USGS Home
Contact USGS
Search USGS

About USGS /  Science Topics /  Maps, Products & Publications /  Education / Publication: FAQ

Alabama
Subcontractors for the Savannah River Laboratory (SRL) collected at least 4,499 stream-sediment, 1,486 surface-water, and 6,204 ground-water samples within 53 counties from the northern two-thirds of Alabama as part of the NURE Hydrogeochemical and Stream Sediment Reconnaissance (HSSR) program. The sediment samples were collected during June - December, 1976 and March 1978 - January 1979, and water samples were collected during January - September, 1977 and December 1977 - March 1979. Sample coverage included portions of the Andalusia, Atlanta, Birmingham, Blytheville, Dothan, Gadsden, Hattiesburg, Meridian, Montgomery, Phenix City, Rome, Tupelo, and West Point 1:250,000-scale quadrangles. (A total of 768 stream-sediment, 675 surface-water, and 1,412 ground-water samples were collected within the Gadsden quadrangle.) These samples were sent to SRL for analysis of uranium and additional elements (16 in sediments and 9 in waters). SRL was able to analyze 4,489 sediments and 7,677 waters from Alabama; this includes 767 sediment and 2,083 water samples from the Gadsden quadrangle. The analytical and site location data for all Alabama samples were released in the Alabama and Georgia Data Report [GJBX-403(81)].

SRL sent 1,476 sediment samples from Alabama to an unnamed contract laboratory for "Supplemental Analyses." Supplemental analytical determinations for up to 23 elements were reported for 1,471 of these samples in the Alabama and Georgia Data Report [GJBX-403(81)]. The digital data file accompanying this report includes Supplemental Analyses for 234 Alabama sediment samples within the Gadsden quadrangle.

Tennessee
Subcontractors for the Savannah River Laboratory (SRL) collected at least 3,309 stream-sediment, 1,584 surface-water, and 3,574 ground-water samples within 58 counties from the eastern half and the northwestern corner of Tennessee as part of the NURE Hydrogeochemical and Stream Sediment Reconnaissance (HSSR) program. The samples were collected during June - December, 1976 and March - November, 1978 and included portions of the Blytheville, Chattanooga, Columbia, Corbin, Dyersburg, Gadsden, Johnson City, Knoxville, Nashville, Rome, and Winston-Salem 1:250,000-scale quadrangles. (Only 1 surface-water and 2 stream-sediment samples were collected within the Gadsden quadrangle.) These samples were sent to SRL for analysis of uranium and additional elements (16 in sediments and 9 in waters). SRL was able to analyze 2,450 sediments and 5,149 waters from Tennessee; this includes none of the sediment samples and the one water sample from the Gadsden quadrangle. The analytical and site location data for all Tennessee samples were released in the Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Tennessee, and Ohio Data Report [GJBX-105(82)].

SRL sent 248 sediment samples from Tennessee to an unnamed contract laboratory for "Supplemental Analyses." Supplemental analytical determinations for up to 23 elements were reported for 247 of these samples in the Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Tennessee, and Ohio Data Report [GJBX-105(82)]. The digital data file accompanying this report does not include Supplemental Analyses for any Tennessee sediment samples within the Gadsden quadrangle.

SRL: Gadsden and Tupelo Quadrangles
Occasionally, SRL released abbreviated reports for quadrangles under their responsibility. These reports include neutron activation analyses done at SRL. An abbreviated report was released for the Gadsden and Tupelo quadrangles [GJBX-213(81)]. Data tables with analyses are included within the microfiche accompanying this report. Data found in this report appear to be the same data as that found in the state digital data-file. No separate digital data file accompanies this report.

ORGDP: Chattanooga, Columbia, Gadsden, and Rome Quadrangles
SRL sent several Tennessee sediment samples to the Oak Ridge Gaseous Diffusion Plant (ORGDP) for analysis of uranium and 31 additional elements. ORGDP released the analytical data for 251 samples in the Chattanooga, Columbia, Gadsden, and Rome Quadrangles GJBX-74(82) Data Report. This report includes data for 2 sediment samples from the Gadsden quadrangle. The site coding information for this data set was summarized in the GJBX-51(82) report.

Gold Analyses
Data for gold analyses of sediments by SRL neutron activation were released in the GJBX-135(82) summary report. The introduction of that report states:

"This report contains previously unreported neutron-activation analyses of gold in sediment samples determined at SRL. These data were not included in the standard SRL NURE data reports because the gold spectrum was not measured in the original analytical procedure and the report format was designed without the gold analyses being included. Gold analyses became available as the analytical procedure was refined, but the report format was not modified to incorporate these data."

Only those sediment samples that had detectable concentrations of gold by neutron activation analysis were given in the GJBX-135(82) report. Sediment samples with concentrations below detection limits were not reported and can only be ascertained by identifying which samples were actually analyzed by neutron activation at SRL.

Summary Tables
Because of the various laboratories and analytical methods used, some SRL samples may have been analyzed once, twice, or not at all. The following table summarizes the analysis of Gadsden quadrangle samples.

The following is a list of all sample types collected and reported for NURE studies in the Gadsden quadrangle.

These Gadsden quadrangle samples were analyzed by one or more of the following methods:

Sediment Samples

• SR1: Savannah River Neutron Activation Analysis - Neutron Counting of sediments for U.
• SR2: Savannah River Neutron Activation Analysis of sediments for Al, Ce, Dy, Eu, Fe, Hf, La, Lu, Mn, Na, Sc, Sm, Th, Ti, V, and Yb. (Note: Au values were reported later for this method.)
• SR3-AA: Savannah River (Supplemental Analysis by contract Laboratory) Atomic Absorption Spectroscopy Analysis of sediments for Ag, Ba, Be, Co, Cr, Cu, Mg, Mo, Ni, Pb, Sn, Sr, Y, and Zn.
• SR3-CA: Savannah River (Supplemental Analysis by contract Laboratory) Colorimetric Analysis of sediments for Nb, P, and W.
• SR3-FE: Savannah River (Supplemental Analysis by contract Laboratory) Flame Emission Analysis of sediments for K and Li.
• SR3-XU: Savannah River (Supplemental Analysis by contract Laboratory) Analysis of sediments for hot acid extractable U. (Exact method undetermined)
• SR3-XX: Savannah River (Supplemental Analysis by contract Laboratory) Analysis of sediments for As, Se, and Ca. (Exact method undetermined)
• OR2: Oak Ridge Neutron Activation Analysis of sediments for U.
• OR7: Oak Ridge Emission Spectrochemical Analysis of sediments for Ag, Al, B, Ba, Be, Ca, Ce, Co, Cr, Cu, Fe, Hf, K, La, Li, Mg, Mn, Mo, Na, Nb, Ni, P, Pb, Sc, Sr, Th, Ti, V, Y, Zn, and Zr.

Water Samples

• SR4: Savannah River Neutron Activation Analysis - Neutron Counting of waters for U.
• SR5: Savannah River Neutron Activation Analysis of waters for Al, Br, Cl, Dy, F, Mn, Na, and V. (Note: Mg may also be reported by this method.)

Discussion of the Reformatting Process for Gadsden Quadrangle

Sediment Records
The Gadsden quadrangle sediment data consist of records from the Alabama portion of the Alabama and Georgia [GJBX-403(81)] Data Report combined with Supplemental Analyses from the Alabama and Georgia [GJBX-403(81)] Data Report and then combined with records from the ORGDP Chattanooga, Columbia, Gadsden, and Rome Quadrangles GJBX-74(82) Data Report. In addition, reformatted Gadsden quadrangle records from the Tennessee portion of the Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Tennessee, and Ohio [GJBX-105(82)] Data Report were added to this file. Site descriptive information and coordinates were compared for all corresponding records. The following problems were found and addressed during the comparison and reformatting stages for the Gadsden Quadrangle sediment data:

1. During reformatting, contamination codes for "residential" and "recreation" were found to be missing from each State's CONTAMC field. The presence of one of these two codes was indicated only by a "." (period). The missing codes were assigned a value of "unknown" in the CONTAMC field within the final water data file.
2. The original ORGDP file for the Chattanooga, Columbia, Gadsden, and Rome quadrangles did not include all of the information about the character of the sample location. This missing information includes observations taken at each site on the stream width, depth, and flow, water color, surrounding vegetation, local relief, weather, and possible contaminants. In addition, the longitude coordinate reported in the ORGDP file only had 3 decimal places instead of the 4 decimal places found in the corresponding records from SRL State files. When combining corresponding SRL and ORGDP records, all of the site descriptive data and the longitude values to 4 decimal places from the SRL data files were preserved in the final database.
3. An analysis of latitude-longitude site coordinates identified several stream-sediment samples that were missing coordinates, did not plot within expected state, county, or map boundaries, or had differing coordinates in corresponding records. To correct or confirm sample coordinates, the original field collection maps for De Kalb, Jackson, Limestone, Marshall, and Winston Counties, Alabama were obtained and re-digitized. The newly re-digitized coordinates were added to the database and the coordinates from the original file(s) were recorded in the COORDPRB comment field. When the newly re-digitized coordinates were not significantly different, that confirmation of the site location was also noted in the COORDPRB comment field.
4. The latitude and longitude coordinates for 2 stream-sediment samples collected within Cullman County, Alabama were not found in the data during the reformatting process. The records for these 2 samples cannot be retrieved on a geographical basis.
5. Gold concentrations from the GJBX-135(82) report were added to the appropriate sediment records. A value of -0.01 (<0.01 ppm Au) was added to all other sediment samples determined to have been analyzed by SRL neutron activation. This value was chosen because 0.01 is the lowest reported gold concentration in the entire report.

Water Records
The Gadsden quadrangle water data consist of reformatted records from the Alabama portion of the Alabama and Georgia [GJBX-403(81)] plus reformatted records from the Tennessee portion of the Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Tennessee, and Ohio [GJBX-105(82)] Data Report. The following problems were found and addressed during the comparison and reformatting stages for the Gadsden quadrangle water data:

1. The original NURE format for surface-water files did not include much information about the character of the sample location. This missing information includes observations taken at each site on the stream width, depth, and flow, water color, surrounding vegetation, local relief, weather, and possible contaminants. This information is given in records for stream-sediment samples that were collected at the same locations. The available site descriptive information for stream-water sites were compared with the corresponding stream-sediment site records. The missing site descriptive data were then added to stream-water records from the corresponding stream-sediment sample records. Sources of data and any problems found are described in the REFORMAT comment field.
2. One ground-water sample record was found with an erroneous SRLID value of ALZZ501R. No counties in Alabama have been identified with a code of ALZZ. Although the record had some site descriptive data, there were no analyses reported. Since this record does not have latitude or longitude coordinates, it cannot be retrieved on a geographical basis.
3. Unlikely sample collection dates were found for four samples. These dates were removed from the SAMPDAT field. For each record, the original SAMPDAT value and the most likely correct value was added as a comment to the REFORMAT field.
4. An analysis of latitude-longitude site coordinates identified several stream-water samples that were missing coordinates, did not plot within expected state, county, or map boundaries, or had differing coordinates in corresponding records. To correct or confirm sample coordinates, the original field collection maps for De Kalb, Jackson, Limestone, Marshall, and Winston Counties, Alabama were obtained and re-digitized. The newly re-digitized coordinates were added to the database and the coordinates from the original file(s) were recorded in the COORDPRB comment field. When the newly re-digitized coordinates were not significantly different, that confirmation of the site location was also noted in the COORDPRB comment field.
5. An analysis of latitude-longitude site coordinates identified several ground-water samples that were missing coordinates, did not plot within expected state, county, or map boundaries, or had differing coordinates in corresponding records. To correct or confirm sample coordinates, the original field collection maps for Blount, Jackson, Limestone, and Winston Counties, Alabama were obtained and re-digitized. The newly re-digitized coordinates were added to the database and the coordinates from the original file(s) were recorded in the COORDPRB comment field. When the newly re-digitized coordinates were not significantly different, that confirmation of the site location was also noted in the COORDPRB comment field.
6. One ground-water sample record was found with an erroneous SRLID value of ALZZ501R. No counties in Alabama have been identified with a code of ALZZ. Although the record had some site descriptive data, there were no analyses reported. Since this record does not have latitude or longitude coordinates, it cannot be retrieved on a geographical basis.
7. The latitude and longitude coordinates for 2 stream-water samples collected within Cullman County, Alabama were not found in the data during the reformatting process. The records for these 2 samples cannot be retrieved on a geographical basis.

Download The Data

The NURE HSSR data are now available online in two databases: The sediment database (also includes data for soils and some rocks) at http://tin.er.usgs.gov/nure/sediment/ and the water database at http://tin.er.usgs.gov/nure/water/. From these two web sites, NURE HSSR data can be selected, examined, summarized, and downloaded by political boundaries (State and County), by quadrangle (1:250,000-scale, 1:100,000-scale, and 1:63,360-scale for Alaska or 1:24,000-scale for the Lower 48 States), and by hydrologic unit (drainage region, subregion, river basin, or sub-basin). Selected data can be downloaded as a dBase file, a shapefile, an HTML table, or ASCII text (tab- or comma-delimited).

Gadsden Quadrangle Sediment Data - 768 records
Gadsden Quadrangle Water Data - 2,085 records

Notes for Data Users

In the eastern United States, SRL collected samples primarily by county. Often, not all counties within a quadrangle were completely sampled. Sample coverage in the Gadsden quadrangle is complete and includes samples from Blount, Colbert, Cullman, De Kalb, Etowah, Franklin, Jackson, Lauderdale, Lawrence, Limestone, Madison, Marion, Marshall, Morgan, and Winston Counties in Alabama; and Franklin County in Tennessee. The laboratory and analytical methods used also may vary by county such that adjacent counties often have very different analytical coverages.

One sediment and four water samples within the Gadsden quadrangle were not analyzed by any of the various laboratories. The following table summarizes the locations of those unanalyzed samples.

Other NURE Geochemical Data for the Gadsden Quadrangle

Geology and Mineral Resources Study
A report on the geology and mineral resources of the Birmingham, Gadsden, and Montgomery quadrangles was prepared for the Savannah River Laboratory (GJBX-78(79)). No geochemical data accompany this report.

Gadsden Quadrangle NURE Bibliography

• Bennett, C.B., 1981, Gadsden and Tupelo 1° x 2° NTMS areas, Alabama (abbreviated): E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., Savannah River Laboratory, Aiken, S.C., SRL Internal Doc. DPST-81-146-1, U.S. Department of Energy, Grand Junction, Colo., GJBX-213(81), 17 p.
• Copeland, C.W., and Beg, M.A., 1979, Geology of the Birmingham, Gadsden, and Montgomery 1° x 2° NTMS quadrangles, Alabama: E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., Savannah River Laboratory, Aiken, S.C., SRL Internal Doc. DP-1530, U.S. Department of Energy, Grand Junction, Colo., GJBX-78(79), 86 p.
• Fay, W.M., and Cook, J.R., 1982, Gold analyses by neutron activation from SRL NURE samples: E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., Savannah River Laboratory, Aiken, S.C., SRL Internal Doc. DPST-81-141-38, U.S. Department of Energy, Grand Junction, Colo., GJBX-135(82), 45 p.
• Fay, W.M., Sargent, K.A., and Cook, J.R., 1981, Data report: Alabama and Georgia: E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., Savannah River Laboratory, Aiken, S.C., SRL Internal Doc. DPST-81-146-21, U.S. Department of Energy, Grand Junction, Colo., GJBX-403(82), 34 p.
• Fay, W.M., Sargent, K.A., and Cook, J.R., 1982, Data report: Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Tennessee, and Ohio: E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., Savannah River Laboratory, Aiken, S.C., SRL Internal Doc. DPST-81-146-25, U.S. Department of Energy, Grand Junction, Colo., GJBX-105(82), 41 p.
• Uranium Resource Evaluation Project, 1982, Hydrogeochemical and stream sediment reconnaissance basic data for Chattanooga, Columbia, Gadsden, and Rome quadrangles, Alabama; Tennessee; Georgia; North Carolina: Union Carbide Corporation, Nuclear Division, Oak Ridge Gaseous Diffusion Plant, Oak Ridge, Tenn., K/UR-429, U.S. Department of Energy, Grand Junction, Colo., GJBX-74(82), 26 p.
• Uranium Resource Evaluation Project, 1982, Supplement to hydrogeochemical and stream sediment reconnaissance basic data reports K/UR-405 and K/UR-408 through K/UR-443 [GJBX-52(82) through GJBX-88(82)]: Union Carbide Corporation, Nuclear Division, Oak Ridge Gaseous Diffusion Plant, Oak Ridge, Tenn., K/UR-412, U.S. Department of Energy, Grand Junction, Colo., GJBX-51(82), 25 p.

Links Within Open-File Report 97-492

Back to Alabama NURE data
Back to Tennessee NURE data
Frequently Asked Questions Concerning NURE Data
Home Page: USGS National Geochemical Database - NURE HSSR data

Page written by Bryan G. Moravec and Steven M. Smith.
Contact: Steven M. Smith (smsmith@usgs.gov)
Version 1.30: September 11, 2001
Version 1.41: February 23, 2006

AccessibilityFOIAPrivacyPolicies and Notices
U.S. Department of the Interior | U.S. Geological Survey URL: https://pubsdata.usgs.gov/pubs/of/1997/492/quad/q_gadsdn.htm Questions or Assistance: USGS Web Contact Page Last Modified: Wed Dec 7 16:26 EST 2016