Part I, 1988 and 1989 Florida petroleum production and exploration ( FGS: Information circular 107 )

STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
Tom Gardner, Executive Director

DIVISION OF RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
Jeremy A. Craft, Director

FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
Walter Schmidt, State Geologist and Chief

INFORMATION CIRCULAR NO. 107
PART 1: 1988 AND 1989 FLORIDA PETROLEUM
PRODUCTION AND EXPLORATION
By
Jacqueline M. Lloyd

INCLUDING FLORIDA PETROLEUM RESERVE ESTIMATES
By
Charles H. Tootle

PART II: PETROLEUM EXPLORATION AND DEVELOPMENT POLICIES IN FLORIDA:
RESPONSE TO PUBLIC CONCERN FOR SENSITIVE ENVIRONMENTS
By
Jacqueline M. Lloyd
and

Joan M. Ragland

UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA LIRAE

PART III: PETROLOGY AND PROVENANCE OF THE
NORPHLET FORMATION, PANHANDLE, FLORIDA
By
Greg W. Scott

Published for the
FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
Tallahassee
1991

DEPARTMENT
OF
NATURAL RESOURCES

LAWTON CHILES
Governor

JIM SMITH
Secretary of State

TOM GALLAGHER
State Treasurer

BETTY CASTOR
Commissioner of Education

BOB BUTTERWORTH
Attorney General

GERALD LEWIS
State Comptroller

BOB CRAWFORD
Commissioner of Agriculture

TOM GARDNER
Executive Director

LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL

Florida Geological Survey
Tallahassee
June 1991

Governor Lawton Chiles, Chairman
Florida Department of Natural Resources
Tallahassee, Florida 32301

Dear Governor Chiles:

The Florida Geological Survey, Division of Resource Management, Department of Natural Resources,
is publishing three petroleum-related reports as its Information Circular 107. Part I is "1988 and 1989
Florida Petroleum Production and Exploration;" Part II, "Petroleum Exploration and Development Policies
in Florida: Response to Public Concern for Sensitive Environments;" and Part III: "Petrology and
Provenance of the Norphlet Formation, Panhandle, Florida." These reports discuss 1988 and 1989 oil
and gas production and exploration, the history of Florida's petroleum policy and legislation, and the
geology of the gas-producing Norphlet Formation, respectively. This information is useful to the oil and
gas industry and to the state in planning wise development of Florida's oil and gas resources.

Respectfully yours,

Walter Schmidt, Ph.D., P.G.
State Geologist and Chief
Florida Geological Survey

Printed for the
Florida Geological Survey

Tallahassee
1991

ISSN 0085-0616

CONTENTS

Page
Part I: 1988 and 1989 Florida Petroleum Production and Exploration.......................................... vi

Part II: Petroleum Exploration and Development Policies in Florida:
Response to Public Concern for Sensitive Environments .................................................. 63

Part III: Petrology and Provenance of the Norphlet Formation, Panhandle, Florida....................... 83

PART I

1988 AND 1989 FLORIDA PETROLEUM
PRODUCTION AND EXPLORATION

By
Jacqueline M. Lloyd, P.G. #74

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page

Abstract.................................................................................................................................................. x
Acknowledgements................................................................................................................................ x
Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 1
1988 and 1989 Production.................................................................................................................. 1
1988 and 1989 Onshore Drilling Activity.............................................................................................. 8
Offshore Drilling Activity......................................................................................................................... 8
Exploratory Drilling in State W aters ............................................................................................... 8
1988 and 1989 Exploratory Drilling in Federal W aters,Offshore Florida........................................ 11
Geophysical Exploration Activity.......................................................................................................... 12
Florida Oil Field Descriptions.............................................................................................................. 12
North Florida Oil Field Sum marines ................................................................................................. 15
Introduction.................................................................................................................................... 15
Bluff Springs Field ......................................................................................................................... 15
McDavid Field................................................................................................................................ 17
Jay Field ........................................................................................................................................ 19
Coldwater Creek Field................................................................................................................ 19
Blackjack Creek Field.............................................................................................................. 22
Mt. Carmel Field ............................................................................................................................ 22
McLellan Field ............................................................................................................................... 25
Sweetwater Creek Field ............................................................................................................. 25
South Florida Oil Field Summaries ................................................................................................ 28
Introduction.................................................................................................................................... 28
Lehigh Park Field .......................................................................................................................... 28
Townsend Canal Field................................................................................................................ 28
W est Felda Field ........................................................................................................................... 30
M id-Felda Field.............................................................................................................................. 30
Sunoco Felda Field ....................................................................................................................... 30
Corkscrew Field............................................................................................................................. 32
Lake Trafford Field ........................................................................................................................ 32
Sunniland Field.............................................................................................................................. 34
Seminole Field............................................................................................................................... 34
Bear Island Field ........................................................................................................................... 34
Pepper Ham mock Field.............................................................................................................. 37
Baxter Island Field......................................................................................................................... 37
Raccoon Point Field ................................................................................................................ 37
Forty Mile Bend Field ................................................................................................................. 37
Sum mary................................................................................................................................................ 39
References............................................................................................................................................. 40

ILLUSTRATIONS

Figure Page

1. South Florida oil field location map.............................................................................................. 2

2. Stratigraphic nomenclature, Upper Jurassic to Lower Cretaceous, south Florida....................... 3

3. Northwest Florida oil field location map....................................................................................... 4

4. Stratigraphic nomenclature, Middle Jurassic to Lower Cretaceous, northwest Florida............... 5

5. Oil production, 1970 through 1989 .............................................................................................. 6

6. 1987, 1988, and 1989 oil production comparison........................................................................ 7

7. Oil exploration wells, Florida state waters .................................................................................. 9

8. Mesozoic structural features in Florida and offshore................................................................... 10

9. 1988 and 1989 oil exploration wells and active leases, federal waters, offshore Florida............ 13

10. 1988 and 1989 geophysical exploration activity .......................................................................... 14

11. Bluff Springs and McDavid fields structure map, top of Smackover Formation........................... 16

12. Geophysical log correlation, Bluff Springs and McDavid fields.................................................... 18

13. McDavid field production curve.................................................................................................... 20

14. Jay field structure map, top of Smackover Formation ................................................................ 21

15. Blackjack Creek structure map, top of Smackover Formation..................................................... 23

16. Mt. Carmel field structure map, top of Norphlet Sandstone......................................................... 24

17. McLellan and Sweetwater Creek fields well location map........................................................... 26

18. Geophysical log correlation, McLellan field ................................................................................. 27

19. Lehigh Park field structure map, top of Sunniland Formation...................................................... 29

20. Sunoco Felda, West Felda, and Mid-Felda fields structure map, top of Sunniland Formation....... 31

21. Corkscrew and Lake Trafford fields structure map, top of Sunniland Formation......................... 33

22. Sunniland field structure map, top of Sunniland Formation......................................................... 35

23. Bear Island field structure map, base of anhydrite in Upper Sunniland Formation...................... 36

24. Raccoon Point field preliminary structure map, top of Sunniland Formation............................... 38

APPENDICES

Appendix Page

1. Florida oil field discovery well data .............................................................................................. 43

2. 1988, 1989 and cumulative production data................................................................................ 45

3. 1988 and 1989 field well statistics ............................................................................................... 47

4. 1988 and 1989 field wells drilled.................................................................................................. 49

5. 1988 and 1989 wildcat wells drilled ............................................................................................. 51

6. Oil exploration wells drilled in Florida state waters...................................................................... 54

7. 1988 and 1989 oil exploration wells drilled in federal waters, offshore Florida............................ 57

8. 1988 and 1989 geophysical exploration activity .......................................................................... 59

9. Florida oil and gas reserve estimates.......................................................................................... 61

ABSTRACT

Florida oil production began to decline in 1979 and continued to do so during 1988 and 1989. Jay
field, as the leading producing field for Florida, controls the rate of decline.
Onshore exploratory drilling during 1988 and 1989 resulted in the discovery of McDavid field in
Escambia County and Coldwater Creek field in Santa Rosa County. Offshore exploratory drilling
included six wells which were completed in federal waters off Florida during 1988 and 1989; one of these
was the second Norphlet discovery in the Destin Dome area and was classified by the federal
government as a producible field.
Geophysical exploration during 1988 and 1989 concentrated in the Florida panhandle and the south
Florida peninsula. The panhandle exploration included the known oil-producing Santa Rosa and
Escambia Counties, an area offshore from Santa Rosa and Escambia Counties, and the Apalachicola
Embayment area. South Florida seismic activity was east of the known Sunniland-producing trend in
Broward, Dade, Hendry and Palm Beach Counties.
In addition to 1988 and 1989 data, a summary of offshore exploratory drilling in state waters, from 1947
through 1983, is included in this report. This information may be useful in evaluating future offshore and
onshore development and exploration. Of similar value are descriptions of each of Florida's 22 oil fields.
Descriptions include discovery data, geologic information, and production totals.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Several Florida Geological Survey staff members contributed to this report. Charles Tootle compiled
oil field data and production statistics. The Oil and Gas Section maintains files on permitted exploratory
and development drilling. Joan Ragland and Charles Tootle provided comments and assistance in using
these files. Joan Ragland tabulated and assisted with the interpretation of the geophysical exploration
permit data. Joel Duncan assisted with the interpretation of geophysical logs from the recently-
discovered McDavid field. Jim Jones and Ted Kiper drafted and photographed the figures. Walt
Schmidt, Tom Scott, Ed Lane, Joan Ragland, and Joel Duncan edited the manuscript and suggested
improvements.

Information Circular 107

1988 AND 1989 FLORIDA PETROLEUM PRODUCTION AND EXPLORATION
By
Jacqueline M. Lloyd, P.G. #74

INTRODUCTION

There are two major oil producing areas in
Florida. One is the Sunniland trend in South
Florida, the other is in the western panhandle
area. The Sunniland trend includes 14 oil fields;
the western panhandle includes eight. Appendix
1 lists the discovery well data for these fields.
The Sunniland trend production began with
Florida's first oil discovery at Sunniland field in
September, 1943. Of the 14 Sunniland trend oil
fields, 10 are active, one is temporarily shut-in,
and three are plugged and abandoned. These
fields are oriented along a northwest-southeast
trend through Lee, Hendry, Collier, and Dade
Counties (Figure 1). Production is principally
from rudistid reefs found in the upper one
hundred feet of the Lower Cretaceous Sunniland
Formation (Figure 2).
Production in the western panhandle began
with the discovery of Jay field in June, 1970. The
eight panhandle oil fields are located in
Escambia and Santa Rosa Counties, Florida
(Figure 3). Seven fields are active and one is
plugged and abandoned. Production is from
Upper Jurassic Smackover Formation
carbonates and Norphlet Sandstone sands
(Figure 4).

1988 AND 1989 PRODUCTION

Florida oil production began to decline in 1979
and has continued to do so since then (Figure 5).
Total oil production for 1988 was 7,746,048
barrels, down 6% from 1987. Production
dropped another 6% during 1989 for a 1989 total
of 7,289,390 barrels. Appendix 2 lists 1988,
1989, and cumulative production statistics for
each of Florida's oil fields including oil, gas, and
water production data. Appendix 3 lists 1988
and 1989 field well statistics including the

number of production, injection, shut-in, and
temporarily abandoned wells for each field.
Jay field dominates Florida production. The
field was discovered in 1970 and reached peak
production in 1978. It accounts for about 61
percent of the 1988 oil production total, about 66
percent of the 1989 total, and about 70 percent
of the cumulative total. Figure 5 graphically
illustrates both state wide annual oil production
and Jay field annual oil production for 1970
through 1989, clearly showing Jay field's
dominance in Florida oil production trends. The
Jay field production curve is typical of oil fields
produced with tertiary recovery methods (David
Curry, Oil and Gas Section Administrator, Florida
Geological Survey, personal communication,
1990). Production has leveled off during the last
three years (1987, 1988, and 1989, Figure 5).
This generally agrees with the projections made
by Christian, et al. (1981) in their discussion of
tertiary recovery estimates for Jay field. They
predicted a production plateau of about 10,000
barrels/day for about 12 years (1984 through
1996). They estimated that tertiary recovery
would be terminated in 1996, followed by rapid
decline to depletion in about 2004. Total
production will be about 84.7 million barrels; 37.5
million would have been produced through
waterflood alone (Christian, et al., 1981).
Figure 6 is a histogram comparing 1987, 1988,
and 1989 oil production for all Florida oil fields
except Jay field. Jay field data would obscure
the information for all other fields since its
production for 1987 was five times greater than
that of West Felda field, the next most productive
field in Florida during 1987. Northwest Florida
production increased by one percent from 1987
to 1988 and by two percent from 1988 to 1989.
South Florida production decreased by 18
percent from 1987 to 1988 and by 24 percent
from 1988 to 1989.

Florida Geological Survey

R24 .. R26E R28E_ _i_ R3.0E_ R32E_ ___ R34E __ B36E
LEHIGH PARK --. I |
TOWNS D CANAI I
r -- --- "s ^------J -"^----------- "-- ^- t < ~
MID- ELAHENR CO.
8UNOCO-FELDA;
LEE CO. PALM I

FIELD
-------I ... _-- --- ------ -C

LAK TRAFF D

EAR IS I l

^""^~~~~~~- -- ----^ --------""" jEff~iB^" i--- -------- ^

S PEPPER AMMOCK I
SBAXTER ISLAND
SI BROWARD
I i I CO.
4-1

COLLIER CO.
S RAC (0N POINTr

1- -DADE CO.

FLORIDA FORTY MILE BEND
qTr EXPLANATION o E C O
ACTIVE OIL FIELD J
0 INACTIVE OIL FIELD
Fgr 1 St10 KM .
0 10 MILES

I FOS050491

Figure 1. South Florida oil field location map.

Information Circular 107

LIMESTONE

DOLOMITE

CLASTICS IhIA4I

ANHYDRITE FGS060491

Figure 2. Stratigraphic nomenclature, Upper Jurassic to Lower Cretaceous, south Florida.

BROWN
DOLOMITE
ZONE

BASAL
CLASTICS

11

SHALE

Florida Geological Survey

EXPLANATION
ACTIVE OIL FIELD
INACTIVE OIL FIELD

5 0 5 KM
5 0 5 MILES

Figure 3. Northwest Florida oil field location map.

Information Circular 107

SANDSTONE

SILTSTONE

LIMESTONE

DOLOMITE

CONGLOMERATE

CLASTICS

AA ANHYDRITE

Lii

SALT

FGS070491

Figure 4. Stratigraphic nomenclature, Middle Jurassic to Lower Cretaceous, northwest Florida.

SYSTEM STAGE GROUPS AND FORMATIONS LITHOLOGY
LOW ER ................
CRETACEOUS BERRIASIAN
COTTON VALLEY .......
GROUP
TITHONIAN UNDIFFERENTIATED :::::::...........

UPPER HAYNESVILLE .??:. KIMMERIDGIAN FORMATION ...... ....
UPPER .;
JURASSIC AAAAAAAAAAA
BUCKNER AAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAA

LOWER (LOWER-"" 1
KIMMERIDGIAN HAYNESVILLE ,
FORMATION)

SMACKOVER ,. ,,
FORMATION. .. ....

OXFORDIAN ____,__I,__I'_I'I
NORPHLET SANDSTONE .. ...

MIDDLE CALLOVIAN LOUANN SALT
JURASSIC + + + +
K + + +

SHALE

1:1:..

""""

Florida Geological Survey

FLORIDA OIL PRODUCTION

1970 THROUGH 1989

1971 1973 1975 1977 1979 1981 1983 1985 1987 1989
YEAR
0 Jaoy Field + State Wide FGS080491

Figure 5. Oil production, 1970 through 1989.

'i)

I
;l:

I )

L)
) *

- -. .

----- -----

Information Circular 107

1.1

0.9 -

V) 0.8 -
w

0.7 -

C2 0.6
Oo

, I 0.5 -
0
0.4 -
-J
0 0.3 -

0.2 -

0.1

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

ACTIVE FLORIDA OIL FIELDS EXCLUDING JAY
S1987 1988 1989 FGS90491
FGS090491

FIELD PLOT CODE
West Felda 1
Raccoon Point 2
Blackjack Creek 3
Bear Island 4
Corkscrew 5
Lehigh Park 6
Sunoco Felda 7
Mid-Felda 8
Townsend Canal 9
Bluff Springs 10
Mt. Carmel 11
Sunni land 12
McLellan 13
Lake Trafford 14
McDavid 15
Coldwater Creek 16

Figure 6.1987,1988, and 1989 oil production comparison.

Florida Geological Survey

1988 and 1989 ONSHORE DRILLING
ACTIVITY

Only three development wells were drilled
during 1988 and 1989. A description of these
wells is given in Appendix 4. One of these was
an injection well drilled at Jay field in Santa Rosa
County. One was the first offset to the McDavid
field discovery well in Escambia County and was
plugged and abandoned as a dry hole. The
McDavid field discovery and this offset are
discussed under the "Florida oil fields
descriptions" section of this report. The third
development well was completed as a potential
producer at Raccoon Point field in Collier County.
Sixteen exploratory wells were drilled during
1988 and 1989 (Appendix 5). Eleven of these
were drilled in northwest Florida; the remaining
five were drilled in south Florida. Only one well
was completed as a potential producer. This
was the discovery well for McDavid field
(Escambia County).
Coldwater Creek field was also discovered in
1988 with the first production test of the Red
Rock Oil and Minerals Corporation Pittman
Estate No. 26-2A in Santa Rosa County. Further
discussion of this field is in the "Florida oil field
descriptions" section of this report.

OFFSHORE DRILLING ACTIVITY

State ownership of the continental shelf off
Florida extends three miles into the Atlantic
Ocean and about 10.5 miles (three marine
leagues) into the Gulf of Mexico. The federal
government controls resources beyond these
state boundaries out to 200 miles. The Outer
Continental Shelf (OCS) is a jurisdictional term
that describes the offshore area which is under
control of the federal government. "Federal
waters," in this context, does not refer to
ownership, but rather to responsibility (Johnson
and Tucker, 1987).

Exploratory Drilling in State Waters

A total of 19 wells have been drilled in Florida
state waters from 1947 through 1983 (Appendix
6 and Figure 7). Effective July, 1990, all drilling
activity was prohibited in Florida state waters
(details are discussed in Part II of this
publication); however, the information obtained
from the wells that were drilled in state waters
may be useful in future decisions concerning
offshore exploration and development in federal
waters.
The 19 offshore wells tested three different
potential oil horizons. Ten of the wells are within
the South Florida Basin (off Charlotte and Lee
Counties and off the Florida Keys, Monroe
County, Figure 8) and targeted the Lower
Cretaceous. The six wells drilled off the Florida
panhandle sought to extend the onshore (and
offshore Alabama) Jurassic production (Figure
4). The remaining three wells drilled off the
northern portion of the Gulf coast (Permits 304,
382 and 383) were Cretaceous or possibly
Paleozoic tests (Applegate and Lloyd, 1985).
As shown in Appendix 6, only one of the wells
drilled in state waters had a significant oil show.
A drill stem test of the Gulf Oil-Florida State
Lease 826-Y (permit 275), located near the
Marquesas Keys off Monroe County, recovered
15 barrels of 220 A.P.I. gravity oil and 14.1
barrels of saltwater from the Lake Trafford (?)
Formation. Another well, which was drilled in
federal waters near the Marquesas, tested black
saltwater in the Lake Trafford and Sunniland
Formations and in the Brown Dolomite interval
(Applegate and Lloyd, 1985). Charles Tootle
(1985, Florida Geological Survey, personal
communication, in Applegate and Lloyd, 1985)
believed this well could be a low volume oil
producer from the Lake Trafford and Sunniland
Formations.
Applegate (1987) conducted an extensive
study of the Brown Dolomite Zone of the Lehigh
Acres Formation in the South Florida Basin. He
concluded that this zone could be a potentially
prolific producing horizon offshore. He found that

Information Circular 107

P-251 17,;981'
7,479 1983
1956

> P P-293
p-281 10,526
P-43 P-87 7,004 1961
7,009 14332 1959
1947 1968

-N-

LEGEND

APPROXIMATE WELL LOCATION

P-280 FLORIDA PERMIT NUMBER

6,09 TOTAL DEPTH OF WELL,
FEET BELOW MSL

1959 WELL COMPLETION DATE

SCALE

0 50 100 150 MILES

0 80 160 240 KILOMETERS

FGS020491

Figure 7. Oil exploration wells, Florida state waters.

10,563
1963

P-297---
12,560 "
1961 P-289
13,961
1960

P-275
15,422
1959

P-292 "'*
7,686 P-298
1961 12,793
1962

P-22
15,432
1947

Florida Geological Survey

FGS100491

Figure 8. Mesozoic structural features in Florida and offshore (after Applegate, 1987).

Information Circular 107

the best development of the Brown Dolomite
onshore is in Charlotte and surrounding counties
in the northern part of the South Florida Basin at
a depth of about 12,000 feet. Here, the Brown
Dolomite Zone attains a maximum thickness of
100 feet, of Which about one-half is porous and
capable of high volume fluid production.
Offshore, the maximum thickness occurs near
the Marquesas Keys, where about 400 feet of
mostly porous dolostone has been found. Very
little oil staining has been found in the Charlotte
County area, but staining has been observed in
the Marquesas area, as discussed above.
Applegate (1987) concluded that the best
possibility for finding oil in the Brown Dolomite
Zone appears to be in the offshore portion of the
South Florida Basin. Brown Dolomite is present
in at least three wells on the Sarasota Arch
(Figure 8) and probably continues around the rim
of the basin southeast to the Marquesas, where
thick porous dolostone is present. Applegate
(1987) believed that stratigraphic and structural
traps associated with this dolostone, which is
capped by dense limestone and anhydrite, may
have led to the formation of giant oil fields.
In addition to this South Florida Basin
potential, there has been interest in extending
Jurassic production in the Florida panhandle
area. Jurassic production occurs onshore in the
Jay trend area (Figure 3) from the Smackover
Formation and Norphlet Sandstone (Figure 4).
There is also Jurassic production twenty miles to
the west of the Florida Alabama boundary
where several natural gas fields produce from
the Norphlet Sandstone in Alabama state waters
in Mobile Bay. The Mary Ann gas field was the
first of these to be discovered in 1979. An
additional six natural gas fields have been
established in Alabama state waters since then
(Masingill, 1989). Recoverable reserves have
been estimated at 4.93 to 8.12 trillion cubic feet
of natural gas (Mink, et al., 1987).
A Jurassic test, the Getty Oil-Florida State
Lease 2338, Well No. 1 (permit 1097), was
drilled in 1983 to a total depth of 18,011 feet
(-17,981 feet MSL) in East Bay, Santa Rosa

County, Florida (Appendix 6, Figure 7). Two
tests in the Smackover Formation produced only
saltwater. The Norphlet Sandstone and
underlying Louann Salt, which together are
responsible for production in the Mobile Bay
fields, were very thin in this well (Applegate and
Lloyd, 1985).
The three wells drilled off Levy, Citrus, and
Pinellas Counties do not fall within the obvious
target areas discussed above. None of these
wells had significant oil shows or porous zones.
Two of the three penetrated Paleozoic rocks; the
third bottomed in the Lower Cretaceous
(Appendix 6). These may have been drilled with
interest in both the Lower Cretaceous and the
Paleozoic potential. Amoco drilled five Paleozoic
wildcat wells to the north of this area (Taylor,
Madison, Lafayette, and Dixie Counties) in the
early 1980's (Applegate and Lloyd, 1985). All
were dry holes and none had any shows of oil.
Paleozoics in Florida range from Devonian to
Ordovician or Cambrian in age, and are faunally
related to African rocks (Cramer, 1971, 1973).
Production from the West African rocks spurred
interest in Florida; however, the Florida
Paleozoic sandstones are extremely indurated
and have very little porosity or permeability
(Applegate and Lloyd, 1985).

1988 and 1989 Exploratory Drilling in Federal
Waters, Offshore Florida

The first federal oil and gas lease sale off
Florida was conducted in May, 1959 off the
Florida Keys in what is now the Straits of Florida
Planning Area. Ten additional OCS lease sales
have occurred since then; seven in the Eastern
Gulf of Mexico Planning Area and three in the
South Atlantic Planning Area. There have been
no sales in the Straits of Florida Planning Area
off Florida since the 1959 sale. The last lease
sale in the South Atlantic Planning Area off
Florida was Sale 78 in July, 1983.
The two most recent lease sales off Florida
were in the Eastern Planning Area. They were

Florida Geological Survey

Sales 79 and 94, held in January, 1984 and
January, 1985, respectively. Eastern Planning
Area Sale 116, held in November 1988, excluded
all areas originally proposed off the Florida coast
(see Part II of this publication for more details).
Lease sales 79 and 94 are discussed in
Applegate and Lloyd (1985) and Lloyd and
Applegate (1987). Historic leases in the Eastern
Planning Area are shown on Figure 9.
Six wells were completed off the Florida
panhandle during 1988 and 1989 (Figure 9).
Appendix 7 includes data on these wells (Gould,
1989). Three of the wells were in the Pensacola
area; three were in the Destin Dome area. The
principal drilling targets in these areas are the
Smackover Formation and the Norphlet
Sandstone (Figure 4); however, three of the
wells were drilled to less than 3,000 feet, which is
too shallow to have penetrated these potential
targets. One of the Destin Dome area wells
(Chevron-6406, block 56, Figure 9) was a
Norphlet discovery and is described as a
producible field by Gould (1989). The Amoco-
8338 well, which was completed in Destin Dome
block 111 in 1987, was also a Norphlet discovery
described by Gould (1989) as a producible field.
This was the first commercial discovery in the
Eastern Gulf of Mexico Planning Area (Gould,
1989). The Oil and Gas Journal (1989)
discusses the Chevron-6406 well and quotes
Chevron USA Inc. as stating that "the well was
not tested due to safety and cost considerations.
However, analysis of cores and wireline logs
indicates the presence of gas in the Norphlet
sandstone." These two discoveries extend the
offshore Norphlet gas trend seaward and
eastward from the Mobile map area of the
Central Gulf of Mexico Planning Area, offshore
Alabama, into the Florida offshore.

GEOPHYSICAL EXPLORATION ACTIVITY

Twenty-two geophysical permits applications
were received by the Florida Geological Survey
during 1988; 15 were received during 1989. Of
these 37 applications, 31 have been permitted,

five were withdrawn or canceled by the
applicants, and four were placed on hold by the
applicants. Appendix 8 summarizes the data for
these applications, including total survey mileage
by area (panhandle onshore, panhandle
offshore, and south Florida) and by survey
method (vibrator, airgun, and seismic gel).
Geophysical exploration was concentrated in
the Florida panhandle and the south Florida
peninsula (Figure 10). The panhandle
exploration included the known oil-producing
Santa Rosa and Escambia Counties, an area
offshore from Santa Rosa and Escambia
Counties, and an area east of the known
production covering Okaloosa, Bay, Gadsden,
Holmes, Jackson, Leon, Wakulla and
Washington Counties. This activity indicates
interest in potential east of the known production
including the Apalachicola Embayment area.
The Apalachicola Embayment area was
discussed by Applegate, et al. (1978) as an area
with significant Smackover oil potential. South
Florida seismic activity was east of the known
Sunniland-producing trend in Broward, Dade,
Hendry and Palm Beach Counties.

FLORIDA OIL FIELD DESCRIPTIONS

Applegate and Lloyd (1985) provided a brief
history of each of Florida's oil fields including
discovery data, geologic information, and
production totals. Structure maps were
presented whenever possible. This publication is
now out-of-print; therefore, this information is
summarized again and presented in this report.
Somewhat more detailed information is
presented for the five oil fields discovered since
1985. These are Bluff Springs, McDavid,
Coldwater Creek, and McLellan fields in north
Florida and Corkscrew field in south Florida.
Fields are discussed in approximate geographic
order from north to south and west to east
(Figures 1 and 3).

Information Circular 107

0 25 50 MILES \
0 40 80 KILOMETERS STRAITS OF FLORIDA
FGS110491 SCALE PLANNING AREA

Figure 9. 1988 and 1989 oil exploration wells and historic leases, federal waters, offshore Florida
(Gould, 1989).

Florida Geological Survey

N-

LEGEND

S PERMITTED AND SURVEYED

PERMITTED) NOT SURVEYED

E APPLICATION RECEIVED) NOT PERMITTED

SCALE

0 50 100 150 MILES

0 80 160 240 KILOMETERS

F09120491
Figure 10. 1988 and 1989 geophysical exploration activity.

Figure 10. 1988 and 1989 geophysical exploration activity.

.4

Information Circular 107

North Florida Oil Field Summaries
INTRODUCTION

Production in north Florida began with the
discovery of Jay field in June, 1970. There are
now eight panhandle oil fields located in
Escambia and Santa Rosa Counties, Florida
(Figure 3). Seven fields are active and one is
plugged and abandoned. Production is from
Upper Jurassic Smackover Formation
carbonates and Norphlet Sandstone sands
(Figure 4).
Jay field is located within a trend which
extends through Escambia and Santa Rosa
Counties in Florida, and Escambia County,
Alabama. Other fields within the trend include
Mt. Carmel, Coldwater Creek, and Blackjack
Creek fields in Florida and Fanny Church,
Flomaton, and Big Escambia Creek fields in
Alabama. The fields are located along a normal
fault complex which rims the Gulf Coast through
Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, Arkansas, and
Texas (Moore, 1984).
Bluff Springs and McDavid fields are located
west and southwest of the Jay trend in an area
known to be underlain by Louann Salt, with
seismic studies indicating salt-induced fault
structures in the overlying formations (Lloyd and
Applegate, 1987). The remaining two north
Florida oil fields, McLellan and Sweetwater
Creek, are located east of the Jay trend, near the
approximate updip limits of the Smackover
Formation (Lloyd, 1989; Applegate et al., 1978;
Ottman et al., 1973 and 1976) and could be the
result of stratigraphic pinchouts. They are also
located within the area known to be underlain by
the Louann Salt and may have salt-related trap
structures. Current data does not reveal which
trapping mechanism produced the Smackover
reservoirs for these fields.

BLUFF SPRINGS FIELD

Bluff Springs field was discovered on March
25, 1984. The discovery well, the Stone

Petroleum Corp. St Regis Paper Co. number 29-
4 (permit 1125), was a rank wildcat located in
Section 29, Township 5 North, Range 31 West,
Escambia County (Appendix 1). It is
approximately 10 miles west-southwest of Jay
field and approximately four miles southeast of
the nearest previously drilled wildcat, permit
1177 (Figures 3 and 11). This area, west and
southwest of Jay, is known to be underlain by
Louann Salt, with seismic studies indicating salt-
induced fault structures in the overlying
formations (Lloyd and Applegate, 1987). Seismic
data has been interpreted by Hughes Eastern
Corporation (1988) (Figure 11) to indicate
several small structures in a northwest-to-
southeast trend in this specific area.
The discovery well produced 477 barrels of oil
and 170 barrels of saltwater per day. Oil gravity
was 57.0 A.P.I.. Production is from Jurassic-
age Smackover Formation dolostones from
-16,154 to -16,161 feet MSL. These dolostones
are dark brownish-gray to brownish-black, fine
grained, microcrystalline, and show evidence of
recrystallization from originally oolitic and
possibly pelletal facies (Lloyd, 1986; Lloyd and
Applegate, 1987).
The first offset, permit 1136 (Stone Petroleum
Corporation St. Regis Paper Company number
29-3) is located about one-half mile northwest of
the discovery well (Figure 11). The Smackover
Formation was encountered at -16,171 feet MSL,
structurally 17 feet lower than in the discovery
well (Figure 12). The well produced only
saltwater from two thin zones (-16,182 to -16,185
feet MSL and -16,192 to -16,195 feet MSL;
Figure 12) within the upper Smackover. Core
analysis by Location Sample Service, Inc. (LSS),
Jackson, Mississippi, yielded mean porosity
estimates for these zones of 11.4 and 8.4
percent, respectively. LSS found a trace of oil in
one sample at -16,185 feet MSL. This well may
be located too low on the structure. Alternatively,
as shown on the structure map (Figure 11) drawn
by Hughes Eastern Corporation (1988; based on
geophysical and well data), Hughes believes
there may be a permeability barrier between the
discovery well and this well.

BLUFF SPRINGS
AND McDAVID FIELDS
ESCAMBIA COUNTY, FLORIDA
STRUCTURE MAP
TOP OF SMACKOVER FORMATION P
(AFTER HUGHES EASTERN CORP., 1988)
7

i'1ea?. ~POSSIBLE 0:
:Z 00- \e OIL/WATER 0 1
20 0oo "so CONTACT 0 |.
" P1234-161 V 36 -
0 -16099 16700
_;0 ,, -

Figure 11. Bluff Springs and McDavid fields structure map, top of Smackover Formation (after Hughes Eastern Corporation, 1988).

Information Circular 107

Ownership of the discovery well transferred to
Hughes Eastern Corporation in 1985. Permits
were issued to Hughes Eastern to drill two
additional offsets, one east and one southeast of
the discovery well (permits 1204 and 1205,
Figure 11). Permit 1204 was completed in
August 1986. The Smackover was again found
at a structurally lower position (Figure 12), this
time 44 feet lower. Two zones of saltwater
production were also encountered (-16,208 to
-16,211 feet MSL and -16,215 to -16,233 feet
MSL; Figure 12). LSS core analysis yielded
mean porosity estimates of 23.9 and 13.6
percent, respectively, and no indications of oil.
As interpreted by Hughes Eastern Corporation
(1988) (Figure 11), the Smackover in this well is
below the probable oil-water contact. The third
offset, permit 1205, has not been drilled. This
well is now actually closer to the more recently
discovered McDavid field (discussed below) and
is outside the potential productive limits drawn by
Hughes Eastern Corporation (1988) (Figure 11).
Production to date at Bluff Springs is solely
from the discovery well. Total production for
Bluff Springs field, as of the end of 1989, was
220,000 barrels of oil (Appendix 2).

MCDAVID FIELD

McDavid field was discovered on June 14,
1988 with the first production test of the
discovery well, the Hughes Eastern Corp.
Walker-Baley number 34-2 (permit 1230). The
well is located in Section 34, Township 5 North,
Range 31 West, Escambia County (Appendix 1).
It is about one and one-half miles southeast of
the Bluff Springs discovery well (Figures 3 and
11). As discussed above for Bluff Springs field,
this area, west and southwest of Jay, is known to
be underlain by Louann Salt, with seismic studies
indicating salt-induced fault structures in the
overlying formations (Lloyd and Applegate,
1987). Seismic data has been interpreted by
Hughes Petroleum Corp (1988) (Figure 11) to
indicate several small structures in a northwest to

southeast trend in this specific area.
The discovery well produced 235 barrels of oil
per day and no saltwater. Oil gravity was 53.80
A.P.I.. Production is (as it is for Bluff Springs
field) from Jurassic-age Smackover Formation
dolostones from -16,075 to -16,089 feet MSL.
These dolostones were described by LSS as
gray to dark gray, sucrosic to granular, with poor
to fair porosity and permeability. Examination of
core chips with a binocular microscope concurs
with this description. Core analysis by LSS
yielded a mean porosity estimate of 15.9 percent
for this zone. Geophysical log analyses by
Charles Tootle (Appendix 9) yielded a mean
porosity estimate of 12.8 percent, an original oil
in place estimate of 4,987,347 barrels, and a
recoverable oil estimate of 498,736 barrels.
The first offset, permit 1234 (Hughes Eastern
Corporation Jones Estate number 34-1) is
located about one-half mile southeast of the
discovery well (Figure 11, Appendix 4). The
offset was completed in June 1989. The
Smackover Formation was encountered at
-16,099 feet MSL, structurally 24 feet lower than
in the discovery well (Figure 12). The structure
map (Figure 11) was drawn prior to the time this
well was drilled. In fact, the map was submitted
to the Florida Geological Survey in support of a
request for an non-regular location for this well.
As shown on the map, Hughes Eastern
Corporation expected to encounter the
Smackover at about -16,050 feet MSL in this
well. Based on the actual depth (-16,099 feet
MSL), the McDavid structure is probably smaller
than that shown. The productive limit expected
by Hughes is still below this depth (at about
-16,200 feet, Figure 11); however, analysis of
geophysical logs from this well indicate that the
oil-water contact may actually be at about
-16,102 feet MSL (Joel Duncan, Florida
Geological Survey, personal communication,
1991). In addition, production from the discovery
well appears to have peaked around December
1988 and may have depleted this small structure
enough to move the potential productive limits
above the level of the Smackover in the offset

BLUFF SPRINGS FIELD

.4. .4-

00

S1 C 4
S--- n at f

se ae s*u-mae &"

Figure 12. Geophysical log correlation, Bluff Springs and McDavid fields.

MCDAVID FIELD

Information Circular 107

(Figure 13) (Joel Duncan, Florida Geological
Survey, personal communication, 1991).
As with Bluff Springs field, production from
McDavid field is solely from the discovery well.
Production from this one-well field, as of
December 1989, totaled about 121,000 barrels of
oil (Appendix 2).

JAY FIELD

Jay field was discovered in June, 1970, by the
drilling of the Humble St. Regis number 1 (permit
417) in Section 43, Township 5 North, Range 29
West, Santa Rosa County (Figures 3 and 14 and
Appendix 1). The well produced from the
Smackover Formation from -15,264 to -15,318
feet MSL. The initial production test yielded
1712 barrels of 50.70 A.P.I. gravity oil and 23
barrels of saltwater per day.
Jay field is located within the "Jay trend" of
Escambia and Santa Rosa Counties, Florida and
Escambia County, Alabama (discussed in north
Florida oil fields introduction above). The
northern extension of Jay, in Escambia County,
Alabama, is the Little Escambia Creek (LEC)
field. Oil accumulation at Jay is within an
asymmetric anticline with the fault complex
forming the eastern barrier to oil migration
(Figure 14) (Applegate and Lloyd, 1985).
The northern limit of Jay field is a porosity
barrier in Alabama where the lithology changes
from porous dolostone to dense, micritic
limestone. The porosity at Jay field is due to
dolomitization of the pelletal grainstones in the
upper, regressive section of the Smackover
Formation. Dolomitization, fresh water leaching,
and an anhydrite cap rock (Buckner Member of
the Haynesville Formation, Figure 4) have
formed a complex, extensive reservoir.
Numerous analyses of the Jay area Smackover
Formation, including comparisons with modern
carbonate environments, have been made in
attempts to understand this complex reservoir
(Ottman et al., 1973 and 1976; Sigsby, 1976;
Mancini and Benson, 1980; Lomando et al.,

1981; Vinet, 1984; Moore, 1984; Bradford, 1984;
Lloyd et al., 1986).
Despite the complexity of the Jay field
Smackover Formation reservoir, exploration and
development of the field have been extremely
successful. Core analyses were combined with
bottom hole pressure data, porosity log
information, and other geologic data to arrive at a
highly successful reservoir management program
(Shirer et al., 1978; Langston et al., 1981;
Langston and Shirer, 1985).
As of December 1989, Jay field was producing
from a total of 44 wells, 43 wells were temporarily
shut-in, and there were 27 injection wells. One
of these injection wells was completed in 1989
(Appendix 4). Total production for Jay field, as of
the end of 1989, was 365,479,000 barrels of oil
(Appendix 2).

COLDWATER CREEK FIELD

Coldwater Creek field was discovered on June
4, 1988. The discovery well was a reentry of a
Smackover wildcat. The original permit was
issued to Inexco Oil Company (permit 1173).
The location is about two miles east of the
southern portion of Jay field in Section 26,
Township 5 North, Range 29 West, Santa Rosa
County (Figure 3). Inexco began drilling in
November, 1985. They drilled the well to a total
depth of -15,407 feet MSL, logged the well, and
recommended plugging and abandonment.
The top of the Smackover Formation had
been encountered at -14,969 feet MSL; the
Norphlet Sandstone at -15,331 feet MSL. Side
wall core analyses by Location Sample Service,
Inc. (Jackson, Mississippi) indicated a potential
oil productive zone from -14,985 to -15,016 feet
MSL. Mean porosity of the zone was about 14.8
percent. Analysis of the same interval by
Charles Tootle yielded a mean porosity of about
12 percent, an original oil in place estimate of
2,080,107 barrels, and a recoverable oil estimate
of 312,016 barrels (Appendix 9).
Louisiana Land and Exploration Company

Florida Geological Survey

McDavid Field Production

C

o1 0
1-1
W
m0
C
0

D Oil Production + Water Production

FGS160491

Figure 13. McDavid field production curve.

Information Circular 107

i I 1 JAY FIELD

25 0 1/2-- 9 2 6 27 I \ 1 "ad Crl A Wib"iU
I
r"--"."" V STRUCTURE MAP
-_ ____ -. TOP OF SMACKOVER-NORPHLET
--- -------------------- 'i OL POOL

I / I- o (Joy-LC FnldUt i t oe Cooical tco iets., 1r4)

A ... .. I -'
-A T 0A / '.474 463 450 4 493 "'
573 0
s-,, iii1 \ -_ I ",40A /
5231 9 7 7 091 ei / 27
S 528 \ / 0 96A \DI 35 / 37
5715' I 494 5 3/
530 -1--5214 495 -15144 -0 *1*14.
\1 / -16147 161
15 5i7 0 -883 481
-1677 -*5310 *-Islas 15197 443 IifI 3

43 4 43-- -, 0 -4-9
\ \ \ \ 918 514 -1516106 509 6 '469
0 676 \- 991 618 -1*-471 M 470 A 2

-1 -126
01r -16354 1663-\ a 51 -162 0 0-- 1 4

14 0 H --15177 543 0_ -\ 1 9161 i 2 \--
0117 1 1253 M
1 708 706 __ 70
114 -1637 5 -503 -417 I52
S WA % 5I C541ON WELL214 -1221 473 10
.- CONTACT, 1974 1 *-. 1

C. 50 FEET20
Committee, 1974). 101 1054
0-15354 &5 4522l 04 6097 48 U
444 479 -16226 -1102 4 -
"' "\ .\ _-__ __ .1002 '",o/a
,k483 II'/a 6
11 414 -3 1073 537 602 9
59. 419110 `16 1 S2 ,0,,5

6 -_ )W C O N T A C T,-10 7 42-1602- O Weh
0, .2 iEEP U
24 21 2
635 5,',8, 58 I .5'" 6

Figue 14 Ja fied sructre ap, op f Smd~oer Frmaton afte Ja-/FFieds Uit eoloica

Florida Geological Survey

(LL&E) took over operations on January 10, 1986
and plugged and abandoned the well. Bruxoil,
Inc. then took over responsibility for the well.
They conducted a geophysical survey across the
area (geophysical permit G-70-86; see Lloyd,
1989). The stated purpose was to determine
whether to reenter the existing well or drill at a
new location. They decided not to reenter the
well and have not submitted any permit
applications to drill in the vicinity.
In 1987, Red Rock Oil and Minerals
Corporation, received permit 1220 (Appendix 1)
to reenter the well. They completed redrilling on
May 24, 1987 and ran the first production test on
June 4, 1988. This test yielded 152 barrels per
day of 46.5 A.P.I. gravity oil and 280 barrels per
day of saltwater. In a retest on December 27,
1988, the well flowed 259 barrels per day of
46.5' A.P.I. gravity oil with no saltwater
production. Production is from the zone
discussed above, from -14,984 to -15,006 feet
MSL in the Smackover Formation. Judging from
the field's location within the Jay trend, it appears
that reservoir formation may have been
structurally related to the Foshee Fault System;
however, a single well does not yield sufficient
information to test this hypothesis.
No additional wells have been drilled at
Coldwater Creek field. Total production, as of
December 1989, from Coldwater Creek field was
9,000 barrels of oil from this single well
(Appendix 2).

BLACKJACK CREEK FIELD

The Blackjack Creek field discovery well was
the Humble Oil and Refining Company St.
Regis Paper Company number 13-3 well (permit
523) drilled in Section 13, Township 4 North,
Range 29 West, Santa Rosa County, about eight
miles southeast of Jay field. The well was
completed February 14, 1972, as a producer in
the Norphlet Sandstone from -15,965 to -15,975
feet MSL. Initial production was 371 barrels of
51.30 A.P.I. gravity oil and 4.5 barrels of
saltwater per day. Due to limited productivity and

water production from the Norphlet Sandstone,
the well was recompleted as a Smackover
Formation producer from -15,633 to -15,743
feet MSL. The initial production test from the
Smackover, on January 22, 1975, yielded 1,428
barrels of 51.2 A.P.I. gravity oil and no
saltwater.
Blackjack Creek field now produces primarily
from oolitic dolostones of the Smackover
Formation (Applegate and Lloyd, 1985). The
trapping structure is an anticline located on the
downthrown, southwest side of the regional
Foshee Fault System (Figure 15). Similar to Jay
field, Blackjack Creek has been carefully cored
and analyzed to achieve a successful reservoir
management and development program.
About 160,000 barrels of oil have been
produced from the Norphlet Sandstone at
Blackjack Creek field. The remaining production,
54,322,000 barrels through December 1989
(Appendix 2), is from the Smackover. Through
January 1990, 20 producing wells had been
drilled at Blackjack Creek; only five dry holes had
been drilled. Nine wells were actively being
produced as of December 1989 (Appendix 3).

MT. CARMEL FIELD

Mt. Carmel field was discovered in December
1971 by LL&E. The discovery well was the LL&E
Finley Heirs number 39-3 (permit 504), located
about one mile east of Jay field in Section 39,
Township 5 North, Range 29 West, Santa Rosa
County (Figures 3 and 16). Initial production was
1,440 barrels of 470 A.P.I. gravity oil per day with
no saltwater.
Mt. Carmel field is separated from Jay field by
the Foshee Fault System (Figure 16). Mt.
Carmel field produces both oil and gas from the
Smackover Formation and the Norphlet
Sandstone. Complex reservoir geometry has
apparently made development of this field more
difficult. As of January 1990, three producing
wells and 10 dry holes had been drilled at Mt.
Carmel field.

Information Circular 107

Figure 15. Blackjack Creek structure map, top of Smackover Formation (after Blackjack Creek Geological
Committee, 1974).

Florida Geological Survey

632 PERMIT NUMBER
-14770 DEPTH

MOUNT CARMEL FIELD
35 Santa Rosa County, Forlda

u STRUCTURE MAP TOP
D OF NORPHLET SANDSTONE
\ \ I (Jim Miller, 1974)
\ABAMA1
.ORIDA- T 6N "
1 28 ^V0 2000 FEET

682 0 600 METERS
% -14930 -

% I N
D U 1219 660 1

-14770 %
+ \ \ 00

-15345
\504
1 14770 \ \
T 5N -- --

S73939

PRODUCER N
BOTTOM HOLE LOCATION
+ DRY HOLE
d ABANDONED LOCATION
-.- OIL/WATER CONTACT, 1974
C.I. 100 FEET

FQ8tl0491

Figure 16. Mt. Carmel field structure map, top of Norphlet Sandstone (after Miller, 1974).

Information Circular 107

There is currently one producing well in the Mt.
Carmel field. As of the end of 1989, the field had
produced 4,666,000 barrels of oil (Appendix 2).

MCLELLAN FIELD

McLellan field was discovered on February 15,
1986, with the initial testing of the Exxon
Corporation State of Florida number 33-1
(permit 1194, Appendix 1, Figures 3 and 17).
The well is located about 3.25 miles north of the
abandoned Sweetwater Creek field in Section
33, Township 6 North, Range 26 West, Santa
Rosa County.
An initial flowing test of the discovery well
produced 152 barrels of 410 A.P.I. gravity oil per
day and no saltwater. Production is from
Smackover Formation dolostones from -13,827
to -13,845 feet MSL (Figure 18). Core analysis
of a potential oil and gas productive zone from
-13,819 to -13,845 feet MSL by Core
Laboratories, Inc. (Dallas, Texas) indicated a
mean porosity of 12.3 percent. The analysis
showed additional oil and gas production
potential between -13,854 and -13,863 feet MSL.
Mean porosity is about 15 percent for this zone.
Both of the analyzed zones contained dark, fine
grained, microcrystalline dolostones with vuggy
porosity.
McLellan field is located within the area known
to be underlain by the Louann Salt and may have
a salt-related trap structure. It is also located
within a few miles of the approximate updip limits
of the Smackover Formation (Lloyd, 1989;
Applegate et al., 1978; Ottman et al., 1973,
1976); thus, the trap could be a stratigraphic
pinchout. Current data does not reveal which
trap mechanism produced the Smackover
reservoir for this field.
The first offset and confirmation well for the
field was the Exxon Corporation State of Florida
number 34-2 (permit 1206). It is located about
one-half mile east of the discovery well (Figure
17). It was tested on March 9, 1987 and flowed
641 barrels of 43.40 A.P.I. gravity oil and 24

barrels of saltwater per day. The Smackover
Formation was encountered at -13,788 feet MSL,
27 feet higher than in the discovery well (Figure
18). Production is from the Smackover
Formation from -13,797 to -13,847 feet MSL.
Core analysis by All Points, Inc. (Houston,
Texas) yielded a mean porosity of 11.5 percent
for the productive zone.
A second offset to the discovery well, Exxon
Corporation State of Florida number 28-4
(permit 1226) was drilled about one-half mile
north of the discovery well (Figure 17). During
initial production tests, in February 1988, the well
flowed 154 barrels of oil (gravity not reported)
and 171 barrels of saltwater per day. The
Smackover was encountered 42 feet higher in
this well than in the discovery well (Figure 17),
indicating a fairly steep gradient between these
wells.
Operations at the second offset well were
suspended in March 1988 and the well has since
been temporarily abandoned. As of December
1989, production for McLellan field was from the
two remaining wells and totaled 174,000 barrels
of oil (Appendix 2).

SWEETWATER CREEK FIELD

Sweetwater Creek field was discovered on
April 22, 1977, with the successful flow test of the
Houston Oil and Minerals Corporation W. M.
Stokes number 15-2 well (permit 881, Appendix
1, Figures 3 and 17). The well is located in
Section 15, Township 5 North, Range 26 West,
Santa Rosa County. In the initial test the well
produced 624 barrels of 43.50 A.P.I. gravity oil
and only a trace of saltwater from a Smackover
limestone interval from -14,044 to -14,085 feet
MSL. This test data spurred rumors that a "new
Jay" field had been discovered. Rumors proved
to be false and an offset drilled in 1978 to the
south of the discovery well was dry (permit 890,
Figure 17). Core analyses of the Smackover
Formation in the offset well by Core Laboratories,
Inc. (Dallas, Texas) indicated very fine

Florida Geological Survey

ALABAMA

FLORIDA
29

32

P175
8

P1226*
-13773
P153 0
4 P1194
-13815

27

* P1206
-13788

* P881
-14045

+ P890
-14071

26

McLELLAN FIELD

1 0 1 Ml
i -I -I --I

1.6

1.6 KM

SCALE

EXPLANATION
P1136 PERMIT NUMBER

-16176 DEPTH TO TOP OF SMACKOVER
FORMATION (FEET BELOW MSL)
PRODUCER
-4 DRY HOLE

11

23

R26W R25W
25

36

T 6 N
T 5 N

12

I

6

13
01

F-
24 Z
(n

0

0
0
-j

0

FGS200491
wain se

Figure 17. McLellan and Sweetwater Creek fields well location map.

30

-N-

LI

o1 SWEETWATER
I I
CREEK FIELD

,

:^::!:t .^ ==::i ;^ ^
^m:;^ ~ ~ ~ 11 i:;:j;;: ?
..7... --. 3 -- ,

i .....
d t : .
^ams^-i~~~r^; -o lw ,^ ?Tn'5
r~f'i T^ .....TV

11.5%

1IIl : :!

i 1i

t i illll

1W1~E

* -
K ii .1.

as/

R
i,': 1?

Dual Induction-SFL/Gamma Ray

FGS220491

Figure 18. Geophysical log correlation, McLellan field.

BUCKNER
ANHYDRITE

12.3%

14100

14200

Dual Inductlon-SFL/Gamma Ray

.f. 7 rl T rrooo-r-T"I-~'m "TTHTTIL;;i;l: -;J5...6A A 11111T 111 m-

MEAN
POROSITY

SMACKOVER
FORMATION

~-~c~U -- -= ---- ----- --

idiij: ij-
"ii' i^Lii i -
*.IrK SI;-Z ^ i~i: -;: i
-- -ff ^ t.:.---- -J

--^ --- ~ ~i^ i ':: ::1!!
,'!

,,,.. .......

=;=!t *^ ^ ; H!
i i R.V It
1: : ::: ::

i ii i:::: \\i ='i
^ ^ -- ^ tt -t *
... 1>, 11-^-i

i i (j ^SS

"'^ ^ "iili ofF "

_...| 1 L-?.
14 0 :: -JH :; -L -
_" Z _.1
__ Zg:i -..
: : : : ; l '* "~ '* ; : : : I

'*.L- bJirtt7^ba~

- F ,r *

%-1 4.L.vi ;

l l ll ll t '

1' (

|K/

P-1194

|P-I206|

I.

Florida Geological Survey

crystalline, gray brown limestone and dolostone,
with low porosity and permeability, and potential
for only saltwater production. The field produced
a total of 13,695 barrels of oil during its entire
lifetime (Appendix 2). The discovery well was
the only producer at Sweetwater Creek field and
was plugged and abandoned in December 1980,
after it began producing 100 percent saltwater.

South Florida Oil Field Summaries
INTRODUCTION
South Florida oil production began with
Florida's first oil discovery at Sunniland field in
September, 1943. There are now a total of 14 oil
fields in South Florida, oriented in a northwest-
southeast trend through Lee, Hendry, Collier and
Dade Counties (Figure 1). Of these 14
Sunniland trend oil fields, 10 are active, one is
temporarily shut-in, and three are plugged and
abandoned.
Reservoirs found along the Sunniland trend
are composed of localized buildups of organic
debris into mounds or pods which formed porous
grainstones within the upper Sunniland
Formation (Figure 2). The fauna which make up
these bioherms include rudistids, algal plates,
gastropods, and foraminifera. Dolomitization has
enhanced the porosity of these grainstones. The
grainstones grade laterally into nonporous,
miliolid-rich mudstones (Means, 1977, Mitchell-
Tapping, 1984, 1985, and 1986). These miliolid
mudstones often provide the trapping
mechanism for these reservoirs.
The exception to the above general description
of south Florida oil fields is Lake Trafford field.
Lake Trafford produces oil from a fractured
limestone in the lower Sunniland Formation
(Means, 1977).

LEHIGH PARK FIELD

The discovery well for the Lehigh Park field
was the Exxon Consolidated Tomoka number

22-4 (permit 712) drilled in Section 22, Township
44 South, Range 26 East, Lee County. This is
the most northwesterly field in the Sunniland
trend (Figure 1). The discovery well was
completed on July 30, 1974, in the -11,349 to
-11,354 foot MSL interval of the Sunniland
Formation. Initial production was 490 barrels of
27.60 A.P.I. gravity oil and 48 barrels of saltwater
per day. This well was later abandoned and a
deviated well (permit 712A) was drilled at the
same surface location to produce higher on the
structure. A total of nine dry holes were drilled to
delineate this field. All of the producing wells
were directionally drilled because bottom hole
locations are beneath the town of Lehigh Acres.
Figure 19 is a structure map on the top of the
Sunniland Formation (Ferber, 1985) at Lehigh
Park field. The reservoir appears to be typical of
the south Florida Sunniland trend fields -a
leached limestone bioherm. Core analysis by R.
E. Laboratories, Inc. (Dallas, Texas) yielded an
average porosity of 19.7 percent for the
Sunniland Formation from -11,337 to -11,364
feet MSL. They described this interval as a tan
to brown, fossiliferous, partially dolomitized
limestone.
Two wells were actively producing and
production totaled 5,165,000 barrels of oil at the
end of December 1989 for this field (Appendices
2 and 3).

TOWNSEND CANAL FIELD

Townsend Canal field is located in Section 2,
Township 45 South, Range 28 East, Hendry
County, approximately three miles north of Mid-
Felda field, within the Sunniland trend (Figure 3).
It was discovered on June 27, 1982, with the first
production test of the Natural Resources
Management Corporation A. Duda & Sons
number 2-3 well (permit 1070). The test
produced 160 barrels of 28.40 A.P.I. gravity oil
and 42 barrels of saltwater per day. Production is
from the Sunniland Formation between -11,363
and -11,368 feet MSL (Appendix 1).

Information Circular 107

Figure 19. Lehigh Park field structure map, top of Sunniland Formation (after Ferber, 1985).

Florida Geological Survey

Two wells were producing at Townsend Canal
field at the end of 1989 (Appendix 3). Production
totaled 406,000 barrels of oil at the end of 1989
(Appendix 2).

WEST FELDA FIELD

West Felda field was discovered on August 2,
1966, with the drilling of the Sun Red Cattle
number 21-3 well (permit 371) in Section 21,
Township 45 South, Range 28 East, Hendry
County (Appendix 1, Figures 1 and 20). The first
production test yielded 56 barrels of 24.60 A.P.I.
gravity oil and 148 barrels of saltwater per day
from the -11,437 to -11,440 foot MSL interval of
the Sunniland Formation.
The field is mainly a stratigraphic trap;
however, structural closure is more evident than
at Sunoco Felda field (Figure 20). The main
producing unit has a composition typical of the
south Florida Sunniland trend fields (Means,
1977, Mitchell-Tapping, 1986). Means (1977)
summarized the reservoir characteristics for
West Felda field as follows: average pay
thickness of 17 feet, average porosity of 20
percent, average water saturation of 35 percent,
A.P.I. oil gravity of 260, and average daily oil
production of 4,600 barrels. Values indicate
improved reservoir quality over Sunoco Felda
field.
Means (1977) believed that the reservoir
quality was improved because West Felda field
"experienced higher energy and more-normal
marine conditions" than did Sunoco Felda field.
Alternatively, Mitchell-Tapping (1986) considered
the energy levels about the same for both fields
and believed that the improved quality is "due to
greater sub-aerial exposure as the mound
structure is larger and topographically higher" at
West Felda field.
At the end of December 1989, eleven wells
were producing at West Felda field and
cumulative production totaled 41,226 barrels of
oil (Appendices 2 and 3).

MID-FELDA FIELD

The Mid-Felda field discovery well was the R.
L. Burns Red Cattle number 27-4 (permit 904)
in Section 27, Township 45 South, Range 28
East in Hendry County, Florida. The well was
completed in the -11,433 to -11,437 foot MSL
interval of the Sunniland Formation on October
13, 1977. An initial production test on October
24, 1977 yielded 281 barrels of 260 A.P.I. gravity
oil and 53.6 barrels of saltwater per day
(Appendix 1).
The well is located on a small subsurface
feature between West Felda field and Sunoco
Felda field (Figure 20). Samples from the
producing zone show a partially dolomitized
fossil hash with about ten feet of oil staining.
Geophysical log analysis indicated approximately
20 percent porosity for an eight-foot interval
(Applegate and Lloyd, 1985).
At the end of 1989, two wells were actively
producing (Appendix 3). Cumulative production,
as of the end of December, 1989 was 1,239,000
barrels of oil (Appendix 2).

SUNOCO FELDA FIELD

The Sunoco Felda field, located in Hendry and
Collier Counties, was discovered in July 1964 by
Sunoco, when they drilled the discovery well
(Appendix 1). The well (the Sun Red Cattle
number 32-1; permit 315) is located in Section
32, Township 45 South, Range 29 East. Sunoco
Felda was the second commercial oil field
discovered in Florida and was discovered 21
years after the first commercial discovery
(Sunniland field). Forty Mile Bend field was
discovered in 1954 but turned out to be non-
commercial and was abandoned in 1956. The
Sunoco Felda discovery well location was based
on a combination of subsurface and seismic data
(Tyler and Erwin, 1976).
In an initial pumping test in November 1964,
the discovery well produced 427 barrels of 25.40
A.P.I. gravity oil and 11 barrels of saltwater per

I I 1 1 SUNOCO FELDA, WEST FELDA, AND MID-FELDA FIELDS
S1I0NAI 5 I CIC W O Ii
WEST FELDA- -- -. --.- --- .--- M
.,,1\, I I TOP OF SUNNLAND

I -
'as ,/ I ,

10 111 I. 7I5
I-- R a 0- ..
if --ft Is I, 1 i39

1T '- I-. I M1, + -

-I I1 1
Ts75 1

"---... .. .-- .. __ [ -- -- 1 I
F ------.; -7+1a
6 "5 *-37 -- SUN O C O-. ELD A =
I119" s 1153 rT I I1ri,

..5 -nsw I I -- 3' Itss)
11 I1 1o I
a s jt m I M -- -..

I1 I -

( if 991 l 1 1 = I l. 1i I 1

442 f46- -, -

Figure 20. Sunoco Felda, West Felda, and Mid-Felda fields structure map, top of Sunniland Formation.

Florida Geological Survey

day. Production is from the Sunniland Formation
from -11,417 to -11,430 feet MSL from a leached
limestone bioherm. The faunal composition of
the bioherm is somewhat typical of the Sunniland
reservoirs (as described in the south Florida oil
fields introduction above) (Means, 1977, Mitchell-
Tapping, 1986). Mitchell-Tapping (1986)
observed faunal differences at Sunoco Felda
field which indicated formation in "the shallow
lagoonal zone of the back-reef environment."
The reservoir has a permeability barrier to the
northeast which prevents migration of the oil up-
dip (Tyler and Erwin, 1977).
Means (1977) summarized the reservoir
characteristics of Sunoco Felda field. These
include an average pay zone thickness of 11
feet, average porosity of 18 percent, average
water saturation of 50 percent, A.P.I. oil gravity of
25', and average daily oil production of 1,700
barrels.
As of December 1989, Sunoco Felda field was
producing from 18 wells (Appendix 3). Total
production was 11,529,000 barrels of oil
(Appendix 2).

CORKSCREW FIELD

Corkscrew field was discovered on November
10, 1985 with an initial swab test of the R. K.
Petroleum Rex Properties number 33-2 (permit
1170). Corkscrew field is located about two and
one-half miles north and slightly west of the one-
well Lake Trafford field in Collier County, Florida
(Figures 1 and 21). In its initial test, the
discovery well produced 435 barrels of 250 A.P.I.
gravity oil per day with no saltwater. Production
was from open hole in the Sunniland at -11,502
to -11,520 feet MSL.
Core analysis by Analytical Logging, Inc. (Ft.
Myers, Florida) indicated an oil producing zone
from -11,506 to -11,515 feet MSL. The zone was
described as a "fossil-hash" of dolomitic
limestone with an average porosity of 15.25
percent. This description, and the small closed
structure drawn by Cheeseman (1988) (Figure

21), are again consistent with a bioherm
formation for the reservoir.
Two successful offsets have been drilled at
Corkscrew field (Figure 21, permits 1199 and
1201A) (Lloyd, 1989). These two wells and the
discovery well were all producing at the end of
1989 (Appendix 3). Total oil production as of
January 1, 1990 was 524,000 barrels (Appendix
2).

LAKE TRAFFORD FIELD

Lake Trafford field was discovered by Mobil Oil
Corporation on the Baron Collier Jr. lease in
Section 9, Township 47 South, Range 28 East in
Collier County (Figures 1 and 21). The discovery
well (permit 401) was completed on March 30,
1969 (Appendix 1). During initial production tests
the well pumped 118 barrels of 25.60 A.P.I.
gravity oil and 78 barrels of saltwater per day.
Production was from the Sunniland Formation
from -11,830 to -11,892 feet MSL. The well was
later squeeze cemented to shut off water from
above the perforations. The well is unique in
south Florida in that it has not produced water
since that time.
Lake Trafford field is also unique in south
Florida as the only field which produces oil from
a fractured limestone in the lower Sunniland
Formation (Means, 1977). Core material from
the discovery well has been described as an
argillaceous, burrowed, limestone "rubble." The
combination of burrowing and fracturing was
believed to be responsible for the development of
producible permeability and porosity (Jim
Richter, Mobil Oil Corporation, personal
communication, in Applegate and Lloyd, 1985).
Offsets drilled northwest and south of the
discovery well were dry holes. The discovery
well remains the single producing well for Lake
Trafford field. The well was shut-in in March
1988 and remained shut-in for the rest of 1988
and all of 1989. Total oil production for this field,
as of the end of 1989 was 278,000 barrels
(Appendix 2).

Information Circular 107

CORKSCREW AND
LAKE TRAFFORD FIELDS
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
STRUCTURE MAP
TOP OF SUNNILAND FORMATION
(CHEESMAN,1988)

2

408 PERMIT NUMBER
-11573 DEPTH
0 PRODUCER
BOTTOM HOLE L
-DRY HOLE

C.I. 20 FEET

1200

Figure 21. Corkscrew and Lake Trafford fields structure map, top of Sunniland Formation (after M.
Cheeseman, independent petroleum geologist, Pensacola, Florida, 1988, personal
communication).

Florida Geological Survey

SUNNILAND FIELD

In September 1943, Humble Oil and Refining
Company discovered Sunniland field in Collier
County, Florida (Figure 1); this was the first
commercial oil discovered in Florida. The
discovery well was the Humble Oil and Refining
Company Gulf Coast Realties number 1 (permit
42) located in Section 29, Township 48 South,
Range 30 East. The well was completed in an
open hole interval between -11,568 and
-11,592 feet MSL. Initial production was 97
barrels of 260 A.P.I. gravity oil and 425 barrels of
saltwater per day by pumping.
The well was drilled on a prospect outlined by
magnetic, gravity, seismic, and core data.
Production in the field is from various porous
zones in rudistid mounds in the upper 60 feet of
the formation. Mitchell-Tapping (1985) described
the producing horizon as consisting of leached
rudist and algal particles together with pellets
and foraminifers. Mitchell-Tapping's (1985)
study of Sunniland, Bear Island, and Forty Mile
Bend fields concluded that the depositional
environment of these fields was that of a tidal
shoal with a landward (east-northeast) mud-flat
area and a seaward (west-southwest) shallow-
water back-reef area. The structure map (Figure
22) for the Sunniland field shows a northwest-
southeast trending dome that formed as these
rudistid beds grew with slowly-rising sea level
during the Lower Cretaceous. The dome is
about four miles long and two miles wide with
closure of about 40 feet.
Twenty-six producing wells and ten dry holes
have been drilled at Sunniland field. Sunniland
field has been producing oil for almost 50 years;
increased saltwater production has forced
abandonment of many of the old Sunniland wells.
Eighteen of the producers had been abandoned
by the end of 1989. Of the remaining eight
producers, five were shut-in during 1988 and
1989. The other three produced intermittently
during 1988 and 1989 and were all also shut-in
as of December 1989 (Appendix 3). Oil

production totaled 18,445,000 barrels at the end
of December 1989 (Appendix 2).

SEMINOLE FIELD

The discovery well for the Seminole field was
the Weiner-Oleum Corporation well number 12-1
(permit 662) in Section 12, Township 48 South,
Range 32 East, Hendry County (Figure 1). The
well was completed in the -11,379 to -11,384 foot
MSL interval of the Sunniland Formation on
November 14, 1973. Initial production was 26
barrels of 25.40 A.P.I. gravity oil and eight barrels
of saltwater per day. This three-well oil field was
abandoned in 1978 after producing a total of
85,000 barrels of oil (Appendix 2).

BEAR ISLAND FIELD

Bear Island field was discovered on December
5, 1972, with the completion of the Exxon Gulf
Coast Realties number 2-4 well (permit 563) in
Section 2, Township 49 South, Range 30 East
(Figure 23). The field is located about two miles
southeast of Sunniland field (Figure 1). The
discovery well pumped 132 barrels of 260 A.P.I.
gravity oil and 545 barrels of saltwater per day
from perforations between -11,558 and -11,564
feet MSL in Sunniland carbonates.
The structure map of Bear Island field (Figure
23) indicates a northwest-southeast trending
dome about 4.5 miles long and 2.5 miles wide
with a closure of about 55 feet. Mitchell-Tapping
(1985) found this field to have the same faunal
assemblage as Sunniland field; his conclusion
concerning the general depositional environment
is listed above in the description of Sunniland
field. Despite the generally similar origin,
Mitchell-Tapping (1985) found Bear Island field to
be lithologically different than Sunniland field.
Most of the Sunniland Formation at Bear Island
field is dolomitized and is more leached than at
Sunniland field. Anhydrite and some secondary
dolomitization has reduced the effective

Information Circular 107

Figure 22. Sunniland field structure map, top of Sunniland Formation.

35

Florida Geological Survey

BEAR ISLAND FIELD
Colr County, Floria

STRUCTURE MAP
BASE OF ANHYDRITE IN UPPER SUNNILAND FORMATION
~----< (From Bwr mlm Geologol Conmitte,1978)

0 4000 FEET

0 1200 METERS

N

BOTTOM HOLE LOCATION
DRY HOLE
WATER INJECTION WELL
OIL/WATER CONTACT, 1978
C. I. 8 FEET

*4*,- I 4
-11543

802 800 |
23 -11525 'o-11534 \$ |1

I 19 962 \ 6

779 733 838B
3\ *-11529 *-11532 -11547 I

1 4\1118
1060 1 \ 640
64 563 -11542 7
-611643 -1 52462

824 727
-11536 -11540

1825
0-118 52

733 PERMIT NUMBER I
-11532 DEPTH I

I i FGS250491

Figure 23. Bear Island field structure map, base of anhydrite in Upper Sunniland Formation (after Bear
Island Geological Committee, 1978).

T 48 8
T 49 8

4

+

@
Ol

Information Circular 107

permeability in some sections. Dolomitization in
the lower units of the upper Sunniland, however,
enhanced both porosity and permeability
(Mitchell-Tapping, 1985).
A total of 25 producing wells have been drilled
at Bear Island field; seven of these were active at
the end of 1989 (Appendix 3). Total oil
production, through December 1989, was
10,575,000 barrels (Appendix 2).

PEPPER HAMMOCK FIELD

Pepper Hammock field was discovered on
September 28, 1978. The discovery well, the
Exxon Corporation Collier Company number
23-1 well (permit 897) is located in Section 23,
Township 29 South, Range 30 East,
approximately one and one-half miles south of
Bear Island field (Figure 1). The initial production
test yielded 20 barrels of 270 A.P.I. gravity oil and
206 barrels of saltwater per day. Production was
from Sunniland limestones between -11,586 and
-11,590 feet MSL. The discovery well is the only
well at Pepper Hammock and is shut-in. A total
of 323 barrels of oil were produced before the
well was shut-in in October 1978 (Appendix 2).

BAXTER ISLAND FIELD

Baxter Island field is a one-well, abandoned
field located approximately eight miles southeast
of Bear Island field (Figure 1). The single
producer and discovery well was the Diamond
Shamrock Gerry Brothers Ltd. number 31-3 well
(permit 865) located in Section 31, Township 49
South, Range 32 East, Collier County. In its
initial production test on August 11, 1977, the
well pumped 35 barrels of 22.4 A.P.I. gravity oil
and 220 barrels of saltwater per day. Production
was from the Sunniland Formation from -11,482
to -11,485 feet MSL. The field produced a total
of 1,859 barrels of oil before the well was shut-in
in 1978 (Appendix 2). The well was plugged and
abandoned on January 12, 1980.

RACCOON POINT FIELD

Raccoon Point field is the southeastern-most
active field in the Sunniland trend (Figure 1). Its
discovery well was the Exxon -Oleum
Corporation number 33-4 (permit 829) drilled in
Section 33, Township 51 South, Range 43 East,
Collier County (Figure 24). Initial production was
from the -11,371 to -11,375 foot MSL interval of
the Sunniland Formation. In a production test on
June 20, 1978, the well pumped 57 barrels of
23.30 A.P.I. gravity oil and 845 barrels of
saltwater per day.
Figure 24 is a preliminary structure map for
Raccoon Point field. The map indicates an
elongated series of small highs trending north-
south. The limits of the field are still not
completely defined since no dry holes have been
drilled at Raccoon Point to date. A total of 15
producing wells have been drilled, one during
1989 (Appendix 4).
At the end of 1989, 12 of the 15 wells were
active (Appendix 3). Oil production totaled
4,444,000 barrels at the end of December 1989
(Appendix 2).

FORTY MILE BEND FIELD

Commonwealth Oil Company drilled the
Wiseheart State Board of Education number 1
wildcat (permit 167) in Section 16, Township 45
South, Range 35 East, Dade County. It was
located 50 miles southeast of Sunniland field
(Figure 1). The well was completed in the
-11,298 to -11,315 foot MSL interval of the
Sunniland Formation and was initially tested on
February 5, 1954. In this initial test, the well
pumped an estimated 76 barrels of 21.30 A.P.I.
gravity oil and 96 barrels of saltwater per day.
Core examination (Applegate and Lloyd, 1985) in
the open interval showed a partially to fully oil-
saturated, finely crystalline dolostone and
limestone with pin-point porosity, which did not
appear to be commercial.
The second well in the Forty Mile Bend field,

Florida Geological Survey

22

P998 P1190
-11360
EXPLANATION
P1136 PERMIT NUMBER
-16176 DEPTH TO TOP OF SUNNILAND
FEET BELOW MSL 11
BOTTOM HOLE LOCATION
4A SALT WATER DISPOSAL

141 1 0
329 0 LL

0

12 -

FGS280491

Figure 24. Raccoon Point field preliminary structure map, top of Sunniland Formation.

I

-~I

RACCOON POINT FIELD
COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
STRUCTURE MAP
TOP OF SUNNILAND
0 1 MI
tH I I
0 SCALE 1.6 KM --

015 26
02 0

/ A 35 Q

P -P928 36
-11352
//*/ d

Information Circular 107

the Gulf Oil State of Florida number 1 well
(permit 182), was completed in 1954. The well is
located about three and one-quarter miles east of
the discovery well (Figure 1). It was completed
as a pumping well in the -11,309 to -11,316 foot
MSL interval of the Sunniland Formation. Initial
production was 112 barrels of 21.70 A.P.I. gravity
oil per day. Water production was not tabulated.
The distance between the two wells
comprising Forty Mile Bend field indicate that
they probably did not produce from the same
reservoir. Mitchell-Tapping (1985) studied the
fauna and lithology of Sunniland, Bear Island,
and Forty Mile Bend fields. His description of the
depositional environment for these fields is
discussed above in the Sunniland field
description. He found the lithology and fauna at
Forty Mile Bend to be similar to that of Sunniland
field, except for the presence of anhydrite in the
pore space and an increase in the dolomite
content.
Low oil gravity and low porosity and
permeability in the Sunniland at both well
locations made this field non-commercial. In
addition, a half-inch hole was found in the casing
of the Gulf well (permit 182) at -10,027 feet MSL.
This could have caused excessive water flow,
and thus shortened the productive life of this
well. Both of the Forty Mile Bend wells were
abandoned in 1956, after producing only 32,888
barrels of oil in about 17 months in 1954 and
1955 (Appendix 2) (Gunter, 1955 and 1956).

SUMMARY

Florida oil production continued to decline
during 1988 and 1989. Jay field, as the leading
producing field for Florida, controls the rate of
decline. The field appears to be following the
production curve predicted by Christian, et al.
(1981) in their discussion of tertiary recovery
estimates for Jay field.
Three development wells and sixteen
exploratory wells were drilled during 1988 and
1989. One exploratory well was completed as a

producer and was the discovery well for McDavid
field (Escambia County). Coldwater Creek field
was also discovered in 1988 with the first
production test of the Red Rock Oil and Minerals
Corporation Pittman Estate No. 26-2A in Santa
Rosa County.
Six wells were completed in federal waters off
Florida during 1988 and 1989. Three of the wells
were in the Pensacola area; three were in the
Destin Dome area. The principal drilling targets
in these areas are the Smackover Formation and
the Norphlet Sandstone (Figure 4). One of the
Destin Dome area wells (Chevron-6406) is the
second offshore Norphlet discovery in this area.
Geophysical exploration during 1988 and 1989
concentrated in the Florida panhandle and the
south Florida peninsula. The panhandle
exploration included the known oil-producing
Santa Rosa and Escambia Counties, an area
offshore from Santa Rosa and Escambia
Counties, and the Apalachicola Embayment
area. South Florida seismic activity was east of
the known Sunniland producing trend in Broward,
Dade, Hendry and Palm Beach Counties.

Florida Geological Survey

REFERENCES

Applegate, A. V., 1987, The Brown Dolomite Zone of the Lehigh Acres Formation (Aptian) in the South
Florida Basin A potentially prolific producing horizon offshore: Florida Geological Survey Information
Circular no. 104, Part II, p. 46-66.

and Lloyd, J. M., 1985, Summary of Florida petroleum production and exploration,onshore
and offshore, through 1984: Florida Geological Survey Information Circular no. 101, 69 p.

Pontigo, F. A., Jr., and Rooke, J. H., 1978, Jurassic Smackover oil prospects in the
Apalachicola embayment: Oil a*id Gas Journal, January 23, 1978, p. 80-84.

Bear Island Geological Committee, 1978, Bear Island field structure map, Exxon Corporation Sunniland
oil pool report: Florida Department of Natural Resources Hearing no. 40.

Blackjack Creek Geological Committee, 1974, Blackjack Creek field unit, Exhibit M-1: Florida
Department of Natural Resources Hearing no. 38.

Bradford, C. A., 1984, Transgressive-regressive carbonate of the Smackover Formation, Escambia
County, Alabama: in Ventress, W. P. S., Bebout, D. G., Perkins, B. F., and Moore, C. H. (editors), The
Jurassic of the Gulf Rim: Proceedings of the third annual research conference, Gulf Coast Section,
Society of Economic Paleontologists and Mineralogists Foundation, p. 27-39.

Christian, L. D., Shirer, J. A., Kimbel, E. L., and Blackwell, R. J., 1981, Planning a tertiary oil-recovery
project for Jay/LEC fields unit: Journal of Petroleum Technology, v. 33, p. 1535-1544.

Cramer, F. H., 1971, Position of the north Florida Lower Paleozoic block in Silurian time; phytoplankton
evidence: Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 76, no. 20, p. 4754-4757.

1973, Middle and Upper Silurian chitinozoan succession in Florida subsurface: Journal of
Paleontology, v. 47, no. 2, p. 279-288.

Ferber, R., 1985, Depositional and diagenetic history of the Sunniland Formation, Lower Cretaceous,
Lehigh Park field, Lee County, Florida: Master's thesis, University of Southwestern Louisiana,
Lafayette, Louisiana.

Gould, G. J., 1989, Gulf of Mexico Update: May 1988 July 1989, U. S. Department of the Interior
Minerals Management Service: OCS Information Report, MMS 89-0079, 51 p.

Gunter, H., 1955, Exploration for oil and gas in Florida, Florida Geological Survey, 1954 Supplement to
Information Circular no. 1, 35 p.

1956, Exploration for oil and gas in Florida, Florida Geological Survey, 1955 Supplement to
Information Circular no. 1, 31 p.

Information Circular 107

Hughes Eastern Corporation, 1988, McDavid Prospect, Escambia County, Florida, top Smackover,
Geophysical Map: Florida Department of Natural Resources Hearing no. 42.

Jay-LEC Fields Unit Geological Committee, 1974, Structure map-top of Smackover-Norphlet oil pool,
Exhibit no. G-1: Florida Department of Natural Resources Hearing no. 36.

Johnson, P. G. and Tucker, D. L., 1987, The federal Outer Continental Shelf oil and gas leasing program;
a Florida perspective, February, 1987: Office of the Governor, Office of Planning and Budgeting,
Intergovernmental Unit, 16 p.

Langston, E. P., and Shirer, J. A., 1985, Performance of the Jay-LEC field unit under mature waterflood
and early tertiary operations: Journal of Petroleum Technology, v. 37, p. 261-268.

Shirer, J. A., and Nelson, D. E., 1981, Innovative reservoir management key to highly
successful Jay-LEC waterflood: Journal of Petroleum Technology, v. 33, p. 783-791.

Lloyd, J. M., 1986, Bluff Springs field discovery renews interest in Florida's western panhandle: Oil and
Gas Journal, June 30, 1986, p. 105-108.

1989, 1986 and 1987 Florida petroleum production and exploration: Florida Geological
Survey Information Circular no. 106, 39 p.

and Applegate, A. V., 1987, 1985 Florida petroleum production and exploration: Florida
Geological Survey Information Circular no. 104, Part I, p. 1-42.

Ragland, P. C., Ragland, J. M., and Parker, W. C., 1986, Diagenesis of the Jurassic
Smackover Formation, Jay field, Florida: Gulf Coast Association of Geological Societies Transactions,
v. 36, p. 201-211.

Lomando, A. J., Jr., Schreiber, C., and Nurmi, R. D., 1981, Sedimentation and diagenesis of Upper
Smackover grainstone, Jay-field area, west Florida (abstract): American Association of Petroleum
Geologists Bulletin, v. 65, no. 5, p. 950.

Mancini, E. A., and Benson, D. J., 1980, Regional stratigraphy of Upper Jurassic Smackover carbonates
of southwest Alabama: Gulf Coast Association of Geological Societies Transactions, v. 30, p. 151-165.

Masingill, J. H., 1989, The petroleum industry in Alabama, 1988: Alabama State Oil and Gas Board, Oil
and Gas Report 3-L, 100 p.

Means, J. A., 1977, Southern Florida needs another look: The Oil and Gas Journal, v. 75, no. 5, p. 212-
225.

Miller, J., 1974, Mount Carmel field structure map: Florida Department of Natural Resources Hearing no.
27.

Florida Geological Survey

Mink, R. M., Hamilton, R. P., Bearden, B. L., and Mancini, E. A., 1987, Determination of recoverable
natural gas reserves for the Alabama coastal waters area: Alabama State Oil and Gas Board, Oil and
Gas Report 13, 74 p.

Mitchell-Tapping, H., 1984, Petrology and depositional environment of the Sunniland producing fields of
south Florida: Gulf Coast Association of Geological Societies Transactions, v. 34, p. 157-173.

1985, Petrology of the Sunniland, Forty Mile Bend, and Bear Island fields of south Florida:
Gulf Coast Association of Geological Societies Transactions, v. 35, p. 233-242.

1986, Exploration petrology of the Sunoco Felda trend of south Florida: Gulf Coast
Association of Geological Societies Transactions, v. 36, p. 241-256.

Moore, C. H., 1984, The Upper Smackover of the Gulf Rim: depositional systems, diagenesis, porosity
evolution and hydrocarbon development: in Ventress, W. P. S., Bebout, D. G., Perkins, B. F., and
Moore, C. H. (editors), The Jurassic of the Gulf Rim: Proceedings of the third annual research
conference, Gulf Coast Section, Society of Economic Paleontologists and Mineralogists Foundation, p.
283-307.

Ottman, R. D., Keyes, P. L., and Ziegler, M. A., 1973, Jay field a Jurassic stratigraphic trap: Gulf Coast
Association of Geological Societies Transactions, v. 23, p. 146-157.

1976, Jay field a Jurassic stratigraphic trap: in Braunstein, J. (editor), North American oil
and gas fields: American Association of Petroleum Geologists Memoir 24, p. 276-286.

Shirer, J. A., Langston, E. P., and Strong, R. B., 1978, Application of field-wide conventional coring in the
Jay-Little Escambia Creek Unit: Journal of Petroleum Technology, v. 30, p. 1774-1780.

Sigsby, R. J., 1976, Paleoenvironmental analysis of the Big Escambia Creek-Jay-Blackjack Creek field
area: Gulf Coast Association of Geological Societies Transactions, v. 26, p. 258-278.

Tyler, A. N. and Erwin, W. L., 1976, Sunoco-Felda field, Hendry and Collier Counties, Florida: in
Braunstein, J. (editor), North American oil and gas fields: American Association of Petroleum
Geologists Memoir 24, p. 287-299.

Vinet, M. J., 1984, Geochemistry and origin of Smackover and Buckner dolomites (Upper Jurassic), Jay
field area, Alabama-Florida: in Ventress, W. P. S., Bebout, D. G., Perkins, B. F., and Moore, C. H.
(editors), The Jurassic of the Gulf Rim: Proceedings of the third annual research conference, Gulf
Coast Section, Society of Economic Paleontologists and Mineralogists Foundation, p. 365-374.

Information Circular 107

APPENDIX 1

FLORIDA OIL FIELD DISCOVERY WELL DATA

Florida Geological Survey

FLORIDA OIL FIELD DISCOVERY WELL DATA

DISCOVERY PERMIT
DATE NO. FIELD

PERFORATIONS
DATUM FOR DEPTH OR OPEN HOLE
MEASUREMENTS, DEPTH BELOW
COUNTY FT. MSL (1) DATUM, FT.

TOTAL DEPTH
BELOU DATUM,NAME OF PRODU- DISCOVERY

FT. CING FORMATION STATUS DEGREES API

9-26- '.43

2-5-54

7-22-64

8-2-66

3-30-69

6-15-70

12-19-71

2- 14-72

12-5-72

11-14-73

7-30-74

4-22-77

8-11-77

10-13-77

6-20-78

9-28-78

6-27-82

3-25-84

11-10-85

2- 19-86

6-4-88

6-14-88

42

167

315

371

401

417

504

523

563

662

712

881

865

904

829

897

1070

1125

1170

1194

1220

1230

1. This is usually the kelly bushing elevation; where this was unavailable, drill floor (DF) elevation is given.

OIL GRAVITY,

Sunniltand

Forty Mite Bend

Sunoco Felda

West Felda

Lake Trafford

Jay

Mt. Carmel

Blackjack Creek

Bear Island

Seminole

Lehigh Park

Sweetwater Creek

Baxter Island

Mid-Felda

Raccoon Point

Pepper Hammock

Townsend Canal

BStuff Springs

Corkscrew

McLettan

Coldwater Creek

McDavid

Cot t ier

Dade

Hendry

Hendry

Cot tier

Santa Rosa

Santa Rosa

Santa Rosa

Collier

Hendry

Lee

Santa Rosa

Collier

Hendry

Collier

Collier

Hendry

Escambia

Collier

Santa Rosa

Santa Rosa

Escanbia

34 (DF)

24 (DF)

55

49

40

206

274

157

31

36

40

255

30

59

39

43

53

178

45

245

166

271

11,602-11,626

11,322-11,339

11,472-11,485

11,486-11,489

11,870-11,892

15,470-15,524

15,260-15,280

15,790-15,900

11,589-11,595

11,415-11,420

11,389-11,394

14,299-14,340

11,512-11,515

11,492-11,496

11,410-11,414

11,629-11,633

11,416-11,421

16,332-16,339

11,547-11,565

14,072-14,090

15,150-15,170

16,346-16,360

11,626

11,557

11,485

11,675

11,987

15,984

15,399

16,235

11,817

11,651

11,630

14,611

11,823

11,686

11,658

11,897

11,462

16,800

11,565

14,475

15,407

16,800

Sunnitand

Sunnitand

Sunnitand

Sunnitand

Sunni and

Smackover

Smackover
& Norphlet

Smackover

Sunnitand

Sunnitand

Sunniland

Snackover

Sunnitand

Sunnitand

Sunni and

Sunnitand

Sunni land

Smackover

Sunnit and

Smackover

Smackover

Smackover

Pumping

Pumping

Pumping

Pumping

Pumping

Flowing

Flowing

Flowing

Pumping

Pumping

Pumping

Pumping

Pumping

Pumping

Pumping

Pumping

Pumping

Flowing

Pumping

F lowing

Flowing

Flowing

Information Circular 107

APPENDIX 2

1988,1989 AND CUMULATIVE PRODUCTION DATA

45

Florida Geological Survey

1988, 1989 AND CUMULATIVE PRODUCTION DATA (1)

1988 PRODUCTION
Gas Water
(MCF) (Bbts)

Oil
(Bbls)

1989 PRODUCTION CUMULATIVE PRODUCTION
Gas Water Oil Gas
(MCF) (Bbts) (MBbts) (MMCF)

NORTHWEST FLORIDA

Bluff Springs 26,737 13,993 171,510 15,889 5,369 158,041 220 122
McOavid 38,417 12,478 7,536 82,789 35,886 33,566 121 48
Jay 4,729,067 7,443,364 46,050,785 4,814,354 7,595,813 51,452,328 365,479 466,858
Coldwater Creek 5,759 238 11,485 1,766 203 700 9 0
Blackjack Creek 462,464 740,047 6,252,039 517,142 1,016,557 9,581,475 54,482 51,989
Mt. Carmel 63,081 17,138 483,995 12,520 0 55,147 4,666 4,797
HcLettan 64,107 29,549 17,981 44,541 20,302 15,313 174 77
Swetwater Creek (3) 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 15

Subtotal 5,389,632 8,256,807 52,995,331 5,489,001 8,674,130 61,296,570 425,165 523,906

SOUTH FLORIDA

Lehigh Park 168,605 16,493 1,297,670 104,109 8,956 1,510,456 5,165 519
Townsend Canal 30,283 0 156,898 46,590 0 216,085 406 0
West Felda 634,923 44,879 4,954,270 494,652 34,818 3,404,318 41,226 3,427
Mid-Felds 79,221 0 222,258 77,195 0 243,795 1,239 10
Sunoco F*lda 82,636 4,513 1,046,974 36,591 1,308 404,823 11,529 980
Corkscrew 159,838 0 5,505 108,037 0 33,616 524 0
Lake Trafford 1,790 0 0 0 0 0 278 0
Seminole (3) 0 0 0 0 0 0 85 0
Sunnitand 30,459 2,629 726,203 5,325 482 124,390 18,445 1,824
Bear Island 337,823 27,815 2,450,255 245,024 19,609 2,443,173 10,575 837
Pepper Hammock 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Baxter Island (3) 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0
Raccoon Point 830,838 99,863 643,621 682,866 81,989 626,993 4,444 529
Forty Mile Bend (3) 0 0 0 0 0 0 33 2

Subtotal 2,356,416 196,192 11,503,654 1,800,389 147,162 9,007,649 93,951 8,128

STATEWIDE TOTAL 7,746,048 8,452,999 64,498,985 7,289,390 8,821,292 70,304,219 519,116 532,034

1. Statistics compiled by Charles Tootle, Florida Geological Survey, Oil and Gas Section.
2. Fields are listed in approximate order from north to south and west to east.
3. Plugged and abandoned oil fields.

Abbreviations: 8bts Barrels (42 US Gallons)
NBbts Thousand Barrels
NCF Thousand Cubic Feet
MMCF Million Cubic Feet

FIELD (2)

Oil
(Bbts)

Information Circular 107

APPENDIX 3

1988 AND 1989 FIELD WELL STATISTICS

47

Florida Geological Survey

1988 AND 1989 FIELD WELL STATISTICS (1)

1988
Number of Wells
PRO INJ SI TA TOT

1989
Number of Wells
PRO INJ SI TA TOT

NORTHWEST FLORIDA

Bluff Springs 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 1
McOavid 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1
Jay 38 22 59 0 119 44 27 43 0 114
Coldwter Creek 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 1
Blackjack Creek 7 7 11 0 25 9 7 10 0 26
t. Carmel 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 2
McLellan 2 0 1 0 3 2 0 1 0 3
Sweetwater Creek (3) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Subtotal 49 29 74 0 152 59 34 55 0 148

SOUTH FLORIDA

Lehigh Park 1 0 3 0 4 2 0 2 0 4
Townsend Canal 1 0 3 0 4 2 0 2 0 4
West Felda 13 0 27 0 40 11 0 21 0 32
Mid-Felda 1 0 1 0 2 2 0 0 0 2
Sunoco Fetda 2 0 19 0 21 1 1 16 0 18
Corkscrew 3 0 0 0 3 3 0 0 0 3
Lake Trafford 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1
Seminole (3) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sunni land 0 0 13 0 13 0 0 8 0 8
Bear Island 10 0 17 0 27 7 2 17 0 26
Pepper Hamock 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1
Baxter island (3) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Raccoon Point 12 0 3 0 15 12 0 3 0 15
Forty Mile Bend (3) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Subtotal 27 0 54 0 81 23 3 46 0 72

STATEWIDE TOTAL 92 29 162 0 283 99 37 126 16 262

1. Statistics compiled by Charles Tootle, Florida Geological Survey,
Oil and Gas Section.
2. Fields are listed in approximate order from north to south and west to east.
3. Plugged and abandoned oil fields.

Abbreviations:

PRO Producing Wells
INJ Injection Weltls
SI Shut In Wells
TA Temporarily Abandoned Wells
TOT Total No. Welts

FIELD (2)

Information Circular 107

APPENDIX 4

1988 AND 1989 FIELD WELLS DRILLED

49

Florida Geological Survey

1988 AND 1989 FIELD WELLS DRILLED

Well (1) and Operator-Well
Permit No. Name & No. Location (2)

Drill Floor Total
Completion Elev., Ft. Depth,
Date Above MSL Ft. (3)

Escambia W-16368 Hughes Eastern
P-1234 Corp.-Jones Estate
No. 34-1

JAY FIELD

Santa Rosa W-16369 Exxon Corp.- Jones
P-1249 McDavid No. 7-8

RACCOON POINT FIELD

Collier W-16121 Exxon Corp.-
P-1215 Collier Land &
Cattle Corp.
No. 27-4

2420' FNL &R
1637' FEL
Sec. 34,
T5N, R31U

2,337.66' FSL &
3,381.86' FEL
Sec. 7,
T5N, R29U

SHL:
2,651' FNL &
1,738' FEL
BHL:
1,320' FSL &
1,320' FEL
Sec. 27,
T51S, R34E

6/13/89

8/04/89

1/07/89

20 16,750 Plugged and abandoned
as a dry hole, 6/16/88.

235 15,735 Injection well.

34 MO: 11,796 Completed as a potential
TVD: 11,542 producer.

FIELD
County

MC DAVID FIELD

Status

1. Florida Geological Survey wll number for samples (cuttings or core chips).
2. For directionally drilled wells, SHL is surface hole location, BHL is bottom hole location.
3. For directionally drilled wells, MD: measured depth; TVD: true vertical depth.

Information Circular 107

APPENDIX 5

1988 AND 1989 WILDCAT WELLS DRILLED

Florida Geological Survey

1988 AND 1989 WILDCAT WELLS DRILLED

Drill Floor Total
Well (1) and Operator-Welltt Completion Etev., Ft. Depth
Permit No. Name No. Location (2) Date Above MSL Ft. (3)

Status

IORTHMEST FLORIDA

Cathoun U-16298 Zlkha Energy Co.-
P-1235 Donald Leonard
No. 15-3

Escambia W-16126 ARCO Oil &
P-1228 Co.- R. H.
No. 34-3

1049' FSL &
1330' FUL.
Sec. 15,
T2S, R8U

Gas 1029' FSL &
Sherritt 1050' FUL
Sec. 34,
T5N, R33U

Escambia U-16406 Hughes Eastern
P-1230 Corp.-Walker-lotey
No. 34-2

1500' FNL &
1050' FWL
Sec. 34,
T5N, R31W

Escambia W--16506 ARCO Oil & Gas 977' FSL &
P-1250 Co.- A. Grimes 976' FEL
No. 8-4 Sec. 8,
T4N, R32U

Okatoosa W-16503 Hardy Oil & Gas
P-1253 U.S.A., Inc.-
State of Florida
No. 30-4

Santa Rosa U-16180 Louisiana Land &
P-1232 Exploration Co.-
Jeffreys No. 20-1

Santa Rosa W-16244 Exxon Corp.-
P-1244 Exxon-Champion
International
No. 5-1

Santa Rosa W-16301 Harkins & Co.-
P-1245 Champion No. 16-2

Santa Rosa U-16302 Exxon Corp.-
P-1246 Shrinera Hospital
et at. No. 28-1

Santa Rosa No WO (4) Hardy Oil & Gas
P-1252 U.S.A., Inc.-
T.R. Miller HMittll
Co. No. 13-4

Santa Rosa U-16498 Cation Petrol.
P-1257 Co.-B. Decker
Ellis No. 18-4-3

1320' FSL &
1650' FEL
Sec. 30,
T6N, R25U

1600' FNL &
1100' FEL
Sec. 20,
T4N, R28U

1330.75' FNL &
923.22' FEL
Sec. 5,
T2N, R29U

SHL:
1988.7' FSL &
186.7' FWL
Sec. 15,
BHL:
2220' FSL &
660' FEL
Sec. 16,
T5N, R30U

1600' FNL &
1100' FEL
Sec. 28,
T4N, R26W

1200' FSL &
1200' FEL
Sec. 13,
T5N, R27W

859' FSL &
1783' FEL
Sec. 18,
T4N, R28U

08/26/88 141 9,758 Plugged & abandoned
as a dry hole, 10/24/88.

03/17/88 193 17,262 Plugged & abandoned
as a dry hole, 3/17/88.

07/14/88 269 16,800 Completed as a potential
producer, 7/14/88.
(McDavld Field)

08/11/89 30 17,500 Plugged and abandoned
as a dry hole, 8/11/89.

10/12/89 22 14,105 Plugged & abandoned
as a dry hole, 10/12/89.

06/24/88 182 16,080 Plugged & abandoned
as a dry hole, 6/24/88.

01/28/89

25 17,400 Plugged & abandoned
as a dry hole, 1/28/89.

03/20/89 76 MD: 16,236 Plugged & abandoned
TVDt: 16,123 as a dry hole, 3/20/89.

04/26/89 25 15,589 Plugged & abandoned
as a dry hole, 4/26/89.

10/12/89 25 14,970 Plugged & abandoned
as a dry hole, 10/12/89.

12/21/89 191 6,600 Plugged & abandoned
as a dry hole, 12/21/89.

County

Information Circular 107

1988 AND 1989 WILDCAT WELLS DRILLED

Well (1) and Operator-Well
Permit No. Name & No.

Drill Floor Total
Completion Elev., Ft. Depth
Location (2) Date Above MSL Ft. (3)

W-16122 Sabine Corp.- 1320' FNL &
P-1208 Collier Co. 1600' FWL
No. 4-2 Sec. 4,
T47S, R28E

W-16165 Sabine Corp.- 1042.81' FNL &
P-1216 Collier Co. 1027.51' FWL
No. 18-2 Sec. 18,
T5OS, R33E

W-16195 Sabine Corp.- 1584.97' FNL &
P-1217 Collier Co. 1644.89' FWL
No. 29-2 Sec. 29,
T47S, R29E

W-16457 Sabine Corp.-
P-1238 Alico Land
Development
No. 3-1

1081.92' FNL &
1398.02' FEL
Sec. 3,
T46S, R28E

Collier

Collier

Collier

Collier

Collier

01/28/88 43 11,850 Plugged & abandoned
as a dry hole, 2/1/88.

05/27/88

07/09/88

11/13/89

36 11,750 Plugged & abandoned
as a dry hole, 6/13/88.

46 12,000 Plugged & abandoned
as a dry hole, 7/9/88.

51 11,620 Plugged & abandoned
as a dry hole, 11/13/89.

12/10/88 38 MD: 12,345 Plugged & abandoned
TVD: 11,879 as a dry hole, 12/10/88.

County

SOUTH FLORIDA

Status

W-16243 Sabine Corp.- SHL:
P-1240 Collier Co. 656' FNL &
No. 5-5 868' FWL
Sec. 9,
BHL:
967' FSL &
967' FEL
Sec. 5,
T49S, R30E

1. Florida Geological Survey well number for samples (cuttings or core chips).
2. For directionally drilled wells, SHL is surface hole location; BHL is bottom hole location.
3. MD: measured depth; TVD: true vertical depth (determined by directional survey).
4. Well samples have not been submitted yet.

Florida Geological Survey

APPENDIX 6

OIL EXPLORATION WELLS DRILLED IN FLORIDA STATE WATERS

Information Circular 107

OIL EXPLORATION WELLS DRILLED IN STATE WATERS

Well (1) and
Year Permit No. Operator

Lease No.
and Area

Rotary
Table Elev.
County Ft. above MSL

1947 P-16 Gulf Oil State of Florida
W-1413 Corp. Lease 374 No. 1
Sugarloaf Key Area
1947 P-22 Gulf Oil State of Florida
W-972 Corp. Lease 373 No. 1
Big Pine Key Area

1947 P-43 Magnolia State of Florida
W-1502 Petroleum Block 5-B No. 1-A
Co. St. Vincent Sound

1955 P-232 Gulf Oil State of Florida
W-3510C Corp. Lease 826-G No. 1
Florida Bay

1956 P-251
W-4122

HORC State of Florida
Lease 833 No. 1
Pensacola Bay

1959 P-275 Gulf Oilt State of Florida
W-5094 Corp. Lease 826-Y No. 1
Marquesas

1959 P-280 California State of Florida
W-5152 Coastal Lease 1011 No. 1
Big Pine Key Area
1959 P-281 California State of FLorida
W-5103 Coastal Lease 224-A No. 1
St. George Island
Area

1960 P-289 California State of Florida
W-5574 Coastal Lease 224-B No. 1
Boca Grande Area
1961 P-292 California State of Florida
W-5713 Coastal Lease 1011 No. 2
Marquesas
1961 P-293 California State of Florida
W-5654 Coastal Lease 224-A No. 2
South of Alligator
Point
1961 P-297 California State of Florida
W-5785 Coastal Lease 224-B No. 2
Boca Grande Area

offshore
Monroe

offshore
Monroe

offshore
Franklin

offshore
Monroe

offshore
Santa Rosa

offshore
Monroe

offshore
Monroe

offshore
Franklin

offshore
Lee

offshore
Monroe

offshore
Franklin

offshore
Lee

23 6,100 Bottomed in Upper Cretaceous(?).

23 15,455 No porosity in Sunnitand Fm.
Well bottomed in Pumpkin Bay
(Late Coahuitan). Very difficult
to correlate this well because of
anhydrite development. Structur-
ally very low.

7,019 Bottomed in Lower Cretaceous.

32 12,631 Well cored from 11,661-12,544'
in SunniLand and Punta Gorda.
Encountered some salt stringers
in Punta Gorda. Only 60' of dark,
dense calcilutite in Sunnitand.
26 7,505 Bottomed in Lower Cretaceous.

56 15,478 Four drill stem tests:
12,474-12,533'(Lake Trafford?)
12,534-12,544'(Sunniland)
12,582-12,822'(Sunnitand)
14,642-14,702'(Brown Dolomite)
The 12,474-12,533' test recovered
15 barrels of 22 degree API
gravity oil and 14.1 barrels of
saltwater. Brown Dolomite from
14,650-15,036' was somewhat vuggy.
This may be the principal target
in this area. Net dolomite esti-
mated at 400'.

21 6,030 Bottomed in Lower Cretaceous.

7,030 Bottomed in Lower Cretaceous.

39 14,000 Brown Dolomite: 12,485-12,589'.
Estimated net dolomite: 103'.

36 7,722 Bottomed in Lower Cretaceous.

34 10,560 Did not encounter Smackover Fm.
Bottomed in Eagle Mills Fm. of
Triassic Age. Diabase found in
Eagle Mills.
40 12,600 There is an estimated 40' of dolo-
mite in the 12,445-12,560' Brown
Dolomite interval. No evidence of
oil staining. Dolomite microcrys-
talline to finely crystalline.
Core analysis from 11,255-11,625'
Sunnitand interval showed no
permeability, extremely low por-
osity, and no oil.

Total
Depth, Ft.

Geological
Significance

Florida Geological Survey

OIL EXPLORATION WELLS DRILLED IN STATE WATERS

well (1) and Lease No.
Year Permit No. Operator and Area

Rotary
Table Etev.
County Ft. above MSL

1962 P-298 California State of Florida
w-5970 Coastal Lease 1011 No. 3
Marquesas

1963 P-304 California State of Florida
w-6278 Coastal Lease 224-8 No. 3
Honeymoon Island
Area

1967 P-375 Nobit Oil State of Florida
w-8139 Corp. Lease 224-B No. 1
Boca Grands Area

1967 P-382 Mobil Oil State of Florida
w-8304 Corp. Lease 224-A No. 1-A
W-SW of Crystal
River

196? P-383 Mobil Oil State of Florida
W-8305 Corp. Lease 224-A No. 1-8
Cedar Key Area

1968 P-387 Mobil Oil State of Florida
U-8487 Corp. Lease 224-A No. 1-C
Little St. George
Island Area

1983 P-1097 Getty Oil State of Florida
W-15391 Coopany Lease 2338 No. 1
East Bay

offshore
Monroe

offshore
Pinellas

offshore
Charlotte

offshore
Citrus

offshore
Levy

offshore
Franklin

offshore
Santa Rosa

... ...... .. .. .. ,= .

1. Florida Geological Survey well number for samples (cuttings or core chips).

Total
Depth, Ft.

Geological
Significance

57 12,850 Bottomed in Punta Gorda. No shows
of oil and no porosity reported.
Dritt stem test of the 12,521-
12,600, interval tested saltwater.
Rebecca Shoals Reef (Paleocene
and Upper Cretaceous) present.

37 10,600 Bottomed in Lower Cretaceous.
Very poor samples. No oil shows.
Carbonates-clastics below 7,000'.

21 12,931 This well drilled into Pumpkin
Bay Fm. (Upper Coahultan) at
12,230'. Drilled into basement
(rhyolite porphyry) at 12,830'.
No shows in Sunni stand Fm. Brown
Dolomite Zone: 11,920-12,000'.
Estimated net dolomite: 70'. Poor
samples.

22 6,041 Mixed faces carbonatess, sand-
stones, and shales) at 4,325';
Triassic, Eagle Mitlls at 5,625';
Paleozoic at 5,920'. Very indur-
ated shale and sittstone. Some
quartzite. Bedding planes verti-
cal in this core. No shows and no
porosity.

25 4,735 Mixed faces carbonatess, sand-
stones, and shares) at 2,882' in
Cretaceous. Predominantly vari-
colored unconsolidated sandstone
below 4,180'. Highly indurated
quartzites and interbedded shales
in core (Paleozoic) from 4,720-
4,735'.

37 14,369 This well encountered Jurassic
limestone. First indication of
possible Smackover in Apalachi-
cola area.

30 18,011 Smackover tests at 17,405-17,411'
and 17,328-17,411' produced only
saltwater. Norphlet Ss. and Louann
Salt were very thin.

Information Circular 107

APPENDIX 7

1988 AND 1989 OIL EXPLORATION WELLS DRILLED

IN FEDERAL WATERS, OFFSHORE FLORIDA

57

Florida Geological Survey

1968 AND 1989 OIL EXPLORATION WELLS DRILLED IN FEDERAL WATERS, OFFSHORE FLORIDA

DEPTH, FT.
OPERATOR LOCATION BELOW MSL

PLUGGED &
SPUD ABANDONED
DATE DATE

oestin Dome OCS*0-6406 Chevron Block 56 22,572 06/12/87 01/26/88 Tenporarfty abandoned
Producible Norphlet discovery.

Pensecolt OCS-0-6391 Twenneco Block 948 19,200 10/14/87 01/19/88 Tefmporarfly abandoned.

Pensacola 0CS-0-6396 Texaco, Inc. Block 996 17,910 04/08/88 09/07/88

Destin Dome OCS-0-6397 Gulfetar Block 1 2,000 01/09/89 01/18/89 Tecporarfty abandoned.

Destin Dome OCS-G*-6398 Gulfstar Block 2 1,800 01/21/89 01/27/89 Tefrporarity abandoned.
No. 2

Pensacola OCS-0-6390 Gulfstar Block 881 2,700 01/29/89 02/07/89 Temporarily abandoned.

Date from Gould, 1989.

AREA

WELL
NO.

COMMENTS

Information Circular 107

APPENDIX 8

1988 AND 1989 GEOPHYSICAL EXPLORATION ACTIVITY

59

196 AND 1969 GEOPNMTSCAL EXPLORATION ACTIVITY

GEOPHYSICAL
COMPANY

Shell Western El
GFS
Teledyne
Western
GFS
GFS
Dee Eptloration
GFS
IaGC
Conoco

PEINI T

6-96-8M

6-100-88
101-88
G-102-88
G-103-88
G-104-88
G-105-88
6-106-8
G-107-88

G-1086-
6-109-88
G6-110-8
G6-111-88
G-112-88
6-113-88
G-114-88
6-115-M
6-116-88
6-117-88
6-118-88
6-119-88

6-120-89
6-121-89
G-122-89
0-123-89
0-124-89
6-125-89
G-126-89
0-127-89
6-128-89
G-129-89
6-130-89
G6-131-89
6-132-89
G-133-89
G-134-89

SURVEYED
FOR

iP Shell Western E&P DO,CL

Norkins & Co.
First Seismic
Western
Davis Petrolt
Union TX
Exxon
Pruat Oif
Coastal Oil &
Canoco

an

PEUIT EXPIRATION
COUNTY APPODED DATE

SR. ES
=R.OK
SR'Q
SR
ES2
ES
ISR
8T,GANOJK,

USRES

SR.0K,ES
DD
DO
DO, N
NO
ES
DO
DDO R, HE
M.iECL
DD

Coastal Oi L & Gas SR,OK
Coastal Petroleua GL,HE,MT,OE,PB

Paramount
First Seismic
SheLL Western E&P
ARCO
Exxon
Shell Uestern EP
Exxon
Nobil t
Chevron
Shell Western E&P
Paramount
Shell Western E&P
Shel I eastern E&P

OK
SR
BR,PB
ES
ES
DO,BR
SR,ES
Offshore
ES
DO
OK
DO
DO

N/A
14-mar-M8
27-May-88
20-Apr-8
08-Apr-88
11-Apr-88
11-Apr-8
27-ay-88
17-Aug-88
21-Jun-88

17-Au-88
17-AW-88
30-Jun-88
19-Sep-UM
19-Oct-88
02-Dec-88
07-Sep-88
19-Sep-U8
02-Dec-M
19-Dec-88
27-Jan-89
27-Jan-89

N/A
N/A
13-Jul-89
13-Jul-89

11-Aug-89
11-Aug-89

26-Sep-89
09-Nov-89
11-Oct-89
05-Dec-89

05-Dec-89

STATUS

N/A Withdraln
14-Nar-89 Coepeted
27-May-89 Copleted
20-Apr-89 Cpleted
08-Apr-89 Cmpleted
11-Apr-89 Completed
11-Apr-89 Cepleted
27-Nay-89 Completed
17-Aug-89 Creleted
21-Jun-89 Completed

17-Aug-89 Completed
17-AUB-89 Cmleted
30-Jun-89 Completed
19-Sep-8P Coeplete
19-Oct-90 Pending
02-Dec-89 Cpleted
07-Sep-89 Cancel Led
19-Sep-89 Completed
02-Dec-89 Completed
19-Dew-89 Coepleted
27-Jan-90 Pending
27-Jan-90 Completed

N/A Cancelled
N/A WUthdrami
13-Jul-90 Completed
13-Jul-90 Completed
Pending
11-Aug-90 Expired
11-Aug-90 Completed
Pending
26-Sep-90 Completed
09-Nov-90 Completed
11-Oct-90 Completed
05-Dec-90 Pending
CanceLLed
05-Dec-90 Pending
Pending

ENERGY DEPTU, CHARGE SNOT MOLE SURVEY
SOURCE FEET SIZE, ULS SPACING LENGTN,NI

Seismic Gel
Seismic Gel
Seis/Airgun
Vibroseis
Seimic Get
Seimic Get
Seimic Gel
Seimic Get
Seimic Gel
Vibroseis

Seismic Gel
Seis/Airgun
Seis/Airgun
Vibrator
Vibrator
Vibrator
Vibroseis
Seismic Gel
Vibrator
Vibrator
Vibrator
Vibrator

Seismic Get
Ai r/Watergun
Seismic Get
Seismic Gel
Seismic Get
Seismic Get
Seismic Get
Seis/Vib
Seismic Get
Ai rgun
Seismic Gel
Vibrator
Seismic Gel
Vibrator
Vibrator

5
N/A
60
0.33
27
150
80-90
27
30-90
N/A
30-90
N/A
60
N/A
N/A

3
20
.5
N/A
15
.33
15
5
.33
N/A

10
.5
.5
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
6
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A

.33
N/A
15

.3-5
N/A
1-20
N/A
15
N/A
H/A

133.2
6.3
113.8
45.0
4.7
28.3
5.0
1.6
9.4
140.0

149.0
46.0
18.0
35.0
90.5
55.5
19.2
65.0
24.1
37.7
26.0
2.5

46.0
225.0
4.3
8.0
27.9
7.0
11.0
25.8
31.5
185.0
12.5
70.8
4.6
50.0
8.5

County Abbreviations:

BR-Brouard GL-Glades
BY-Bay HE-Hendry
CL-Cottllier NO-Holmes

DO-Dade JK-Jackson
ES-Escambia LN-Leon
GA-Gadsden MT-Martin

OE-Okeechobee
OK-Okaloosa
PB-Palm Beach

SR-Santa Rosa
WK-Wakut ta
WS-Uashington

Total Miles in Applications:
Total Surveyed:
Surveyed Miles by Area:
Panhandle Onshore:
Panhandle Offshore:
South Florida:
Surveyed Mites by Method:
Vibrator:
Airgun:
Seismic Gel:
Seis.Gel/Airgun:
Total Pending:
Total Withdrawn, Cancelled, Expired:

1988 1989 TOTAL
1,055.8 717.8 1,773.6
786.9 252.3 1,039.2

632.1 67.3 699.4
0.0 185.0 185.0
154.8 0.0 154.8

339.8 0.0 339.8
0.0 185.0 185.0
269.3 67.3 336.6
177.8 0.0 177.8
116.5 183.0 299.5
152.4 282.6 435.0

IGC
Coastal Petroleum
GFS
GFS
Shell Western EP
Hatlliburton
Halliburton
Shell Western EP
Halliburton
Digicon
Haltiburton
Shell Western EP
GFS
Shell Western EP
Shell Western ESP

GFS Exxon
Teledyne First Seismic
Teledyne First Seismic
Shellt Iastern P Shell Westem E&P
Shell Western SP Shell Western E&P
Shell Wastern EP Shell Western EP
Conco Conoco
Petty Ray ARC
ShelL Western EP Shell Western E&P
Shellt Western EUP Shell Western EP
Shell Weastern P Shell Western EP
Shell Western EP Shell Western EP

0.

cc

CD

Information Circular 107

APPENDIX 9

FLORIDA OIL AND GAS RESERVE ESTIMATES

By
Charles H. Tootle, P.E. #40,500

FLORIDA OIL AMD GAS SERVE ESTIMATES

OIL AVERAGE PWOOUC-
GRAVITY, PORITY, TIVE
A.P.I. PERCENT ACRES

AVERAGE
GAS-OIL
RATIO,
SCF/STB

GRIGINMAL
OIL IN
PLACE,
ARIRELS

ESTIMATED
RECOVERY
FACTOR,
FRACTION

ORIGINAL
RECOMVER-
ABLE OIL
IN PLACE,
ARRELS

OIL
PRODUCED
TNOUGN
1-1-90,
BARELS

REMAINING
RECOVERABLE
OIL RESERVES
AS OF 1-1-90,
IAAELS

ORIGINAL
RECOER-
ABLE GAS
IN PLACE,
NCF

GAS
PRODUCED
TNIUGM
1-1-90,
NCF

REMAINING
RECOERALE
GAS RESERVES
AS OF 1-1-90,
NCF

ORTHWUST FLORIDA
Bluff Springs 53 19.6 160.00 550 1,300,440 0.19 247,066 220,111 26,973 135,795 120,791 15,004
INowid 53 12.8 160.00 400 4,967,347 0.10 496,736 121,206 377,530 199,494 48,364 151,130
Jay (FL & AL) 51 14.0 14,414.50 1,277 820,569,505 0.60 492,341,702 395,356,327 96,965,375 628,720,354 505,466,642 1235,251,712
Jay (FL only) 51 14.0 13,021.14 1,277 763,129,63 0.60 457,877,783 365,479,210 92,398,573 564,709,929 466,58,558 117,851,371
Colater Creek 47 12.1 160.00 500 2,000,107 0.15 312,016 6,802 303,214 156,006 537 155,471
Blackjack Crek 48 16.5 5,719.96 954 100,500,000 0.60 60,300,000 54,482,137 5,817,863 57,526,200 51,969,890 5,536,310
Mt. Carel 43 9.1 481.28 1,028 17,500,000 0.29 5,075,000 4,665,696 409,306 5,218,140 4,797,292 420,848
McLlltan 43 9.0 480.00 430 2,915,540 0.14 412,686 174,289 238,397 177,455 74,905 102,550
Swetwater Crok (2) 44 11.0 160.00 1,070 624,000 0.10 62,400 13,695 48,705 66,768 14,655 52,113

Subtotal (3) 20,342.40 893,037,072 524,785,705 425,165,146 99,620,559 648,189,89 523,904,992 124,284,797

SOUTN FLORIDA
Lehigh Park 28 17.7 800.00 100 8,211,707 0.65 5,337,609 5,164,594 173,015 533,761 518,448 15,313
Tmmsend Canal 28 13.7 640.00 0 4,504,699 0.20 900,940 406,117 494,823 0 0 0
est Felds 26 15.0 7,5000. 80 125,802,366 0.35 44,030,828 41,225,828 2,805,000 3,522,466 3,221,145 301,321
NMid-Felds 26 11.9 480.00 10 5,090,419 0.30 1,527,126 1,239,166 287,960 12,726 10,094 2,632
SunoEo Folds 25 15.0 3,840.00 85 28,946,578 0.40 11,578,631 11,528,631 50,000 964,184 951,329 2,855
Corkscrew 26 6.9 480.00 0 1,667,806 0.40 667,122 524,462 142,660 0 0 0
Lake Trafford 26 7.9 160.00 0 7,690,293 0.06 307,612 277,746 29,866 0 0 0
Seminole (2) 25 14.1 480.00 0 2,366,565 0.10 236,657 84,755 151,902 0 0 0
Sumi land 26 15.0 2,080.00 100 37,685,118 0.50 18,842,559 18,444,812 397,747 1,884,256 1,824,628 59,628
Bear Island 26 11.9 2,880.00 80 42,811,959 0.35 14,984,184 10,575,398 4,408,786 1,198,735 836,093 362,642
Pepper Hamock 27 15.3 160.00 0 976,713 0.10 97,671 323 97,348 0 0 0
Baxter Island (2) 22 19.6 160.00 0 1,276,617 0.10 127,662 1,859 125,803 0 0 0
Raccoon Point 23 13.9 2,400.00 120 42,437,790 0.25 10,609,448 4,443,959 6,165,489 1,273,134 530,070 743,064
Forty Mile Bend (2) 21 10.0 320.00 50 1,112,701 0.07 77,889 32,888 45,001 3,894 1,656 2,238

Subtotal 22,380.00 310,581,331 109,325,938 93,950,538 15,375,400 9,413,156 7,923,463 1,489,693

STATEWIDE TOTAL 42,722.40 1,203,618,403 634,111,643 519,115,684 114,995,959 657,602,945 531,828,455 125,774,490

1. Fields are Listed in approximate order from northwest to southeast. UNITS: MCF Thousand Cubic Feet

2. Plugged and abandoned oil fields.
3. Northwest Florida subtotals use Jay (FL only) data.

SCF Standard Cubic Feet
STB Stock Tank Barrels

METHODS USED TO DETERMINE RESERVE ESTIMATES:
Archie's Equation was used to estimate the oil saturation in two feet increments. The formation water resistivities used were 0.018 ohm-meters for the Smack-
over Fi. (northwest Florida) and 0.022 ohm-meters for the Sunni Land FI. (south Florida). Formation temperatures were estimated SST 76 + depth/80 for north-
west Florida and SST a 76 depth/100 for south Florida. SST is subsurface formation temperature in degrees Fahrenheit, and the depth is the distance in feet
below ground surface. The volumetric calculation procedure was used to estimate the reserves for aLL of the oil fields except Sunnitand, Sunoco Felda, and
West FeLda fields. Decline curve analysis was used to estimate the reserves for these three oil fields. This type of analysis will give credible results for
these fields because they are well into the decline part of their production curves. In addition, few porosity Logs were available for these three fields and
resistivity Logs yield anomalous values because the wells were drilled with water.
DISCLAIMER:
An attempt was made to present realistic estimates; however, no guarantee or warranty is expressed or implied. Anyone who uses this information does so at
their own risk.

FIELD (1)

Information Circular 107

PART II

PETROLEUM EXPLORATION AND DEVELOPMENT POLICIES IN FLORIDA:
RESPONSE TO PUBLIC CONCERN FOR SENSITIVE ENVIRONMENTS

By
Jacqueline M. Lloyd, P.G. 74
and
Joan M. Ragland, P.G. 298

63

Florida Geological Survey

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page
Abstract.................................................................................................................................................. 66
Acknowledge ents................................................................................................................................ 66
Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 67
Phase I: Encouraging Exploration and Petroleum Legislation............................................................ 67
Early Exploration ............................................................................................................................... 67
Early Legislation ................................................................................................................................ 67
Phase II: Econom ic Concerns and Petroleum Legislation.................................................................. 70
Early Rules and Regulations .......................................................................................................... 71
Early Offshore Geophysical Perm itting........................................................................................... 71
Phase III: Petroleum Policy Development in Response to Environmental Concern........................... 72
South Florida Developm ent History................................................................................................ 72
Policy Development in Response to South Florida's Sensitive Environments ............................... 72
Current Regulation of Geophysical Exploration.............................................................................. 73
Offshore Activity and Policy Developm ent...................................................................................... 73
Jurisdictional Boundaries ........................................................................................................... 73
Offshore State W aters ............................................................................................................ 73
Offshore Federal W aters......................................................................................................... 75
Activity....................................................................................................................................... 75
Policy ........................................................................................................................................ 75
Sum m ary................................................................................................................................................ 80
References............................................................................................................................................. 81

ILLUSTRATIONS

Figure Page

1. South Florida oil field location map showing boundaries of the Big Cypress Swamp
drainage area, the Big Cypress Swamp Area of Critical State Concern, and the
Big Cypress Swam p National Preserve......................................................................................... 68

2. Northwest Florida oil field location m ap......................................................................................... 69

3. Florida portion of the 1987-1992 federal Outer Continental Shelf oil and
gas leasing program ........................................................................................................................ 74

4. O il exploration wells, Florida state waters ..................................................................................... 76

5. O il exploration wells, federal waters, offshore Florida................................................................... 78

ABSTRACT

Florida's oil and gas policies have evolved in response to its increased awareness of the economic and
aesthetic value of its other natural resources. The history of state oil and gas regulations and policy in
Florida can be divided into three phases. The first phase encouraged exploration with no stated concern
for other natural resources. This phase culminated in the legislative offer of an award for petroleum
discovery. The second phase began in 1945 with the passage of the conservation law and spanned the
mid- 1940's to -60's. This period was characterized by economic concern for tourist trade and commercial
fisheries. Finally, environmental concerns became an issue in the early 1970's. The effects of these
concerns are especially apparent in the development of recent offshore policies and regulations. The
following text describes the history of oil and gas development and regulation in Florida as it relates to
concerns for the economic and aesthetic value of Florida's other (non-petroleum) natural resources.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Walt Schmidt, Tom Scott, Steve Spencer, David Curry, Ed Lane, and Frank Rupert, all staff members
of the Florida Geological Survey, reviewed this report and suggested improvements. Debbie Tucker
(Office of the Governor, Environmental Policy, Community and Economic Development Unit,
Tallahassee, Florida) reviewed the section on offshore activity and policy development and suggested
clarifications. Jim Jones and Ted Kiper drafted and photographed the figures.

Information Circular 107

PETROLEUM EXPLORATION AND DEVELOPMENT POLICIES IN FLORIDA:
RESPONSE TO PUBLIC CONCERN FOR SENSITIVE ENVIRONMENTS
By Jacqueline M. Lloyd, P.G. 74
and
Joan M. Ragland, P.G. 298

INTRODUCTION

Florida currently produces oil from two areas
(Figures 1 and 2). One is in south Florida, the
other is in the western panhandle area. The
south Florida area includes 14 oil fields; the
western panhandle area includes seven.
South Florida production began with Florida's
first oil discovery at Sunniland field in September,
1943 (Gunter, 1949) (Figure 1). The south
Florida fields are oriented along a northwest-
southeast trend through Lee, Hendry, Collier,
and Dade counties (Figure 1). The trend is the
Sunniland trend and is approximately 12-miles
wide by 145-miles long and happens to lie within
some of south Florida's most sensitive wetland
environments.
Production in the western panhandle began
with the discovery of Jay field in June, 1970
(Babcock, 1972). Although Jay field straddles the
Escambia River, most of the field is within less
sensitive upland environments (Figure 2). Even
though ecological and environmental concerns
affected development at Jay field (Oil and Gas
Journal, 1972), most of Florida's environmental
regulations have evolved in response to
development in south Florida.

PHASE I: ENCOURAGING EXPLORATION
AND PETROLEUM LEGISLATION
Early Exploration

The years 1900 to 1939 were characterized by
sporadic, shallow wildcat exploration in Florida.
Florida's "first phase" (1900 to 1945) policies
concerning petroleum exploration somewhat
parallels this same period. Until Florida's first
commercial oil field discovery in 1943, emphasis

was on encouraging exploration. The only
petroleum legislation passed prior to this
discovery was the reward bill, which was passed
in 1941. Attempts to pass petroleum
conservation legislation began after the state's
first deep oil test was drilled in 1939. These
attempts were not successful until 1945. The
attempt to pass this legislation and the history
leading up to the passage of the conservation
law in 1945 are described in detail by Fields
(1959). The following discussion of this history is
summarized from his report.
The first test for oil in Florida was in 1900 at
Pensacola in Escambia County (Gunter, 1949).
This well was drilled to only 1320 feet. An
additional 79 exploratory wells were drilled
between 1900 and 1939; however, many of
these were very shallow and may have been
more "promotional" than serious oil tests (Gunter,
1949). In 1939, the first significant deep oil test
was completed near Pinecrest, in Monroe
County, at a depth of 10,006 feet (Gunter, 1949).
Information yielded by this deep test drew the
attention of major oil companies to Florida and
marked the beginning of more "serious" oil
exploration in Florida.

Early Legislation

The interest shown by these major oil
companies prompted the first attempt to pass
conservation legislation in Florida in 1939. The
bill was supported by the petroleum industry and
proposed to make "waste" in production, storage,
and transportation of oil or gas unlawful. The bill
briefly:
1. Prohibited waste of oil and gas.
2. Defined waste.
3. Set up the State Board of Conservation.

Florida Geological Survey

SOUTH FLORIDA OIL FIELD LOCATION MAP

A2R24 8E_ 0 r2E RER3E R93
LEHIG A RK O L
,I I
__ OWNGIEhD ANAL I
MID- I A
8UNOCO-FELDA HENDR. CO.
LEE CO. PALM I
II IN .....---...... .. .... BEACH -
LIO
IWET -LDA- ---
CORKSCauseIW CO. ,

TRAFF Ww

I I LAND i SEMINOLE

A ND I
MMOCKI
BAXTER ISLAND Q
IBROWARD

_Lx .. ... ..__.. .

NPINT

FOS 130888 DADE CO.
SED AUGUST 1988
--+-- -J-..

F. (ORIOA ORTY MILE BEND
EXPLANATION
AREA OF
CRITICAL CONCERN
ICAIQ BIG CYPRESS .-

M ItESERVE AREA
ACTIVE OIL FIELD
Q INACTIVE OIL FIELD
0 10P KM
0 10 MI
SCALE

BIG CYPRESS
SWAMP BOUNDARY

I

Figure 1. South Florida oil field location map showing boundaries of Big Cypress Swamp drainage area,
Big Cypress Swamp Area of Critical State Concern, and Big Cypress Swamp National Preserve.

68

REVI!

Information Circular 107

SLACKJA(
SICREEK

rv- A -- -- -^ _

EXPLANATION -
P ACTIVE OIL FIELD
INACTIVE OIL FIELD 44 .
5 0 5 KM
5 0 MILES MILTON
CANTONMENT 4"
SCALE

FLORIDA

LOCATION

S/ \ ENSACOLA
Figu ENSACOLA f

Figure 2. Northwest Florida oil field location map.

Florida Geological Survey

4. Required notice of intention to drill, deepen
or plug a well.
5. Required that log and plugging records be
filed with the State Board of Conservation.
6. Authorized the State Board of Conser-
vation to promulgate and enforce rules and
regulations and prescribe necessary forms.
7. Prescribed penalties for violations.
Opponents to the legislation argued that such
a law would doter rather than encourage
exploration. A quote from one of the opposition
leaders states:" ... as long as the state has no
production .. there is about as much necessity
for legislation to regulate or control production as
there would be to require paupers to rent lock
boxes in banking institutions." This first effort to
pass legislation failed.
Florida's legislature only met every two years
so the next attempt to pass a conservation bill
was not made until 1941. The proponents had
enlisted petroleum industry lawyers to prepare a
much more detailed bill than the previous one.
The opposition revised the bill to the extent that it
dealt more with ground-water pollution concerns
than with conservation of oil and gas. The
original proponents, therefore, fought the
passage of the bill in the House of
Representatives after it passed the Senate. It
died on the House calendar at the end of the
session. Efforts to pass a conservation law were
again delayed by two years.
1941 was also the year that the discovery
award bill (Chapter 20667-No. 459, Laws of
Florida, 1941) was passed to encourage
exploration for oil and gas. The bill offered an
award to the explorer and operator of the first
commercial oil or gas discovery. The award
included $50,000 and a five-year oil and gas
lease covering four tracts of land up to 10,000
acres each "free of any bonus, rental or lease
charges except the reservation of one-eighth
royalty usually retained in such leases." This act
became law without the Governor's approval and
was filed in the Office of Secretary on June 4,
1941.
In 1943, the conservation bill was Introduced
again. A briefer, simpler version was proposed to

avoid the alteration by the opposition that had
occurred in 1941. The bill had stronger backing
but failed to be voted on during this session. The
session closed with the bill on the calendar. A
separate bill, which sought to protect ground
water by regulating drilling practices, was also
introduced in 1943. This bill passed the Senate,
but died in the House, primarily due to a lack of
Interest by its sponsors.
The 1943 legislature adjourned in June; just
three months before the first oil discovery. If the
discovery had been made before the end of the
session, the conservation law may have passed.
By the end of 1943, more than 15 major oil
companies and numerous independents were
buying leases in the state. Major newspapers
began publishing oil news and discussing
conservation issues.
The September 1943 discovery, named the
Sunniland field, was made by Humble Oil and
Refining Company (HORC) in Collier County,
Florida (Figure 1). In 1944, after proven
commercial production, HORC was awarded the
$50,000 for finding the first oil production in
Florida. HORC donated the award to the
University of Florida and Florida State College for
Women (now Florida State University) and added
$10,000 as a gift (Elliot, 1945).

PHASE II: ECONOMIC CONCERNS AND
PETROLEUM LEGISLATION

The second phase of Florida's petroleum
legislative history began in 1945 with the
passage of the conservation law and spanned
the mid-1940's to -60's. The public began to
show concern for the value of Florida's other
natural resources. This concern was prompted
primarily by potential economic impact on tourist
trade and commercial fisheries.
In 1945, due to the Sunniland discovery and
the resulting increase in exploration, Governor
Millard F. Caldwell appointed an Oil Advisory
Committee to study the petroleum laws and
practices of other states. The State Bar
Association also appointed an oil and gas

Information Circular 107

committee to study legislation of other states.
The two committees worked together, with
advice from the Interstate Oil Compact
Commission, to prepare what was to become the
first conservation law. The 1945 legislature saw
the introduction of this conservation law and
several other related oil bills. The bills included:
1. The conservation law.
2. A bill to ratify the Interstate Oil Compact
and to make Florida a member of the Inter-
state Oil Compact Commission.
3. A bill for taxation of oil and gas produced
in Florida.
4. A state lease law.
Unexpected opposition arose to all of the oil
bills; this time from the cities along the west
coast of Florida. They were not opposed to the
subject matter of the oil legislation, but wanted
provisions to be inserted in all the proposed bills
that would ensure protection of the Florida west
coast beaches from pollution and "unsightly
operations." Their concerns were not
environmental but rather economic. They
contended that oil operations might "destroy the
beauty of the west coast and do irreparable
damage to the tourist trade."
Newspapers of these cities "clamored" for
beach protection. Amendments were adopted
which addressed this issue and were made a
part of Florida's conservation bill. After six years
of effort, a law providing for the conservation of
oil and gas in Florida was finally passed and
signed by the Governor on June 5, 1945
(Chapter 22819-No. 305, Laws of Florida, 1945).
The bill to ratify the Interstate Oil Compact and
make Florida a member of the Interstate Oil
Compact Commission (Chapter 22823-No. 270,
Laws of Florida, 1945) and the state lease law
(Chapter 22824-No. 310, Law of Florida, 1945)
were also passed by the 1945 legislature.
The conservation law:
1. Prohibited the waste of oil or gas.
2. Set up the State Board of Conservation and
gave them the authority to:
a. administer and enforce the Conservation
Act,
b. adopt necessary rules and regulations,

c. establish drilling units, and
d. regulate production procedures as nec-
essary to prevent waste.
3. Set penalties for violations.
4. Restricted drilling on or near improved
beaches or municipalities.
A taxation law was not passed until the next
legislative session. The oil and gas taxation act
(Chapter 22784-No. 270, Laws of Florida, 1947)
became law without the Governor's approval and
was filed in the Secretary of State's office June 3,
1947.

Early Rules and Regulations

The first rules regulating oil and gas
exploration and production were adopted in 1946
(Section 115-B-2.05, Florida Administrative Code
(F.A.C.)). There was no mention in the rules of
environmental concerns. As discussed
previously, the statutory protection for improved
beaches was enacted in response to an
economic issue. Primarily, the rules were written
to "... prevent waste of oil or gas ..."
Rule revisions in 1949 (Gunter, 1950), 1962
and 1963 (Babcock, 1964) were procedural in
nature and did not include environmental
concerns. The 1949 and 1962 revisions added
provisions for the temporary abandonment of
wells and defined an abandoned well. The 1963
revision changed the time for supplying the Oil
and Gas Section of the Division of Geology with
electrical logs and other surveys made in the
drilling of a well from six months to ninety days. It
also provided that the State Board of
Conservation would keep information confidential
for a period not exceeding one year from the
date the information is filed, unless exceptional
hardship was proven.

Early Offshore Geophysical Permitting

In 1963, the first five offshore geophysical
permits were granted by the State Board of
Conservation (Babcock, 1964). In 1965, a

Florida Geological Survey

statement of policy outlining rules and
regulations to be observed in performing offshore
geological and/or geophysical work was
prepared by the State Board of Conservation
(Babcock, 1966). These covered "submerged
lands, other than inland waters of Florida and
applicable to federal lands seaward of Florida's
boundary." The rules were supposedly "pursuant
to authorization of the Department of the Interior
of the United States dated April 3, 1965, and
published in the federal register (Federal
Register Document 56-2450, Volume 21, No.
64)."
Approximately 100 offshore geophysical
permits were issued. In the early 1970's, it was
determined that there was no statutory authority
to issue these permits and geophysical
permitting was discontinued (David Curry, Florida
Geological Survey Oil and Gas Section
Administrator, personal communication, 1989).
These rules expressed concern for natural
resources other than oil and gas, primarily for
commercial fisheries; thus, the concern was
again prompted by economics. They included;
however, a brief reference which indicates an
aesthetic or environmental concern (Babcock,
1966):
"All operators conducting seismic operations
shall use reasonable precaution in
accordance with approved and accepted
methods to prevent destruction of, or injury
to, fish, oyster, shrimp and other aquatic life,
wildlife, or other natural resources."

PHASE IIl: PETROLEUM POLICY
DEVELOPMENT IN RESPONSE TO
ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERN

South Florida Development History

The minimal legislative activity and apparent
lack of environmental concern between the time
of the passage of the conservation law and the
early 1970's may have been partly due to the
slow development and limited success in south

Florida following the opening of the Sunniland
field. During the years between Sunniland field
discovery (1943) and the first rule revision to
include extensive environmental concerns
(1972), only 92 exploratory wells were drilled in
south Florida. The Sunniland discovery was not
followed by the usually rapid successes seen
when new production areas are opened. Forty
Mile Bend field was discovered in 1954, but
showed disappointing production from only two
wells and was abandoned in 1955 (Gunter, 1955
and 1956). The second really successful oil field
was not discovered until 1964, 21 years after the
Sunniland discovery. This was the Sunoco Felda
field (Babcock, 1966). Discoveries of West Felda
field in 1966 (Babcock, 1968), Lake Trafford field
in 1969 (Applegate and Lloyd, 1985), and Bear
Island in 1972 (Applegate and Lloyd, 1985)
followed.

Policy Development In Response to South
Florida's Sensitive Environments

The rule revision of 1972 included the first
statutory evidence of serious environmental
concerns and the first mention of concern for
onshore native and sensitive environmental
resources. These rules incorporated the
concerns that developed through the years with
the recognition of the importance of wetland
environments, especially as it related to oil
exploration and development in south Florida.
South Florida oil production is partially within
the Big Cypress Swamp and is adjacent to the
Everglades (Figure 1). The wetlands of these
areas provide important feeding, nesting, and
wintering grounds for migrating and several
endangered and threatened species. are
dependent upon the wetland ecosystem for
subsistence (Big Cypress Area Management
Task Force, 1984).
The Big Cypress Swamp Advisory Committee
was created by the Governor and Cabinet in
1971 in response to pressures exerted on the Big
Cypress ecosystem by many external factors, not

Information Circular 107

solely by oil and gas exploration. This Committee
provides a forum for industry, various regulatory
agencies, and environmental groups to allow oil
exploration and development while ensuring the
protection of sensitive environmental and wildlife
resources (Big Cypress Area Management Task
Force, 1984).
In 1974, Congress set aside about 40 percent
of the Big Cypress Swamp (570,000 acres) as
the Big Cypress National Preserve (Figure 1). In
the legislation creating the Preserve, the National
Park Service acquired the surface land rights,
but, in most cases, not the mineral rights. This
legislation (Public Law 93-440) allows oil and gas
exploration as long as it is not detrimental to the
purpose of the preserve, which is to: ... ensure
the preservation, conservation and protection of
the natural, scenic, hydrologic, floral, faunal and
recreational values of the Big Cypress
watershed, and to provide the enhancement and
public enjoyment thereof."
The rule revisions of 1981 through 1986
incorporated additional environmental concerns.
These rules and the interagency cooperation of
the Big Cypress Swamp Advisory Committee
allow oil production and exploration to take place
while minimizing damage to the environment.

Current Regulation of
Geophysical Exploration

An amendment in 1980 gave the Florida
Geological Survey the statutory authority to
regulate geophysical activity, both onshore and
offshore in state waters (Chapter 377, Part 1,
Florida Statutes). Rules were adopted in 1984
(Chapter 16C-26.07, F.A.C.) to implement this
authority and legitimate permitting began in July
1984. The rules state:
"It is the intent of the department to permit
geophysical operations in Florida
provided that this activity is conducted in a
manner which minimizes or prevents the
destruction of or injury to the environment
and the natural resources of the State of

Florida."
There were major revisions to the geophysical
rules in 1985 and 1986 that resulted from safety
violations by some geophysical companies and
from additional concerns about wildlife habitat
and sensitive environments.

Offshore Activity and Policy Development
JURISDICTIONAL BOUNDARIES

State ownership of the continental shelf off
Florida extends three miles into the Atlantic
Ocean and about 10.5 miles (three marine
leagues) into the Gulf of Mexico. The federal
government controls resources beyond these
state boundaries out to 200 miles. The Outer
Continental Shelf (OCS) is a jurisdictional term
that describes the offshore area that is under the
control of the federal government. The federal
government divides the OCS into planning areas.
Three federal OCS planning areas surround
Florida: the Eastern Planning Area, the Straits of
Florida Planning Area, and the South Atlantic
Planning area (Figure 3) (Johnson and Tucker,
1987).

OFFSHORE STATE WATERS

There has been no leasing of tracts within
Florida state waters since the early 1980's. At
this time, the only known active leases within
Florida state waters are held by Coastal
Petroleum Company. Three leases were
obtained by Coastal Petroleum in the late 1940's.
Two of these leases cover state land in the Gulf
of Mexico, from the coastline to about 10 miles
offshore, between Apalachicola and Naples,
Florida and the submerged land of rivers and
lakes that feed this area. A third lease covers
Lake Okeechobee.
Between 1947 and 1983, a total of 19 wells
were drilled in Florida state waters (Figure 4).

Florida Geological Survey

Figure 3. Florida portion of the 1987-1992 federal Outer Continental Shelf oil and gas leasing program
(after Johnson and Tucker, 1987). The areas off Florida Bay and the Florida Keys were
removed from the 5-year plan. The area south of 260 North latitude was removed from the
November 1988 lease sale. President Bush later canceled Sale 116, Part II in this area until
after the year 2000.

Information Circular 107

Detailed information on these wells is tabulated
in Part I, Appendix 6, of this publication. One of
these wells, .drilled in 1959 in the Marquesas
Keys area (Florida permit 275, Figure 4), had a
significant oil show in the Lake Trafford (?)
Formation (Applegate and Lloyd, 1985; also Part
I, Appendix 6 of this publication).
Recognition of environmental sensitivity, as
well as dependence of many commercial
enterprises on the vitality of these areas, has led
state government to place all state waters under
a no-lease protection policy. This policy was
enacted by the legislature in two steps: effective
July 1, 1989, drilling was prohibited in Florida
state waters south of 260 north latitude off the
west coast and south of 270 north latitude off the
east coast; effective July 31, 1990, drilling was
prohibited in the remainder of Florida's territorial
seas, i.e., north of 260 north latitude off Florida's
west coast to the western boundary of the state
bordering Alabama and north of 270 north
latitude off Florida's east coast to the northern
boundary of the state bordering Georgia (Section
377.242, Florida Statutes).

OFFSHORE FEDERAL WATERS
Activity

A total of 53 wells have been drilled in federal
waters offshore Florida; 43 wells in the Eastern
Planning Area, 3 in the Straits of Florida Planning
Area near the Marquesas Keys, and 7 in the
South Atlantic Planning Area off northern Florida
and southern Georgia (through February, 1989)
(Figure 5). This relatively small number of
offshore wells has not resulted in any
development in Florida's offshore to date.
However, two Destin Dome area wells (Amoco-
8338 and Chevron-6406, Figure 5) off Florida are
Norphlet discoveries and are described as
producible fields by Gould (1989).
The Amoco-8338 well, completed in Destin
Dome block 111 in 1987, was the first
commercial discovery in the Eastern Gulf of
Mexico Planning Area (Gould, 1989). The Oil and

Gas Journal (1989) discusses the Chevron-6406
well and quotes Chevron USA Inc. as stating that
"the well was not tested due to safety and cost
considerations. However, analysis of cores and
wireline logs indicates the presence of gas in the
Norphlet sandstone." These two discoveries
extend the offshore Norphlet gas trend seaward
and eastward from the Mobile map area of the
Central Gulf of Mexico Planning Area, offshore
Alabama, into the Eastern Gulf of Mexico
Planning Area, offshore Florida.
In addition to the potential indicated by these
Destin Dome discoveries, an offshore south
Florida well (Florida permit 284, Figure 5), drilled
in the Marquesas Keys area in 1960, had
potential for low volume oil production from the
Lake Trafford and Sunniland Formations
(Applegate and Lloyd, 1985).

Policy

Former Florida Governor Bob Martinez
negotiated with the federal government
concerning the current five-year (1987-1992)
federal OCS Oil and Gas Leasing program
(Figure 3). His negotiations reflected his belief
that "oil and gas activities must not be allowed at
the expense of our unique and sensitive
resources" (Governor Martinez, March 3, 1987
letter to Secretary of the Interior, Donald Hodel).
When the five-year oil and gas leasing plan
was first proposed by the Secretary of the
Interior, Donald Hodel, Governor Martinez
expressed his concerns to both Secretary Hodel
and to President Reagan. He requested that
sensitive areas off Apalachicola Bay in northwest
Florida, Florida Bay and the Florida Keys be
removed from the plan. In August 1987, the
Governor filed a petition for judicial review in
federal court of the Department of the Interior's
five-year leasing plan because these areas were
not removed (Press Release, Office of the
Governor, August 14, 1987).
In January 1988, Secretary Hodel
accompanied Governor Martinez on a snorkeling

Florida Geological Survey

7,47 1993
1956

P-e1 10,526
P-43 -3P 7WEL L19
7,009 14,338 1959
1947 1968

4,710
1967 1
N P-382
6,019
1967

P-304 9
10563
1963
LEGEND

APPROXIMATE WELL LOCATION

P -80 FLORIDA PERMIT NUMBER

TOTAL DEPTH OF WELL, P-375 -
,0 FEET BELOW MSL }eg9o0
1967 1
1959 WELL COMPLETION DATE Pe 97"
1961 P-2e9
13,961
1960

SCALE

0 50 100 150 MILES
t- -- ^ -^ ---- ^ ----

0 80 160 240 KILOMETERS
P-2
14

FOS02041 P-Me
1961

Figure 4. Oil exploration wells, Florida state waters.

'75
22
9

'-298
2,793
962

P-22
15,432
1947

Information Circular 107

trip to the Florida Keys. The Governor was able
to show Secretary Hodel "exactly what it is that
we in Florida are fighting to protect." The
following March, the Secretary of the Interior
agreed to remove 11 million acres of sensitive
habitat around Florida Bay and the Keys from
further consideration for leasing under the five-
year plan (Figure 3). The Secretary further
agreed to require a one-year study before any
drilling could take place in an area of "special
concern" off northwest Florida (Figure 3). The
study would verify that the exploration would be
for gas and not oil. The Department of the
Interior would also establish an emergency
response team to deal with possible accidents.
As a result of this agreement, the petition for
judicial review of the five-year plan was dropped
(Press Release, Office of the Governor, March
24, 1988).
In May, 1988, the Governor requested that the
federal government delay exploratory drilling for
oil and gas off southwest Florida. The request
specifically referred to leases which were sold off
southwest Florida during 1984 and 1985. The
leases are in an area south of Naples to just
north of the Dry Tortugas, Marquesas Islands,
and the Florida Keys (south of 260 north latitude,
Figure 3). Congress had required a three-year
environmental study before exploratory drilling
would be permitted in this area. A panel of
scientists was assembled by Governor Martinez
to review the federal environmental study. The
panel concluded that the federal study was not
extensive enough to ensure protection of
sensitive environmental resources. Specifically,
there was not enough information to determine
the potential effects of an oil spill. Subsequently,
the Governor supported and Congress imposed
a one-year drilling moratorium on the area south
of 260 north latitude (Press Releases, Office of
the Governor, May 26, 1988, and June 16,
1988).
In June 1988, Hodel agreed to remove 14
million acres in the same area (south of 260 north
latitude) from the November 1988 lease sale
(Figure 3). Martinez and Hodel appointed two

task forces to assess the environmental impact
of proposed drilling in previously leased areas.
One task force assessed the risk posed by oil
spills and the directions spilled oil would be
carried by winds and currents. The second task
force assessed the impact of drilling on marine
and coastal resources (Press Release, Office of
the Governor, June 16, 1988). President George
Bush established an additional federal task force
to review drilling and leasing in this area. As a
result of this task force, President Bush
canceled, until after the year 2000, Gulf of
Mexico Sale 116, Part II, which covered this
area. He also ordered the Minerals Management
Service to begin procedures to cancel the leases
that oil companies hold in this sale area and
begin discussions with Florida on a joint federal-
state repurchase of the leases costing $100-
$200 million (Oil and Gas Journal, 1990).
The House Appropriations Committee voted in
June 1990 to delay lease sale 137 (scheduled for
November 1991), which includes the area from
Naples to Pensacola. Also in June 1990,
President Bush proposed a 12-year moratorium
on drilling off the southwest coast near the
Florida Keys, but this was not supported by the
same House panel that delayed lease sale 137.
The panel said they did not want to lock up the
area for that long a time.
Florida's current Governor Lawton Chiles has
begun discussion with President George Bush
concerning the draft proposed 5-year OCS oil
and gas leasing program for mid-1992 through
mid-1997. The 5-year program includes oil and
gas lease sales off Florida's panhandle in 1994
and 1997. In a letter to the president dated
February 18, 1991, the governor stated that:
"The west Florida coast contains many
sensitive marine and coastal resources
which are vital to our State's well-being. The
economy of Florida is directly tied to these
resources through such industries as
tourism and recreational and commercial
fishing. We cannot afford to place these
marine and coastal resources at
unnecessary risk, simply because this

Florida Geological Survey

0 25 0 MIi S
h 0 o Momcun STRAITS OF FLORIDA
SCALE PLANNING AREA

Figure 5. Oil exploration wells, federal waters, offshore Florida. Well locations are plotted at the center
of their three-square mile lease block. If two or more wells have been drilled In the same
lease block, they are represented by the same location point and code on the map and In the
map location code and well data table.

Information Circular 107

MAP LOCATION CODES AND WELL DATA

LEASE NO.
MAP OR FLORIDA PLUGGED & TOTAL
PLANNING LOCATION MAP BLOCK PERMIT WELL ABANDONED DEPTH
AREA CODE AREA NUMBER NO. (P-) OPERATOR NO. (1) DATE (FT.)
EASTERN 1 Destin Dome 162 2486 Exxon 1 1974 10,930
GULF OF 2 Destin Dome 118 2492 Exxon 1 1974 7,075
MEXICO 3 Florida Middle Ground 252 2516 Texaco 1 1975 15,663
PLANNING 4 Destin Dome 166 2490 Fina 1 1975 17,608
AREA (2) 5 St. Petersburg 7 2527 SheLl 1 1975 18,443
1 Destin Dome 162 2486 Exxon 2 1975 10,418
2 Destin Dome 118 2492 Exxon 2 1975 7,507
6 St. Petersburg 100 2523 Texaco 1 1975 17,388
7 Destin Dome 250 2472 Exxon 1 1975 6,634
8 Destin Dome 207 2480 Exxon 1 1975 4,800
1 Destin Dome 162 2486 Exxon 3 1975 17,938
9 Destin Dome 360 2468 Gulf 1 1975 20,988
10 The ELbow 566 3344 Mobil 1 1977 15,865
11 Destin Dome 617 2463 Chevron 1 1977 10,513
12 Destin Dome 31 2502 Amoco 1 1977 18,338
13 Destin Dome 529 3888 SheLl 1 1980 20,450.
14 Charlotte Harbor 144 3906 Gulf 1 1981 11,362
15 Charlotte Harbor 672 3917 Tenneco 1 1981 11,302
16 Charlotte Harbor 265 3912 Shell 1 1981 12,362
17 The Elbow 915 3341 Mobil 1 1981 18,128
18 Vernon Basin 654 3903 Mobil 1 1981 10,768
19 Charlotte Harbor 628 3915 Mobil 1 1981 1,270
20 Pensacola 973 3886 Mobil 1 1981 23,264
21 Charlotte Harbor 188 3909 Odeco 1 1981 11,360
22 Destin Dome 563 3890 Sohio 1 1982 21,068
23 Destin Dome 160 6417 Shell I TA 1985 7,764
24 Pensacola 948 6391 Sohio 1 1985 18,958
23 Destin Dome 160 6417 Shell 2 1985 16,953
25 Gainseville 707 6456 Sohio 1 1985 15,941
26 Deatin Dome 284 6428 Exxon 1 1985 17,500
27 Destin Dome 422 6438 Chevron 1 1985 22,222
28 DeSoto Canyon 512 6472 SheLl 1 1986 12,300
29 Charlotte Harbor 622 4950 Shell 1 1986 10,550
30 Florida Middle Ground 455 8363 Tenneco 1 1986 12,401
24 Pensacola 948 6391 Tenneco 2 ST 1987 19,200
31 Destin Dome 111 8338 Amoco 1 1987 19,240
32 Destin Dome 56 6406 Chevron I TA 1988 22,572
24 Pensacola 948 6391 Tenneco 2 TA 1988 19,200
33 Pensacola 996 6396 Texaco 1 1988 17,910
34 Destin Dome 1 6397 Gulfstar 1 TA 1989 2,000
35 Destin Dome 2 6398 Gulfstar 2 TA 1989 1,800
36 Pensacola 881 6390 Gulfstar I TA 1989 2,700
37 Destin Dome 167 6420 Chevron I Drilling 17,259

SOUTH I NH 17-5 208 3686 Tenneco 1 1979 7,754
ATLANTIC 2 NH 17-5 427 3695 Tenneco 1 1979 7,472
PLANNING 3 NH 17-2 913 3664 Getty 1 1979 7,000
AREA (3) 4 NH 17-2 1005 3671 Transco 1 1979 11,635
5 NH 17-5 472 3699 Exxon 1 1979 7,578
6 NH 17-5 564 3705 Exxon 1 1980 12,863
7 NH 17-5 387 Ocean GE-1 1977 13,254
Production

STRAITS OF 1 NG 17-10 44 P-296 Gulf 1 1961 4,686
FLORIDA 2 NO 17-10 46 P-290 Gulf 1 1961 7,871
PLANNING 3 NG 17-10 28 P-284 Gulf 1 1960 15,294
AREA (3)

1. TA = Temporarily Abandoned; ST = Sidetrack Well.
2. Data from Gould, 1989.
3. Data from Karpas and Gould, 1990.

Florida Geological Survey

Nation continues its strong dependence on
fossil fuels and fails to implement a
comprehensive energy policy. Therefore, it
is in the national, as well as the State's best
interest to ban all oil and gas activities within
100 miles of Florida's coast."
The governor feels that a comprehensive,
national energy policy is essential. Only within
such a policy can the risks associated with
coastal oil and gas development be wisely
assessed. He concluded his letter to the
president with:
"This Nation, with your leadership, should
develop a strong national energy program
which includes the development of
alternative energy sources, fuel efficiency,
conservation and the rapid decrease in the
dependency on fossil fuels. Without such a
program, interest in oil and gas drilling
offshore Florida and the associated risks to
the resources of our State will remain; and I
will continue to oppose short-sighted
approaches to such monumental and long-
term problems."

SUMMARY

Florida petroleum regulations have evolved
from simple to the complex, from encouragement
for exploration to concern for economic and then
aesthetic value of Florida's other natural
resources. There were no laws regulating oil and
gas activities before 1945. Early legislation
responded to the need for petroleum resource
conservation and to the need to protect the
economic value of other resources. Later
legislation responded to environmental concerns,
especially due to development within the wetland
environments of south Florida.
Petroleum exploration eventually extended into
areas offshore from the panhandle and
southwest Florida. Other natural and economic
resources in these areas include commercial and
recreational fisheries, coastal and barrier island
environments, Florida Bay, the Florida Keys, and

the only living coral reef in the conterminous
United States. This juxtaposition of potential
petroleum resources and existing natural
resources has yielded strong state environmental
policies. Florida's concerns influenced the federal
1987-1992 OCS oil and gas leasing program.
Florida's Governor Chiles has begun discussion
with the President which may Influence the next
5-year OCS oil and gas leasing program as well.

Information Circular 107

REFERENCES

Applegate, A.V., and Lloyd, J. M., 1985, Summary of Florida petroleum production and exploration,
onshore and offshore, through 1984, Florida Geological Survey, Information Circular no. 101, 69 p.

Babcock, C., 1964, Summary of Florida petroleum production and exploration in 1962, Florida Geological
Survey, Information Circular no. 45, 63 p.

1966, Florida petroleum exploration, production, and prospects, 1964, Florida Geological
Survey, Information Circular no. 49, 117 p.

1968, Oil and gas activities in Florida, 1966, Florida Geological Survey, Information Circular
no. 55, 35 p.
____ 1972, Oil and gas activities in Florida, 1970, Florida Geological Survey, Information Circular
no. 80, 82 p.

Big Cypress Area Management Task Force, 1984, Sensitive natural resources of the Big Cypress Area of
Critical State Concern, a report to the governor and members of the cabinet, February 21, 1984, 69 p.

Elliot, F. C., 1945, Minutes of the Trustees of the Internal Improvement Fund, State of Florida, July 11,
1944, vol. 24, p. 732-733.

Fields, D. W., 1959, A legal history of conservation of oil and gas in Florida, unpublished report, Florida
Geological Survey Petroleum PAM file, 34 p.

Gould, G. J., 1989, Gulf of Mexico update: May 1988 July 1989, Outer Continental Shelf oil and gas

activities, U.S. Department of the Interior Minerals Management Service: OCS
MMS 89-0079, 51 p.

Gunter, H., 1949, Exploration for oil and gas in Florida, Florida Geological Survey,
no. 1, 106 p.

1950, Exploration for oil and gas in Florida, Florida Geological Survey,
Information Circular no. 1, 38 p.

1955, Exploration for oil and gas in Florida, Florida Geological Survey,
Information Circular no. 1, 35 p.

1956, Exploration for oil and gas in Florida, Florida Geological Survey,
Information Circular no. 1, 31 p.

Information Report,

Information Circular

1949 Supplement to

1954 Supplement to

1955 Supplement to

Johnson, P. G., and Tucker, D. L., 1987, The federal Outer Continental Shelf oil and gas leasing
program; a Florida perspective: February, 1987: Office of the Governor, Office of Planning and
Budgeting, Intergovernmental Coordination Unit, 16 p.

Florida Geological Survey

Karpas, R. M., and Gould, G. J., 1990, Atlantic update: July 1986-June 1990, Outer Continental Shelf oil
and gas activities, U.S. Department of the Interior Minerals Management Service: OCS Information
Report, MMS 90-0060, 57 p.

Oil and Gas Journal, 1972, Jay field development tied to ecology, Oil and Gas Journal, February 14,
1972, p. 58-59.

1989, Norphlet gas find indicated off Pensacola, Oil and Gas Journal, February 6, 1989,
p. 18.

1990, Bush orders cancellation of eight controversial offshore lease sales, Oil and Gas
Journal, July 2, 1990, p. 26-27.

Information Circular 107

PART III

PETROLOGY AND PROVENANCE OF THE
NORPHLET FORMATION
PANHANDLE, FLORIDA

By
Greg W. Scott

Florida Geological Survey

CONTENTS

Page

Abstract.................................................................................................................................................. 87
Acknowledgm ents.................................................................................................................................. 87
Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 89
Norphlet Form ation of Panhandle Florida .......................................................................................... 89
Denkm an M em ber ............................................................................................................................. 97
Fram work G rains......................................................................................................................... 97
M atrix and Cem ents...................................................................................................................... 103
Red Bed Lithofacies .......................................................................................................................... 103
Fram work Grains......................................................................................................................... 107
Cem ents...........................................................:............................................................................ 109
Conglom erratic Lithofacies ........................................................................................................... 109
Provenance of Norphlet Sedim ents .................................................................................................... 113
Conclusions ........................................................................................................................................... 118
References ............................................................................................................................................. 119

ILLUSTRATIONS

Figure Page

1. Area of study and location of core, chip,and log data ................................................................ 90

2. Stratigraphic column, of Mesozoic and older units of the North Central Gulf Coast .................. 95

3. Tectonic m ap of South Central G ulf Coast................................................................................. 96

4. Isopach m ap, Norphlet Form ation, panhandle Florida ............................................................... 98

5. Monocrystalline quartz grain, exhibiting subrounded shape and hematite coating.................... 100

6. Potassium feldspar overgrowth on m icrocline............................................................................ 101

7. Dissolution of feldspars .............................................................................................................. 102

8. Low-rank m etam orphic rock fragm ent........................................................................................ 104

9. Volcanic rock fragm ent ............................................................................................................ 105

10. High-rank m etam orphic rock fragm ent ....................................................................................... 106

11. Induction log and spontaneous potential curve illustrating serrate pattern
associated with red beds............................................................................................................ 108

Florida Geological Survey

12. Volcanic rock fragment............................................................................................................ 110

13. Scanning electron micrograph of secondary quartz overgrowths and clay coatings.................. 111

14. Scanning electron micrograph of chloritic clay coatings............................................................. 112

15. Norphlet Formation-Werner Anhydrite ....................................................................................... 114

16. North-south stratigraphic cross section, Panhandle, Florida...................................................... 116

17. West-east stratigraphic cross section, Panhandle, Florida ........................................................ 117

TABLES

Table Page

1. Well names, locations, and permit numbers for all wells used in this study ............................... 91

ABSTRACT

The Norphlet Formation of the Florida Panhandle is primarily a sandstone that underlies the
Smackover Formation and overlies the Louann and Werner Formations. Three lithofacies of Norphlet
strata have been identified in the Florida Panhandle: an updip conglomerate, red beds, and an upper
quartzose sandstone (Denkman Member).
The Denkman Member consists of an upper gray and a lower brown to reddish-brown quartzose
sandstone. Generally, these sandstones are fine- to medium-grained and well sorted with rounded to
subrounded grains. The upper Denkman is massively bedded to faintly horizontally or wavy laminated;
the lower Denkman is either horizontally laminated or has low to high-angle cross- stratification. The
average composition of the member is 62 percent quartz, 26 percent feldspar, and 12 percent rock
fragments.
The red bed lithofacies has fine- to coarse-grained, moderately sorted sandstones with subrounded to
rounded grains. The most distinctive feature of the lithofacies is its closely spaced horizontal to slightly
inclined (10 50) laminae. The average composition of the faces is 35 percent quartz, 16 percent
feldspar, and 49 percent rock fragments.
The conglomeratic lithofacies is a multilayered section of gray conglomerates and red, coarse-grained
sandstones. The conglomerate consists of poorly sorted, subangular to subrounded, cobble- to pebble-
size plutonic and metamorphic rock fragments.
Principal source areas for Norphlet sediments in the Florida Panhandle were the basement rock of the
Conecuh Ridge (Talledega Slate Belt) to the north and the Pensacola Arch (Piedmont Belt) to the south
and east. Additionally, contributions from the Eagle Mills, Werner, and Louann Formations probably were
significant.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This study was originally completed in 1986 as part of the author's master's degree requirements at
Northeast Louisiana University. Thanks to Jacqueline M. Lloyd and the Florida Geological Survey for
encouragement and editing of the manuscript. Financial support for the project was provided by the
Society of Economic Paleontologists and Mineralogists and Geraghty & Miller, Inc. I express my sincere
gratitude to Leonard M. Young, Professor, Department of Geosciences, Northeast Louisiana University,
for his professional guidance, constructive criticism, and encouragement in pursuing this project. Thanks
to Frank H. Guinn for his editing expertise. Finally, thanks to Sally Easterwood and Geeta Modha, for
drafting support and Alice Wingerter, Carol Ratcliff, Ileana Kiefer, and Shelly Hargrave of Geraghty &
Miller for word processing and document preparation.

Florida Geological Survey

Information Circular 107

PETROLOGY AND PROVENANCE OF THE NORPHLET FORMATION,
PANHANDLE, FLORIDA

By
Greg W. Scott

INTRODUCTION

Several authors have published data on the
petrologic character of the Upper Jurassic
Norphlet Formation in Mississippi and Alabama
(Hartman, 1968; Badon, 1975; McBride, 1981;
Mancini et al, 1984). This study is primarily
confined to areas of Norphlet deposition
previously undocumented, namely Escambia,
Santa Rosa, and Okaloosa Counties, Florida
(Figure 1, Table 1). Throughout panhandle
Florida, the Norphlet Formation is encountered at
depths usually greater than 13,000 feet below
mean sea level. The formation underlies most of
the study area except eastern-most Okaloosa
County, where it wedges out. The Norphlet
unconformably overlies the Louann, Werner, or
Eagle Mills Formations (Oxley et al, 1967;
Mancini et al, 1984). Lying above the Norphlet
Formation sandstones and making an abrupt
lithologic break are carbonates of the Smackover
Formation (Sigsby, 1976) (Figure 2).
Most of panhandle Florida is located within the
Conecuh Embayment which, in turn, is situated
within the Alabama Interior Salt Basin. The
Conecuh Embayment, as defined by Sigsby
(1976), lies between the pre-Jurassic Conecuh
Ridge to the north and the Pensacola Arch to the
southeast, both of which probably served as
source areas for Norphlet sediments (Figure 3).

NORPHLET FORMATION OF
PANHANDLE FLORIDA

The Norphlet Formaiion varies considerably in
lithologic character across panhandle Florida. In
central Escambia and Santa Rosa Counties, the
upper Norphlet Denkman Member (informally
subdivided into upper and lower units) is
characterized by relatively clean, light-colored

sandstones (Tyrrell, 1973). Core material
available for this study is concentrated within this
quartzose lithofacies because the member lies
just below the more productive Smackover
Formation and therefore is more frequently cored
than other lithofacies.
The Pensacola Arch trends southwest through
Okaloosa County and across southern Santa
Rosa and Escambia Counties (Figure 3).
Placement of the arch this far west is based upon
the overall subsurface trend of structural features
and stratigraphic sequences and geophysical
well logs interpreted for this project. It is against
this arch that the relatively clean sandstones of
the Denkman Member thin and grade into
medium- to coarse-grained and gravelly
sandstones.
In southern Santa Rosa County, the formation
is represented by a 14.6-foot section of
conglomerates and coarse grained sandstones
(Getty Oil Company, Florida permit 1097),
interpreted to lie on top of or adjacent to the
Pensacola Arch. The conglomeratic sands
contain granule- to cobble-sized igneous and
metamorphic clasts. Mancini et al, (1985)
identified chert, granite, rhyolite, quartzite, and
shale pebbles within this conglomerate
lithofacies in southern Alabama.
In western Okaloosa County (Champlin
Petroleum Company well, Florida permit 518),
the Norphlet Formation is characterized by
coarse, red, lithic sandstones (red beds), which
probably represent a transition from the
conglomerate deposits over the Pensacola Arch.
The formation thins dramatically east of this well
and wedges out completely within approximately
16 miles. In southern Santa Rosa County, the
Norphlet Formation represented within the Belco
Petroleum Corporation well core (Florida permit
692) exhibits a red bed lithofacies at its base.
A discontinuous basal shale sequence has
been identified within Norphlet cored sections in

Figure 1. Area of study and location of core, chip, and log data.

	Title Page
	Table of Contents
	Part 1 1988 and 1989 Florida petroleum...
	Part II Petroleum exploration and...
	Part III Petrology and provenance...

MILLISECOND	CLASS.METHOD	MESSAGE
0	sobekcm_page_globals.constructor
0	sobekcm_page_globals.constructor	Application State validated or built
0	sobekcm_database.verify_item_lookup_object
0	sobekcm_page_globals.constructor	Navigation Object created from URI query string
0	sobekcm_database.verify_item_lookup_object
0	sobekcm_page_globals.display_item	Retrieving item or group information
0	sobekcm_page_globals.get_entire_collection_hierarchy	Retrieving hierarchy information
0	sobekcm_assistant.get_entire_collection_hierarchy
0	cached_data_manager.retrieve_item_aggregation
0	cached_data_manager.retrieve_item_aggregation	Found item aggregation on local cache
0	item_aggregation_builder.get_item_aggregation	Found 'all' item aggregation in cache
0	system.web.ui.page.page_load (ufdc.page_load)
0	sobekcm_page_globals.constructor.on_page_load
0	html_echo_mainwriter.add_style_references	Adding style references to HTML
0	html_echo_mainwriter.add_text_to_page	Reading the text from the file and echoing back to the output stream
2	html_echo_mainwriter.add_text_to_page	Finished reading and writing the file