While our analytical method was designed to include a wide range of chemicals, the scope of any analysis is inherently limited. We intentionally included both liquid and solid portions of primary sludge to measure both hydrophilic and hydrophobic chemicals. However, this prohibited the exact quantification of chemicals in either phase. We therefore are not able to use our data to back calculate per capita consumption as has been done in other wastewater studies . Additionally, we designed our sample preparation method for the relatively small volume of sample available from corresponding research on levels of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in primary sludge; we could not use solid phase extraction to preconcentrate the liquid portion of our samples, as is common in wastewater studies . This likely caused a decrease in the number of liquid phase contaminants we detected. Additionally, our unique method makes our quantitative results difficult to relate to other studies, though trends over time can still be compared. We note that our analytical methods were highly effective, and our sample collection and preparation method was simple, fast, and did not require specialized supplies. Sewage sludge is a well-mixed, concentrated source that does not require complex sampling equipment. Though we collected data over a relatively long period of time in 2020, our sampling campaign did not begin until the pandemic was underway; therefore, we cannot directly compare our results to those from previous years. The data presented in this manuscript represents only a small fraction of what was collected using our high-resolution mass spectrometry methods. We plan to conduct further investigation of chemicals in the sludge that were not easily identifiable using our databases and investigate chemical correlations with measured levels of SARS-CoV-2, as in Wang et al., 2020 who reported statistical relationships between a variety of chemical features and virus RNA levels .