Camp Maxey - Archives Search Report - Findings - USA ProjectHost

us Army corps
of Engineers
HUNTSVILLE DIVISION
~
Defense Environmental Restoration Program
for
Formerly Used Defense Sites
Ordnance and Explosive Waste
Chemical Warfare Materials
ARCHIVES SEARCH REPORT
FINDINGS
CAMP MAXEY
Paris, Texas
Site Number - K06TX030500
JUNE 1994
Prepared by
US ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
ST. LOUIS DISTRICT

1.0 Introduction
1.1 Authority
1.2 Subject
1.3 Purpose
1.4 Scope
2.0 Previous Site Investigations
3.0 Site and Site Area DescriDtion
3.1 Location
3.2 Pastuses
3.3 Current Uses
3.4 Demographics of the Area
4.0 phvsical Characteristics of the Sites
4.1 GeologyIPhysiography
4.2 Soils
4.3 Hydrology
4.4 Weather
4.5 Ecology
5.0 Real Estate
5.1 Present Ownership
5.2 Confmed DOD Ownership
5.3 Historically Significant Past Ownership
ORDNANCE AND EXPLOSIVE WASTE
CHEMICAL WARFARE MATERIALS
ARCHIVES SEARCH REPORT
for the former
CAMPMAXEY
Paris, Texas
Site Number - K06TX030500
TABLE OF C 0"TS
i
1-1
1-2
1-2
1-2
2-1
3-1
3-1
3-1
3-1
4-1
4- 1
4-2
4-3
4-5
5-1
5-1
5-1

6.0 OEWlCWM Site Analvsis
6.1 Historical Summary of OEWICWM Activities
6.2 Records Review
6.3 Interpretation of Aerial Photography
6.4 Interviews
6.5 Site Inspection
7.0 Evaluation of Ordnance Contamination
8.0 Conclusions and Recommendations
1. Vicinity Map
2. Range Map
3. Found Ordnance Locations
MAPSIDRAWINGS
ii
6- 1
6-3
6-6
6-7
6-7
7- 1
8-1
Figure 3.1
Figure 3.2
Figure 7.1

A. REFERENCES
B. ACRONYMS
ORDNANCE AND EXPLOSIVE WASTE
CFiEMICAL, WARFARE MATERIALS
ARCHIVES SEARCHREFQRT
for the former
CAMPMAXEY
Paris, Texas
Site Number - K06TX030500
APPENDICES
C. REPORTS/STUDIES/LE’ITERS/MEMOR4NDUMS
D. HISTORICAL PHOTOGRAPHS
E. INTERVIEWS
F. NEWSPAPERS/JOURNALS
G. PRESENT SITE PHOTOGRAPHS
H. HISTORICAL MAPS/DRAWINGS
I. RISK ASSESSMENT CODE PROCEDURE FORMS
J. REPORT DISTRIBUTION LIST
K. ARCHNEADDRESSES
iii

a
1.0 Introduction
1.1 Authority
In 1980, Congress enacted the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and
Liability Act (CERCLA) 42 USC 9601 et seq. Ordnance and explosive wastes are included
in the CERCLA definition of pollutants and contaminants that require a remedial response.
In 1983, the Environmental Restoration Defense Account (ERDA) was established by Public
Law 98-212. This Congressionally-drd fund was to be used for environmental
restoration at Department of Defense @OD) active installations and formerly used
properties. The DOD designated the Army as the sole manager for environmental restoration
at closed installations and formerly used properties. The Secretary of the Army assigned this
mission to the Corps of Engineers (USACE) in 1984.
The 1986 Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA) amended certain aspects
of CERCLA, some of which directly related to OEW contamination. Chapter 160 of the
SARA established the Defense Environmental Restoration Program (DERP). One of the
goals specified for the DERP is "Correction of environmental damage (such as detection and
disposal of unexploded ordnance) which creates an imminent and substantial endangerment to
the public health or welfare or to the environment".
The DERP requires that a CERCLA response action be undertaken whenever such "imminent
and substantial endangerment" is found at:
A. A faciity or site that is owned by, leased to, or othenvise possessed by
the United States and under the jurisdiction of the Secretary of Defense.
B. A facility or site that was under the jurisdiction of the Secretary of
Defense and owned by, leased to, or otherwise possessed by the United States
at the time of actions leading to contamination.
C. A vessel owned or operated by the Department of Defense.
The National Contingency Plan (NCP) was established by the Clean Water Act of 1972. The
NCP has been revised and broadened several times since then. Its purpose is to provide the
organizational structure and procedures for remedid actions to be taken in response to the
presence of hazardous substances, pollutants, and contaminants at a site. Section 105 of the
1980 CERCLA states that the NCP shall apply to all response actions taken as a result of
CERCLA requirements.
The March 1990 National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan given in
40 CFR part 300 is the latest version of the NCP. Paragraph 300.120 states that "DOD will
be the removal response authority with respect to incidents involving DOD military weapons
and munitions under the jurisdiction, custody, and control of DOD."
1-1

On April 5, 1990, U.S. Army Engineer Division, Huntsville (USAEDH) was designated as
the USACE Mandatory Center of Expertise (MCX) and Design Center for Ordnance and
Explosive Waste (OEW). As the MCX and Design Center for OEW, USAEDH is
responsible for the design and successful implementation of all Department of the Army
OEW remediiations required by CERCLA. USAEDH will also design and implement OEW
remediation programs for other branches of the Department of Defense when requested. In
cooperation with the Huntsville Division, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers St. Louis
District has been assigned the task of preparing Archives Search Reports for those Formerly
Used Defense Sites (FUDS) suspected of chemical warfare materials (CWM) contamination.
1.2 Subiect
Camp Maxey, located about ten (10) miles north of Paris in Lamar County, Texas was an
Infantry Advanced Training Center. The post was activated on July 15, 1942, with a troop
capacity of 45,000 men.
1.3 Purpose
This Archives Search Report (ASR) compiles information obtained through historical
research at various archives and records holding facilities, interviews with persons associated
with the site or its operations, and personal visits to the site. All efforts were directed
towards determining possible use or disposal of chemical warfare materials on the site.
Particular emphasis was placed on establishing the type (agent), munitions or container,
quantities and area of disposal. Information obtained during this process was used in
developing recommendations for further actions at the site.
1.4 Scow
The entire area of the former Camp Maxey site, consisting of approximately 39,000 acres,
was evaluated for OEw/cwM contamination. It is designated as DERPS-FUDS Site No.
K061x030500.
1-2

a
2.0 Previous Site Investieations
The Tulsa District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers informed us that no Findings and
Determination has been completed for the subject site pursuant to the Defense Environmental
Restoration Program.
2-1

I.
3.1 Location
The former Camp Maxey site is located in northeast Texas, approximately 10 miles north of
Paris, Lamar County, along US highway 271 (Figure 3.1).
The site was established by the U.S. Government War Department in 1941 as a Division
training center. A chemical company is listed among the installations tenant units (Figure
3.2).
3.3 Current Uses
Major portions of the former site are currently occupied by the Pat Mayse Lake Project, a
Corps of Engineers flood control and recreation area (approximately 20,000 acres), and a
Texas National Guard Wing site (6424 acres). Other portions of the site have been
developed into housing subdivisions (Figure 3.2).
3.4 DemoEraDhics of the Area
3.4.1 Center of Activity
The former Camp Maxey is located near the city of Powderly, Lamar County, Texas. This
community has very few centers of activities. The nearby Pat Mayse State Park is the main
recreational facility in the area.
3.4.2 Population Density
City: Powderly county: Lamar
Area: 1 sq. mi. Area: 919sq. mi.
POP: 3,153 POP: 43,949
PD: 3,153 persons per sq. mi. PD: 47 persons per sq. mi.
Population and area are based on the U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census,
1990 statistics, and telephone interviews.
3.4.3 Types of Businesses
A review of both telephone interviews and County Business Patterns (1990) assisted in
developing a business profile. The city of Powderly is not diverse.

O K L A
I
I - '
FIGURE 3.1
0
or---- m
.. .a1
CAMP MAXEY
POWDERLY, TEXAS
LAMAR COUNTY
DERP-FUDS' K06TX030500
VICINITY MAP

f
d
Nor ro XALE
I
LECEWI I
KEY TO SYMBOLS:
3 FORMER INSTALLATION W A R Y
-
Fz
PAT MAYK LAKE (PRESENT DAY LOCATION)
- RANGES
I HIGHWAY I97 (PRESENT DAY LOCATION)
FIGURE 3.2
CAMP MAXEY
POWDERLY, TEXAS
LAMAR COUNTY
DERP-FUDS' K06TX030500
RANGE MAP
I
I

m -
3.4.4 Types of Industry
Powderly is not an economically diverse community.
3.4.5 Types of Housing
Housing in Powderly is composed of both single and multi-family homes.
3.4.6 New Development in the Area
No new development is occurring in the Powderly area.
3.4.7 Typical Cross Section of the Area
The percent of those under the age of 18 is 6.1 %, over 65 years is 12.7%. The median age
is 35. Approximately 92.6% of the population is White, 5.2% Black, 1.2% American Indian
or Eskimo, and .09% Asian or Pacific Islander. There are approximately 1,248 housing
units with a median value of $43,700. The work force, based on the number of
establishments of Lamar County, is broken down into the following: manufacturing, 12%;
non-manufacturing, 82.3%; agriculture, 1.5%; and other non-agricultural, 4.2%.
3-2

a
p
4.1 GeologvlPhvsiomauhy
Camp Maxey is located in the West Gulf Coastal Plain section of the Coastal Plain province.
The West Gulf Coastal Plain section displays two contrasting types of topography, an inner
zone of erosional cuestas, and an outer zone of coastwise, terraced, deltaic plain. The inner
part of the Coastal Plain owes its major features to the fact that erosion on Tertiary and
Cretaceous formations has developed a Series of lowlands on the weak rocks and west facing
scarps or cuestas.
During most of the Paleozoic era, a sedimentary basin existed throughout much of central
and north-central Texas. Sediments were deposited in this basin until late Pennsylvanian time
when the Llano Uplift and the Ouachita Fold Belt caused a regional tilting to the west and
faulting in the immediate uplift area. The Pennsylvanian-Cretaceous unconfonniv shows a
tremendous period of emergence and erosion.
During the Triassic and Jurassic periods of the early Mesozoic era, withdrawal of the seas
from the north-central Texas area along with subsidence in the Gulf Coast embayment led to
a reversal of drainage direction. This resulted in an extensive truncation of the
Pennsylvanian strata in the Fort Worth basin and surrounding area. By the close of Jurassic
time, Paleozoic rocks had been reduced to an almost flat-featureless plain, or peneplain, upon
which marine sediments were deposited along an oscillating shorelie during the Cretaceous
period.
The repeated transgression and regression of the sea resulted in an alternating sequence of
marine and continental deposits of Tertiary and Quarternary age. Throughout Tertiary time,
except for minor periods of subsidence, the land surface was eroded and modified by
streams. During Quartemary time, the streams deposited alluviaI sediments. The older
sediments are represented by tenace deposits above the alluviated valleys of present streams
(Nordstrom, 1982).
4.2 Soils
The Camp Maxey site is a broad area with a mix match of soil types. The majority of the
area is the land surrounding Pat Mayse Lake. A great portion of this land is tree covered.
In these tree covered areas, the soil consists of silt sand and clay. The surface layer is
generally a brown or grayish-brown fine dty clayey sand about 25 cm deep. In the lower
part of the surface layer, the color may change to slightly yellow or red. In the subsoil and
stratum, the soil is a red or yellowish-red, brown or grayish-brown, silty sandy clay or clay
with mottles ranging in color from light gray to red to olive to brown. This soil is separated
into layers by the coloring of the mottles. In some areas where mottles are not present, the
soil is streaked vertically with yellow and red uncoated sand grains.
4- I

In these forest areas the slope of the surface soil ranges from 0 to 20 %. The areas of lower
slope have similar characteristics; slow to moderate permeability, slow runoff, and medium
water capacity. The afeas of larger slope have a medium to rapid runoff and slow
permeability causing a severe water erosion hazard. The corrosivity of the soil ranges from
moderate to high for uncoated steel and from moderate to high for concrete.
Two large areas of a different soil type are also included in this site. In the northwestern
comer there is Round Prairie. The soil here has a simple profile; very dark gray silt and
clay to a depth of 100 cm then grayish-brown clay with mottles that are light olive brown
and olive yellow in color. The other area is in the southeastern comer of the site, near
Lamar Iake. The soil here is a little more complex. The surface soil is brown fine silty
clayey sand in the upper part (0-15 cm) and light yellowish-brown, fine silty clayey sand in
the lower part. In the subsoil the soil becomes more clayey and mottled. The mottle colors
range from strong brown to red to yellow to gray. The characteristics of these soils are
similar also. Runoff is slow, water capacity is medium, and permeability is slow. There is
only a slight water erosion hazard (Ressel, 1979).
4.3 Hydroloq
Camp Maxey is located in Lamar County and is drained by numerous small creeks and
primarily by the Sanders Creek. The entire Sanders Creek valley within the former Camp
Maxie area is now the site of Pat Mayse Lake with the dam site at approximately the
northwest boundary of the former Camp. Pat Mayse Lake is a Corps of Engineers project.
About 3 miles downstream of the dam, Sanders Creek enters the Red River. The normal
lake pool elevation is 451 feet NGVD. A United States Geological Stream Gage is located
about one mile downstream of the dam site (idW335400). The drainage area for this gage
is 175.0 square miles. The gage has been recording continuously since 1968. The maximum
discharge observed for this gaging station between 1968 and 1986 was 1100 cfs in 1982.
The maximum stage reading for the same period was 22.87 feet in 1971. The zero datum
for the gage is 440.00 NGVD.
4.3.1 Ground Water
The Trinity Group of Cretaceous age is the largest and most prolific aquifer in the study
area. The aquifer consists of the Antlers, Paluxy, and Twin Mountains Formations. The
Trinity Group aquifer ranges in thickness from about 30 m to 366 m near the downdip limit
of fresh to slightly d ie water. The transmissibility is highly variable with average values
ranging from 45,900 (Yd)/m in the Paluxy and in the Antlers near Sherman to over 124,000
(l/d)/m in most downdip areas in the Twin Mountains and in the Antlers near Gainesville. A
wide range of permeabilities is also encountered, but an overall average is 2,040 (l/d)/m*.
Artesian storage coefficients range from O.OOO1 to 0.00025 and specific yields range from 15
to 25 percent in the outcrop.
4-2
a

Another aquifer, the Woodbine Group, is divided into three water-bearing parts-upper,
middle, and lower-which vary considerably in quality and productivity. The upper Woodbine
is of extremely p r quality with excessive iron concentrations. The middle Woodbine
generally contains good quality water; however, high iron concentrations occur in some
areas. The lower Woodbine is the most productive and contains good quality water. High
yields are characteristic in this part from the outcrop downdip to the slightly saline limit
which is approximately 610 m below land surface. Total thickness of the Woodbine ranges
from 70 m near the outcrop to 213 m near the downdip limit. The artesian coefficient of
storage is 0.00015 where the Woodbine is under artesian conditions, and the specific yield is
about 15%. Transmissibility values in downdip areas average 58,400 O/d)/m and
permeability values average 1790 (Vd)/m* (Nordstrom, 1982).
4.4 Weather
The site is on the edge of the Gulf Coastal Plain which results in a humid subtropical
climate, predominantly continental in winter and marine in summer. Winters are mild, and
summers are hot. Tropical maritime air masses flow through the area in late spring,
summer, and early fall, and polar air masses frequent the area in winter. Rainfall is fairly
well distributed through the year, and the total is sufficient for the needs of most crops.
From April through September, rain generally falls during thunderstorms, and fairly large
amounts fall in a short time. In winter, precipitation may fall as rain, freezing rain, sleet, or
snow, but thunderstorms and heavy rains may occur in any month. About 50 thunderstorms
occur each year with a few of these thunderstorms accompanied by destructive wind,hail, or
high intensity rain.
prevailing winds are southerly during all months of the year. In January and February,
northerly winds occur from cold fronts moving through the area.
Relative humidity is close to 83 percent during the early hours of the day on the average and
drops to around 55 percent late in the afternoon.
In Paris, the sun shines for about 75 percent of the daylight hours in summer.
Climatological data for the area are summarized in TABLE 4-1. Data were collected at the
National Weather Service meteorological stations at Paris and Dallas-Ft. Worth, Texas. The
site is located approximately 5 miles north of Paris.
4-3

' Local Climatological Data for Paris, Texas
CLIMATOLOGICAL DATA FOR
PARK & DALLAS-m. WORTH,TEXAS
TABLE 41
' Local Climatological Data for Dallas-Ft. Worth, Texas
4-4

4.5-
The following Federally recognized species are known to occur in Lamar County, Texas:
Bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucoceuhalus), endangered; whooping crane (Grus americana),
endangered; interior least tern (Sterna antillarum), endangered; white-faced ibis (Pleeadis
m, category 2; Ouachita rock-pocketbook (Arkansia wheeleri), endangered; Arkansas
meadow-rue (Thalictrum arkansanum), category 2; paddlefish (Polvodon spathula), category
2; and Texas homed lizard (P hrvnosoma cornutum), category 2.
The Texas Parh and Wildlife Department recognizes the following species as either
threatened or endangered in Lamar County: Bald eagle, interior least tem, whooping crane,
red-cockaded woodpecker (Picoides borealis), paddlefish, American swallow-tailed kite
( E m forficatus), white-faced ibis, wood stork (Mycteria americana), Arctic peregrine
falcon (Falco pereerinus tundrius), Texas homed lizard, timber rattlesnake (Crotalus
homdus), alligator snapping turtle (Macroclemvs temrninckii), and blue sucker (-s
eloncatus).
No additional information on the occurrence of rare or endangered species or M tUd
communities is known at this time. This does not mean that other state or federally-listed
species may not be present within the areas of interest. An on site inspection by appropriate
state and federal personnel may be necessary to verify the presence, absence or location of
listed species, or natural communities if remedii action is recommended as part of the final
ASR.
4-5

m
5.0 RealEstate
Established in 1941 by the War Department, Camp Maxey consisted of more than 80,000
acres of land. When declared excess on 20 May 1947, 14,957.29 was disposed of by the
War Assets Administration and 9,989.25 acres was conveyed to the State. of Texas for use by
the Texas National Guard on 1 Sept 1949. War Assets sold 988 acres of the cantonment
area to DeKalb Hybrid Seed Company. All sales are said to contain an adequate recapture
clause.
Subsequent to the original transfers of land, the Corps purchased lands and has constructed
Pat Mayse Lake which now occupies approximately 20,000 acres of the former installation.
5 -R
Based on historical records reviewed in the preparation of this ASR, portions of the site was
purchased by DOD beginning in 1941, and utilized through 1947.
5 -E wnershi
There is nothing in the records to indicate that there were any historically significant past
ownerships with respect to possible OEW or CWM contamhation. The Texas National
Guard, which currently owns a majority of the eastern portion of the former installation uses
only small caliber ammunition and subcaliber munitions in its training.
5-1

6.0 OEWlCWM Site Analvsis
1.
6.1 Historical Summary of OEW/CWM Activities
Originally grazing and farming land, Camp Maxey, located about ten miles north of Paris,
Texas, in Lamar County was activated on 15 July 1942. Historical documents indicate that
approximately 40,000 acres were acquired by the War Department for the camp. Historical
maps of the installation however, indicates that the site was in excess of 80,OOO acres. Camp
Maxey was established as an infantry training camp during World War 11 and had a troop
capacity of approximately 45,000 men. The first division to be trained at the camp, the
103rd Infantry Division, was organized and activated on 15 September 1942. The 102nd and
99th Divisions followed. After October 1944 Camp Maxey was designated the Infantry
Advand Replacement Training Center, which consisted of 15 weeks of basic training for
replacement troops to existing divisions. Troops trained at Camp Maxey fought in both the
European and Pacific theaters of operation (Steely 1992).
An m y of weapon systems were fired at Camp Maxey, including pistols, carbines, rifles,
tommy guns, automatic rifles, machine guns, mortars, bazookas, anti-tank guns, and artillery
pieces (105mm and 155mm howitzers). Training also included laying land mines and setting
"booby traps" (Washington Infantry Journal Press 1947).
In addition to the Army Ground Forces trained at Camp Maxey, Army Service Forces and
Army Air Forces had a part in the development of camp operations and training. Between
1942 and 1945, Camp Maxey hosted the 9th Special Troops Headquarters, 3rd and 4th Army
Special Troop Units, Army Service Forces Replacement Training Center (for ROTC students
from a five-state area), 10th Corps Headquarters, I882nd (local administration for the Eighth
Service Command) Regional Hospital and Reconditioning Annex, and a regional troop
separation point near the war's end.
"Non-divisional units" also trained at Camp Maxey, including artillery, tanks, tank
destroyers, cavalry, ordnance, quartermaster, maintenance, signal corps, engineers, medical
and military police. A nondivisional gas school was established at Camp Maxey to train
these units, as well as chemical d are units (CWS 1943), (Brophy 1959).
Camp Maxey included a small airstrip, which only accommodated light aircraft for artillery
observms. However, Cox Field, which was a military air base east of Paris, served as the
major air auxiliary base for Camp Maxey. The Army Air Corps at Cox Field supported
artillery training at Camp Maxey by providing associated reconnaissance aircraft.
As with most basic training camps, infantry troops underwent chemical training at Camp
Maxey. A historical map depicts the locations of three gas chambers at Camp Maxey.
Chemical warfare units also received training at Camp Maxey. For example, the 35th
Chemical Decontamination Company, which provided realism in its training through the use
of small quantities of mustard, conducted decontamination exercises at Camp Maxq.
According to historical documentation, known contaminated areas were cleared of grass and
6- 1

urned, then sprayed with chloride of lime. While one historical document refers to a
formerly contaminated area situated somewhere along Goolesby Road, specific grounds of
other formerly contaminated areas were unable to be located through the lack of additional
historical documentation (CWS 1943b and 1943~).
In addition to decontamination units, chemical depot and chemical maintenance companies
established and operated chemical warfare depots and maintenance facilities in the field (HQ,
Third Army 1943). Camp Maxey received its shipments of chemical warfare materials
primarily from the San Antonio Chemical Warfare Depot.
The varied terrain at Camp Maxey provided facilities for working out problems of infantry
training to meet modern baffle conditions As indicated on a historical map and in historical
documentation, live firing ranges were established for the pistol, rifle, hand grenade, land
mines, 3 inch (APHE, MK29), 20mm projectile, 40mm projectile, 60mm mortar, 81mm
mortar, 2.36 inch rocket, and artillery (105mm and 155mm) (Albert Love Enterprises nd.).
Included in training maneuvers at Camp k e y were an obstacle course, infiltration course,
a "German Village'' for "house-to-house fighting" (Webb 1952).
One of Camp Maxey's most important, but least publicized components from October 1943
through February 1946 was its Prisoner of War camp. The POW stockade at Camp Maxey
became the largest in the United States.
When the war came to a close, the camp had served its purpose. It was deactivated on 1
October 1945. Although the City of Paris lobbied the Army for permanent status of the
camp, Camp Maxey was declared surplus on 20 May 1947. The camp sat empty, but
evidently intact, for several years after the war. During 1948 and 1949 Certificates of
decontamination, which included restrictions on land for any purpose and for surface use
only, were issued by the US. Army Corps of Engineers (Office of the Chief of Engineers
1949). On 1 September 1949, approximately 10,OOO acres were conveyed to the State of
Texas for use by the Texas National Guard, which is now limited to small arms firing @A
1951) (Office of the Chief of Engineers 1959). In 1967, approximately 6,000 acres of the
land previously provided to the Texas National Guard were reconveyed, through exchange of
other federal lands or purchase, back to the federal government, for use as a reservoir by the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
During the 1950s and 1960s the City of Paris, its citizens, businessmen, and state agencies
obtained the remaining acreage of the former Camp Maxey for commercial, agricultural,
residential, and educational uses. The physical remainders of the facility are many, but are
rapidly fading from view as nature and new developments overwhelm portions of the camp
50 years later. Over the years warning signs have been posted prohibiting entrance by the
public onto certain portions of the former Camp Maxey due to hazards from exploding
ordnance (The Paris News 1943).
Historical materials retrieved from the National Archives, Regional Archives, State Archives,
the 61st Ordnance Detachment, Ft. Sill, and local sources not only warn of the potential but
6-2

a
have also reported the discovery of ordnance at the former Camp Maxey since its disposal by
the U.S. government. On a number of occasions, The Paris News, the local newspaper, has
also warned and reported the discovery of ordnance at the former Camp Maxey (The Paris
News 1953), (Look 1985), @lassingame 1994). Interviews with local authorities, property
owners, knowledgeable citizens, and federal employees at the Pat Mayse Lake Project of the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Tulsa District) also c onh the continued presence of
ordnance at the former Camp Maxey. According to official reports and interviews most of
the ordnance, which has been and is being discovered, roughly aligns with the boundaries of
the live fire ranges or impact areas of the camp. However, ordnance has also been and is
being discovered in other portions of the former Camp Maxey. Evidence also indicates that
ordnance may be migrating outside the original boundaries of the former Camp Maxey
(Lamar County Sheriffs Department 1993).
6.2 Records Review
6.2.1 Archive Searches
Records concerning the history of Camp Maxey were reviewed between March and June
1994 at the following locations.
National Archives
8th and Pennsylvania Avenues
Washington, D.C. 20408
We researched Record Group (RG) 18 (Army Air Corps), RG 407 9 (Adjutant General), RG
269 (General Services Administration), RG 270 (War Assets Administration), RG 165
(Property Disposal), and RG 338 (Army Commands). Information on decontamination of
certain tracts of land, restricted usage, and no use of certain tracts of land at the former
Camp Maxey was found and copied. In addition, information on stock control inspections
and the surplus property descriptions by tract numbers were found at this repository.
National Archives and Records Administration
Suitland Branch
4205 Suitland Road
Suitland, MD 20409
We researched Record Group (RG) 175 (Chemical Warfare Service), RG 77 (U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers), RG 338 (Army Commands), and RG 92 (Quartermaster Corps). We
found and copied index cards reflecting the shipment of chemical warfare materials to Camp
Maxey from the San Antonio Chemical Warfare Depot and the activation of chemical
warfare units after completion of training at Camp Maxey.
National Archives and Records Administration
Southwest Region, 501 West Felix St.
Fort Worth, TX 76115
6-3

We examined a totaI of 55 boxes of records relating to all of our Texas sites, including
Camp Maxey. Record Group (RG) 270 (War Assets Administration) and RG 103 (Farm
Credit Administration) had information on Camp Maxey. Information regarding propem
description, surplus property, disposal of property to the Texas National Guard, transfer of
property for private ownership, and restricted use of land at the former Camp Maxey was
found and copied.
Historical Office
U.S. Army Chemical and Biological Defense Agency
Aberdeen Proving Ground
Edgewood, MD 21010
Research was conducted on chemical warfare service organization and unit history files,
reports of chemical warfare controlled and other critical items of equipment, manuscripts and
texts on the history of the chemical warfare service, World War I1 chemical warfare service
bulletins and newsletters for the 3rd Army, 8th Service Command, and the 2nd Air Force.
Significant information was found in military correspondence, which was copied, relating to
a nondivisional gas school and the training of chemical service units at Camp Maxey. The
35th Chemical Decon Company, which used mustard in small quantities, conducted,
conducted actual decontamination operations at Camp Maxey.
U.S. Army Center of Military History
1099 14th St., N.W. Franklin Court Bldg.
Washington, D.C. 20005-3402
Information was received from the Center of Military History on the activation, use, and
deactivation of Camp Maxey.
National Personnel Records Center
Military Records
9700 Page Avenue
St. Louis, MO 63132
No records pertaining to MaKey Camp were found at the National Personnel Records Center
in St. Louis.
National Guard Bureau
Departments of the Army and Air Force
Washington, D.C. 2031&2500
6-4

NGB Pamphlet 25-1 was reviewed. Information on the types of firing ranges and number of
firing points at Camp Maxey was copied. In addition, the Texas National Guard provided
information on the transfer of property by the federal government and a certificate listing
tracts of land that had been visually observed for explosive hazards and tracts of land
restricted to surface use only.
Texas State Archives
1201 Brazos Street
Austin, TX 78711
Files of the Texas State Archives were reviewed on the Camp Maxey Military Reservation,
Lamar County, Paris, Texas. Information on the use of terrain at Camp Maxey for f ~ g
ranges and other types of training was found and copied. In addition, correspondence
regarding the surplus and disposal of real property was found and copied.
Regional Archives, Learning Center
Paris Junior College
2400 Clarksville Road
Paris, Tx 75460
Files on Camp Maxey were reviewed, including military and civilian correspondence,
personal letters written by soldiers, Wing yearbooks, town newspaper clippings, maps,
aerials, camp newsletters, aaicles on recent unit reunions, and oral histories of units that
trained at the former Camp Maxey. We copied a journal on the training of the 102nd
Infantry Division at Camp Maxey, newspaper clippings on the discovery of ordnance at
Camp Maxey, and a map showing where warning signs are posted at various entry points to
the former Camp Maxey.
The Paris News
5050 S.E. Loop 286
Paris, Texas 75461
Newspaper clippings, manuscripts on Camp Maxey, and maps were reviewed. We copied a
manuscript on the history of Camp Maxey by Dr. Jim Steely of the Texas Historical
Commission and newspaper clippings on the discovery of ordnance at Camp Maxey.
6-5

-3
6.3.1 Photo Analysis
Photo analysis and land-use interpretation were performed using the following photographic
sources:
Photo Approx Frame
Date &.& &gxe ID#s
19 Sep 1981 1"=20' Toler Aerial 2-195 to
Surveys 2-473
03 Oct 1989 1" =2Ooo' Texas DOT 1-7-165,
1-8-082
Aerial photography for this site was referenced using USGS topographic quadrangles and a
U.S. Army layout plan.
Photography (1981) over Camp Maxey shows a largely abandoned area, heavily overgrown
with vegetation. The outline of the cantonment area is visible, but most of the structures
have been razed. The ranges have also been overgrown, and show no evidence of military
use. No visible signs of the gas warfare buildings can be detected on the photography. A
dump exists on the west side of the cantonment area. Disturbed soil is evident in this area,
but as with the rest of the Camp, no evidence of ordnance or explosive waste was found on
the 1981 photography.
The area changed very little between 1981 and the 1989 photo date. The dump area still
exists, and the soil is still disturbed. Outlines of some of the structures are still visible, but
no other evidence of ordnance or explosive waste are seen on the photography.
6.3.2 Map Analysis
The following USGS 7.5' topographic quadrangles were used in analysis of the site:
PAT MAYSE LAKE EAST, EX. (1980)
PAT MAYSE LAKE WEST, TEX. (1980)
Camp Maxey is located ten miles north of Paris, TX. The camp is situated immediatly south
of Pat Mayse Lake - an Army Corps of Engineers Recreation Area. Relief in the area is on
the order of 150'. The area is served by a major 4-lane divided highway, and a rail road
line. Roads in the former cantonment area are shown on the chart, as are some of the
administrative buildings and housing units. No features associated with military use are
labeled on the topographic chart.

The approximate geographic coordinates of Camp Maxey are:
33" 47' 00" N Latitude
095" 32' 00" W Longitude
A Reservation Boundary Master Plan (1946) from the U.S. Army shows the layout and
description of the ranges at Camp Maxey. Also shown are the ordnance area (immediatly
south of the cantonment area) and gas chambers (in the cantonment area).
6.4 Interviews
Interviews were conducted by telephone and in person, both prior to and during the site
inspection. The primary purpose of these interviews was to make initial contact with
individuals knowledgeable of the site and to coordinate follow-up visits during the site
inspection phase of this ASR's preparation. A list of persons interviewed is included at
Appendix E. Any pertinent information derived from these discussions is covered within the
context of this report and in the trip reports included at Appendix C.
6.5 Site Inspection
The subject site inspection was performed 19 May 1994 by the following St. Louis District
personnel:
Dennis W. Gilmore Project Manager and
Site Safety Officer
Fred Miller Historian
Our initial inspection was of the former ordnance area. This area is grown over and remains
undeveloped. It is a triangular tract of approximately 25 acres. No indications of OEW
contamination was found.
From here we proceeded to the Corps' project office to meet with Ranger Grady Dobbs of
the Corps of Engineers Pat Mayse Lake Project Office. We had previously coordinated to
have Ranger Dobbs accompany us on this portion of the inspection. Ranger Dobbs has
personal knowledge and/or experience with the majority of the ordnance related discoveries
on lands of the former Camp Maxey.
Prior to departing the lake project office, Dennis Gilmore provided the safety briefing and
safety aspects related to the site were discussed.
At the lake project office, prominently displayed, is an assortment of ordnance found on the
former site. This display includes everything from landmines to howitzer rounds.
6-7

Ranger Grady showed us two locations of previously discovered/reported ordnance. At the
first site, in the vicinity of an old bazooka range, we observed debris from what has been
reported to be 2.36" rockets. The debris was in the form of tail fms and expended bodies.
At the second site similiar remains were found. None of the OEW observed was of a
hazardous nature. Each item was individuaUy flagged and subsequently disposed of by EOD
personnell from Ft SiU, Oklahoma.
We next inspected sites of previous recoveries, ie. a commercial sand and gravel operation
from which two live 81mm mortar rounds were excavated, private lands on which a live
57mm AP round was unearthed and a homestead were five landmines were dug up. The
first two of these incidents occurred within the last year.
Reports of incidents since the former installation was deactivated are numerous. We were
unable to obtain records from the local authorities because of their method of filing. The
local police and sheriff departments each file reports by the name of the individual
concerned. As we did not know the names, and they could only remember the incidents, the
reports were irretrievable.
This concluded our site inspection of the former Camp Maxey. During the conduct of the site
inspection we found no indication of CWM contamination. However, based on observations
made of OEW and historical incidents reports, I believe the former Camp Maxey to pose a
serious threat to the human environment and as such recommends that immediate actions be
taken to mitigate the dangers to the public.
6-8

@
7.0 Evaluation of Ordnance Contamination
Based on the extensive archive searches performed, the inteMews with the owners andor
occupants of major portions of this DERP-FUDS site, and the results of the site
investigation, there is no confirmation of CWM contamination of the site evaluated.
However, there was a chemical company station on the installation and records indicate that
at least one building and plot of ground was contaminated at one time.
The contaminated areas were reportedly decontaminated (see Ltr, dtd 25 September 1943,
subject: "Report on Decontamination procedures as of Field Order No. 1,25 September
1943" at Appendix (2-5). Note that the map referred to in the letter was not found. No
other references to CWM or any resdtant contamination was found. Nor was any
indications of CWM contamination observed during the conduct of the site inspection.
Records did indicate that the Company "...used actual Mustard in small quantities" (letter
dated August 11, 1943, subject: Request for Allocation of CWS Decon, Material at
Appendix C-6). Additionally, there were three gas chambers located on the installation.
These facilities where used for familiarization training of individuaI soldiers. Therefore,
based of standard practices, it is most likely that a tear agent or other simulated agent was
Utilized.
The former installation was found to be saturated with OEW, both hazardous and
nonhazardous. The discovery of UXO is commonplace and the handling of it by the local
populace is of a routine nature. In addition to reported incidents, we observed several UXO
items at various locations (Figure 7.1) throughout the site. Subsequently, EOD (Ft. Sill) was
called and we were informed of their discovery of an additional 40 plus bazooka rockets.
The occurrence of ordnance related incidents is so commonplace that the EOD from Ft. Sill
routinely conduct ordnance identification and safety training for the local law enforcement
agencies. Reports of mishap, detonation, andor discove.ry, though made to local authorities,
are irretrievable. Some examples of reported incidents ace the excavation of mortar rounds
during quarry operations, followed by depositing the excavated lill and munitions on a
ballfield; the recovery of landmines by a homeowner performing yardwork; the unearthing of
various types of munitions during the construction of a subdivision; and the detonation of an
unkown munition which resulted in injury.
This last example is significant for two reasons. First, it is the only reported incident for
which a copy of the report was obtained. Secondly, and most significant, is the location of
this mishap.
The local sheriff's department Ne reports by the name of the individual concerned,
therefore, unless the name is known the information is irretrievable. In this case the
responding officer had maintained a copy of the record in his personal file. A copy of the
report is included at Appendix C-7.
7-1

.-. . ... . . . -. .... . . . .. ... . . . . , . ..
NOTE1 SEE LEGEND FOR DESCRIPT.IOY OF ITEMS FOUND AT NUMBERED LOCATIONS.
--
SCALE IN FEET
="-
*OD 0 .I)=-
RED RIVER
PUBLIC USE AREAS
UNCLEARED AREAS
SWIWIUC AREAS
--" PAVED ROADS
__ IrnOVED ROADS
__- DIRT ROAD
21
lL=*
I
Arthur City
FORMER SITE BOUNDARY
LAMAR COUNTY
DERP-FUDS" K06TX030500

1. 13 Aug 86 &
2. 22 Aug 86
3. 28 Aug 86
4. 9 - 10 Jul
5. 21 Aug 87
6. 28 Aug 87
7. 30 Jun 89
8. 7 Jul 89
9. 31 Jul 89
10. 1 Aug 89
11. 8 Feb 90
12. 8 Mar 90
13. 31 OCt 90
14. 3 NOV 90
15. 19 Dec 90
16. 10 Apr 91
17. 11 Jul 91
18. 4 Apr 92
19. 20 Sept 92
20. 24 JUl 93
21. 12 Aug 93
22. 11 May 94
23. 15 May 94
24. 3 OCt 87
25. 17 Mar 88
26. 9 Oct 88
LEGEND FOR FOUND ORDNANCE MAP
14 Aug 86
87
CAMP MAXEY
12 rounds, EOD team
EOD team
Bazooka Rocket
EOD team
unknown shell
EOD team, 4 Bazooka
Rockets, 1-3" shell
15 Bazooka Rockets
4 Bazooka Rockets
Bazooka Rockets
Bazooka Rocket
EOD team
EOD team, 1-57mm AP
105mm base ejecter
9 O m
Private land busters, pit
area, Bazooka Rockets
Private land busters, pit
area, BAzooka Rockets
6 Bazooka Rockets
Private land, Lamar Point,
57m AP
Bazooka Rocket
Red River, shell picked up
and then exploded
EOD team, hand grenade,
Bazooka Rockets, 30-4Omm
shell
12 Bazooka Rocket parts,
shaped head type
ATV area, 3 Bazooka Rockets
2 - 3" shells
EOD team
unknown shell

The location of the incident was at the confluence Sanders Creek and the Red River,
approximately three miles downstream of the Pat Mayse Lake Dam. This location is also
well outside the boundaries of the former installation. Recovered schrapnel indicates that
exploded item was of military origins.
There are several possible explanations for how the UXO came to rest at this location. The
most plausible is that it was transported there by flood waters, prior to construction of the
dam in 1965. Corps records show that during construction of the dam an inordinate number
of UXO items were encountered on or just beneath the ground surface. To facilitate the
timely completion of the structure, an EOD team was assigned to the worksite for more than
a year, during which time they documented the recovery and disposed of in excess of 1300
items of UXO (Appendix C-8). In that no flood event, since completion of the dam, has
topped the spillway, the UXO most probably was transported by a flood event before the mid
1960's.
In any scenario, the discovery of UXO outside of the site boundary presents a distinct
possibility of migration of the ordnance. If in fact the means of transport was flood waters,
there exists a possibility of contamination throughout the Sanders Creek watershed,
downstream of the site, and potentially within the Red River.
Though no hazardous OEW was observed during the conduct of the site inspection, it
documented that EOD has responded to several incidents at the site. A listing of UXO
handled by EOD since 1987 is included at Appendix C-9. Photographs of OEW obsewed
are provided at Appendix G. Based on the location of past encounters, the heaviest
concentration of OEW is in the former western range impact area, then most probably the
eastern impact area. Both of these former areas are now covered to some degree by Pat
Mayse lake.
The site inspection confirmed the contamination of the site with ordnance. A RAC score of
1 has been derived, indicating that further actions are required.