Geologic and shallow salt tectonic setting of the Mad Dog and
Atlantis fields: Relationship between salt, faults, and seafloor
geomorphology
DANIEL L. ORANGE, AOA Geophysics, Moss Landing, California, U.S.
MICHAEL M. ANGELL, William Lettis & Associates, San Rafael, California, U.S.
Downloaded 06/06/13 to 128.59.62.83. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/
JOHN R. BRAND, Geoscience Earth & Marine Services, Houston, Texas, U.S.
JIM THOMSON, TIM BUDDIN, MARK WILLIAMS, and WILLIAM HART, BP America, Houston, Texas, U.S.,
WILLIAM J. BERGER III, Geoscience Earth & Marine Services, Houston, Texas, U.S.
Many of today’s active hydrocarbon provinces are in areas
with mobile substrate (either salt or mud). Interpreting the style
and activity of the substrate, and its impact on the seafloor
and near-surface environment, is central to understanding
the geohazards of such field areas.
Both the Mad Dog and Atlantis prospects are located
where the base of the northern Gulf of Mexico continental slope
meets the continental rise at the Sigsbee Escarpment (Figure
1). In this area, the Lower Continental Slope at the top of the
Escarpment has an average water depth of 4500 ft, and the
Upper Continental Rise at the base of the escarpment has an
average water depth of 6800 ft (for a thorough and more
detailed discussion of salt tectonics, including numerous
papers on the Gulf of Mexico and Sigsbee Escarpment, see
AAPG Memoir 65). Mad Dog and Atlantis are in the “Tabular
Salt and Minibasin Province” of the Gulf of Mexico, charac-
terized by salt sheets and/or tabular salt with more or less
flat tops and bottoms. The salt is allochthonous (meaning out
of place, as opposed to autochthonous = in place), and the
Sigsbee Escarpment represents the seafloor expression of the
downslope limit of the allochthonous shallow salt.
Bathymetric data show different seafloor textures across
the area, indicating that portions of the Sigsbee have evolved
differently in the recent geologic past. These differences are
due to a combination of salt morphology, suprasalt stratigra-
phy, and slumping. The suprasalt section along this portion
of the Sigsbee Escarpment contains evidence for active defor-
mation in the form of normal faults with seafloor offset. In the
study area, all of the faults on and above the escarpment are
extensional, even though the salt is translating seaward and
there are some buckle folds above the salt sheet suggesting
regional contractional strain. Although numerous models of
propagating salt sheets have been published, we find that the
Atlantis and Mad Dog data fit the “salt glacier” or “tank tread”
model best. These models imply that the salt is flowing under
gravitational forcing, that the suprasalt section is not in com-
pression, and that the basal traction of the salt sheet leads to
the suprasalt section flowing over the “tank tread” of the
escarpment front. Both normal faults in the suprasalt section
and seaward-dipping beds above the frontal salt monocline
can provide pre-existing and preferential failure planes for
slumping at the escarpment front. These dipslope conditions
control the slumping in the shallow-seated slope failure por-
tions of the escarpment at both the southwest Mad Dog and
northeast Atlantis Fields.
(Fourteen papers on the detailed geology, geomorphology,
geotechnical and geohazard environment at the Mad Dog
and Atlantis areas were presented at OTC ’03. See suggested
Editor’s note: The material in this paper was prepared and presented (OTC
Paper 15157) at the 2003 Offshore Technology Conference, 5-8 May in
Houston, Texas, U.S., and is published with permission. Acknowledgment
is gratefully made to the OTC for granting permission for publication of this
work.
354 THE LEADING EDGE APRIL 2004
Definitions used in this article
Dipslope: a surficial (mud-line) condition where the local
seafloor has the same planar orientation as the under-
lying geology (bedding planes, fault planes, etc.).
Head: a term defining hydrologic potential; a combina-
tion of gravitational potential energy and pressure.
Mass gravity flows: downslope flows of sediment + clasts
+ entrained fluid (e.g.: turbidity currents, debris flows,
mud flows).
Regional: when used in reference to stratigraphy above
salt, an assumed horizontal datum at the time that a
specific seismically identifiable unit was deposited.
Slumps: for the purposes of this paper, a region on the
seafloor characterized by removal of sedimentary sec-
tion, slope failure, slumping, etc.
Level of neutral buoyancy: the depth in the section where
salt has a density similar to the surrounding strata.
reading.)
The Sisgbee Escarpment represents a bathymetric break
that coincides with the downdip edge of this regional salt
canopy and manifests the dynamic evolution of the salt sheet.
Previous work published in TLE by Nibbelink (1999) showed
that the allochthonous section in the southeastern Green
Canyon area is characterized by a series of extensive “upper
escarpment fan sands” approximately 500 ms below the
seafloor, and that some of these sand-prone units may have
ponded behind subtle bathymetric highs. Nibbelink also noted
the presence of strong currents in the Gulf of Mexico, and
hypothesized that the deep currents eroded the sediment
overlying salt canopies, causing dissolution of salt at the
seafloor and slumping of the section toward the abyssal plain.
Previous work in the Gulf of Mexico documented the
presence of a fold and thrust belt of mid- to late-Miocene age
beneath and downdip of the salt canopy in the central-east-
ern Gulf of Mexico. This Mississippi Fan Fold Belt is charac-
terized by approximately 10 km of shortening coeval with the
main pulse of sediment input to the shelf. Previous authors
(in particular Peel et al.) noted this temporal coincidence, and
suggested a causal link between the two processes.
Salt models. There are a variety of models for the emplace-
ment for the allochthonous salt at the Sigsbee Escarpment.
Although some may view the competing models for how
shallow salt moves as an academic exercise, in reality these
are key to evaluating the geohazards at the Mad Dog and
Atlantis prospects. Each model has a different mechanism for
driving the over-steepening of the escarpment, which in turn
drives the gravitational instability and slumping of the escarp-
ment front. The dynamic behavior of the salt underlying
Sigsbee Escarpment is the most important factor in the geo-
Downloaded 06/06/13 to 128.59.62.83. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/

Figure 1. Regional seafloor

rendering of the northern
Gulf of Mexico, showing
the location of the Mad
Dog and Atlantis
prospects (southeastern
Green Canyon OCS).

logic and geomorphic development of the two

prospect areas.
Models for allochthonous salt emplacement
include thrusting, inflation due to salt “sill” injec-
tion, and lateral salt sheet growth as a salt “glac-
ier” or “tank tread.” Given that salt is weak relative
to the surrounding section, the salt cannot act as a
stress guide. If the salt were behaving according to
the thrust model (i.e., not a stress guide) the max-
imum compressive stress in the suprasalt section
would be subhorizontal. This implies that in the
thrust model, the suprasalt section should be char-
acterized by compressional stress and contractional
strain.
A detailed discussion of the competing salt
emplacement models is beyond the scope of this
paper. Instead, we will focus on the salt “glacier” Figure 2. Exploration seismic line across the Sigsbee Escarpment, northeast Atlantis
model, as this is the model that best fits the detailed Field area, showing the monoclinal fold above salt underlying the escarpment. Note the
conformity between the top of salt and the seismic reflectors at the base of the suprasalt
local data at the Mad Dog and Atlantis areas. section. The southwest Mad Dog Field area shows similar features.
Key attributes of the salt glacier model include:
(1) Salt spreads laterally at or near the seafloor, first as a salt deposited atop, and transported by, spreading salt glaciers may
fountain, and then as a composite salt/sediment glacier (with be more shale-prone than age equivalent subsalt strata. The
overburden loading helping to sustain gravitational salt mobi- lack of seismic scale deformation zones along the sheet bases
lization). (2) The relative salt spread rate through time is is consistent with the salt glacier model, and is in contrast to
reflected in the base of salt geometry. (3) Suprasalt sediments the long distance lateral translation required by thrust sheet
translate downslope by means of gravity gliding and gravity models.
spreading, and may come to overlie coeval subsalt strata, The differences in geomorphic appearance of the escarp-
resulting in repeated suprasalt/subsalt sequences. (4) The ment across the site can be related to variations in the geom-
downslope “flow” of the suprasalt section along with the etry and structural interactions between shallow sediments
underlying salt precludes significant shear at the sediment- and the underlying salt, stratigraphic sources of anomalously
top salt boundary. (5) Shear deformation within the salt glac- high pore-fluid pressure (conduits), and long-term patterns
ier facilitates the continued downslope translation of suprasalt of sediment erosion and deposition. Local variations in salt-
sediments in a tank tread manner until burial of the downdip sediment interaction strongly influence both the style and
salt edge arrests further salt spreading. (6) Condensed sections timing of faulting in a particular area and the relationship of

APRIL 2004 THE LEADING EDGE 355

Downloaded 06/06/13 to 128.59.62.83. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/
Figure 3. Shaded relief seafloor rendering of Sigsbee Escarpment in the Mad Dog and Atlantis Field areas, southeastern Green Canyon, Gulf of Mexico.
faulting to mass wasting in that area. The different styles of
fault-related deformation, the geomorphic character of the
seafloor, and mechanisms driving slope failure are directly
related to spatial variations in the sedimentary basin forma-
tion and distribution and geometry of the salt nappe.
Both Mad Dog and Atlantis fields reside in areas of com-
plex salt geometry. We use a detailed evaluation of the sub-
surface stratigraphy, salt structure, and seafloor geomorph-
ology to constrain how each area has evolved over time, and
how the overall geology relates to the geohazard environ-
ment.
Extension above and contraction below—salt and faults.
The basic underlying geologic structure of the escarpment is
a salt-cored monocline or anticline (Figure 2). The state of stress
in a monoclinal buckle fold will promote contraction at the
base (syncline) of the limb and extension at the crest.
Furthermore, in a monoclinal buckle tilted downslope, which
is characteristic of much of Sigsbee, the downslope-vergent
normal, and reverse bending moment, faults are energetically
preferred (requiring less work against gravity than their con-
jugates) whereas the upslope-vergent faults are suppressed.
In those areas where the salt nappe is structurally shallow
and near its level of neutral buoyancy, the top-of-salt has a
low-relief geometry, and the overlying sediments typically are
near horizontal and form a seaward-facing monocline. Where
the salt nappe is structurally deep, it may be below its level
of neutral buoyancy and therefore dynamically unstable. As
a result the salt may move vertically (as well as laterally) in
response to deformation of the surrounding sediments. This
356 THE LEADING EDGE APRIL 2004
basic difference in salt near the escarpment face governs the
style of faulting, the distribution of anomalous pore pressures,
and the style of slope failure on the escarpment face.
The top and face of the escarpment contain a narrow zone
of predominantly seaward-dipping, scarp-parallel extensional
faults. A system of contractional toe-thrust faults and related
folds lies close to the base of the escarpment across parts of
both field areas (Figures 3 and 7b). Contractional features at
the base of Sigsbee Escarpment are of two basic types: those
that root below (or near) the base of salt, and those that orig-
inate structurally above the salt. Thrusts that can be tied to
the base of salt may be the result of regional contraction related
to localized buckle folding. Several thrusts can be tied to
slumps and normal faults on the escarpment face, indicating
a local source for contraction at the base of the escarpment
due to gravitational collapse.
Data used to evaluate the geohazards of Mad Dog and
Atlantis. To evaluate these two prospects, BP and partners uti-
lized an unprecedented suite of nested geophysical data sets.
Seismic data sets included exploration 3D and high-resolu-
tion 2D and 3D multichannel data. Exploration 3D seismic was
used to get a first-order interpretation in both field areas, and
provided excellent imagery of the suprasalt sedimentary sec-
tion, the top of salt, and, in places, the base of salt and the sub-
salt strata. High-resolution 3D seismic provided excellent
imagery of the supra-salt section, and allowed detailed analy-
sis of complex, fine-scaled features. The two data sets were
complementary and were extremely useful in interpreting the
complex geology in the field areas. Detailed surveys with an
Downloaded 06/06/13 to 128.59.62.83. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/
Figure 4. Isometric overview (view to the NW) of the Mad Dog and Atlantis field areas, showing the location and number (Mad Dog) or letter
(Atlantis) of identified slump features. No vertical exaggeration.
AUV (an autonomous underwater vehicle with exceptional
stability and maneuverability) provided exceptional quality
multibeam bathymetry, side-scan backscatter, and subbottom
profiling data, even along the steep terrain of the escarpment
front. In addition to the geophysical data sets, a large num-
ber of piston cores and box cores, as well as deep geotechni-
cal borings for in-situ sediment physical properties and pore
pressure, were collected in both field areas.
Setting of Mad Dog and Atlantis. In both field areas, Sigsbee
Escarpment shows approximately 600-700 ft of relief with
slopes typically greater than 20° (Figure 4). The style and ori-
gin of faulting and deformation of sediment across the field
area primarily are due to differences in the depth, geometry,
and movement history of the underlying allochthonous salt.
The southwest Mad Dog and northeast Atlantis areas show a
similar surficial morphology on the Sigsbee Escarpment, with
a relatively smooth escarpment front, numerous southeast-dip-
ping normal faults, and numerous small slumps (Figures 3
and 4). In contrast, the northeast Mad Dog and southwest
Atlantis areas are characterized by larger, amphitheater-shaped
slumps and a more scalloped escarpment front. Both the Mad
Dog and Atlantis prospects reside at changes in the local strike
of the Sigsbee Escarpment. As we will show, these changes in
escarpment trend are due to the lateral variations in the salt
geometry, which has a first-order effect on the geomorphol-
ogy of the escarpment and the style of geohazards in each field
area.
Despite the similarities in the overall appearance of the
seafloor in the two field areas, there are numerous processes
that lead to the seafloor slumps, and these processes are not
identical in the two field areas. In particular, the geologic
mechanisms responsible for the two primary slumps (Slump
8 in Mad Dog, and Slump E in Atlantis), are different.
The slumps in Mad Dog are labeled numerically, begin-
ning at the northeastern extent of the detailed study area.
Most interesting to our study is Slump 8, due to its proxim-
ity to planned facilities.
In the Atlantis prospect, the slumps are labeled alphabet-
ically, beginning at the southwestern extent of the detailed
study area. Proximal to the planned facilities is Slump E. We
will also examine Slump A due to its similarity to the slumps
in the northeast Mad Dog area, and contrast this feature with
the other large slumps in the southwest Atlantis prospect.
The Sigsbee Escarpment in the Mad Dog prospect trends
approximately east-northeast, and separates the lower conti-
nental slope from the continental rise (Figures 3 and 5). The
dynamic geology with respect to the movement of the salt has
created several complex geologic/geomorphologic domains
within the study area. The most obvious features consist of
steep slopes, faults, slumps, and seafloor furrows. The geo-
morphic conditions are quite different between the northwest
(lower continental slope) and southeast (continental rise) por-
tions of the Mad Dog area. Northeast of and including Slump
8, the escarpment front is scalloped by numerous deep-seated
slump features that have eroded into the escarpment. Slumps
in this area are characterized by amphitheater-shaped head-
scarps, linear trends, and linear “drainage divides” perpen-
dicular to the scarp separating slump features. Southwest of
Slump 8, and to the limit of the detailed study area, the escarp-
ment front is characterized by a less incised seafloor with
smaller, shallow-seated slump features. Slumps in this area
have broader headscarp regions, sinuous bases, and do not
show the steep amphitheater-shaped headscarps that char-
acterize the northeast Mad Dog region.
In the Atlantis area, the geomorphic grain of Sigsbee
Escarpment shows a change in trend from northeast to more
easterly (Figures 3 and 6), and there is a difference in geo-
morphic character on the escarpment itself associated with
this change in trend. In the southwestern portion of Atlantis,
Slump A shows a morphology similar to Mad Dog Slump
8 and the northeastern slumps of the Mad Dog study area
(e.g., amphitheater-shaped headscarps forming deep re-
entrants in the escarpment face, steep headwall, linear, flat
bases, sharp inflection points at the top and bottom of the
slump headscarp). Between Slump A in the southwest, and
Slump E in the central Atlantis, the escarpment is cut by
numerous large slumps with a morphology similar to Slump
A, but with a more degraded appearance (less sharp bathy-
metric inflection point; Figure 6); these slumps are also dis-
sected by branching, sinuous (dendritic) channels. Slump E
also shows an overall amphitheater shape, but with a promi-
nent bench midway up the escarpment. Northeast of Slump
E, the escarpment front is characterized by a smoother
appearance with numerous smaller slump features.
Northeast of Slump E there are numerous down-to-the-
APRIL 2004 THE LEADING EDGE 357
Downloaded 06/06/13 to 128.59.62.83. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/
Figure 5. Detailed seafloor rendering of the Mad Dog study area from
AUV multibeam bathymetry data. The southwest Mad Dog area is
characterized by a relatively narrow and steep escarpment, with
numerous small, shallowly seated slope failures. In contrast, the north-
east area shows larger, deeper seated slope failures. The escarpment-
parallel graben is underlain by a subtle reactive salt diapir.
basin normal faults above the escarpment; fewer faults are
present southwest of Slump E.
A tale of two grabens. Both the Mad Dog and Atlantis field
areas have a graben in the suprasalt section. In Mad Dog the
graben is oriented more or less parallel to the escarpment front
(Figure 5), whereas in Atlantis the graben is perpendicular to
the escarpment (Figure 6).
The escarpment-parallel graben in the Mad Dog area
occurs behind and northeast of Slump 8. This graben is asso-
ciated with a local salt high diapiric ridge that continues to
the northeast edge of the field area (Figure 11a), and the change
from the graben to the southeast fault domain is coincident
with an abrupt and steep southwest limit of the diapir ridge.
This local salt high may therefore be a reactive diapir related
to suprasalt extension in the graben. The graben abruptly ter-
minates behind Slump 8, and the extension continues to the
southwest as a single main down-to-the-southeast scarp
(Figure 5). West of Slump 8, the seafloor immediately land-
ward of the escarpment shows faulting consisting predomi-
nantly of evenly spaced, southeast-dipping, normal faults.
An exception to this occurs in the Slump 10-11 region, where
a symmetric “keystone” fault system occurs above a local lin-
ear salt high. The importance of these faults and the salt is
that they can provide pre-existing and preferential failure
planes for localized slope failure on the escarpment face. In
contrast, there are few visible seafloor fault scarps northeast
of Slump 8 between the graben and the escarpment (Figure
5).
In contrast to the escarpment-parallel graben at Mad Dog,
the graben at Atlantis is perpendicular to the escarpment front
(Figure 6), and the top of salt in the Atlantis area shows a sig-
nificant change at the graben. Northeast of the graben the top
of salt is relatively shallow (0.8 – 1.2 two-way traveltime below
the mud line), flat, smooth, and dips gently to the north
(Figures 7a and 7c). In contrast, southwest of the graben the
top of salt is deeper (more than 1.5 s TWTT below the mud
line), dips landward, and shows significantly more variation
on the top-salt surface with multiple local salt highs—diapirs—
and minibasins with different structural trends (Figures 7b and
7c).
358 THE LEADING EDGE APRIL 2004
Figure 6. Detailed seafloor rendering of the Atlantis study area from
AUV multibeam bathymetry data. The northeast Atlantis area appears
similiar to the southwest Mad Dog area, and Slump A appears similar
to Mad Dog slump 8. Slumps B-E have been isolated by en echelon
diapiric salt ridges. The Atlantis graben represents the suture zone
where two originally distinct salt masses met, and is now characterized
by shallow salt and recent extension.
By examining reflector packets in the suprasalt section, we
can determine how the salt has moved over time. In the north-
east Atlantis area, the uppermost 400 ms shows a relatively
constant layer thickness, suggesting that this province is more
or less in equilibrium with respect to the salt (e.g., relative to
regional, the salt is at its level of neutral buoyancy). In the
southwest Atlantis area, the suprasalt strata show more vari-
ations in thickness, indicating relative vertical motion within
this section during the time that the strata were deposited. The
southwest Atlantis salt, therefore, cannot be considered to be
at its level of neutral buoyancy, or in vertical equilibrium rel-
ative to the mud line.
The central Atlantis graben is the surface expression of an
extensional feature formed over inflated salt in the suture
zone between two originally independent salt bodies (Figures
6 and 7c). Collision between the neighboring salt provinces
occurred along two converging paleoescarpments underlain
by shallow salt tongues and relatively thin sedimentary sec-
tions, similar to the modern-day escarpment. As the two salt
bodies approached each other, the seafloor in between would
have been a local low, and this would provide a conduit for
downslope gravitational flows from the lower slope to the rise
and the abyssal plane (turbidity currents, channels, etc.). This
model is supported by the correspondence of the present-day
graben with interpreted channels and channel deposits
mapped in the subsurface both above the escarpment and on
the continental rise (see Suggested reading).
As the suture developed and the salt tongues converged,
it formed a region of thin overburden and shallow alloctho-
nous salt positioned between subsiding minibasins within
the interior of the individual salt provinces. These conditions
lead to active diapirism of a salt ridge in the suture zone
(Figure 7c). Active faults forming scarps at the seafloor pro-
vide evidence that the graben continues to extend the over-
burden by inflation of the diapiric salt ridge (Figure 6), with
extensional rates on the order of 1mm/yr. Slump E lies at the
intersection of this central graben and the escarpment, sepa-
 a a
Downloaded 06/06/13 to 128.59.62.83. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/
b b
c showing the seafloor-parallel dips of seismic reflectors below the escarp-
Figure 7. Exploration seismic data showing contrasting geometry of
Atlantis salt. (a) Seismic line across the escarpment in the eastern salt
province, showing the relatively shallow and flat top of salt. (b) Seismic
line across the western escarpment, showing the relatively deep and
rugose top of salt. Local stratal thickening indicates postdepositional
subsidence behind the escarpment. (c) Escarpment-parallel seismic line,
showing the differing suprasalt sections, and the shallow salt beneath
the Atlantis graben.
rates the two distinct structural provinces, and appears as a
re-entrant at the escarpment overlying the leading edge of the
collision between the two salt lobes.
Mad Dog and Atlantis: Similarities and differences. The
southwest Mad Dog and northeast Atlantis areas are charac-
terized by a relatively narrow and steep escarpment face,
numerous normal faults in the suprasalt section, marked
“steps” on the escarpment face, and relatively small and shal-
low slope failures (Figures 5 and 6). The headscarps of slumps
in these regions are relatively broad and irregular, and the
slumps are not characterized by steep amphitheater-shaped
scarps. There are several seaward-dipping geomorphic steps
on the escarpment related to exposed bedding planes and fault
surfaces, and that are consistent between several slumps.
The central and northeastern Mad Dog, and southeastern
Atlantis, are characterized by significantly larger amphithe-
ater-shaped slumps on the escarpment face. Head scarps in
Figure 8. (a) High-resolution seismic line through Slump 10, Mad Dog
southwest, illustrating the monocline below the escarpment, seaward
dipping normal faults, shallow salt tongue, and conformance between
the suprasalt section and top of salt. (b) Close-up of the escarpment,
ment and dip-slope conditions.
these regions vary from geomorphically sharp, to smooth and
degraded.
These differences between the northeast and southwest
portions of both the Mad Dog and Atlantis areas are attrib-
uted to local changes in slope failure mechanisms, which are
controlled by the geometry of top of salt, suprasalt movement,
and subsequent faulting. The changes in seafloor geomorphic
character, both on and above the escarpment, are related to
changes in the geometry of the top salt—sediment contact. The
top of salt in the Mad Dog area shows a significant change in
the vicinity of Slump 8, along a trend more or less perpen-
dicular to the Sigsbee Escarpment. Similarly, the top of salt in
the Atlantis area shows a significant change in the vicinity of
Slump E.
Mad Dog southwest and Atlantis northeast. In the supra-salt
section in the southwest Mad Dog (southwest of Slump 8) and
northeast Atlantis (northeast of Slump E), seismic reflectors
in the suprasalt section are more or less parallel with the inter-
preted top of salt (Figures 7a and 8), consistent with traction
between the suprasalt section and top of salt. All of the faults
identified in this area show normal offset, indicating that this
region is undergoing extension. The geologic structure under-
lying the escarpment in both areas is a south-facing mono-
cline (Figures 2, 7a, 8, and 9a). The axis of the monocline lies
within the face of the escarpment. Beds are more or less flat
lying at the top of the escarpment and southeast-dipping near
the base, producing dipslope conditions along most of the
lower face where beds dip parallel to the escarpment face. The
upslope limit of these bedding plane dipslope conditions is
defined by the intersection of the monoclinal axis with the
seafloor; fault plane dipslope conditions are present on the
seafloor above this limit (Figure 9b).
Seaward of these faults the seismic reflectors “roll over”
on the frontal monocline below the escarpment, and show sea-
APRIL 2004 THE LEADING EDGE 359

a section can develop into gravitational slides. Gravitational
Downloaded 06/06/13 to 128.59.62.83. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/
b than the displacement associated with the escarpment nor-
Figure 9. (a) Exploration seismic line across the Sigsbee Escarpment in
the northeast Atlantis area. (b) Detail of escarpment area with shallow
salt tongue below escarpment. Note seaward dipping faults cut through
the suprasalt section to the top of salt. On the upper escarpment, fault
planes in the subsurface are parallel to and coincident with local
seafloor scarps. On the lower part of the escarpment, bedding planes
show dipslope conditions.
ward dips. The seafloor in the Mad Dog Slump 10 area is more
or less parallel to the underlying seismic reflectors (and the
top of salt) indicating that this is a region of dipslope condi-
tions, with seaward-dipping bedding parallel to the mud-
line.
Southwest Mad Dog and northeast Atlantis escarpment nor-
mal faults. Extensional faults characterize the suprasalt sec-
tion in the southwest Mad Dog and northeastern Atlantis
areas, and show predominantly south-dipping fault planes
(Figure 9). The few landward-dipping faults generally are cut
by seaward-dipping faults, indicating larger and/or more
recent displacement on seaward-dipping faults. The asym-
metry of the fault system is due to the seaward vergence of
the monocline, the seaward translation of the suprasalt sedi-
ments and underlying salt nappe, and the gravitational poten-
tial of the escarpment.
In several parts of the field area the hinge of the mono-
cline is cut by scarp-parallel extensional faults that show
decreasing displacement downdip (Figure 9b). This charac-
teristic suggests that they form initially as “bending moment”
faults by outer-arc extension of the suprasalt sediments dur-
ing monoclinal folding. An origin as bending moment faults
(also called keystone faults above folds) is consistent with the
mechanical stratigraphy of a relatively strong layer (sedi-
ments) bounded by very weak, ductile layers (salt below,
water above).
Bending moment faults appear to evolve into extensional
faults that accommodate diapiric uplift of the salt (“footwall
breakaway” faults or “flap” faults). These faults are com-
monly observed in the Gulf of Mexico as outward-dipping
normal fault structures on the margins of diapirs. The foot-
wall breakaway mechanism is important for understanding
the development of the “isolated” block structure of the region
surrounding Atlantis Slump E.
With the continued rise and translation of salt and devel-
360 THE LEADING EDGE APRIL 2004
opment of the escarpment, the normal faults in the suprasalt
failure above the salt monocline can be identified by signifi-
cant back rotation within the sediments and a lack of offset of
the salt-sediment contact (Figure 9b).
Southwest Mad Dog and northeast Atlantis thrust front. A
system of predominantly seaward-vergent thrust faults is pre-
sent at the base of the escarpment in the southwest Mad Dog
and northeast Atlantis areas. The thrust faults are mostly
emergent (extend to the seafloor) and are associated with a
series of linear to arcuate seafloor scarps (Figures 5 and 6). In
some locations there also is a blind (buried and active) thrust
fault southeast of the emergent fault expressed as a warp or
fold of the seafloor.
These thrust faults may be related to extension on the
escarpment front or they may be due to compression ahead
of advancing salt. If the two fault systems are linked, we
expect displacements on the normal faults at the top of the
escarpment to be similar to displacements on the thrust faults
at the base of the escarpment. However, the amount of dis-
placement observed on the toe thrusts is significantly less
mal faults or regional extension; low amounts of contraction
on the toe-thrust fault system cannot account for the large
extensional strains at the top of the escarpment. The thrusts,
therefore, appear to accommodate some, but not all, of the
updip extension (local or regional).
Southwest Mad Dog and northeast Atlantis: Relevance to
facilities. Behind the escarpment in the southwest Mad Dog
and northeast Atlantis areas, seismic reflectors in the
suprasalt section are more or less parallel with the inter-
preted top of salt. All of the faults in the suprasalt section
show normal offset, and a down-to-the-basin dip. In both
field areas these faults project from the seafloor to the inter-
preted top of salt (Figure 9b).
Slope failures are predominantly translational dipslope fea-
tures related to escarpment-parallel normal faults and bed-
ding planes above the monoclinal toe of salt. Slumps in
southwest Mad Dog and northeast Atlantis are relatively
small, due to the large number of potential failure planes pro-
vided by seaward-dipping faults and beds. These dipslope con-
ditions lead to shallowly seated, relatively small, localized
slump deposits (Figures 5 and 6).
The dipslope conditions on the escarpment control the
overall morphology and geomorphic character of the south-
west Mad Dog and northeast Atlantis areas. Seaward-dipping
beds and seaward-dipping fault planes provide pre-existing
and preferential failure planes for shallowly seated gravita-
tional slope failure. The dipslope conditions are present on a
seaward-dipping monoclinal fold limb above shallow salt.
All of the faults in the suprasalt section are extensional, with
a significant percentage of the faults showing seaward dips
as well. Dipslope failures would be facilitated by salt-induced
oversteepening, and would lead to progressive failure by bed-
ding-parallel and fault-parallel slip surfaces of the section
along the escarpment front as the suprasalt section approaches
the escarpment front via the tank tread model. The overall
shape of the southwest Mad Dog and northeast Atlantis
slumps, with their complex, dendritic channel pattern, and
multiple small headscarps, suggests that the scale of individ-
ual gravitational failures is, at a maximum, on the order of
hundreds of meters in lateral extent, and relatively thin in
depth extent.
Along the upper part of the escarpment, seismic reflectors
dip horizontally to shallowly landward, with faults showing

Downloaded 06/06/13 to 128.59.62.83. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/
Figure 10. Isometric view of the Atlantis northeast through Atlantis
Slump E area. The Atlantis northeast region is characterized by a
narrow, steep escarpment with numerous small, shallowly seated slope
failures. Bedding planes show dip-slope conditions on the lower escarp-
ment, whereas fault planes show dip-slope conditions on the upper
escarpment (Figure 9b). In both cases, these planar features may pro-
vide pre-existing and preferential failure planes that localize slope
failures on the escarpment.
basinward dips (Figure 9). In the middle-to-lower portions of
the escarpment, below the monoclinal hinge, seismic reflec-
tors roll over and show seaward dips. Similar to the south-
west territory of Mad Dog, the northeast Atlantis area is a
region of dipslope conditions. On the upper part of the escarp-
ment, basinward-dipping normal faults provide dipslope con-
ditions and pre-existing and preferential failure planes for
slope failure (Figure 9b). On the middle and lower portions
of the escarpment, seaward-dipping strata provide dipslope
conditions. The seaward-dipping steps observed on the
seafloor (Figure 10) correspond to specific reflector packets
(stratigraphic units or faults) in the section (Figures 8b and
9b).
The ubiquity of normal faults in the suprasalt section in
both the southwest Mad Dog and northeast Atlantis is most
consistent with a salt glacier model for salt tectonics, with the
underlying salt translating seaward. The parallel, and relatively
flat, geometry of the top of salt and suprasalt sediments sug-
gests that this section is near regional and at its level of neu-
tral buoyancy. The southwest-directed translation of the
sediments is accommodated by planar, “domino-style” fault-
ing, with faults that project from the seafloor to the inter-
preted top of salt. This mechanism suggests the faults are
rooted in the salt, and that there is traction between the sed-
iment and the salt. Furthermore, the faults in the suprasalt sec-
tion imply that the sediment is being “carried along” with the
salt. Note that the vast majority of fault planes dip to the
southeast, providing pre-existing and preferential failure
planes for slumping once they are within reach of the escarp-
ment face. The seaward limit of mass gravity flows associated
with such slope failures will be limited by their initial size,
physical properties, and original position on the escarpment.
The transition between geomorphic domains on the escarp-
ment at Atlantis occurs at Slump E, and at Mad Dog occurs
at Slump 8. We use Slump 8 to illustrate the different processes
affecting the Sigsbee Escarpment in the northeast Mad Dog
area.
Mad Dog Slump 8 and the northeast Mad Dog region. In
contrast to the southwest Mad Dog area, the larger (1-2 km
across) slumps in the northeast Mad Dog area, such as
a
Figure 11. (a) Exploration seismic line through Slump 8, showing the
top of salt and its conformance between the suprasalt section, the con-
jugate normal faults underlying the graben, and the subtle local salt
high beneath the graben. Note the absence of normal faults between the
graben and the top of the slump. (b) High-resolution seismic line show-
ing detail of the escarpment at the Slump 8. Subsurface reflectors dip
up toward the slump headscarp, and are at a high angle to the seafloor.
Horizon 25 is the prominent reflector packet that projects toward the
inflection point at the base of the headscarp.
Slump 8, show steep amphitheater-shaped headscarps. The
top of the headscarp shows a sharp inflection point with the
lower continental slope, and the base of the headscarp shows
a sharp inflection point with the upper continental rise
(Figure 5). The floor of Slump 8 is relatively flat, with sev-
eral steps and benches along the slump floor. The main
headscarp of Slump 8 appears scalloped by individual,
smaller amphitheater-shaped headscarps hundreds of
meters across, and detailed examination of seafloor ren-
derings shows subtle resistant ledges suggestive of indi-
vidual bedding units. Northeast of Slump 8, the slumps
that cut the escarpment show amphitheater-shaped head-
scarps and morphologies similar to Slump 8, but they are
not as “fresh”; the intersection between the top of each head-
scarp and the lower continental slope appears more
degraded and smoothed relative to Slump 8, although there
is variation in this degree of smoothness (a function of rela-
tive youth of activity?).
Seismic reflectors in the suprasalt section behind Slump 8
are again conformable with the top of salt (Figure 11a), imply-
ing traction between the suprasalt section and top of salt.
There is a local high in the salt below the scarp-parallel graben
observed on the seafloor. The graben shows a conjugate set
of normal faults from the seafloor to a local high at the top of
salt. In contrast to the southwest Mad Dog region, there are
no normal faults in the section immediately landward of the
slump headscarp.
Below the slump headscarp, seismic reflectors within the
suprasalt section are at a high angle with the seafloor (Figure
11b), indicating that the dipslope conditions present in the
southwest Mad Dog are not present in Slump 8.
The inflection point at the base of the Slump 8 headscarp
corresponds to a distinctive high amplitude reflector package
referred to informally as horizon 25; this association is true
regardless of what arbitrary line is selected across the head-
APRIL 2004 THE LEADING EDGE 361
 a b
Downloaded 06/06/13 to 128.59.62.83. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/
Figure 12. (a) Approximate location of regional tie line between the Mad Dog and Atlantis. (b) Model of retrogressive slump formation by head-
ward migration due to seepage-induced spring sapping. (c) Exploration seismic tie-line showing the association of horizon 25 with the headscarps
of Mad Dog Slump 8 and Atlantis Slump A, and its continuity between the two areas.
scarp. In map view, this horizon is present throughout the
northeast Mad Dog. The area of highest amplitude, however,
is laterally restricted to the region behind Slump 8. Following
previous work in the area by Nibbelink, we interpret horizon
25 to be a regionally extensive sand-prone unit (sheet sand?).
All of the slumps northeast of Slump 8 in the Mad Dog
study area show a similar relationship between the base of
the headscarp and seismic reflector unit horizon 25. Based
upon the high angle of seismic reflectors with the slump head-
scarp, the amphitheater-shaped headscarp, steep headwall, flat
base, linear sidewalls, and sharp inflection points at both the
top and bottom of the headscarp, we infer that Slump 8 formed
by retrogressive failure (headward migration) related to inter-
nal overpressures (for a more detailed discussion of Slump 8,
see Orange et al. in the September 2003 TLE).
Within the Slump 8 headscarp, and in the northeast terri-
tory in general, dipslope conditions are not present on the
escarpment. Instead, subsurface reflectors are at a high angle
to the escarpment, and horizon 25 projects to the base of the
slump headscarps. The morphology of these slumps suggests
that they are forming by internally driven slope failure. As
such, the canyon formation may not be directly triggered by
salt activity, but instead may be controlled by the dynamic pore
pressure regime within the suprasalt section. Minibasin sub-
sidence in the suprasalt section can lead to strata projecting
up toward the escarpment face, as well as sedimentary load-
ing. If an aquitard is present in the section (a unit which hin-
ders fluid migration), and there is stratal continuity, then this
can lead to overpressured horizons that impact the potential
362 THE LEADING EDGE APRIL 2004
for slope failure on the escarpment face.
We note that the southwest Mad Dog area is character-
ized by numerous faults, and that these faults may interrupt
the hydrologic connectivity required to propagate overpres-
sures below horizon 25; alternatively, horizon 25 may not crop
out at the escarpment due to the structural setting. Behind and
northeast of Slump 8, in contrast, the suprasalt section is rel-
atively unfaulted, with minibasin subsidence and sediment
loading behind the escarpment creating conditions conducive
to the creation and propagation of high pore pressure (head
gradients) below horizon 25.
Western Atlantis overview. The Sigsbee Escarpment in the
western Atlantis area is relatively broad, with deeply incised
slumps that extend up to 16 000 ft north from the base of the
escarpment. Slump A in the far western Atlantis Field appears
similar to the northeastern Mad Dog slumps and Mad Dog
Slump 8, but the slumps immediately east of Slump A appear
more degraded. All faults in the suprasalt section in the west-
ern escarpment region show normal offset, indicating exten-
sion, although the faults are related to a range of processes.
Previous work by Angell indicated that faults adjacent to the
escarpment originate as “bending moment faults” above ris-
ing diapiric salt. As the diapirs continue to rise, these faults
can evolve into gravitational slides controlling slope failure
on the escarpment face with consequent rising of the diapir
into the fault footwall. Extensional faults in the western escarp-
ment area dip predominantly south and southeast, and exhibit
a long-term growth history with displacement increasing with
Downloaded 06/06/13 to 128.59.62.83. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/

Figure 14. High-resolution seismic line through the western escarp-

ment at approximately Slump B. Note diapiric salt below the escarp-
ment face, and stratal continuity over the diapir. In map view the
diapiric salt appears as an en echelon set of ridges slightly oblique to
Figure 13. Isometric view of the western Atlantis Field. Note the con- the escarpment face. These salt ridges elevate and broaden the escarp-
trast between the steep, geomorphically sharp headscarp at Slump A, ment, decreasing the local slope gradient, and also isolate the seaward
and the smoother, more degraded headscarp at Slump B. Note also the section from any potential overpressure behind the escarpment.
mass gravity flow debris in front of the slumps.
depth. Growth on these faults suggests the position of the
escarpment in this region has been stable enough to allow mul-
tiple periods of fault deformation on the same faults before
they are removed by slumping and escarpment retreat.
Atlantis southwest region—Slump A detail. In map view,
Slump A shows a morphology similar to the northeastern
slumps in the Mad Dog area: amphitheater-shaped headscarp,
steep headwall (with sharp upper and lower inflection points),
shallowly dipping base, and linear trend (compare Figures 5
and 6). In cross-section, Atlantis Slump A appears similar to
Mad Dog Slump 8, with a prominent reflector packet projecting
to the base of the slump headscarp. A regional tie line from
Mad Dog Slump 8 to Atlantis Slump A (Figure 12) shows that
the prominent reflector at the base of the Slump A headscarp
is horizon 25, which is in fact continuous across the intervening
four OCS blocks (approximately 20 km). Published work using
coherency and amplitude maps of a channel-prone sequence
in this area of Green Canyon showed that within this regional Figure 15. High-resolution seismic line across the escarpment in the
horizon there were areas of varying channel morphology western Atlantis area, showing a thrust fault and associated anticline
(channels, fans, etc.; published by Nibbelink in TLE, 1999). below the escarpment. Thrusting may be related to compression ahead
Based upon geomorphic and structural similarities with of salt, or associated with local extension on the escarpment.
Mad Dog Slump 8, and the northeast slumps of the Mad Dog
study area, we interpret the formation mechanism for Atlantis ward of the salt ridge (Figure 14). If internally driven mech-
Slump A to be similar to the formation mechanism of Mad anisms are responsible for the retrogressive failure of Slump
Dog Slump 8, namely internally driven retrogressive (head- A, then these salt ridges may provide barriers to transmitting
ward migrating) failure related to overpressure. such conditions to the escarpment front.
Atlantis southwest region between Slump A and Slump D. In There is a northwest-southeast trending syncline axis par-
map view, the slumps immediately northeast of Slump A allel to and beneath the floor of Slump B. This syncline rep-
show a similar gross morphology (broad headscarps, relatively resents a marked structural change between Slumps A and B.
deep bases), but they do not show inflection points at the top Due to folding associated with diapiric ridges there are areas
or bottom of the headscarps as sharp as Slump A. Slump B, of the escarpment front between Slumps B and D character-
in fact, appears to be a smoothed, partially infilled feature, with ized by local dipslopes (both seaward-dipping faults and
a dendritic and branching channel morphology visible on the beds). Smaller headscarps in the upper scarp area, however,
seafloor (Figure 13). have a basal inflection point associated with prominent reflec-
Evaluation of the seismic data shows that there are sev- tor packets in the subsurface; some of these are at the seafloor
eral narrow salt ridges that project toward the seafloor behind projection of horizon 25, whereas others are from deeper pack-
the escarpment between Slumps B and D, and that their trend ets (the uplift of the salt ridges has brought deeper strata to
is oblique to the escarpment front. These salt ridges show an the seafloor northeast of Slump A).
en echelon pattern in map view. The salt ridges isolate the sea- Western thrust front. A system of south vergent toe-thrust
ward escarpment section from the stratigraphic section land- faults and folds extends up to 6000 ft beyond the base of the

APRIL 2004 THE LEADING EDGE 363

Downloaded 06/06/13 to 128.59.62.83. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/
Figure 16. Exploration seismic line depth section through Slump E,
showing multiple diapiric salt tongues landward of the Slump E. These
salt ridges may isolate the Slump E section from any overpressure
generated in the suprasalt section landward of Slump E.
western escarpment. Displacement on this fault system
increases from the southwest end of the field area, to the
northeast near the base of Slump B, where the fault system
consists of imbricate thrust faults having greater offset and
more tightly folded reflectors. Northeast of Slump B dis-
placement rapidly decreases and dies out near the base of
Slump D.
In contrast to the southwest Mad Dog and northeast
Atlantis regions, there are fewer prominent normal faults that
cut the escarpment face in the region of thrusting ahead of the
escarpment in the western Atlantis area (Figure 15). This sug-
gests that either the thrusting is related to compression ahead
of advancing salt, or it is related to local updip extension that
predates the present-day escarpment front.
Atlantis Slump E detail: An isolated block. Due to its loca-
tion relative to planned facilities, Slump E is central to the geo-
hazard evaluation of the Atlantis Field development. The salt
ridges in the southwest Atlantis area continue northwest of
Slump E, and yet Slump E shows a distinctive seafloor mor-
phology of an amphitheater-shaped lower headscarp, a mid-
escarpment bench, and a smoother, yet more irregular upper
escarpment (Figures 6 and 10).
Evaluation of both the exploration and high-resolution 3D
seismic data sets indicates that the en echelon diapiric salt
ridges identified behind Slumps B-D continue behind Slump
E, and form a diapiric wall northwest of and behind Slump
E. North of Slump E lies the shallow salt that is present below
the suture zone/graben. Northeast of Slump E is another shal-
low salt section that forms the southerly limit of the eastern
salt province. Relatively recent inflation of the salt ridge behind
Slump E was accompanied by salt deflation below the escarp-
ment front, which resulted in a decrease of the escarpment
slope gradient, and a stabilizing of this seafloor. We note that
this area of the escarpment is distinctive in its lack of slump-
ing and slope failures, and relate this to the salt tectonics adja-
cent to Slump E (see Figure 10).
Salt ridges and shallow salt surround the Atlantis Slump
E section, leading to a “slump” section that is actually a coher-
ent block seaward of, and isolated from, the rest of the suprasalt
section by diapiric salt ridges on all sides, and a free face open
to the seafloor at the escarpment. Based upon these observa-
tions, we refer to Atlantis Slump E as an “isolated” section
surrounded by salt. Exploration and high resolution (Figures
16 and 17) seismic data show that there are multiple salt ridges
behind Slump E, with a complex history of salt motion, ero-
sion, and sediment accumulation.
364 THE LEADING EDGE APRIL 2004
Figure 17. Arbitrary high-resolution seismic line through Slump E
(location shown in inset). Yellow lines indicate unconformities within
the Slump E section. Pink arrows show interpreted location of salt.
Exploration seismic data were used to interpret the isolated nature of
the section, whereas high-resolution seismic data allow for a detailed
evaluation of the Slump E section, and correlation of the mapped
unconformities with borehole data. The isolation of the Slump E section
ahead of salt, and the exposure of sandy unconformities at the escarp-
ment face, suggest that Slump E cannot support the overpressures
encountered at Mad Dog Slump 8. These two “slumps” are related to
fundamentally different processes.
Both the exploration and high-resolution 3D data were crit-
ical to deciphering the complex geology within and around
Slump E. Vertical and arbitrary slices through the exploration
data demonstrated the isolated nature of the escarpment sec-
tion (Figure 16), whereas time slices of the exploration seis-
mic data showed the distribution and en echelon nature of
the salt ridges in map view. The high-resolution seismic data
allowed detailed evaluation of the complex stratal geometries,
and the identification of distinct stratigraphic sequences sep-
arated by unconformities (Figure 17). Unconformities within
the Slump E block may separate sequences of significantly dif-
ferent sediment physical properties, with changes in sedi-
ment strength and consolidation state expected downhole.
Unconformities can also be sand prone. The combination of
the nearby free face (which would allow overpressure to bleed
off) and isolation seaward of salt ridges (which would pre-
vent overpressured fluids from communicating with the
Slump E section) suggest that the Slump E section cannot
support excess overpressures. This interpretation is supported
by in-situ pore pressure measurements.
In contrast to Mad Dog Slump 8, the hydrogeology of
Slump E would be dominated by the shallow salt ridges that
surround it. In this system, seawater (or originally seawater-
density pore fluids) interacts with the shallow salt ridges and
diapirs, increases in density, and flows in a density-driven man-
ner downward through the section and toward the escarp-
ment face utilizing whatever permeable pathways are present.
The presence of saline pore fluid brines within the Slump E
sediments supports this density-driven hydrologic model.
Despite its apparent geomorphic similarity to Mad Dog Slump
8, Atlantis Slump E presents a fundamentally different sys-
tem and lacks any geohazard potential related to seepage-
induced (overpressure-driven) slope failure.
Summary and implications. Salt tectonics dominates the geo-
hazard environment of both the Mad Dog and Atlantis
prospects. By combining exploration 3D seismic, high-reso-
lution 3D seismic, AUV bathymetry, AUV side scan, AUV sub-
bottom profiling, piston cores, boreholes, and ROV
 observations we have formulated a process-based set of mod-
els that address the structural and geomorphic setting of the
present-day Sigsbee Escarpment, and the variation in processes
that occur throughout the two field areas.
All of the geophysical data indicate that deformation in
the suprasalt section is extensional above and near the escarp-
ment front; the toe/base of the escarpment may be undergo-
ing local contraction due to compressive stresses, but the state
Downloaded 06/06/13 to 128.59.62.83. Redistribution subject to SEG license or copyright; see Terms of Use at http://library.seg.org/
of stress in the suprasalt section is predominantly extensional.
Our observations indicate that the salt glacier, or tank
tread/tractor tread models are the most appropriate for under-
standing how the suprasalt section deforms along this part of
the Sigsbee Escarpment. This implies that faults farther back
from the escarpment front may eventually be closer to the
escarpment face. The ubiquity of extensional faults above the
escarpment indicates that the suprasalt section is not experi-
encing horizontal maximum compressive stresses which
would be characteristic of thrust environments (e.g., the salt
is not experiencing a regional “push,” where it would fail by
compression and thrusting in the suprasalt section). The salt
sheet can still be propagating seaward, but it’s flowing under
its own weight, rather than being pushed.
The combination of normal faults and frontal monocline
at the escarpment leads to seaward-dipping normal faults, and
seaward-dipping strata, that can provide pre-existing and
preferential failure planes for gravitationally driven slope fail-
ure. These dipslope conditions dominate the escarpment in
the southwest Mad Dog, and northeast Atlantis, and lead to
relatively small, shallow-seated slope failures.
In contrast to the dipslope areas, the northwest Mad Dog
and southwest Atlantis areas show larger, deep-seated,
amphitheater-shaped slumps. Geophysical and geotechnical
data from Mad Dog Slump 8 are most consistent with an
internally driven formation mechanism, with overpressure
confined below a regional sand-prone unit, horizon 25.
Analysis of the evolution of hydrocarbon migration at Shah
Deniz suggests that when an initially overpressured sand-
prone horizon is exposed and drained, it creates an intrafor-
mational seal capable of confining overpressures to the sections
above and below it. The presence of horizon 25 at the north-
east Mad Dog and southwest Atlantis Slump A slope failures
suggests that this process is responsible for the geomorphic
character of these regions. The relatively deep salt, landward
dip of the suprasalt section, and lack of faults in the suprasalt
section may provide the conditions necessary for propagat-
ing overpressures to the escarpment front in these regions.
Northeast of Atlantis Slump A, however, the deep-seated
slumps in the Atlantis area are more degraded. We show that
a set of en echelon diapiric salt ridges are present behind these
slumps, and isolate them from the landward suprasalt sec-
tion. This isolation by salt ridges culminates in Atlantis Slump
E, which is isolated on three sides by salt, with the fourth side
exposed on the escarpment face. The salt effectively isolates
Slump E from confined overpressures, and instead leads to a
brine-driven hydrologic system.
For both types of failure, geophysical evaluation of high-
resolution data and geologic evaluation of slump debris below
the escarpment can be used to interpret the recurrence inter-
val of failures capable of reaching the continental rise. Given
the link between salt activity and oversteepening of the dip-
slope regions, an increase in gravitational failures should fol-
low an increase in salt activity. Note that the internally driven
slope failures, such as Mad Dog Slump 8, may be controlled
more by pore pressure fluctuations, which may not be directly
linked to salt activity. In these regions a similar evaluation of
geophysical and geologic data may be used to evaluate past
slump activity.
Although the geology of the Sigsbee Escarpment is com-
plex, we show that it is possible to differentiate the forcing
mechanisms responsible for shaping the seafloor in the Mad
Dog and Atlantis Fields. An understanding of these mecha-
nisms, and the processes that impact the seafloor and shallow
section, improves our ability to constrain the geohazards that
impact the Mad Dog and Atlantis prospects.
Suggested reading. At the 2003 OTC meeting (Houston, Texas),
14 papers were presented in two sessions on the detailed geol-
ogy, geomorphology, geotechnical and geohazard environment
at the Mad Dog and Atlantis field areas (papers 15157-15162,
15199-15204, 15269, and 15402). Taken together, these 14 papers
provide a comprehensive analysis of the Mad Dog and Atlantis
field areas. AAPG Memoir 65 Salt Tectonics: A Global Perspective
(1995) provides an excellent overview of the topic, and includes
numerous papers on the Gulf of Mexico (see especially papers
by Diegel et al., Fletcher et al., and Peel et al.). Additional papers
on the subject were also published in 1995 as part of the GCS-
SEPM meeting on “Salt, Sediment and Hydrocarbons.” For a
well-illustrated glossary of salt tectonics, see Jackson and Talbot’s
University of Texas BEG Geological Circular 91-4, 1991. Swierz
addressed the correlation between seismic stratigraphy and salt
tectonics along the Sigsbee Escarpment in southeastern Green
Canyon (CRC Handbook of Geophysical Exploration at Sea, 1992).
Jackson and Vandeville discuss the association of salt diapirism
and extension (GSA Bulletin, 1994). Detailed descriptions of salt-
related fault familes can be found in Rowan et al. (AAPG Bulletin,
1999) and in Angell et al.’s 2003 OTC paper 15402. For a discus-
sion of the Mississippi Fan fold belt, see Weimer and Buffler
(AAPG Bulletin, 1992). George et al. (OTC 2002 paper 14139) pro-
vide a detailed discussion of high-resolution AUV surveys in the
Mad Dog and Atlantis field areas. Nibbelink, in TLE (1999), pub-
lished a study of the Mad Dog and Atlantis area, and provides
map view imagery of some of the supra-salt channel and chan-
nel sand units (“Modeling deepwater reservoir analogs through
analysis of recent sediments using coherence, seismic amplitude,
and bathymetry data, Sigsbee Escarpment, Green Canyon, Gulf
of Mexico”). For a detailed analysis of retrogressive slope failure
and Mad Dog Slump 8, see the article by Orange et al. in the
September 2003 TLE. TLE
Acknowledgments: The authors thank BP America and its partners, Unocal
and BHP Billiton Petroleum (for Mad Dog Field), and BHP Billiton
Petroleum (for Atlantis Field), for permission to publish. The authors thank
WesternGeco for permission to publish the exploration 3D data. The ideas
and models presented in this paper are the culmination of four years of team-
work with the Mad Dog and Atlantis teams. Philippe Jeanjean (BP America)
coordinated both the Mad Dog and Atlantis geohazard evaluation efforts,
and his guidance and support are gratefully acknowledged. From BP, we
thank Bill Gafford, Jim Thomson, Kevin Hampson, Trevor Evans, Herlinde
Mannaerts, Greg Riley, and Ed Lisle for their assistance and insight into
the Mad Dog and Atlantis field areas. From Unocal, we thank John Hoffman.
Bob Bruce (consulting geologist) provided valuable feedback and insight into
the Mad Dog and Atlantis field areas, and in particular, the interaction of
salt and overpressure. The authors would like to specifically thank Mark
Rowan (Rowan Consutling, Inc.), Bruno Vendeville (University of Lille),
and Frank Peel (BHP Billiton) for their candid and extensive comments
regarding salt tectonics. Discussions with Jean-Pierre Brun (Geosciences
Rennes) regarding alternative models for salt sheet propagation were also
helpful. Tim Buddin is now at Midland Valley, Denver, Colorado, U.S.
Corresponding author: Dan_Orange@AOAGeophysics.com
APRIL 2004 THE LEADING EDGE 365