UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Ray Lyman Wilbur, Secretary 

GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 

George Otis Smith, Director 

Professional Paper 163 

~fHE SIGNIFICANCE OF GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS IN 

NAVAL PETROLEUM RESERVE No.3, WYOMING 

BY 

,V. T. TI-IOM, Jr., and EDM-UND M. SPIEKER 

WITH A SECTION ON THE 

WATERS OF THE SALT CREEK-TEAPOT DOME UPLIFT 

BY 

HERMAN STABLER 

UNITED STATES 

GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 

· WASHINGTON : 1931 

For sale by the Supcriutendcnt of Documents, Washington, D. C. - - - • - Price $1.25 (paper) 
...... ~,.. : .. . , I- .. '•: 
CONTENTS 

Introduction-------------~-------------------------------------------------------~--------------------------- Scope and purpose of report ____________________ -.- ________________________________________________________ _ 

Field work and acknowledgments __________________________________________________________________________ _ 

Previous field studies __________________________________________ ----- _________________ ------ ______________ _ History of development _____________ - __________ - ________ :- ________________________________________________ _ 

GeographY-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Location and extent of field ___________ . ____________________________________________________________________ _ 

Acces~bilitY---------------------------------~---------~------------------------------------------------- Topographic features ________________________ - __________ :..· _________________ ;.. _____ · _____________________ ~ ____ . 

. Drainage and water supply_---- ________________ -- ________ ·.:. ___ ---- ______ ----- _____ ---- ___________ ----- ____ _ 

Culture-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

' GeologY-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

StratigraphY--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- General section~ _________________ - ____ ----- __________ :.. _______________________ · ________________ -·- _____ _ 

Exposedrocks----------------------------------:..---------------------------------------------------- Parkman sandstone member of Mesaverde formation __________ ---~ __________________ -------- ________ _ 

Upper Middle sandstone ______ .:.---------------------------------------------------------------------- shale _______ -.- _________________________________________________ -.- ____________________ _ 

Lower sandstones-------------------------~--------------------------------------------------

Steele shale-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Upper member _________________________________________ . _____________________________________ _ 

Shannon sandstone member __________________________________________________________________ _ 

Unexposed rocks------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Steele shale _______________________________________________ . ______________________________________ _ 

Lower member-------------------------------------------------------------------------------· 

Niobrarashale----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Carlile shale _____________________________________________________________________ :.. ______________ _ 

Frontier formation ______________ -----_-- __________ -----_-------- ________________ -·- _______ .. ______ _ " First Wall Creek sand 11 _______________________________ ..: _____________________________________ _ 

"Second Wall Creeksand 11-----------------------------------------------~----~--------------- '' Third Wall Creek sand'' ____________________________________________________________________ _ 

Mowry shale _________ ~ _____ -.- ___________________________________________________________________ _ Thermopolis shale _______________________________________________________________ . ________________ _ 

Cloverly formation _____________ --- ____ -- ______ ----- ___ ---- ____ -------_-----·----- ________________ _ "Dakota sand" ____________________________________________________ -·- _________ · ______ . ____ ,.. ___ _ 

Middle shale member _________ --_-_- ____________ ~ ______________________________________ ;.. _____ _ 

"Lakota sand" _______________ .:. ____ · _____ - __ -- _____ -_--- _________ - ___ .: _______________________ _ 

Morrison formation ________________ --- ___ ----- ___ ---- ______ --:.. __________________ -.- ________________ . 

Sundance formation _____________________ .,.--- ______________ ----.------- ___________________________ _ Chugwater formation ________________________ --- ______ :...---- ____ -- ______ -- ________________________ _ 

Embar formation ____________ ~ _______ -·- ________ -~- _______________________________________________ _ 

Ten~eep sandstone----------------------:---------------------------------------~---:.. ____________ _ 

Olderformations-----------------------------------------------------------~--------------------- Structure _________________________________ .:, ______ ~-------------------------------------------------------

Generalfeatures ____________________ .:----------------------------------------------------------------- Methods of representing structure _____________________________________ -- __________________ ---- ________ _ 

Structure of region surrounding Naval Petroleum Reserve No.3 _______ :...----------------------------------- Structure within Naval Petroleum Reserve No. 3 ____ ---- ________________________________________________ _ 

Occurrence of oil, gas, and underground water_---------- __ ----- ___________ · _____ ---- _________________________ _ 

Migration and accumulation of oil and gas _________________ ·---------------------------------------------- Character and distribution of underground waters in the Teapot and Salt Creek oil fields ____________________ _ 

Sands which are or may be reservoirs for oil and gas in the Teapot and Salt Creek fields_.- .. -------------------

Shannon sandstone--------------~---------------------------------------------------------------- " First Wall Creek sand" ________________________________________________________ .,. ________________ _ 

'' Second Wall Creek sand" ____________ . ________________________ ~ __________________________________ _ 

" Third Wall Creek sand" ___ . _____________________________________________________________________ _ 

" Muddy sand" and " Dakota sand 11 ___________________ ~ ___________________________________________ _ 

"Lakotasand11---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sands in Morrison and Sundance formations ______ :. _________________________________________________ _ 

m 

Page 

1 

1 

1 

2 

2 

10 

10 

10 

10 

11 

11 

11 

11 

11 

11 

11 

11 

12 

12 

12 

12 

13 

13 

13 

13 

14 

14 

14 

14 

14 

15 

15 

15 

16-

16 

16: 

1& 

16· 

16-

16· 

16· 

16· 

16· 

17' 

17 

17 

17' 

19· 

20· 

2(). 

21 

23-

23. 

. 23. 

23. 

23-

24' 

24 

2~ 
IV CONTENTS 

Geology-Continued. 

Occurrence of oil, gas, and underground water-Continued. 

Sands which are or may be reservoirs for oil and gas in the Teapot and Salt Creek fields-Continued. 

Sands ·of the Chugwater and Embar formations __________________ . ___________________________________ _ . Teri~eep sandstone ______________________________________________________________________________ _ 

Older formations _____________________________ ~ ____________________________ . _______________________ _ 

Fissures in shale--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Original distribution of oil, gas, and water in tlie"Second.Wall Creek sand"------------------------------------

Estimates of oil content of Naval Petroleum Reserve No.3--------------------------------------------------------

Susceptibility of Naval Petroleum Res~rve No. 3to loss bydrainage _____ -.- _________________________________________ _ 

Factors controlling fluid movements within or from reserve _________________________________________ ·'"-----------

Pressure conditions in Salt Creek-Teapot a~ea _____ ~ ________________ · _________________________________________ _ 

Probable discontinuity of "Second Wall Creek sand" as a porous bed __________________________________________ _ 

Lack of water encroachment in Salt Creek-Teapot area __________________________________________________ ._ 

"Tight sand" area north of reserve ______________________ · _____ ~- ___________ · _____ · ________________________ _ 

Multiple bedding and cross bedding of the sand __ .- ______________________________________________________ _ 

Faults and keystone joints ____________________________________________________________________________ _ 

Summary arid conclusions _______________ --.-- _________________ ·· ____ · _________________________ · ___________ · __________ _ 

Oil content of Naval Petroleum Reserve No. 3- __________________________ :. __ ~ _______________________________ _ 

Fissures in shale _____________________________________________________________________________________ _ 

Shannon s~ndstone ____________________________________________________________________ · __ ·_ · ____ · ________ _ 

"Second Wall Creek sand" _________________________________ · _____________________ -_____________________ _ 

"Third Wall Creek sand" __________________________ · ___ -.---.- ___ ·_-.-.-.---_· ____ · _____ -.-_-__ -.-.-.- __ · _________________ _ 

" Muddy," " Dakota," and "Lakota" sands ____________________________________________________________ _ 

Sands of the Morrison and Sundance formations ________ ·_· __ -_______ ·_· __ · __ -_·_·_· ________ · __ ~---------------~----

Ten~eep sandstone-------------------------------------~-----~--~~-~~--~--~-----------------------~-- Safety of oil deposits in Naval Petroleum Reserve No.3 from los~ by d~~inage to near~by wells ___________________ _ 

Waters of the Salt Creek-Teapot Dome uplift, by Herman Stabler_ ___________ -___ -:_ ___ ·_~-- ________________ -~ ________ _ 

Introduction _____________________________ --_- _____ - ________ - __ - _________ ·_·_·_· __ ·_ .. _______ .--- ____ . ____ : ___ - __ 

Surface waters _______________ -.-.- ______ -.- ___ -.- _____ ·_-__ · __ :_-.- ___ · __ -.-.-.-:--.-.-.- __ · ___ ·_·_· ________ ·_· _____ -____________ _ 

Underground waters _________________ -.- ___________________ -. ______________________________________________ _ 

Waters of the Shannon sandstone member _____________ ·_· __________ -~ __ ~- ___________________ . ____________ . __ 

Intermediate waters--.------------.-------------· _________ -·---.-- _______ -.-.- ___ · _____ ·_-_->-.-.- ____ · ___ ---:- ____ _ Waters of _the. "First Wall Cr~ek sand~~ __________________ -.- _________ .- ___________________________________ _ 

Water movement in the "First Wa~l Creek s~nd" --------.----------.-------------------------~------------- -: : Waters of the "Second Wall Creek sand''_-- _______________ -.-- _________________________ - _____ - _________ _ 

Waters of the "l'hird Wall Creek san~"---------------.-----.--------------------:--:----------------------

1' Water of the "Muddy sand"----------------------------------------------------------------'----------

._Water of the "Dakota san~" ___________________________ -.- __ - ___ -.- __ -.- ____ "" ____ "'"-_----- ___ · __ -'- _______ -_ 

Waters of the "Lakota sand" ____________________________________ .- __ -.. - _______________________ • ________ _ 

. Water of the sand in, the Mqrrison formation- _______ -.- _____________ -,.-.-.--.-_---.-- ______ ~ _________________ _ 

Waters of the sand in the Sun<;l.::mce formation.-,.-----------.-.----------.-.-------------------------------.:--

~o~;a~:s!~e oJ~:~:;~--~~~~~~~~~= = =-= ~~~ -=-= = = = ~ =-=-= =-=-= ~ = ~-~ = =-~-~-~-==.~ =-= -~-~ ~-= =~= ~-= ~.= = = ~:= = = = = = ~.~ =: ~ = = = = = = ~ = ~ = ~ = = ~ ~ ~:i!~~q~f.:: :~:!:r:~ -a~~~-0-(- ~il-;;Q-;r~~~~~= ~ =: = = :.: ~ ~ ~ = ~ =:= ~ = = =-= ~ = -~= ~ =.=:= ~ =·=·=-= ~ =:~ = = = = = ~ = ~ ~ = ~ ~ = ~ = ~ = = = = ~ ~ = = = ~ = ~ ~ ~ Tables--------------:----------~---------'---~-------------------------------------~------~----------------

Index ______________ ""------------:-~-----~----------,.~----------------~-------------~------------------------

ILLUSTRATIONSPLATE 1. A, Panorama of Teapot dome from point on Parkman rim at so.uth end of dome; B, Panoram-a of southern part ·of 

Page 

24 

24 

24 

24 

27 

28 

29 

30 

31 

33 

33 

33 

34 

34 

35 

35 

'37 

37 

37 

37 

37 

37 

37 

37 

38 

38 

38 

39 

39 

39 

39 

42 

43 

45 

45 

45 

46 

48 

48 

48 

48 

50 

53 

55 

63 

Page 

Teapot dome from p.oint on Shannon _rim ~orthwest of Mammoth camp No. !_____________________________ 10 

2. Panorama of Teapot dome from Shannon rim at southeast c;ln!;l_of Salt Creek field---------'----~--------------- 10 

3. A, Parkman sandstone just north of road from !)amp No. ~ .t.9 Qasper;. B, Characteristic exposl,l~e of Shannon 

sandstone just east of. road irr sw. X NW. X sec. 17, T. 39 N., R. 78 w_._ ______ .... ~-.:.~------,.----:~-------~- 10 

4. A, Parkman.sandstane from point northwest of camp_No. 1; B, Panorama shQwip.g character and structure of 

formations above Parkman sandstone, exposedjqst_ west of Nayal Petro~e~l!l. ~_eserveNo. 3-----~---------- 10 

5. A, A fault; B, 1,000-foot vertical section of Unkar wedge, or" graben" block, exposed in Gr~nd C.aJ?.y.on of Arizona; 

C, Big fault exposed _in ravine near ~enter of NW. X sec. 33, T. 39_N., R. 78·W --------------------------- 10 

6. Map.of the Salt Creek oil field, including the. Shannon pool ~nd 'feapot dom~,_ Natrona County, Wyo ____ .,_ In pocket. ·:· 7. Geologic map of United States Naval Petroleum Reserve_ N:o. 3 an_d 9f adjacent portions of the Salt Creek oil field, 

8. 

Natrona County, Wyo __________ -.-.,. ___ :.. _______________ ..,,.,. =-: = -:: 7 :-:--= _ 7 :--:-:- _ :--:-:-:-- __ _ .:. ---------·-- -·-- In pocket. 

Map of United States Naval Petroleum Reserve No. 3, hidicating approximate original areal distribution 

.?.! gas, oil, and water a1~d fault traces in "Second Wall Creek sand"--------------------------------- ·In pocket. 
PLATE 9. 

10. 

11. 

12. 

13. 

14-24. 

25. 

26. 

27. 

28. 

29. 

30. 

FIGURE 1. 

2. 

3. 

4. 

CONTENTS 

White Parkman sandstone in graben in Parkman rim east of Teapot dome,.sec. 35, T. 39 N., R. 78 W _________ _ 

A, View northeastward from point near center of NE. X sec. 35, T. 39 N., R. 78 W., showing offsetting of thin 

hard ledge cap caused by small faults; B, Cross-bedding and lamination in a littoral sandstone _____________ _ 

Composite well log of Salt Creek oil field showing sequence of formations and position of beds yielding oiL ____ _ 

Map of Naval Petroleum Reserve No.3 showing wells which yielded some oil and gas from fissures in shale _____ _ 

Map s~owing comparative initial yields and dates of completion of wells in Naval Petroleum Reserve No. 3 and 

v 

Page 

26 

26 

26 

26 

in southern part of Salt Creek field-------------------------------------------------------------- In pocket. 

Curves showing decline in oil production in Naval Petroleum Reserve No. 3 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ In pocket. 

Graph showing effect of introduction of compressed gas into well 405-20 on oil and gas production of near-by 

wells--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 34 

Map showing equal concentration values for waters of the "First Wall Creek sand"_____________________ In poe ket. 

Map showing equal carbonate-chloride ratio for waters of the "First Wall Creek sand" __________________ In pocket. 

Map showing equal chloride values for waters of the "First Wall Creek sand"__________________________ In pocket. 

Map showing equal carbonate values for ·waters of the "First Wall Creek sand"________________________ In pocket. 

Map showing equal percentage carbonate values for waters of the "First Wall Creek sand"______________ In pocket. 

Sketch map showing location of Naval Petroleum Reserve No.3------------------------------------------ 1 

Map showing location of leases sold at auction June 15, 1921_---------------------------------.----------- 4 

Sketch showing method of representing structure by structure contours__ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 18 

Sketches showing fissure systems developed when horizontal and vertical forces are applied locally to anticlinal 

folds---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

5. Map showing concentration of dissolved solids in water of "First Wall Creek sand" in Salt Creek oil field ______ _ 

19 

22 

6. Diagram showing how open fault fissures in brittle beds change degree of slope and become closed in plastic beds __ 24 

7. Relation between geologic structure and reported rock pressure in wells in Naval Petroleum Reserve No. 3 and 

the Salt Creek oil field ___________________________________________________________________ · _________ _ 32 

8. Sketch map showing reported yields of oil and water from certain wells near north line of Naval Petroleum Reserve 

No.3, August, 1924, and August, 1927------------------"'-------------------------------------------- 36 

9. Analyses of surf ace waters __________________________________________________________________________ ,.. _ 38 

10. Analyses of waters from the Shannon sand______________________________________________________________ 39 

11. Analyses of waters from shale and stray sands---------------------------------------------------------- 40 

12. Analyses of waters from the "First Wall Creek sand"---------------------------------------------------- 40 

13. Analyses of waters from the "Second Wall Creek sand"-------------------------------------------------- 44 

14. Analyses of waters from the "Third Wall Creek sand"--------------------------------------------------- · 45 

15. Analyses of waters from the "Muddy," "Dakota," Morrison, and "Lakota" sands-------------------------- 46 

16. Analyses of waters from the Sundance sand------------------------------------------------------------- 47 

17. Analyses of waters from the Tensleep sand______________________________________________________________ 48 

18. Analyses of waters from various sands ____________ ..: ___________________________________ ~_________________ 49 

19. Comparative analyses of waters from different sources____________________________________________________ 50 

TABLES 

1. Dates of completion of Mammoth Oil Co.'s wells along northwestern boundary line of reserve, as compared with dates of 

. completion of wells on adjacent leasedlands in Salt Creek oil field-------------------------------------------- 5 

2. Well history of Naval Petroleum Reserve No.·3-------------------------------------------------------------- 6 

3. Monthly production from Naval Petroleum Reserve No.3, October, 1922, to December, 1927______________________ 10 

4. Principal rock formations in Teapot Dome and Salt Creek oil fields ________________________ .:. ______________ facing 12 

5. Wells in Naval Petroleum Reserve No.3 which obtained oil or gas from fissures in shale, depth of occurrence, and yield___ 26 

6. Analyses of water from surface sources_·-------------------------------""------------------------------------- 55 

7. Analyses of water from wells of the Shannon sand_____________________________________________________________ 55 

8. Analyses of water from wells of the '.'First Wall Creek sand"--------------------------------------------------- 56 

9. Analyses of water from wells of the "Second Wall Creek sand"_________________________________________________ 59 

10. Analyses of water from wells of the "Third Wall Creek sand" _____________________________ _:____________________ 60 

11. Analyses of water from wells of the "Muddy," "Dakota," Morrison, and "Lakota" sands_________________________ 60 

12. Analyses of water from wells of the Sundance sand---------:--------------------------------------------------- 61 

13. Analyses of water from wells of the Tensleep sand____________________________________________________________ 61 

14. Analyses of water from miscellaneous sources _____________ .____________________________________________________ 62 
THE SIGNIFICANCE OF GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS IN NAVAL PETROLEUM 

RESERVE NO. 3, WYOMING 

By W. T. THOM, Jr., and EDMUND M. SPIEKER 

INTRODUCTION 

SCOPE AND PURPOSE OF REPORT 

Certain geologic facts and factors naturally entered 

into the formulation of governmental policy after the 

restoration to the Government of Naval Petroleum 

Reserv~ No. 3 (popularly lmown as the Teapot Dome 

Reserve), and it was to supply such information that 

time the study was made was not conclusive. · The 

location of the reserve·is shown on Figure 1. 

FIELD WORK A~tl:' ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 

The work on which this report is based consisted of 

detailed field and office studies which occupied the . 

greater part of the summer of 1927. During this 

period mapping was done with plane table and t(~le0 20 40 60 80 100 MILES .. : .< ._ 

~IGURE i.-Sketch map showing location of Naval Petroleum Reserve No. 3. 

this report was prepared for the United States Geological Survey, for transmission to the Navy Department. In order that conclusions may be stated most 

intelligibly, the writers ·will give an outline of the 

general geologic features of the area; an analysis of 

the factors controlling fluid movements within or from 

the reserve; and an enumeration of the tests needed 

to clear up points on which available evidence at the 

scopic . alidade on a scale of 1 inch to ·1 ,000 feet, and 

wells, faults, and outcrops within the productive part 

of the Teapot field were located in· detail; the inner 

Parkman "rim" encircling the field was mapped by 

stadia traverse; a detailed reconnaissance of the area 

between the rim and the productive field was made; 

and a detailed study was made of the portion of the 

Salt Creek field 'adjacent to the reserve. In addition, 

1 
2 GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS IN NAVAL PETROLEUM RESERVE NO.3, WYOMING 

the records of the more than 1,600 "Second Wall Creek 

sand" wells in the Salt Creek field were reviewed and 

tabulated, and a g;r~phic_ analysis was made of the dates 

of completion and relative yields of the wells drilled to 

this sand in the southern third of the Salt Creek field. 

(See pl. 13.) During the field work and subsequent 

compilation and interpretation of field results and of 

well and production records, the writers were assisted 

by Vladimir Pentegoff and were in frequent conference 

with J. W. Steele, of the Geo~ogical Survey, supervisor 

of oil and gas operations in the Rocky Mountain district; with Lieut. Comm·ander W. H. Osgood, of the 

Navy Department, inspector of naval petroleum and 

oil-shale reserves; with J. S. Ross, _petroleum eng~neer, 

·Geological Survey, Midwest, Wyo.; and with other 

members of th~ Geological Survey's staff acquainted 

with development--in the naval reserve or actively interested in the problems of oil production fro_m the Salt 

Creek and Teapot fields. Great assistance and cordial 

cooperation ·were received from all of these gentlemen 

and are hereby acknowledged with sincere thanks. 

Acknowledgments are also due to Messrs. W. L. Connolly and J. W. Jordon, of the Mammoth Oil Co., for 

many courtesies and for practical aid; to officials of 

the Midwest Refining Co. and ·the-New York Oil Co. 

. for courteous and material assistance; to Capt. W. C. 

Stuart, of the Navy, and to Herman Stabler, chief of 

the conservation branch of the Geological Survey, who 

supervised the work of the writers in both field and 

office; and to Director George Otis Smith, of the Geological Survey, who took a personal interest in the work, 

authorizing it in the first place in his capacity as chairman of the President's Committee on Naval Oil 

Reserves. 

PREVIOUS FIELD STUDIES 

The geology of Naval Petroleum Reserve No. 3 

has been studied in greater or less detail on numerous 

occasions, and many events in the development of the 

Salt Creek-Teapot area have been reeorded by Wegemann/ by Estabroo:k and Rader/ and by Lewis. 3 

Of the several early field studies of the Teapot area, 

those of particular importance \vere two made by 

Wegemaun, described in the bulletins cited; a survey 

made in 1919-20 by Estabrook and Morley 4 ; one made 

in 1921 by Case and Olds 5 ; and studies of the Teapot 

1 Wegemann, C. H., The Salt Creek oil field, Wyoming: U.S. Geol. Survey Bull. 

452, pp. 38-40, 1911; Bull. 670, pp. 6-9, 1918. 

2 Estabrook, E. L., and Rader, C. M., History of production of Salt Creek oil 

field, Wyoming: Petroleum Development and Technology in 1925, pp, 20G-204, 

Am. Inst. Min. and Met. Eng., 1925. 

a Lewis, J. 0., Report of the geological conditions of Teapot dome (Naval Reserve 

No.3, Wyoming): Hearings before the Committee on Public Lands and Surveys, 

U. S. Senate, on S. Res. 282 and S. Res. 294, pp. 72-73, 1923. 

4 Estabrook, E. L., and Morley, H. T., Structure contour map, Salt Creek and 

Teapot domes, Natrona County, Wyo.; prepared for Midwest Refining Co., under 

supervision of Harrison & Eaton, consulting geologists, 1920. 

• & Case, W. B., and Olds, T. H., Structure contour map, Salt Creek and Teapot 

domes, Natrona County, Wyo., under supervision of Fisher & Lowrie, August, 

1921. 

field, more especially of the "saddle" area-made hy 

Lewis 6 and Clapp 7 in 1923. 

HISTORY. OF DEVELOPMENT 

According to the reports above cited, seepages or 

other indications of oil had been found in the Salt 

Creek region prior to 1880, and the existence of a 

former oil seepage in the NE. X SW. X sec. 22, T. 

38 N., R. 78 W., just outside of the reserve boundary, 

was reported to Wegemann 8 by T. S. Harrison during 

or before 1911. Wegeinann also noted occurrences 

of mineral wax or ozokerite within Naval Reserve 

No. 3 in 1915. 

The history of oil discovery and development in the 

Salt Creek field, which adjoins,reserve No. 3,hasbeen 

summ~}.~~~J?.~ Es~abro?~. and Rader 9 as follows: ..,.,. __ _ 

The presence of oil seeps at Salt Creek were reported before 

1880, and the first drilling in the vicinity was done in 1889. 

The first development was in the Shannon pool, which is a 

small accumulation of oil in the Shannon sand on the north 

flank of the Salt Creek dome and about 1 ~ miles north of the 

point where that sand outcrops to form the escarpment around 

the dome. The Shannon pool was developed from 1889 to 

1905. Shipments of oil began in 1893, and about 15,000 

barrels were produced from 1893 to 1896; the oil was hauled 

by teams to Casper. Only minor amounts were shipped fro_m 

1897 to 1911, but during the latter part of 1912 a pipe-line connection was made and regular production was resumed. From 

January 1, 1913, to May, 1915, when the wells were· finally 

shut down, 38,441 barrels of oil were produced and sold. The 

Shannon oil was green with a paraffin base but contained 

almost no gasoline. The Baume gravity was only 24° and the 

initial boiling point 210°. • 

The discovery of shale oil in 1906 and of First sand oil in 

1908 directed attention to th~ Salt Creek d9me proper, and 

oil placer claims were soon staked out over most of the area 

now producing from the Second sand. Some of the early 

claimants seem to have failed to protect their titles fully, so 

that in some cases several claims were filed covering the same 

land. The situation was further complicated by the withdrawal from entry, on September 27, 1909, ·of all Government 

land in the Salt Creek field. The claimants under the old 

placer law took their cases to court, and the litigation continued until the passage of the leasing bill, in 1920, which 

made possible an equitable settlement of the disputes. 

The early history of Salt Creek and Shannon and some of 

the intricacies of the land and title situation have been described by Wegemann. The first well that produced oil from 

the Frontier sands is now known as No. 15, on the SE. X ·sec. 

23, T. 40 N., R. 79 W. This well was completed on 'October 

23, 1908, with an initial production of 200 barrels per day. 

The oil was found in the First Wall Creek sand at a depth of 

1,000 feet. The existence of oil in commercial quan.tities in 

the Secon,d Wall Creek sand was proved on August 26, 1917, 

by well No. 1 of the E. T. Williams Oil Co., in the SE. X sec. 

_11, T. 39 N., R. 79 W. The Second sand was reached at a 

depth of 2,270 feet, after a heavy flow of water had been found 

in the First sand and cased off. * * * 

e Lewis, J. 0., op. cit.; pp. 69-110. 

7 Clapp, F. G., Report on Teapot Dome Naval Reserve No.3: Idem, pp. 111-154. 

s Wegemann, C. :8:., op. cit. (Bull. 452), p. 67. 

9 Estabrook, E. L., and Rader, C. M., op. cit., pp. 20Q-203. 
HISTORY OF DEVELOPMENT 3 

Oil is reported to have been found in the Third Wall Creek 

sand in E. T. Williams well No. 2, SE. X sec. 11, T. 39 N., R. 

79 W., in 1917 or 1918, but no record seems to have been made 

of the amount. In the fall of 1923 the same company obtained 

what is thought to be Third sand oil in well No. 25A, on the 

SW. X sec. 11, T. 39 N., R. 79 W., but it was accompanied by 

water (probably First sand water leaking from above) and was 

finally plugged off. The first important production from the 

Third sand in another part of the field was from well No. By-12 

of the Producers & Refiners Corporation near the center of the 

NW. X sec .. 20, T. 39 N., R. 78 W., brought in on March 11, 

1924. Three other producers have been found in the same 

vicinity, but in general less than 25 per cent of the wells that 

have been drilled to the Third Wall Creek sand have obtained 

commercial production. 

Several important seepages of oil from the shale were found 

by the early investigators, but the first occurrence of crevice 

oil in a well was in the Iba, now called No. 13, on the southwest 

corner of sec. 22, T. 40 N., R. 79 W., which was drilled in 

December, 1906. 

Shale crevice oil above the First sand may be found anywhere 

in the field, as well as over a considerable area across the syncline to the west. Between the Fii:st and Second sands it 

seems to be found only near the top of the dome. Shale oil has 

also been found between the Second and Third sands, and to a 

depth of 500 feet below the Third sand. 

Lewis 10 states that between 1909 and 1915 

A few wells of negligible value had been drilled to the Shannon sand in the Teapot dome, but that was all the development 

that had taken place there (within the reserve) and constituted 

the only tangible evidence that it was actually oil-bearing. 

Prior to the leasing of the reserve to the Mammoth 

Oil Co., on April 7, 1922, some dozen or more wells of 

appreciable depth had been put down just outside the 

eastern or western borders of the reserve, but without 

yielding promise of oil or gas production. 

On February 2, 1920, leases were issued by the Departinent of the Interior on the SE. X sec. 17 and the 

E.~ SW. X sec. 20, T. 39 N., R. 78 W., both of which 

directly adjoin the reserve, and on June 15, 1921, 

rights to leases covering the remaining tracts adjoining 

the northwestern boundary of the reserve (see fig. 2) 

were sold at public auction. Leases covering these 

tracts were issued during 1921 or in February and 

March, 1922. 

The map of the Teapot area made by Estabrook 

and Morley in 1920 indicated that the structural saddle between the Teapot and Salt Creek domes lay 

within the naval reserve, and the map made by Case 

and Olds in the August (1921) following the sale of 

leases along the reserve boundary confirmed this indication. Moreover, it has been reported 11 that an old 

well drilled about 1918 by the Wolverine Oil Co. in 

the NW. X sec. 9, T. 39 N., R. 78 W., and at first regarded as a water well was later repaired and yielded 

10 Lewis, J. 0., op. cit., p. 73. _ 

II 'l'ougb, F. D., Memorandum to the Secretary: 67th Cong., 2d sess., S. Doc. 210, 

p. 39, 1923. 

3289-31--2 

a small oil production from the "Second Wall Creek 

sand," which was reached at an altitude of about 2,050 

feet above sea level, or lower than the position of the 

same sand in the saddle between the Salt Creek and 

Teapot domes. 

Largely on the basis of the facts above set forth 

W egemann, 12 as chief geologist for the Midwest Refining 

Co., submitted a mem9randum. in the fall of 1921, 

pointing out to the Government the possibility of loss 

of oil from the naval reserve through wells drilled near 

the northwestern boundary. and recommending the 

developn1ent of the reserve as a unit. After the submission of W egemann's memorandum, K. C. Heald, 

of the Geological Survey, made a reconnaissance visit 

to the Teapot dome and checked the new determination of the position of the Salt Creek-Teapot saddle, 

reporting this finding in a memorandum 13 which also 

agreed with Wegemann's prediction that ultimately 

. some oil would be lost from the reserve through nearby drilling, althoug~ holding that such loss was not 

imminent. 

The naval reserve was leased to the _Mammoth Oil 

Co .. on April 7, 1922, a few days after the completion 

of a 2,000-barrel oil welfl4 (now Prairie well No. 1) 

in the NW. X sec. 20, T. 39 N., R. 78 W., about a 

quarter of a mile from the reserve boundary. At the 

time the lease was signed an overproduction of oil 

existed in Wyoming, and an agreement was in effect in 

the Salt Creek field limiting each operator's output to 

35 per cent of the rated capacity of his wells. Natwithstanding this situation an active development· 

campaign was undertaken in the northern part of the 

reserve, although the holders of leases adjoining the 

reserve attempted 15 "to get the Mammoth Oil Co. to 

subscribe to their conservation policy of equitably 

prorating production among the producers of Salt 

Creek, because they held the Mammoth Oil Co., 

drawing upon its wells to 100 per cent- capacity, 

would drain oil from their wells across the line that 

were producing at the rate of only 35 per cent~" Lewis 

also further stated: 16 

It is likely that this part of the [Salt Creek] field would not 

have been developed so rapidly had drilling not been stimulated 

by drilling on the reserve. 

The dates of commencement and completion of the 

wells offsetting the reserve boundary are given in 

Table 1, and the locations of these wells are shown 

by Plates 7 and 8. 

12 Wegemann, C. H., A report on the position of the dividing line between the Salt 

Creek and Teapot domes: 67th Cong., 2d sess., S. Doc. 210, pp. 36-37, 1923. 

13 Heald, K. C., Memorandum to Director through chief geologist: Idem, pp. 

37-38. 

u Tough, F. D., op. cit., p. 39. 

15 Lewis, J. 0., op. cit., p. 87. 

10 Idem, p. 90. 

:1 
4 G_EbLOGIC CONDITIONS IN NAVAL PETROLEUM RESERVE NO. 3, WYOMING 

r-------,------R_.179 __ W_·~---.--~---r--~--~--~~--~~----~~----~R~.78W. 

i. I ,..... : 

32 33 34 35 32 33 

;t 

r: BUFFALO LAND DIS 'RICT 

···--3~-- --- ~]L-·-

. : ~~Nrin DOU~LAS l..ANp 0/STRICT 

6 5 4 5 

7 8 8 9 

16. 

28 

6 f ! . ' ~ i \ i \)/?JNJI:!i/1: . ! B·'\'~~ 1 ~ -----r·-_;.~ · -r--- --~~-~--~--~v--·j---- -----r---- c ~~~ -- 4 

1----~ : ·)· . . : : : : ; ll ~c R \ 

g : ·' ; . :,~11\ \ ~ : : ,: I : ! Fs' \ 7 o -----a----·- ----9---- ----1: ---- _.:._..:t 1

t----- ----tz---- ----·7-- ~ ----1 11-- --9----

-~ : i I '-.......b ~ I ~ /o I\ - .1 ~ ~ I . - \ . 

31 

0 z 3 

32 

R.78 W. 

4 MILES 

3.3 

FIGURE 2.-Map showing location of leases sold at auction June 15, 1921. Tracts at 33~ per· cent royalty, A to P, inclusive. Tracts at 25· 

per cent royalty, Q to Z and AP to OD, inclusive 
HISTORY OF DEVELOPMENT 5 

TABLE 1.-Dates of completion of Mammoth Oil Co.'s wells along northwestern boundary line ·of reserve, as compared with dates of 

completion of wells on adjacent leased lands in Salt Creek oil field 

-- .. .. ....... .. Wells in Salt Creek field Mammoth Oil Co.'s offset wells 

No. Location Begun Completed No. Begun Completed (T. 39 N., R. 78 W.) 

Argo No. 4 _________________ SW. 7i sec. 16 _______ July 5, 1922 Nov. 26, 1922 . 201-21. . July .11, 1922 ·Jan . 27, 1923 

Argo No.3----'------------- SE. X sec. 17 ______ ,_ Oct. 12, 1922 Dec. 29, 1922 102-20 Sept. 19, 1922 Dec. 10, 1922 

Argo No.4----------------- _____ do _____________ June 15, 1923 Aug. 28, 1923.! 

Argo No.5----------------- _____ do--------~---- May 19, 1923 July 13, 1923 103-20 Mar. 31, 1923 June 4, 1923 

Producers & Refiners No.8 ___ NE. X sec. 20 _______ Apr. 7; 1923 May 29, 1923 

Producers & Refiners. No. 2 ___ _____ do _____________ June 26, 1922 Sept. 6, 1922 101-20 Aug. 10, 1922 Dec. 20, 1922 

I 105-20 Apr. 27, 1923 July 27, 1923 

Producers & Refiners No. 9 ___ _____ do _____________ May 20, 1923 July 7, 1923 407-20 May 27, 1923 July 11; 1923 

408-20 May 30, 1923 Aug. 24, 1923 

Producers & Refiners No. 5 ___ _____ do _____________ Nov. 19, 1922 ·Feb. 3, 1923 l Producers & Refiners No.7 ___ NW. X sec. 20 ______ Mar. 8, 1923 May 8, 1923 401-20 Sept. 26, 1922 May 1, 1923 

Argo No.3----------------- SW. X sec. 20 _______ June 11, 1923 July 28, 1923 

Argo No.5----------------- _____ do _____________ Mar. 25, 1924 June 3, .1924 409-20 May 15, 1924 June 30, 1924 Argo No. 6 _________________ _____ do _____________ Apr. 23, 1924 June 18, 1924 41Q-20 May 26, 1924· July 17, 1924 

I 402-20 Feb. 20, 1923 May 12, 1923 

Argo No.2----------------- _____ do _____________ Mar. 19, 1923 May 17, 1923 101-29 Apr. 1, 1923 June 5,1923 

201-29 July 20, 1922 Nov. 29, 1922 

Argo No.4----------------- _____ do _____________ Apr. 4, 1923 June 2, 1923 l Ohio No.4----------------- _____ do _____________ May 2, 1923 Aug. 4, 1923 203-29 Mar. 23, 1923 June 24, 1923 Ohio No.3 ___________ :_ _____ NW. X sec. 29 ______ Mar. 10, 1923. June 20, 1923 

Ohio No.5----------------- _____ do _____________ Apr. 10, 1923 June 15, 1923 204--29 Apr. 5, 1923 May 24, 1923 

Active drilling within the reserve continued through 

1923, and three wells were completed during the first 

half of 1924. The salient facts regarding the wells 

drilled are given in Table 2, and the dates of completion of the wells and their relative yields of oil and gas 

are shown graphically in Plate 13. 
6 GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS IN NAVAL PETROLEUM RESERVE NO. 3, WYOMING 

TABLE 2.--Well history of Naval Petroleum Reserve No. 3 

[Compiled from well logs by F. M. Cole, May, 1927] 

Shannon sand "First Wall Creek "Second Wall 

sand" Creek sand" 

Altitude of 

wen No. Date begun Date completed well mouth Shale production 

(feet) Depth Thick- Depth Thick- Depth Thick- to top ness to top ness to top ness ·(feet) (feet) (feet) (feet) (feet) (feet) 

·6A NE 20 June 23, 1922 Aug. 2, 1922a -------- 35 120 2, 268 102 -------- ------

301-2 Sept. 17, 1922 Oct. 5, 1922 

401-33 Sept. 4, 1922 Nov. 17, 1922 

201-29 July 20, 1922 Nov. 29, 1922 

102-20 Sept. 19, 1922 Dec. 10,.1922 

301-3 Aug. 30, 1922 Dec. 14, 1922 

lOlB-20 Aug. 10, 1922 Dec. 20, 1922 

201-21 July 11, 1922 Jan. 27, 1923 

201-3 Sept. 2, 1922 Feb. 18, 1923 

101-'-28 Sept. 21, 1922 Feb. 20, 1923 b 

301-14 Sept. 26, 1922 ----dO---"----

201-2 Sept. 15, 1922 Mar. 3, 1923 . 

201-34 Sept. 17, 1922 Mar .. 4, 1923 

201-28 Sept. 3, 1922 Mar. 9, 1923 

401-28 Aug. 11, 1922 Mar. 21, 1.923 

301-21 July 26, 1922 · Mar. 22, 1923 

301-27 Aug. 26; 1922 Apr. 26, 1923 

301-28 Aug. 20, 1922 Apr. 29, 1923 

401-20 Sept. 26, 1922 May 1, 1923 c 

401-10 Sept. 21, 1922 May 4, 1923 

101-15 Sept. 24, 1922 May 5, 1923 

402-20 Feb. 20, 1923 May 12, 1923 

106-29 Apr. 28, 1923 ____ do ________ 

101-10 Nov. 1, 1923 May 13, 1923 d 

203-3 Apr. 13, 1923 May 16, 1923 

204-29 Apr. 5, 1923 May 24, 1923 

302-3 Apr. 1, 1923 June 1, 1923 

103-20 Mar. 31, 1923 June 4, 1923 

101-29 Apr. 1, 1923 June 5, 1923 

204-3 May 14, 1923 June 6, 1923 

301-11 Sept. 9, 1922 June 7, 1923 

203-34 Apr. 20, 1923 June 15, 1923 · 202-34 Apr. 7, 1923 June 20, 1923 

103-33 May 13, 1923 June 21, 1923 

203-29 Mar. 23, 1923 June 24, 1923 

202-3 Apr. 19, 1923 June 26, 1923 

101-33 June 3, 1923 June 27,.1923 

104-33 May 15, 1923 _____ do _______ 

107-29 Apr. 27, 1923 July 4, 1923 

407-20 May 27, 1923 July 11, 1923 

10.3-29 Apr. 18, 1923 July 12, 1923 

105-29 May 5, 1923 _____ do _______ 

204-34 May 21, 1923 _____ do _______ 

403-20 May 7, 1923 July 22, 1923 

404-20 May 10, 1923 _____ do _______ 

a Drilling suspended by United States marines. b Drilling suspended. • Diamond drilling completed Sept. 14, 1925. 

5, 154 500 

5, 145 415 

5, 012 100 

4, 991 95 

5, 180 296 

5,025 ------ 4, 981 100 

5,_215 415 

5,021 380 

5, 239 630 

5, 122 565 

5, 106 505 

5, 006 175 

5,067 248 

4, 991 212 

5, 058 405 

5,082 275 

5, 052 5 

5,192 295 

5, 244 405 

5,014 95 

4, 980 140 

5, 217 300 

5, 197 410 

5,016 161 

5, 199 317 

5,-018 90 

5,003 120 

5, 170 405 

5, 165 430 

5,088 475 

5,093 "489 

5, 132 235 

5,020 105 

5, 232 416 

5, 154 485 

5, 119 210 

4,974 80 

5,056 15 

4,988 150 

4,985 155 

5,093 425 

5,012 105 

5,004 110 

115 -------- ------ -------- ------ Show at 1,435 feet, pro- duction at 1,515 feet. 

105 2, 624 116 2, 989 51 Show at 1,685 feet. 

135 2, 375 105 2, 756 30 

115 2, 265 95 2, 680 28 

110 2,490 97 2,914 45 Show at 1,410 feet. 

------ 2, 205 125 2, 624 36 

145 2, 260 160 2, 702 22 

105 2, 595 105 3,048 60 Good show at 1,225 f~et. 

130 2,610 116 -------- ------ Show at 1,225 feet. 

105 2, 775 95 3,260 15 Show of gas at 2,150 feet. 

130 2, 779 118 3, 198 16 .. 

55 2, 620 .95 2, 953 22. 

120 2, 426 101 2, 830 62 

47 2, 570. 70 2, 868 55 

103 2, 470' 105 2, 862 16 Show at 890-905 feet. 

35 2, 605 155 3, 033 60 Show at 3,270-3,285 feet. 

70 2,560 110 2, 929 50 Sandy at 1,900-1,910 feet. 

140 2, 245 75 2,661 35 

' 95 2, 415 110 2,857 63 1,610-1,615 feet; 50 barrels daily at 2,195 feet. 

110 2,570 80 2,986 43 139 barrels at 1,300 feet. 

110 2, 355 135 2, 735 7 

150 -------- ------ -------- ------ 657 feet. 

110 2, 540 70 2, 940 50 625, 1,020 and 2,052 feet. 

100 -------- ------ -------- ------ Show at 840 feet; pro- duction at 2,010 feet. 

89 2,440 80 2,826 27 

93 2, 535 120 2, 933 57 Show at 700 feet and 

1,635 feet. 

110 2, 205 85 2,638 20 

105 2, 365 165 2, 756 42 

110 -------- --3,-oso r-i 1 -r ~~~!-~i41

110 2,640 100 1~tii\nd 1,630 

feet. 

105 2,450 120 2, 826 72 

76 2, 485 140 2, 890 26 

55 2,445 100 2, 831 20 

75 2,375 95 2, 763 25 

120 2,620 70 3,009 65 

115 -------- ------ -------- --·- --- 130 2,465 135 2,854 14 

150 2,345 85 2, 739 35 

85 2, 210 105 2, 673 31 

140 2,475 e 85 .2, 832 18 

145 2,425 105 2, 939 25 

90 2,420 180 2, 804 76 

100 2, 306 114 2, 713 36 

62 2, 280 150 2, 730 35 

d Diamond drilling suspended Feb. 22, Hl24. • Logged sandy shale at 2,325-2,475 feet. 

Show of gas at 365 feet, 

of oil at 2,060 feet. 

Show at 680-690 feet. 

Sandy at 1, 910-1,922 feet. 

Show of gas at 335 feet. 
HISTORY OF DEVELOPMENT 7 

TABLE 2.-Well history of Naval Petroleum Reserve No. 3-Continued 

Well No. 

6A NE 20 

301-2 

401-33 

201-29 

102-20 

301-3 

101B-20 

201-21 

201-3 

101-28 

301-14 

201-2 

201-34 

Rock pressure (pounds) 

Initial production of Gas (M oil (barrels) cubic feet) 

Initial Later 

28, 000-30, 000 ________ I ___________________________ _ 

45 - - - - - - - - ---- - --- - - - - - - - ----- - - - -- - - - 383. 5 - - - - - -- - - - - --- - - - - - ------ - - - - - - - - - - - 84. 3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ---------------- 24, 000 960 Oct., 1924, 735 _____ _ 

155. 5 -------- -------- -------------------- 36. 9 - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ---- - - ---- - - - - - - - - - 121. 2 ---------------- -------------~------

I 

----------------------------------------------------

100 per 

water. 

cent 

252.9 

201-28 10. 5 -------- -------- -------------------- 401-28 105.0 ------------------------------------ 301-21. Mostly water ____________ -----------.---------.,.-------

301-27 

301-28 50 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

401-20 68. 5 - ----- - - - - - - - - - - - - --- - - - - - - --- - - - - - -

401-10.---------------- 17,500 1,050 June, 1926, 690 ____ _ 

101-15 

402-20 

106-29 

101-10 

203-3 

---------------- 60,000 11,050 June, 1926, 680 ____ _ 

8, 000 -------.,. -------- ---------------.-----

312 

124 

204-29 266. 16 -------- -------- -------------------- 302-3 ---------------- 13,000 1, 050 Aug. 1925, 680 ____ _ 

103-20 120 -------- -------- -------------------- 101-29 ------------------------ ---------------------------- 204-3 ---------------- -------- -------- -------------------- 301-11 150 -------- -------- --------------------

Total 

depth 

(feetj 

2, 388 

1, 520 

3, 041 

2, 788 

2, 710 

2, 959 

2, 661 

2, 724 

3, 110 

2, 815 

3, 275 

3, 214 

2, 975 

2,895 

2, 925 

2, 880 

3,340 

3, 108 

2,881 

2, 920 

3,025 

2, 742 

657 

3,050 

1, 165 

2, 853 

3,000 

2,658 

2, 798 

1, 410 

3,097 

'203-34 ---------------- 14, 000 -------- ___________ :_________ 2, 906 

202-34 45 ------------------------------------ 2, 916 

103-33 ---------------- 56,990 '1, 050 {~J~~', t~il,' fg8~:~~=} 2, 831 

'203-29 . -------- -------- -------------------- 2, 788 

1200 

202-3 ---------------- 16, 096 ----:---- {!~~·.', i~~~: 6~~---~===} 3, 075 

101-33 

104-33 

107-29 

407-20 

103-29 

105-29 

204-34 

403-20 

404-20 

120 -------- -------- -------------------- .1, 922 ---------------- 39, 126 -------- ___ ·_________________ 2, 868 

40 - - - --- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ---- - - - - 2, 77 5 

125 -------- -------- -------------------- 2, 704 

40 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - --- - - - - - - - - - - 2, 850 

50 ---- - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --- - - - - - - 2, 864 ---------------- 7, 000 1, 060 Aug., 1925, 525_____ 2, 885 

------------zos- :::::::: ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::I ~: ~:~ 

.J Estimated. 

Remarks 

Mutual well, plugged and abandoned July 5, 

1924. 

Shale well. 

Stray sand at 2,490-2,530 feet, dry. 

Plugged back to 2, 704 feet. 

Plugged back to 2, 717 feet. 

Test Mar. 6, 1923, sho~ed 30 barrels of oil, · 1, 700 M cubic feet of gas. 

15 feet in "Second Wall Creek sand, " hole 

filled 2,500 feet with water. 

Do. 

Plugged back to 2, 972 feet. 

2,973 feet. 

Bottom water at 

300 feet of oil, 2,200 feet of water in hole. 

Plugged and abandoned. 

5 bailers of oil an hour at 1,900 feet. Plugged back to 2,974 feet. 

"Third Wall Creek sand," at 2,873-2,881 feet; 

oil and gas. 

1 bailer of oil an hour at 11750 feet. 

Shale oil also at 1,900, 2,215, and 2,305 feet. 

Shale well.· 

Shale producer June 13 to Nov. 13, 1.923. 

Plugged back to 2,838 feet, bottom water. 

Bottom w~ter; plugged back to 2,787 feet. 

Shale well. 

Shale break at 2,876-2,878 feet. 

Shale well. 

Dry gas. 

Stray sand at 2,33Q-2,347 feet. 

Dry gas. 

600 feet of oil in hole. 

Reported good flow of oil and gas in first 4 feet 

of "Second Wall Creek sand." 700 barrels 

after being shot . 
8 

Well No. 

401-29 

105-20 

402-28 

104-29 

102-33 

201-10 

404-28 

403-.28 

408-20 

402-29 

301-34 

305-28 

404-33 

306-28 

405-20 

403-33 

402-33 

102-10 

303-21 

406-20 

110-29 

302-21 

J101-3 

111-29 

202-28 

303-28 

109-29 

304-28 

203-28 

108-29 

405-28 

201-11 

201-33 

303-27 

302-27 

304-21 

302-28 

205-28 

409-20 

410-20 

l. J. 

GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS IN NAVAL PE~ROLEUM RESERVE NO.3, WYOMING 

TABLE 2.-Well history of Naval Petroleum Reserve N. o. 3-Continued 

Altitude of 

Date begun Date completed well mouth 

(feet) 

July 2, 1923. July 23, 1923 5, .. 036 

Apr. 27, 1923 July 27, 1923" 5,006 

June 22, 1923. Aug. 2, 1923 5,082 

Apr. 17, 1923 Aug. 3, 1923 4,982 

June 13, 1923 Aug. 7, 1923 5, 149 

Sept. 25, 1922 Aug. 8, 1923 5, 238 

June 19, 1923 Aug. 10, 1923 5,080 

June 26, 1923 Aug. 18, 1923 5,060 

May 30, 1923 Aug. 24, 1923 h 5,029 

Aug. 8, 1923 Aug. 24, 1923 5,032 

Oct. 2, 1923 ____ do ________ 5, 153 

Aug. 6, 1923 Aug. 27, 1923 5,055 

Aug. 131 1923 Aug. 28, 1923 5, 160 

Aug. 12, 1923 Aug. 29, 1923 5,040 

June 20, 1923 Sept. 3, 1923 4,997 

Aug. 19, 1923 Sept. 9, 1923 5, 139 

July 25, 1923 Sept. 11, 1923 i 5, 162 

Sept. 24, 1923 Sept. 15, 1923 5, 218 

July 12, 1923 Sept. 17, 1923 4, 991 

July 7, 1923 Sept. 19, 1923 4,999 

Aug. 14, 1923 Sept. 24, 1923 4,967 

July 30, 1923 Sept. 28, 1923 4,999 

Aug. 5, 1923 Oct. 7, 1923 5, 171 

Aug. 22, 1923 Oct. 7, 1923 5,025 

Aug. 16, 1923 Oct. 12, 1923 4,964 

July 25, 1923- Oct. 13, 1923 5,049 

July 19, 1923 Oct. 18, 1923 4,965 

Aug. 2, 1923 Oct. 22, 1923 5,072 

Aug. 20, 1923 Oct. 27, 1923 4,974 

Aug. 4, 1923 Oct. 27, 1923 i 4,969 

Sept. 9, 1923 Oct. 30, 1923 5,049 

Aug. 1, 1923 Nov. 1, 1923 5, 177 

Sept. 4, 1923 Nov .. 6, 1923 5, 150 

Sept. 12, 1923 Nov. 27, 1923 5,069 

Sept. 21, 1923 Jan. 20, 1924 5,070 

Sept. 20, 1923 Feb. 13, 1924k 4,983 

Aug. 22, 1923 Mar. 6, 1924k 5,094 

Dec. 7, 1923 Apr. 20, 1924k 5, 018 

May 15, 1924 June 30, 1924l 5, 043 

May 26, 1924 July 17, 1924 5,022 

u Diamond drilling completed· Dec. 25, 1925. 

"Diamond drilling completed Nov. 2, 1925. ; Diamond drilling completed Jan. 29, 1924. 

Shannon-sand 

Depth Thick- to top ness (~eet) (feet) 

220 95 

10 120 

240 100 

170 .130 

300 90 

405 .145 

190 130 

270 110 

15 110 . 

235 110 

375 125 

221 94 

430. 115 

195 115 

117 143 

445 100 

470 130 

310 100 

140 100 

110 100 

115 135 

140 95 

400 120 

185 135 

150 100 

225 105 

95 155 

225 130 

175 95 

90 85 

275 110 

410 100 

350 125 

310 130 

250 110 

75 105 

225 90 

160 150 

82 98 

75 130 

"First Wall Creek "Second Wall 

sand" Creek sand" 

Depth Thick- Depth ThickShale production 

to top ness to top ness (feet) (feet) (feet) (feet) 

-------- ------ -------- ------ 1,740-1,745 feet. 

2, 210 75 2, 673 27 

2,450 180 2,865 47 

2,485 90 2,866 26 

2,465 110 2,844 58 

2,615 95 3,001 60 840, 1,120, 1,820, and 

2,000 feet. 

2,450 240 2,828 48 

2,480 125 2,870 53 

2,227 98 2, 666 28 

-------- ------ -------- ------ 1,438-1,453 feet. 

2,600 120 2, 995 50 Show at 1,920-1,970 feet. 

-------- ------ -------- ------ Sandy at 1,597-1,630 feet. 

-------- ------ -------- ------ Sandy at 1,105-1,161 feet. 

-------- ------ -------- ------ 1,532 feet. 

2, 300 100 2, 750 36 Show at 1,400 and 1,580 

feet. 

-------- ------ -------- ------ 2,024-2,076 feet. 

2, 570 210 2, 882 63 Show at 1,885-1,890 feet. 

-------- ------ -------- ------ 2,097 feet. 

2; 347 101 2, 755 35 Show at 1,391-1,410 feet. 

2, 320. 80 2, 723 3.5 Show of gas at 710 feet. 

2,355 95 2, 775 39 Show at 870 feet. 

2,355 85 2,769 38 Show at 1,080 feet. 

2,615 105 3,024 38 

2,450 100 2,855 37 Show at 2,000 feet. 

2,420 75 2, 764 30 

2,440 165 2,870 41 

2, 350 135 2, 753 4=2 

2,470 130 2,884 51 

2, 380 118 2, 776 39 

2,360 110 2, 750 61 

2,475 170 2,887 52 

2,575 100 3,000 60 

2,550 145 2,963 63 

2, 510 185 .2, 895 75 

2, 515 185 2,889 54 

2,325 100 2, 742 27 

2,510 80 2,854 46 

2,425 135 2,832 40 Show at 580 and 890 feet. 

2,280 96 2,883 31 Show at 1,160 feet. 

2,295 100 2, 704 37' Show at 450, 595, and 

1,210 feet. 

I Diamond drilling suspended Feb. 24, 1923 •. " Drilling suspended .. z Diamond drilling completed Jan. 22, 1926. 
Well No. 

401-29 

105-20 

0

402-28 

104-29 

102-33 

201-10 

404-28 

403-28 

408-20 

402-29 

301-34 

305-28 

404-33 

306-28 

405-20 

403-33 

402-33 

102-10 

303-21 

406-20 

110-29 

302-21 

101-3 

111-29 

202-28 

303-28 

109-29 

304-28 

203-28 

108-29 

405-28 

201-11 

201-33 

303-27 

302-27 

304-21 

302-28 

205-28 

409-20 

410-20 

HISTORY OF DEVELOPMENT 9 

TABLE 2.-Well history of. Naval Petroleum Reserve No. 3-Continhecl 0 0 

Inltlnl pwductlon or I Gns (M oil (barrels) cubic feet) 

Rock pressure (pounds) 

Initial Later 

165 -------- -------- --------------------

~; I;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;; 

Total 

depth 

(feet) 

1, 745 

2, 945 

2,912 

2, 893 

10, 000 -------- -------------------- 2, 905 

9 375 {

Apr., 1924, 900 ______ } 3 063 ' -------- June 1926, 300______ · ' 

9 750 {

Apr., 1924, 800 ______ } 2, 884 

' -------- June, 1926, 435 ____ _ 250 

390 - - ------ ---- - - - - ------ - - - - ---- ------ 2, 923 - - ------ ---- --- - ------------ - ----- - - 2, 906 

135 

185 

147 

100 

100 

30 

65 - - - - - - - - - - ---- - - ------ - - - - - - -------- 70 15,000 1,050? ___________________ _ 

240 

50 

75 

60 

35 

550 

75 

75 

150 

75 

400 

75 

Show of oil and 

water. 

300 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 200 10,000 ---------------------------- 40 365 ---------------------------- 125 -------- -------- -------------------- 225 -------- -------- -------------------- 11 ------------------------------------ --------------- - 16, 000 ---- - - - - ---- - ----- ----- -----

75 ------------------------------------ 25 

1, 108 

3,045 

1,,630 

1, 161 

1, 532 

2, 786 

2,076 

3, 141 

2,097 

2,791 

2,759 

2,814 

2, 809 

3,062 

2,901 

2; 794 

2,912 

2, 795 

2,935 

2,815 

2,870 

2,939 

3,061 

3,029 

2,987 

2,954 

2,980 

3,065 

2,873 

2,926 

2,741 

Remarks 

Show at 1,600 feet. 

"Third Wall Creek sand" at 2,912-2,916 feet. 

Plugged back to 2, 702 feet. 

Sandy shale above "Second Wall Creek sand" 

at 2,684--2,866 feet. 

Dry gas. Mudded off May, 1927. 

Making 1,225,000 cubic feet of gas a day and 

40 barrels of water an hour, Jan. 30, 1926. 

Oil from " Second Wall Creek sand"; "Third 

Wall Creek sand" at 2,902-2,906 feet, 50 

barrels 80 per cent water. 

Shale well. 0 

Do. 

Do. 

Do. 

Shale well. Show also at 1,445 feet. 

"Third Wall Creek sand" at 3,107-3,124 feet. 

Plugged back to 3,124 feet. Oil from "Third 

Wall Creek--sand," gas from "Second Wall 

Creek sand." 

Shale well. 

Some water in sandy shale at 2,555-2,570 feet. 

Plugged and abandoned Sept; 14, 1926. 

Sandy shale at 2,500-2,614 feet. 

Shale break at 2, 787-2,789 feet. 

Sandy shale at 02,917-2,980 feet, dry. Mudded. 

1,200 feet of oil ("Second Wall Creek") in hole. 

"Third Wall Creek sand" at 2,918-2,92~ feet. 
10 GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS IN NAVAL PE'rROLEUM RESERVE NO. 3, WYOMING 

TABLE 3.-Monthly production from Naval Petroleum Reserve 

No. 3, October, 1922, to December, 1927 

[Furnished by U. S. Navy Department] 

Month 

·October, 1922 (2 days) __________ _ 

l'rovember _____ ~---------------- December ______________ . _______ _ January, 1923 ______________ ~ __ _ 

FebruarY------------~---------- ~arch ________________________ _ April ______________ · ___________ _ ~ay __________________________ _ 

July Jupe-------------------~------- __________________________ _ 

~~~~b~~~~~~================== October _______________________ _ l'rovember _____________________ _ 

. December______________________ · J an:uary, 1924 ___ -: _ -. ___________ _ February ______________________ _ ~arch ________________________ _ 

ApriL _______ ---- _____ -_-------

June ~ay--__________________________ -- ~·----------------------_ July __________________________ _ August ________________________ _ September _____________________ _ 

October--~--------------------- l'rovember _____________________ _ December ______ ~ ______________ _ January,J925 _________________ _ February ______________________ _ 

~arch------~--------~--------- ApriL ________ --- _____________ _ 

June ~aY--~-------------~---------- __________________________ _ July_..: ________________________ _ August ________________________ _ September _____________________ _ October _______________________ _ l'rovember _____________________ _ December _____________________ _ January, 1926 _________________ _ 

FebruarY-------------------~---

~arch _______ ~----------------- ApriL __________ -..: ____________ _ ~ay __________________________ _ June _ _: ________________________ _ 

August JulY-------------------~-------. ________________________ _ September _____________________ _ October _______________________ _ l'rovember _____________________ _ ·December _____________________ _ January, 1927 _________________ _ 

FebruarY-----------------~----- ~arch ________________________ _ 

June tr:~---~= _______________ = = = = = = = =·= = = = ~----------- = = = = = = = = = = = July _____________________ _: ____ _ 

August------------------~------

September ___ ~------------------ October ____________________ _: __ _ l'rovember _____________________ _ December _____________________ _ 

SUMMARY 

Barrels 

Barrels 

830. 16 

19, 191. 97 

17, 221. 16 

30,379.64 

27, 606. 05 

37,980.34 

41, 399. 81 

119, 296. 42 

122, 744. 83 

115, 675. 83 

124,588.38 

127, 659. 61 

138, 081. 51 

131,647.06 

119, 888. 80 

123, 242. 29 

108, 393. 27 

106,229.09 

94,058.08 

87, 162. 97' 

82, 757. 41 

74, 727. 95 . 68, 712. 88 

74, 661. 42 

65,975.49 

57,483.02 

60,353.32 

62,439.58 

57, 272. 98 

63, 136. 07 

56,477.67 

54, 607. 44. 

51,330.55 

48, 770. 15 

48,982.96 

47,586.31 

48,662.97 

47, 117.09 

46,317.89 

39,613.97 

39, 154. 00 

41, 683. 16 

38, 958. 97 

38, 031. 44 

35, 801. 09 

35,027.50 

34,415.74 

32, 536. 63 

28, 751. 63 

30,482.90 

31, 227. 76 

28, 294. 62 

24,935.60 

31,277.04 

25, 216. 87 

29, 225. 61 

25,657.42 

27,650.29 

27,663.66 

23,578.06 

26,494.48 

20, 271. 81 

22, 626. 96 

3,549, 227.63 

Number of 

wells pro- ducing 

1 

2 

4 

6 

6 

8 

8 

13 

23 

27 

34 

44 

51 

59 

61 

62 

60 

60 

60' 

59 

59 

61 

61 

62 

61 

62 

62 

61 

62 

62 

62 

62 

62 

62 

62 

63 

62 

62 

62 

63 

62 

62 

62 

62 

62 

64. 

64 

. 61 

62 

63 

61 

61 

61 

61 

61 

61 

61 

62 

62 

62 

62 

62 

53 

Barrels 

1922________ 37,243.29 1926 ________ ~ 425, 684. 79 1923 ________ 312, 892. 42 .1, 136,948.28 1927 ________ _ 1924 ________ ~00~ 75~ 19. 

1925________ 63~ 701.66. 3, 549, 227;·. 63 

Sub~:iequently special counsel for the Government 

filed suit to have the Mammoth Co.'s lease canceled, 

and on March 13, 1924, a receivership was created to 

maintain the status quo within the reserve pending 

decision of the suit. After hearings in the lower courts 

the case was brought befor~ the Supreme Court of the 

United States, which on October 10, 1927, handed 

down a decision ordering the cancellation of the lease. 

Accordingly, on December 29, 1927, the receivers 

rendered an accounting and control of the reserve was 

returned to the Navy Department. 

GEOGRAPHY 

Location and extent of field.-Vnited States Naval 

Petroleum Reserve No. 3 embrac~s an area of about 

9,300 acres in Tps. 38 and 39 N., R. 78 W., Natrona 

County, Wyo., 25 to 35 miles north-northeast of 

Casper (see fig. 1) and about an equal distance southeast of the Big Horn Mountains. The outlines and 

geography of the field are shown in greater detail by 

Plates 7 and 8 . 

Accessibility.-Geograpbically, as well as geologie-ally, the Teapot field is closely related to the larger 

Salt Creek oil field, and avenues of communication 

for one field are essentially the same as those for 

the other. An excellent highway con~ecting Casper 

with towns in the Salt Creek field and with Sheridan 

passes just northwest of the reserve; the North & 

South Railway extends from Casper to Salt Creek 

and Midwest and to intervening stations 5 to 10 miles 

northwest of the Teapot field; a.J;ld the reserve itself 

is crossed by several pipe lines leading to Casper and 

by the Sinclair pipe line, whic~ connects with transcontinental trunk lines at Freeman,_ Mo. 

Topographic. jeatures.-N a val Petroleum Reserve 

No.3 lies near the western margin of the High· Plains, 

or western part of the Great Plains region, and is 

characterized by the topographic features, the assemblages of plant types, and the climat~c conditions nor-

. mally found in such a region. The surface of the 

central part of the reserve consists of a grassy plain, 

dotted with sagebrush and gashed by ravines, bordered by an encircling rin1 of sandstone which has, 

. because of its superior hardness, r~sisted the forces 

of E}rosion th~t have scooped out the basin in the soft 

shales exposed above the apex. of the Teapot uplift. 

The surface ·features of the fiel~ · a;re well illustrated 

by Plate 1, A. · The main camp of the Mammoth 

Oil Co. is ·visible on the left in the middle 9-istance, 

and the tank fa;rm, formerly belonging to the Sinclair 

Crude Oil Purchasing Co., is vis~ble on the right. 

In the extreme background are to be seen C~stle 

Rock and other parts of the Shannon escarpment, 

which borders the southeast end of the Salt Creek 

· field. Plate 1, B, shows the Teapot field from the 
U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 163 PLATE 

A . l1A ' ORAMA OF TEAPOT DOME FROM POINT ON PARKMAN HIM AT SOUTH END OF DOME 

B. PANORAMA OF SOUTHERN PART OF TEAPOT DOME FROM POINT ON SHANNON RIM NORTHWEST OF MAMMOTH CAMP No.1 
U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 163 PLATE 2 

PANORAMA OF TEAPOT DOME FROM SHANNON RIM AT SOUTHEAST END OF SALT CHEEK FIELD 
U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 163 PLATE 3 

Arrow shows lriangu lation poinL on lower sandstone of Parkman member m aPiwd hy Lhl" writers in slructura l sludy 

B. CHAHACTERISTIC EXPOSURE OF SHANNON SANDSTO E J UST EAST OF HOAD IN SW. H NW. H SEC. 17, T. 39 ., H. 78 W 
U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 163 PLATE 4 

A. PARKMA SA DSTONE FROM PO! T ORTHWEST OF CAMP No. l 

B. PA OllAMA SHOW! G CHARACTER AND STRUCTURE OF FOHMATIONS ABOVE PARKMA SANDSTONE, EXPOSED JUST WEST OF AVAL PETROLEUM RESERVE o. 3 
U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 

A. A f<'AULT 

The lctLcrs indicate corresponding strata on the two sjdcs of the 

fault and show the extent. of !he displ acnrnent. 

PROFESRIO::-<AL PAPER 163 PLATE .5 

13. 1,000-FOOT VERTICAL SECTION OF UNJ\AH 

WEDGE, OR" GHABEN " BLOCK, EXPOSED I N 

GHAND CANYO OF AH !ZONA 

H, Hakatai shale; S h. Shinumo q11 artzit c; d . diabase. 

C. BIG FAULT EXPOSED IN RAVINE NEAR CE 'TER OF NW. H SEC. 33, T. 39 N., R. 78 W. 

a, Concretion beds in dropped block, showing tilting due Lo drag near fault; h, bentonite drawn out to featheredge by drag on fault; D, down throw; 

U, upt.brow. 
STRATIGRAPHY 11 

opposite direction, and Plates 2, 3, A, and 4 give further details as to surface features in· or near the field. 

At a tin1e fairly well back in the glacial epoch the 

surface features of the Teapot field had been eroded to 

essentially their present form. Then, probably owing 

to a renewed advance of the ice sheet into regions 

north of this field the streams were more or less ponded, 

and silt was deposited over their valley bottoms, 

locally to depths of 50 feet or more. ·The alluvial 

plains thus formed are now being attacked by a renewed 

down-cutting, and the .alluvial lowlands are trenched 

by deep and narrow stream courses, bordered at 

intervals by bluffs 40 feet or more in height. 

Drainage and water supply.-Although the North 

Platte River passes within 25 miles of the south end 

of the Tea.pot dome a.nd flows thence almost due eastward to join the Missouri near Omaha, the streams 

that drain Naval Petroleum Reserve No. 3 are tributary to Salt Creek, a branch of the Powder River, 

which in turn joins the Yellowstone River near Miles 

City, Mont. The run-off from the reserve thus 

reaches Omaha by a route several hundred miles 

longer than if it followed the North Platte Valley. 

The reserve lies immediately within the drainage 

basins of Little Teapot and Teapot Creeks. Even 

these larger creeks are intermittent in their flow, owing 

to the semiaridity of the climate, and such water as 

they contain has a high content of dissolved salts. 

Water for drilling was obtained from reservoirs formed 

by damming ravines (see pl. 1, B), and water for 

general camp use was obtained from a group of wells 

near the Casper-Salt Creek highway, which drew their 

water from the Shannon sandstone. A large volume 

of water under artesian head exists in the "First Wall 

Creek sand" beneath the reserve, but, like the other 

waters of the area, it is too highly mineralized to be 

satisfactory for don1estic, use. In both the Salt 

Creek and the Teapot fields it is customary to distiJl 

water to be used for drinking or for such purposes as 

require noncorrosive or nonmineralized water. Owing 

to the abundant supply of natura] gas such distillation 

can be done cheaply. 

Oulture.-ln its cultural as well as in its geographic 

features the Teapot field is essentially a continuation 

of the Salt Creek field, and the systems of roads, 

camps, telephone lines, oil wells, pipe lines, oil tanks, 

etc., constructed within the reserve (see pls. 1, B, 

and 2) closely resemble similar systems developed in 

the Salt Creek field. · GEOLOGY 

STRATIGRAPHY 

GENERAL SECTION 

The sedin1entary formations that are exposed within 

or underlie the Teapot and Salt Creek oil fields are of 

wide extent in eastern Wyoming and were deposited 

along or near the shores of a se~ or gulf which in early 

Cretaceous time extended over much of the Rocky 

Mountain region and later on occupied smaller areas, 

as,. for example, the Powder River Basin-the great 

structural depression corresponding to the lowland 

area surrounded by the Big Horn Mountains on the 

west, the Black Hills on the east, and the Casper 

·Mountains and· Hartville uplift on the south and 

southeast. 

The Teapot-Salt Creek area lies along the western 

margin of this major basin, and thus the formations 

penetrated by wells drilled in the two fields consist 

of marine shales interbedded with beach and nearshore sands that grow thinner tow.ard the east and 

northeast, where progressively greater depths of water 

existed when the formations were being laid down. 

Some. limy beds also underlie the Teapot dome, but 

thick limestones are present only in the part of the 

sedimentary column far below the sands so far penetrated within the reserve. 

The sequence of the formations underlying part or 

all of the Teapot and Salt Creek fields, and their 

general' character and thickness, are indicated by 

Table 4. 

EXPOSED ROCKS 

PARKMAN SANDSTONE MEMBER OF MESAVERDE FORMATION 

The youngest rocks exposed within. the reserve belong to the Parkman sandstone, which is the lowest 

member of the Mesaverde formation in this area. 

This member normally consists of three parts, the 

general nature· and· sequence of· which are showil. by 

Plates 3, A, and 4, A. 

· Upper sa.ndstone.-Tbe upper part consists loeally 

of massive yellow sandstone, which is not persistent 

but merges laterally, within short distances, into 

yellow sandy shale and thinner beds of sandstone, as 

may be seen by comparing Plates 3, A, and 4, A, the 

massive sandstone at the upper left in Plate 3, A, being 

the same as that visible on the extreine right in Plate 4, 

A. W egemann 17 gives the thickness of this sandstone 

as about 110 feet a.nd reports that fossil dinosaur and 

crocodile remains were found in its top about 10 miles 

northwest of the Teapot field. 

Both east and west of the reserve boundary the 

Parkman sandstone is conformably overlain by a 

marine shale unit, which is in turn overlain in order by 

the Teapot sandstone, forming the top member of the 

Mesayerde, a.nd the Lewis shale, including the equivalent of the Fox Hills sandstone. Plate 4, B, shows 

characteristic exposures of these units visible in the 

. southward-sloping trough that lies just west of -the 

Teapot field. The V-shaped outcrop of pine-covered 

rocks in the middle foreground consists of the Teapot sandstone exposed on both flanks of the southward-pitching synclinal fold; and the high hill in the 

left background is capped by a tongue of sandstone in 

11 Wegemann, C. H., op. cit. (Bull. 670), pp. 21-22. 
12 GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS IN NAVAL PETROLEUM RESERVE NO. 3, WYOMING 

the upper part of the Lewis shale, which ·projects 

northward along the axis of the downfold. 

Middle shale.-The middle part of the Parkman 

mmnber consists chiefly of dark carbonaceous shale 

(see pl. 3, A) containing layers of iron ore and thin coal 

beds developed in brackish coast~l-plain swamps. 

Local channel sandstones are also to be seen here and 

there along the outcrop, and one or two .persistent 

white sandstones occur in the lower part. A n1assive 

gray sandstone is also found at the base near the sout? 

end of the dome, and channeling at the base of .this 

sandstone is clearly evident in many places. The 

thickness of this unit is given by W egemann 18 as 

about 190 feet. 

Lower sandstones.-The lower part of the Parkman 

member was rr1apped by the writers in the course of 

their structural study and comprises the series of 

sandstone beds for1ning the inner face of the horseshoeshaped escarpment that borders the Teapot field. ·As 

shown in Plate 3, A, and 1nore especially in Plate 4, A, 

it does not consist of solid sandstone but is made up of 

several near-shore or beach sandstones separated by 

minor shale beds which yield more readily to erosion 

and leave notches in the cliff profile. Normally there 

are four main sandstone beds or groups of beds, which 

are exposed in characteristic fashion in the headland 

west of the l\1ammoth camp. (See pl. 4, A.) The 

lowest sandstone normally makes a bold cliff, the 

~econd sandstone commonli makes a minor cliff, and 

the third sandstone is the main rim rock of the inner 

escarpment and forms the second main promontory 

west of the camp. (See pl. 4, A..) The fourth sandstone, which is in places of a snowy whiteness, is 

much softer and in consequence usually crops out on 

the back slope of the third sandstone and just at the 

base of the carbonaceous clays of the middle part of 

the Parkman. (See pls. l, B, 3, A, and 9.) 

The basal sandstone of the Parkman, the lowest of 

the four just mentioned, grades downward into the 

shale below and attains a thickness of 40 feet or more. 

Its top is commonly marked by a zone of irregular 

reddish-weathering calcareous and ferruginous con- . 

cretions about 5 feet thick. The second sandstone, 

which attains its principal observed development 

near the northeastern margin of the reserve, is likewise of marine origin and develops an irregular and pitted 

upper surface where exposed to weathering and solution. The third sandstone is relatively resistant to 

erosion and normally is capped by a hard red platy or 

ripple-marked layer, which the writers used as a key 

bed for determining structure. The fourth sandstone· 

is a soft sandstone of beach origin, in which numerous 

impressions of Halymenites, a fossil seaweed, are 

visible. Around the southern part of the Teapot 

uplift this sandstone is cut out and replaced by the 

massive gray channel sandstone at the base of the 

ts Wegemann, C. H., op. cit. (Bull. 670), p. 21. 

rriiddle division; and in its outcrop northeast of the 

field, near the valley of Salt' Creek, it assumes a yellow-

. ish banded phase, being streaked with iron stain and 

associated with considerable quantities of hernatite, 

apparently formed by the alteration of an old chemical precipitate of hydrated iron oxide. The thickness 

of this white sandstone above the key bed ranges from 

38 to 54 feet; and the aggregate thickness of the whole 

of the lower division of the Parkman ranges from about 

170 to 190 feet, the bottom of the member, because of 

its gradational character, being rather arbitrarily 

determined. 

STEELE SHALE 

The Steele shale includes the beds between the :Parkman sandstone member of the Mesaverde formation 

and the Niobrara shale and consists of upper and lower 

shale members separated by. the Shannon sandstone 

member. These three members are roughly equivalent, in descending order, to the Claggett shale, the 

Eagle sandstone, and the Telegraph Creek formation 

of southern Montana. Almost the entire thickness of 

the upper shale member is exposed within the reserve, 

and its remaining basal beds and the underlying Shannon sandstone are well exposed in the immediately ad-

.jacent parts of the Salt Creek field. The beds of the 

lower member are only partly exposed in the Salt Creek 

field and were not studied by the writers, information 

regarding them being obtained either from well records 

or from descriptions by W egemann and others of the 

constitution of the member where exposed in the Tisdale (Powder River) anticline or along the flank of the 

Big Horn Mountains. 

Upper member.-The upper member of the Steele 

shale is about 1,450 feet thick and apparen.tly underlies 

the Parkman conformably, the persistent series of 

thin sandstones in the upper part of the Steele, which 

form minor ledges beneath the Parkman rim (see pl. 

4, A), apparently belonging to the same gradational 

series as the sandstones of the basal Parkman. For 

about 800 feet below this zone of thin sandstones the 

Steele consists of soft bluish shale containing layers or 

zones of hard concretions, some of which can be seen 

projecting from the shale exposures on the sides of the 

ravine above the reservoir in the view given in Plate 

4, A. The concretions of the lower 200 feet of this 

section are normally gray calcareous nodules; those of 

the upper part commonly weather red because of their 

iron content. 

Numerous ·beds of bentonite, a white claylike substance, are conspicuously developed in a zone between 

400 and 550 feet above the base of the upper member · 

of the Steele shale and afford one of the important 

guides for determining the structural details within 

the Teapot field. The outcrops of these bentonites 

form the white patches on the landscape visible in the 

middle foreground in Plate 1, B, also the white streaks 

visible between the derricks and oil tanks at the left 
TABLE 4 -Pnnc~pal rock j01 rnatwns w 1 eapot dome and halt C1 eek ml j~elcl::, 

Formations and members 

System Sene Oh'ltteter Thwhness (feet) 

As recogmzed m Bulletm 670 As defined by present wnter:, 

1\.f '>S e .) ello~ >'>d. db tor e o yello\\ l'>h s u d.} >'>hale For 1s 1 In 'l.t top of Parkman sea p 110± 

P tl h.man &andstone membe1 of P d.l kmct.n &s nd& tone member of Bl tch. c u bon '1.Ceou., &hale tlun coal beds lenhcubt s'tndstoue& tnd t" o 01 tln ee per 190± 

l\Ie&'tVelde fmm'ttiOn Mes'tve1de f01matwn &r.,tent \\lute S'tnd&tone& ne.tl ba..,c, 

---

I 

M tb& \ e to f1 tggy m tune & tnd& tone.., Wlute &.:mdstone at top Md.ke& mnm P'trkm'tn 170-190 

Ilill 

I 

Soft bltu;;,h gr iY :;,hale cont tunng conCletwnm} la} ers \lso '1. g10up of bentomte bed& 

.tnd .tn underlymg tlun &ctnd&tone (" wate1 sand 1 ) 100-o50 feet 'tbove ba&e 

I 

1 400---1 460 

Steele '3h'tllll01l &tmd&tone Steele Sh'tnnon :;,a,nd&tone Greem&h gr 'tY rnaune &ctnd&tone (wmmonly m t"' o benche&) & tndy &hale 'lnd ferrugmou& 1&5± 

shale membe1 &h'tle membm beds 

I 

I 

G1ay &h'tle \\lth thm feuugmou:;, l tye1s 

400-500 feet 'tbo\ e IYtse a fe"' bentomte bed& ctnd t tlun c,onglomer'tte bed 

Nwbr u.t shale Nwbr'tia shale Ltght colored &hale, With &orne hmdet c<tlcmeous bed~ 1 espeCl'"tlly near top 1, 650-21 140 

C'1.1hle '3h'tle Datk ruaune <-hale 

Uppu C1ehceoub Wall C1eek sand \V'tll Cteel" b'tlld C1 osb bedded &'tnd.stoue wd &'lnd.r &h.tle common!) m t\-\o bed:;, ("Fnst W'tll C1eek 90-160 

stone member &tone membe1 bd.Ild ) 

-- ~ -- - ~ -

I 390-400 

I I 

Gray slule b mdy shale 'tnd thm & mdstone& 

Cret'tceous 

I I 

I 

F1ontiet Gra.) to Llm&h wh1te &'tndstone with p'tl ting& ot bentomte ''Inch ct.IG not numerous near 4Q-90 ' 

fotm't :::.outh end of bctlt Cteel field ("Second W .tll Cted s'l.nd 11 ) 

twn 220-250 

G 1 ty shale 'tnd 111 egulm leme& of s md& tone 

Benton 

sh'tle .Fme grctmed &and&tone mn1egul ti 'tnd drscontmuous pakhe& (" llmd "Vt '111 C1eeh. &'tnd ') 0-JO 

I D'1.1 k gr 'tY .sh 'tle &ctnd.r &h tle 'tnd ha1 d &and& tone lenses JOOJ: 

Mow1y &h'tle mem Mo\\ IY &h<tle Hard fl :::.1le sh'tle "e<ttheung hght gt 'tY 'tnd cont..tmmg fi&h cales Numerou:::. bentomte 200 

ber hym& 

Dad wft shale 20± 

'lhetmopolls sh tle Soft fme grJ..med :::.and~ tone \uth &orne co'tl a,nd fos.:.ll v;, ood fwgments ( l\luddy &'tnd ) 0-11 

Soft blac,k &hale contctmmg pl m t 1 em 'tlll s 'tlld a tev\ shai k teeth 200± 

Ientrcuhr whrte 01 biO\\Il &md&tone ("Dal ... ota s'tnd ) 0-20 1 

I 

Lowei C1 ehceous Clove!ly f01matwn Clo\ elly fo1matwn &ott light colored or mas&n e d uk sh'tle 100 :r: 

Conglomuate and gutty &'1.ncl&tone1 wrth lenses of coal (" L'tkota &ctnd ) 20-75 I -- --

Ctetctceous (?) Motu&on form'ttwn / Moiu&on fotm'ttwn Soft m'tbSive vc~,neg tted chy 'tncl thm h'tld sandstone-, e&pecrctlly m middle of form'ttwn 285-360± 

Jm 'tSSlC Uppm Ju1 tbSIC Sund'tnce fmmatwn bunclance form'ttlon G1een and gt'ty sha,le, gla.) 1 \\lute1 and blO'\\n s'1nd:::.tone ctnd some &ctnd.) lune&tone 235-285 

lu tSbiC Chug\\ 'tter fo1matwn Chug\\ 'ttei foim'ttlOn Soft m tb&l\ e 1ed &hc~,le, red sand:::.tone thm lunestone.:. a,nd ma&&rve beds of g} psum 700± 

---

Peimi'tn Rmb'ti formatiOn Al tm net t1ng 1 ed &hale md vaucolor ed hmestones D nd and stone& 

C'tl boru!m ous 

Pcnn&j lv'tm'tn Ten&leep &<tnd&tone M't'-dVe 'dutl. ClO&s bedded &and&tone with &ome brown c'tk ueou& la.r ers 

l\hny of the data a~ to form'ltwns below &econd \\ 111 Creel s md 1nd all tht'l1S to number of well~ ptoducmg 01l1nd 1s to >!Id\ ttY of oil t th.Pn from U -.. C eolog1c11 <.,un ey dr'lwmg \lid\\ e~t 835v compt!ed b~ ] vi Colt- and lPI ro\ Pd 1\ J S Ro~~ (&ee pl 11) 

3281)-31 (I ace p 12) 

220± 

270 :r: 

Number of'' elli> 

producmg otl Grw1ty of 

from form tlwu otl produced 

lU Sult Otlilil\ flel(l 1 ( Buume) 

Mar 1, 1027 

- -

---

-----

- ---

- - --

------ ------

38 (1dle) 29 

65 08-12 

267 38 

- -

111..>12 d7 7 

-----------

-

u .39 

-

21 .::>8 

1 

-----

-

70 36 

J JJ 4 

I 

I 

I 
STRATIGRAPHY 13 

. end of the picture. The outcrop of these beds around 

the south end of the dome is also shown, rather· 

obscurely, in Plate 4, A, at the base of the cloud 

shadow just above the derrick near the left end of the 

picture. The lowest of the large bentonite beds of this 

group is underlain by a persistent zone of light yellowish-gray concretions which split along vertical planes 

into multitudes of thin hard plates. This concretion 

zone (called by the writers, for convenience, the 

"shell" bed) is in turn underlain by a bentonite layer 

about 1X feet in thiclmess; and at the base of this 

bentonite is half an inch or so of. brown to honeycolo red "silky " calcite or sa tin spar, mentioned by 

Lewis 19 as a good marker bed. Layers of gray concretions associated with beds in the upper part of the 

bentonite series can also be used over considerable 

areas in mapping structure, but without continuous 

tracing they can not be correlated across wide concealed intervals with absolute certainty, because of 

the large number and sin1ilarity of such beds. About 

20 feet below the "silky" calcite layer, or 25 feet 

below the base of the lowest large bentonite bed, 

there is a bed of soft sandstone or sandy shale about 

10 feet in thickness, within which is an almost continuous layer of sandstone nodules that affords the 

best key bed for mapping the structural details of the 

productive part of the Teapot dome. ·This sandstone, 

which is commonly lmown as. the water sand, lies 

about 395 feet above the top of the Shannon sandstone, and because of its hardness it occurs extensively 

as a protective capping on hills and ridges near the 

crest of the Teapot uplift. 

Many nodule layers, some weathering yellow and 

others red, occur in the inter·val between the Shannon 

and water sands, and a number of these are sufficiently 

distinct and continuous to be usable in detailed work 

·for mapping structure over considerable areas. One 

such bed, consisting of a double layer of yellow sand.y 

concretions splitting into thin slices and otherwise 

closely resembling the "shell" bed previously mentioned, is exposed in the critical area south of wells 

201 and 205, in sec. 28, T. 39 N., R. 78 W., and a 

gray nodular bed that contains many fossils of the 

genus Inoceramus, lies about 3 feet above a prominent 

yellow concretion layer, and crops out around the 

hill j~1st southeast of well 304-28 was also ~sed in 

the SW. X sec. 28. The tops of. these two beds lie, 

respectively, about 174 and 131 feet below the top of 

the water sand and a thick bentonite bed conspieuously exposed in or near the northwestern part of the 

reserve lies about 90 feet above. the top of the Shannon. 

Thinner layers of bentonite also occur within this 

90-foot interval. 

Shannon sandstone member.- The top of the Shannon 

sandstone is exposed along or just outside of the 

northwestern edge of the reserve, and the whole ' . 

u Lowis, J. 0., op. cit., p. 77. 

member can be ~tudied in detail along its escarpment 

a nllie northwest of the reserve boundary. 

Within and near the northwestern part of the Teapot 

field the Shannon is about 135 feet thick, and its 

general appearan.ce and character are indicated by 

Plate 3, B, supplemented by the following partial 

section measured at the hill shown in the foreground 

in the photograph. 

Partial section of Shannon sandstone member .east of road in 

SW. X NW. X sec. 17, T. 39 N., R. 78 W. 

1. Sandstone, hard, calcareous; caps persis.tent bench__ 2 

2. Sandstone, thin bedded, grading downward into 

massive dark sandy clay_______________________ 26~ 

3. Clay, dark,. containing massive greenish sandstone 

concretions___________________________________ 3 

4. Clay, bluish gray, massive, somewhat sandy________ 35 

5. Ironstone layers weathering to red flakes, sandy 

shale, and some sandstone ____ .,. _______________ ~ 3 

6. Sandstone, hard; caps lower prominent bench______ 2 

7. Sandstone, thin bedded, and thin shale beds________ 19~ 

8. Sandstone, ferruginous, carbonaceou~, in thin irregular 

beds separated by shale partings; rests on eroded 

surface of lower member of Steele shale__________ 19 

110 

Thus normally the Shannon consists of two benches 

of sandstone capped by hard layers (1 and 6) separated 

by an interval of dark clay (4) containing large concretions of greenish sandstone. This erosional effect 

is illustrated in the foreground in Plate 3, B, and more 

especially in the far hillside beneath the derrick 

where ' the double cliff formed by the two sandstone 

benches can be seen and where the rounded slope 

formed by the soft upper part of the Shannon is also 

characteristically displayed. The part of the Shannon 

above bed 1 of the measured section is about 25 feet 

thick and consists of greenish sandstone thickly 

sprinkled with ferruginous matter like that of bed 5 

or more commonly of sandy shale and soft sandstone. 

Owing to the ~oftness of this bed, the top of the Shannon is logged in many well records at the . top of the 

hard ledge-cap layer. Some dark chert nodules 

having corroded surfaces occur at the top of the 

Shannon, and the base of the member rests upon a 

somewhat eroded surface of the shale beneath. 

Water and minor amounts of oil have been found in 

the Shannon. (See p. 23.) 

UNEXPOSED ROCKS 

The sedimentary rocks below the Shannon sandstone are not exposed in the Teapot field, and their 

sequence and general character, indicated in Table 4, 

are known either from well records, from partial exposures in the Salt Creek and Tisdale uplifts, or from . 

outcrops along the flank of the Big Horn Mountains. 

STEELE SHALE 

Lower member.-The lower member of the Steele 

shale corresponds closely to the Telegraph· Creek 
14 GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS IN NAVAL PETROLEUM RESERVE NO.3, WYOMING 

formation 20 of southern Montana, and according. to 

Wegemann 21 consists, in the Salt Creek field, of about 

1,000 feet of gray shale interbedded with thin ferruginous layers and a few bentonite beds. A thin conglomerate, commonly spoken of as the "fish-tooth 

conglomerate," occurs about the middle of the member and, besides shark teeth, contains fossil saurian 

bones. Cone-in-cone structure is conspicuously developed in the concretionary layers near the base of 

the member. NIOBRARA SHALE 

The Niobrara shale underlies the Steele and consists 

of about 750 feet of buff or bluish-gray shale interbedded with thin limestone layers, especially in the 

upper part of the formation. 

CARLILE SHALE 

Th~ Niobrara is underlain by about 220 feet of dark 

shale, commonly correlated with the Carlile shale of 

the Black Hills region, beneath which lie the "Wall 

Creek sands" of the drillers, which, with their intervening shales, are referred by most geologists to the 

Frontier formation. However, the presence of the 

characteristic Carlile fossil Prionocyclus WJJomingensis 

at the base of the "First Wall Creek sand" 22 apparently indicates. that rocks of Carlile age extend down 

through the "First Wall Creek sand," possibly to the 

base of the conglomerate 23 that locally marks the top 

of the "Second Wall Creek sand" and elsewhere seems 

to occur within the body of the sand. 

FRONTIER FORMATIQN 

The current classification, which makes the Wall 

Creek sandstone member ("First Wall Creek sand" of 

drillers) the top of the Frontier formation, is accepted 

in this report. The "Wall Creek sands" are at the 

present time of major importanc~ as sources of oil in 

the Teapot and Salt Creek fields, ~nd they will therefore be described in SOII?:e detail. 

"First Wall Greek sand."-The uppermost or "First 

Wall Creek sand," as stated by Estabrook and Rader/4 

is usually logged in well records 

as a continuous sand with an average thickness of 136 feet, but 

it is really composed of two distinct parts .separated by either 

a shale bed or a layer of hard limy sand. The upper layer, or 

bench, is 80 to 100 feet, and the lower about 20 feet thick. As 

suggested by Nowels,25 the conditions under which the oil and 

water are found in the two layers are quite different. The 

lower sand contains water under high pressures and is sometimes sufficiently porous to yield an artesian flow of several 

thmisand barrels per day when first tapped. In some places 

·this bed seems to pinch out entirely, and only the inconsequen20 Thorn, W. T., jr., Oil and gas prospects in and near the Crow Indian Reservation, Mont.: U.S. Geol. Survey Bull. 736, p. 38, 1922. 

21 Wegemann, C. H., op. cit. (Bull. 670), p. 20. 

u Idem, p. 18. 

• 2s Idem, p. 17. 

24 Estabrook, E. I..., and Rader, C. M., op. cit., pp. 205-206. 

25 Nowels, K. B., Preliminary report on water conditions in the First Wall Creek 

sand, Salt Creek oil field, Wyo.: Am. Assoc. Petroleum Geologists Bull., 1924, 

p. 492. 

tial water of the upper layer will be encountered in a well, but 

. usually water will fill the hole 1,000 feet or more as soon as the 

lower bench is tapped. The water line in the First sand as. 

usually reported is the water line in the lower bench. 

The upper part of the sand is more irregular in . porosity 

than the lower, and the water and oil content are under much 

less pressure. The outer limit of the oil in the upper bench 

is irregular and much further down on the str.ucture than in. 

the lower; oil in appreciable amounts has been found 1 mile: 

or more outside the water .line in the lower part. Usuallyonly a small amount of water is found in the upper bench, 

but occasionally the hole will fill with water as soon as the 

sand is tapped. Such water is probably coming up under 

pressure from below through 'veils in which the cement has 

not confined the high-pressure water within its natural channels. 

At its outcrop this sand consists of medium-grained 

cross-bedded sandstone of a dirty buff color, which 

contains fragments of petrified wood, shark teeth, 

and the shells of marine inv~rtebrates.26 

In the Tisdale (Powder River) area the "First. WaU 

Creek sand" is underlain in turn by 20 feet of shale,. 

15 feet of sandstone and shale, 65 feet of shale, 10. 

feet of ~andstone, 20 feet of shale, 20 feet of shaly 

sandstone, and 110 feet ofshale/7 and the presence of 

local sandstone beds in this interval is recorded by 

the logs of a number of Salt· Creek wells. A thin 

. bentonite marks the base of the lowest shale bed, and 

the normal aggregate thickness of the "First Wall 

Creek" and underlying beds mentioned in the Salt 

Creek and Teapot fields is 390 to 400 feet. 

"Second Wall Greek sand."-The "Second Wall 

Creek sand" is the one of present importance in the 

Teapot field and has yielded the greater part of the oil 

obtained at Salt Creek. It was studied at its outcrop 

by Wegemann before it was known to be oil bearing 

in the Salt Creek region and was described by him as. 

follows: 28 

This sandstone is usually referred to as the "Lower Wall. 

Creek sandstone." It is not over 20 or 25 feet thick in itS. 

~assive part, although sandy shale above and below it may 

carry oil. It is the highest bed that carries pine trees and is a, 

massive medium-grained sandstone, with a calcareous cement, 

and would apparently form a good reservoir for oil. The sand 

grains composing the rock are colorless quartz, but the sandstone as a whole has a bluish-white cast, due to the presence 

among the quartz grains of innumerable black particles, which 

were apparently derived from the same rock that furnished 

the numerous well-rounded dark quartzitic pebbles that are 

distributed sparsely through the mass of sandstone. On top 

of the sandstone is a 6-inch bed of conglomerate formed of 

these same rounded black pebbles, which range in diameter 

from an eighth of an inch to an inch. Among them are found 

here and the~e a few pebbles of transparent quartz. It is 

interesting to note that thin beds of conglomerate composed 

of similar black pebbles have been reported at about this 

horizon from the Big Horn Basin.29 Overlying this bed of 

conglomerate in the Powder River [Tisdale] field is a bed of 

bentonite about 12 inches thick. 

26 Wegemann, C. H., op. cit., p. 18. 

21 Idem, p. 17. 

2s Idem, pp. 17, 18. 

20 Hewett, D. E:., The Shoshone River section, Wyoming: U. s, Geol. SurveyBull. 541, pp. 89-113 (especially p. 98), 1914. ' 
STRATIGRAPHY 15 

Within the Salt Creek field the "Second Wall Creek 

sand" consists of a number of sandstone layers, rather 

than of a single sandstone bed; and it is quite probable-from the variations in gas flow found at different 

depths in the sand and from the water conditions 

reported-that the same situation exists in the Teapot 

field, though the well records available are so poor 

'that they do not give satisfactory evidence on this 

·point. The existence of shale "breaks" In the "Sec-

-ond Wall Creek" and its lateral variability in thickness 

.and c01nposition have been described by Estabrook 

.and Rader,30 who state that in the Salt Creek field 

The Second Wall Creek sand varies in thickness from 20 to 

100 feet. In the northern half of the field the thickness will 

:average 75 feet and in the. southern half about 60 feet. In 

.sees. 8 and 9, T. 39 N., R. 78 W., the sand is thinnest; and in 

sees .. 22, 23, 25, and 26, T. 40 N., R. 79 W., it is consistently 

·the thickest. Thin partings of· shale, often containing much 

"bentonite, are common throughout the field, but they thicken 

"toward the south and east and split the sand into several dis.:. 

tinct layers. A number of wells in T. 39 N., R. 78 W., report 

three or more layers of sand separated by shale beds from 

:2 to 25 feet thick. The lower benches of the sand are usually 

the most productive, and even in those parts of the field where 

"the sand is reported to be continuous the best•production is 

found in the lower half. 

These thin shale partings of bentonite material make the 

.Second a "dirty" sand. "Cleaning out" for weeks is often 

.necessary before a Second sand well is in shape for pumping. 

The best production is obtained from the northern half of the 

\[Salt Creek] field. In much of the southern half the production is so small that many of the wells are unprofitable, and in 

-one area, around the quarter corner between sees. 7 and 18, 

'T. 39 N., R. 78 W., several dry holes have been drilled. 

The average production per acre from the Second sand was 

4,967 barrels on January 1, 1925. The most productive 160-

acre tract was the SE. X sec. 25,. T. 40 N., R. 79 W., with • 

75,037 barrels per acre. · 

Furthet· facts beil.ring upon the composition and 

continuity of the "Second Wall Creek sand" within 

the Salt Creek field are given by R. F. Peake,31 of the 

Midwest Refining Co., as follows: 

In the first place, the First Wall Creek sand is 125 feet thick 

and the Second is only 60 feet thick. The First sand is probably more uniform than the Second. * * * More important still is the fact that there is a difference in hydrostatic 

heads. There are even two hydrostatic heads in the First sand 

itself. There is a hydrostatic head in the bottom of the Second 

sand that is much larger than the hydrostatic head in the top. 

How uniform it is we have not been able to determine and we 

are working on it. The hydrostatic head in the Second sand is 

not as great as the hydrostatic head in the bottom of the First 

sand. 

At the outcrop the "Second Wall Creek sand" is 

separated from the "Third Wall Creek sand" by 150 

feet of gray shale, and in the Salt Creek-Teapot area 

the interval is occupied by gray shale containing variable lenses of sandy shale and sandstone. The total 

interval between the tops of the two sands ranges · 

fr01n 215 to 275 feet. 

ao Estabrook, E. L., and Rader, C. M., op. cit., p. 206. 

at Peake, R. F., Petroleum development and technology in 1926, p. 217, Am. Inst. 

Min. and Met. Eng., HJ26. . 

"Third Wall Creek sand."-At its outcrop the 

"Third Wall Creek sand" comprises two benches, 32 the 

lower one, from 30 to 40 feet thick, consisting of 

"medium-grained dirty-white sandstone" supporting 

a growth of pine trees, and the upper one, separated 

from the lower by 35 feet of gray shale, consisting of 

"25 feet of shaly sandstone, also carrying a growth of 

pine." Regarding this sandstone, Estabrook and 

Rader 33 state: 

The Third Wall Creek sand is found from 625 to 675 feet 

below the top of the First sand. At Powder River [Tisdale], 

where measured by Wegemann, it consisted of two benches, the 

upper 20 feet and the lower 30 feet thick with a 35-foot shale 

bed between them. At Salt Creek the lower bench of sand is 

seldom found and the upper bench is very lenticular. 

' Thirty wells have been drilled to th~ Third sand horizon [in 

the Salt Creek field]. Commercial production was obtained 

in seven wells, sm.all shows of oil and gas in five, a dry sand was 

found in seven, no sand at all in nine, and water is reported in 

two wells; 23 per cent of the wells were productive, and 30 per 

·cent encountered· no sand. The average thickness of sand in 

the producing wells is 20 feet; in the 20 wells rep<,:>rting some 

sand the average thickness is 15 feet. The sand generally 

appears to be thin and tight and not likely to be an important 

producer, although it is possible that thicker and more porous 

lenses that will yield valuable amounts of oil may be found. 

The possible productive area of the Third sand appears likely 

to be as large as in the Second sand. The total production 

from the Third sand .up to January 1, 1925, has been about 

75,000 barrels. 

Since Estabrook and Rader prepared their paper it 

has become more apparent that the "Third Wall 

Creek sand" exists only in strips or scattered patches 

beneath the Teapot and Salt Creek fields and probably 

has its principal local development in the southeastern 

part of the Salt Creek field. It is underlain b.y 250 to· 

300 feet of dark shale containing some lenses of sandy 

shale and sandstone and thin ferruginous layers that 

weather into flakes of a deep reddish-brown color. 

MOWRY SHALE 

The Mowry shale is conspicuous at its outcrop 

because of its light color, scarp-forming habit, and 

abundance of contained "fossil fish scales, but commonly 

it is not recorded-in the .Jogs of wells which penetrate it. 

It consists of hard dark shale that splits into thin 

plates and weathers a silvery gray, interbedded with 

se-veral layers of bentonite, one of which rests upon 

the top layer of the "fish-scale" shale. The local 

thickness of the Mowry probably ranges from 230 to 

280 feet. THERMOPOLIS SHALE 

TheThermopolis shale, which underlies the Mowry, 

consists chiefly of very dark soft shale containing plant 

remains but commonly includes near its top a thin . 

sandstone that is generally regarded as the equivalent 

of the "Muddy sand" of the Big Horn Basin. This 

bed, which is usually 6 feet or less in thickness, lies 

about 20 feet below the Mowry shale and consists of 

u Wegemann, C. fl., op. cit., p. 17. . 

as Estabrook, E. L., _and Racier, C. M., op. cit., p. 207. 
16 GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS IN NAVAL PETROLEUM RESERVE NO.3, WYOMING 

white sandstone or sandy shale containing fragments 

of petrified wood and local lenses of coaly material.· 

· The lower part of the Thermopolis consists of 17 5 

to 200 feet of dark shale containing plant fragments. 

Shark teeth are also found in the basal beds. 

CLOVERLY FORMATION 

The Cloverly formation underlies the Thermopolis 

shale and consists of two sands and an intermediate 

shale .. The upper sand is called. by the drillers the 

"Dakota sand" and the lower one the "Lakota sand," 

but the correlations implied by these names are not 

established. For convenience the driller's terms are 

here used. 

"Dakota sand."----:.At its outcrop the "Dakota sand". 

consists of 14 feet of shaly sandstone which is strongly 

ripple-marked in its upper layers, 34 and in the Salt 

Creek field it ranges from an inch or less to 14 feet in 

thickness and contains small amounts of oil and ga.s. 35 

Middle shale member.-The shale that underlies the 

"Dakota sand" is a varicolored or dark massive shale 

70 to 80 feet in thickness. 

''Lakota sand.''-According to Estabrook and Rader35 

the "Lakota sand" as developed in the Salt Creek field 

is about 70 feet thick and consists' of sandstone beds 

separated by thin layers of shale. This multiple 

character is indicated by variations in the yield of oil 

and by the temperature of water encountered at different depths in the sand. 

At its outcrop· northwest of Salt Creek this sand 

consists of 

a conglomerate containing some layers of sandstone, the whole 

56 feet thic.k, and including at the base a thin bed of coal, which 

in many localities suffered erosion before the conglomerate was 

laid down, as is shown by bits of coal that occur throughout 

the bed. There is much cross-bedding in the conglomerate. 

In the Powder River [Tisdale] field the sandstone is a lithologic 

unit, but 25 miles to the north, where it crops out along the 

Big Horn uplift, it consists of numerous thin layers of sandstone 

and conglomerate interbedded with shale, some of it pink and 

not very different in appearance from the underlying Morrison. 

In this region fossil plants were collected from layers of shale 

that lay between beds of conglomerate near the base. * * * 

According to Mr. Knowlton, these are undoubtedly Kootenai 

species. There appears to be little question, therefore, that the 

conglomerate is equivalent in age to at least a part of the 

:J{ootenai of Montana, probably being the same as the Pryor 

conglomerate of the Elk Basin oil field. The conglomerate, so . 

far as known, is the principal oil-bearing formation of the 

Powder River [Tisdale] field.a' 

MORRISON FORMATION 

In the Salt Creek field the Morrison appears to consist of about 300 feet of soft purple to green clay interl;>edded with hard fine-grained sandstone, especially 

between 110 and 225 feet above the base of the formation. At its outcrop the Morrison is about 250 feet 

thick 36 and consists of s:Q.ale interbedded with .four or 

N Wegemann, C. H., op. cit., p. 15 .. 

u Estabrook, E. L., and Rader, C. M., op. cit., p. 207. 

ae Wegemnnn, C. H., op. cit., p. 14. 

five hard thin sandstones which form conspicuous 

ledges along the outcrop. Oil seeps from at least 

two of these sandstones in the Tisdale anticline 36 and 

fresh-water shells and the bones of dinosaurs have been 

found along the Morrison outcrops over wide areas. 

SUNDANCE FORMATION 

The Sundance formation, of Upper Jurassic age, 

underlies the Morrison conformably and as ordinarily 

identified in well records consists of a 100-foot upper 

bench of limestone and sandstone; a lower bench, 60 

feet thick, of sandstone, limestone, and shale; and 

a middle member, 90 feet thick, of grayish shale, 

sandy shale, and soft sandstone. Part· of the red 

rocks below the lower hard bench may belong either . 

to the Sundance or to the Upper Triassic Jelm formation; but definite evidence on this point is lacking.· 

CHUGWATER FORMATION 

The Chugwater formation ("Re·d Beds"), of Triassic 

age, as at present identified in Salt Creekwell records, 

consists of about 700 feet of massive red shale and sandstone, interbedded with some limestone beds and beds 

of gypsum. # 

EMBAR FORMATION 

Beds tentatively correlated with the Embar formation, of Permian age, underlie the Chugwater and consist of 220 feet of ·alternating limestone and red shale, 

interbedded with a few layers of varicolored sandstone .. 

TENSLEEP SANDSTONE 

The Tensleep sandstone, of Pennsylvanian age, underlies the Embar and consists of about 270 feet of 

massive cross-bedded white sandstone, interbedded 

with a few thin layers of dark-brown limestone. This 

sandstone has been reached by a deep well just southwest of the town of Midwest, in the Salt Creek .field, 

and there yields a flow of several thousand barrels a 

day of water having a temperature of about 170° F. 

A second well drilled in 1930 in the SW. X NW. X sec. 

35, T. 40 N., R. 79 W., reached the Tensleep at a 

depth of about 3, 780 feet and obtained an initial yield 

of about 1,900 barrels a day of heavy oil. 

OLDER FORMATIONS 

The nature and sequence of formations beneath the 

Tensleep sandstone in the Teapot area is as yet a 

matter of conjecture. However, in view of the results 

of the Salt Creek deep test well, above referred to, 

which penetrated about 1,500 feet of sedimentary beds 

beneath the Tensleep, it is probable that the Tensleep 

at Teapot is underlain by at least 1,500 feet of sedimentary rocks corresponding in a general way to the 

Amsden formation (Pennsylvanian and Mississippian), 

Madison limestone (Mississippian), Bighorn dolomite 

(Ordovician), and Deadwood formation (Cambrian). 

As some oil has been produced from both the Amsden 

and the Madison in Montana, and as petroleum resi-
STRVCTURE 17 

dues have been reported fr01n outcrops of the Deadwood fonnation, these lower rocks can not be ignored 

as possible sources of oil within Naval Petroleum 

Reserve No.3. 

STRUCTURE 

GENERAL FEATURES 

The term "structure" as applied by the geologist . 

to sedimentary strata means their present slope and 

attitude. Most sedimentary formations, especially 

the marine shales and sandstones that yield the greater 

part of our commercial oil and gas supplies, were laid 

down in alnwst horizontal layers of wide extent an4 of 

fairly uniform thickness within local areas. ·Since 

their deposition these ·beds have been uplifted and· 

warped or folded by the great forces active in the 

earth's crust and thus have been deformed or tilted. 

Trough-shaped folds are spoken of. as synclines, and 

archlike folds are called anticlines, or if the length and 

breadth of such folds are nea.rly equal, they are spoken 

of, respectively, as structural basins and domes. 

During folding or tilting the beds may have been 

broken and displaced, and the breaks on which displacement has occurred are spoken of as faults. 

(See pl. 5, A.) 

The development of faults during folding, and the 

accompanying earthquakes, may be important causes 

of the concentration of oil and gas (probably originally 

present in tiny droplets a.nd bubbles scattered through 

great thicknesses of rock) into the commercially 

valuable pools now found concentrated in our present 

oil and gas bearing sands.37 The relative lightness of 

oil and gas in comparison _with water means that in 

water-bearing sands any gas and oil that may be 

present will be found in upfolds-that is, beneath 

don1es and anticlines-with water around the flanks 

of such folds and in the synclines . or downfolds. 

Where free gas, oil, a~d water occur. in the same fold, 

gas, being lightest, will be found. in the top of the 

fold, then oil, then water. (See fig. 3 and sketch with 

pl. 8.) 

METHODS OF REPRESENTING STRUCTURE 

Several graphic methods are used for representing 

geologic structure upon a map. In one method dip 

symbols are used, each consisting. of a bar showing 

the direction of a level line drawn on the bed mapped; 

an arrow drawn at right· angles to the strilm line, 

showing the direction of the bed's slope; and a fig:ure 

beside the arrow showing, in degrees, the slope of the 

bed, n1easured from the horizontal downward. (See 

pl. 6.) 

A second method, and the one chiefly used in this 

report, is that of contour lines. drawn on tlfe surfaqe 

of certain key strata. The principle is. the same as 

17 Mills, R. V. A., Natural gas as a factor in oil migration and accumulation in 

the vicinity of faults: U.S. Bur. Mines Repts. Inv. 2421, December, 1922. 

that employed in topographic mapping, except that 

the contour lines show the altitude of the underground or restored surface of some particular bed instead of the surface of the ground. (See fig. 3 and 

pls. i and 8.) Each contour line connects all points 

·on the key bed at a specified altitude above sea 

level, and the difference in altitude between adjacent 

contours is usually a fixed interval, as, for example, 

10, 20, 50, or 100 feet. Thus with a uniform contour 

interval the crowding of the contour lines together 

means a steep structural slope, and wide spacing of 

the contour lines means a gentle slope. CAs a fault is 

a break along which the beds on one side are displaced 

with reference to those on the other, the contours on 

opposite sides of the fault will be offset,· and the 

amount of throw of the fault may be ascertained by 

comparing the altitudes of the same bed on opposiet 

sides of the fault at the same point. Thus if the _1,050-

foot contour as determined on one side of a fault is 

exactly opposite the 1,100-foot contour on the other 

side, ·the downthrow at that point is just 50 feet, 

toward the side of the lower altitude. (See pl. 6.) 

STRUCTURE OF REGION SURROUNDING NAVAL PETROLEUM RESERVE NO. 3 

Naval Petroleum Reserve No.3 lies near the southwestern n1argin of the great structural depression commonly spoken of as the Powder River Basin, which is 

bordered by the Big Horn Mountain uplift on the 

west, by the Casper Mountains and Hartville uplift 

on the south and southeast, and by the Black Hills 

uplift on· the east. The position of this major basin 

is clearly indicated on the geologic map of North 

America and on the map of the coal fields of the United 

States by the oblong tongue of coal-bea.ring rocks 

which projects southward from Montana into the part 

of Wyon1ing between the Big Horn Mountains and 

Black Hills. 

Near Kaycee an anticlinal spur projects southeastward from the Big Horn MoUntains into the southwestern part of the· Powder . River Basin, on which 

· the minor uplifts of the Kaycee, Tisdale (Powder 

River), and Salt Creek anticlines are superimposed. 

The Salt Creek anticline extends at least from the 

northern part of T. 40 N., R. 79 W., into the southwestern part of T.· 37 N., R. 77 W., and upon this 

anticline the Salt Creek and Teapot domes are in 

turn superimposed. · . 

The structural relationships in this region have been 

well described by Wegemann,38 who states: 

The Big Horn Mountains are flanked on the southeast by 

several anticlines, arches of strata that rise like a series of 

waves, each higher than the last, toward the major arch that 

forms the .mountains themselves. On the easternmost-the 

outermost-of these anticlines is the Salt Creek oil field [and 

also the related Teapot field]. * * * 

as Wegemann, C. H., op. cit., p. 24. 
18 GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS IN NAVAL PETROLEUM RESERVE NO. 3, WYOMING 

~ 

~ 

----. ~--..::.::;;~--=- --

------·-- -------------- ~---=-==- ---

B 

FIGURE 3.-Sketch showing method of representing structure by structure contours. A, Structure contour map of the anticline shown in B. 

B, Cross section and perspective sketch of an anticline. (After Hewett and Lupton) 
STRUCTURE 19 

The [Salt Creek] fold is not symmetrical, for its crest is 

much nearer its western than its eastern limit. The width of 

the eastern limb of the fold, measured from the crest to the 

bottom of the adjoining syncline, is about 20 miles, whereas 

the width of the western limb, measured from the crest to the 

bottom of the adjoining syncline, is only about a mile and a 

quarter. From northwest to southeast the Salt Creek anticline [including the Teapot field] is approximately 30 miles long. 

Wegemann's map (pl. 6), though requiring modificatiol1 as to details, gives a picture of the relative size 

and position of the Salt Creek ,and Teapot domes, 

although the Teapot uplift is shown as two complete 

domes instead of a single elongated uplift broken by 

faults into a number of segments. 

The Salt Creek dome lies upon the north end of the 

Salt Creek anticline, and its apex rises structurally 

about 1,200 feet above that of the Teapot uplift. It 

is much larger and less elongated than the Teapot 

dome, but the two domes have similar steepening of 

the west flank and similar fault patterns. 

A 

Because of their direct bearing on questions of oil 

migration and production the faults in and near the 

naval reserve were studied in detail, both at the outcrop and ·as revealed by well records. As shown by 

this study, the displacement along the local faults 

ranges from a. few inches to about 280 feet. The 

arrangement of the faults with respect to· the anticline 

·and with respect to each other clearly shows that they 

~ere breaks which developed during the elevation and 

flexing of the anticline. Compression was produced 

by forces applied, at once upward and northeastward, 

against the west flank of the Teapot dome, causing 

breaks to develop across the axis of the fold, approximately in the direction of the forces applied. In 

places this faulting was accompanied by lateral crowding of one fault wall past the other, with consequent 

differential upbowing along parts of the anticlinal 

axis, as is well illustrated by the series of half domes 

present on the plunging north and south ends of the 

B 

As revealed by the writers' recent 

mapping (see pl. 8) a minor faulted 

uplift, the Castle Rock dome, intervenes between the Salt Creek and 

Teapot uplifts, lying southwest of 

Castle Rock and centering within 

theSE. }~sec. 18, T. 39 N., R. 78 W. 

Minor half domes, bounded on the 

north by faults, also occur between 

the Castle Rock and Salt Creek 

domes. The Teapot and Salt Creek 

do1nes thus lie, respectively, near 

the south and north ends of the 

Salt Creek anticline and are separated by the Castle Rock and other 

minor f~ulted uplifts-a fact which, 

though significant, has nOt been FIGURE 4.-Sketches showing fissure-systems developed when horizontal (A) and vertical (B) forces are applied 

locally to anticlinal folds brought out in previous descriptions 

of the strueture of the Salt Creek and. Teapot fields. 

STRUCTURE WITHIN NAVAL PETROLEUM RESERVE NO. 8 

Structural conditions within Naval Petroleum Reserve ~ o. 3 are shown in considerable detail by ;E>lates 

7 and 8, which serve to illustrate the multiplicity of 

faults or fractures .that cut the upfolds into numerous 

segments and wedges. These maps and the structure 

section (pl. 8) drawn along a line approximately following the crest of the Teapot uplift show ·the irregular 

depression or saddle extending from the east-central 

part of sec. 29, T. 39 N., R. 78 W., across the NW. X 

sec. 28 and the southern part of sec. 21. North of 

this saddle the beds rise irregularly to the apex of the 

Castle Rock. dome, which lies three-quarters of a mile 

northwest of the naval reserve; and south of the saddle 

the beds rise irregularly to the major apex of the 

Teapot dome, 'in sec. 10, T. 38 N., R. 78 W., and 

slope thence southward to and beyond the southern 

boundary of the reserve. 

Teapot uplift. Elsewhere rotational movement caused 

the opening of tensional fissures into which thin slices 

of rock were dropped, giving rise to the "graben" 

blocks or wedges which are so characteristic and 

conspicuous a feature of the Teapot-Salt Creek area. 

Though only a partial representation of the conditions, the sketches in Figure 4 give an essentially 

correct idea of how tensional fissuring set the. stage 

for down-dropped wedges, or grabens, to form. Plate 

5, B, shows a cross section of such a graben exposed in 

the Grand Canyon in Arizona. The upper part of 

such a wedge, which crosses· the northern parts of 

sees. 2 and 3, T. 38 N., R. 78 W., is exposed in the 

Parkman rim in the southeastern part of sec. 35, T. 

39 N., R. 78 W. (see pl. 9), where the block is about 

300 feet Wide and has dropped vertically about 120 

feet, bringing the white upper sandstone of the basal 

division of the Parkman member opposite the brown 

marine sandstones at the base of the .Parkman. · 

Drag on the left-hand fault is practically absent, 

showing that. movement on that wall \yas almost 
20 GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS IN NAVAL PETROLEUM RESERVE NO.3, WYOMING 

vertically downward, which is also suggested by the 

horizontal and undisturbed condition of the principal 

mass of strata within the block. On the right-hand 

fault the down-faulted beds have been dragged or 

bent upward sharply near the fault, showing that 

strong friction occurred along this fault plane as the 

graben wedge sank. 

Such drag at another fault is also shown by the slope 

·of the hard layers visible at the left in Plate 5, 0. 

The thin gray layer at the right of this picture ·has 

been bent downward and dragged out to a featheredge · 

along the fault plane, which is marked by the hammer 

and the white calcite masses below it. Evidence of 

irregular displacement of down-faulted blocks is also 

clearly afforded· by the thin hard layer capping ridges 

in the northeast corner of sec. 35, T. 39 N., R. 78 W., 

visible in the central foreground in Plate 10, A. 

The approximate position and magnitude of the 

several faults mapped within or near the reserve can 

be understood by comparing Plates 7 and 8. Written 

description of such faults will therefore be limited to a 

few words regarding the particularly large group of 

fractures that cross sees. 33 and 34, T. 39 N., R. 78 W. 

These faults (U, V, V-l, and V-3, pl. 8) separate the 

northern and southern gas areas and apparently have 

planes on which the northern fault walls were thrust 

almost horizontally eastward with respect to the 

southern walls, the crest line of the fold being thus 

·offset by the faults. The vertical displacement- of the 

"Second Wall Creek sand" on fault U is approximately 

200 feet near the center of sec. 33. This displacement 

decreases to 175 feet, more or less, near the ·center of 

sec. 34, where the main fracture of fault U probably 

merges with that of fault V, which has a throw of about 

260 feet near the north line of sec. 26. The surface 

trace of fault U is clearly marked just southwpst of the 

New York Oil Co.'s gas plant (see pl. 7) and in the 

ravine·s both east and west of the road near well 

201, in sec. 33. East of its intersection with fault V 

fault u appears to have a displacement of only 20 to 

50 feet. 

Faults V-1 and V-3, which radiate fron1 the intersection of faults U and V ncar the center of sec. 34, 

also step the " Second Wall Creek sand " do:wn to the · 

south. On fault V -1 the throw is. approximately 50 

feet at the center of sec. 34, increases to about 100 feet 

near well 401, in sec. 33, and decreases thence westward. On fault V-3 also the throw is about 50 feet 

to the south. near the center of sec. 34 but decreases 

aouthwestward until it fades out in sec. 4. 

OCCURRENCE OF OIL, GAS, AND UNDERGROUND WATER 

. Except beneath the higher parts of the Salt Creek 

and Teapot upfolds the sands that yield oil in these 

fields contain water under strong hydrostatic or artesian pressure. Consequently the oil and gas present, 

being lighter than the water, have accumulated beneath 

the uplifts-free gas, being lightest, tending to occupy 

the tops of the domes. (See diagrammatic sketch on 

pl. 8, also fig. 3.) 

MIGRATION. AND ACCUMULATION OF OIL AND GAS 

According to commonly held views the oil-bearing 

sands and intervening shale beds were laid down in 

marine waters, and the voids between the sand grains 

and mud particles were originally filled with sea water 

with which at that time or subsequently were mingled 

gas bubbles and disseminated droplets of oil. Because 

of the high pressures existing underground considerable 

quantities of gas became dissolved in the interstitial 

water, and because of the greater solubility of gas in 

oil much larger quantities were dissolved in the oil. 

Then as folding of the beds of rock progressed, faults 

formed and afforded avenues for the escape of the 

compressed fluids, which rushed toward the openings 

just as oil or gas rushes to a well when it is drilled. 

Therefore, as oil that is rendered frothy by the expansion of the gas dissolved in it moves more readily than 

water,39 the local reduction in rock pressure caused 

by the formation of faults near the anticlinal crests 

induced a migration of both gas and oil toward the 

folds. Much of the gas and a part of the oil escaped 

from the faults at surface seepages; but after a time 

the· hydrostatic pressure exerted on the· sand by the 

. column of oil extending upward to the surface equaled 

the effective pressure in the sand, and the escape of 

oil and gas practically ceased. During this period 

of quiet channels for upward migration were sealed 

off, owing either to plastic settling of the shale beds, to 

the hydration and swelling of the bentonite layers, to 

the settling and collection of mud in the constricted 

parts of the fault fissures, to local cen1entation of the 

sand by calcite, or to cementation of the fault walls 

and the development of the calcite fissure fillings which 

are so commonly found marking the fault planes in the 

Salt Creek , and Teapot fields. After the faults were 

sealed local pressures were rebuilt or redistributed 

through regional hydrostatic and hydrf:tulic adjustments, ·and gravitational readjustments went on within 

the folds, producing a segregation of gas above oil and 

of oil above water, as in the Teapot field. With 

increasing pressure increased quantities of the free 

gas became redissolved in the oil, this process apparently going so far in the Salt Creek field as to cause the 

reabsorption of whatever free gas may have existed 

there after the initial accumulation had taken place. 

The views set forth above are emphasized by Mills 40 

as ·follows : 

The fact that nearly all the productive domes and anticlines 

in the Rocky Mountain fields are cut by fault fissures furnishes 

striking evidences that faulting and fissuring have played an 

important r6le in the migration and accumulation of oil into 

these entrapments. Probably the best example of this is the 

petroleum geologists' paradise at Salt Creek, Wyo., described 

by Wegemann. The huge Salt Creek structure and the· some·. 

ao Mills, R. V. A., op. cit. 

~o Idem, pp. 4-6. 
OCCURRENCE OF OIL, GAS, AND UNDERGROUND WATER 21 

what smaller Teapot dome are literally cut to pieces by--fault 

fissures which are evidenced at the surface both ·by rock displacement and by calcite veins and stringers. At several 

places in the Salt Creek field the calcite veins and stringers 

contain ozokerite intermixed with calcite crystals. 

The presence of open fissures below the surface is indicated by 

the occurrence of so-called shale oil in commerCial quantities 

in the shales overlying the First W ~ll Creek sand, by the ejection 

of calcite crystals along with shale oil issuing from wells, and 

by the esca.pe of oil and gas through these fissures incidenL to 

drilling operations. Shale oil and gas in crevices fairly pPrmeate the Steele shale at various depths, sometimes within 

4 or 5 feet of the surface. Wegemann 41 has described these 

features of the field in considerable detail. The so-called shaleoil wells in the Salt. Creek and Teapot fields evidently tap 

fissures through which the oil has migrated upward from the 

Wall Creek sands. 

Many of the 'fissures in the Salt Creek field are only partly 

filled with calcite, and much of the calcite filling is porous, 

with free surfaces of well-define9- crystals lining vugs that are 

empty or filled with ozokerite. The writer has observed this 

same porous, vuglike structure in calcite that was deposited in 

oil and gas wells near Butler, Pa. 

Evidence that the escape of small. proportions of the gas and 

oil has continued practically to the present time is furnished by 

the occurrence of numerous seepages in the Salt Creek field. 

The spotted character of the production, together with the 

phenomenally high initial rates of production of some of the 

wells tapping fault zones in the Second Wall Creek sand, give 

further evidences of the relation that faulting bears to underground fluid movements in the Salt Creek field. 

Again, the comparatively small productive area in the First 

Wall Creek sand is probably due, in part at least, to the loss 

of oil through fissures in the overlying strata. In this same 

connection there is the possibility that the First Wall Creek 

sand has received its oil by upward migration through fissures 

from the Second Wall Qreek sand. An example o( this t'ype of 

oil migration and accumulation in Osage County, Okla., was 

recently described by Paul V. Roundy befo:r:e the Geological 

Society of Washington. 

These relations of faulting and fissuring to the migration and 

accumulation of oil and gas are further indicated by the large 

proportion of productive structures that are faulted in the 

Mid-Continent, Gulf Coast, and California fields. One of the 

most interesting examples of oil accumulation under the influence of faulting seems to be the El Dorado, Ark., field, which 

is severely faulted but is practically devoid of any anticlinal 

structure. The processes herein outlined have probably been 

lnrgely responsible for the accumulation of o'il in that field. 

Primary and secondary gas accumulation.-For the· purposes 

of this paper the retention and accumulation of a part of the 

gas that originally accompanied the oil is termed primary gas 

accumulation; whereas the subsequent migration and accumulation of gas into a faulted entrapment is termed secondary 

gas accumulation. 

Where the gas· originally accompanying the oil and water 

·(primary gas) has escaped through the fissures, the accumu-. · 

lated oil may be practically devoid of gas, as at Soap Creek 

and Cat Creek, Mont.; at Mule Creek, Plunket, Maverick 

Springs, and other fields in Wyoming; and at Eldorado, Kans. 

But where considerable gas under high pressure accompanies 

oil in faulted and fissured structures it seems probable L~at 

this gas is either primary gas retained by the early sealing of 

the fissures, or that it is secondary gas which formed in or 

migrated to the entrapment afte:t the fissures were sealed. 

It is possible that both phases of gas accumulation are represented in many structures. That there· has been an enorn Wegemnnn, C. H., The Salt Creek oil field, Wyoming: U.S. Geol. Survey Bull. 

670, pp. 36-39, 1918. . 

mous escape of gas incident to the migration and accumulation 

of oil in 'most fields is indicated by the high concentration of 

salts in the waters associated with the oil. This concentration 

has undoubtedly been brought about through the removal of 

, water vapor in escaping gases.42 

Retention of oil.-The question is sometimes asked, Why did 

not all the oil and gas escape from faulted areas before the 

fissures were sealed? The question might just as well be 

asked, Why does all the oil not flow from a productive sand 

through the wells that tap that sand? In both cases the flow 

ceases when the propulsive force becomes inadequate to propel 

the oil to the surface. Let it be remembered that under ordinary. conditions of recovery about 80 per cent of the oil originally contained in a productive sand may, and probably 

does, remain underground when an oil field is abandoned.43 

As is the case with wells, the complete escape of oil through 

open fissures has probably failed largely because of dissipated 

gas pressures,· whereas the final retention of the oil is due to 

the sealing of the fissures before the gas pressures in the vicinity 

of the faults have again built up through regional adjustments. 

Summary.-In conclusion, the following points are em .. 

phasized: 

1. Under favorable conditions, especially in firm consolidated 

strata, faulting that has yielded open fissures ·has been an important factor in the migration and accumulation of oil and gas. 

2. Differential pressure, caused by the release of pressure 

through fault fissures, has been largely responsible for the 

migration of oil and gas to the places of accumulation, enriching the sands immediately around the fissures as well as 

the fissures themselves. 

3. The migration of gas and oil through fissures has been 

upward either to the surface or from one bed to another. 

Fissuring has also facilitated the lateral migration of oil and 

gas through porous beds toward these points of escape. This 

corresponds with the lateral migration of oil and. gas through 

sands toward producing wells. · 

4. The propulsive force of expanding gas, more especially 

the gas absorbed in oil and water under high pressure, has 

been one of the important factors in the migration of oil thro1.,1gh 

porous strata toward fissures where the pressures were relieved. 

5. ·Oil is propelled more effectively than water by the propulsive force of absorbed gas. Immediately upon the release 

of pressure, the absorbed gas expands and propels the oil from 

within. The comparatively high absorption capacity of oil and 

its tendency.to remain entangled with the flowing and expanding 

gas appears to be largely responsible for this effective propulsion. 

6. The migration and accumulation of oil and gas under the 

influence of differential pressures caused by faulting has been 

a comparatively rapid process, not the long drawn out process 

that is generally pictured. 

7. The occurrence of faults in the Rocky Mountain and 

Mid-Continent 'fields is a valuable criterion in the search for 

petroleum. In these regions a closed structure that is faulted · 

should generally be given preference to one that is not faulted. · 

Further application of these facts may possibly be made in 

other fields. 

8. Shallow sands have generally undergone more advanced 

drainage of oil and gas through fault fissures than have the 

deeper sands. 

CHARACTER AND DISTRIBUTION 0 F UN i> ERG R 0 UN D 

W ATE~S IN THE TEAPOT AND SALT CREEK OIL 

FIELDS 

The oil pools occurring within the sands beneath the 

Salt Creek and Teapot domes are surround.ed by waters 

42 See U. S. Geol. Survey Bull. 693. 

11 Lewis, J. 0., Methods of increa!'ing the recovery from oil sands: U. S. Bnr. 

Mines Bull. 148, 1917; Our future supplies of petroleum products: U.S. Bur. Mines 

Repts. Inv. 2174, October, 1920. 
22 GEOLOGIC CO~DITIONS IN NAVAL PETROLEUM RESERVE NO.3, WYOMING 

that vary in character and are under unequal and to a 

certain extent irregular pressures. The difference in 

the character of the several waters found in the Salt 

Creek field is pointed out in detail by Mr. Stabler on 

pages 38-62 and has also been described by Young and 

Estabrook 44 ~nd by Ross and Swedenborg.45 

R 79W 

l 1468~ 7671 I 7193 ' l 

1---10--11 z 12 j7_ 

4950f.l4 7482 7308 501t 

4475 3952 4071.~ 8985 10461 

-IS I '- 13--f----tl8-

4764 fr'6 r Clt\e.~6§7 5436 f ~~~~uo~·--~~~R~.7r8~W~. 

4672 ~ \\04?0 7967 ~\ J 

-22 23-f----24~. L-19-+--+--2o-- .tl ~11853 _\ 

4036 Sfl4 ~ I 8603 504~ 

1

/J. IOSIO ~ \ \ '1'58 " ~ 9500 

f--27 J. . 26 25 ~ ~ -3 1 29- T. 

4863 5874 I f ,~ 9487 9098 

l----f--f--+--t----i-'=9~2~9:!>.33Lj..··r 40 o , ~\ N 1. ~I '(tl \, . 7178 ~ 033 ~1~135 107 8756 ,_ ~560 

r---3!+ 35 ffil~ ~\.-31 ~~' 32- . m4tt~ 36 ~I ' ...... 4 ;>03 ~ 05900 J0330 8170 "j 

1--~1-+--+---t--1- ~ oO. f ~~-..., 

1743 1~11851 ~~~to {i89~'Z 8747 ,10387 ~\ 4434 

-3 R~LIM.~~s~ 6-r--C(.--sss~ 1~ 1£: 736317466 m 4226 

~ . I ~ j '· n11 898o 500o., 

10---t-' ..... -. ~ ... l~-- --~~~,.:~ 8--+--9 

3402 3262 3459 

3599 

IS 14 13 18 

2752 

2854 

I 24 19 

3336 

2134 T. 

39 

2831 N. 

---t--17 --+--16 

3430 2903 

3165 

---t--20 --t-----21 

3307 

Creek field, eontains a sulphate and carbonate water 

essentially similar to the average surface water of the 

region. The water of the "First Wall Creek sand~' is a 

brackish bicarbonate water which shows a marked 

geographic variation in its concentration and character, 

as shown by chloride-carbonate ratio (see fig. 5), the 

content of dissolved solids being much greater 

southeast and east of the oil pool in the "First 

Wall Creek sand," suggesting th_e existence of an 

eastward movement of artesian water from the 

high outcrop west of Salt Creek and perhaps a 

less active northward movement of water from 

the south and southwest across the saddle north 

of the Teapot fieJd and up the . east side of the 

Salt Creek dome. As was pointed out on page 

14, water movement is apparently more active in 

the lower bench of the "First Wall Creek sand" 

than in the upper bench, and, probably as a 

result, the oil pool in the lower bench is proportionately smaller. 

The water in the "Second Wall Creek sand" 

is a somewhat diluted and altered brine which 

occurs in much more concentrated form, with 

lower carbonate-chloride ratio and under less 

pressure, than the water in the "First Wall Creek 

sand"; and these facts, together with what is 

known regarding edge-water encroachment in the 

"Second" sand, suggest that owing to irregularities of bedding or cementation in the "Second" sand it is practically sealed off from active 

"intake of water along its outcrop, and that essentially stagnant conditions prevail within the 

sand except as movement has been induced by 

drilling operations. Probably because of this 

retarded or nonexistent water movement in the 

"Second Wall Creek," its productive area in the 

Salt Creek field is far larger than that of the 

"First" sand. Also the "Second Wall Creek" 

is oil bearing over a considerable area in the 

25 30 

Teapot field, whereas the "First" sand .there is 

--1-- 29 -c--28 _-t--_27 barren of 6il. ., The water in the "Dakota sand," which here 

is a thin, discontinuous sandstone, is of about the 

4802 

I 

same concentration as the "Second Wall Creek" 

water but is more nearly a normal brine, strongly 

suggesting stagnant conditions. In contrast 

with this situation, the "Lakota sand," a few 

FIGURE 5.-Map showing concentration of dissolved solids in water of "First Wall Creek feet below the "Dakota sand," contains circusand" in Salt Creek oil field. (By Young and Estabrook) 

The history and present relations of. these waters 

are largely revealed by what is known regarding their 

pressures and content of dissolved matter. ·Thus the 

Shannon sandstone, which crops out around the Salt 

44 Young, H. W., and Estabrook, E. L., Waters of the Salt Creek field, Wyoming: 

Petroleum Development and Technology in 1925, pp. 256-261, Am. Inst. Min. and 

Met. Eng., 1926. 46 Ross, J. S., and Swedenborg, E. A., Analyses of waters of the Salt Creek field 

applied to underground problems: Am. Inst. Min. and Met. Eng. Tech. Pub. 157, 

1928. 

lating artesian waters that res~mble the more 

dilute samples of "First Wall Creek" water in composition; and coincidently the oil-bearing area of 

the "Lakota sand" at Salt Creek is somewhat smaller 

than that of the "First Wall Creek sand" and very 

much smaller than that of the "Second Wall Creek 

sand." 

Little information regarding the waters of lower 

sands is yet available. It is, however, worthy of note 

that a well drilled to the Tensleep near the center of 
OCCURRENCE OF OIL, GAS, AND UNDERGROUND WATER 23 

sec. 25, T. 40 N., R. 79 W., yields large volumes of 

water that has a temperature of about 170° F. and 

·contains relatively little dissolved matter. 

SANDS WHICH ARE OR MAY BE RESERVOIRS FOR OIL AND 

GAS IN THE TEAPOT AND SALT CREEK FIELDS 

Up to the present time commercially valuable 

amounts of oil and gas have be·en found within' Naval 

Petroleum Reserve No. 3 only in the "Second Wall 

Creek" and "Third Wall Creek" sands and in fissures 

in the shales above the "First Wall Creek sand." In 

the Salt Creek field, however, commercial oil has been 

yielded by the Shannon, the "First Wall Creek," the 

"Second Wall Creek," the "Third Wall Creek," the 

uMuddy," the "Dakota," the "Lakota," the Sundance, 

and the Tensleep sands and by fissures in shale. Other 

sands-for example, those in the Morrison and pre-Sundance fo.rmations-may also be found locally productive in the Salt Creek field and perhaps in the Teapot 

field also. (See pl. 11.) According to all reports, the 

uFirst Wall Creek sand" is exclusively water bearing in 

the naval reserve, but a possibility remains that the 

"Lakota sand" and lower sands may contain oil and 

gas within the reserve. 

Shannon sandstorie.-The Shannon sandstone normally consists of two cliff-forming benches of sandstone overlain by a 25-foot bed of sandy shale or soft 

sandstone. ,An escarpment· formed by the Shannon 

encircles the Salt Creek field, and the bed dips below 

the surface near the northern edge of the naval reserve 

(see pl. 2) and is within 400 feet of the surface over 

most of the productive part of the Teapot field. Some 

heavy oil has been prod need from the Shannon sand 

just north of the main Salt Creek field, and noncommerc.ial quantities of oil have been found in it at 

places in or near the Teapot reserve; but elsewhere 

water is found in the Shannon, or it is reported to be 

dry, Indicating that faulting or irregularities of cementing or bedding prevent free fluid movement through 

the sand. Consequently, although some oil may yet 

be found in the Shannon within the reserve, it is probably unhnportant commercially, except perhaps for 

ulti1nate exploitation by the sinking of shafts and 

actual mining of oil-soaked sand, as is now being done 

at Pechelbronn, in Alsace. 

''First Wall Greek sand.''-The ''lfirst Wall Creek 

sand" normally consists of about 125 feet of soft sandstone and sandy shale divided into two benches by a 

break 20 to 40 feet above the base of the sand. The 

lower bench, besides being . thinner, contains water 

under stronger pressure and is the one which was principally exploited during the earlier development of the 

Salt Creek field. Porosities in the upper bench at Salt 

Creek are more irregular than in the lower, the recorded variations for the sand being between 7.6 and 

25.8 per cent, and Es_tabrook and Rader 46 state that 

~~ .Estabrook • .E •. L ... a.n..d..Ra.dor,_C. .• M.,.op. cit .• _p._209. _ . 

oil in appreciable amounts has been found (in the upper bench) 

a mile or more outside the water line in the lower part. 

Oil was found in this sand in the Salt Creek field 

in 1908, and until the-opening of the "Second Wall 

Creek sand" in 1917 it was the principal productive 

formation of that field. The size of the productive 

area of the "First Wall Creek sand" at Salt Creek is 

difficult to estimate because of the twofold character 

of the sand and the incompleteness of early records, 

but it is probably between 4,500 and 5,000 acres. In 

the naval reserve the "First Wall Creek sand" is 

reported to be water bearing throughout. 

"Second Wall Greek sand."-The "Second Wall 

Creek sand" which was opened by wells drilled at Salt 

Creek in 1917, has yielded the gre~ter part of the oil 

produced in both the Teapot and Salt Creek fields and 

is the sand principally involved in present discussions. 

There is evidence indicating that in the Salt Creek 

a.rea it norma.lly consists of a number of layers of 

sa.ndstone and sandy shale rather than of a single 

massive bed of sandstone. The presence of bentonitic 

shale "breaks" in the sand, especially toward the 

south end of the Salt Creek field, is stressed by Estabrook and Rader. Furthermore, the existence in 

that field of a much larger hydrostatic pressure in 

the base of this sand than in its top has been pointed 

out by Peake. The records of wells drilled in the naval 

reserve also indicate marked irregularities in thickness 

of this ~and and the probability that it consists of at 

least two distinct layers. This view was set forth 

by H. B. Hill, of the Bureau of Mines, in an unpublished report on water conditions in the Teapot dome, 

dated February 28, 1924, in which he says: 

A study of the logs and history of the field leads one to belie.ve 

that there is a shale break in the Second Wall Creek sand from 

30 to 40 feet from the top, and that below the break, especially 

in wells low on the structure, the sand contains oil and water. 

For this reason it is deemed advisable to stop drilling in the 

. upper part of the sand. 

Drilling has been stoppe:i in a number of. wells before reaching the break, and I believe that possibly all of these wells are 

making practically clean oil. 

The lack of pressure communication- (or of interference) between near-by wells in parts of the Salt 

Creek field also suggests that the "Second Wall Creek 

sand" is there to a considerable extent divided into 

separate reservoir units by cementation along joint 

planes parallel to the crest of the fold, on which the 

crest has settled slightly, as the keystone of an arch 

settles when the sides of the arch are spread apart 

somewhat, or the independent performance (noninterference) may be due to composite bedding or crossbedding in the sand, which may consist of s~nd lenses 

overlapping shingle fashion. (See pl. 10, B.) 

"Third Wall Greek sand."-The "Third Wall Creek 

sand" lies 215 to 27 5 feet below the top of the "Second 

Wall ·Creek sand" and has yielded some oil in both the 

Sa!t.Q!g_~!_{: __ ~!!9:. T~~:QQU~!~~---J!! _p_~~t4er_ ~1·~-f!.. ~~-~ __ i ~ _ 
24 GEOLOGIG CONDITIONS IN NAVAL PETij.OLEUM RESERVE NO.3, WYOMING 

been completely tested, but because of its irregularity 

and relative thinness it does not appear to be of great 

prospective importance. 

"Muddy sand" a1J;d "Dakota sand."-The "Muddy 

sand" and perhaps other sandy beds in the Thermopolis 

shale and the "Dakota sand" have yielded considerable 

quantities of oil in the Salt Creek field and elsewhere in 

Wyoming. They have not .been completely tested at 

Salt Creek and are as yet wholly untested in the Teapot field, but in spite of their comparative thinness 

they appear to be of considerable potential importance 

withi'n the nayal reserve. 

"Lakota sand."-The "Lakota sand" of the driliers 

is a coarse conglomeratic sandstone, normally containing artesian water under strong pressur~ and also con:.. 

taining a considerable oil pool beneath the higher part 

of the Salt Creek dome. It is as yet untested within the 

naval reserve and may be found to contain, commercial 

quantities of oil and gas, although from the ~pparent 

as yet inadequately tested in the. Salt Creek field and 

wholly untested within the naval reserve. There is 

believed to be less than an even chance that it contains 

oil within the Teapot field. 

Tensleep sandstone.-Tbe Tensleep sandstone yields 

large flows of artesian water in the Tisdale and. Salt 

Creek fields, and because of the indicated strength of 

the water movement it is probably barren of oil beneath 

the Teapot dome, although the presence of an oil pool 

in this sand beneath the crest of the Salt Cree~ dome 

(revealed by drilling in 1930) indicates the possible 

existence of a similar pool in the Tensleep at Teapot. 

Because of its considerable thickness and high porosity, 

however, there is a bare possibility that it contains very 

large quantities of oil beneath the naval reserve-a 

possibility which it would be unwise to ignore. 

. Older formations.-The formations that underlie the. 

Tensleep s~ndstone at depths of 6,000 to 7,000 feet or 

more below the surface of the Teapot dome include 

beds that yield some oil in other area8 in 

Wyoming and Montana. However, because 

of the nrinor importance of such known 

occurrences, the barrenness of these beds at 

Salt Creek, and the great depth of the formations in the reserve, it is believed that the 

drilling of wells to test beds below the Tensleep would not be warranted under any 

conditions· that are likely to exist during the 

next decade. 

FISSURES IN SHALE 

Many of the faults that cut the Teapot and 

Salt Creek uplifts have induced a shattering· 

· · · . of brittle beds along the fault planes or have, FIGURE 6.-Diagram showing how open fault fissures in brittle beds change degree of slope f d · fi d t h ge of dip· . and become closed in plastic beds. (After Willis) orme · gapmg SSUres Ue 0 C an . 

strength of the water movement in the ·sand in the 

Salt Creek field it is believed that there is less than an 

even chance that it Will yie~d oil in the res~rve. 

Sands .in Morrison and Sundance jormations.-=-The 

Morrison and Sundance formations contain a number 

of sands which may serve as reservoirs for oil and gas 

·accumulation. (See pl. 11..) The existence of oil 

seepages froin some of these beds where they crop out 

on the Tisdale anticline has been reported by W egemann, 47 and the few wells drilled to these sands in the 

Salt Creek field indicate their potential value as oil 

reservoirs. The results of recent drilling in northwestern Colorado also suggest that important oil and 

gas pools may be found in Morrison and Sundance 

sands underlying the Teapot uplift. 

Sands of the Chugwater and Embar formations.-The 

Chugwater formation consists of 700 feet of red shales 

and sandstones and is probably though not certainly 

barren of oil and gas in the Salt Creek and Teapot 

fields. The underlying Embar formation contains 

"blac~" oil in many par~s of ce~ tral Wyoming and is 

o Wegemann, C. H., op. cit., p. 14. 

of the fault planes where they pass from soft 

into hard beds. (See fig. 6.) Much oil has been pro--. 

duced from·such "crevices" within both the Teapot. 

(pl. 12) and the Salt Creek fields and even outside the 

area of anticlinal uplift. The abundance of such open 

fissures, many of them entirely empty, and their prac-. · 

tical bearing have been described by Wegemann/8

· 

who says: 

In practically all the wells drilled in the Salt Creek field moreor less oil is encountered in the shale at different depths. Thesedepths do not corres.pond in adjoining wells, and a comparison. 

of logs shows that the oil is not obtained in porous beds within 

the shale but from some other source. The shale is so fine· 

grained that it would not in itself constitute a reservoir for oil,. 

as the openings between the particles are too small to permit. 

oil to flow rapidly through them. Some wells in the Salt Creek 

field have obtained oil from the shale in large quantities, a few 

obtaining 1,500 barrels or more a day, indicating that the 

openings from which the oil is supplied to the wells are largeenough to allow rapid flow. A comparison of analyses of the 

oil from the shale with analyses· of the oil from the [First] Wall 

Creek sand shows that the two are practically identical, the 

only difference being that the oil from the sand contains a little 

more dissolved gas. 

u Idem, pp. 36, 37. 
OCCURRENCE OF OIL, (!AS, _AN:Q."Q"NPERGROUND.WATER 

In "drilling in" the shale wells, which start flowing under 

considerable pressure, it is often noticed that fragments 'of 

calcite are ejected from the wells. The calcite is like that which 

fills or partly fills the fissure's produced by faulting in the shale~ 

All the phenomena of the known shale wells indicate that the 

oil in them is derived from fissures in the shale, and that this oil 

is derived from the [First] Wall Creek sand below. Certain of 

the faults in the shale extend <;town to the sand and afford 

passages through which the oil in the sand, under great pressure, r 

has been forced upward into the shale. As the fissures in the 

shale are not confined to the dome itself but extend into the 

adjoining syncline on the west, oil has been forced laterally 

through the fissures into the shale of the syncline', in which it is 

encountered in commercial quantities in wells drilled in the 

shale. The Wall Creek sand, wherever it has been reached in 

this area, has produced water. * * * · The shale above the [First] Wall Creek sand is fractured by 

many faults and probably co~tains many fissures unfilled by 

either oil, water, or calcite. There can be little question that 

faults which break the oil sand and throw its broken edges 

against impervious shale beds partly or wholly seal the sand 

along the fault planes so as to prevent the migration of oil 

across them. If the broken edges of the beds are left even 

slightly separated oil will find an easy passage through the 

fissure, but if the edges are compressed against each other or if 

the fissure is filled with. calcite or other deposits, the fault forms 

an impervious barrier to the migration of oil in certain directions. 

Were these fissures all connected with one another or with the 

Wall Creek sand below, they would probably lon·g ago have 

been filled with the oil which is now held under great pressure 

in the Wall Creek sand, and in filling the· fissures a large part 

of the oil in the sand would doubtless have been dissipated. 

Several wells in the Salt Creek tield were drilled to the· sand 

and afterward capped and allowed to remain idle. When first 

drilled these wells may have shown considerable gas pressur~ 

and co~sequent large production of oil, but on being opened 

sev.eral weeks or several months later it was found that the 

pressure had decreased in some of them and that these wells 

were comparatively 'Small producers. The explanation is 

obviou1:1. A well drilled through the shale to the sand _passes 

through one gr more fault fissures, and as the casing is not 

firmly set in the hole the oil, under pressure in thesand, finds 

its way around the outside of the casing. up to these fissures, 

gradually filling them. . )3y this process the oil in the area 

drained by the well is in large part dissipated through these 

openings in the shale, the pressure is diminished, and the production of the well is greatly reduced. On entering the fissures 

the oil is in part doubtless absorbed by the shale on the sides of 

the fissures and so held in the rock, from which it can never be 

recovered. It ·is reported that d:Uring one cold winter the 

2-inch line from well No. 6, in the NW. X sec. 36, T. 40 N., 

R. 79 W., became choked with paraffin, virtually shutting the 

oil in, so that within a few hours oil seeps appeared at the 

surface 200 feet west of the well. A pit was then dug at the 

seeps and oil was pumped from it at the rate of several hundred 

barrels a day. When the clogged line from the well was open~ d 

the oil ceased to rise in the pit. 

There can be no doubt that the life of the field and its production will be greatly increased by care in the proper setting 

of casing upon the sand. The additional expense involved by 

this care will probably be many times repaid by the resulting 

prolongation of production. · 

At the time that Wegemann wrote the statements 

quoted above the view had not been developed that 

" oil had migrated into the fault fissures during anticlinal 

uplift and that the upper parts ·of the fissures had 

subsequently.been sealed off from the ·sands below, 

although his observations and interpretations are in 

harmony with such a view.. A very illuminating 

statement regarding the presence of fissures in the 

beds overlying anticli;nal uplifts in the Rocky Mountain region is also gi~en by Estabroo~. and Rader, 49 

who say: . . . · 

Oil in commercfal quantities is found in crevic.es in the shale 

· above the First Wall Creek sand in about 5 per cent of the 

wells started. ;Few wells fail to find .some shows of oil in the 

crevices, and occasionally the production is very large and 

valuable. ·crevice oil must be taken when found, for a well 

drilled only a few feet away may miss it entirely. It is the 

practice, in ~he Salt Creek field, to suspend drilling whenever 

crevice oil is found in .amounts of 25 barrels or more per' day; 

the production may last only a few weeks or may continue 

for years. Drilling is suspended until an adequate production 

test has been made and is then resumed or a new hole started, 

as determined by the staying qualities of the shale production. 

· Shale oil has been found all over the Salt Creek dome and 

also in 20 or more wells located across the syncline, west and 

entirely outside of the dome. At Teapot dome, where the 

First sand contains only water, there are numerous occurrences 

of shale oil (above the First Wall Creek). The most spectacular 

shale well opened in the district was the Mammoth Oil Co.'s 

well No. 301, in the southwest corner of sec. 2, T. 38 N., R. 

78 W., Teapot dome, which came in·October 5, 1922, flowing a 

solid 12-inch stream of oil over the crown block. The production during the first few hours is thought to have been at the 

rate of 15,000 barrels per. day, but after the initial flow the 

production declined rapidly, and a year later the well was a 

small pumper. 

In Salt Creek the. best shale well of which there is a complete 

production record is No. 16, in the NW. X sec. 11, T. 39 N., R. 

79 W., which came in at about 1,500 barrels and, after producing 92,000 barrels in the ~5 months ending December 31, 

1924, was still pumping 42 barrels per day. The oil from the 

big shale well on the NW. X sec. 27, T. 40 N., R. 79 W., which 

came in at· 2,250 barrels per day and after two years was still 

making 90 barrels ·per day, has been 'run with the other wells 

on ~he lease, and no record has been kept of .this production. 

Most shale wells are short lived-when the fissure is drained 

the production ceases. Some of the best .sustained shale production lies across the syncline west of the field. Well No. 2, 

in the SW. X sec. 33, T. 40 N., R. 79 W., came in at 150 barrels, 

· and in 10 years 'has p·roduced over 100,000 qarrels of oil. 

These. crevices in shale are of common ·occurrence on the 

anticlines of the Rocky Mountain region. Oil in commercial 

.· quantities ·has been found in them at Florence so and Rangely,st 

Colo., and in the Salt Creek, Big Muddy, and· Pilot Butte 

fields, Wyo .. During 1924 discoveries of crevice oil in what 

appears to be commercial quantities have been made at the 

·Fort _Collins, Iles, and Tow Creek domes, Colo. Empty 

crevices are niore common than those containing oil and are 

found on almost every dom~ where any of the Colorado shale 

· is present. Rotary holes lose their circulating mud in the 

crevices, and cable-tool holes lose their fluid or get crooked in 

the fractured ground. Wagonloads of rock, dumped in to.aid 

in straightening a hole, may disappear. When mudding behind 

the casing above the First Wall Creek sand in Salt Creek, often 

a large amount of mud is lost in the crevices. 

Shale crevices ·frequently contain oil, rarely free gas, but 

almost never any water. The absence of water is especially 

4D Estabrook, E. L., and Rl;\der, C. M., op. cit., pp. 209-211. 

60 Wa~burne, C. W., The Florence oil field, Colo.: U. S. Geol. Survey Bull. 

381, p. 517, 1910. 

61 Gale, H. S., Geology of the Rangely oil district, Rio Blanco County, Colo.: 

U.S. Geol. Survey BulL 350, 1908. 
' 

26 GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS IN NAVAL PETROLEUM RESERVE N0.-3, WYOMING 

noteworthy, as the shale bodies contain sands carrying water 

under artesian pressure. At Salt Creek the. First sand contains 

water under pressure everywhere except in the oil-producing 

area of about 4,500 acres on -the crest of the dome, yet except 

in one or two cases no water has been reported in the shale 

crevices until recently. This lack of water has been the more 

surprising in Salt Creek because, in some of the early wells, 

water from the First sand rose nearly to the surface of the ground 

and for years wa& free to enter any crevices that might have · 

been exposed. Water from this source and from drilling and 

mudding operations is constantly entering the shale crevices, 

and reports ·of its presence may be expected more frequently in 

the future. The ability of the shale to absorb some of the 

water that entered the crevices may have been a factor in the 

problem, but no investigation on that point has been made. 

The absence of water in the shale crevices makes it difficult 

to believe that there has been any direct connection through 

them to the sands below, or that oil entered the crevices from 

the oil sands. 

The writers are not in agreement with the suggestion that the absence of water in the fault fissures 

conclusively negatives the idea that these fissures ever 

communicated directly with the sands below. It is 

evident, as· Mills has suggested (see p. 20), that for 

some reason-whether it be cementation by calcite, the 

plastic flowage of soft beds abutting against the fault, 

the hydration and swelling of bentonites, or the natural 

mudding off of the sands by the settling and compacting of fine mud in constricted parts of the fissuresthe fluid in the sands, especially the water in the 

"First Wall Creek sand," no longer has access to the 

open parts of the fissures that cut the shale beds. It 

is believed to be probable that the empty fissures 

were once filled by water and that the shale of the 

fissure walls has absorbed the water by capillary 

processes, in part stimulated by the unloading incident 

to the erosion of some hundreds of feet of strata from 

the surface of the oil field .. 

The foregoing rather lengthy statement as to the 

nature and distribution of fissures in the shales in the 

Salt Creek and Teapot areas has been given partly as 

indicative of the underground losses of oil and gas 

which may occur if wells are not properly drilled and 

cased, but more especially because a very appreciable 

part. of the oil remaining in Naval Petroleum Reserve 

No. 3 may occur in such fissures. Not only are these 

oil-bearing fissures numerous, as is attested by the 

facts set forthby Plate 12 and Table 5, but they may 

be found anywhere· within the reserve, whereas the 

buried sands, if oil-bearing at all, will be found to be 

productive beneath only a fraction of the reserve area. 

TABLE 5.---:-Wells in Naval Petroleum Reserve No. 3 which obtained oil or gas from fissures in shale, depth of. occurrence, and yield 

[Compiled by Mammoth Oil Co.] 

' Surface Depth of shale 

Well No. altitude (feet) oil (feet) 

301-2 5, 153. 7 

201-3. 5, 215. 0 

202-3 5, 237. 52 

203-3 5, 196. 90 

204-3 5, 172. 71 

301-3 5, 180. 4 

302-3 5, 198. 96 

101-10 5, 217. 1 

102-10 5, 218. 11 

201-10 5, 238. 17 

401-10 5, 192. 19 

301-11 5, 164. 9 

101-15 5, 244. 1 

405-20 4, 996. 75 

a Oct. 26, 1928. 

{ 1,435 

1, 515 

{ 1, 225 

1, 260 

680-690 

{ 

850 . 2,010 

{ 

{ 

1,405-1,410 

1, 945 

700 

1, 635 

625 

1,020 

{ 760-900 

( 097-;: ~~~ 

l 

::m 

1, 750 

2, 290 

{ 1, 515 

l

. u~s 

'1, 900 

2, 215 

2,305 

{ 1,400 

1, 580 

Production (barrels) -

Remarks 

First 24 hours seg~~~s 24 From shale, July 1, 1927 

S 11 h . !Producing from shale. rna s owmg------ -------- ------------.---- This well flowed over derrick through 12~- 8,000______________ 200 5-------------- inch casing on afternoon of strike. 

Small showing _______ -------- }Drilled deeper ___ {Produ~ed approximately 12 barrels a day 

12----------------- 12 for s1x weeks from 1,260 feet. 

Small showing ______ ------------------------ Drilled deeper; no test. 

-i24:~~============= ----~~:- _ ~~==:: :::::=:::}Producing from shale. 106 ________________ -------- 32 ____________ · Do. 

Small showing _______ ------------------------ Drilled deeper; no test. . 

Show of oil and gas __ ·}--- ____ ---------------- Do. -~---do ____________ _ 

-----dO---------------------} 1,020 feet; was producing from May 

{

Flowed through 15~-inch casing from 

312_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 135 , --------------- 13 to Nov. 13, 1923, when drilled deeper 

I for deep test. 

~~8~~~-~i~~-n-~~~~== -----15- }--------------- Producing from shale. 

a 82 ________ -- _ ·_- -- _ - ------.. ----------------

1 bailer per hour_ __________________________ _ 

_____ do _____________ ------------------------

137--~--------~---- ------------------------

= = = = = = =- = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = i= = =·= = = = = = = = = = = = = 

1 barrel an hour.} 

5 barrels an hour. Not produced. 3 barrels an hour. 

3 barrels an hour. 

Small amount of oil, gas, and water. 

100 feet of oil in hole. 

900 feet of oil in hole at 1,615 feet; produced well till Jan. 1, 1923. 

Showing of shale oil. 

Do. 

Hole full of oil at 1,290 feet; production 

fell off to 40 barrels in 20 days; drilled 

deeper. 

Showing of oil. 

5 bailers of oil. 

Oil and gas. 

Show of oil. 

Do. 
"C. E. GEOLOGICAL SuRVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER. 163 PLATE 9 

WHITE PARKMAN SANDSTONE I N GRABEN I N PARKMAN HIM EAST OF TEAPOT DOME, SEC. 35, T. 39 N., R. 78:.W. 

a. Top of white sam.lst.one: hh, .key bed ; D , downlhrow; U, uplhrow. 
U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIO AL PAPER 163 PLATE 10 

A. VIEW NORTHEASTWARD FHOM POINT NEAR CENTEH OF NE. )4 SEC. 35, T. 39 N., R. 78 W., SHOWJ G OFFSETTING OF THIN 

HARD LEDGE CAP CAUSED BY SMALL l<' AULTS 

D , Downlhrow ; U, uplhrow ; dashed lines, faull traces. 

B. Cf10SS-BEDDI G AND LAMINATION IN A LITTOHAL SANDSTO ~ 

Eagle sandstone as exposed on 13roadvicw dome, Lake Basin field, Montana . 
0'. 8. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 163 PLATE 11 

Ul 

::J 

0 

w 

u 

~ w 

0: 

u 

Average thickness (feet) and formation name 

Shannon sandstone member. 

730 Niobrara shale 

200 

120 

260 

Carlile shale. 

Wall Creek sandstone mem- ber {"First Wall Creek 

sand"). 

41 Second Wall Creel(sa.Dd." 

230± Mowry shale 

90 

115 

110 

"Lakota. sand." 

Alternative lnterpret&.tlon of top of Sundance formation. 

Morrison formation (315 feet). 

Description" 

Buff resistant sandstone with intermediate zone or softer sandstone 

and shale. Oil produced from lower bench. 'l'hickness Q0-170 feet. 

Gray shale with thin calcareous layers and abundant cone-in-cone structwe near base. "Shark-tooth oonglomerate" 2± feet thick, 

400 to .600 feet above base. 

Light-rolored shale, somewhat sandy, with thin lime beds at top. Ostrea congeata clustered on fragments~of Inoceramus are charac· 

teristic. 

Dark shale; thin ferruginous lime beds at 50 to 60 foot intervals. 

Hardbgritty, gray, medium to fine grained cross-bedded sandstone 

wit shale parting 20 to 40 feet above base. Contains small black 

chert pebbles and a few shark teeth. Thickness Q()-160 feet. 

Gray shale, slightly sandy. Interval 230-310 feet. 

Gray me~ium to flpe grained sand~tone with thin partings of shaly bentomte. Partmgs more prominent to south and east. Thick· ness 50-QO feet. 

Gray shale, with variable sandy zones and sandstone lenses. Inter· 

val145-170 feet. 

Dark-gray shale and sandy shale with variable sAndstone lenses. 

Firm fissile dark shale, weathering silver·grny. Prominent slabby bed of bentonite at top, thinner beds near base. Abundant fish 

scales. 

Soft black shale bearing plant remains and rarely shark teeth. 

Beds of variable character. Soft light-colored shale and thin shells or else massive dark shale. 

Int6fbedded conglomerate ~d coarse gritty white sandstone; few 

thm coal lenses. Iron pyntes common. Thickness 20-75 feet. 

Soft variegated purple to green shale with thin bard fine sandstone 

beds predominSDt in mJddle zone.; Fresh-water origin. Iron 

pyrites common. 'l'biclmess 285-360 feet. (May include part or Sundance formation.) 

Alternating gray, white, or brown limestone and sandstone, with 

Oravit.y 

of oil 

29 

3&-42 

38 

37.7 

36 

intermediate zone predominantly gray shale. Thickness 235-285 33. 4 

u 

iii 

Ul 

( 

~ 

Ul 

::J 

0 

0: 

w 

.. 

z 

0 

ID 

ll: 

<( 

u 

705± Chugwater 

Beds"). 

formation 

220:1:: Emba(formation. 

270± Tensleep sandstone. 

feet. 

("Red Soft inassive red shale, with beds:o(sandstone, gypsum, and lime. 

Alternate lime and red shale with !ew sandstone members. Creamcolored to brown, and pink to. purple. 

Massive fine to medium white cross-bedded sandstone. Few bands 

of dark-brown lime. 

Vertt.cal scale 

0~<=>=3C=-~IO~O~========OE========~3~0~0~========>=========~5~00 FEET 

"Description or formations above •• First WaH Creek sand" based on U. S. Geological Survey Bulletins. & Below this point tha data were obtained from one well only, 12 Tp, SW. ~ sec. 25, T. 40 N ., R. 79 W. 

Number 

of pro· ductng 

wells 

March 1, 1927 

3S (idle) 

65 

267 

1, 612 

70 

COMPOSITE WELL WG OF SALT CREEK OIL FIELD SHOWING SEQUENCE OF FORMATIONS AND PORTTION OF 

BEDS YIELDING OIL 
U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 163 PLATE 12 

t8----------~----------17©,~~~$~0~~- r---~1 ----16 -----------.-----------15----------~ 

2003 ©2 I 7 2 to2 I 

30 

OH 10 

1?"\ 9 o'JRGo;l O' OHIO ""' v <Pz2.5 ARGO .• ___ _, 

I 1-G 

©0 

1 ~ I 0 [0203 (0 (0 (0 0 0 202 lf) I <( 0 3 i2(.160'* 201 101 107 lOB"' 

<t: I I?'\ ttJ 1?"\203 

ARGO 

------1 I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

301 di--------J:...._--...&...--22----------f 

101 

X I :::!: vc;, 0204 109 v 

~ I 103 .105 diC -¥04 ()201 

I 0 947·1oobhls':'i!J7< * I 

I ~04 Ql05 Ill ~~~"* 1 2ooor.© Oa9o 29 40'2. .40 0303 0 

16 oo *JD ro..,o .. 304 

J740-16Sbbls. 

301 

©1910-§1 

30~ .3~~ ------~"T"'"'C-4.....,·0"""6+-------- 27 __ ......... __ _. 

, 15 2-JOobbls • 

1597-147'f;b/S. 401 1) 05 

<0 ';~ tt:. 0303 

0302 

40~ (82 ©302 

(f)' r21, 

¢!04 .205 

0 

©201 -¢-'03 

-¢102 .205 

0 

-~~~s-!'2obbls. &04 <f030202 © 01 I 

3l~ .. ----------~-----------32----~----~--------33A02 403 3~---------~-----+--~35----------~ 

fQ) ~1445 ~02 189G * 2024 199G ~~ zo7B-6SbWs. 

1------------ 4 

_j 

• 

EXPLANATION 

Boundary of Reserve 

Rig 

Shale well 

0 '(Second Wall Creek sand" well 

© ({Third Wall Creek sand''well 

.P Gas well 

<t> Abandoned well 

Drilling suspended 

Well locat1on 

w Water 

101 Well number 

1290 Depth m feet below ground surface 

DATA ON WELLS ENCOUNTERING OIL 

IN CREVICES IN SHALE 

(From reports by Mommoth Oil Co.) 

* Show of oil or of oil and gas at depth given 

~** Show of gas 

fi/ 5 bailers of oil per hour 

0 I Mile 

9 

0~~1* 

1161 

1000 bbls.. ~E A 301 

4o4 ~ 'to.J/9201f 

• ~4<&~ fo 1410-106 bbls . 

• 2J>s~~ 2010-124 bb/5. 

<l-~~~fo6'90H­ IOI 1=201 

©!01 

R.78W. 

~201 

w 

0 

0 

ws~ Cf/2 5* 302...... 3~ 3 -----+------ 2 ---1-----1 

\12 o-tzbt:Ys -v 1945 * 

ot> 

700#1 

1635, 

760 to 900 * 2070 to 2097 

102 240bbls. 

~101 

625 ff 

1020-325 bbls. 

l02JOI 840- 2~9 bbls 

1120-IZO:t bb/s. 

1820 -72.t bbls. 

8001f 

201 

<0 

no' 660* 

1615- 8 bbls. 

1750* 

2290tf 

.301 

301 

v,515 ~ 1630* 

-¢101 

1290-137 bbls. 

1900* 

2215i!-

2305*. 

15 301 

(ij>~~ 

0 

• 

II 

14 

1---------- 22·--------+-------- 23 -----------f 

1\fAP 0~ NAVAL (PETROLEUM RESERVE No.3 SHOWING WELLS WHICH YIELDED SOME OIL AND GAS FROM FISSURES 

IN SHALE 
ORIGINAL DISTRIBUTION OF OIL, GAS, AND WATER IN THE "SECOND WALL CREEK SAND" 27 

TABLE 5.-Wells in Naval Petroleum Reserve No.3 which obtained oil or gas from fissures in shale, depth of occurrence; and yieldContinued 

Production (barrels) 

Remarks Surface Depth of shale 

Well No. altitude (feet) oil (feet) 

First 24 hours seg~~~s 2

4 From shale, July 1, 1927 

--· -··- ~~ --------l---------l----1--------l---------------

409-20 5, 043. 08 

410-20 5, 022. 05 

302-21 4, 998. 5 

303-21 4, 991. 46 

301-27 5, 057. 54 

101-28 5, 021. 38 

205-28 5,018. 32 { 

301-28 5, 081. 73 

303-28 5,049. 31 

1, 160 

1, 875 

1, 080 

1, 391-1, 410 

510 

1, 225 

590 

890 

1, 910 

1, 840 

Show of oil. 

Do. 

Do. 

Tested but not commercial. 

Show of oif and gas. 

Show of oil. 

Show of gas. 

Show of oil. 

5 bailers of oil an hour; not produced. 

Show of oil. 

305-28 5,055. 42 1, 597 147 ________________ -------- 7 _____________ _ Producing from shale. 

306-28 5, 039. 86 1, 532 100 ________________ -------- 10 ____________ _ Do. 

106-29 4, 980. 33 947 Do. 100 ________________ -------- 5 _____________ _ 

llQ-29 4, 967. 24 870 

111-29 I 5, 024. 59 2,000 

203-29 5, 020. 26 2, 060 

Show of oil and gas. 

Show of shale oil. 

Do. 

Do. 401-29 5, 038. 32 { 1, 600 

1, 74Q-1, 745 165---------------- -------- 6 _____________ _ Producing from shale. 

402-29 5,035-23 1, 438-1, 453 135 ________________ -------- 5-------------- Do. · 101-33 5, 153. 51 1, 918-1, 922 120 ________________ -------- 10 ______ ------- Do. 

401-33 5, 145. 16 

402-33 5, 162. 44 { 

403-33 5, 142. 92 

1, 685 

1, 890 

1, 990 

1,445 

2,024 

Show of oil and gas. 

Show of oil. 

Show of gas. 

Show of oil. { Do. 

2, 076 65 _________________ -------- 6 _____________ _ Producing from shale. 

404-33 5, 159. 62 1, 161 100 ________________ -------- 4 _____________ _ Do. 

301-34 5, 150. 39 1, .92Q-1, 970 Show of oil. 

Shale wells producing July 1, 1927, 12; wells showing shale oil while drilling, 25; total37. 

ORIGINAL DISTRIBUTION .OF OIL, GAS, AiiD WATER IN THE 

"SECOND WALL CREEK SAND" 

In describing or depicting the distribution of oil, 

free gas, and water in a sand it is necessary to bear 

in n1ind that the so-called edge-water line or marginal 

contact between an oil pool ~nd the surrounding water 

is not a. line· but a zone in which oil is floating on 

water, their plane of contact cutting obliquely across 

the sand (see diagrammatic sketch forming part of pl. 

8); also that edge water commonly rises to a higher 

altitude on the steep flank of a dome than on the 

gentle flank and that it may be found at different 

altitudes in different sands, and even in different layers 

of the same sand. 

The qriginal position of the "Second Wall Creek 

sand" edge-water line in the Salt Creek dome or the 

Teapot field is not known with precision, but it is safe 

to say that the original oil-water contact in this sand 

in the Salt Creek field corresponded roughly with the 

closing contour, or lowest structure contour, that completely encircles the domelike uplift. The contact rose 

above this contour on the steep west flank of the Salt 

Creek dome and followed a· plane inclined southeast-. 

ward toward the saddle between the Teapot and Salt 

Creek domes. Owing to this southeastward slope of 

the water line in the Salt Creek field,· it was found 

that in th~ "Second Wall Creek sand" the oil-bearing 

area of the Salt Creek and Castle Rock domes was 

3289-31--3 

continuous with that of the Teapot dome, although 

the connection was rather tenuous, water being found 

in the lower part of the sand almost up to the axis of 

the fold in sec. 29, T. 39 N., R. 78 W., and also being 

·found between 20 and 30 feet below the top of the 

sand in wells 102-20 and 201-21, a mile northeast. 

(See pl. 13.) 

The map of. the reserve given on Plate 8 presents an 

interpretation as to the original limits of the area that 

contained oil, or oil and water, in the "Second Wall 

Creek sand." It also presents an interpretation as to 

the area from which gas alone was produced or from 

which gas was produced in such volume with respect 

to the accompanying oil as to make the productive 

wells normally classifiable as gas wells rather than oil 

wells. The unruled area surrounding the gas caps 

therefore includes a fringe marginal to the gas caps 

which would yield some oil, but only with wastefully 

large gas-oil ratios. The unruled. area beyond the 

limits of this fringe includes a wide or narrow zone 

whose yields would range from 100 percent oil to 100 per 

cent water. The apparent oil area as shown by the map 

is not therefore to be regarded as an area all of which 

would give commercial oil yields. The area of pros-· 

pective commercial oil yield is from half to threequarters of the total unruled area. It is worthy of note 

that the Salt Creek field contained no free-gas. area 

comparable to those found beneath the Teapot dome. 
28 GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS IN NAVAL' PETROLEUM RESERVE NO. 3, WYOMING 

ESTIMATES OF OIL CONTENT OF NAVAL PETROLEUM 

RESERVE NO.3 

Until n1ore data of a fundamental nature have been 

obtained there appears to be no particular point in· 

attempting to supplement the estimates of oil content 

made by Clapp and Lewis. Clapp calculated that 

about 26,000,000 barrels was recoverable by natural 

methods from the "Second Wall Creek sand" of the 

reserve, out of a total sand content of about 119,000,000 

barrels. Lewis estimated the recoverable oil as between 12,000,000 ·and 24,000,000 barrels from the 

"Second Wall Creek sand" and from shale fissures above 

the "First Wall Creek sand." Such statements as to 

"recoverable" oil of course do not indicate the actual 

magnitude of the oil deposits underlying the field discussed but refer to a fraction-it may be but a small 

fraction-of the total amount of oil present. 

As Beal and Lewis 52 state, 

The difference between oil content and the amount of oil that 

may be recovered, or the ultimate production, is important. 

The recoverable oil of a sand underlying an area is the quantity 

that may actually be taken from the sand rather than the 

amount present in it. This recoverable oil is a percentage of 

the total oil content, and it varies with the conditions under 

which the oil occurs in the sand and under which it is produced. 

The proportion recovered, using only the natural forces, from 

a certain area depends mainly upon the porosity and size of the 

pores, upon the available energy within the sand for expelling 

the oil from the pores of the sand, and upon the efficiency of 

. this energy. The last, in turn, is controlled largely by the external artificial conditions affecting the well or property. 

The main force that expels oil from a formation is the gas 

compressed and dissolved in or associated with the oil. Gravitation and direct water pressure occasionally play an important 

part in expulsion· but by no means as important a part as gas. 

Artifici!l-1 forces are now being employed more and more to increase oil recovery, such as vacuum pumps, by the use of which 

suction is placed on the productive sands; water flooding, by 

which the oil is driven to oil wells by water flowing through the 

sand from strategically located wells; and compressed· air or 

gas forced into the sand to simulate the original conditions of 

absorbed and compressed gas in the oil and oil sand. 

The efficiency with which these forces can be employed governs the ultimate amount of recoverable oil. The friction of 

the oil passing through the porous formation retards the expulsion forces to a degree depending on the viscosity of the oil but 

principally on the character of the porous medium containing 

the oil. Other factors governing the efficiency of expulsion are 

the distance the oil must flow through the sand to tl?-e well outlet, and the mechanical conditions obtaining at the well. In 

some cases the expulsive forces are wasted and the recovery is 

reduced. These wastes. may be due to improper casing, which 

allows the gas to escape through a barren or partly depleted oil 

sand above; to inefficient operating;_ and sometimes the expulsive force is wasted because of the nature of the sand or because 

of the infiltration of water. · 

The term "exhaustion of a well," therefore, pertains more 

to the forces available for expelling the oil than to the actual 

depletion of the oil contained in the sand. These points have 

been discussed in general by LE;lwis and Bet1l 53 and in some 

detail· by Lewis.54 

u Deal, C. H., and Lewis, J. 0., Some principles governing the production of oil 

wells: U.S. Bur. Mines Bull. 194, pp. 12-13, 1921. 

63 Lewis, J. 0., and Deal, C. H., Some new methods for estimating the future production of oil wells: Am. Inst. Min. Eng. Bull. 134, pp. 478-480, 1918. 

64 Lewis, J. 0., Methods Jor increasing the recovery from oil sands: U. S. Bur. 

Mines :pun. 148. p. 20. 1917. 

Lewis also pointed out 55 that much of the "irre~ 

coverable" oil could be made "recoverable" by use 

of the newer production methods: 

That much of the oil in a field is never recovered is well 

known, but how large a proportion is left underground and the 

possibility of increasing the recovery can not be fully realized 

until one clearly understands that the exhaustion of an oil well 

is due more to the exhaustion of the natural gas, which is the 

principal agent in driving the oil into the well, than to the 

exhaustion of the oil itself. 

Facts presented in this bulletin go to show that the capacities 

of the oil sands in the various fields of the United States are 

five to ten times greater than the quantities of oil commonly 

extracted from them. If it could be fully established, as seems 

most probable, that the pores of the oil-bearing sands were 

completely filled with oil at the time the fields were first developed, then 80 to 90 per cent of the oil is left underground when 

the wells are abandoned. Although the evidence at hand does 

not permit positive statements th.at this proportion is being left 

underground, there is abundant evidence that much oil capable 

of being recovered remains in the sands. Complete extraction 

is not to be hoped for, yet there is no reason to conclude that 

the maximum possible recovery has been reached when the 

natural forces have been exhausted, and, furthermore, it has 

been demonstrated that it is practicable to get more oil from 

the sands by the processes described in this report. 

It is too soon to know just how much to expect from these 

methods of increasing recovery, but the results have been so 

encouraging that they give possibilities of new values to the 

properties of every producer and to the country as a whole as a 

new source of supply to ward off the threatened shortage. It 

would thus seem the part of wisdom for the individual producer 

and for the general public to see that the oil fields are left in 

condition to use these or any new or improved processes that 

may be discovered in the future. It should be insisted, as far 

as practicable, that oil wells not now profitable be abandoned 

in such manner that they may be reclaimed at some later date, 

when, as seems probable, new discoveries and improved eco-

. nomic conditions will make their operation profitable once more. 

In 1926 the same author· said: 56 

At first thought it would seem absurd that 80 to 90 per cent 

of the oil was being left underground, and the Industry has 

justifiably demanded ample proof of such claim. When I 

made my first estimates for the Bureau of Mines in 1916 I 

had more reasons to support the conclusions of myself and others 

as to this low recovery than I then published, for I thought it 

wise to be conservative on so radical n proposition. The 

evidence since has been confirmatory, especially that from 

France and Germany, of 14 per cent recovery, which closely 

coincides with my estimate of 10 to 20 per cent, but exact 

estimates are still impossible. However, the evidence is, I 

think, sufficient for present purposes. I do not think this oil 

left underground can fairly be considered a waste, for it is 

still recoverable and its value as a reserve for future needs is 

greater than would have been its value if it had been possible 

to throw it on the market during these past years of overabu.ndant supply. 

Broadly speaking, I estimate that one-seventh of the oil has 

been recovered by old processes, another seventh seems possible 

by present commercial practices for rejuvenating depleted oil 

fields, another two-sevenths seems possible by improvements in 

present rejuvenating processes, and three-sevenths can be 

recovered only by radical improvements over methods now 

in use. * * * 

The knowledge that a huge oil reserve of unrecovered oil is 

being left under ground introduces a new element into the 

66 Idem, pp. 8, '9. 

66 Lewis, J. 0., The rejuvenation of depleted fields: Federal Oil Conservati~n 

Board Hearings, Feb. 10-11, 1926, pp. 53, 61. 
SUSCEPTIBILITY OF NAVAL PETROLEUM RESERVE NO.3 TO LOSS BY DRAINAGE 29 

tlconornics of the oil industry. Production, as a whole, declines 

naturally 1 about 25 to 35 per cent from one year to the next, 

and to make up this loss, as well as to provide for growth in 

demand, it has been necessary to find new pools each year. The 

existence of new pools can only be inferred by geological evidence 

and not certainly known until drilled; consequently, there is 

always uncertainty as to the future oil supply, for no one can 

foretell whether new pools will provide a feast or a famine. 

The dormant oil reserves in the old pools are of different 

nature. Their existence is known definitely, and it remains 

but to apply improved methods, and the rate at which it can 

be brought to the surface is largely within the control of the 

industry. · 

The cost of recovering this dormant oil will not be as much 

as many have thought. This will be especially true if the 

pressme method can be applied in unit operations. The cost 

of producing each barrel of oil is considerably reduced, and 

this production will not be charged with the large cost of 

finding, n.cquiring, and developing oil in new pools, which is 

increasing year by year. 

The rate ·at which oil from these reserves will be brought to 

market will be largely in response to our needs. 

As Lewis estimated that the average recovery of 

oil by flowing and pun1ping amounts to one-seventh 

of the total oil in the ground, his estimate of 12,000,000 

to 24,000,000' barrels of recoverable oil in Naval 

Petroleun1 Reserve No. 3 suggests that he regarded 

t~e gross oil content of the reserve as between 

84,000,000 and 168,000,000 barrels. These estimates 

howev.er, are regarded by the writers as of doubtful 

value, because of the fact that in spite of the drilling 

which has been done in the reserve the extent, porosity~ 

and degree of saturation of the oil-bearing portions' of 

the "Second and Third Wall Creek sands" are as yet 

incompletely known; the n1agnitude of the oil in fissures above the "First Wall Creek sand" is uncertain· 

and the possible productivity of the Shannon ·sand 

and of sands below the "Third Wall Creek sand" has 

not been deter1nined. Core drilling of the Shannon 

sand and further driJling to test the oil-bearing extent 

of productivity of the "Second Wall Creek" and lower 

sands are therefore highly desirable. 

SUSCEPTIBILITY OF NAVAL PETROLEUM RESERVE 

NO.3 TO LOSS BY DRAINAGE 

A number of those who favored the leasing of the 

reserve appear to have done so because they regarded 

the "Second Wall Creek sand" as a continuously permeable reservoir bed which would permit· loss of gas 

pressure to extend throughout the field from wells 

drilled near the boundary. or because they felt that 

the Navy's best interests would be served by recovering as n1uch oil as possible (at the least cost) by current 

methods of production, discounting improved processes of recovery, or future methods of secondary oil 

recovery as being too uncertain or too costly to merit 

consideration. Those who opposed leasing the naval 

reserve did so because they· held that these reserve·s 

had been created to insure a supply of oil for theN avy 

when it would no longer be able to obtain adequate 

quantities by purchase or requisition-cost conse~ 

quently becoming subordinate to adequacy of supplyalso because they believed that any losses from the 

reserve· due to line drilling would consist chiefly of loss 

of gas and of gas pressure and only to a minor degree 

of oil, and that with the perfection of n1ethods for. 

repressuring fields and for other forms of secondary oil 

recovery, such loss of gas pressure, while regrettable, 

would not prevent the naval reserve from serving its 

intended purpose. 67 (See pp. 37-38.) Some also believed that because of the geologic conditions prevailing there was doubt as to whether the loss of pressure caused by drilling outside the reserve would extend for more than an insignificant distance within 

the Teapot field. 

The absence of dangerous or extensive loss of gas 

and oil from Reserve No. 3 by drainage to wells just 

outside' the reserve boundary has now been demonstrated beyond reasonable doubt, partly as a result of pressure observations taken on key wells 

within the reserve and partly by an analysis of the 

prqduction records of leases adjoining the reserve 

boundary. The operators of the several leases adjoining the reserve boundary have all been granted reductions in royalty payments to the Government because 

of the scant yield of their properties. The absence of 

any large-scale migration of oil from the reserve to 

these wells was therefore evident at the time these. 

reductions were granted. 

However, because of-the publicity which the "drainage" issue has received, it is probably desirable to review the gro\lnds for past differences of opinion on the 

subject and also for the belief, even at the time the 

reserve was leased, that drainage was not a serious 

menace to the reserve. 

Opinions as to. the desirability of leasing the reserve 

differed largely because of differences in conception 

of the policy and intent underlying the establishment. 

of the naval petroleum reserves. To this basic disagreement were added others arising from incomplete 

k_nowledge and incomplete analysis of the geologic 

factors entering into the problem. In order to arrive 

at a judgment as to whether drainage was or was not 

greatly to be feared at the time the reserve was 

lease.d it is necess~ry to review (1) the nature of the 

factors c~ntrolling oil, gas, and water movements 

through uniform sands; (2) the pressure conditions 

in the Salt Creek-Teapot area; (3) the evidence indicating that oil migration could not take place· over 

long distances through the "Second Wall Creek sand". 

because of lack of water .movement in the sand be- . ' 

cause of local cementation of the sand, because of the 

bedding qf the sand,.or because of discontinuity of th& 

sand due to faulting. · · 

·. 67 Lewis, J. 0., Methods for increasing recovery from oil fields: U.S. Bur. Mines 

Bull. 148, 1917. 
30 GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS IN NAVAL PETROLEUM RESERVE NO. 3, WYOMING 

FACTORS CONTROLLING FLUID MOVEMENTS WITHIN OR 

FROM RESERVE 

The rate at which oil, gas, and water move through 

a uniform and continuous sand, under the same pressure differentials, is inversely proportional to the 

frictional resistance to movement offered by the sand 

to each fluid. Gas and water, because of their lack 

or relative lack of viscosity, will move through an 

ordinary continuous sand under pressure differentials 

as low as 1 pound to the mile. 

Oil fron1 which gas is escaping rapidly (being thereby 

in a state of active e~pansion or having been converted 

to a froth) may flow through a sand even more rapidly 

than water. On the other hand, oil from which the 

dissolved gas has escaped or from which it is escaping 

slowly will move through a sand only under pressure 

differentials measurable in hundreds of pounds to the 

mile. The difference in behavior of oil under the two 

conditions n1ay be illustrated by imagining what will 

happen if a bottle is filled with sa.o.d and then with 

ginger ale· or some other carbonated liquid. If the 

Cf!.P is removed from such a bottle ·and it is shaken 

vigorously a n1iniature gas eruption will ensue, spattering a part of the liquid over a large area and leaving a 

residue of liquid in the bottle practically free of gas. 

On the other hand, if the bottle is opened carefully· 

and then allowed to stand, bubbles of gas will gradually 

form and escape from the liquid until eventually all 

the excess gas has escaped from solution-or, as it 

would be put by oil men, the liquid has become "gas 

drained." The fluid, however, will never cease to be a 

liquid and will maintain its general.properties without 

major change throughout the transition from the gascharged to the gas-free condition. 

When an oil well is completed the oil near the hole 

ordinarily effervesces violently, the hole becomes 

filled with an oily froth or frothy oil, and gas and oil 

flow from the well. This behavior is due to the great 

difference in pressure between the well opening and the 

gas-charged oil in the sand arid also to the agitation 

caused by drilling or by the explosion of a charge of 

nitroglycerine. The effervescence spreads radially 

from the well. It decreases in intensity as the increasing distance from the hole causes increased resistance 

to flow. This decrease continues to a distance of 

several hundred feet, where the retarded movement 

is practically limited to that of gas bubbles passing or 

"slipping" through the oil without pushing it forward 

appreciably. At length, even near the well the escaping gas passes through the upper part of the sand, 

which has become drained of oil, and hence no longer 

pushes oil toward the well, the weak force of gravity 

alone remaining to bring oil within reach of the pump. 

Because ordinary sands resist the flow of gasdrained oil, drainage' by gravity extends but a 

short distance from a well. It is believed by experienced engineers that in fields where oil is recovered 

thro~gh flowing a:Q.d pumping-.that is, through utilization of the forces of dissolved gas and of gravity.-

but one-fifth to one-tenth of the oil in the sand is 

normally extracted.58 In such fields wells normally 

show large initial oil yields and quickly decline to a 

small output, which may continue with gradual 

diminution over a period of many years. 

The radius to which oil drainage extends from a well 

is largely dependent upon the grain size of the sand 

and the viscosity of the oil, oils of high Baume gra~ity 

characteristically moying through the sand with far 

· greater ease than "low gravity" asphaltic oils. 

Regarding the influence of grain size on drainage 

Brewster 59 states that the flow of oil to a well "varies 

inversely as the logarithm of the distance through the 

sand. The finer grained the sand the less is the distance from the well where frictional resistance becomes 

equal to the differential flowing pressure . and flow 

toward the well practically ceases." For petroleums 

having gravities similar to those of Teapot crude the 

slight areal extent of oil drainage has been indicated 

by the work of Cutler.6o 

· In other fields the first flush yield of oil under gas 

impulse may give place to a comparatively large and 

long-sustained yield of oil that is being borne forward 

by advancing water, but the yield will·die out rapidly 

as the water reaches the well, first through the lower 

or more porous parts of the sand and then progressively through its entire thickness. In such fields 

the water surrounding the oil pool moves in, as the 

escape of gas and oil lessens pressures within the field. 

The yield by water flooding may be from 40 to nearly 

100 per cent of the oil in the sand, compared with 10 

to perhaps 25 per cent under the impulse of dissolved 

·gas. The yield depends upon the character of ()the 

sand and _of the oil, upon the slope of the reservoir bed, 

and upon the temperature and salt content of the 

water. 

In the Salt Creek field the oil pools beneath the 

domelike uplifts are surrounded by water under 

pr~ssures of 1,000 pounds or more to the square inch, 

and production from such pools would therefore be 

expected to show the twofold phase of yield-by gus 

impulse and by the "drive" of encroaching water. 

The encroachment of edge water and its effect have 

gradually become apparent in the "First Wall Creek 

sand·". at Salt Creek and are clearly marked in the 

"Lakota sand." Water encroachment in the "Second 

Wall Creek sand," however, except perhaps along 

certain fault planes, appears to be slight or almost 

nonexistent. This fact is referred to on page 33 

in the discussion of factors that have suggested the 

os Lewis, J. 0., Methods for increasing recovery from oil fields: U. S. Bur. 

Mines Bull. 148, pp. 8-9, 1917; The rejuvenation of depleted fields: Federal Oil 

Conservation Board Hearings, Feb.10-ll, 192~, p. 53. Swigart, T. E., and Bopp, 

E. C., Experiments in the use of back pressures on oil wells: U. S. Bur. Mines 

Tech. Paper 322, pp. 36-37, 1924. Ambrose, A. W., Underground conditions in oil 

fields: U. S. Bur. Mines Bull. 195, p. 121, 1921. 

ou Brewster, F. M., Petroleum development and technology in 1925, p. 39, Am. 

Inst. Min. and Met. Eng., 1926. 

60 Cutler, W. W.,jr., Estimationofundergroundoilreservesbyoil-well production 

curves: U. S. Bur. Mines Bull. 228, pp. 86-87, 101, 1924. 
SUSCEPTIBILITY OF NAVAL PETROLEUM RESERVE NO.3 TO LOSS BY DRAINAGE 31 

discontinuity of the "Second Wall Creek sand" as a 

porous bed. 

·In contrast with the energy of dissolved or associated 

gas, which is of definite an1ount and is speedily expendable, the hydrostatic pressure of artesian edge water 

usually does not diminish greatly as an oil field is 

developed unless water waste is permitted, for water 

taken in along the outcrop of the sand tends to satisfy 

the deficit caused by oil or water withdrawn in the oil 

field. For this reason water may drive oil for much 

greater distances than gas does, parti9ularly up a 

structural slope. 

Because of its sustained. pressure and relatively low 

viscosity water normally moves more rapidly than oil 

except in the first stages of flow. Consequently, on 

the assmnption that the "Second Wall Creek sand" 

was a continuous and uniformly porous bed, it was 

natural to expect that, as oil was withdrawn from wells 

near the northern boundary of the reserve, water would 

encroach across the "saddle" or structural low point 

· north of the Teapot don1e and would then "drive" 

northward to these wells the· recoverable oil between 

the saddle and the reserve boundary. 

Under the assumption of uniformity of sand conditions Wegemann 62 described what would happen 

when wells were drilled along the northern reserve 

· boundary, as follows: 

It is obvious that as wells are drilled along the northwest line 

of the naval reserve, part of the oil produced by those wells will 

be drawn from the naval reserve itself. As the amount of oil 

in the sand is reduced and the gas pressure also relieved, the 

water which is present in the sand on the flanks of the structure 

below the oil will gradually invade the oil sand. It will advance 

into the lowest part of the structure first. In other words, it 

will creep into the saddle between the two structures on the 

NW. X sec. 28 and the E. ~ sec. 29. This invading body of 

water will gradually work its way entirely across the saddle 

separating the oil in the S. ~ sec. 28 from the oil in the NE. X sec. 29. 

H. B. Hill, of tbe Bureau of Mines, 64 also expressed 

the view that 

The water will at a time not far distant be gradually drawn in 

from each side toward the axis until the northern p·art of Teapot 

or the southern end of the Salt Creek field is entirely separated 

by water from the southern or main part of the Teapot dome. 

PRESSURE CONDITIONS IN SALT CREEK-TEAPOT AREA 

Because of their bearing upon the problems of fluid 

1novement just discussed pressure conditions must be 

thoroughly understood before the importance of their 

evidence as to possible drainage, even in 1921, can be 

fully c01nprehended. A summary of pressure condi~ 

tions in the several sands of the Salt Creek-Teapot area 

is therefore given below. 

The "First Wall Creek sand" in the Salt Creek field 

consists of two benches separated by a break of shale 

02 Wegemnnn, C. H., A report on the. position of the dividing line between the 

Salt' Creek and 'l'eapot domes: Hearing before tho Committee on Public Lands and 

Surveys, U.S. Senate, Oct. 22, 1923, Exhibit G, p. 62. 

e. Letter to 1~. D. Tough, Aug. 28, 1923. 

or of nonporous sand. Both benches contain oil pools 

surrounded by water under artesian pressure, n.nd the 

pressure in the lower bench is greater ·than that in the 

upper. 

The hydrostatic head or pressure in the "Second 

Wall Creek sand" is roughly 100 pounds to the square 

inch lower than that in the "First" and, according to 

Peake (see p. 15), is smaller in the upper part of the 

"Second" sand than in the· lower part. Hydrostatic 

pressures in the "Lakota sand" and the Tensleep 

sandstone are higher than in the "Second Wall Creek 

sand," an artesian well near Midwest yielding a large 

flow of hot water (about 170° F.) from the Tensleep. 

· In contrast with the high .artesian pressure existing 

in the "First Wall Creek sand" the pressure in the 

empty fissures found in the shale a short distance· 

·above the sand is practically zero, necessarily indicating· a sealing of the fissures at points between the 

openings and the water-bearing sand. 

It is reasonably certain that· fluid pressures within 

the "Second Wall Creek sand" were essentially in 

equilibrium when the accumulation of oil and gas in 

the sand (within the Teapot-Salt Creek area) was 

about completed. The drillers' field reports as to 

initial gas and water pressures in several wells in the 

naval reserv:e indicate that a pressure equilibrium 

existed throughout the reserve at the time it was 

opened. (See fig. 7.) These pressures had also, 

beyond serious question, been in equilibrium with the 

original rock pressures in the Salt Creek field, which 

had been· rev:ealed by the height to which water rose 

in wells drilled at the margins of that field. It is true 

that these drillers' reports regarding pressure measurements made on Teapot gas we1ls and regarding the 

height to which water rose in the edge wells are given 

in round figures;. but when the weights of water and 

of Salt Creek crude oil are borne in mind it appears 

that the original fluid pressures in the "Second Wall 

Creek sand" in the Teapot-Salt .Creek area were 

approximately 1,100 pounds to the square inch at 

the 2,000-foot structure contour. The top of this sand 

lies between 2,150 and 2,200 feet above sea level in 

the saddle and rises to somewhat above 2,300 feet in 

the higher parts of the Teapot dome and to more than 

3,500 feet near the crest of the Salt Creek dome. Consequently, because of these differences"of sand altitude, 

a zero fluid pressure in the sand at the crest of the Salt 

Creek uplift would be in equilibrium with a fluid 

pressure of about 500 pounds in the sand at the saddle 

and with a pressure of about 450 pounds at the crest 

of the Teapot dome. It was therefore evident that in 

so far as gas pressures and gravity were concerned, 

on the assumption that water did not encroach, the 

tendency was for oil to move from Salt Creek toward 

Teapot instead of the reverse. · 

These facts are illustrated graphically by Figure 7, 

which also indicates the relative decrease in fluid heads 
32 GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS IN NAVAL PETROLEUM RESERVE NO. 3, WYOMING 

Ul 

2 

0 

0 

~ 

LL.l 

uJ 

0:: 

<.) 

1-

.J 

<t: 

1/) 

LLl 

~ 

0 

0 

r0 

a. 

<( 

w 

tM6Di '"NO·Vl 

'€r~as JO 91..!!1 41..10N 

'M6Cd' N6£1 

'sz ·oas JO ..~~uaJ -

M6Cti ''N6£'1 

'I oas J.O ~a1ua:>-

'M9L"~ ''N6£1 

·oz ·oas JO ..~alua') -

'Mgnt''N9Z'l 

ez·::>as '~'/o'MNM9L'~"N6£'.L 

'vr~as ;o au!l LflnO<; 

0 

0 

Q 

Lil 

1'-

~ 

s 

c 

ro 

'o.O 

Q) 

.0 

~., 

c 

t1l 

Ill 

" c 

0 

0 

<ll 

1/) 

~E 

0 

1.. 

..... 

c· 

0 

.;:; 

0 

::J 

1:l 

0 

1.. 

a.· 

6 

( "1'3A'3"1 'v''3S '3A08'v' 1.'3'3.:1) 3an.LI.Ll'v' 

0 

0 

~~ 

0 

0 

~ 

0 

0 

R,-

g 0 

ttJ <D 

('Nr·~s ~3d SONnOd Nl) :ntnSS3~d Olnl.:! 3Ail.'V'l3~ 
SUSCEPTIBILITY OF NAVAL PETROLEUM RESERVE NO.3 TO LOSS BY DRAINAGE 33 

in the Salt Creek ~nd Teapot fields as determined at 

various times. 

PROBABLE DISCONTINUITY OF" SECOND WALL CREEK 

SAND" AS A POROUS BED 

Although dogn1atic statements were not warranted 

prior to the closing in of the reserve, a number of lines 

of geologic and engineering evidence availab~e from 

the Salt Creek-Teapot area strongly suggested that 

the "Second Wall Creek sand" was not sufficiently 

continuous as a porous and pervious bed to permit 

fluids to flow through it for more than relatively short 

distances-in other words, that the sand probably did 

not afford an avenue for widespread drainage. 

The factors that appeared to indicate the locali'zation of fluid movement within and through this sand 

were (1) the lack of water encroachment in the sand 

around the 1nargins of ·the Salt Creek field; (2) the 

known existence of a "tight-sand" area extending 

across the Salt Creek field just north of the reserve; 

(3) the cementation of the sand in certain places near 

faults and joints; (4) the displacen1ent of the sand 

by faults; and (5) the probably cross-bedded character 

of the sand. 

· LACK OF WATER ENCROACHMENT IN SALT CREEKTEAPOT AREA 

In considering the evidence as to sand conditions 

yielded by water encroachment (or rather by the lack 

of encroachment), a knowledge of both past and present water conditions is necessary. 

At the end of Cretaceous tjme water pressures in 

the "Second Wall Creek sand" were slightly greater 

than those in the "First Wall Creek sand," becttuse of 

greater depth of burial. Moreover, as the "Second 

Wall Creek sand" nO\V crops out along the mountain 

side a few 1niles west of Salt Creek at altitudes at least 

equal to those of the "First Wall Creek" o:utcrop, 

wells drilled to the "Second Wall Creek sand" in the 

Salt Creek and Teapot fields should have found initial 

hydrostatic heads to be larger than those in th~ "First 

Wall Creek," provided there were equal sand continuity. 

Such higher pressures were not found, however, for 

although the "First Wall Creek sand" and the Tensleep sandstone gave flowing watm· wells, the water in 

the "Second Wall Creek sand" failed to reach the 

surface by smne hundreds of feet. 

The contents of dissolved solids in the "First Wall 

C1·eek" and Tensleep waters likewise show· that artesian circulation has been very active in the Tensleep, 

moderately so in the "Fh·st Wall Creek," and much 

less so in the "Second Wall Creek." The lack of free 

fluid n1ovement in the "Second Wall Creek sand" w~s 

also indicated by the fact that the. decrease in pressure 

incident to production from this sand at Salt Creek 

took place first around the margin of the Qil field and 

spread thence inward toward the crest, indicating thato 

dissolved gas and not water pressure was the important 

force inducing oil flow. In this connection Estabrook 

and Rader 65· say: 

Pumping from the Second sand started in the southern half 

of the [Salt Creek] field and spread northward along the edges. 

The gas pressure is rapidly declining·, even in the best parts of 

the field, and by the end of 1926 probably there will be few 

flowing wells from the Wall Creek sands. The decline in gas 

pressure is concentric and moves gradually inward toward the 

apex of the dome. 

·At the present time, even though pressures in the 

"Second Wall Creek sand" at Salt Creek average lesP 

than 25 pounds to the square inch, water encroachmen\. 

in the sand is hardly detectable, although production 

from this sand began in 1917 and original water 

pressures in wells at the margins of the field were and 

are about 1,000 pounds to the square inch. It therefore seems reasonably evident that the water pressures 

found when the field was drilled were due to cubic 

compression of water in one or more sealed systemssuch pressures, because of the slight compressibility 

of water, being dissipated by a slight expansion of the 

water. An alternative suggestion is that barriers in 

the sand prevented water migration over any considerable distance; otherwise under norma] artesian pressure 

in ~a continuous sand water would have moved in as 

oil was withdrawn and would have caused not only a 

marked water encroachment but also a maintenance 

of pressures around the edges of. the field. 

"TIGHT SAND" AREA NORTH OF RESERVE 

Moreover, in the southern part of the Salt Creek 

field there is an area · of small oil production (the 

"tight sand" area, so called), which occupies a strip 

more than a mile wide extending across the whole 

width of the field in the vicinity of Castle Rock. It 

includes all that part of the Salt Creek field adjacent 

to the naval reserve except for a belt a few hundred 

yards wide next to the reserve boundary. (See pJ. 13.) 

Regarding this "tight sand" area Estabrook and 

Rader 66 say: 

In much of the southern half [of the Salt Creek field] the 

production is so small that many of the wells are unprofitable, 

and in one area around the quarter corner between sees. 7 and 

18, T. 39 N., R. 78 W., several dry holes have been drilled. 

[See pl. 13 for dates of completion of wells.] * * * 

In the southern part of the [Salt Creek] field there are several 

thousand acres where the production is so small that the wells 

are not profitable and but little further development is to be 

expected. 

Obviously, therefore, in this area at least, which 

separates the Teapot field from the main part of the 

Salt Creek field, the " Second W aU Creek sand" is so 

impervious or so irregular in porosity that fluid movement through it for considerable distances is practically 

prohibited. 

6$ Estabrook, E. L., and Rader, C. M., op. cit., p. 219. 

66 Idem, pp. 203, 206. 
34 GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS IN NAVAL PETROLEUM RESERVE NO.3, WYOMING 

MULTIPLE BEDDING AND CROSS-BEDDING OF THE SAND 

Because of its mode of origin the "Second Wall 

Creek sand" probably consists of overlapping layers 

and lenses of sand and sandy shale rather than of a 

single uniform or persistent sand bed. (See pl. 10, B.) 

Sands of this type are produced by rhythmic earth 

movements causing oscillations of the sea level and 

coincident migrations of the strand line; and it is 

common to find such sands-as, for instance, the Eagle 

sandstone of Montana or the Parkman sandstone 

member of the Teapot field-c-consisting of a relatively 

uniform and persistent basal sandstone, a clayey 

carbonaceous middle bed, and an upper bed of thin 

lenticular sands and sandy shalef). The "First Wall 

Creek sand" clearly shows this general composition 

and character. On the other hand, the "Third Wall 

Creek sand" consists, in the Salt Creek area, of. a 

number of discontinuous sand lenses or porous areas 

rather than of a single bed, as is shown by the results 

of deep drilling. Out of 30 wells drilled to the "Third 

Wall Creek sand" horizon commercial production was 

obtained in 7 wells, small shows of oil and gas in 5, a 

dry sand was found in 7, no sand at all was found in 

9, and water is reported in 2 wells. The sand generally 

appears to be thin and· tight. (Se·e p. 15.) The 

"Second sand," which is intermediate between the 

"First" and "Third" in stratigraphic position, is also 

of intermediate character and composition, as is suggested by the quotations from Estabrook and Rader 

and from Peake given on page 15. 

It consists of more than one bed or lens ill the naval 

reserve, as is indicated by its recorded irregularities 

of thickness and composition (pl. 13) and by the 

occurrence of water in the base of the sand in some 

wells (and not in others) north of the ·saddle. The 

record of well 101-15 also supports this view, its log 

of the "Second Wall Creek sand" being as follows: 

Show of gas ________________________________ _ 

Sandy shale, with 2 million feet of gas _________ _ 

Sand, with 3 million feet of gas _______________ _ 

Shell (hard, tight sand)-----------------------

Sand, with 5 million feet of gas _______________ _ Shell (as above)" _____________________ .:. ______ _ 

Sand, with 60 million feet of gas ______________ _ 

Depth (feet) 

2, 982 

2, 982-2, 990 

2, 990-3,002 

3,002-3,004 

3,004-3,020 

3,020-3,025 

3,025 

Evidently three and probably four distinct gasbearing beds were encountered in this well, of which 

the lowest obviously afforded the most open avenue for 

gas discharge. · 

A review by the writers of the logs of some 1,600 

wells drilled to the "Second Wall Creek sand" in the 

Salt Creek-Teapot area further emphasizes the multiple bedding of this sand. A comparison of the 

records of near-by wells suggests that the planes 

separating the sand layers may be inclined, causing 

the composite sand to consist of numerous lenses that 

overlap more or less, in shingle fa~hion, successively 

· higher. lenses coming in toward the west. 

FAULTS AND KEYSTONE JOINTS 

Such initial comple:xity as may have been caused.by 

irregularity of sand deposition has been tremendously 

increased by the subsequent development of the 

myriad faults which extend from west to east across 

the crest of the Salt Creek, Castle Rock, and Teapot 

domes and intervening parts of the Salt Creek anticline. As Mills 67 says: 

The huge Salt Creek structure and the somewhat smaller 

Teapot dome are literally cut to pieces by fault fissures, which 

are evidenced at the surface both by rock displacement and by 

calcite veins and stringers. * * * The spotted character of 

the· production, together with the phenomenally high initial 

rates of production of some of the wells tapping fault zones in· 

the· Second Wall Creek sand, give further evidenees of the 

relation that faulting bears to underground fluid movements in 

the Salt Creek field. 

Minor irregular cross fractures connect some of the 

faults, but the _larger ones clearly have ·a general 

systematic east-west arrangement and were products 

of the forces that caused the folding and domal uplift. 

Such faults, which trend across the axes of uplifts, are 

characteristic features of Rocky Mountain domes and 

anticlines and are familiar to all geologists who have 

worked in the Rocky Mountain region. Their distribution and probable mode of origin have been 

discussed by Irwin 68 and by Link, 69 and the writers' 

conception of the way in which the faults have been 

formed is outlined on pages 19-20. It is certain 

that the faults cause maximum displacement of the 

several sands at or near the crests of the uplifts, their 

"throw" dying out toward the flanks. . 

As was pointed out by _Mills in the passages quoted 

on pages 20-21, many of these faults when first formed 

afforded open channels extending to the surface, 

through which oil and gas, and probably water, escaped 

until equilibria were developed between fluid pressures 

in the sand and the hydrostatic pressures exerted by 

the fluid columns extending from the sand to the 

surface. 

A set of subsidiary faults or joints extend approximately ·at right angles to the major set and have 

been caused by the in-dropping of the crest of the 

arch, just as the keystone of a span would settle if 

the arch became somewhat spread. These joints or 

faults, parallel to the axis of the anticline, are referred 

to as keystone joints, and vertical movement along 

them rarely exceeds a foot or so. They are therefore 

im.portant as interruptions to fluid movement only if 

they have ·iriduced the cementation of the sand along 

their planes-a possibility suggested by the following 

note by Estabrook: 70 

Well No. 21, on the SE. X sec. 34-40-79, Salt Creek field, 

Wyo., was commenced on November 3, 1924. It was just an 

67 Mills, R. V. A., op. cit., p. 4. 

as Irwin, J. S., Faulting in the Rocky Mountain region: Am. Assoc. Petroleum 

Geologists Bull.,&vol. 10, pp. 105-129, 1926. 

D 69 Link, T. A., The origin and significance of "epi-anticlinal" faults as revealed by 

experiments: Idem, vol. 11, pp. 853-866, 1927. 

1o Estabrook, E. L., Am. Assoc. Petroleum-Geologists Bull., vol. 9, p. 1295, 1925. 
!· 

~· .f 

f 

0 

U. 8. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 163 PLATE 25 

r-,_ . r- ~ 425~~~~~~-+-+-i--+-+~~~~~+-~-+-+-~J_J~~~-+-+-+-+-+-+-+~~~4-4-4-+-+-+-+-t-~~~~-4-4-4-+-+-+~~~4-4-4-+-+-+-+-+-~~_,-i-i-i-t-i-t-t-t-t-r~~ri-W.~~-t-t-t-t-t~ 

~ 0 

4oo~~~~~~:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-4~~-4-4-4-4-1-1-1-1-1-1-4-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-1-4~~~~~~~~~~~-+-+-+-+-+-+-+~-i~~~~--r-~·~~-t-fr~r:+-+-,_,_,_,_, :I 

.., 

::1 

375~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-4-4-4-4-4-i-4-4~~-i-i-i-i-i-i-i-i-i-i~-i~-+-+-+-+-+~-t-i-i-t-t-i-t-t-t-t-t~~-+-+-+-+-+-i 

1/) 22 ~ 

LLI 

~ 

:::> 

..J 200 

0 

> 

~ 17 '!) 

~ 

15 0 

12 s 

10 0 

'!) 

!) 0 

0 

If) 

..J 

WIO 0 a: 

0: 

< Ul 

2: 7 5 

% 

0 

t= 

0 50 ::> 

0 

0 

0: 

n. !) 

...J 

0 

0 

I 

I I I 

'ol i 

I -i I i i 

I 

I ~ I I 

I

I r·1 I 

., H ,,--1 - !l I 

; . : I I . I 

! 

! I I I 1- I. ' I f- I I I I i ! I I 

15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 26 29 30 31 I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 II 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 II 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 1 z 3 4 !) 6 7 8 9 IO II 12 

.JUL.Y AUGUST SEPTEMBER OCTOBER 

GRAPH SHOWING EFFECT OF INTRODUCTION OF COMPRESSED GAS INTO WELL 405-20 ON OIL AND GAS PRODUCTION OF NEAR-BY WELLS 
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 35 

inside location, drilled in the normal course of development, and 

no one's reputation was at stake. At 1,313 feet it reached the 

top of the First Wall Creek sand; at 1,375 found a small. show 

of oil; and at 1,422 looked good for about 10 barrels per day. 

When casing was run it stopped at 1,361, showing a crook in 

the hole at that point. After attempting unsuccessfully to 

straighten the hole in the sand the well was filled with rock 

back to 50 feet from the surface and a new hole started. The 

new hole reached the top of the sand at 1,310, showed oil at 

1,340, and began to flow at 1,400. It was called a completion on 

May 5, and on May 8 pumped 320 barr~ls. An almost dry hole 

and a 320-barrel well under the same derrick floor! * * * 

P. S.-The writer believes this is one of the comparatively 

rare CaSeS Where a II fault II haS SOmething to dO With the resultS. 

The dry hole 11 slid off 11 into an inclined fault plane with more 

or less indurated walls. 

Owing to cementation and to other causes there is a 

question as to whether oil and gas are migrating or can 

migrate across the fault system of the Teapot field. 

It seems probable that where faults of minute displacement cut a sand the more or les·s open fractures thus 

formed in the sand (see fig. 6) may facilitate the flow 

of oil to wells tapping such fracture zones-as, for 

example, well 402-20. Presumably the ease of flow 

in such zones would stimulate production in the same 

way .that fractures produced by a shot of nitroglycerine 

stimulate production. On the other hand, pressure 

differentials, such as were found to exist between the 

upper and lower benches of the "First Wall Creek 

sand," between the "First Wall Creek sand" and the 

"Second Wall Creek sand," and between the "First 

Wall Creek sand" and the open fissures in the overlying 

shale, could have existed over long geologic periods 

only if these different sands, and the different benches 

of the same sand, were completely shut off from one 

another-in other words, only if the fault fissures 

were sufficiently sealed to prevent important fluid 

migration across them or between the several sand 

. beds, and in spite of the fact that the sand "benches" 

of the "First Wall Creek" are only a few feet apart and 

the larger faults bring the "First Wall Creek" and the 

"Second Wall Creek" almost into contact. When it 

was found that pressures were different in the different 

sands and that the water in the "First Wall Creek 

sand" did not invade the oil-bearing "Second Wall 

Creek sand," in which pressures were about 100 pounds 

to the square inch lower, the conclusion therefore seemed 

fairly obvious that the faults were effectively sealed in 

the vicinity of the sands. The validity of the conclusion that there is little or no oil and gas movement 

across faults of appreciable displacement was further 

suggested by- a graphic comparison of the dates of well 

completion with the initial yields of the wells. (See 

pl. 13.) The spotted charttcter of the production revealed by this comparison and the anomalies of yield 

of many offset wells, completed at considerably differ-. 

ent dates, apparently were explainable only on the 

assumption of lack of ready communication through 

the sand between such wells. In places anomalies of 

sa.nd deposition, rather than favlting and cementation, 

"3289-31-4 

may have caused the discrepancies of yield noted, but 

in many and probably in most places lateral oil movement and reductions in pressure apparently have extended less than 200 yards from productive wells (presumably because of local cen1entation by calcite, which 

has taken place along fault planes). 

It therefore seemed probable that several of the 

faults extending east and west across the Castle Rock 

and Teapot domes interposed effective barriers to the 

movement of oil and gas from the Teapot dome 

northward toward Salt Creek-such calcite-cemented 

faults, as it were, cutting the field into separate parts 

just as· the bulkheads in a ship's hold subdivide its 

space into a number of water-tight con1partments. 

That this was a valid inference is to a certain extent 

evident now that disturbances due to oil and gas 

production have been eliminated from the Teapot 

field. Pressure and production records now available 

indicate that the reserve is cut by faults into at least 

three disconnected areas, only the smallest and most 

northerly of which (the area north of fault M, pl. 7) 

is subject to possibility of loss by drainage. 

That there is slight danger of loss of considerable 

quantities of oil northward or westward across the 

reserve boundary is furthermore indicated by Plates 

14 to 24. These diagrams show that the wells within 

the reserve near the northwest boundary were almost 

depleted when the reserve was closed down, except 

in so far as they might be rejuvenated by artificial 

restoration of pressures within the reserve. Statistics 

of oil and water yielded by certain wells during August, 

1927, likewise confirm the suggestion of the approaching depletion of the part of the reserve adjoining Salt 

Creek, Figure 8 and Plate 25 indicating that such 

drainage from the reserve as may occur will probably 

be limited to movement along the fault passing through 

well 402, in sec. 20, T. 39 N., R. 78 W., and will be 

apparent as an increase in the yield of the Argo well, 

immediately west of well 402. 

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 

OIL CONTENT OF NAVAL PETROLEUM RESERVE NO.3 

Oil and gas occur in the Salt Creek field· in the 

Shannon sandstone member of the Steele shale; ·"First 

Wall Creek sand" (Wall Creek sandstone member of 

Frontier formation); "Second Wall Creek sand" (in 

Frontier formation); "Third Wall Creek sand" (in 

Frontier formation); "Muddy sand" (in Thermopolis 

shale); "Dakota sand" (in Cloverly formation); "Lakota sand'' (in Cloverly formation); Morrison and 

Sundance formations; and Tensleep sandstone; also 

in fissures in the shales overlying and underlying the 

"First Wall Creek sand" and to some extent in the 

shales beneath the "Second Wall Creek sand." 

In the Teapot field some oil saturation has been· 

found in the. Shannon sandstone, which lies a few hlmdred feet below the surface, and commercial quantities 
36 GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS IN NAVAL PETROLEUM RESERVE NO. 3, WYOMING 

Dai!Y yield per well, in barrels 

/04-0=0il-water yield in 1924 

30-Tr=Oil-water(trace)yie\d in 1927 

Fault traces 

0 

R.78W. 

7Yz-4 

022-J 

EXPLANATION 

~ 

0 

Well abandoned in "Second Wall 

Creek sand" and deepened to 'Third 

Wall. Creek sand" 

ISJ 

Axis of anticlinal fold 

I MILE 

32 Tr 

0 5-Tr 0,.:. 67-0 

29-0 16-Tr 28-1 0 0 70-}2 

· 5-Tr 30-4 

22~00 ° 

Area in which water constituted 

50to90 percent of fluid yield by 

wei Is, August, 1927 

Boundary line of Naval Petroleum 

Reserve No.3 

FIGURE 8.-Sketch map showing reported yields of oil and water from certain wells near north line of Naval Petroleum Reserve No. 3, August, 1924, and August, 1927 
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 37 

of oil have been obtained from fissures in shales above 

the "First Wall Creek sand" and from the "Second 

and Third Wall Creek sands." 

Fissures in shale.-The reserve of oil in the shale 

fissures present within Naval Petroleum Reserve No.3 

can be determined only by complete drilling of the 

reserve, and it is therefore now impossible to say more 

than that this reserve is of considerable magnitude. 

Shannon sandstone.-The degree of saturation of the 

Shannon sandstone is not known but may be sufficiently grea.t to make the sand a prospective source 

of a large quantity of oil, recoverable by mining or by 

water-flooding operations. Test drilling to determin~ 

its potential value is therefore recommended. 

"Second Wall Greek sand."-The "Second Wail 

Creek sand" has yielded most of the oil and gas so far 

produced from the Teapot Reserve and undoubtedly 

contains a fairly large volume of oil, much of which is 

certainly not recoverable by flowing and pumping or 

by other current production practices. The precise 

lin1its and ·porosity of the oil and gas bearing part of the 

sand are as yet indeterminate, and therefore the content 

of the sand can not be estimated with accuracy. For 

present purposes we can hardly do better than accept 

the estimates made by Lewis and Clapp in their report. 

to the Senate investigating committee, remembering 

that Clapp's calculation indicated gross content of oil 

in the sand, whereas Lewis based his calculations upon 

the amounts recoverable by ordinary production 

practices, which may be regarded as yielding about 

one-fifth of the oil present in the grotmd. Cla.pp's 

estin1ates give an original total content in the sand 

in the naval reserve of 119,000,000 barrels, and multiplying Lewis's figures of recoverable oil by 5 would 

give the ot·iginal gross oil content of the sand within 

the field as between 60,000,000 and 120,000,000 

barrels. These figures are estimates and not verified 

calculations, and it is desirable that s01ne half dozen 

wells be drilled to the "Secorid Wall Creek sand" in 

order to ascertain with approxi1nate precision the magnitude and the location of the oil reserves remaining in 

that sand. 

"Third Wall Greek sand."-Some oil has been produced fr01n the" Third Wall Creek sand" in the reserve, 

but it has been the general experience that this sand is 

fairly thin, is notably irregula.r in thic~\:ness, and probably is not of sufficient importa.nce a.s a prospective 

source of oil to n1erit testing, except a.s tests of it may 

be made in connection with wells drille·d to deeper 

forn1ations. 

"1.1.uddy," "Dakota," and "Lakota" sands.-The 

"Muddy" and "Dakota. " sands a.nd associ a ted sha.les 

have yielded a considerable volume of oil in the Salt 

Creek field and ma.y be important sources of oil in the 

reserve, a.nd the underlying '.'Lakota" sa.nd is a.n 

importa.nt source of oil in the Sa.lt Creek field .. The 

productivity of these sands within the reserve is a·s yet 

a ma.tter of speculation. There is probably less than 

a.n even chan-ce that they contain oil beneath the 

reserve, but because of their possible importance it is 

felt that at least two wells should be drilled to test them. 

Sands of the Morrison and Sundance formations.- Oil 

seeps issue from the Morrison sands where exposed on 

the Tisdale uplift, and some oil has been found in the 

Morrison beds beneath the Salt Creek field. Several 

commercial oil wells have been drilled to the underlying 

Sundance formation at Salt Creek, and a considerable 

amount of oil is also being pro.duced from the Sunda.nce 

sands in northwestern Colorado. It is therefore suggested that the possibility of production from sands in 

these formations may be sufficiently great to warrant 

the drilling of test wells. 

Tensleep sandstone.-The Tensleep sandstone has· 

not been completely tested in the Salt Creek field. 

One well drilled in the NE. X SW. X sec. 25, T. 40 N.,. 

R. 79 W., yielded water, a.nd a deep test hole drilled 

in 1930 .in the SW. }~ NW. X sec. 35, T. 40 N., R. 79 

W., encountered an initial flow of nearly 1,900 ba.rrels 

of oil a day in the Tensleep and rea.ched granite a.t 

5,420 feet. The ma.ximum area. in the Sa.lt Creek field 

·which will yield oil frorn the Tensleep proba.bly will 

not exceed 2,000 a.cres, a.nd the sa.nd may conta.in only 

water in the naval reserve. However, because of the 

great thiclmess and porosity of the sand a.nd because 

of the fact that it yields oil in other parts of Wyoming, 

at least two deep test wells should be drilled to the 

Tensleep near the higher parts of the Teapot uplift 

before it can be condemned a.s ba.rreil of oii within the 

reserve. These wells would at the sa.me time test the 

possible oil content of the sa.nds between the Tensleep 

sandstone and the "Second W a.ll Creek sand," thus 

completing the eva.luation of forma.tions which ma.y be 

regarded a.s having present potential importa.nce, in 

view of the results obtained by the Sa.lt Creek deep 

test well. According to carefully made estimates the 

· drilling of such Tensleep tests is feasible and would 

require the completion of wells about 5,800 feet deep. 

SAFETY OF OIL DEPOSITS IN NAVAL PETROLEUM RESERVE 

NO. 3 FROM LOSS BY DRAINAGE TO NEAR-BY WELLS 

Geologic evidence in hand or ·obtainable at the time 

the naval reserve was leased indicated that the reserve 

was probably not susceptible to serious loss of oil by 

drainage to near-by wells, and this probability has now 

been n1ade a certainty as a result of evidence obtained 

since wells in the reserve were closed in. Pressure 

readings taken on key wells in the reserve show that 

at least two groups of fa.ults (M-P and U-V, pis. 7 a.nd 

8) interpose effective barriers to northward oil and gas 

migration, and production records of leases adjoining 

the reserve on the northwest ~lso show that there has 

been but little increase in the yields of oil and gas from 

these leases since the reserve was shut in. The oil 

in the "Second Wall Creek sa.nd" in the Teapot 

field is therefore safe from: draina.ge, and such possible 

oil pools as ma.y be present in. other sands under-
38 GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS IN NAVAL PETROLEUM RESERVE NO.3, WYOMING 

lying the reserve are, for geologic reasons previously 

given, likewise safe from loss induced by operations 

outside of the reserve. 

WATERS OF THE SALT CREEK-TEAPOT DOME 

UPLIFT 

By HERMAN STABLER 

INTRODUCTION 

The)tudy whose results are set forth in the follow-· 

ing pages is based chiefly on information supplied to 

the writer by Jack W. Steele, supervisor of oil and gas 

operations in the Rocky Mountain district. The 

analyses were made at the laboratories of the United. 

States Geological Survey (operated prior to July 1, 

1925, by the United States Bureau of Mines) andof 

the Midwest Refining Co. at Midwest, Wyo. In 

general they are believed to be reliable, but in a recent 

personal communication E. A. Sweden borg stated: 

"Upon investigating the condition of the wells, as 

so 

... 

z 40 I.J 

0 

a: 

I.J 

a. 

~ 30 

~ X 

-

tJ 

:::> 

.J 

~ 

C> 20 

z 

j:• 

0 

< 

I.J 

-~ 

a: 10 -~ ~ ~ _12; 0 

Concentration value 8?.. 

-- ~ 'l:; 

136 

in parts per million were used to calculate reacting 

values and concentration values-that is, sum of 

reacting values in parts per million. All observations 

and conclusions are based on reacting values and concentration values, and all quantitative and qualitative 

statements have reference to these simplified and 

strictly chemical values. 

The number of analyses of waters from other than 

. the "First Wall Creek sand" is small, and it is probable 

that the variations in charactei' and concentration 

are by no means fully disclosed by available data. 

The greater number of analyses of water from the 

"First Wall Creek sand" makes possible an instructive 

study of variations in character and concentration. 

~ 

SURFACE WATERS 

The Salt Creek-Teapot uplift is a region in which 

surface waters are not abundant. Rainfall is meager, 

and stream channels are for the most.part dry or covv 

v 

v 

/ / 

~ ~ 

• ~ 

• 21 10 37 81 

Source Ca5Ue Creek 

Dale June 1,1924 

200 

Castle Creek 

Dec.\,1925 

Salt Creek 

June 16,1923 

Sail Creek Pond Pond Average<&> 

Aprii30, 1923 Sec.24,T!ION.,R79W. Sec.Z7,T.40N.,R.79W. 

13 

N.Plat.le R. ft. laramie 

EXPLANATION 

o.~ • ~ m mm Sodium Magnesium Calcium Chloride Sulphate Carbonate. 

FIGURE 9.-Analyses of surface waters 

shown by their logs, and the methods of sampling the 

'raters, the sources of some of the waters were found 

to be doubtful, and the analyses were accordingly 

thrown out." Except as specifically noted, however, 

the use herein of some of these analyses subsequently 

found to be doubtful does not affect the matters discussed or the conclusions drawn. The writer is indebted to W. D. Collins, chemist in charge of the 

quality of· water division, United States Geological 

Survey, Washington, D. C., to E. A. Swedenborg, 

chemist, United States Geological Survey, Midwest, 

Wyo., and to W. T. Thorn, jr., and A. C. Spencer, · 

geologists, United States Geological Survey, Washington, D. C., for friendly criticism and suggestions. 

The water analyses on which the study is based are 

shown in Tables 6 to 14, being reported in parts per 

million and in reacting ·values both in parts per 

million and in per cent. The statements of analyses 

ered by a shallow trickle of water, though after summer stot·ms they earry great flood flows including a 

heavy burden of surface wash and silt. As would be 

expected under such conditions, the analyses in 

Table 6, shown graphically in Figure 9, representative 

of surface waters of the region, show marked differences 

in concentration and appreciable differences in character but on the whole are fairly typical of surface 

waters of an arid or semiarid area whose surface soil 

is derived from marine sediments. These local 

waters differ from the water of the North Platte 

River at Fort Laramie, a large stream draining a 

great area, chiefly in containing smaller percentages 

of the calcium and bicarbonate radicles, but, like the 

North Platte water, they are characterized by secondary salinity-that is, the alkali radicles are insufficient to react with the strong-acid radicles-and in 

this respect, as well as in generally lower concentra-
WATERS OF THE SALT CREEK-TEAPOT DOME UPLIFT 39 

tion, they are to be distinguished from subsurface 

waters above· the Tensleep sandstone, which are all of 

primary alkaline type. The chloride radicle is low, 

but the sulphate radicle is most prominent and constitutes 35. per cent or n10re of the concentration 

value. Contamination of well waters from any sand 

by surface waters may well be suspected if they show, 

relative to other waters of the sand, a tendency toward 

secondary salinity,. high sulphate content, or low 

concentration. 

~NDERGROUND WATERS 

WATERS OF THE SHANNON SANDSTONE MEMBER 

The Shannon sandstone crops out as an escarpment 

around the greater portion of the Salt Creek-Teapot 

uplift, and its waters may therefore be expected to partake of the nature of surface waters in some places and 

a:. 

LJJ 

0. 

12.0 117 189 

Shannon waters may also be recognized as possible 

mixtures of waters typical of the lower sands with 

typical surface waters. Because Shannon waters 

partake to a considerable degree of the nature of 

surface waters, they, as well as surface waters, come 

under suspicion as the possible cause of relatively high 

sulphate found in the waters of some wells producing 

from the lower sands. · 

· The Shannon sand is oil bearing in parts of the uplift, 

but production from it is small as compared with that 

from several of the lower sands. 

INTERMEDIATE WATERS 

Water is found at places in crevices or lenticular 

sands .in the shale above the "First Wall Creek sand." 

A few analyses of such waters are shown graphically 

in Figure 11. They resemble average "Second Wall 

·. 

161 97 116 

Source Weii106A, seo.29, Weii403A,sec.2.0, We112,sec.3, Weii105A, sec.29, Well lA, sec.19, 

T.39N.,R.76W. T.39N.,R.78W. T.39N.,R79W. T.39N.,R78W. T.39N.,R.78W. 

108 

We\121A,sec.IS, 

T.40N.,R.79W. Well 22.A, sec.l4, Well 6, sec.33, Average (8} 

T.39N.,R.79W. T.40N.,R.79W. 

EXPLANATiON 

Sodium o~•m~• Magnesium Calcium Chloride Sulphate Carbonate 

FIGURE 10.-Analyses of waters from the Shannon sand . 

to bear the character of a regional Shannon water, if 

such there is, in other places. The analyses in Table 7, 

presented graphically in Figure 10, show considerable 

variation in character. The water from well 106A, in 

sec. 29, T. 39 N., R. 78 W., is characteristically that 

of the "First Wall Creek sand" near the oil and may 

represent the general nature of waters of the Shannon 

sand when uncontaminated by surface drainage.71 

The water from well 2, in sec. 3, T. 39 N., R. 79 W., 

most closely approaches a surface water in character, 

prin1ary .alkalinity being negligible and the sulphate 

radicle prominent. It is closely paralleled in character and concentration by a mixture of 1 part of 

water from well106A with 9 or 10 parts of water from 

the pond in sec. 27, T. 40 N., R. 79 W. The other 

11 A subsequent review by E. A. Sweden borg indicates a doubt as to the source of 

water from well106A and ·or some of the other waters here reported from the Shannon. 

It seems likely, therefore, that the water of well 106A is in fact a water from the 

"First Wall Creek sand," as its character indicates. 

Creek" waters in character and concentration. Pre-· 

sumably derived from the "First Wall Creek sand," 

they differ from the waters of that sand as by solution 

of common salt. The available analyses are too few to 

warrant conclusions as to persistency of character over 

any considerable area. 

WATERS OF THE "FIRST WALL CREEK SAND" 

Apparently relia~le analyses of waters reported to be 

derived from the "First Wall Creek sand" are available· 

for study to the number of 155· and are presented in 

Table 8. Some few of these suggest a measure of contamination with surface or drilling water, but the 

contamination, if it exists, is too slight to warrant 

exclusion of these analyses from consideration as 

representing "First Wall Creek" water. 

A great quantity of oil has been produced from the 

"First Wall Creek sand" in the Salt Creek field, but 
40 GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS IN NAVAL PETROLEUM RESERVE NO.3, WYOMING 

40 1-

;5 

u 

n: 

w 

0.. 

!": 

w 

:::> 

...J 

<t 

::> 20 

(!) 

z 

j: 

u 

< 

w 

0: 10 

0~------------~~= Concentration value ..•....•.. 378 

Source .•.......•.....•.. Weii34A, sec.35, 

T.40N., R.79W. 

1-

z 

w 

u 

~ 

w 

:::> 

...J 

~ 

<!) 

z 

j: 

u 

< w 10 a: 

Concentration value 

Number of. analyses 

averaged 

1-

z 

w 

u 

~ 

w 

0.. 

30 

~ 

w 

:::> 

...J 

~ 

<!) 

z 

j: 

u 

< uJ 

a: 

o...iz::<=zz:~ 

Concentration value 

Number of a11alyses 

averaged 

174 

2.0 

196 

13 

420 

Well 165h, sec. 34, T.40N ., R.79W. 

EXPLANATION 

Sodium 

o~~mmm Magnesium Chloride Sulphate Carbonate. and calciurl') 

FIGURE H.-Analyses of waters from shale and stray sands 

17 2.4 

22.5 261 

14 

EXPLANATION 

Sodium 

D 

Magnesium ~~~- Chloride Sulphate Carbonate and calcium 

FIGURE 12.-Analyses of waters from the "First Wall Creek sand" 

18 

474 

Weii3A,sec3, 

T.39N.,R79W. 

Zl 

ISS 
WATERS OF THE SALT CREEK-TEAPOT DOME UPLIFT 41 

this sand is reported to be saturated with water 

throughout the Teapot dome, an area from which 

water analyses are not available. 

The ,·,First Wall Creek" waters differ widely in concentration values, ranging between extremes of 37 and 

360 parts per Inillion, a range of 1 to ] 0. Calciunl, 

1nagnesiun1, and sulphate are present in amounts so 

small as to affect the character of the waters inappreciably. The waters may, indeed, .be regarded as 

.solutions of sodium chloride and sodium carbonate 

and bicarbonate. Their differences in character may 

readily be expressed in tenns of the ratio of carbonate 

plus bicarbonate to chloride, herein referred to as the 

carbonate-chlori~e ratio, or in terms of per cent of 

carbonate or chloride in the concentration value. The 

carbonate-ehloride ratio ranges fron1 0.24 to 18, or 

fron1 1 to 75. The range in character difference therefore is more than seven ti1nes the range in concentration. For graphic representation in Figure 12, the 

waters of approximately the same character have been 

grouped together and averaged, the number of analyses 

in each group being indicated on the chart. Each 

group contains dilute and concentrated waters, the 

range in concentration within the group being· of 

about the same order of magnitude as the range in 

concentration for the area as a whole. It should be 

understood that the entire group of 155 analyses is 

indicative of continuously progressive change in 

character and that the division into 11 groups has 

been necessarily arbitrary and was made solely to 

facilitate graphical study. The figure portrays clearly 

the negligibility of calcium and magnesium among the. 

bases and of sulphate among the acid radicles and the 

progressive increase of chloride over carbonates. The 

relative concentration values of the 11 groups do not 

appear to 'be significant but would seem to be accidental, depending chiefly on the number of analyses 

averaged and the nqmber of relatively dilute sa1nples 

included in each group. There is a measure of suggestion that, in general, higher concentration values 

and lower carbonate-chloride ratios go together. This 

is by no means clear in the figure, however. Detailed 

exa1nination of the analyses, as well as of the range of 

concentration values in each group, shows that with 

increasing concentration both carbonates and chlorides 

increase but that the range of average carbonates in 

the 11 groups is from 72 to 96, or 1 to 1Ya, whereas for 

chloride the range between groups is from 6.3 to 51.7, 

or from 1 to 8.2. There is an apparent tendency for 

carbonates to remain relatively constant while chlorides progressively increase-the effect that would be 

obtained if a body of salt were to be leached with a 

solution of sodium bicarbonate. 

By plotting on a map of the Salt Creek field the 

principal significant features of the analyses, some idea 

is obtained of the areal significance of differences in 

concentration and in character. On Plate 26 the 

concentration values have been plotted and lines of 

equal concentration, or isocons, have been drawn. 

These isocons are more or less symmetrical with 

respect to the oil pool of the "First Wall Creek sand." 

Concentration values less than 100 are found only 

south and west of the oil pool, but values less than 150 

surround it, and there is a progressive increase of 

concentration from the outside toward the edge of the 

pool. Greatest concentrations are found near the 

edge of the oil pool on the south and east. There are, 

surprisingly enough, less than half a dozen wells whose 

waters do not conform closely to the general pattern 

of the isocons. Explanation of these anomalies is not 

obvious but may perhaps be found in doubtful analyses, trapped pools of water, .or the influence of faults. 

Plate 27 is a map showing lines of equal carbonatechloride ratios. In any "Wall Creek" water the sum 

of the reacting values of the chloride and carbonate 

radicles determines its concentration value, but the 

ratio of carbonate to chloride determines its character. 

On Plate 27 the character changes produce a rather 

regular pattern. The highest ratios are found west 

of the oil pool, where concentrations are low. South 

of the oil pool and more than 2 n1iles south of the line 

between Tps. 39 and 40 N., where concentrations are 

low, ·carbonate-chloride ratios are approximately· half 

the ratios for the region of equal concentration west 

of the pool. Beginning in sec. 11, T. 39 N., R. 79 W., 

and extending east and north around the south and 

east borders of the oil pool is a zone of relatively high 

carbonate-chloride ratios in which the ratios progressively decrease toward the north. South and east 

of this zone is a .. region of relatively low Fatios, and 

north and west of it ratios rapidly decrease as the oil 

pool is approached. On this map, as on Plate 26, 

the number of anomalies is very small, the ratios 

conforming remarkably well to a regular pattern. 

Wells 25A3, in T. 39 N., R. 79 W., and 20A27, in 

T. 40 N., R. 79 W., show the only irreconcilable ratios, 

and the waters from these wells are very dilute for the 

area and conform poorly in other respects to "First 

Wall Creek" characteristics. They might well · be 

rejected as nonrepresentative if indeed the analyses· 

were made from samples actually taken from the 

"First Wall Creek sand." As shown on Plates 28 and 

29, the chloride values are approximately symmetrical 

with respect to the oil pool but the carbonate values· 

are asymmetrical, and this difference accounts for 

most of the lack of symmetry of the lines on Plates 

26 and 27. The general tendency toward lower carbonate-chloride ratios as· the center of the oil pool is 

approached is far more pronounced, as shown on 

Plate 27, than the tendency toward increased concentration, as shown on Plate 26. 

Plate 28 is a map showing lines of equal chloride 

values, or isochlors. General symmetry of patterr. 

with respect to the oil pool is evident, with greater 
42 GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS IN NAVAL PETROLEUM RESERVE NO.3, WYOMING 

values to the east than- to the west. The lowest 

chloride values, less than 5.0, are found northwest of 

the pool and in a single analysis far to the south. 

Chloride values of 6.0 and 8.0 are found along the 

entire west and south borders of the pool, but no 

values less than 9.0 are shown on the east. An 

isochlor o'f 10, however, borders the entire east side 

and nearly encircles the oil pool. Of interest are the 

lobe-shaped area of relatively high chloride at the 

southeast and the narrow zone of relatively low values 

at the north following one edge of an upthrown fault 

block and separating the main oval pattern from ~ 

smaller oval of high values wholly beyond the limits 

of the main oil pool of the "First Wall Creek sand." 

The presence of a minor northern area containing 

some oil is suggested by the pattern. ·Chloride is 

perhaps the most stable element o{ the water solution 

reflected in an ordinary analysis. Once in the 

chen1ical system, the chloride radicle is. removed only 

by precipitation from a saturated solution or by the 

application of intense heat. The areas of high 

chloride must therefore be regarded as areas in which 

saline deposits have been incompletely leached or as 

areas in which the water solution has been subjected 

to concentration, as by evaporation with escaping gas. 

Plate 29 is a map showing lines of equal carbonate 

values, or isocarbs. In terms of reacting values, with 

only five exceptions in 155 analyses, carbonate (that 

is, carbonate plus bicarbonate) constitutes 30 per cent 

or more of the chemical system in the water solution, 

averaging· 41.3 per cent. Next to sodium, it is the 

chief constituent in all but three of the"'water analyses. 

It is carbonate, therefore, that chiefly determines the 

concentration values shown on Plate 26~ If chloride 

and an equivalent value of sodium were removed the 

analyses would show markedly greater uniformity in 

concentration and character, indicating that a normal 

"First sand" water acquires sodium chloride from the 

aquifer in the region of the oil pool. The pattern of 

isocarbs shows that there is low concentration of carbonate values (less than 40 parts per million of reacting· value) over a large area at the south end of the 

Salt Creek field. Areas of less than 50 in carbonate 

value are found to the east and west of the field. In 

passing toward the oil pool from isocarb 50 greater 

carbonate values are encountered until the approximate position of the original oil line is reached. 

There a maximum is encountered, and values decrease 

thence toward the center of the pool. The area of 

maximum carbonate extends northward along the east 

side of the pool, but with decreasing intensity, to the 

extren1e limits of the field. An area of maximum 

carbonate lies to the west of the pool, but it is small 

and, roughly, of only half the intensity of the eastern 

area. An area of low carbonates lies northwest of the 

pool and extends northeastward with slightly increased 

concentration to the limits of the field. 

WATER MOVEMENT IN THE "F'IRST WALL CREEK SAND" 

In ·a surface lake there is water movement, more or 

less irregular, from inlet streams, possibly of different 

concentration and character, toward a single outlet, 

if there is one, or from one part of the lake to another 

in induced currents, if there is no outlet. Other 

things being equal, the larger the lake relative to 

volume of outflow the greater will be the concentration 

. of the water and the greater will be the differences in 

character of the water in different parts of the lake. 

The ground-water body of a pervious sand, such as the 

"First Wall Creek sand," n1ay be likened to a lake, the 

major differences being that for the same volume of 

flow moven1ent will be much less free ·than in an open 

lake, being somewhat restricted to channels, as in a 

lake studded with islands; concentration should be 

greater because of intimate contact with rather finely 

divided mineral matter; and differences in concentration should be more widely varied and differences in 

character more notable because of differences in nature 

of material encomitered. Even though very slow, 

long-continued water movement through a sand will 

leach it of readily soJuble material, and the character 

and concentration of the water will tend to become 

more uniform and the mineral solution more dilute. 

On the assumption that the sands were once filled with 

water approaching present-day sea water in concentration, it is evident from the relative dilution of the 

waters now found in the sands that much leaching has 

taken place and that total water movement through 

geologic· time has been great. 

Plate 27, in terms. of carbonate-chloride ratio, and 

Figure 63, in terms of percentage of carbona.te, show the 

character of waters in the" First" sand ~n the vicinity 

of the oil pool and tell the same story. Chloride value, 

in per cent, is practically the difference between 50. 

and the percentage of carbonate ~nd would provide a 

similar pattern. As shown on Plate 30, water with 

a carbonate content of 43 to 46 per cent and therefore 

of practically uniform character is found on the west 

side of the pool and in a zone south of it and extending 

northward along the east side. The 40 per cent 

carbonate line encircles the oil pool very close to the 

oil-water contact except at the north and ·where it 

swings a mile north and half a mile east of the line of 

contact. The pattern formed, generally concentric 

with the oil pool but shad.ing out toward the northeast, 

and the character change indicated, from an alkaline 

carbonate to an alkaline chloride water as the oilwater contact is approached from the outside, are 

precisely what .would be expected in a lake of alkaline 

carbonate water in which there was an island of common salt washed by a current moving gently toward 

the north and east. Plate 26, however, shows that in 

the zone of 43 to 46 per cent carbonate the concentrations 

are approximately twice as great on the east side of 
WATERS OF THE SALT CREEK-TEAPOT DOME UPLIFT 43 

th~ oil pool, as on the west side, indicating that any 

water movement close to the oil pool is more rapid and 

leaching of the sand has progressed further on the 

west side than on the east. The zone of 43 to 46 per 

cent ·of carbonate on the south and east also shows 

progressive increase of concentration from the outside 

toward the oil pool. This suggests concentration as 

by evaporation, without change of character, carbonate 

and chloride radicles increasing in like proportion. 

Beyond this zone, to the west, concentration increases 

slowly as the proportion of chloride increases rapidly, 

as if chloride '\\~ere replacing carbonate in the solution. 

East of the zone· of 43 to 46 per cent carbonate the 

concentration decreases eastward as the proportion of 

chloride shows a tenden.cy to increase slightly, suggesting the presence of an easterly bank to the channel of 

northward flow. 

0~ the ·whole, the available data suggest rather 

strongly an eastward movement of water south of the 

oil pool, a northward movement wes~ of the pool, and 

a northeastward n1ovement northwest of the pool. 

There is probably also a less definite northward movement of wa.ter east of the pool, though this is by no 

means so evident within the limits of the available 

data. A former concentric movement of water toward 

the oil pool is also suggested, with concentration as by 

evaporation with escaping gas and as by solution of 

chlorides from less thoroughly leached sand. The 

concentric move1nent was evidently more vigorous on 

the west side than on the east, and the total water 

movement was greater at some distance from the pool 

than immediately adjacent to it, as if there had been 

a major escape of water and gas on the flanks of the 

uplift. In general faults appear· not to affect the 

general water movement, unless the many cross faults 

cause or assist in causing the islandlike barrier to 

water movement that coincides in a gen~ral way with 

the oil pool. It is not unreasonable to assume that 

such faults provide an obstruction to northward movement in the anticline but die out on the flanks so as to 

pernrit fairly regular flow. An exception to the general 

effect of faults is found just north of the field, where a· 

northeastward channel Qf flow apparently follows a 

fault or fault block. With production of oil there has 

also been a very definite tendency for water to encroach 

most rapidly along the fault Jines. · 

WATERS OF THE "sECOND WALL CREEK SAND'' 

Thirty-eight analyses of waters reported from the 

"Second Wall Creek sand" a.re presented in T&ble 9 

and shown in averaged groups in Figure 13. The first 

two groups in this figure are indistinguishable from 

groups of" First Wall Creek" waters shown in Figure 12. 

In fact, concentration alone distinguishes the third·, 

fourth, and fifth groups in Figure 13 from some of the 

groups in Figure 12. The waters of both sands are 

essentially solutions of sodium carbonate and ·sodium 

chloride in varying proportions. The two figures 

show, indeed, a continuous overlapping series of 

character changes, from an almost pure sodiun1 carbonate solution at the beginning of the "First Wall 

Creek" groups to an almost pure sodium chloride solut.ion at the end of the "Second Wall Creek" groups. 

If chloride and an equivalent value of sodium were 

removed from both, the "First" and "Second" sand 

waters would be very doubtfully distinguishable from 

each other by concentration or character, though there 

seems to be a tendency toward slightly·higher calciu1n, 

magnesium, and sulphate percentages in the "Second" 

sand. However, it is not di:ffi.cu~t to distinguish 

between them as found at any locality, for the "Second 

Wall Creek" water from any well is. n1ore concentrated 

and carries a higher percentage of chloride than the 

"First Wall Creek" water fron1 the saine well. The 

analyses fonning the extreme of the "Second Wall 

Creek" series on Figure 13 may represent a pocket of 

water not truly representative of the sand, and too 

much reliance can not be placed on them. The highly 

concentrated brine 72 from well 34A, in sec. 29, T. 40 

N:, R. 78 W., is the only water from the east side o(the 

Salt Creek field represented in this group of analyses 

and suggests the absence of water circulation on that 

side. This brine has the characteristics of a fossil 

sea water from which the alkaline earths and sulphate 

have been removed. The other "Second" sand waters 

analyzed from the Salt Creek field came from wells 

along its west edg~, and, though the analyses are too 

few to warrant the drawing of lines, they indicate a 

tendency toward increase of concentration and of 

proportion of chloride with approach to. the oil pool, 

just as in the "First Wall Creek sand." A group of 

analyses from wells in sees. 28 and 29, T. 39 N., R. 78 

W., ·approximately in the saddle between the Salt 

Creek and Teapot domes, ·shows an apparent tendency 

toward highest concentration along the axis of the 

anticline, with greater dilution on both east and west, 

thus conforming to the general rule for "First Wall 

Creek" waters of the Salt Creek field. The character 

of these waters, as portrayed by carbonate-chloride 

ratios, however, is. very irregular, though showing a 

tendency toward a greater proportion of chloride 

towai·d the west. Other scattered analyses from the 

Teapot dome show considerable variation in concentration and character but without definite arrangement. 

The available analyses of waters from the "Second 

Wall ·creek sand" show that on the average samples 

from the Teapot dome have about 90 per cent and 

samples from the saddle about 75 per cent of the concentration of samples from Salt Creek. . 

The irregular variation in character of waters of 

the "Second Wall Creek sand" and their relatively 

12 This analysis was reported doubtful by E. A. Sweden borg on subsequent study 

or the well and sampling history, and any discussion of it should therefore be taken 

not too seriously. 
uJ 

::J 

..J 

~ 

(!) 

z 

t= 

u 

<t: 

WI 

0:: 

Concentration value 90 

Number of analyses 

averaged 

Source 

~ 

w 

3 

~ 

l!l 

z 

i= 

u 

<t: 

w 

a: 

Weii103A,sec.20, 

T.3QN.,R.78W. 

Concentration value 396 

Number an~lyses averaged 6 

5ource 

255 

2 

402 397 

378 

7 

5 

EXPLANATION 

6 

1~14 (quarter scale) 

Well 34A, sec.29 

T.40N. ,R.78W. 

Sodium 

o~~m~m Magnesium Chloride Sulphate Carbonate and calcium 

FIGURE 13.-Analyses of waters from the "Second Wall Creak sand" 

393 

8 

410 

38 

:t 

0 

t%J 

0 

~ 

0 

0 

1-4 

a 

a 

0 

z 

tj 

1-4 

~ 1-4 

0 

z 

[/). 

1-4 

z 

z 

~ ~ 

'"d 

t;l 

;d 

0 

~ q 

~ 

[/). 

~ 

t%J 

~ t%J 

z 

0 

-CJ.j 

~ t-< 

0 

~ 1-4 

z 

0 
WATERS OF THE SALT CREEK-TEAPOT DOME UPLIFT 45 

higher concentration argue for n1uch less water movenlent than in the "First Wall Creek sand" and perhaps 

for a general condition of present stagnation, though 

the analyses are too few and too widely spaced to 

warrant definite conclusions. 

WATERS OF THE "THIRD WALL CREEK SAND", 

A few analyses from the "Third Wall Creek sand" 

or from a stray sand stratigraphically above it in the 

1-

z 

IIJ 

u 

a: 

IIJ 

0. 

~ 

~­

z 

IIJ 

u 

a: 

IIJ 

0. 

~ 

w 

::J 

..J 

<( 

> 

'-IV 

40-

30-

20-

10 

0 

Concentration value 

Source 

5 

40· 

30-

20-

10 

Concenlralion value 

Source 

~ 

570 

Well 409, sec.zo, 

T.39N.,R.78W. 

570 

Well !!>,sec. '20, 

T. 39N.,R.78W. 

--

• 

indicate a further step in the progressive change from 

alkaline carbonate to alkaline chloride character noted 

for "First"· and "Second" sand waters. A less thorough leaching and even less water n10vement than for 

the "Second Wall Creek sand" is also indicated. 

WATER OF THE "MUDDY SAND" 

A single analysis of water from the "Muddy sand" 

is available. (See Table 11 and fig. 15.) It shows a 

560 

Well 409,sec.zo, 

T. 39 N. ,R.78W. 

54\ 

Well9, sec. zo, 

T. 39N.,R.78W. 

~ 

~ ;~; 

EXPLANATION 

Sodium 

D~~~- Magnesium Chloride Sulphate Carbonate and calcium 

FIGURE 14.-Analyses of waters from the "Third Wall Creek sand" 

vicinity of the saddle between the Salt Creek and 

Teapot domes are given in Table 10 and shown graphically in Figure 14. These samples were produced 

with oil fron1 the "Third Wall Creek sand," but there 

is a suggestion that the water is derived not from the 

"Third Wall Creek sand" itself but from a stray sand 

above. They show greater concentration and higher 

percentage of chloride than the "Second" sand waters, 

the greater concentration being more than accounted 

for by the greater chloride content. These waters 

water indistinguishable in character from the average 

of "Second Wall Creek" waters shown in Figure 13. 

The concentration value is 281, or only about 70 per 

cent of that of the average "Second" sand water. A 

water movement somewhat more free than for the 

"Second!' sand is indicated. 

WATER OF THE "DAKOTA SAND" 

A single analysis of water from the "Dakota sand" 

(Table 11), which, however, is substantially the same 
46 GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS IN NAYAL PETROLEUM RESERVE NO.3, WYOMING 

as the reported average of four analyses of water from 

this sand, is shown graphically in Figure 15. This 

water is essentially a sodium chloride solution with 

small percentages of sulphate and carbonate and is 

thus easily distinguishable from the waters hereinbefore 

considered. Its nearest .counterpart is in the "Second"· 

t-o 

~40 

u 

0: 

a. "" 

~ 

w 

:::> 

.J 

~ 

Cl 

z 

;:: 

0 

oct: 

L&J 

0: 

Concentration value 

Source 

1-

z 

L&J 

0 

a: 

L&J 

n. 

~ 

L&J 

:::> 

.J 

~ 

~ 

z 

i= 

0 

oct: 

L&J 

0: 

~~~=ntralion .82 

Source ~~~~~~~~~ 

"L~~~~ ~!nd" Lower 

89 

Well 7L.,sec.25, 

T.40N.,R.79W. 

Lower 

408 

Dakota Weii31D,sec.7, T.39N.,R.78W. 

119 

We1112Tp.,sec.25 

T.40N. 1R.79W. 

Upper(?) 

82 

Wei119L.,sec.19, 

T. 39N.,R.78W. 

Upper· 

122 

We1121 Su.,sec.35, 

T.40N. 1 R.79W. 

Vpper 

concentration nearer the oil pool is fairly well shown,. 

and greater concentration from south to north and. 

from west to east is suggested, but the analyses are· 

too few to be considered conclusive. The percentage 

of carbonate ranges from 45.7 to 22.5, but whether 

this variation bears any relation to position with 

119 

392 

Dakota 

Average(4) 

95 

Weii33L.,sec. 23, Weii1SL.,sec.34, 

T.40N. 1R.79W. T.40N.,R.79W. 

Upper(?) Upper(?) 

112 

WeiiiOL.,sec.IS, 

T.40N.,R.79W. 

Upper 

406 

Morrison 

? 

Ill 

Well19 L.,sec.Z3, 

T.40N.,R.79W. 

Upper<?l 

104 

Average(9h 

EXPLANATION 

D~~~~I]B Sodium Magnesium Calcium Chloride Sulphate Carbonate 

FIGURE 15.-Analyses of waters from the "M~ddy," "Dakota," Morrison, and "Lakota" sands 

sand waters of lowest carbonate-chloride ratio, which 

resemble it closely in concentration value. 

WATERS OF THE "LAKOTA SAND" 

Nine analyses of water from the "Lakota sand" 

(Table 11) are available and are shown graphically in. 

Figure 15. Si.."'{ of these waters came from wells adjacent to the Lakota oil pool of the Salt Creek field. 

Two came from a single well about.3 miles southeast of 

the pool, near the southern limits of the field, and one 

from a well about a mile northwest of the pool. The 

range in concentration value is from 82 to 122. Greater 

respect to the oil pool seems doubtful with the meagerdata at hand. Well 19L23, showing tlw lowest percentage of carbonate, is the only welJ that shows. 

chloride in excess of carbonate and the only one that. 

shows an appreciable sulphate content. Contamina-. 

tion with water from the "Dakota sand" would affect 

these results. Two analyses are designated as repre--

senting water from the lower bench of the "Lakota .. 

sand." If these and the analyses from well 19L23 are·· 

left out of account, the percentage of carbonate ranges 

from 42.1 to 35.1, indicating very uniform character for-

. what are presumably waters of the upper bench,. 
0 

0 

oo0-

0-

Concenlralton value 

Source 

Bench of sand 

N1ckel 

1-

z 

w 

l) 

a 

w 

~ 

~ 

w 

:J 

-' 

~ 

l!) 

z 

i= 

l) 

<{ 

w 

0: 

Concentralton valu& 

Source 

E>ench of sand 

Ntckel 

203 

Well 34 Su. sec.23 

l.40N.,R.79W 

7 

-

187 

Well 34 x Su., sec. 23, 

T.40N.,R.79W 

Firsl 

--

--

350 

Weii12Tp.,sec. 25, 

T.40N.,R.79W 

1 

53pp.m. 

292 277 

Well21 Su., sec.3S, Well 21 Su., sec.3S, 

T40N.,R.79W. T.40N.,R.79W. 

426 

Well 3A, sec. 29, 

T.39 N.,R.78W. 

Second 

ssppm. 

Second 

43RPI". 

EXPLANATION 

o~~~m~ Sodium .Magtiesium Calcium Chloride Sulphate Carbonate 

FIGURE 16.-Analyses of waters from the Sundance sand 

299 

Average(7J 

359 

Well21 Su.,sec. 2, T.40N.,R.79W 

124 

Well33x, sec. 28, 

1,41 J:l., R.81W. 

Second 

1;0 

~ rFl 

0 

~ 

~ t:;l 

~ 

~ (") 

~ t:;l 

~ 1-3· 

t:;l 

> '"d 

0 

1-3 

t;j 

~ t:;l 

q· 

~ 1-4 

~ 

~ 

-..J 
48 GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS IN NAVAL PETROLEUM RESERVE NO. 3, WYOMING 

though only two of the six are so designated. Analyses 

from well 19L19, T. 39 N., R. 78 W., show a percentage of chloride approximately twice as great in 

the upper bench as in the lower, and a similar difference 

is shown by the analyses from wells 7L and 12Tp, 

only a few hundred feet apart in sec. 25, T. 40 N., 

R. 79 W., suggest.ing that analysis 12Tp represents 

water from the upper bench. 

"La~ota" waters have less than 60 pe~ cent of the 

concentration of "First Wall Creek" waters and are 

apparently much more uniform in character, though 

1-

z 

IIJ 

u 

0: 

IIJ 

Q. 

~ 

w 

::l 

..J 

<( 

> 

<.!) 

z 

;:: 

u 

<( 

w 

0: 

Concentration value 106 

Source We1112 Tp.,sec.zs, T.40N., R.79W. 

93 82 67 

-we1133X,sec.28, T.40N.,R.81E.(Tisdale)-

of hydrogen sulphide, suggests reduction of sulphate 

and its replacement by carbonate. A noticeable 

an10unt of nickel is found in a number of the Sundance 

waters but is not indicated for waters from other 

horizons. 

WATERS OF THE TENSLEEP SANDSTONE 

A single analysis of water from the Tensleep sandstone is available for the Salt Creek field. This, 

together with analyses of waters from three separate 

benches of this sand from a well on the Tisdale dome, 

87 

Average (4) 

some 15 miles to the west, is given in 

T~ble 13 and Figure 17. All contain 

notable proportions of calcium and 

magnesium, a feature that distinguishes 

Tensleep waters from other subsurface 

waters of the region. Chloride is fairly 

constant at about 24 to 30 per cent of 

the chemical system. As in the Sundance waters, sulphate is present in 

noteworthy degree and varies inversely 

with carbonate. This feature, together 

with the presence of hydrogen sulphide, 

suggests the possibility of partial reduction of sulphate and replacen1ent 

with carbonate. Tensleep waters are 

.the most dilute of the subsurface Depth below Lakota sandstone 1,870'- 2,040' 2,061!.2,159' 2,200'-2,228' 

waters, and, with the exception of the 

first bench water at Tisdale, they show 

an excess of chloride over sodium, a 

characteristic not found in other subEX PLANATION 

o ~ ~ -~.m m Sodium Magnesium Calcium Chloride Sulphate Carbonate 

FIGURE 17.-Analyses of waters from the Tensleep sand 

like the waters of the "First Wall Creek sand" they 

are essentially solutions of sodium carbonate and 

chloride. Water movement in the "Lakota sand" is 

therefore probably n1uch more free than in the "First 

Wall Creek sand." · 

WATER OF ',('HE SAND IN THE MORRISON FOR:r-.fATION 

A single analysis of water from the Morrison sand 

shown in Table 11 and Figure 15 indicates that it is. 

of essentially the same character and concentration 

as water from the "Dakota sand." 

WATERS OF THE SAND IN THE SUNDANCE :FORMATION 

Analyses of eight Sundance waters from four townships, including one from a well on the Tisdale dome, 

are shoWn in Table 12 and Figure 16. Calcium· and· 

magnesiuin are present in small amounts, the waters 

being essentially solutions of sodium salts. The chloride radicle is fairly constant at about 30 to 35 per cent 

of the chemical system. Sulphate and carbonate 

range from a trace to about 18 per cent, greater sulphate being accorr1panied by lesser carbonate and the 

sum of the two being nearly a constant. This relation 

of sulphate and carbonate, together with the presence • 

surface waters. Water movement in this sandstone is evidently free. 

COMP~RISON OF WATERS 

The averages of analyses of waters from the various 

sands of the Salt Creek-Teapot region are shown 

graphically in Figure 18. All subsurface waters above 

tlie Tensleep are of the primary alkaline type, being 

solutions of sodium salts with very minor proportions 

of calcium and magnesium. Tensleep waters are distinguished from the others by secondary salinity and 

a very considerable proportional content of calcium 

and magnesium. Sulphate, perhaps introduced by 

surface-water contamination, is notable in Shannon 

waters but is inappreciable in waters from the "Wall 

Creek" or "Lakota" sands. Beginning with the 

"Muddy," sulphate becon1es increasingly prominent 

with depth ("Lakota" sand excepted) and is noteworthy in the Sundance and prominent in the Tensleep waters. Chloride becomes more pron1inent and 

carbonate less prominent with depth throngh the "Wall 

Creek" series. The carbonate-chloride ratio of the 

"Muddy" is similar to that of the" Second Wall Creek," 

and that of the "Lakota" is like though less than that of 

the "First Wall Creek." The carbonate-chloride ratio 
• 

.... v 

IZ4o- w 

1.) 

0: 

w 

Cl 

~30-

w 

:::> 

<1 

>zoSource Surface Shannon sandstone "First Wall Creek sand 

~~~~~~sof 6 8 155 

"""~)< 

[)(V~ 

I410 

"second Wall Creek sand" 

38 

I 

!j li&ffffcff~- ~ ~ ~~ru~entrauon 281 392 

Source "Muddy sand" "Dakota sand" 

~~~~~~sof I 4 

D 

104 

"Lakota sand" 

9 

EXPLANATION 

406 

Morrison formation 

~~~mm!l 

1--

Ill 

Sodium Magnesium Calcium Chloride Sulphate Carbonate 

FIGURE 18.-Analyses of waters from various sands 

560 

"Third Wall Creek sand" 

4 

II 

"zgg 

Sundance formation 

7 

I>< 

~ 

106 

Tensleep formation 

~ 8 

t;j 

~ [/1 

0 

l:lj 

8 

~ t;j 

g: 

~ 

c 

~ 

t;j 

t;j 

~ 

~ > '"d 

0 

8 

t1 

0 

~ t;j 

~ 

'"d 

~ 

~ 

~ 

co 
50 GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS IN NAVAL PETROLEUM RESERVE NO.3, WYOMING 

of the "Dakota" and Morrison waters is smaller than 

for any other sands. Below the Morrison the carbonate-chloride ratio increases with depth through the 

Sundance and Tensleep. With the exception of- the 

Tensleep, the carbonate-chloride ratio is greater than· 

1 for waters whose concentration values are less than 

200 and less than 1 for the more concentrated waters, 

though the ratios and concentration values by no 

1neans run parallel. Greater concentration is in some 

waters due to greater chloride and in others to greater 

.... 

z 

UJ 

I) 

40-

~ 30 a. 

C) 

z 

1:- ZOo 

< 

UJ 

0: 

toacter to waters flowing, from an igneous terrain or 

from sand and gravel derived by the weathering of 

igneous rocks. With rare exceptions, therefore, waters 

in contact with primary rocks are of the primary alkaline or alkaline carbonate type, containing in general 

large proportions of sodium and bicarbonate radicles, 

appreciable amounts of calcium and magnesium, a 

little chloride, but little or no sulphate. 

· . The subsurface waters of the Salt Creek-Teapot 

uplift, though showing variations, are of the primary 

104 106 5.4 1.6 93 38 1209 

"Lakota sand" 

Tensleep 

5andstone 

Shoshone River Waleree River 

Cody, Wyoming Camden,S.C. 

1,260' well zpoo' well 

Charleston,S.C. Charleslon,S.C. 

1367 

Abert 

Lake Ocean 

EXPLANATION 

o~~~m;m Sodium Magnesium Calcium Chloride Sulphale Carbonate 

FIGURE 19.-Comparative analyses of waters from different sources 

carbonate and chloride. Nickel is found only in 

Sundance waters but appa.rently not in all waters 

from this sand. 

ORIGIN OF THE WATERS 

Igneous rocks contain about 0.1 per cent of sulphur, 

and soluble sulphur compounds on the exposed igneous 

surface are notably rare. Silicates of the alkalies are 

among the most soluble constituents of igneous rocks, 

and these, with carbonic acid from the air, give char-

. . . 

alkaline type, and their origin in an area of igneous 

rocks is strongly suggested. It is thought that these 

waters in the main have migrated through the relatively porous sandstones from· the igneous mountain 

masses to. the west. No analyses from the streams of 

these mountain masses are available, but in Figure 19 

is presented the average character of daily sample;.; 

taken from the Shoshone River at Cody, Wyo .. , for 

a period of· a year. This strea1n drains an. area of 

mixed igneous and sedimentary rocks, bu.t except for 

• 
WATERS OF THE SALT CREEK-TEAPOT DOME UPLIFT 51 

a relatively high proportion. of sulphate, presumably 

derived from marine sediments, it is thought to represent fairly well the type of water in which the oil-field 

waters here considered had their origin. 

Teosleep water may be conceived as having about 

10 per cent of its solids derived from a water like that 

of the Shoshone River at Cody, 55 to 60 per cent deriyed from normal ocean water, and 30 to 35 per cent 

from gypsurn beds. Shoshone River water seeping 

for some miles through marine sediments would be 

expected to exhibit such changes. Whether the 

ocean-water ch~racter exhibited by the Tensleep is 

the result of mixing with fossil water or the result of 

leaching saline .deposits associated with gypsum is 

uncertain. Doubtless both influences have contributed, but the rather dilute char,acter of the water 

suggests that ocean water originally in the sand has 

been largely flushed out and that the present mineralizq,tion is due principally to leaching of saline and 

gypsu1n deposits. 

In contrast to the· very ·simple explanation given 

for the origin and character of water from the Tensleep 

assumptions of chemical changes must be made to 

account for the character of waters from the "Wall 

Creek" and "Lakota" sands. These waters doubtless 

have originated in dilute primary alkaline solutions 

such as the water of the Shoshone River at· Cody. 

The absence in the ·oil-sand waters of calcium and 

magnesium and of sulphate, all present in the water of 

the Shoshone River, requires explanation. Mere concentration, if carried far enough, would account for 

the loss of calcium and magnesium.· Lake waters of 

the Lahontan Basin and tl;le other alkaline lakes of 

California, Oregon, and Nevada, according to Clarke, 73 

are primary concentrations of lea.ched material from 

areas of igneous rocks in which rhyolites and andesites . 

are especially abundant,· and all, when fairly concentrated, have lost their calcium and magnesium by 

precipitation as carbonates, leaving solutions of sodium 

sulphate, chloride, and carbonate in different proportions. Such, of course, is the natural result of concentration of any prin1ary alkaline water, just as it. is 

the natural result of removal of excess of carbon 

dioxide from it. The water of Abert Lake, Oregon 

(see Table 14 and fig. 19), is such a water which ha.s 

lost its calcium and magnesium by natural processes of 

evaporation and contains a relatively small proportion 

of sulphate. Though three time~ as concentrated it 

can scarcely be distinguished in character from many 

well waters of the "Second Wall Creek sand." Origin 

of the oil-field waters by mere concentration of nearly 

sulphate-free priinary alkaline· waters is therefore 

suggested as a possibility. However, the oil-field 

waters are not sufficiently concentrated to warrant 

'taking the suggestion very seriously, and the absence, 

u Clarke, F. W., The data of geochemistry, 5th ed.: U.S. Geol. Survey Bull. 770, 

p. 161, 1924. 

so far as known, of sulphate-free waters of ongm 

further controverts the suggestion. Certainly, concentration alone of Shoshone River water would not 

produce waters of the type found in the oil sands. 

In the calcite deposits, particularly in fault traces, of 

the. Salt Creek and. Teapot fields, there is evidence of 

precipitation of calcium (and probably magnesium), 

but this is doubtless the result of loss of carbon dioxide 

on release of pressure and exposure to the air, perhaps 

facilitated by escaping natural gas, rather than an 

indication of deep-seated precipitation. Calcite has, 

however, been found in cores of both "First and Second 

Wall Creek sands." Another reasonable explanation 

of the absence of calcium and magnesium in the oilfield waters lies in base exchange, calcium and mag-

·nesium for ·sodium, through the medium of baseexchange silicates. The principle of base exchange ~n 

contact with certain silicates is used in certain types of 

modern water-softening plants in which waters practically free from magnesium and calcium are produced 

artificially. Bentonite, one of the most efficient of 

the base-exchange silicates, is found at the surface in 

the vicinity of the Salt Creek field and is encountered 

in drilling :both in the oil sands themselves and in 

the intervening shales. The materials for a natural 

water-softenip.g process are therefore ready at hand, 

and the softened character of the oil-field waters may 

be regarded as adequate evidence that nature has used 

the process effectively. 

There rentains the matter of sulphate. The available evidence indicates that the waters of origin (that 

is, the surface waters from which the oil-field waters 

are thought to have originated), though primary 

alkaline in character, contain an appreciable propor- · 

tion of sulphates, but the primary alkaline waters of 

the· "Wall Creek" and "Lakota" sands are practically 

sulphate-free, many samples analyzed showing not 

even a trace of sulphate. · Something more than 

contact with the usual minerals of marine sediments is 

required to explain this change. Reduction of sulphates to sulphides and at least partial substitution of . 

carbonates was proposed by Hoefer Has an explanation 

·of the presence of sulphate-free alkaline carbonate 

waters in oil measures, and his hypothesis has been 

widely adopted in oil-field literature. Several references to the early literature on the subject are given 

by Riffenburg. 75 Palmer 76 strongly controverts the 

idea, stating that 

No experimental evidence worth mentioning is on record that 

it is possible for a sulphate to be reduced to a sulphide under 

conditions prevailing in · oil fields. * * * Reduction of 

sulphate to sulphide is not spontaneous; the reaction is endothermic, so that it must be forced by continual application of 

external energy. * * * Reduction of sulphate to sulphide 

r• Engler, C., and.Hoefer, H., Das Erdoel, Band 2, p. 28, 1909. 

u Riffenburg, H. H., Chemical character of grOund water of the northern Great 

Plains: U. S. Geol. Survey Water-Supply Paper 560, p. 38, 1925. 

16 Palmer, Chase, California oil-field waters: Econ. Geology, vol. 19, pp. 623-6~.5, 

1924. 
52 GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS IN NAVAL PETROLEUM RESERVE NO. 3, WYOMING 

is a fire process, and in the absence of proof to the contrary it 

may be accepted that sulphates are not reducible to sulphides 

in oil-field waters. 

Palmer concludes that the alkaline waters of the 

California oil fields belong naturally to the format~ons 

in which they are found, having acquired their properties from the minerals of the local rocks, and that 

alkaline sulphide waters of the oil fields are alkaline 

carbonate waters more or less altered by absorption of 

a volatile sulphur compound emanating from the oil 

and are not formed by the reducing action of hydrocarbons on sulphates. Palmer's contention that 

alkaline waters of oil fields have acquired their properties from the minerals of the local rocks is most 

assuredly the logical explanation of the character of 

many oil-field waters. Applied to oil-field waters. of 

the alkaline carbonate type that are sulphate-free, it 

presupposes a sulphate-free water of origin or contact 

with a sulphate-eliminating substance in the local 

rocks. For the Salt Creek-Teapot waters, a sulphatefree water of origin is improbable, though not beyond 

the bounds of possibility. Precipitation of sulphates 

by contact with barium salts would fulfil Palmer's 

specification, but barium is one of the rare earths, and 

its wholesale distribution over a wide area in sufficient quantity to effect the change appears unlikely. 

Furthermore, precipitation of sulphates by barium 

in an alkaline bicarbonate solution is by no means 

complete. The lack of other explanation drives us 

back upon the hypothesis of substitutio~of carbonate 

for sulphate by interaction with hydrocarbons. Although such a hypothesis is unsupported by experimental evidence or chemical theory, there is nevertheless considerable circumstantial evidence to support it. 

The occurrence of sulphate-free waters in the oil 

measures where no sulphate-free waters of origin· are 

known to exist is perhaps the strongest and best 

known bit of evidence: Renick 77 has recorded an 

instance of apparent reduction of sulphate to sulphide 

and substitution of carbonate in the water system in 

shallow water wells of a nonoil area in Montana that 

carry methane, the methane-bearing, sulphate-free 

waters of some wells being in marked contrast to the 

methane-free, sulphate-bearing waters of other wells. 

Lindtrop 78 reports that in a region where the ground 

waters have a temperature of 170 to 190° F., in a well 

that had produced sulphate water with oil for four 

years, the sulphate was wholly replaced by carbonate. 

while the well was shut in for three and a half months. 

The original sulphate character of the well water 

gradually returned on pumping and was completely 

reestablished after pumping for two days. He says: 

77 Renick, B. C., Some geochemical relations of ground water and associated 

natural gas in the Lance formation, Montana: Jour. Geology, vol. 32, pp. 668-684, 

1924. 

78 Lindtrop, N. '1'., Outline of water problems in New Grosny oil field, Russia: 

Am. Assoc. Petroleum Geologists Bull., vol. 11, No. 10, 1927. 

Not only in this well, but in some others also, it could be observed that the waters from the different sands are sometimes 

sulphate, sometimes reduced, but always the amount of reacting 

value of acids and the ratio are practically the same. 

In discussing six aquifers from which analyses are 

shown, he says: 

In each horizon, practically, there are two kinds of watersulphate and reduced waters. 

Bastin 79 reports the finding of sulphate-reducing 

bacteria in oil-field waters and attributes the reduction 

of sulphates to the action of these bacteria. His results are suggestive but inconclusive and at best afford 

only circun1stantial evidence of the activity at depth 

of these organisms, whose ability .to reduce sulphates 

(usually with precipitation of sulphur or sulphides) is 

well known and is particularly noticeable in the cooling 

waters of springs whose high temperatures effectually 

negative the suggestion of subsurface bacterial activity. 

Except, perhaps, in the cooler waters of idle wells, the 

sulphate reduction in waters cited from Lindtrop is 

likewise apparently accomplished at temperatures that 

strongly suggest bacterial sterility. Whether the exchange of su1phate for carbonate is purely chemical, 

with or without one or more catalysts, or is aided or 

initiated by bacteria, there can be little doubt that it 

takes place under ground, and considerable reliance 

can be placed upon it ·for an explanation of the sulphate-free character of most waters of the Salt CreekTeapot uplift. 

In the Salt Creek field hydrogen sulphide is practically absent in the Frontier sands, though pyrites is 

reported in the formation. Does this mineral sulphide 

represent one end product· of acid exchange? In some 

of the lower oil-bearing strata pyrites is reported, and 

in the Sundance and Tensleep sands hydrogen sulphide 

in considerable quantity is also reported. In these 

sands (see Tables 12 and 13) a fairly uniform proportional chloride content in the waters, with carbonate 

and sulphate supplementing each other in inverse 

degree to make up the balance, adds a further bit of 

circumstantial evidence supporting the hypothesis of 

some mechanism for acid exchange and suggests that 

it is even now in operation in these sands. 

There is some little evidence that the ocean water 

that originally saturated them, or salts deposited from 

ocean water, have affected the waters of oil-bearing 

sands at Salt Creek. The common occurrence of 

traces of iodine and the increasing proportion of chloride on approach to the oil pools are both strongly 

suggestive of marine influence. The sulphate and 

magnesium content of sea water are not in evidence, 

however, these substances apparently having been removed from the water solution by some of the methods 

herein discussed. Ocean water, so modified, would be 

79 Bastin, E. S., The problem of the natural reduction or sulphates: Am. Assoc. 

Petroleum Geologists Bull., vol. 10, No. 12, 1926. 
WATERS OF THE SALT CREEK-TEAPOT DOME UPLIFT 53 

essentially a solution of sodium chloride and would 

have precisely the san1e effect on circulating. waters of 

the oil n1easures with approach to a zone of stagnation 

as has hereinbefore been noted with particular reference to waters of the "First Wall Creek sand." 

Stephenson and Palmer 80 have provided an interesting con1parison that suggests a water history similar 

to that of son1e of the W ymning . oil fields, and in 

Table 14 and Figure 19 are shown analyses of water 

fro1n the W ateree River and from two deep wells at 

Charleston taken from Paln1er's paper. The Wateree 

River at Camden, S. C., has flowed over the predmninantly feldspathic rocks of the Piedmont Plateau, and its water is in consequence primary alkaline. It contains, however, appreciable amounts of 

calciun1, magnesium, and sulphate. It is, on the 

whole, similar to the water of the Shoshone River at 

Cody, Wyo. Water of the Piedmont Plateau, of 

which the Wateree River is representative, is regarded 

by Stephenson and Palmer as the water of origin of 

the Charleston wells, just as waters of the igneous 

core of westward-lying mountain masses,. of which the 

Shoshone River is representative, are regarded by the 

writer as the waters of origin of the greater part of the 

oil-field waters at the Salt Creek and Teapot don1es. 

The water of the 1 ,260-foot Charleston well, though 

more dilute, is in character substantially like the 

average water of the "Second Wall Creek sand." The 

water of the 2,007-foot Charleston well, though more 

dilute, is substantially the same in character as water 

frmn the "Lakota" or "First Wall Creek sand." 

Waters from the Piedmont Plateau flow into the Cretaceous formations of the Atlantic· Coastal Plain, as 

waters fron1 the mountain masses of Wyoming flow 

into the Cretaceous formations that are oil bearing at 

Salt Creek and the Teapot dome. Both groups of 

waters undergo similar changes, doubtless mix to a 

nunor degree with originally included sea water, and 

emerge at the wells substantially free from calcium, 

magnesiun1, and sulphate. In the Charleston wells 

green sand and other silicates capable of softening 

water by base exchange were encountered. The explanations presented for the practical.absence of calcium 

and Inagnesium in Salt Creek oil-field waters may 

apparently serve for the similar condition in the 

Charleston well waters. The cause of loss of sulphate, 

whether derived from the fresh water of origin or from 

sea water, can not be explained on the basis of known 

facts. It is by no means unlikely that the same 

explanation will serve for Wyoming and South Carolina, though Charleston is not in an oil country and 

there is no suggestion that the Charleston well waters 

have encountered oil. They may have encountered 

methane and doubtless have been in contact with 

so Stephenson, L. W., A deep well at Charleston, S.C.: U.S. Geol. Survey Prof. 

Paper 90, pp. 69-90, 1915. Palmer, Chase, Mineralogy of waters from artesian wells 

at Charleston, S. C.; Idem, pp. 9o-94. 

organic matter of various kinds within the Cretaceous 

sediments. . 

To summarize, the subsurface waters of the Salt 

Creek-Teapot uplift appear to have been derived 

from rainfall and the normal leaching of igneous 

rocks; to have been concentrated by passage through 

sand derived from igneous rocks, probably to some 

extent by evaporation incident to escaping gas, and by 

leaching of salt deposits or mixing with brines more or 

less coincident with the oil pools; to have had sodium 

substituted for at least a part of their content·of calcium 

and magnesium by the action of base-exchange silicates; to have suffered some deposition of calcium by 

reason of deficiency of carbon dioxide resulting from 

escaping gas or possibly from the changes incident to 

sulphate reduction; and to have had their sulphate 

removed in whole or in part by reduction and carbonate 

substitution through contact with hydrocarbons. 

RELATION OF WATERS TO AREA OF OIL OCCURRENCE 

The fact that the areas of the three main oil pools 

("First Wall Creek," "Second Wall Creek," and 

"Lakota") vary with the concentration of the waters 

found in the oil-bearing sands is of more than casual 

interest. It is natural to surmise that· the differences 

in concentration follow differences in freedom of water 

movement and that where water movement is most 

free migrating oil has been swept past the trapping 

dome or, after being trapped, has been partly removed 

by water movement. In the "First Wall Creek sand" 

oil occ·urs 150 feet lower in the northeastern portion of 

the pool than in th~ southwestern portion, suggesting 

that with less vigorous water movement the oil pool 

would have been greater in area by the ring. corresponding to about 150 feet of structural depth. These 

considerations encourage speculation. The relation 

between pool area and concentration value of water 

in the three main producing sands of the Salt Creek 

field may be expressed approximately by the equation 

A=0.11r2+ 1,000, in which A is the pool area in acres 

and r is the average concentration value in parts per 

million. The values of A from this equation for given 

values of r for the several sands in the Salt Creek field 

are as follows: 

"First Wall Creek"_______________________ 186 

"Second W.all Creek"______________________ 430 

" Third Wall Creek " __ . ______ ...: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 560 

"Muddy"________________________________ 281 

"Dakota"________________________________ 392 

"Lakota"________________________________ 104 

Morrison ______________ ·___________________ 406 

Sundance-------------~------------------ 299 Tensleep_ _ __ _____ _ _ _ _ _ __ __ __ _ _ __ _ _ ___ ___ _ 106 

A 

. 4, 800 

21,000 

35,000 

9, 700 

18,000 

2,200 

19,000 

11,000 

2, 200 

These figures should not, of course, be taken too 

seriously. If the values of A have any significance 

whatever it is merely that, if the soluble. materials of 
54 GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS IN NAVAL PETROLEUM RESERVE NO.3, WYOMING 

the sands are essentially alike, water movement is such 

in the Sait Creek field that any oil accumulated within 

the areas indicated would probably not be removed 

by water circulation .. 

Moreover, the concentration values assumed for 

most of the sands are based on meager data and even 

if otherwise acceptable as indices of pool area would 

nevertheless be only suggestive, because of the great 

cha:nce for error in the values used. 

The "Third Wall Creek sand" has been found to be 

thin and notably irregular and, regardless of area, is 

not likely to be a major producer. The "Muddy" and 

"Dakota" sands and associated shales have yielded a 

considerable volume of oil in the field but are also thin 

and lenticular and not likely to be great producers. 

A few wells have reached the Sundance, and although 

oil has been found in this formation, there is little 

indication that it will be highly productive over the 

area of 11,000 acres mentioned above. 

Perhaps the most interesting feature of the foregoing speculation is the suggestion that the Tensleep 

sand may have an oil pool about the size of the "Lakota" pool. The Tensleep has been reached by only 

one well in the field, and in this well a strong flow of 

hot water but no oil was encountered. In this well, 

which lies outside the line of clean oil for the "Lakota" 

pool, the "Lakota" water encountered had a concentration value of 119, and the Tensleep water had a 

concentration value of 106. From these values the 

formula would suggest a smaller area for the Tensleep than for the "Lakota," or perhaps 2,000 acres. 

The character of Tensleep water, however, is rather 

suggestive of the absence of oil. 81 

In view of the water-bearing character of the "First 

Wall Creek sand" in the Teapot dome, the table 

suggests strongly that the "Lakota," Tensleep, and 

probably some other sands would also be free from 

oil. in that field. 

st In 1930, about three years after the above statement was written, a second 

well was drilled to the Tensleep sandstone in the Salt Creek field and encountered 

commercial quantities of oil in it. The structural relations of the two wells give 

strong ·confirmation of the suggestion that the oil pool now known to exist in the 

Tensleep may be of about the size of the • 'Lakota" pool. 
TABLES 

In the following tables, for constituents unreported the analyses showed no more than a trace. 

Source 

Na 

Castle Creek, June 1, 1924 ____________ · 577 

Castle Creek, Dec. 1, 1925 ____________ 1, 436 

Salt Creek, June 16, 1923______________ 720 

Salt Creek, Apr. 30, 1923______________ 71 

Pond in NE. X sec. 24, T. 40 N., R. 

79 w----------------------------- 35 

Pond in NE. X sec. 27, T. 40 N., R. 

79 w----------------------------- 213 

North Wyo______________________________ Platte River at Fort Laramie, 40 

TABLE 6.-Analyses of water from surface sources a 

Reacting values 

Constituents (parts per million) 

Parts per million Per cent 

I I - I I ConcenMg I Ca I Cl I SOt !HCOa Na Mg Ca Cl SOt HCOa tration Na Mg I Ca I Cl I SOt IHCOa 

j value 

-----------~----j-~--

103 148 20 1, 811 152 25. 1 8; 5 7. 4 0. 6 37. 7 2. 5 81. 8 30. 6 10. 4 9. 0 0. 7 46. 2 3. 1 

231 368 136 4, 187 535 62. 5 19. o 18. 4 3. 8 87. 3 8. 8 199. 8 31. 3 9. 5 9. 2 1. 9 I 43. 7 4. 4 

223 312 24 3, 100 338 31. 3 18. 3 15. 6 .. 7 64. 5 5. 5 1135. 9 24. 0 14. 0 12. 0 . 5 45. 6 3. 9 

28 98 12 400 98 3. 1 2. 3 4. 9 . 3 8. 3 1. 6 20. 5 15. 0 11. 2 23. 8 1. 6 40. 6 7. 8 

17 43 

59 '92 

18 69 

8 

13 

19 

165 78 

770 142 

150 150 

1.5 

9. 3 

1.7 

. 2 3. 4 1. 3 9. 9 15. 0 13. 8 21. 2 2. 3 34. 8 12. 9 

. 4 16. 0 2. 3 37. 4 24. 7 13. 0 12. 3 1. 0 42. 8 6. 2 

. 5 3. 1 2. 5 12. 7 13. 1 11. 1 25. 8 4. 4 25. 5 20. 1 

Average __ --_.; __ ---_---- ____ -.- -1- ____ -1- _ ---1- _ ---1-----1-- __ ---1-----1 22. 1 I 

1.4 

4. 8 

1.5 

9. 0 

2. 1 

4. 6 

3. 4 

8.8 1.0 36.2 3. 7 80. 8 27.7 11. 3 11..0 1.2 44. 3 1. 4. 5 

· "North _Platte River from U. S. Geol. Survey Water-Supply Paper 274, 1911; all others from Young, H. W., and Estabrook, E. L., Waters of the Salt Creek field, Wyo.: Petroleum development and technology in 1925, Am. Inst. Mm. and Met. Eng., 1926. 

TABLE 7.-Analyses of water from wells of the Shannon sand a 

Reacting values 

Location Constituents (parts per million) 

Well 

Parts per million Per cent 

Sec. T. N. R. W. Na Mg Ca Cl SOt HC03 C03 Na Mg. Ca Cl SOt Hgga + ~~~~~~- Na Mg Ca Cl SOt Hgga+ 3 value 1 

_..;.._ ____ , __ ----------- ---------------------------------------

6 ______________ 33. 40 79 1, 107 ---- 6 20 1, 868 462 43 48. 1 ----- 0. 3 0. 6 38. 9 9. 0 96.9 49. 7 ------ 0. 3 0. 6 40. 1 9. 3 

22A ___________ 24 39 79 1, 825 ____ 18 177 2, 896 _______ 451 79.4 _____ . 9 5. 0 60.3 15.0 160.6 49.4 ______ . 6 3. 1 37.6 9. 3 

21A ___________ 15 40 79 1,057 80 30 52 1,730 880 66 46.0 6.6 1.5 1.5 36.0 16.6 108.2 42.5 6.1 1.4 1.4 33.3 15.3 

1A ____________ 19 39 78 2, 133 20 6 324 2, 552 1, 452 260 92. 7 1. 6 . 3 9. 1 53. 1 32.5 189.3 49.0 . 8 . 2 4. 8 28. 1 17. 1 

2______________ 3 39 79 326 88 101 20 630 . 774 ----- 14. 2 7. 2 5. 0 . 6 13. 1 12. 7 52. 8 26. 8 13. 7 9. 5 1. 1 24. 8 24. 1 

105A __________ 29 39 7'8 1, 282 26 16 691 815 ------- 669 55.7 2. 1 . 8 19.5 17.0 22.3 117.4 47.5 1. 8 . 7- 16.6 14.4 19.0 

403A __________ 20 39 78 939 ________ 425 307 ------- 689 40.8 ----- _____ 12.0 6. 4 23.0 82.2 50.0 ------ _____ 14.5 7. 7 27.8 

106A b _________ 29

1

39 78 1, 376 ________ 603 ------- 2, 294 156 59. 8 __________ 17. 0 ------ 42. 8 119. 6 50. 0 ------ _____ 

1

14. 2 ______ 35. 8 

Average __ -------- ------- ____ ----- ------- ------- _____ 54. 6 2. 2 1. 1 8. 2 28. 1 21. 8 116. 0 47. 1 1. 9 1. 0 7. 0 24. 2 18. 8 

___ ___:__.:_____:_____.__ __ -'-1 _____:_ _ _: __ __.,.__ --· ·-·-·---- - ---

"Analyses made by Midwest Refining Co. and U.S. Geol. Survey and furnished by J. W. Steele, U.S. Geol. Survey, Casper, Wyo. & Source from Shannon as reported doubtful as a result of subsequent study of well history by E. A. Swedenborg. 

~ ~-

~­

'(f1 

0 

l%j 

8 

~ 

t;J 

r:; 

E3 

(") 

~ t;J 

~ ~ 

'"d 

0 

8 

t:1 

0 

~ q 

'"d 

t'4 

1-4 

~ 

<:.71 

<:.71 
TABLE 8.---:Analyses of water from wells of the "First Wall Creek sand" a 

Reacting values 

Location Constituents (parts per million) 

No. Well 

Parts per million 

HCOa+ Concen· 

Sec. T.N. R.W. Na Mg Ca Cl so4 HCOs CO a Na Mg Ca Cl S04 tration Na Mg CO a value 

- ----- ---------------------------

1 33 A __________ 6 39 78 1, 612 ---- ---- 139 ---- 4;036 ----- 70. 1 ----- ----- 3. 9 ----- 66. 2 140 50. 0 ----- 2 4 A ___________ 6 39 78 2, 491 5 8 240 42 6, 194 ----- 108' 0. 41 0. 40 6. 8 0. 87 102 21'8 49. 6 0. 19 3 36 A __________ 11 40 79 2, 058 11 3 204 ---- 5;096 40 89. 5 . 90 . 15 5. 8 ----- 84. 8 181 49. 4 . 50 4 13 A ________ .:._ 11 39 79 2, 304 ---- ---- 229 ---- 5, 260 216 100 ----- ----- 6. 5 ----- 93. 4 200 50. 0 ----- 5 3 A ___________ 11 40 79 1, 791 ---- ---- 185 ---- 4, 115 134 77 .. 9 5. 2 ----- 71. 9 155 50.0 ----- 6 26 A __________ 15 40 79 1,268 6 4 140 ---- 3, 163 ----- 55. 1 . 491 . 20 4. 0 ----- 51. 8 112 -:\:9. 4 . 44 

7 13 A~--------- 11 40 79 1, 547 19 37 180 ---- 4,000 ----- 67.3 1. 56 1. 85 5. 1 ----- 65. 6 141 47. 6 1.11 8 25 A __________ 27 40 79 2,936 ---- ---- 344 ---- 7, 200 ----- 128 . ----- ----- .9. 7 ----- 118 256 50.l ____ 9 12 A __________ 1 39 79 3,044 ---- ---- 390 ---- 7, 460 ----- 132 11.0 ----- 122 265 50. 0 ____ ·_ 

10 29 A __________ 14 40 79 1, 122 15 6 149 ---- 2, 736 45 48. 8 1. 23 . 30 4. 2 ----- 46. 3 101 48. 5 1. 22 

11 19 A __________ 14 40 79 1, 045 4 5 134 78 2, 181 147 45. 4 . 33 . 25 3. 8 1. 62 40. 6 92 49.4 . 36 

12 13 A __________ 15 40 79 1, 184 10 10 153 ---- 2, 866 ----- 51. 5 . 82 . 50 4. 3 ----- 47. 0 104 48.7 . 78 

13 33 A _________ ~ NE.U· 11 40 79 1~ 286 7 3 170 58 2,867 110 55.9 . 58 . 15 4. 8 1. 21 50. 7 113 49. 4 . 51 

14 19 A __________ 34 40 79 1, 295 12 4 '174 2, 832 186 56. 3 . 99 . 20 4. 9 ----- 52. 6 115 49. 0 . 86 

15 19 A __________ 11 40 79 1, 528 3 8 204 45 3, 684 ----- 66. 4 . 25 . 40 5. 8 . 94 60. 4 134 49. 5 . 18 

16 31 A __________ 11 40 79 1,330 2 3 181 ---- 3, 186 24 57.8 . 16 . 15 5. 1 ----- 53. 0 116 49. 7 . 14 . 17 4 A ___________ SE.U 31 40 78 2,348 14 5 323 ---- 5, 760 ----- 102 1. 15 .. 25 9. 1 ----- 94.4 207 49. 3 . 56 

18 22 A __________ 31 40 78 2, 510 ---- 348 ---- 6,065 ----- 109 ----- . 9. 8 ----- 99. 4 218 50. 0 ----- 19 27 A __________ 6 39 78 2, 835 5 7 400 ---- 6, 878 ----- 123 . 41 .• 35 11. 3 ----- 113 248 49. 7 . 16 

20 6 A _______ .. ___ 11 40 79 1, 272 6 8 181 ---- 2,645 232 55. 3 . 49 . 40 5. 1 ----- 51. 1 112 49. 2 . 44 

21 26 A __________ 3 39 79 1,889 4---- 266 20 4, 150 195 82. 1 . 33 ----- 7. 5 . 42 . 74.5 165 49. 8 . 20 

22 16 A __________ 30 40 78 2, 537 3 6 364 ---- 6, 100 18 110 . 25 . 30 10. 3 ----- 101 221 49.8 .11 

23 7 A ___________ 30 40 78 2, 695 ---- ---- 386 ---- 6, 215 135 117 10. 9 ----- 106 234 50. 0 

24 30 A __________ 3 39 79 1, 288 5 16 186 99 3,045 ----- 56. 0 . 41 . 80 5. 2 2. 06 49. 9 . 114 48.9 . 36 

25 15 A __________ 30 40 78 2, 780 13 ---- 403 ---- 6,350 188 121 1. 07 ----- 11. 4 ----- 110 244 49. 6 . 44 

26 31 A __________ 1 39 79 2,036 7 8 298 ---- 4,950 ----- 88. 5 ~ 58 . 40 8. 4 ----- 81. 1 179 49. 5 . 32 

27 35 A __________ 30 40 78 2, 978 ---- ---- 432 ---- 7, 152 129 12. 2 ----- 117 258 50. 0 ----- 28 13 A __________ SE.%: 31 40 78 2, 293 ---- ---- 337 5, 350 85 99.·7 9. 5 ----- 90. 5 200 50. 0 ----- 29 13 A __________ NW.U31 40 78 2, 290 10 12 343 ---·- 5, 540 ----- 99. 6 . 82 . 60 9. 7 ----- 90. 8 201 49. 3 . 40 

30 15 A~--------- 31 40 78 2, 382 5---- 356 ---- 5, 720 ----- 104 . 41 ----- 10. 0 ----- 93. 8 208 49. 8 . 30 

31 6 A----~------ 31 40 78 2,590 ---- ---- 386 ---- 6, 210 ----- 113 ----- ----- 10. 9 ----- 102 226 50. 0 ----- 32 33 A __________ 31 40 78 2,317 ---- ---- 346 ---- 5, 552 ----- 101 ----- ----- 9. 8 ----- 91. 0 202 50. 0 ----- 33 3 A ___________ sw.u 6 39 78 2, 521 ---- ---- 376 ---- 6,042 ----- 110 ----- 10. 6 ----- 99. 0 220 50. 0 ----- 34 24 A_ ~ ________ 31 40 78 2, 540 ---- 4 380 ---- 6,086 ----- 110 . 20 10. 7 ----- 99. 7 221 49. 9 ----- 35 18 A __________ 31 40 78 2, 540 38 14 398 6, 270 no·· 3. 13 . 70 11. 2 ----- 103 228 48. 3 1. 37 

36 31 A __________ 30 40 78 2, 595 19 10 406 ---- 6, 110 98 113 1. 56 . 50 11.4 ----- 103 230 49. 1 . 68 

37 3 A ___________ NE.U 6 39 78 3, 008 ---- ---- 466 ---- 7, 174 ----- 131 13. 1 ----- 118 262 50. 0 ----- 38 22 A __________ 1 39 79 3,098 20 8 493 ---- 7,488 ----- 135 1. 64 . 40 13. 9 ----- 123 274 49. 21 . 60 39 18 A __________ 6 39 78 2.420 11 ____ 388 ---- 5, 810 ----- 105 . 90 ----- 10. 9 ----- 95. 2 212149. 6 . 43 40 34 A __________ 18 40 78 1, 957 8 5 312 134 4, 543 ----- 85. 1 . 66 . 25 8. 8 2. 79 74. 5 172 49. 5 . 38 

41 24 A __________ 1 39 79 2, 814 ---- 3 452 ---- 6, 277 208 122 . 15 12. 7 ----- 110 245 49. 9 - - - - - 42 21 A __________ 31 40 78 3, 043 21 489 57 6, 960 169 132 1. 73 ----- 13. 8 1. 19 120 268149. 4 . 65 43 19 A __________ 1 39 79 3, 125 ---- 496 ---- 7, 015 195 136 14. 0 ----- 122 272 50. 0 -- --- 44 3 A ___________ 30 40 78 2, 290 17 30 384 20 5, 585 99. 6 1. 40 1. 50 10. 8 . 42 91. 5 205 48. 6 . 68 

45 36 A __________ 30 40 78 2, 45~ 

---~[~~~ 402 ---- 5, 592 121 107 ----- 11. 3 ----- 95.7 214150. 0----- 46 24 A _____ .:. ____ 27 40 79 1, 684 280 ---- 4, 036 ----- 73. 2 . 33 . 15 7. 9 ----- 66. 2 148 49. 7 . 22 

47 12 A __________ 22 40 79 1, 119 188 ---- 2,410 130 48. 7 . 49 ----- 5. 3 ----- 43. 8 9.8 49. 5 . 50 

48 34 A __________ 3 39 79 1, 296 6 5 218 ---- 2, 832 139 56. 4 . 49 . 25 6. 2----- 51. 0 114 49. 41 . 43 

49 1 A ___________ 34 40 79 2, 123 ---- ---- 354 ---- 4,382 319 92. 3 ----- ----- 10. 0 ----- 82.4 185 50.l ____ 50 19 A __________ 6 39 78 1, 773 15 30 305 56 4, 284 ----- 77. 1 1. 23 1. 50 8. 6 1. 17 70. 2 160 48. 3 . 77 

51 26 A~ _________ 11 40 79 1, 253 10 40 220 45 2, 962 60 54. 5 . 82 2. 00 6. 2 . 94 50. 5 115 47. 5 . 76 p2 1 A ___________ 30 40 78 2, 286 4:4: 40 .. ~10 ---- 5, 690----- 99, 4 3. 62. ~- 00 ll. 6 ----- 93. 3 210 47. 3 1. 72 

Per cent 

Ca Cl 

----

2. 8 

0. 18 3. 1 . 08 3. 2 

----- 3. 2 

----- 3. 4 . 18 3. 5 

1. 31 3. 6 

-----1 3. 8 

4.1 . 30 4.1 . 27 4. 1 . 47 4.2 . 13 4. 2 . 17 4. 3 . 30 4. 3 . 13 4. 4 . 12 4. 4 

----- 4. 5 . 14 4. 5 . 36 4. 6 

----- 4. 6 . 14 4. 6 

4. 6 . 70 4. 6 

----- 4. 7 . 22 4. 7 

----- 4 .. 7 

----- 4. 8 . 30 4. 8 

----- 4. 8 

----- 4. 8 

----- 4. 8 

----- 4. 8 . 09 4. 8 . 31 4. 9 . 22 5. 0 

----- 5. 0 . 15 5. 1 

5. 1 . 14 5. 1 . 06 5. 2 

----- 5. 2 

5. 2 . 73 5. 3 

5. 3 . 10 5. 3 

5. 4 . 22 5. 4 

5. 4 . 94 5. 4 

1. 74 5. 4 . 95 5. 5 

so4 

---

-----

0. 40 

-----

-----

-----

-----

-----

-----

-----

-----

1. 76 

-----

1. 07 

----- . 70 

-----

-----

-----

-----

----- . 25 

-----

-----

1. 80 

-----

-----

-----

-----

-----

-----

-----

-----

-----

-----

-----

-----

-----

-----

-----

1. 62 

----- . 44 

----- . 20 

-----

-----

-----

-----

----- . 73 

. 81 

-----

4 

2 

8 

7 

7 

0 

6 

6 

5 

5 

4 

2 

4 

4 

6 

3 

3 

3 

2 

2 

2 

2 

2 

2 

2 

0 

0 

9 

9 

3 

8 

4 

8 

5 

7 

7 

6 

6 

6 

9 

8 

5 

01 

o:> 

§ 

0 

~ 

0 

0 

H 

0 

0 

0 

z 

t;; 

H 

~ 0 

z 

Ul 

H 

z 

z 

~ ~ 

~ 

~ 0 

~ c:l 

~ 

~ Ul 

t:r:l 

~ 

< t:r:l 

z 

0 

~~ 

~ 0 

~ H 

z 

0 
53 5 A ___________ ! 6 39 78 2, 040' ____ , ____ 357----14, 800-----1 88. 7 -----'-----' 10. 1'-----' 78. 7 178 50. 0 --.-6i!===== 5. 7----- 44. 3 

54 16 A __________ 31 40 78 2, 591· 17---- 466---- 6, 150 221 113 1. 401-----' 13. f _____ i 102 229 49. 4 5. 7_ ----- 44. 3 

55 4 T ___________ l 20 39 78 832. 8 10 154 50 1, 994-----1 36. 2 . 66 . 50 4. 3 1. 04: 32. 7 75 48. 4 . 88 . 67 5. 7 1. 36 42. 9 

56 31 A __________ , 6 39 78 1, 779, 42 14 332---- 4, 404----- 77. 4 3. 45 . 70 9. 4! _____ j 72. 2 163 47. 5 2. 11 . 43 5. 8 ----- 44.2 

57 7 A ___________ 

1 

22 40 79 1, 2771 5 6 237---- 2, 786 116 55.5 . 41 . 30 6. 71----- 1 49. 6 112 49. 4 . 37 . 27 5. 9 ----- 44. 1 

58 1 A ___________ 19 40 78 1, 785i 11 10 345---- 4, 128 54~ 77. 6 . 90 . 501 9. 7----- 69. 5 158 49. 1 . 57 . 32 6. 1 ----- 43. 9 

59 7 A~---------- 6 39 78 2, 568i_--- 481 ____ 5, 416 282 112 ----- ----- 13. 6 ----- 98. 2 224 50. 0 ----- ----- 6. 1 ----- 43.9 

60 6 A ___________ 7 39 78 1, 911 10 9 363 74 4, 030 185 83. 1 . 82 . 45' 10. 2 1. 54 72.3 168 49.2 . 49 . 27 6. 1 . 92 43. 0 

61 13 A __________ 19 40 78 2, 022---- 3 384 ---- 4,462 122 87.9 ----- . 15 10. 8 ----- 77. 2 176 49. 9 ----- . 08 6. 1 ----- 43. 9 

62 12 A __________ 13 40 79 2, 1911 7---- 424 15 4, 105 487 95.3 . 58 ----- 12. 0 . 31 83. 5 192 49. 7 . 30 ----- 6. 2 . 16 43.6 

63 11A __________ 6 39 78 2, 1831 55 124 465 73 3, 673 928 94. 9 4. 52 6. 19 13. 1 1. 52 91. 1 211 44. 9 2. 14 2. 93 6. 2 . 72 43. 1 

64 4 A ___________ SW. X 31 40 78 3, 122 10 5 605 30 7, 270 ----- 136 . 82 . 25 17. 1 . 62 119 274 49. 6 . 30 . 09 6. 3 . 23 43. 5 

65 F 6 A _________ 19 40 78 1, 762' ____ 20 352 4, 130 ----- 76. 6 ----- 1. 00 9.9 ----- 67. 7 155 49. 4 ----- . 64 6. 4 ----- 43. 6 

66 6 A ___________ 30 40 78 2, 5771 7 11 516 ---- 5, 660 170 112 . 58 . 55 14. 6 ----- 98. 5 226 49. 5 . 26 . 24 6. 5 ----- 43. 5 

67 30 A __________ 31 40 78 3, 007---- 602 ---- 6,078 430 131 17. 0 ----- 114 262 50.0 ----- ----- 6. 5 43. 5 

68 2 w ___________ '11 39 79 1, 022 8 3 209 ---- 2, 148 125 44.4 . 66 . 15 5.9 ----- 39.4 90 49. 1 . 73 . 17 6. 5 ----- 43. 5 

69 22 A __________ 18 40 78 1, 664---- 335 3, 457 172 72. 4 ----- ----- 9. 4 ----- 62. 4 144 50. 0 ----- ----- 6. 5 ----- 43. 5 

70 2 A ___________ 13 39 79 8731 6 10 181 35 1, 274 371 38.0 . 49 . 50 5. 1 . 73 33. 3 78 48. 7 . 63 . 64 6. 5 . 93 42. 6 

71 21 A __________ 24 39 79 873 ---- ---- 177 1, 604 200 38.0 

--:-~~1= =~i6 5. 0 ----- 33.0 76 50. 0----- ----- 6. 6 ----- 43. 4 

72 14 A __________ 22 40 79 1,329 3---- 272 3,068 57.8 7. 7 ----- 50. 3 116 49. 8 . 20 ----- 6. 6 ----- 43. 4 ~ 1-3 73 14 A __________ 30 40 78 2,897 7 10 602 6, 310 188 126 17.0 ----- 109 253 49. 6 . 23 . 20 6. 7 ----- 43. 3 t:rJ 

74 1 A ___________ NE. X 25 40 79 2,958 25 ---- 626 6,900 129 2. 06----- 17. 7 ----- 113 262 49.2 . 79 ----- 6. 8 43. 2 ~ 

75 6 A ___________ 17 39 78 977 2 ___ ..: 209 2, 242 42. 5 . 16 5. 9 36. 7 85 49. 8 . 19 6. 9 43. 1 [/1 

---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- 76 34 A __________ 12 40 79 1,984 ---- ---- 433 ---- 4, 296 110 86. 3 ----- 12. 2 ----- 74. 1 173 50. 0 ----- ----- 7. 0 43.0 0 

77 8 A ___________ 17 39 78 846 6 10 188 40 1,557 184 36.8 . 49 . 50 5. 3 . 83 31. 6 76 48.7 . 65 . 66 7. 0 1. 10 41. 9 lo%j 

78 3 A ___________ 19 39 78 952 10---- 213 2, 116 45 41. 4 . 82 6. 0 36. 2 84 49. 0 . 97 ----- 7. 1 42. 9 1-3 ----- ----- ~ 79 21 A __________ 19 40 78 2, 895 6---- 633 . 25 6,090 232 126 . 49 ----- 17. 9 . 52 108 252 49.8 . 19 ----- 7. 1 . 21 42. 7 t:rJ so 401 T _________ 20 39 78 933 19 4 215 ---- 2,040 84 40. 6 1. 56 . 20 6. 1 ----- 36. 2 85 47. 9 1. 84 . 24 7. 2 ----- 42.8 [/1 

81 6 A ______ :_ ____ 22 40 79 1,051 8---- 241 ---- 2,053 209 45. 7 . 66 ----- 6. 8 ----- • 40.6 94 49. 3 .71 ----- 7. 2 ----- 42. 8 > 

82 30 A __________ 27 40 79 1, 674 12 16 391 3, 620 138 72. 8 . 99 . 80 11. 0 ----- 63. 9 149 48. 8 . 66 . 54 7. 3 42. 7 t-t 

1-3 83 103 A _________ 20 39 78 1,047 ---- ---- 231 82 1,977 115 45. 5 ----- ----- 6. 5 1.71 36.2 90 50. 0 ----- ----- 7. 3 1. 92 40. 8 

84 25 A __________ 18 40 78 1, 520 5 4 350 20 3, 209 116 66. 1 . 41 . 20 9. 9 . 42 56. 5 133 49. 5 . 31 . 15 7. 4 . 31 42. 3 0 

~ 85 31 A __________ NW. X 19 40 78 2, 722 15 4 639 ---- 6, 220 ----- 118 1. 23 . 20 18. 0 ----- 102 239 49.4 . 52 . 08 7. 5 ----- 42. 5 t:rJ 

86 36 A __________ 19 40 78 1,960 6---- 458 2, 730 840 85. 2 . 49 ----- 12. 9 ----- 72. 7 171 49. 7 . 29 ----- 7. 6 ----- 42.4 t:rJ 

87 32 A __________ 36 40 79 3, 696 7---- 875 28 8,300 161 . 58 24. 7 . 58 136 323 49. 8 . 17 ----- 7. 6 . 18 42.2 ~ ----- 88 32 A __________ 22 8 40 79 2, 131 ---- ---- 510 ---- 4, 790 ----- 92. 7 ----- ----- 14. 4 ----- 78. 5· 186 50. 0 ----- ----- 7. 7 ----- 42. 3 

89 3 A ___________ 36 40 79 3,459 13 8 830 7,840 150 1. 07 . 40 23. 4 128 303 49. 5 . 35 . 13 7. 7 42. 3 t:rJ ---- ----- ----- ----- > 90 21 A __________ 5 39 78 1, 225 6 6 300 ---- 2,596 93 53. 3 . 49 . 30 8. 5 ----- 45. 6 108 49. 3 . 46 . 28 7. 8 ----- 42. 2 ~ 

91 27 A __________ 12 40 79 2, 147 6 16 519 ---- 4,590 130 93.4 . 49 . 80 14. 6 ----- 79. 5 189 49. 3 . 26 . 42 7. 8 42. 2 0 ----- ~ 92 5 A ___________ 19 40 78 1, 440 ---- ---- 348 ---- 3, 221 --:292 62. 6 ---- ----- 9. 8 ----- 52.8 125 50.0 ----- ----- 7. 9 ----- 42. 1 

93 13 A ___________ SE. }~ 13 40 79 2, 711 14 665 5,528 118 1: 15 18. 8 100 238 49. 5 . 48 ----- 7. 9 42. 1 c; ---- ----- ----- ----- 0 94 25 A __________ 13 40 79 2,942 11 ---- 728 6,555 128 . 90 20.5 ----- 107 256 49. 6 . 35 ----- 8.0 ----- 42.0 ~ 95 4 A ____ ._ ______ 12 40 79 1,594 ---- 15 423 82 2, 718 482 69. 3 . 75 11. 9 1.71 60. 6 144 49. 5 ----- . 54 8. 0 1. 16 40.8 t:rJ 

96 25 T __________ 11 39 79 1,018 6---- 257 ---- 2, 290 ----- 44. 3 . 49 ----- 7. 2 ----- 37. 5 90 49.4 . 55 ----- 8. 1 ----- 41. 9 q 97 13 A __________ 24 40 79 2,.918 24 ---- 752 ---- 6, 600 22 127 1. 97 ----- 21. 2 ----- 109 259 49. 2 . 76 ----- 8. 1 ----- 41. 9 ~ 

98 36 A __________ 2 40 7911, 970---- ---- 502 ---- 3, 620 365 85. 7 ----- ----- 14. 2 ----- 71. 5 171 50. 0 ----- ----- 8. 3----- 41. 7 t-t 

1-4 

99 4 A ___________ 1 39 79 2, 382 15 3 620 4, 980 188 104 1. 23 . 15 17. 5 ----- 87. 9 211 49. 4 . 58 . 07 8. 3----- 41. 7 

100 31 A __________ sw. X 19 40 ~ 781 3, 325 7 --~- 845 60 7, 320 145 . 58 _.;., ___ 23.8 1. 25 120 291 49.8 . 20 ------ 8. 31 . 43 41. 3 

101 4 A_ _ ________ 19 40 78,1, 467 3---- 379 25 3, 198 ----- 63. 8 . 25 ----- 10. 7 . 52 52.4 128 49. 8 . 19 ----- 8. 4 . 41 41. 2 

102 19 A __________ 29 40 78 1, 148 4 40 320 158 1, 950 278 49. 9 . 33 2. 00 9. 0 3. 29 41. 3 106 47. 8 . 32 1. 92 8. 4 3. 08 38. 5 

103 24 A __________ 15 40 7911, 362---- ---- 358 2,478 255 59. 2 ----- ----- 10. 1 ----- 49. 1 118 50. 0 ----- ----- 8. 6 ----- 41. 4 

104 1 A ___________ 13 39 79 871 4 17 - 237 25 1, 654 141 37. 9 . 33 . 85 6. 7 . 52 31. 8 78 48. 5 . 42 1. 08 8. 6 . 67 40. 7 

105 11 T __________ 7 39 781 1, 059 8 6 287 1,995 192 46.0 . 66 . 30 8. 1 ----- 39. 1 94 49. 0 . 70 . 32 8. 6 ----- 41. 4 

106 24 A __________ SW}~ 12 40 791 2, 348---- ---- 620 ---- 5, 170 ----- 102 ----- ----- 17. 5 ----- 84. 7 204 50.0 ----- ----- 8. 6 ----- 41. 4 

107 19 A __________ 12 40 79 2, 094---- ---- 561 ---- 4,490 48 91.0 15. 8 ----- 75.2 182 50.0 ----- ----- 8.7 ----- 41. 3 

108 8 A ___________ 36 40 7913, 340 ---- 123 952 ---- 7,660 145 -----

=~-=~;1 26. 8 ----- 126 304 48. 0 ----- 2. 03 8. 8 ----- 41.2 

109 9 A ___________ 18 39 78 1, 051 ____ ---- 285 2, 231 32 45. 7 8. 0 ----- 37.7 91 50.0 ----- ----- 8. 9 ----- 41. 1 

110 30 A __________ 12 40 79 1,717 15 ____ , 479 3, 379 212 74. 7 1. 23 13. 5 ----- 62.5 152 49.2 . 81 ----- 8. 9 ---- 41. 1 

111 21 A __________ 24 40 791 3, 410---- ---- 943 7,425 148 26. 6 ----- 122 297 50.0 ----- ----- 8.9 ----- 41. 1 

112 15 A __________ 22 40 791 I, 554-__ T ___ 441 3, 170 121 67. 6 12. 4 ----- 56. 0 136 50. 0-----

::~~~~ 9. 0 ----- 41. 0 

113 5 A ___________ 27 40 79, 1, 995 8 4 585 ---- 3, 305 510 86. 7 . 66 . 20 15. 7----- 71. 21 174 49. 5 . 38 9. 0 ----- 41. 0 

114 13 A __________ 36 40 791 2, 950 ---- ---- 826 ---- 4,984 696 128 ---------- 23. 3----- 1o5 I 2561 50. 0----- 9. 1 ----- 40. 9 

115 23 A __________ 24/ 40 79 1, 856 16 25 5441 42 3, 710 198 80. 7 1. 32 1. 25 15. 3 . 87 67.4 167 48. 5 . 79 . 75 9. 2 . 52 40. 3 

a Analyses made by Midwest Refining Co. and U.S. Geol. Survey and furnished by J. W. Steele, U.S. Geol. Survey, Casper, Wyo. 

Ot 

" 
TABLE B.-Analyses of water from. wells of the "First Wall Creek sand"-Continued 

Reacting values 

Location Constituents (parts per million) 

Parts per million 

No. Well 

I so, HCOa+ ConcenSec. T.N. R.W. Na Mg Ca Cl so, HCOs COs Na Mg Ca Cl tration Na Mg COs value 

----

116 24A __________ 14 40 79 1,792 ---- 15 525 72 3, 115 339 77. 9 ----- 0. 75 14. 8 1. 50 62. 4 157 49. 5 

117 35 A __________ 12 40 79 2, 216 17 20 663 ---- 4,645 112 . 96.4 1. 40 1. 00 18. 7 ----- 79. 8 197 48. 8 0. 7i 

118 24 A __________ NWX 12 40 79 2,220 11 2 654 ---- 4,780 96.5 . 90 . 10 18.4 ----- 78.3 194 49. 5 . 46 

119 5 A __ --------- 12 40 79 1,916 ---- ---- 576 3,500 294 83.3 ----- ----- 16. 2 ----- 67.2 167 50.0 ----- 120 16 A __________ · 13 40 79 2,996 15 8 .912 ---- 6, 135 169 130 1. 23 . 40 25.7 ----- 107 264 49.4 . 45 

121 3 A ___________ sw. 7~ 14 40 79 1,384 7 6 442 ---- 2, 852 56 60. 2 . 58 . 30 12. 5 ----- 48.6 122 49. 3 . 47 

122 34 A __________ 36 40 79 2,470 27 0 786 -~-- 5, 040 136 107 2. 22----- 22. 2 ----- 86. 9 218 49.0 1. 02 

123 24 A ______ - _ - _ 24 40 79 3,025 19 ---- 960 ---- 6, 500 ----- 132 1. 56----- 27. 1 107 268 49.3 . 70 

124 18 A-~-------- 22 40 79 877 17 6 292 ---- 1, 720 102 38. 1 1. 40 . 30 8. 21----- 31. 6 80 47. 9 ·1. 76 

125 4 A ___________ 27 . 40 79 1, 841 ____ ---- 600 32 3, 480 150 80. 0 ---------- 16. 9 . 67 62.0 160 50. 0-----

126 3 A ___________ 22 40 79 1,552 10 ---- 524 ---- 2, 600 328 67. 5 . 82----- 14.8 ----- 53. 5 137 49. 4 . 60 

127 1 A ___________ 14 40 79 2, 104 6 5 710 ---- 4, 417 ----- 91. 5 . 49 . 25 20. 0 ----- 72.4 185 . 49.6 . 27 

128 15 A __________ 25 40 79 3, 518 ---- 1, 218 ---- 6,850 218 153 ----- 34. 3 ----- 119 307 50. 0 -----

129 2 A ___________ 12 40 79 2, 134 115 20 824 4,645 112 92.8 9. 46 1. 00 23.2 ----- 79.8 206 45.0 4. 56 

130 17 A __________ 14 40 79 1,949 712 3,930 84. 7 -2:i4 20. 1 ----- 64.4 169 50.0 ----- 131 24 A _______ - - - 2 39 79 3, 760 26 15 1,410 7,675 163 . 75 39. 8 ----- 126 332 49. 1 . 65 

132 7 A----------- 12 40 79 1,881 705 3, 778 81. 8 19. 9 ----- 61. 9 164 50. 0 ----- 133 33 A ___ - _ - --- - SE.X 11 40 79 2, 220 ---- 40 866 54 4, 130 162 96.5 ----- 2. 00 24. 4 1. 12 73. 1 197 49. 0 ----- 134 25 A_· __ - - - - - - - 3 39 79 504 ---- ---- 218 872 104 21. 9 ----- ----- 6. 2 ----- 17. 8 46 50. 0 ----- 135 18 A __________ 13 . 40 79 2,943 17 12 1, 232 ---- 5, 770 ----- 128 1. 40 . 60 34.7 ----- 94.6 259 49. 2 . 54 

136 29 A ______ - - - - 2 39 79 3, 797 1, 571 7,380 165 44. 3 ----- 121 331 50. 0 ----- 137 1 A ___________ SE. X 25 40 79 2,071 15 7 884 3,540 265 90. 0 1. 23 . 35 24. 9 ------ 66. 8 183 49. 1 . 67 

138 34 A _____ - - - -- 13 40 79 3, 518 1, 502 6, 745 153 42. 4 ----- 111 307 50. 0 ----- 139 29 A ___ - - - - --- 36 40 79 2, 873 6 24 1, 293 5,820 11 125 . 49 1. 20 36. 5 ----- 95.8 259 49.3 . 20 

140 15 A __________ 27 40 79 1, 854 828 2,960 268 80. 6 23. 3 ----- 57.4 161 50. 0 ----- 141 15 A __________ 24 40 79 4,018 19 18 1, 910 7, 925 175 1. 56 . 90 53. 9 ----- 130 361 49. 3 . 44 

142 33 A ___ - - - - - - - 14 40 79 1,656 5 4 760 72 3,035 72.0 . 41 . 20 21. 4 1. 50 ·49. 7 145 49. 6 . 28 

143 3 A ___ ._ _______ NE.% 14 40 79 1,977 25 15 944 93 3,395 139 86. 0 2. 06 . 75 26.6 1. 94 60.2 178 48. 4 1. 16 

144 4 A ___________ 24 40 79 3,827 1,839 6,990 .J66 51. 9 ----- 115 333 50. 0 ----- 145 2L ___________ 26 40 79 1, 847 5 20 937 ---- 2,890 225 80. 3 ; 41 1. 00 . 26.4 ----- 54.9 163 49. 1 . 25 

146 13 A __________ NW. ~13 40 79 2, 951 28 4 1,502 5,396 128 2. 30 . 20 42. 4 88.4 261 49. 0 . 88 

147 4 A ___________ 14 40 79 1,886 7 3 941 85 3,320 82. 0 . 58 . 15 26. 5 1.77 54.4 165 49. 6 . 34 

148 26 A _____ - - - - '- 22 40 79 1, 581 13 .6 881---- 2, 647 74 68. 7 1. 07 . 30 24. 8 ----- 45. 9 141 49. 0 . 76 

149 33 A _______ - - _ 13 40 79 2, 558 5---- 1, 435 87 3,805 197 111 . 41 40. 5 1. 62 69. 0 222 49. 8 . 18 

150 23 A _______ - - - 36 40 79 3,854 13 34 2, 373---- 5, 960 172 168 1. 07 1. 70 66. 9 ----- 103 341 49. 2 . 30 

151 32 ____________ 24 40 79 4, 125 16---- 2, 670---- . 5, 120 646 179 1. 32 75. 3 ----- 105 361 49. 6 . 37 

152 4 A ___________ 13 40 79 2, 691 . 15 11 1,810 ____ 4,060 56 117 1. 23 . 55 51. 0 ----- 68.4 238 49. 3 . 52 

153 7 _____________ 13 40 79 2, 120 35 12 1,875---- 2, 440 85 92.12. 88 . 60 52. 9 ----- 42. 8 191 49. 2 1. 51 

154 20 A ______ - _-- 27 40 79 407 5 -7 427---- 392 17. 7 . 41 . 35 12. 0 ----- 6. 4 37 48. 0 1.11 

155 18 A ______ · ____ 36 40 79 1, 658 -.--- 34 1, 982 205 778 28 72. 1 _____ 1. 70 55.9 4. 27 13. 7 148 48. 8 -----

Averages: 

------·---'---- ------1---- 1-10 ______ ---- ------ ---- ---- ------ ----- 87. 7 . 46 . 29 6. 2 . 09 82.2 177 49. 6 . 26 

11-20 _____ ------------- 72. 2 . 50 . 26 6. 4 . 38 66. 2 146 49.5 . 34 

21-37 _____ --------- ---- ~~=~==~==== 105.6 . 49 . 21 10. 2 . 15 95.9 213 49. 7 . 23 

38-61_ ____ --------- ---- ---- ------ ----- ---- ------'---- ------ ----- 89.8 . 87 . 45 9. 8 . 38 80. 8 182 49. 3 . 48 

62-79 _____ --------- ---- ---- ------ ---- ---- ------ ---- ------ ----- 82. 5 . 70 . 54 11. 0 . 25 72. 2 167 49. 3 . 42 

8Q-100 ____ --- -·----- ---- ---- ------ ---- ---- ------ ---- . --- -- ----- . 90. 9 . 68 . 18 14. 4 . 27 77.2 184 49. 5 . 37 

.1 0 1-120-- - ----- ---- - --- - -;.. - ------ ---- --- - - - ---- -- - - --- - - - ----- 85.5 .42 . 65 15. 7 . 34 70. 8 174 49. 4 . 24 

HtHt: : =: ::: =: :~:: :: =:: :. =:: ::: ::: =:: =: : =::: = =::: :::::: 

96. 0 1. 44 . 35 21. 8 . 14 75. 9 196 49. 1 . 74 

110. 9 . 75 . 38 33.0 . 37 79.8 225 49.5 . 33 

128. 711. 02 . 51 51. 7 . 32 78. 4 261 49. 4 . 39 

--- _____ 1~J5~~~::: :::::::::1:::: :::: :::::::::: :::: ::::: ~ :::: :::::: 

60. 7 1. 10 . 88 40. 3 1. 42 21. 0 125 48. 4 . 88 

92. 1 . 72 . 40 16. 0 . 30 77. 1 186 49. 4 . 38 

Per cent 

Ca Cl so, 

0. 48 . 9. 4 0. 96 . 50 9. 5----- . 05 9. 5J----- ----- 9. 7----- . 15 9. 7 ----- . 24 10. 2 ----- ----- 10. 2 ----- ----- 10. 1 ----- . 38 10. 3j----- ----- 10. 61 . 42 ----- 10. 8----- . 14 10.8 ----- ----- 11. 2 ----- . 48 11. 3 ----- ----- 11. 9 ----- . 23 12.0 ----- ----- 12. 1 ----- 1.0 12. 4 . 57 

----- 12.8 -----· . 23 13.4 ----- ----- 13.4 ----- . 19 13.6 ----- ----- 13.7 ----- . 47 13. 8 ----- ----- 14. 5 ----- . 25 14. 7 ----- . 14 14. 7 1. 03 . 42 14.9 1. 09 

----- 15. 5 ----- . 61 16. 2 ----- . 08 16. 2 ----- . 09 16.0 1. 07 . 21 17. 6 ----- ----- 18.3 . 73 . 50 19. 6 ----- ----- 20.8 ----- . 23 21. 4 ----- . 31 27.7 ----- . 94 32.6 ----- 1. 15 37.8 2. 89 

. 16 3. 5 . 05 . 18 4. 4 . 26 . 10 4.8 . 07 . 25 5. 4 . 21 . 32 6. 6 . 15. . 10 7. 8 . 15 . 37 9. 0 . 20 . 18 11. 1 . 07 . 17 14. 6 . 16 . 19 19.8 . 12 . 70 32. 1 1. 13 . 21 8. 6 . 16 

HCOs+ 

COs 

39.6 

40. 5 

40. 5 

40. 3 

40.3 

39.8 

39.8 

39. 9 

39. 7 

39. 0 

39.2 

39. 2 

38. 8 

38. 7 

3'8. 1 

38. 0 

37.9 

37. 0 

37. 2 

36. 6 

36. 6 

36. 4 

36.3 

36. 2 

35.5 

35. 3 

34.3 

34. 0 

34. 5 

33. 8 

33.8 

32. 9 

3:2. 4 

31. 0 

30. 4 

29.2 

28. 3 

22. 3 

17. 3 

9. 3 

46. 5 

45. 3 

45.2 

44.4 

43. 2 

42. 1 

40. 8 

38.8 

35. 3 

30. 1 

16. 7 

41. 3 

Cl 

00 

0 

t?:l 

0 

t"4 

0 

0 

~ 

0 

0 

0 

z 

t:j 

~ 

t-3 

~ 

0 

z 

UJ 

~ 

z 

z 

~ t"4 

"' t:=l 

~ 0 

~ q 

i:= 

~ UJ 

t:=l 

~ l:;j 

z 

0 

~CJ.j 

~ 0 

i:= 

~ 

z 

0 
~ No. I Well 00 

co 

I 

~ I ,_.l 

01 1 

1

103 A ________ _ 

2 33 A_ --------- 3 1 A __________ _ 

4j 36 A _________ _ 

5 , 6 A __ 6 I 5 A __ 

7 12 A---------- 8 16 A _________ _ 

9 401 A ________ _ 

10 9 A--~--------

11 24 A- - - - - - - - - - 12 36 A_ - -------- 13 403 A_--------

14 302 A_--------

15,21 A_- 16 18 A _________ _ 

17 101 A ________ _ 

18.403 A ________ _ 

19 20 1 A- - - - - - -.- - 20 ColossaL ____ --

21 25 A_--------- 22 31 A _________ _ 

23 108 A ________ _ 

24 8 A __ - - - - - - - - -

25 I 34 A __ - - - - - - - -

261409 T A- - - - - - - 27 111 A- -------- 28 26 A_---------

29 1 A_ - - - - - - - - - -

30 I 302 A- - - - -- --- 31 4 A __________ _ 

32 201A _______ :__ 

33 104A ________ _ 

34 204 A--------- 35 301 A ________ _ 

.36 301 A_--------

37 29 A----------

a38 34 A------.----

AverageJ: 

Sec. 

TABLE 9.-Analyses of water from wells of the "Seco·nd Wall Creek sand" 

Reacting values 

Loeat!on Constituents (parts per million) 

Parts per million Per cent 

I ' I I 1 • I ; : I . 

• Concen· ' i I T. N.IR: W. Na i :\·Ig Ca I Cl sol I HC03 co, Na ; Mg Ca Cl sol H§g:+ tration Na Mg Ca Cl sol rrgg:+ 

· 1 t i I 1 value , 

!-~-:----;------;---. ----- -~---· ----- 20 39 78 1, 0471 ____ ; ____ ; 230 821 1, 977 115) 45. 5!'----- _____ 6. 5 1. 11 36. 2 90 50. o' _______ ..;__ 7. 3 1. 9 40. 8 

15 40 79 3, 840 171 12J 1, 286 27· 7, 085 485 167 1. 40 0. 60 36. 3 . 561 132 338 49. 41 0. 41 0. 2 10. 7 . 2 39. 1 

34 40 79; 1,967 161 ____ ,1,080 2041 3,160 _____ 85.5 1.32 _____ 30.5 4.25! 51.8 173 49.2) .81 _____ 17.6 2.5 29.9 

27 40 79, 3, 316 79, 60 2, 302 681 5, 333----- 144 6. 50 2. 99 64. 9 1. 42; 87. 4 307 46. 9· 2. 1 1. 0 21. 1 . 5 28. 4 

27 40 791 2, 932---- 7 2, 064----1 4, 652----- 127 ----- . 35 58. 2 _____ , 76. 2 262 49. 9----- . 1 21. 6----- 28. 4 

3 39 79j 5, 575----1---- 3, 906 __ 2_j 8, 075----- 242 ----- _____ ,110 -----, 132 484 50.0----- ----- 22. 7----- 27. 3 

27 40 791 4, 703 401 ____ 3, 545 5 0 5, 902 ---~-- 204 3. 29----- 100 10. 8• 96. 7 4151 49. 2 . 8----- 24. 1 2. 6 23. 3 

11 40 79i 6, 100 48 78 4, 775---- 8, 350----- 265 3. 95 3. 89 135 ----- 137 545 48. 6 . 7 . 7 24. 8----- 25. 2 

33 39 78· 4,472 ____ 9 3,598 93 5,584 _____ 194 ----- .45 102 1.94 91.5 390 49.9 _____ .1 26.0 .5 23.5 

27 40 7915, 121 51 6 4, 202 134 5, 910 . 159 223 . 41 . 30 118 2. 79 102 447 49. 8 . 1 . 1 26. 5 . 6 22. 9 

24 39 79 3, 513 71 20 3, 040---- 4, 000 85 15~ . 58 1. 00 85. 7----- 68. 4 309 49. 5 . 2 . 3 27. 8----- 22. 2 

2 40 79 6, 380 33 29 5, 801 ---- 7, 216 _____ 271 2. 71 L 45 164 ----- 118 563 49. 2 . 5 . 3 29. 1----- 20. 9 

20 39 78 4,085 ________ 3,840 ____ 3,900 359 178 ---------- 108 ----- 75.9 362 50.0 __________ 29.4 _____ 20.6 

21 39 78 3,626 ____ 3 3,290 ____ 3,422 265158 ----- .15 92.8 _____ 64.9 316 49.9 _____ .1 29.4 _____ .20.6 

24 39 79 4, 069 5 15 3, 872 ____ 4,100 57 177 . 41 . 75 109 ----- . 69. 1 356 49.7 . 1 . 2 30. 6_____ 19.4 

12 401 79 5, 980 30 30 5, 760---- 6, 200----- 260 2. 47 1. 50 162 ----- 102 : 528 49. 2 . 5 . 3 30. 7----- 19. 3 

29 39 78 4, 606____ 16 4, 325 173 4, 475 _____ 200 _____ · . 80 122 3. 60 73.3 400 49. 8_____ . 2 30.7 . 9 18.4 

28 39 78 3, 565 59---- 3, 545 . 33 3, 634----- 155 4. 85----- 100 . 69 59. 6 320 48. 5 1. 5----- 31. 2 . 2 18. 6 

28 39 78 4,650. ________ 4,608 204 ______ 2,232 202 ---------- 130 4.25 74.4 411 50.0 __________ 31.2 1.0 17.8 

32 39 78 4, 751____ 11 4, 910 43 4, 136 ----~ 207 ----- :55 138 . 90 67.8 414 49.9----- . 1 33. 4 .. 2 16. 4 

.3 39 79 4, 155 12 9 4, 350 80 ~. 325 85 181 . 99 . 45 123 1. 67 57. 3 364 49. 6 . 3 . 1 33. 7 . 5 15. 8 

34 40 79 3, 906 20 43 4, 170 3~ 3, 360----- 170 1. 64 2. 15 118 . 81 55. 1 348 48.9 . 5 . 6 33.9 . 2 15. 9 

29 39 78 4, 842---- . 7 5, 2501 ____ 3, 810----- 210 ----- . 35 148 ----- 62. 4 421 49. 9----- . 1 35. 2----- 14. 8 

14 40 79 4, 602 9 12 5, 125---- 3, 480----- 200 . 74 . 60 145 ----- 57. 0 403 49. 6 . 2 . 2 35. 9----- 14. 1 

3 39 79 3, 806---- 32 4, 260---- 2, 550 150 165 ----- 1. 60- 120 ----- 46.8 333 49. 5----- . 5 36.0----- 14.0 

20 39 78 3,864 ________ 4,300 ____ 2,850 _____ 168 ---------- 121 ----- 46.7. 336 50.0 __________ 36.1----- 13.9 

29 39 78 4,940 27 13 5,728 ____ 2,018 697 215 2.22 .65 162 ----- 56.3 436 49 .. 4 .5 .1 37.1 _____ 12.9 

2 39 79 6,025 21 22 7,350 ____ 3,430 50 262 1.731.10 207 ----- 57.9 530 49.5 .3 .2 39.0 _____ 11.0 

10 39 79 3, 024 24 6 3, 710 167 1, 254 161 131 1. 97 - : 30 105 3. 48 26. 0 268 49. 2 . 7 . 1 39. 0 1. 3 9. 7 

27 39 78 5, 003---- 12 6, 100---- 2, 810----- 218 ----- . 60 172 ----- -46. 1 436 49. 9----- . 1 39. 4----- 10. 6 

13 39 79 2, 547 30 60 3, 290---- 1, 414----- 111 2. 47 2. 99 92. 8----- 23. 2 232 47. 6 1. 1 1. 3 40. 0----- 10. 0 

10 39 78 4, 974 8 46 6, ·345 62 2, 440 . 15'1216 . 66 2. 30 179 1. 29 40. 5 440 49. 3 . 2 . 5 40. 5 . 3. 9. 2 

29 39 78 3,·813 ---- ---- 4, 800 __ :.._ -1; 855----- .166 ----- ----- 135 ----- 30. 4 332 50.0----- ----- 40.8----- 9. 2 

29 39 78 4, 472 53 24 5, 484. 59 2, 062----- 194 4. 36 1. 20 158 1. 23 33. 8 393 48. 6 1. 1 . 3 40. 9 . 3 8. 8 

14 38 78 4, 200---- ---- 5, 317---- 2, 008----- 183 ----- ----- 150 ----- 32. 9 365 50. 0----- ----- 41. 0----- 9. 0 

27 39 78 4, 415---- ---- 5, 601 ____ ------ 1, 023 192 ----- ----- 158 ----- 34. 1 384 50. 0----- ----- 41. 1_____ 8. 9 

2 ag 79 5, 68ol . 2 681 1, 475 a1al1, 970 34 247 . 16! a. 39 211 I 6. 52 .33. 4l · 502 49; o

1 

. a . 1

1 

42. o 1. 3 6. 1 

29 40 7818, 550---- ----,28, 360 295------ .52 807 ~---- ----- 800 6. 14 1. 7 1, 615 50.0----- ----- 49. 5 . 41 0. 1 

§~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~ ~=~~ ~~~~ ~:~~~~ ~~~~ ~~~t~~~~ ~~~~ ~~~~~~ =~~~~ ~!i!~~ ::: :::::~=:: :: := :::::::::: :::: :: j::: ::1::::,:::::::::::1 

126 

196 

197 

194 

196 

187 

203 

1. 36 

2. 75 

. 62 

1. 30 

. 83 

1. 09 

1. 18 

. 30 33.4 2. 40 

1. 44 93. 6 2. 44 . 56 112 . 79 . 78 125 1. 49 . 65 148 . 43 

1. 41 155 1. .29 

. 85 139 1. 42 

91. 9 255 49.4 .5 . 1113. 1 .9 36. 0 

106 402 49 .. 0 .7 . 3 23.2 . 6 26. 2 

86.8 397 49.8 . 1 . 1' 28.0 . 2 21. 8 

69.8 392 49. 5 .3 . 2 31. 9 .4 17. 7 

49. 9 396 49. 6 . 2 . 2 37. 3 . 1 12. 6 

32. 6 378 49. 3 .3 .4 41. 0 .4 8. 6 

64. 7 410 49. 5 .3 -. 2 33.9 .3 15. 8 

"Reported doubtful by E. A. Sweden borg on subsequent study of well history. 

~ 

> 8 

t;J 

~ 

U1 

0 

.,_, 

8 

t;J = 

~ 

~ 

0 

~ t;J 

~ 

~ t;J 

> 1-d 

0 

8 

t1 

0 

~ t;J 

q 

1-d 

t"' 

H 

~ 

-~ 
TABLE 10.-Analyses of water from wells of the "Third Wall Creek sand" a 

H~acting_ valu_es_ 

J.ocation Constituents (parts per million) 

Willi 

Parts per million Per c~nt 

Ca I: .Cl 1 so IHC03+ 

~-~: _) ___ 4:1~ 

0. 441 0. 39 .. 39. 71 0. 19 10. 1 .. 29 . 29 40. 2 .. 16 I 9. 1 . 12 . 16 -42. 2 ' . 21 7. 6 

·_ 43. 3_ j---:---I 6. 7 

. 2 I • 2 I _ 41. 4 l . 1 8. 5 

-----'---I soc. I: N. R. w: ~ ~~ _:_L_:~J so, Hco, I co, _:__l__:~l_:j_c_l_· L·-~·---1 agg:+ I f~~ti_:__I_M• 409 __________ 20 39 78 6, 430 131 44 8, 024 51 I 2, 754 372 

408 __________ -20 .39 .78 6, 375 ,18 31 7.n9.69 , 43 I· 2, 902 199 

5 ____________ 20 39 78 6, 506 6 18 8, 500 60 2, 650 ------

9 ____________ 20 39 78 6, 218 .---- ---: 8, 300 ----12, 210 ------

Average ________ 

1 

______________ -I- ______________________________ _ 1 • I I 

280 I 2. 5 I 2. 2 2271 1. 1 57. 5 I 570 49. 2 

277 . ' 1. 51 1. 5 225 .9 ' 54. 2 . -560 : 49. 4 

~~i ---~~- ---~=- ~~ 1--~~~- 43. 41 570 49. 7 

.36. 2' 541 50.0 

278 1. 21 1.1 232 .8 47.8 560 49. 6 

o Analyses :made by U.S. Geol. Survey and furnished by J. W. Steele, U.S. Geol. Survey, Casper, Wyo. Samples from wells producing from "Third Wall Creek sand," but the water may be from a stray sand above. 

TABLE 11.-Analyses of water from wells of th~ "Muddy," "Dakota," Morr£son, and "Lakota" sands_a 

Reacting values 

·Location Constituents (parts per million) 

Parts per million Per cent 

clanrl and well 

Mg Ca Cl so. I HCOa+ Concen- tration Na Mg Ca Cl I S01 I HCOa+ 

COs value COa 

"Muddy"---------:-===~-0 ~~~--;-~~-4-~=~-~~-;r;.-;-~~ 49.8 _____ ~~~~~~ "Dakota": 31 D____ 7 39 78 _4, 519 47 7816,208 267 1, 4341 _____ 196 3. 9 3. 9 175 15.6 23.5 408 48. 1 0. 9·5 _;~9~~ 42.911. 3=i · 5. 8 

Average (4) ______ ---- ____ 

1 

4; 420 

1 

20 65 I 6, 008 240 1 1, 257 I 14 192 ~~ 3. 2 170 . 5. 0 . 21. 1 

1 

393 48.8 . 4 · . 8 , 43.3 1. 3 !--~· 4 

Morrison ___________ ---- ----j--~- 1 4, 580 24 36. 6, 361 I 334 11,049 -----1199 I 2. 0 1. 8 1180 7. 0 117. 2 1 407 49. 1 i . 5 . 4 44. 1 1. 7 I 4. 2 

"Lakota": 19 L (LB) ______ 19 39 I 78 I 943 ----I ---- 124 1=1 _____ ,1, 824 229 I 41.0 I -'---- -----I 3. . 5 =I· 

----- 37.5 . 82 I I 50.0 . I _____ I ----- 4. 3 -----' 45. 7 

7 L (LB) ______ I25 40 79 1, 017 ---- 6 139 ----- 2, 092 195 44. 2 ----- . 3 3. 9 ----- 40.8 89 49.7 I_____ • 3 4. 4 -----' 45.6 

12 Tp _____________ 25 40 I 79 1, 302 18 25 332 ----- 3, 050 ----- 56. 6 1. 5 1. 2 9. 4 ----- 50.0 119 47. 7 ; 1. 3 1. 0 7. 9 ----- 42. 1 

19 L (UB) _________ 19 39 78 925 ---- 2 247 ----- 1, 790 160 40.2 ----- . 1 7. 0 ----- 34.6 - 82 49.9 I_____ • 1 8. 4 ----- 41.6 

21 Su ______________ 35 40 I 79 1, 362 ____ 30 426 _____ 2, 980 _____ ·59. 2 _____ 1. 5 12. o _____ 48.8 122 48.8 :----- 1. 2 9. 8· _____ .

1 

40. 2 

33 L _______________ 23 40 79 1, 270 24 46 · 452 20 2, 928 ----- 55. 2 2. 0 2. 3 12. 7 .. 4 46. 4 119 46. 4 I 1. 7 1. 9 10. 6 . 4 39.0 

15 L _______________ 34 40 79 1, 091 ____ ____ 465 _____ 2, 090 _____ 47.4 ----- ----- 13. 1 _____ 34. 3 95 50.0 '----- ----- 13.8 ----- 36.2 

LO L (UB) _________ 15 40 79 1, 281 ---- 7 586 _____ 2, 390 _____ 55.7 ----- . 4 16.5 _____ 39.2 112 49.7 1---'"- . 3 14.9 -----1 35. 1 

l9 L _______________ 23 40 79 1, 232 ---- 39 1, 027 76 1, 440 42 53. 6 ----- 2. 0 29. 0 1. 6 25. 0 111 48. 2 1----- 1. 8 26. 1 1. 4 I 22. c I I I . ' ' 

Ave..rage (9)--:---- -~-~---- -------1---- ____ ------- ----- ------- _____ 50. 3 . 4 . 9 11. 9 . 2 1 39. 6 1041 48. 81 . 4 . 8. 11. 5 . 21 38. 3 

Sec. IT.N.IR.W. Na Mg Ca Cl .so. HCOa COs Na 

o Analyses made by Midwest Refining Co. and U. S. Oeol. Survey and furnished by J. W. Steele, U. S. Oeol. $urvey, Casper, Wyo. 

~ 

c 

0 

t%J 

0 

t'4 

0 

Q 

,.... 

a 

a 

0 

z 

t:::f 

~ 

~ ~ 

0 

z 

Ul 

1-1 

z 

~ > t'4 

1-d 

1::9 

;a 

0 

~ c::l 

a:::· 

~ Ul 

t;1 

~ l%.1 

z 

0 

~ 

:a 

~ 

0 

~ 1-4 

z 

0.. 
TABLE 12.-Analyses of water from wells of the Sundance sand a 

I Reacting values 

Location Constituents (parts per million) 

Parts per million Per cent Well 

!- . ' I I I . I · 1 Concensec. T. N. R.W. ___::__ Mg _:_ _c_l _ _:_ a co, co, Ni ___::__ Mg I_:_ _c_l _._:_ ag<5;+ I '~,.\~;' ___::__ Mg \-""-_:_:_:_I agg:+ 

I . I 

3 A (2B)____________ 29 39 78 4, 502 81 218 5, 012 3, 100 472 ____ 55 195 6. 910. 9 141 : 64. 5 7. 71 426 45. 9 ·1. 6 2. 5 33. 11 15. 1 1. 8 

33 X (2B)b__________ 28 41 81 1, 423 ____ ---- 1, 452 845 118 43____ 61. _8 ____ ,____ 41.01 17.6 3. 3 124 50. Q____ ____ 33.11 14.2 2. 7 

34 x (1B) .su __ ,_____ 231 40 79 1, 976 22 116 1, 920 1, 620 353 ____ ____ 86. 1 1. 8j 5. 8 54. 2 33. 7 5. 8 187 45. 9 1. o 3. 1 28. 91 18. o 3. 1 

21 Su______________ 2 39 79 3, 950 66 43 4, 720 1, 465. 975 ____ 115 172 5. 4

1

2.2 133 30.5 16.0 359 47.9 1. 5 6. 6 37. 11 8. 5 4. 4 

21Suc _____________ 35 40 79 3,064 33 513,620 927 1,035 ________ 133 2.7 2.6102 19.3 17.0 277 48.11.0 .9 36.91 7.0 6.1 

21 (2B) Su __________ 

1 

35 40 79 3, 299 19 26 3, 610 I, 030 I, 405---- 43 143 I. 6, I. 3 102 20. 9 23. 0 292 49. 0 . 5 . 5 34. 9i 7. 2 7. 9 

12 Tp d_____________ 25 40 79 4, 010____ 20 4, 580 850 1, 725____ 53 174 ---- 1. 0 129 17.7 28.3 350 49.7---- . 3 36.8 5. 1 8. 1 

34 (IB) Su __________ 

1 

23 40 79 2, 308 8 15 2, 272 0 2, 290 ____ 40 100 . 7 . 7 64. 1------ 37. 5 203 49. 3 . 3 . 4 31. 6 ______ 18. 4 

Average (7) ___ -------- =-=--=---=--~---~~ ------------------ ________ 143 _ ~-~ 3~:___!-0~6. 5 ~9. 3--299 47.9 . 9 I. 2 34.61 ~· 9 ____:: 5 

• Analyses made by Midwest Refining Co. and U.S. Oeol. Survey and furnished by J. W. Steele, U.S. Gaol. Survey, Casper, Wyo. h From Tisdale dome. Excluded from averages. . • HsS, 341 parts per million. d HsS, 185 parts per million. 

TABLE 13.-Analyses of water from wellsof the Tensleep sand a 

Reacting values 

Location'·· Constituents (parts per million) 

Parts per million Per cent Well I I 

I 

Sec. IT. N.IR. W.l Na 1_::_1_:_' Cl I ~04 I HCOa I HsS 

I I . I 12 Tp ___________ 25 40 79 615 65 4161 998 1,090 

l~~ l-i73- 33X-----------~- 28 41 181 {~~~ 86 224 790 721 

194 210 I 753 417 650 232 

468 114 80 742 484 154 -----

I I ' Cl i S04 I HCOa 

' . ConcenNa I Mg I Ca I Cl i S04 HCOa tration Na Mg Ca : value 

-------- -1--

26.7 5. 4 20. 8 I 28. 1 22.7 2. 1 106 25. 3 5. 1 19. 6 26. 6 I 21. 4 2. 0 

28. 3 7. 1 11. 2 22. 3 15. 0 9. 3. 93 30. 4 7. 6 12. 0 23.9 16. 1 1D. 0 

14. 7 15. 9 10. 5 21. 2 8. 7 10. 7 82 17. 9 19. 3 12.8 26. i 10. 7 13. 2 

20. 4 9. 4 4.0 20. 9 10. 1 2. 5 67 30. 2 13. 9 5. 9 31. 2 15. 1 3. 7 

Average----\-- 22. 5 9. 5 11. 6 123. 1 14. 1 6.'21 87 25.8 10.9 1a. a 1 26. 6 16.31 7. 1 --1----1----I-----1-- -·--~-- -- -~-- ---·------·-----·-----

• Ailaly8es made by Midwest Refining Co. and furnished by J. W. Steele ·u.:s. Geol: .Survey,: Casper, ·Wyo. . Well 12 Tp is in the Salt Creek field; -well 33X is in the Tisdale d~me, and tn'e sainples.ca~e from depths or 1,87()-2,040, 2,061-2,159, and 2,200-2~228 feet respectively below the top of the "Lakota." 

~ 

>· ;3. 

~ 

\ll 

0 

12j~ 

8 

= tr:i: 

\ll 

>- t"4-

8. 

c 

~ 

l:;j· 

l:;j 

~ 

8 tr:i_ 

> 1-d o. 

8. 

t1 

0 

a=· 

l:;j 

c:l 

1-d 

tot 

~.:· 

~ 

-... 
·r\.,.: ~. "~.. ; ·, 

TABLE f4.-Andlyses of water from miscellaneous so·urces 

Constituents (parts per million) 

Parts per million 

Na K lVIg Ca Cl so. HCOa COa I J---1 1---- Na+K 

1

__::__1 Oa I 01 I so, 

1 29 ------ 6. 7i 23 11 35 87'_----- 1. 26 0. 551 1. 15 0. 31 0. 73 

2 . 7. 2 1. 6 2. 3 5. 7 2. 2 4. 2 

3 1, 014 41. 0 8. 3 14. 0 944 

4 ' 4~.1 : : 4. 4 '. . . 4 3. 0 ~ ~2 ' 

5 15; 400 : 560 ' .:_;;_·::.- :._ :._-- 'J._·_--- 14; 100 

.7. 2 

740 

39 ------ 1, 115 41 

872 54 ______ · 8, lOO 

. 35 

45. 0 

,.18. 4 

684 

. 19 . 28 . 06 . 09 . 68 . 70 26. 6 ------ . 03 .15 2 .. 6 . . 15 

------ ------ 398 15 

6 10; ·710- - 390·· .... 1; 300 420 ·19; 350- 2, 700 .. ------· 70 476 . -107; 31 2-1. 2 .. 545. 6- 56. l 

1. Shoshone River, Cody, \Vyo. U. S. Geol. Survey Water-Supply Paper 274. 

2. Wateree River, Camden, S. C. U. S. Geol. Survey :Prof. Paper 90. . :l .. Artesian .well.l,260 feet deep, Charleston; !;l. C. U.S. Geol. Survey Prof. Pap·er 90. 

4. Artesian well 2,007 fe'et deep, Charleston, S. 0. U. S. Geol. Survey Prof. Paper £0.- .'i. Abert Lake, Oreg. ·Recomputed frQm U.S. Geol. Survey Bull. 330. · ·' t'l.' Ocean. U. S. Geol. Survey Bull. 479· · __ , 

Reacting values 

HCOa+ 

CO a 

Concentration 

value 

Per cent 

Na+K I Mg I oa I 01 I so, ag;;+ 

--1·---1--~--~--,------

21. 31 9. ~ 19. 41 6. 31 14. 8 28. 9 1. 43 5. 4 

21. 2 11. 5 17. 3 3. 811 5. 6 40. 6 

48. 5 . 7 . 8 28. 6 - - - - - - 21. 4 

4.9 .. 5 . 1 . 41 ' 6. ;8 . 4 42. 8 

50. () - - - - - - - ~ - - - _· .. 29. 1 1. 1 19. 8 .... 39 .. 3( - 8.. ----L8 -- -45..11- -A •. .'l ____ -0 . ..2 

. 65 1.6 

19. 9 93 

16. 3 38 

270 '1, 367 ... . 2.-1--- ----1, 209--- . 

r .. 

0> 

~ 

0 

t9 

0 

t"' 

0 

0 

c """' 

c 

0 

z 

t:j 

1-t 

8 

"""' 0 

z 

Ul 

z 

z 

~ t"' 

"d 

t9 

;a 

0 

.t" 

t".J 

c: 

~ 

pj 

t9 

Ul 

t9 

~ t9 

.z 

0 

~ 

~ ~ 

0 

~ 

z 

0 
INDEX 

Page 

Abert Lake, Oreg., unulysis of water oL--------------------------------·---- 62 

Acknowledgments for aid ____ ------------------ __ --------------------.. ----- 1-2,38 

Amsden formation, occurrence of beds corresponding to _______ "-------------- 16 

Heal, C. H., and Lewis, J. 0., quoted--------------------------------------- 28 

Bentonite, occurrence and character oL _____________________________________ 12-13 

Bighorn dolomite, occurrence of beds corresponding to_______________________ 16 

Carlile shale, occurrence and character oL----------------------------------- 14 

Castle Creek, analyses of water oL------------------------------------------ 55 

Charleston, S. C., deep well at, analysis of water oL------------------------ 62 

deep well at, charac~~r of water in_______________________________________ 53 

Chugwater formation, oGctirrence and character ot-------------------------- 16,24 

Cloverly formation, occurrence and character oL____________________________ 16 

Cross-bedding and lamination in littoral sandstone ____ ------ ___ pl. 10 (in pocket) 

"Dakota sand," occurrence and character of------------------------------- 16 

occurrence of oil in------------------------------------------------------- 24 water of, analyses oL ____________________ ----- _ __ __ __ _ ___ __ ___ ____ __ _ _ _ __ 60 

general features oL _____ --------------------------------------------- 45-46 

Deadwood formation, occurrence of beds corresponding to _________ ,________ 16 

Drainage, loss of oil by ________________________________________________ 29-35, 37-38 

l~mbar formation, occurrence and character oL------------------------------ 16,24 

Estabrook, K IJ., quoted---------------------------------------------------- 34-35 

Estabrook, K IJ,, and Hader, C. M., quoted------------------- 2-3,14, 15,25-26,33 

Faults, occurrence and general features ot~---------------------------------- 34-35 

offsetting of thin hard ledge cap caused by------------------------------ pl. 10 

views ot ___ -------- ________________________________________ ------ ________ pl. 5 

Field work, summary oL--------------------------------------------------- 1-2 

"First Wall Crock sand," occurrence and character ot______________________ 14 

occurrence of oil in------------------------------------------------------- 23 

pressure conditions in------------------------------------------------____ 31 water movement in ________________ ------ ____________ ----- _______________ 42-43 

waters of, analyses oL--------------------------------------------------- 56-58 

general features oL ---- ___ ----- __ ----- ____ ------------------- ________ 39-42 

map showing equal carbonate chloride ratio for __________ pl. 27 (in pocket) 

mup showing·equal carbonate values for _________________ pl. 29 (in pocket) 

map showing equol chloride values for ___________________ pl. 28 (in pocket) 

map showing equal concentration values for _____________ pl. 26 (in pocket) 

map showiug eqqal percentuge carbonate values for ______ pl. 30 (in pocket) 

waters of shale above; goueral features oL------------------------------- 39 

i•'rontier formation, occtir,rence and character oL---------------------------- 14-15 

Gas, occurrence oLr--------------------------------------------------- 2Q--21, 23-27 

Clas. See also Oil. 

Hill, H. 13., quoted----------------------------------------------------------- 23,31 

History or development__ ________________________ ---------------------------- 2-10 

"Lakota sand," occur.rouce and character or_ __ ------------------------------ 16 

occurrence of oil in------------------------------------------------------- 24 waters or, analyse~ or____________________________________________________ 60 

general features oL ___________ ----- __________________________________ 46, 48 

Lewis, J. 0., quoted _______________________________________________________ 3,28-29 

Lewis, J. 0. See also Heal, C. H., and Lewis, J. 0. 

Lindtrop, N. '1'., quoted_____________________________________________________ 52 

lVJ:udisonlimostono, occurrence of bods corresponding to_____________________ 16 

:Mummoth Oil Co.'s wells, datos of completion oL---------------------------

Map, geologic, of Naval Petroleum Heserve No.3 ________________ pl. 7 (in pocket) 

stmcturo contour, of "Second Wall Creek sand"------------- pl. 8 (in pocket) 

lVfosaverdo formation, occurrence and character or_ __________________________ 11-12 

Mills, H. V. A., quoted-------------------------------------------------- 2(}-21, 34 

M:orrison formation, occurrence and character oL _______________ :____________ 16 

occurrence of oil and gas in, possibility oL------~------------------------ 24, 37 

wnter of sand in, analyses of--------------------------------------------- 60 general features oL _ _ __ _ __ _ __ _ _____ _ __ ___ __ __ __ _ ____ __ _ _ _ __ __ __ __ ____ 48 

1Vlovomonts of fluids through the sands, factors controlling ___________________ 3Q--31 

Mowry shale, occurrence and character oL---------------------------------- 15 

"Muddy sand," occurrence of oil in_________________________________________ 24 

water or,' analyses oL ____ ---------- _______ ----------------------------- __ 60 

general features oL __ ----------- _____ -------------- __________ ------- _ 45 

Pug~ 

Niobrara shale, occurrence and character or__________________________________ 14 

North Platte Hiver, analyses of water oL------------------------------------ ~5 

Ocean, analysis of water oL _______ ------ __________________ ------- _ __ __ _ _ _ _ __ 62 

Oil and gas production, effect on, of introduction of compressed gas into well, 

graph showing _______________________________________ pl. 30 (in pocket) 

Oil, estimates of, in Naval Petroleum Reserve No.3------------------- 28-29, 35-37 

loss of, by drainage------------------------------------------------ '29-35, 37-38 movement of, through the sands, factors controlling _____________________ 3Q--31 occurrence oL ____________________________________________________ 20-21, 23-27 

production of, decline in, curves showing _________________ pis. 14-24 (in pocket) 

from fissures in shale, table showing_________________________________ 26 

recoverability of, by different methods-------------------------------~--- 28-29 

Palmer, Chase, quoted ______ -- __ ---rr- _______________________ ---- ______ -- ____ 51-52 

Parkman sandstone, exposures or_ _____ ·--------------------------------- pls. 3, 4, 9 

occurrence and character oL--------------------------------------------- 11-12 

panorama showing character and structure of formations above__________ pl. 4 

Peake, R. F., quoted-------------------------------------------------------- 15 

Petroleum. See Oil 

Ponds, analyses of water oL ___________________________________ -- __ -- ______ -- 55 

Pressure, fluid, conditions of, in Salt Creek-Teapot area _____________________ 31-33 

Production, oil, monthly, table showing_____________________________________ 10 

Rader, C. M. See Estabrook, E. L., and Rader, C. 1\L 

Salt Creek, analyses of water oL-------------------------------------------- 55 

Salt Creek oil field, composite well log oL----------------------------------- pl. 11 

history of oil discovery and development in______________________________ 2-3 

map oL------------------------------------------------------ pl. 6 (in pocket) 

principal rock formations in, table showing______________________________ 11 

Stratigraphy oL ____________________________ ------ ______________________ 11-17 

Sands, occurrence and character of, as reservoirs for oil and gas _______________ 23-24 

Scope and purpose of report_________________________________________________ 1 

"Second Wall Creek sand," multiple bedding and cross-bedding oL________ 34 

occurrence and character oL------------------------~------------------- 14-15 

occurrence of oil in __ ~---------------------------------------------------- 23, 37 

·occurrence of "tight sand" area in---------------------------------------- 33 

original distribution of oil, gas, and water in_____________________________ 27 

pressure conc'litions in ___________ ·- _______________ -------- _______________ 31-33 

probable discontinuity of, as a porous bed_______________________________ 33 

structure contour map oL-------------------·--------------·- pl. 8 (in )locket) 

waters of, analyses oL--------------------------------------------------- 59 

general features oL _ ------ _ ------ ________ -------- ____________________ 43-45 

Shale, occurrence of oil in fissures in ____________________________________ ·- 24-27,37 

Shannon sandstone, exposure oL---~---------------------------------------- pl. 3 

occurrence and character oL-------------------------------------------- 13 

occurrence of oil and gas in_--------------------------------"------------ 23,37 

waters of, analyses oL--------------------------------------------------- • 55 

general features oL ____ ·--------- __ ---------- __ ------ __ ------ __ _ _ __ _ _ 39 

Shoshone H.iver, analysis of water oL--------------------------------------- 62 

Stabler, Herman, Waters of the Salt Creek·Teapot dome uplift ______________ 38-62 

Steele, J. W., analyses furnished by __ -----------------------~~-------- 55-58, 6Q--61 , 

Steele shale, occurrence and character oL------------------------------------ 12-14 

Structure, general features oL ________ ----- ____________ ------------ ____ __ _ _ __ 17 

in surrounding region __ ------------------------------------------------- 17-19 

methods of representing_------------------------------------------------ 17 

within Naval Petroleum I{,eserve No.3--------------------------------- 19-20 

map showing ____________________________________________ pl. 8 (in pocket) 

Sundance formation, occurrence and character oL--------------------------- 16 

occurrence of oil and gas in, possibility oL------------------------------- 24,37 waters of, an:>lyses oL _ ~- ____________ ------ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ __ ____ __ __ __ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ 6 [ 

general features oL ______________________________________ ------------ 48 

'l'eapot dome, panorama or_ _________ ·-------------------------------------- pis. 1, 2 

Teapot oil field, accessibility oL-------------------------------------------- 10 

drainage anrl water supply oL------------------------------------------ 11 

principal rock formations in, table showing______________________________ 11 

stratigraphy oL ___________________ ------ _______________ ------- __________ 11-17 

topographic features oL ___ ----------------- ________ ------- ______________ lQ--11 

'rensleep sandstone, occurrence and character oL_____________________________ 16 

occurrence of oil in ___ -------------- ______ ------- _____ ----- ____ ------ ____ 24, 37 

waters of, analyses of---------------------------------------------------- 61 

general features oL ---------------- ____ ---------------------------- __ 48 

Thermopolis shale, occurrence and character oL----------------------------- 15-1fl 

63 
64 INDEX 

Page 1 

"'rhird Wall Creek sand," occurrence and character oL..................... 15 

occurrence or oil in._.-----------------.. ----------.••. ----........ --.... · 23, 37 

waters ·of, analyses of. ••••.•••.••.... ----------------------------------.. 60 

general features of.--------------.• ------------------------------.... 45 

"Tight sand" area, occurrence of..------------------------------------------ 33 

Unkar wedge or graben block, in Orand Canyon or Arizona •. --------------- pl .. 5 

.. 

.• ! 

Page· 

waters, surface, analyses of.--------------------------------------.- oJ .. - JJJ. 55 surface, general features of. •. ______ . ___________________________ ._._. ___ .. 38-39 

underground, character and distribution of. _____________________________ 21-23 

comparison of..----------------------------------------------------- 48-50 

general features of. •.•..••.••..••..•. __ ------ ____ ----·_. __ .---------- 39-62' 

origin of. .. ----------------------..... -------....•..••• __ .• __ ....•..• 5Q-53' 

relation or, to area or oil occurrence ........•...............•..••••••• 53-54 

Wegemann, C. H., quoted ••..•.•.•••.•••.......•••.........•• 14,16,17, 19,24-25,31 

Well history, table showing ...•...... -------~----:·------------------------- 6-9 

Wells, comparative initial yields and dates or completion or, mnp showing __________________________________________________ pl. 13 (in pocket) 

which yielded oil and gas from fissures in shale, map showing ____________ pl. 12