the pesticide methods ranged from 11 to 

149 percent, and the mean recovery was 95 percent. 

Differences between results from replicate samples were 

examined. Of 680 replicate results, all were below the reporting level. Sixteen results were estimated at very low concentrations. All replicate results, when compared, were consistent 

with one another.

Table 3. Summary of recoveries of fortified compounds for each analytical method used in this study.

[NWQL, National Water Quality Laboratory; OGRL, Organic Geochemistry Research Laboratory]

Laboratory and 

analytical method

Type of 

fortified 

sample

Number of 

compounds 

analyzed

Recovery, in percent

Minimum Maximum Mean

Relative 

standard 

deviation

NWQL organic wastewater compounds Field 114 12 180 91 22

NWQL pesticides Field a177 11 149 95 29

NWQL pharmaceuticals Laboratory 13 6 104 56 62

Kansas OGRL antibiotics Laboratory 39 20 291 104 62

a

 Includes some constituents analyzed by two methods.
10 Occurrence of Pharmaceuticals, Personal-Care Products, OWCs, and Pesticides in the Lower Tallapoosa River 

Results for the 10 compounds that were analyzed by two 

different methods were compared. Nearly all analytical results 

were reported below the method’s reporting level. Although 

the reporting level for one method was significantly greater 

than for the other, the results were consistent. Two results, one 

each for metolachlor and prometon, were reported above the 

reporting level using one method and were estimated below 

the reporting level for the other method. The results at these 

very low concentrations differed by nearly 75 percent.

Pharmaceuticals, Personal-Care 

Products, Organic Wastewater 

Compounds, and Pesticides

Of 186 compounds analyzed, 32 were detected in at 

least one sample from the lower Tallapoosa River watershed 

(fig. 2). Of the detected compounds, 13 were measured at 

concentrations above reporting levels, and 19 only were 

at concentrations less than the reporting levels but were 

estimated (fig. 2; table 4). Detections estimated below the 

reporting levels are discussed separately from concentrations 

greater than the reporting level (see “Methods” section). 

Atrazine, CIAT1, hexazinone, metalaxyl, metolachlor, 

prometryn, prometon, simazine, azithromycin, oxytetracycline, 

sulfamethoxazole, trimethoprim, and tylosin were measured 

at concentrations greater than the reporting levels (fig. 2). The 

first eight of these compounds are pesticides and a pesticide 

degradate (CIAT); the last five are antibiotics. The lowest 

reporting levels for these 13 compounds ranged from 0.005 

to 0.0321 μg/L (table 2). Every sample collected had between 

one and six compounds at a concentration above the reporting levels (fig. 3B). Total concentrations of detections above 

reporting levels ranged from 0.008 to 0.229 μg/L at Chubbehatchee (CHU, in October) and Cubahatchee (CUB, in April) 

Creeks, respectively (fig. 3A). Pesticides were more frequently 

detected above reporting levels than other types of compounds 

(fig. 2). Concentrations of atrazine equaled or exceeded 

the reporting level (0.007 μg/L) at every site, and simazine 

1

 2-chloro-4-isopropylamino-6-amino-s-triazine.

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

AZITHROMYCIN

OXYTETRACYCLINE

SULFAMETHOXAZOLE

TRIMETHOPRIM

TYLOSIN

4-OCTYLPHENOL MONOETHOXYLATE

para-NONYLPHENOL

4-tert-OCTYLPHENOL

ACETOPHENONE

CAMPHOR

METHYL SALICYLATE

3-METHYL-1H-INDOLE

ISOPHORONE

para-CRESOL

ATRAZINE

CIAT

DEET

DESULFINYL FIPRONIL

3,4-DICHLOROANILINE

HEXAZINONE

MALATHION

METALAXYL

METOLACHLOR

PROMETON

PROMETRYN

SIMAZINE

TRIFLURALIN

NAPHTHALENE

3-beta-COPROSTANOL

beta-SITOSTEROL

beta-STIGMASTANOL

CHOLESTEROL

NU

MBER

OF TIMES

DETE

C

TED

Estimated detection less than

 laboratory reporting level

Detected above reporting level

Antibiotics/

pharmaceuticals

Fragrances and

flavors

Industrial compounds

and disinfectants

Detergent metabolites

Insect repellents, pesticides,

and degradates

Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon 

Steroids

(stanols)

Figure 2. The number of detections of 32 organic compounds at sites in the lower Tallapoosa River watershed, 

Alabama, April 25–28 and October 24–26, 2005.
Pharmaceuticals, Personal-Care Products, Organic Wastewater Compounds, and Pesticides 11

Table 4. Compounds detected at measured and estimated concentrations in the lower Tallapoosa River watershed, Alabama, 2005. 

[DEET, N,N-diethyl-m-toluamide; compounds in bold text only were detected at least once at concentrations above the laboratory reporting level]

Compound Possible compound uses or sources

Antibiotics/pharmaceuticals

Azithromycin Antibiotic (macrolide) used to treat bacterial infections.

Oxytetracycline Antibiotic (tetracycline) used for infections and to control acne. Also used in fish hatcheries.

Sulfamethoxazole Antibacterial sulfonamide often used in combination with trimethoprim. Used for urinary tract 

infections, malaria.

Trimethoprim Antibiotic used for urinary infections, travelers diarrhea, respiratory and middle ear infections. 

Tylosin Broad-spectrum antibiotic (macrolide) used on cattle, swine, and poultry (veterinary drug).

Detergent metabolites

4-Octylphenol monoethoxylatea Nonionic detergent metabolite.

para-Nonylphenola Nonionic detergent metabolite.

4-tert-Octylphenola Nonionic detergent metabolite.

Fragrances and flavors

Acetophenone Fragrance in detergent and tobacco, flavor in beverages.

Camphor Used for its scent, as a flavor and an odorant, in ointments, as embalming fluid, and for medicinal purposes. 

Also used in fireworks, as a moth repellent, and as a plasticizer.

Methyl salicylate Flavoring agent in food, candies, and beverages. It also is used as a perfumery, odorant, an ultraviolet absorber, and as an analgesic. It is a natural product of many species of plants, including wintergreens.

3-Methyl-1H-indole (skatol) Fragrance in low concentration, stench in feces and coal tar.

Industrial compounds and disinfectants

Isophorone Solvent for lacquer, plastic, oil, silicon, resin.

para-Cresolb Several uses including use as a solvent for other chemicals, as a disinfectant and deodorizer, as an ingredient in chemicals that kill pests, and as a wood preservative. Cresol solutions such as Lysol® are used as 

household cleaners and disinfectants. Found in wood and tobacco smoke, exhaust, coal tar, and creosyte 

(wood preservative).

Insect repellents, pesticides, and degradates

Atrazineb Triazine herbicide used to control weeds in corn and grain sorghum in the Mobile River Basin.

CIAT Pesticide degradate of atrazine (2-chloro-4-isopropylamino-6-amino-s-triazine).

DEET Insect repellent, urban uses, mosquito repellent.

Desulfinyl fipronil Pesticide degradate of fipronil, a broad-spectrum insecticide. Used on crops and in veterinary products.

3,4-Dichloroanilineb Breakdown product from diuron, linuron, or propanil. Industrial chemical intermediate. 

Hexazinone Herbicide commonly used in silvaculture.

Malathionb General-use insecticide of the organophosphate class.

Metalaxyl Systemic benzenoid fungicide.

Metolachlorb Acetanilide herbicide, indicator of agricultural land use.

Prometon Nonselective, general-use herbicide (triazine) used in noncrop areas such as roadways, railways, and 

industrial areas.

Prometryn Herbicide used on cotton.

Simazineb Triazine herbicide applied on corn, pecans, and peaches.

Trifluralinb Selective, pre-emergent selective herbicide (dinitroaniline) used to control grasses and broadleaf weeds in a 

large variety of tree fruit, vegetable, and grain crops, including soybeans and alfalfa.

Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon

Naphthalene Fumigant, moth repellent, major component of gasoline.

Steroids and stanols

Cholesterol An animal and plant sterol often used as a fecal indicator; most cholesterol is synthesized internally.

3-beta-Coprostanol Metabolite of cholesterol that is a mammalian fecal indicator.

beta-Sitosterol Found in plants, saw palmetto, pumpkin seeds. It is similar to cholesterol, but can actually 

lower cholesterol.

beta-Stigmastanol Plant sterol.

a

 Known endocrine disrupter.

b

 Suspected endocrine disrupter.
12 Occurrence of Pharmaceuticals, Personal-Care Products, OWCs, and Pesticides in the Lower Tallapoosa River 

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

NUMBER OF DETECTED COMPOUNDS

B.

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

TAL-1

TAL-2

CAL

CUB

GDW

LIN

CHU

BRE

TAL-3

HAR

TAL-1

TAL-2

CAL

CUB

GDW

LIN

CHU

BRE

TAL-3

HAR

TOT

AL C

ONCEN

TRATIO

N, I

N

MICROGRAMS PE

R LITER

Estimated detections below the laboratory

 reporting level

Greater than the laboratory reporting level

Estimated detections below the laboratory

 reporting level

Greater than the laboratory reporting level

A.

April high base flow October high base flow

TAL-1

TAL-2

CAL

CUB

GDW

LIN

CHU

BRE

TAL-3

HAR

TAL-1

TAL-2

CAL

CUB

GDW

LIN

CHU

BRE

TAL-3

HAR

April high base flow October high base flow

Figure 3. Summary of compounds detected in concentrations greater than the 

laboratory reporting level and at estimated concentrations summarized by the 

(A) total concentration in the sample and (B) number of compounds in the sample 

collected from the lower Tallapoosa River watershed, Alabama, 2005.
Pharmaceuticals, Personal-Care Products, Organic Wastewater Compounds, and Pesticides 13

exceeded the reporting level (0.005 μg/L) at every site except 

Calabee (CAL) and Cubahatchee (CUB) Creeks (table 5). This 

finding is consistent with the results of a national USGS pesticide study, in which atrazine and simazine were among the 

pesticides most frequently detected along with prometon and 

metolachlor (Gilliom and others, 2006). Tylosin, a veterinary 

antibiotic, was found in concentrations equal to or greater than 

the reporting level (0.005 μg/L) at every site except Brensen 

Branch (BRE) and Harwell Mill Creek (HAR; table 5). CIAT, 

a degradate of atrazine, was found in concentrations near 

the reporting level (0.006 μg/L) at every site except Chubbehatchee (CHU) and Cubahatchee (CUB) Creeks.

Except for Brensen Branch (BRE) and Harwell Mill 

Creek (HAR), one or two more compounds were detected 

above reporting levels in April, during a period of high 

base flow, than in October during a period of low base flow 

(fig. 3B). The greatest number of compounds detected above 

the reporting levels and highest concentrations were at Line 

(LIN), Cubahatchee (CUB), and Calebee (CAL) Creeks and 

Tallapoosa River near Montgomery (TAL-3; fig. 4). 

The greatest total detected concentrations occurred in 

April at Cubahatchee (CUB), Line (LIN), and Calebee (CAL) 

Creeks and Tallapoosa River (TAL-3; fig. 4A). Rainfall during 

April 26–27 may be a contributing factor. Goodwater Creek 

MILLER CREEK

JOHNSONS RC

EEK

BRENSEN BRANCH

CUBAHATCHEE

CREEK

O

H A RWELL MILL

CREEK

TALLAPOOSA RIVER

WALLAHATCHEE

EK

UPHAPEE CREEK

PANTHER

CR EEK

Shorter

Milstead

Tallassee

LINECREEK

STO NE

CR EEK

TUMKEEHATCH EE CREEK

OLD TOW N CREEK

GOODWATER

CR. I

LINE

CREEK

OLD TOWN C REEK

T ALLAPOOSA RIVER

TALLAPOOSA

RIVER

TALLAPOOSA RIVER

LINE CREEK

LIN

HAR

GDW

CUB

CHU

CAL BRE

TAL-3

TAL-2

TAL-1

86°15' 86°

32°24'

32°36'

0 2.5 5 MILES

0 2.5 5 KILOMETERS

Yates Dam

Thurlow Dam

PESTICIDES ANTIBIOTICS/

 PHARMACEUTICALS

0.016 (Minimum)

0.229 (Maximum) 

SIZE OF PIE CHART

 REPRESENTS TOTAL

 CONCENTRATION, IN

 MICROGRAMS PER LITER

MUNICIPALITIES

 REPRESENTED BY

 SIZE

Azithromycin

Sulfamethoxazole

Trimethoprim

Tylosin

Atrazine

Hexazinone

Metalaxyl

Metolachlor

Oxytetracycline

Prometon

Prometryn

Simazine

A.

CIAT

BASIN BOUNDARY

EXPLANATION

 DAM

CALABEE

CREEK

CHUBBEHATCHEE CREEK

§ ̈¦85

¤£ ¤£ 80 231

¤£ 82

Base from U.S. Geological Survey digital data, 1:100,000

Hydrography from U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Reach File 1, 1:500,000

Figure 4. Total concentrations of all compounds detected above and below the laboratory reporting level in samples 

collected during (A) a high base-flow period in April and (B) a low base-flow period in October in the lower Tallapoosa River 

watershed, Alabama, 2005.
14 Occurrence of Pharmaceuticals, Personal-Care Products, OWCs, and Pesticides in the Lower Tallapoosa River 

(GDW, fig. 1) was sampled as a control site because it is 

mostly forested and was expected to have relatively few 

sources of contamination; however, concentrations of tylosin, atrazine, and simazine above their reporting levels were 

reported at this site (table 5). 

If a compound was detected at a concentration below its 

LRL, the NWQL provided an estimate of the concentration. 

Many of the 19 compounds that were detected only at very 

low concentrations (table 4) were detected frequently and 

widely throughout the study area (table 5). The categories of 

compounds most consistently detected throughout the study 

area were industrial wastewater compounds and disinfectants, 

pesticides, and flavors and fragrances (fig. 5). Camphor, paracresol, and DEET were detected in at least eight samples in 

very low estimated concentrations (fig. 2). Camphor, used in 

personal-care products and as a flavor additive, was detected 

at seven sites (including a replicate sample from site TAL-3); 

para-cresol, used as a wood preservative, a disinfectant, 

and solvent, was detected at six sites (including a replicate 

sample from site TAL-2); and the insect repellent DEET 

was detected at seven sites (table 5). Hexazinone, a triazine 

herbicide mostly used to control grasses and broadleaf weeds, 

was detected at six sites; one detection was above the LRL 

(table 5).

")

L

LIN

HAR

GDW

CUB

CHU

CAL BRE

TAL-3

TAL-2

TAL-1

86°15' 86°

32°24'

32°36'

Yates Dam

Thurlow Dam

B.

CALABEE

CREEK

WALLAHATCHEE

CREEK

STO NE

CR EEK

UPHAPEE CREEK

ALLAPOOSA

RIVER

TU

T

MKEEHATCH EE CREEK

TALLAPOOSA RIVER

CREEK

GOODWATER

CR.

BRENSEN BRANCH

H A RWELL MILL

CREEK

TALLAPOOSA RIVER

T ALLAPOOSA RIVER

LINE CREEK

OLD TOW N CREEK

OLD TOWN CREEK

LINE

CREEK

PANTHER

CR EEK JOHNSONS RC

EEK

LINECREEK

MILLER CREEK

CUBAHATCHEE

CREEK

§ ̈¦85

¤£231 ¤£ 80

¤£ 82

0 2.5 5 MILES

0 2.5 5 KILOMETERS

PESTICIDES ANTIBIOTICS/

 PHARMACEUTICALS

0.016 (Minimum)

0.229 (Maximum) 

SIZE OF PIE CHART

 REPRESENTS TOTAL

 CONCENTRATION, IN

 MICROGRAMS PER LITER

MUNICIPALITIES

 REPRESENTED BY

 SIZE

Azithromycin

Sulfamethoxazole

Trimethoprim

Tylosin

Atrazine

Hexazinone

Metalaxyl

Metolachlor

Oxytetracycline

Prometon

Prometryn

Simazine

CIAT

BASIN BOUNDARY

EXPLANATION

 DAM

Base from U.S. Geological Survey digital data, 1:100,000

Hydrography from U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Reach File 1, 1:500,000

CHUBBEHATCHEE

Shorter

Milstead

Tallassee

Figure 4. Total concentrations of all compounds detected above and below the laboratory reporting level in samples 

collected during (A) a high base-flow period in April and (B) a low base-flow period in October in the lower Tallapoosa River 

watershed, Alabama, 2005.—Continued
Pharmaceuticals, Personal-Care Products, Organic Wastewater Compounds, and Pesticides 15

Table 5. Organic compounds detected in the lower Tallapoosa River watershed, April 25–28 and October 24–26, 2005.[μg/L, micrograms per liter; CIAT, 2-chloro-4-isopropylamino-6-amino-s-triazine; DEET, 

N,N-diethylm-toluamide; <, less than; E, estimated below the laboratory reporting level; —, no data]

Site label 

(fig. 1 and 

table 1)

Sample 

date

Sample 

time

Compounds detected at a concentration above the reporting level, at least once

Atrazine 

(μg/L)

Azithromycin (μg/L) CIAT a (μg/L) Hexazinone (μg/L) Metalaxyl (μg/L) Metolachlor (μg/L) Oxytetra- cycline (μg/L) Prometon (μg/L) Prometryn (μg/L) Simazine (μg/L) Sulfameth- oxazole (μg/L)

TAL-1 4/27/2005 1045 0.009 < 0.005 < 0.006 < 0.013 < 0.005 < 0.006 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.005 0.016 < 0.005TAL-1 10/26/2005 1030 0.014 < 0.005 E 0.004 E 0.007 < 0.005 < 0.006 < 0.01 E 0.005 < 0.005 0.015 < 0.005TAL-2 4/27/2005 1145 0.011 < 0.005 < 0.006 E 0.009 < 0.005 < 0.006 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.005 0.023 < 0.005TAL-2 10/26/2005 1125 0.015 < 0.005 E 0.004 E 0.007 < 0.005 < 0.006 < 0.01 E 0.005 < 0.005 0.017 < 0.005CAL 4/26/2005 1330 0.008 < 0.005 < 0.006 < 0.013 < 0.005 0.009 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005CAL 10/24/2005 1030 0.039 < 0.005 E 0.006 < 0.013 < 0.005 0.011 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005CUB 4/26/2005 1015 E 0.006 < 0.005 < 0.006 E 0.012 < 0.005 < 0.006 < 0.01 < 0.01 0.036 < 0.005 < 0.005CUB 10/24/2005 1450 0.021 < 0.005 < 0.006 < 0.013 < 0.005 < 0.006 < 0.01 < 0.01 0.009 < 0.005 < 0.005GDW 4/25/2005 1720 0.008 < 0.005 < 0.006 < 0.013 < 0.005 < 0.006 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.005 0.021 < 0.005GDW 10/24/2005 0900 0.008 < 0.005 E 0.005 < 0.013 < 0.005 < 0.006 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005LIN 4/28/2005 0920 0.084 < 0.005 0.012a 0.02 0.009 < 0.006 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.005 0.007 < 0.005LIN 10/25/2005 1400 0.015 0.006 0.007a < 0.013 < 0.005 < 0.006 < 0.01 E 0.006 0.013 < 0.008 < 0.005CHU 4/25/2005 1450 0.007 < 0.005 < 0.006 < 0.013 < 0.005 < 0.006 < 0.01 0.023 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005CHU 10/24/2005 1135 < 0.007 < 0.005 < 0.006 E 0.004 < 0.005 < 0.006 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.005 0.008 < 0.005BRE 4/25/2005 1210 0.01 < 0.005 E 0.006 < 0.013 < 0.005 < 0.006 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005BRE 10/24/2005 1240 0.009 < 0.005 E 0.005 < 0.013 < 0.005 < 0.006 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.005 0.01 < 0.005TAL-3 4/28/2005 1315 0.044 < 0.005 E 0.005 E 0.009 < 0.005 E 0.006 < 0.01 E 0.007 0.006 0.02 < 0.005TAL-3 10/25/2005 0900 0.014 < 0.005 E 0.004 E 0.008 < 0.005 < 0.006 < 0.01 E 0.005 < 0.005 0.016 < 0.005HAR 4/25/2005 0910 0.018 < 0.005 E 0.006 < 0.013 < 0.005 < 0.006 < 0.01 < 0.01 0.006 0.007 < 0.005HAR 10/25/2005 1105 0.01 < 0.005 E 0.006 < 0.013 < 0.005 < 0.006 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.005 0.012 0.006

Replicates

TAL-2 4/27/2005 1146 0.012 < 0.005 < 0.006 E 0.009 < 0.005 < 0.006 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.005 0.025 < 0.005TAL-3 10/25/2005 0901 0.014 < 0.005 E 0.004 E 0.007 < 0.005 < 0.006 < 0.01 E 0.005 < 0.005 0.015 < 0.005LIN 10/25/2005 1401

— 0.006

—

—

—

— 0.010

—

—

— < 0.005

Field Blanks

TAL-1 4/27/2005 0930 < 0.007 < 0.005 < 0.006 < 0.013 < 0.005 < 0.006 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005TAL-1 10/26/2005 0930 < 0.007 < 0.005 < 0.006 < 0.013 < 0.005 < 0.006 < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.005
16 Occurrence of Pharmaceuticals, Personal-Care Products, OWCs, and Pesticides in the Lower Tallapoosa River Table 5. Organic compounds detected in the lower Tallapoosa River watershed, April 25–28 and October 24–26, 2005.—Continued [μg/L, micrograms per liter; CIAT, 2-chloro-4-isopropylamino-6-amino-s-triazine; DEET, 

N,N-diethylm-toluamide; <, less than; E, estimated below the laboratory reporting level; —, no data]

Site label 

(fig. 1 and 

table 1)

Sample 

date

Sample 

time

Compounds detected at a 

concentration above the 

reporting level, 

at least once

Compounds only detected at an estimated concentration below the reporting level

Trimethoprim 

(μg/L)

Tylosin 

(μg/L)

Acetophenone 

(μg/L)

Camphor 

(μg/L)

Cholesterol 

(μg/L)

3-betaCoprostanol 

(μg/L)

DEET 

(μg/L)

Desulfinyl 

fipronil 

(μg/L)

3,4-Dichloroaniline 

(μg/L)

Isophorone 

(μg/L)

Malathion 

(μg/L)

TAL-1 4/27/2005 1045 < 0.005 0.015 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 2 < 2 < 0.5 < 0.012 < 0.004 < 0.5 E 0.012TAL-1 10/26/2005 1030 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 2 < 2 E 0.08 < 0.012 < 0.004 E 0.007 < 0.027TAL-2 4/27/2005 1145 < 0.005 0.005 E 0.14 < 0.5 < 2 < 2 < 0.5 < 0.012 < 0.004 < 0.5 E 0.013TAL-2 10/26/2005 1125 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 2 < 2 E 0.08 < 0.012 < 0.004 < 0.5 < 0.027CAL 4/26/2005 1330 0.007 0.093 E 0.12 E 0.02 E 0.7 < 2 < 0.5 < 0.012 < 0.004 < 0.5 < 0.027CAL 10/24/2005 1030 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.5 E 0.006 E 0.5 < 2 E 0.006 < 0.012 < 0.004 E 0.005 < 0.027CUB 4/26/2005 1015 0.019 0.174 E 0.11 E 0.02 E 0.6 < 2 < 0.5 < 0.012 < 0.004 < 0.5 < 0.027CUB 10/24/2005 1450 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.5 E 0.008 E 0.7 E 0.2 E 0.01 < 0.012 < 0.004 E 0.006 < 0.027GDW 4/25/2005 1720 < 0.005 0.014 E 0.1 E 0.01 < 2 < 2 < 0.5 < 0.012 < 0.004 < 0.5 < 0.027GDW 10/24/2005 0900 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.5 E 0.02 < 2 < 2 < 0.5 < 0.012 < 0.004 E 0.01 < 0.027LIN 4/28/2005 0920 < 0.005 0.07 < 0.5 < 0.5 E 0.8 < 2 < 0.5 < 0.012 < 0.004 < 0.5 < 0.027LIN 10/25/2005 1400 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 2 < 2 < 0.5 < 0.012 < 0.004 < 0.5 < 0.027CHU 4/25/2005 1450 < 0.005 0.015 < 0.5 E 0.008 < 2 < 2 E 0.02 < 0.012 < 0.004 < 0.5 < 0.027CHU 10/24/2005 1135 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.5 E 0.01 < 2 < 2 < 0.5 < 0.012 < 0.004 E 0.007 < 0.027BRE 4/25/2005 1210 < 0.005 < 0.005 E 0.1 E 0.01 < 2 < 2 E 0.009 < 0.012 < 0.004 < 0.5 < 0.027BRE 10/24/2005 1240 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.5 E 0.01 < 2 < 2 E 0.005 < 0.012 < 0.004 E 0.006 < 0.027TAL-3 4/28/2005 1315 < 0.005 0.036 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 2 < 2 < 0.5 E 0.004 < 0.004 < 0.5 E 0.014TAL-3 10/25/2005 0900 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 2 < 2 < 0.5 < 0.012 < 0.004 < 0.5 < 0.027HAR 4/25/2005 0910 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.5 E 0.01 < 2 < 2 E 0.01 < 0.012 < 0.004 < 0.5 < 0.027HAR 10/25/2005 1105 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 2 < 2 < 0.5 < 0.012 < 0.004 < 0.5 < 0.027

Replicates

TAL-2 4/27/2005 1146 < 0.005 0.009 E 0.12 < 0.5 < 2 < 2 < 0.5 < 0.012 < 0.004 < 0.5 E 0.013TAL-3 10/25/2005 0901 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.5 E 0.006 < 2 < 2 < 0.5 E 0.004 E 0.001 E 0.004 < 0.027LIN 10/25/2005 1401 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.5

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

Field Blanks

TAL-1 4/27/2005 0930 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 2 < 2 < 0.5 < 0.012 < 0.004 < 0.5 < 0.027TAL-1 10/26/2005 0930 < 0.005 < 0.005 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 2 < 2 < 0.5 < 0.012 < 0.004 < 0.5 < 0.027
Pharmaceuticals, Personal-Care Products, Organic Wastewater Compounds, and Pesticides 17

Table 5. Organic compounds detected in the lower Tallapoosa River watershed, April 25–28 and October 24–26, 2005.—Continued[μg/L, micrograms per liter; CIAT, 2-chloro-4-isopropylamino-6-amino-s-triazine; DEET, 

N,N-diethylm-toluamide; <, less than; E, estimated below the laboratory reporting level; —, no data]

Site label 

(fig. 1 and 

table 1)

Sample date Sample time

Compounds only detected at an estimated concentration below the reporting level

3-Methyl1H-indole 

(μg/L)

Methyl 

salicylate 

(μg/L)

Naphthalene 

(μg/L)

para-Nonylphenol 

(μg/L)

4-Octylphenol 

monoethoxylate 

(μg/L)

4-tertOctylphenol 

(μg/L)

para-Cresol 

(μg/L)

betaSitosterol 

(μg/L)

beta-Stigmastanol 

(μg/L)

Trifluralin 

(μg/L)

TAL-1 4/27/2005 1045 < 1 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 5 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 2 < 2 < 0.009TAL-1 10/26/2005 1030 < 1 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 5 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 2 < 2 < 0.009TAL-2 4/27/2005 1145 < 1 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 5 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 2 < 2 < 0.009TAL-2 10/26/2005 1125 < 1 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 5 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 2 < 2 < 0.009CAL 4/26/2005 1330 < 1 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 5 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 2 < 2 < 0.009CAL 10/24/2005 1030 < 1 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 5 E 0.07 < 1 < 1 E 0.4 < 2 E 0.005CUB 4/26/2005 1015 < 1 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 5 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 2 < 2 < 0.009CUB 10/24/2005 1450 < 1 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 5 E 0.07 < 1 < 1 E 0.5 < 2 < 0.009GDW 4/25/2005 1720 < 1 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 5 < 1 < 1 E 0.07 < 2 < 2 < 0.009GDW 10/24/2005 0900 E 0.007 E 0.009 < 0.5 < 5 < 1 < 1 E 0.03 < 2 < 2 < 0.009LIN 4/28/2005 0920 < 1 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 5 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 2 E 0.7 < 0.009LIN 10/25/2005 1400 < 1 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 5 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 2 < 2 < 0.009CHU 4/25/2005 1450 < 1 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 5 < 1 < 1 E 0.04 < 2 < 2 < 0.009CHU 10/24/2005 1135 < 1 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 5 < 1 < 1 E 0.02 < 2 < 2 < 0.009BRE 4/25/2005 1210 < 1 < 0.5 < 0.5 E 0.6 E 0.05 < 1 E 0.09 < 2 < 2 < 0.009BRE 10/24/2005 1240 < 1 E 0.01 < 0.5 < 5 <1 < 1 E 0.04 < 2 < 2 < 0.009TAL-3 4/28/2005 1315 < 1 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 5 < 1 < 1 E 0.02 < 2 < 2 < 0.009TAL-3 10/25/2005 0900 < 1 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 5 < 1 < 1 E 0.04 < 2 < 2 < 0.009HAR 4/25/2005 0910 E 0.03 E 0.01 E 0.01 E 0.6 < 1 E 0.02 E 0.3 < 2 < 2 < 0.009HAR 10/25/2005 1105 < 1 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 5 < 1 < 1 E 0.04 < 2 < 2 < 0.009

Replicates

TAL-2 4/27/2005 1146 < 1 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 5 < 1 < 1 E 0.02 < 2 < 2 < 0.009TAL-3 10/25/2005 0901 < 1 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 5 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 2 < 2 < 0.009LIN 10/25/2005 1401

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

Field Blanks

TAL-1 4/27/2005 0930 < 1 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 5 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 2 < 2 < 0.009TAL-1 10/26/2005 0930 < 1 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 5 < 1 < 1 < 1 < 2 < 2 < 0.009

a Concentrations greater than the reporting level are considered estimates because this analytical method produces highly variable results.
18 Occurrence of Pharmaceuticals, Personal-Care Products, OWCs, and Pesticides in the Lower Tallapoosa River 

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

1.6

Antibiotics

and

pharmaceuticals

Detergent

metabolites

Fragrances

and

flavors

Polycyclic

aromatic

hydrocarbon

Insect

repellents,

pesticides,

and

degradates

Steroids

and

stanols

Industrial

compounds

and

disinfectants

TAL-1

TAL-2

CAL

CUB

GDW

LIN

CHU

BRE

TAL-3

HAR

A.

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

1.6

TOT

AL C

ONCEN

TRA

TION, IN MICROGRAMS PE

R LITER

B.

See table 1 for

full site names

Figure 5. The sum of detected concentrations by type of compound including compounds detected at 

concentrations above the laboratory reporting level and estimated below the laboratory reporting level from 

samples collected during (A) a high base-flow period in April and (B) a low base-flow period in October in 

the lower Tallapoosa River watershed, Alabama, 2005.
Pharmaceuticals, Personal-Care Products, Organic Wastewater Compounds, and Pesticides 19

Fourteen compounds that are commonly present in raw 

sewage (Wilkison and others, 2002) were used as indicators 

of human activity. Three compounds—skatol (3-methyl-1Hindole), 3-beta-coprostanol, and cholesterol—are products of 

metabolism that are found in human and other mammalian 

feces. Detergents and their metabolites, AHTN (6-acetyl1,1,2,4,4,7-hexamethyltetraline; musk fragrances), caffeine, 

triclosan, and DEET are contained in many consumer products 

and can be delivered to sewage-collection systems through 

human activities. If not removed during treatment, these 

compounds can be delivered to streams in sewage effluents. 

Brensen Branch (BRE) and Cubbahatchee (CUB), Calabee 

(CAL), and Harwell Mill (HAR) Creeks each had detections 

of at least three of these compounds (table 6) in at least one 

sampling period, indicating the effects of human activities. 

However, these concentrations were estimated below their 

LRLs; similar low concentrations of these compounds may 

have been present but undetected at other sites. 

The number of compounds detected in the lower Tallapoosa is similar to the number detected in other studies 

conducted by the USGS in Alabama (table 7; Gill and others, 

2005; McPherson and others, 2005). The total concentration of compounds detected in the lower Tallapoosa River 

watershed was appreciably less than in the other study areas 

(table 7). In a national USGS study of wastewater-associated 

compounds, pharmaceuticals, and antibiotics (pesticides were 

not included), results indicated that detergent metabolites, 

plasticizers, and steroids contributed nearly 80 percent of the 

total concentration of contaminants to the streams sampled 

(Kolpin and others, 2002). The sites selected for the national 

study were considered to be most susceptible to human 

contamination, such as sites below wastewater-treatment 

discharges. Moreover, samples collected for the two recent 

Alabama studies (Gill and others, 2005; McPherson and others, 2005) and for the national study (Kolpin and others, 2002) 

were not filtered as were samples for this study. This may 

account, in part, for the higher concentrations detected during 

these other studies. 

Laboratory reporting levels were different in the national 

study—some were greater whereas others were less. However, 

the results from this study are similar to the national study—

that is, steroids and detergent metabolites accounted for a 

substantial portion of the total concentration of contaminants.

In a study in Iowa (Kolpin and others, 2004), data were 

gathered on a similar group of compounds, including pesticides, in streams upstream and downstream from urban 

areas, and results were related to streamflow conditions. More 

compounds (51) were detected in the Iowa study than in this 

study. As in this study, a pesticide (in Iowa it was metolachlor) 

was detected most frequently. Cholesterol, caffeine, and betasitosterol were detected in more than 50 percent of the Iowa 

samples—a result not matched in this study. In the Iowa study, 

the concentrations of these contaminants tended to increase 

with decreasing streamflow. 
20 Occurrence of Pharmaceuticals, Personal-Care Products, OWCs, and Pesticides in the Lower Tallapoosa River Table 6. Concentrations of compounds, which indicate human activity, detected in the lower Tallapoosa River watershed, Alabama, 2005. [μg/L, micrograms per liter; concentrations in bold were reported at concentrations that were estimated below the long-term method-detection level (LT-MDL); <, less than; AHTN, 6-acetyl-1,1,2,4,4,7-hexame- thyltetraline; DEET, 

N,N-diethylm-toluamide; E, estimated]

Site 

label 

(fig. 1 

and 

table 1)

Products of metabolism 

(concentration in μg/L) 

Human-use compounds 

(concentration in μg/L)

Detergents and detergent metabolites 

(concentration in μg/L) Number 

of 

detections Cholesterol 3-beta- Copros- tanol 3-Methyl- 1H-indole (skatol) AHTN Caffeine DEET Triclosan 4-Cumyl- phenol 4-Nonyl- phenol diethoxy- latea 4-Octyl- phenol diethoxy- latea 4-Octyl- phenol mono- ethoxylatea para- Nonyl- phenola 4-n- Octyl- phenol 4-tert- Octyl- phenol

April high base-flow samples

TAL-1 <2.0 <2.0 <1.0 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <1.0 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <1.0 0TAL-2 <2.0 <2.0 <1.0 <.5 <.5 <.5 <1.0 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <1.0 0CAL E0.7 <2.0 <1.0 <.5 <.5 <.5 <1.0 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <1.0 1CUB E0.6 <2.0 <1.0 <.5 <.5 <.5 <1.0 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <1.0 1GDW <2.0 <2.0 <1.0 <.5 <.5 <.5 <1.0 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <1.0 0LIN E0.8 <2.0 <1.0 <.5 <.5 <.5 <1.0 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <1.0 1CHU <2.0 <2.0 <1.0 <.5 <.5 E0.02 <1.0 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <1.0 1BRE <2.0 <2.0 <1.0 <.5 <.5 E0.009 <1.0 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 E0.05 E0.6 <1.0 <1.0 3TAL-3 <2.0 <2.0 <1.0 <.5 <.5 <.5 <1.0 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <1.0 0HAR <2.0 <2.0 E0.03 <.5 <.5 E0.01 <1.0 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <1.0 E0.6 <1.0 E0.02 4

October low base-flow samples

TAL-1 <2.0 <2.0 <1.0 <.5 <.5 E0.08 <1.0 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <1.0 1TAL-2 <2.0 <2.0 <1.0 <.5 <.5 E0.08 <1.0 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <1.0 1CAL E0.5 <2.0 <1.0 <.5 <.5 E0.006 <1.0 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 E0.07 <5.0 <1.0 <1.0 3CUB E0.7 E0.2 <1.0 <.5 <.5 E0.010 <1.0 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 E0.07 <5.0 <1.0 <1.0 4GDW <2.0 <2.0 E0.007 <.5 <.5 <.5 <1.0 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <1.0 1LIN <2.0 <2.0 <1.0 <.5 <.5 <.5 <1.0 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <1.0 0CHU <2.0 <2.0 <1.0 <.5 <.5 <.5 <1.0 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <1.0 0BRE <2.0 <2.0 <1.0 <.5 <.5 E0.005 <1.0 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <1.0 1TAL-3 <2.0 <2.0 <1.0 <.5 <.5 <.5 <1.0 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <1.0 0HAR <2.0 <2.0 <1.0 <.5 <.5 <.5 <1.0 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <1.0 <5.0 <1.0 <1.0 0

a Results are highly variable.
Summary 21

Summary

Ten stream sites in the lower Tallapoosa River watershed 

were sampled April 25–28, 2005, during high base-streamflow 

conditions and October 24–26, 2005, during low basestreamflow conditions. Concurrent with water-quality sampling, six quality-control samples, including blanks, replicates, 

and environmental samples fortified with known concentrations of the compounds of interest, were prepared to evaluate the quality of the environmental results. Samples were 

analyzed for 186 synthetic and natural organic compounds 

representing a wide variety of uses and origins. Categories 

of compounds included plant and animal sterols and stanols, 

fragrances and flavor additives in foods and personal-care 

products, detergents and their metabolites, polycyclic aromatic 

hydrocarbons, antibiotics, pharmaceuticals, insect repellents, 

pesticides, and industrial compounds.

Of 186 compounds for which analyses were conducted, 

32 were detected in the study area. Thirteen compounds—

atrazine, CIAT, hexazinone, metalaxyl, metolachlor, prometryn, prometon, simazine, azithromycin, oxytetracyline, 

sulfamethoxazole, trimethoprim, and tylosin—had measurable 

concentrations above their reporting levels, and 19 compounds 

were detected only below their reporting levels, in which case 

the concentrations were estimated. Reporting levels for the 

13 compounds detected in concentrations above their reporting 

levels ranged from 0.005 to 0.0321 μg/L.

The most frequently detected compounds were atrazine 

and simazine, which are two commonly used herbicides, and 

tylosin, which is a veterinary antibiotic. One or two more compounds were detected in April, during a period of high base 

flow, than in October during a period of low base flow, except 

at Brensen Branch and Harwell Mill Creek. The greatest number of compounds detected above their reporting levels and the 

highest total concentrations were found at Line, Cubahatchee, 

and Calebee Creeks and Tallapoosa River near Montgomery. 

Goodwater Creek was selected as a control site because it 

is mostly forested and was expected to have relatively few 

sources of contamination; however, concentrations of tylosin, 

atrazine, and simazine greater than their reporting levels were 

detected at this site. Other compounds were detected frequently but mostly below laboratory reporting levels, including hexazinone, camphor, para-cresol, and DEET.

Results for skatol (3-methyl-1H-indole), 3-beta-coprostanol, cholesterol, seven detergents or their metabolites, 

AHTN, caffeine, triclosan, and DEET were used as indicators 

of the effects of human activities on water quality because 

these compounds are commonly found in raw sewage. None 

of these compounds were found in concentrations above their 

reporting levels during this study. At least three of these compounds, however, were detected at very low concentrations at 

Brensen Branch and at Cubbahatchee, Calebee, and Harwell 

Mill Creeks.

Results for the compounds analyzed for this study were 

compared with results from similar recent studies in Alabama. The total concentrations in the lower Tallapoosa River 

watershed were less than total concentrations found in the J.B. 

Converse Lake watershed in Mobile County (1999–2002) and 

Threemile Creek watershed in Mobile (2000–2003). Samples 

in those two studies were not filtered before they were analyzed, which may account, in part, for the higher concentrations found in these studies. 

Table 7. Comparison of pharmaceuticals, personal-care products, organic wastewater compounds, and pesticides detected in 

samples from three watersheds in Alabama between 2000 and 2005.

[μg/L, micrograms per liter; CIAT, 2-chloro-4-isopropylamino-6-amino-s-triazine; NP1EO, nonylphenol monoethoxylate; OP1EO, 4-octylphenol monoethoxylate; DEET, N,N-diethyl-m-toluamide]

Watershed Dates sampled

Sum of the concentration of 

all detected compoundsa, 

in μg/L Number of 

samples 

Number of 

compounds Compounds most 

frequently detected 

Analyzed Detected Study 

minimum

Study 

maximum

Lower Tallapoosa 

River 

April 25–28 and 

October 24–26, 

2005 

0.049 1.70 20 186 32 Atrazine, simazine, tylosin, CIAT, 

camphor, para-cresol.

J.B. Converse 

Lake, Mobile 

Countyb, c

August 1999 to 

August 2002

0 6.32 86 87 29 Metolachlor, atrazine, caffeine, betasitosterol, bromacil, metalaxyl, 

prometon, NP1EO, cholesterol, 

OP1EO, triclosan.

Threemile Creek, 

City of Mobilec, d

March 2000 to 

September 2003

0.12 56.6 63 48 37 Atrazine, caffeine, tris (2-butoxyethyl) 

phosphate, cholesterol, diazinon, 

bromacil, triclosan, fluoranthene, 

DEET.

a

 Includes concentrations estimated below the reporting level.

b

 Gill and others, 2005.

c

 Samples were unfiltered.

d

 McPherson and others, 2005.
22 Occurrence of Pharmaceuticals, Personal-Care Products, OWCs, and Pesticides in the Lower Tallapoosa River 

References Cited

Cahill, J.D., Furlong, E.T., Burkhardt, M.R., Kolpin, D.W., 

and Anderson, L.G., 2004, Determination of pharmaceutical compounds in surface- and ground-water samples 

by solid phase extraction and high-performance liquid 

chromatography-electrospray ionization mass spectrometry: 

Journal of Chromatography A, v. 1041, p. 171–180.

CH2M Hill, 2005, Tallapoosa River basin management plan: 

Montgomery, AL, prepared for the Alabama Clean Water 

Partnership, March 2005, accessed September 29, 2006, 

at http://www.cleanwaterpartnership.org/docs/tallapoosa/

Sections.pdf

Childress, C.J.O., Foreman, W.T., Connor, B.F., and Maloney, T.J., 1999, New reporting procedures based on longterm method detection levels and some considerations 

for interpretations of water-quality data provided by the 

U.S. Geological Survey National Water Quality Laboratory: 

U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 99-193, 19 p.

Conn, K.E., Barber, L.B., Brown, G.K., and Siegrist, R.L., 

2006, Occurrence and fate of organic contaminants during 

onsite wastewater treatment: Environmental Science and 

Technology, v. 40, p. 7358–7366. 

Copeland, C.W., ed., 1968, Geology of the Alabama Coastal 

Plain, a guidebook: Geological Survey of Alabama, 

Circular 47, 97 p.

Galloway, J.M., Meyers, M.T., and Green, W.R., 2005, Occurrence of pharmaceuticals and other organic wastewater 

constituents in selected streams in northern Arkansas, 2004: 

U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 

2005-5140, 24 p.

Geological Survey of Alabama, 2006, Geologic map of Alabama, digital version 1.0: Alabama Geological Survey Special Map 220A [adapted from Szabo, M.W., Osborne, W.E., 

Copeland, C.W., Jr., and Neathery, T.L., 1988, Geologic 

map of Alabama (1:250,000): Alabama Geological Survey 

Special Map 220], accessed November 19, 2007, at 

http://portal.gsa.state.al.us/download/Geology1.0/

Introduction.pdf 

Gill, A.C., McPherson, A.K., and Moreland, R.S., 2005, Water 

quality and simulated effects of urban land-use change in 

J.B. Converse Lake watershed, Mobile County, Alabama, 

1990–2003: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2005-5171, 124 p.

Gilliom, R.J., Barbash, J.E., Crawford, C.G., Hamilton, P.A., 

Martin, J.D., Nakagake, Naomi, Nowell, L.H., Scott, J.C., 

Stackelberg, P.E., Thelin, G.P., and Wolock, D.M., 2006, 

The quality of our Nation’s waters—Pesticides in the 

Nation’s streams and ground water, 1992–2001: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1291, 172 p.

Jobling, Susan, Nolan, Monique, Tyler, C.R., Brightly, Geoff, 

and Sumpter, J.P., 1998, Widespread sexual disruption in 

wild fish: Environmental Science and Technology, v. 32, 

p. 2498–2506. 

Keith, L.H., 1998, Environmental endocrine disruptors: Pure 

and Applied Chemistry, v. 70, no. 12, p. 2319–2326.

Kidd, R.E., 1987, Geohydrology and susceptibility of major 

aquifers to surface contamination in Alabama; Area 9: 

U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations 

Report 87-4187, 33 p.

Kidd, R.E., 1989, Geohydrology and susceptibility of major 

aquifers to surface contamination in Alabama; Area 5: 

U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations 

Report 88-4083, 28 p.

Kolpin, D.W., Furlong, E.T., Meyer, M.T., Thurman, E.M., 

Zaugg, S.D., Barber, L.B., and Buxton, H.T., 2002, Pharmaceuticals, hormones, and other organic wastewater contaminants in U.S. streams, 1999–2000—A national reconnaissance: Environmental Science and Technology, v. 36, no. 6, 

p. 1202–1211.

Kolpin, D.W., Skopec, Mary, Meyer, M.T., Furlong, E.T., and 

Zaugg, S.D., 2004, Urban contribution of pharmaceuticals 

and other organic wastewater contaminants to streams during differing flow conditions: Science of the Total Environment, v. 328, p. 119–130.

Lane, S.L., Flanagan, Sarah, and Wilde, F.D., 2003, Selection 

of equipment for water sampling (ver. 2.0): U.S. Geological Survey Techniques of Water-Resources Investigations, 

book 9, chap. A2.

Lindley, C.E., Stewart, J.T., and Sandstrom, M.W., 1996, 

Determination of low concentrations of acetochlor in water 

by automated solid-phase extraction and gas chromatography with mass selective detection: The Journal of AOAC 

International, v. 79, no. 4, p. 962–966.

Lintelmann, J., Katayama, A., Kurihara, N., Shore, L., and 

Wenzel, A., 2003, Endocrine disruptors in the environment: 

Pure and Applied Chemistry, v. 75, no. 5, p. 631–681.

Madsen, J.E., Sandstrom, M.W., and Zaugg, S.D., 2003, 

Methods of analysis by the U.S. Geological Survey 

National Water Quality Laboratory—A method supplement for the determination of fipronil and degradates 

in water by gas chromatography/mass spectrometry: 

U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 02-462, 11 p. 

[Method ID: O-1126-02]

McPherson, A.K., Gill, A.C., and Moreland, R.S., 2005, 

Assessment of water quality, benthic invertebrates, and 

periphyton in the Threemile Creek basin, Mobile, Alabama, 

1999–2003: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2004-5302, 166 p.
References Cited 23

Meyer, M.T., Lee, E.A., Ferrell, G.M., Bumgarner, J.E., and 

Varns, Jerry, 2007, Evaluation of offline tandem and online 

solid-phase extraction with liquid chromatography/electrospray ionization-mass spectrometry for analysis of antibiotics in ambient water and comparison to an independent 

method: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations 

Report 2007-5021, 28 p.

Montgomery Water Works and Sanitary Sewer Board, 

2006, 2006 Water quality report: Montgomery, AL, 6 p., 

accessed October 2, 2006, at http://www.mwwssb.com/

ccr2006/2006ccr.pdf

Multi-Resolution Land Characteristics Consortium, 2006, 

National land cover database 2001 (NLCD 2001): 

U.S. Geological Survey, accessed July 19, 2006, at

http://www.mrlc.gov/mrlc2k_nlcd.asp

National Climatic Data Center, 2006, Record of climatological observations for Milstead, Alabama, accessed 

October 2, 2006, at http://www1.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/

orders/510680885565dat.html

Sandstrom, M.W., Stroppel, M.E., Foreman, W.T., and 

Schroeder, M.P., 2001, Methods of analysis by the 

U.S. Geological Survey National Water Quality Laboratory—Determination of moderate-use pesticides and 

selected degradates in water by C-18 solid-phase extraction 

and gas chromatography/mass spectrometry: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 01-4098, 

70 p. [Method ID: O-2002-01]

Sapp, D.C., and Emplaincourt, Jacques, 1975, Physiographic 

regions of Alabama: Geological Survey of Alabama Map 

168, 1 sheet. 

Scott, J.C., Cobb, R.H., and Castleberry, R.D., 1987, Geohydrology and susceptibility of major aquifers to surface 

contamination in Alabama; Area 8: U.S. Geological Survey 

Water-Resources Investigations Report 86-4360, 65 p.

Southeast Regional Climate Center, 2006, National Climatic 

Data Center 1971–2000 monthly normals for Milstead, Alabama, accessed October 2, 2006, at http://cirrus.dnr.state.

sc.us/cgi-bin/sercc/cliMAIN.pl?5439

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2006a, EnviroMapper 

for Envirofacts: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

accessed September 28, 2006, at http://www.epa.gov/

enviro/emef

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2006b, Water discharge permits (PCS), overview: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, accessed October 2, 2006, at

http://www.epa.gov/enviro/html/pcs/index.html

U.S. Geological Survey, variously dated, National field manual 

for the collection of water-quality data: U.S. Geological 

Survey Techniques of Water-Resources Investigations, 

book 9, chaps. A1–A9, accessed October 23, 2007, at 

http://pubs.water.usgs.gov/twri9A

Wilde, F.D., Britton, L.J., Miller, C.V., and Kolpin, D.W., 

comps., 2000, Effects of animal feeding operations 

on water resources and the environment; Proceedings of the technical meeting, Fort Collins, Colorado, 

August 30–September 1, 1999: U.S. Geological Survey 

Open-File Report 00-204, 107 p.

Wilde, F.D., Radtke, D.B., Gibs, Jacob, and Iwatsubo, R.T., 

eds., 1999, Collection of water samples: U.S. Geological Survey Techniques of Water-Resources Investigations, 

book 9, chap. A4.

Wilde, F.D., Radtke, D.B., Gibs, Jacob, and Iwatsubo, R.T., 

eds., 2004, Processing of water samples (version 2.1): U.S. 

Geological Survey Techniques of Water-Resources Investigations, book 9, chap. A5, accessed October 6, 2006, at 

http://pubs.water.usgs.gov/twri9A5/

Wilkison, D.H., Armstrong, D.J., and Blevins, D.W., 2002, 

Effects of wastewater and combined sewer overflows on 

water quality in the Blue River basin, Kansas City, Missouri 

and Kansas, July 1998–October 2000: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 02-4107, 162 p.

Zaugg, S.D., Sandstrom, M.W., Smith, S.G., and Fehlberg, 

K.M., 1995, Methods of analysis by the U.S. Geological 

Survey National Water Quality Laboratory—Determination 

of pesticides in water by C-18 solid-phase extraction and 

capillary-column gas chromatography/mass spectrometry 

with selected-ion monitoring: U.S. Geological Survey 

Open-File Report 95-181, 60 p. [Method ID: O-1126-95]

Zaugg, S.D., Smith, S.G., Schroeder, M.P., Barber, L.B., and 

Burkhardt, M.R., 2002, Methods of analysis by the U.S. 

Geological Survey National Water Quality Laboratory—

Determination of wastewater compounds by polystyrenedivinylbenzene solid-phase extraction and capillary-column 

gas chromatography/mass spectrometry: U.S. Geological 

Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 01-4186, 

37 p.

Zimmerman, M.J., 2005, Occurrence of organic wastewater 

contaminants, pharmaceuticals, and personal-care products in selected water supplies, Cape Cod, Massachusetts, 

June 2004: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 

2005-1206, 20 p.


Oblinger and others—Occurrence of Pharmaceuticals, Personal-Care Products, OWCs, and Pesticides in the Lower Tallapoosa River—Scientific Investigations Report 2007–5266

Printed on recycled paper