Chapter 2
+
Structure and Stratigraphy
of the Gulf of Suez, Egypt
Karsten I. Schiitz
Conaco inc.
Houston, Texas, ULS.A.
INTRODUCTION
Since 1886 when the first oil was discovered and
subsequently produced in the Middle East on Gemsa
Peninsula, the Gulf of Suez has challenged the imagi-
nations of geologists and continues to do so. The Gulf
of Suez stretches over 300 km between the city of
Suez and Ras Mohamed (Figures 1-3). The modern
sea inundates only one-third of the geologic graben
feature between the Sinai basement uplift and the
Eastern Desert mountains. For simplicity, the whole
graben system onshore and offshore is referred to as,
Gulf of Suez or “Clysmic Gulf” (“Clysma” being the
Roman name of Suez) (Hume, 1921; Heybroek, 1965).
The water body of the Gulf of Suez is rather shal-
low with a water depth of meters. Only in the south-
‘em part off Ras Mohamed does a deeper trench enter
the gulf from the Red Sea. We define the southern end.
of the gulf as the line from Ras Mohamed to Shadwan
Island and Hurghada. This line follows approximately
a 200-m water-depth contour, where the Red Sea
begins. The Gulf of Suez is the northern extension of
the 2000-km-long Red Sea rift system, which is a
Cenozoic structure slicing through the once-continu-
ous Arabo-African craton. Geologically, the Gulf of
Suez is a complex graben/half-graben system located
between two basement uplifts—the Sinai and the
Eastern Desert mountains. The graben cuts through
older structural trends having ages from Precambrian
to Eocene. The structure of the Gulf of Suez is domi-
nated by normal faults and tilted fault blocks, which
were formed after the Oligocene, mainly during
Miocene time. The axial portion of the gulf underwent
the most subsidence and contains the thickest deposits
of lower Miocene sediments and middle/upper
Miocene evaporites. In contrast to the Red Sea graben
system, where motion is presently occurring along its
entire length, the Gulf of Suez experienced extension
primarily during Miocene time.
“The origins of rifts, whether by lithospheric
stretching (passive) or as grabens over sites of man-
tle upwarps (active) is currently controversial, par-
ticularly in the interpretation of ancient ‘failed’ rift
+
37
systems. .. . Although it is now generally accepted
that rifts reflect tension, there are divergent opinions
as to what causes the tensional regime. Until relative-
ly recently rift grabens were viewed as fault-bounded
basins initiated at the crest of lithospheric domes or
upwarps .... sited over mantle plumes. ... Therefore,
they have often been interpreted in plate tectonic
terms . . . even though many such rifts are wholly
confined to continental areas. . ..” (Sellwood and
Netherwood, 1984, p. 43, 44). This is particularly true
for the Gulf of Suez because, similar to other African
grabens, itis located entirely inside a cratonic area.
‘Toward the north, the African continent, including
the Sinai, extends far into the eastern Mediterranean,
Sea, which is underlain by a thick section of Cenozoic,
Mesozoic and, in part at least, Paleozoic sediments on
a continental crust (Orwig, 1982; Hinz, 1974; Morelli,
1978; Harsch et al,, 1981). Toward the south, the Gulf
of Suez meets the Red Sea, which is clearly a nascent
ocean basin. However, the northern part of the Red
Sea is still underlain by tilted basement blocks. “An
axial trough is not present north of about 25°N”
(Drake and Girdler, 1964) “. . . and the large, linear
magnetic anomalies associated with the axial trough
{in the southern Red Sea] are not present” (Cochran,
11983, p. 55). Only south of 21°N can oceanic crust
with magnetic anomalies parallel to the central
trough be found (Cochran, 1983, p. 41, 55).
The Gulf of Suez graben was formed after the
Eocene, as shown by structural trends and sediment
distribution of the Cretaceous and lower and middle
Eocene. Pre-Eocene or even Carboniferous origin is
not supported by the geological evidence. Pre-
Miocene sediments were deposited on a craton or in
epicontinental seas. Sedimentation was controlled, at
least during the Jurassic, Cretaceous, and Neogene,
by east-west-trending faults (Figures 4, 5). Rifting
began in the Gulf of Suez after the Oligocene, and is,
documented primarily by an upper Oligocene plana-
tion surface on both sides of the Gulf of Aqaba and
the southern Gulf of Suez (Quennell, 1984). In addi-
tion, basalt intrusions and flows in the Gulf of Suez58
Figure 1. Major tectonic elements of northern Egypt and Sinai. AF = Alamein
fault, BF = Alam el Bueib fault, KH = Kattanyia Horst, PF = Pelusium fault,
jebel Maghara fault, NG = Northern Galala Plateau, WA = Wadi Araba,
are all dated as earliest Miocene (20 to 23 Ma;
Garfunkel and Bartov, 1977). The basalts at Gebel
Qatrani and in the Western Desert (Williams and
Small, 1984) are age equivalent.
The sea invaded the Gulf of Suez area again during,
the early Miocene. The basal Nukhul Formation con-
tains conglomerates, limestones, and evaporites.
Differential erosion is limited to the crest of fault
blocks, indicating that initial phases of rifting
occurred near sea level. Initial faulting, therefore, was
small scale, with displacement in the 10-m range
Subsidence and sedimentation, however, accelerated
shortly after Nukhul and contemporaneous with
Rudeis Formation (Burdigalian) deposition, concur-
rent with uplift of the graben shoulders. Erosion
reached basement at Gebel Zeit during the
Burdigalian, as shown by Globigerina limestones
directly on basement. These Globigerina limestones
were deposited on a submerged basement ridge,
which originally had experienced subaerial erosion
a
Figure 2. Location map. A.R. = Abu Rudeis, A.S. =
Ain Sukna, BEL = Belayim, G.A. = Gebel Araba,
G.Z. = Gebel Zeit, N.G. = Northern Galala Plateau,
S.G. Southern Galala Plateau, S.A. = Saint
Anthonys Monastery, S.P. = Saint Paul's
Monastery, 1 = Ras Budran oil field, 2
field, 3 = Belayim Marine oil field, 4 = July oil field,
5 = Ramadan oil field, 6 = Morgan oil field.Structure and Stratigraphy of the Gulf of Suez, Egypt 59
MAJOR FAULT
> 2000 m
FAULT
/|& onFeLo
|G easeuenr
Figure 3, Structural features map.
Tectonic activity slowed several times during the
Miocene. Major quiescent events occurred during,
deposition of the mid-Rudeis (marking the transition
from synrift to postrift sedimentation), at the base of
the Kareem, and throughout the Belayim. After the
Langhian, block-faulting decreased and subsidence
occurred ‘on a more regional scale, predominantly
along the major graben-shoulder faults.
In summary, after continental erosion and minor
deposition of red beds in the Oligocene, the firstSchiitz
Stratigraphy FIED, SEA
Me roman s
Holocene Post a eee
= zeit SEBEL HGRA
Prices m SERA
Upper
te zat em.
south foe SINAL so
Gharib Fm.
Middle im Fi e
Miocene Belayim Fm. Swan ARAB
Kareem Fim A
FETA \
Lower Ate
Miocene [=Ez=]—-Rudeis Fm. eat
fromsany 422 2 is [ARABIA
ra Z :
mares a JIN
ae fom Be
E ttm es N
Eocene beaten. anew Z
tome EY Thebes Fm. ea Vip,
: ix UASSSISS
acca Emam
Maastricht. ot
. FES} sudrFm. Figure 5, Postulated pre-Miocene fault pattern.
$lcampanian Brow Let
i Santonian
3 |coniatan Matulla Fm. breakup started in the earliest Miocene, accelerated
2 during the early Miocene, quieted in middle Miocene
| Wata Fm. ate Langhian and Serravallian), resumed deposition
Turonian To during the late Serravallian, and continued during the
§ Abu Gece Fm. | Tortonian; however, on a broader scale, the whole
(Cenomar Raha Fm. Gulf of Suez subsided as one graben along the main
re[Apt-Albian ["**-] < graben faults. This indicates that extension had
wanarm. | $ decoupled the two sides of the graben, In the Gulf of
Jurassic 2 Suez, major uplift and rifting clearly occurred simul-
pam taneously. Because the uplift is believed to indicate
ia heating and expansion of the lithosphere, timing rela-
_ 3 tive to the faulting and subsidence is crucial to under-
icarssuararars 2 standing the rifting process (Le Pichon et al, 1982).
4 Since 1962, when Said’s Geology of Egypt was pub-
Devonian lished, many kilometers of seismic new exploration
o wells, LANDSAT, and several mapping projects have
Suren eee é increased our geological knowledge. The best way to
ondovean g proceed seems to be to present a regional compilation
3 of generally agreed upon facts, add our new oil explo-
Cambrian ration data, and document, via stratigraphic fine-tun-
— ing, the geologic history of the Gulf of Suez. The aim
of the first part of this chapter is to present the state-
Figure 4. Stratigraphic column of the study area.
of-the-art of the structural interpretation of the Gulf of
Suez; the second part of this chapter shows that, priorStructure and Stratigraphy of the Gulf of Suez, Egypt 61
to the Eocene, the stratigraphic units in the Gulf of
Suez correlate well with those in the Western Desert
and the Sinai, because they were deposited on the
same part of the African craton. From the Miocene, a
marine environment prevails and extensional tecton-
ics controlled sedimentation in the Gulf of Suez.
‘The figures in this chapter were prepared using,
logs of more than 100 exploration wells and more
than 2000 km of mainly marine seismic data.
STRUCTURE
Regional Tectonic Framework
and Pre-Miocene Fault Pattern
A tectonic interpretation of the Gulf of Suez has to
include the regional structural configuration includ-
ing the Western Desert, the eastern Mediterranean
Sea, the Sinai, the Gulf of Aqaba, and the Red Sea
This interpretation also should include the underlying
pre-Oligocene fault pattern, which can be studied
much easier outside the Gulf of Suez, for example in
the Western Desert, where it is not overprinted by
Miocene faulting
I consider the northern part of Africa, the eastern
Mediterranean, and Sinai, inciuding the Gulf of Suez,
as one major block that, since the Cretaceous, has
changed relatively little in comparison to Arabia,
where motion presently is occurring along the entire
length of the Red Sea. Geophysical investigations
(seismic refraction profiling) in the Herodotus Basin
and in the Levantine Basin in the eastern Medit.
ranean area (Morelli, 1978) show that the Moho di
continuity lies at 26 to 27 km. “The results clearly
demonstrate the continental nature of the entire
region south of the allochthonous nappes and thrust
sheets of the Alpine orogenic zone (i.e., south of
Cyprus and Turkey)” (Orwig, 1982, p. 4). “Compar-
able data were reported by Ben-Avraham et al. (1976)
for the Levantine Basin, although these authors main-
tain that the crust is a composite of oceanic and cont
rental fragments. Granted that this may be so, the age
of the crust is nevertheless pre-Jurassic and probably
pre-Carboniferous. For all practical purposes, since
the time of the formation of the crust, the region has
evolved structurally and stratigraphically upon a
rigid crustal block whose properties and thicknesses
are within limits defined as continental. The signifi-
‘ance of this conclusion is vital for the understanding,
of structural evolution and style, and especially in
evolution of hydrocarbon prospectiveness” (Orwig,
1982). In addition, it now seems that the Turkish=
African plate boundary is not related to a subduction
zone, but to an accretional continental margin. "The
nature of the assumed Turkish-African plate bound
ary is investigated in the light of new seismological
and geologic-tectonic data. . . . From the observed
relationship between extensional, compressional and
strike-slip deformation, it is concluded that the
‘Turkish-African convergence results in a sort of com-
plex crustal welding within a broad and diffuse zone
rather than in active consumption of African lithos-
phere beneath the Cypriote-Tauride arc” (Harsch et
al, 1981).
“The crust of the Levantine Sea, according to new
interpretations of geophysical data, is continental
rather than oceanic. Thickness of the crust is about 20
km to the north of the Nile Cone and increases up to
30 km beneath the Mediterranean Ridge” (Harsch et
al, 1981, p. 374)
Taking these interpretations into account, one
should consider the eastern Mediterranean, northern
Egypt, and Sinai as part of one plate (in the sense of
plate tectonics), that is, 8 part of Africa
The opening of the Gulf of Suez is certainly related
to the initial opening of the Red Sea. Based on the sed-
iment and evaporite record in both basins, this is
probably one event. During most of carly and middle
‘Miocene, all subbasins of the gulf were in full marine
connection with each other and with the major basin
to the south, the Red Sea. Exploration wells drilled on
both sides of the northern Red Sea document similar
Miocene sediment and evaporite sequences as occur
in the Gulf of Suez, and, hence, a comparable tectonic
history. Wells (Quseir B-1X, RSO B”’95-1, RSO Z°95-1)
south of Hurghada and on the Saudi Arabian side
(argan-2) encountered equivalents to the Kareem
and Rudeis formations under a thick Miocene evapor-
ite cover. Likewise, lower(?) and middle Miocene
lithothamnium carbonates bordering the western
scarp of the Gulf of Suez and the Red Sea prove a uni-
form, long, coastline, which indicates that the Gulf of
‘Suez and the early Red Sea were flooded at essentially
the same time
The Agaba/Dead Sea rift is considered a transform
plate boundary between the Arabian plate and the
Sinai/Levant plate without uniformity along its length
(Quennell, 1984). The origin of the Aqaba/Dead Sea
rift generally has been linked with that of the Red Sea.
The widening of the Red Sea caused strike-slip in the
Gulf of Aqaba, ceating a rhomb-shaped pull-apart
graben very different from the Gulf of Suez.
“The Red Sea occupies an elongate escarpment-
bounded depression 250 to 450 km wide between the
uplifted Arabian and African shields. Morphologi-
cally, the Red Sea consists of shallow continental
shelves, a wide ‘main trough’ which extends from
about 15°N to the tip of the Sinai peninsula (28°N) at
a depth of 600 to 1000 m, and a narrow ‘axial trough’
found from 15°N to 24°N which is about 2000 m
deep, usually less than 50 km wide, and is character-
ized by steep walls and irregular bottom topogra-
phy... . The axial trough is associated with
large-amplitude magnetic anomalies, which have
been identified as sea floor spreading anomalies .
and have led to a general acceptance of the fact that
the axial trough has been generated by sea floor
spreading over the past 3 to 5 my... . The origin
and nature of the crust underlying the main trough
and shelves is much less certain. Seismic reflection
studies showed a strong reflector (reflector S) at
about 0.5 s below the surface of the main trough.
This reflector was later demonstrated by DSDPCy Schiitz
drilling to be the top Miocene evaporite deposit,
which underlies all of the main trough” (Cochran,
1983, p. 41). Cochran further proves that in the north:
ern Red Sea, north of 24°N, where there is no evi-
dence of mid-ocean ridge tectonics, the main trough is
underlain in general by tilted fault blocks of continen-
tal crust hidden under the extremely thick salt. The
magnetic anomalies north of 24°N coincide with grav-
ity anomalies and thus are interpreted as intrusive
bodies and not as sea-floor spreading anomalies
"The geological and geophysical data of the Red
Sea suggest that oceanic crust in the Red Sea is limited
to the axial trough and the main trough is underlain
by faulted and intruded continental crust. This, how-
ever, does not necessarily mean that only a minimal
amount of motion has occurred between Africa and
Arabia, In fact, significant non-sea floor spreading
extension is required by the documented motion on
the Dead Sea transform’ (Cochran, 1983, p. 42). The
geological results from the Gulf of Suez, and especial-
ly from the Gebel Zeit and the Hurghada/Islands
areas, strongly support this view.
‘Africa moved from the Triassic to the Cretaceous
some 2000 km eastward in relation to Europe
Wrenching due to an unknown resistance (probably
collision and accretion of microcontinents) at its
northern margin occurred, and major blocks on the
continent were sheared off along regional wrench
faults. These wrench faults are well documented in
the Western Desert and near the Gulf of Suez (Figures
1,5) and are as follows (fault direction or position is,
in parentheses): Alamein fault (northeast-southwest),
Pelusium line continuing in the Kattanyia fault, corre-
sponding northwest-southeast Alam el Bueib/Wadi
Natrun fault, Gebel Maghara fault (northeast-south-
west), Wadi Araba faults (parallel to the Pelusium
line), Ain Sukna fault (possible ancient continuation
of the Natrun fault), and Belayim, Morgan, and
Ranim faults (Figure 5).
Considerable changes of sediment thickness in the
Jurassic accompany these major fault lines, e., at the
Kattanyia fault west of Cairo, in the Abu Gharadig
basin in the Western Desert, and in the Darag Basin of
the Gulf of Suez.
‘The Pelusium line is an important limit of the Sinai
block, especially during the Oligocene as a major
hinge line downthrown to the north, and as a bound-
ary between continental sedimentation in the south
and marine sedimentation in the north. It has a mod-
em left-lateral component of more than 1 km.
In the Gulf of Suez, only the Ain Sukna fault and
the Wadi Araba structure are well known enough to
show the Jurassic/Cretaceous origin. However, simi-
lar tectonic elements exist in the Belayim Marine high,
north of Morgan field and farther south at Gebel Zeit,
proven by thickness and facies changes in Cretaceous
sediments (Figure 5)
Determining the time of active faulting is difficult.
‘The Ain Sukna fault and the Gebel Maghara fault
certainly were active during the Jurassic, as is indi-
cated by the enormous increase in the thickness of
the Jurassic toward the north. The Wadi Araba fault
‘was reactivated several times because it controlled
deposition of the Paleozoic Nubia sandstones and
the Sudr, Esna, and Thebes formations. In the
Western Desert, strike-slip motion is documented in
the subsurface by flower structures in post-
Cretaceous horizons, for example at the Alam el
Bueib fault. Horizontal offsets of 1-10 km at these
major faults exist (Figure 1). In comparison, no
strike-slip motion is evident on seismic in the Gulf
of Suez. On the surface, the Wadi Araba fault, with
right-lateral offset, seems to be the only possible site
of strike-slip motion.
Gulf of Suez Structural Features
Gulf of Suez Subdivision
The Gulf of Suez can be subdivided into a series
of subbasins and platforms that, to some degree,
have their own structural and sedimentary history
(Figures 6,7).
The onshore subbasins are the West Bakr basin,
Zeit Bay basin, Sinai onshore area with Wadi
Gharandal and the El Qaa basin, The offshore sub-
basins are the Darag Basin, Issaran-October-Abu
Zenima basins, South Belayim Basin, Morgan Basin,
Gebel Zeit Basin, and Hurghada /Islands area
These basins are generally large half-grabens and
are separated by structural highs. They are generally
bounded on one side by a major fault with a displace-
ment of 1 km to a maximum of 5 km. Complications
occur when the regional dip of the half-grabens
changes from southwest to northeast. Previous work-
ers have recognized the dip changes and have accord-
ingly subdivided the gulf into dip regimes; however,
not all workers have realized the importance of cross
faults, which separate these dip regimes.
Basement and Onshore Plateaus
The Gulf of Suez is bounded by two major base-
ment massifs, the Eastern Desert basement and the
Sinai basement (Figures 3, 6,7). These two massifs are
plunging to the north and are bounded by major
faults on the gulf side. The Eastern Desert basement is
slightly tilted to the west. The Sinai basement is trian-
gular and dips northward. Basement structures gen-
erally trend east-west or, like many of the dikes,
northeast-southwest. Some possible Najd-trending
faults (north-northwest-south-southeast) are present
in the Wadi Feiran area,
Three smaller elongate basement blocks inside the
Gulf of Suez acted as relatively stable highs during
the Miocene. These are the Esh el Melaha range and.
Gebel Zeit on the western side, and the Gebel Araba
on the Sinai side. They are tilted fault blocks with
major faults bounding the blocks toward the gulf
Fault displacements range between 1000 m at Esh el
Melaha and 5 km at Gebel Zeit. The pre-Miocene sedi-
mentary cover dips with the same angle as basement
and reaches 45° at Gebel Zeit (Figures 8, 9, 10). These
surface fault blocks are used as analogs for the sub-
surface, about which we have much less information.Structure and Stratigraphy of the Gulf of Suez, Egypt 3
22 RAS BUDRAN FIELD
3 OCTOBER FIELD
4= ABU RUDEIS FIELD
‘5=SIDRI FIELD
Figure 6. Structure of the northern Gul
‘The main faults at these basement ridges generally
are linear, but are cut and offset by transverse faults,
which dissect main faults into segments that are not
necessarily aligned (Figures 3, 6). This misalignment
is very obvious at the Gebel Araba block, where
major Gulf of Aqaba parallel fault offsets the base-
ment in a left lateral direction. Farther north at Gebel
‘Abu Durba and Gebel Nazzazat, other Aqaba parallel
transverse faults have displacements of about 2000 m
down to the north (Figures 6, 7)
Similar transverse faults are present at the southern
end of Gebel Zeit and at Esh el Melaha; however, the
offsets are not so obvious and probably smaller scale.
‘The Aqaba trend seems to have less influence on the
If of Suez.
west side of the gulf, which is the more stable African
block. In general, very little lateral displacement or
shear is visible in the Gulf of Suez. The observation of
transverse faults (or cross faults) in outcrops and on
LANDsar has been used to help interpret the subsurface
structure Sultan and Schiitz, 1984) (Figures 3,6, 7).
Gebel Zeit
Gebel Zeit (Figures 2, 7-10) is the crest of the steeply
dipping pre-Miocene flank of the Zeit Bay basin and is
one of the prominent basement outcrops along the Gulf
of Suez coast. The main Gebel Zeit has a maximum ele-
vation of 456 m above sea level. Excellent outcrops of
all strata allow a detailed interpretation of the tectonic64 Schiitz
28° 30"
LINE OF
DIP CHANGE
E
BELAYIM MARINE FIELD
2=WULY FIELD
3 = RAMADAN FIELD
{4 = MORGAN FIELD
5= AMAL FIELD
6 = ZEIT BAY FIELD
Figure 7. Structure of the southern Gulf of Suez.
history (Zankl and Klitzsch, 1985). A large area, prob-
ably bounded by old Jurassic east-west-trending
faults, was gently tilted northward during the pre-
Miocene and the southern elevated areas were erod-
ed. “Encrustation of an irregular pre-Miocene relief
by silica indicates a long-lasting influence of ascend:
ing solutions during an arid period of time.
Depressions are filled with residual material, mainly
cherty conglomerates and boulders” (Zankl and
Klitzsch, 1985, p. 32).
During the early Miocene, the formation of elon-
gated, narrow, gulf-paralle! blocks was initiated. In
the Aquitanian, a shallow-marine sea transgressed
the initially gently tilted blocks. Shallow-water car-
bonates cover the remaining relief in the northwest-
em part of the main Gebel Zeit and little Gebel Zeit.
‘The block of the little Gebel Zeit was down-faulted
in relation to the southern edge of the main Gebel
Zeit. In the lower Miocene, the tectonic activity
increased and the Gebel Zeit block was further rotat-
ed to the west. Its crest, for a short time, was uplift
ed, subaerially exposed, and extensively eroded
down to basement. During Rudeis deposition, the
block was rapidly down-faulted and submerged.
Submarine canyons developed along fractures per-
pendicular to the elongation of the blocks. On sub-
marine relief directly on the basement, thin pelagic
Globigerina limestones were deposited indicating rel-
atively deep water. Pelagic marls (“Globigerina
Mar”) fill the relief of the Rudeis sea. Over the sub
merged high of the Gebel Zeit a relatively thin
Rudeis Formation (several meters to 20 m) was
deposited in contrast to adjacent lows, where the
Rudeis Formation reaches over 1000 m. The Gebel
Zeit high remained submerged, but received only
reduced sedimentation during deposition of theEE wren
Figure 8. Gebel Zeit geological map.
Structure and Stratigraphy of the Gulf of Suez, Egypt 6
Kareem and Belayim, and the evaporite deposition.
Uplift and subsequent erosion of Miocene strata to
basement occurred only after the Pliocene, as
Pliocene-age shallow-water carbonates on the west-
ern flank prove.
During the Miocene, Gebel Zeit was continuously
tilted westward, as the dip increase in the various for-
mations demonstrate. Pre-Miocene strata attain dips
of up to 45°. The evaporites strata dip approximately
15-20° and Pliocene sediments dip at least 5°. The
enormous uplift of Gebel Zeit is due to isostatic
movement. Displacement on the east-bounding fault
is in the range of 5 km from the top basement on
Gebel Zeit down to basement in the Gebel Zeit Basin
Figures 8-10).
Esh El Melaha Range
‘The Esh el Melaha Range is a smaller, but longer,
edition of Gebel Zeit. Esh el Melaha is not uplifted as
much as Gebel Zeit and possibly stayed with its crest
SW zersay Basin
sw WESTERN GEBEL ZEIT GEBEL ZEIT NE
GEBEL GEBEL ZEIT BASIN
niaua._BASIN
Figure 10. Geological cross section E-E’.66 Schiitz,
near sea level for long time intervals as the fringing
Miocene reefs on its eastern side prove. Parts of the
crest of Esh el Melaha were exposed subaerially dur-
ing the early Miocene as the onlapping Miocene reefal
limestones and granite boulder conglomerates within
the limestones demonstrate. The recent uplift ranges
between 50 and 100 m. On the western side, a thin
layer of Paleozoic Nubia sandstones and Cretaceous
sediments is present.
Gebel Araba/Gebel Abu Durba (Sinai)
Gebel Araba/ Gebel Abu Durba (Figures 2, 7) is the
largest, exposed, tilted fault block inside the Gulf of
Suez graben. Basement is exposed along the coast
over a distance of nearly 40 km, Well-exposed easter-
ly dipping Nubia and Cretaceous sediments trail the
high over 60 km as far north as Gebel Nazzazat. The
basement is segmented by Aqaba-trending faults,
which are the best-exposed transverse faults in out-
crop. These faults, however, show very little horizon-
tal displacement. The fault north of Gebel Abu Durba,
in fact, dies out in the Upper Cretaceous sediment
section south of Gebel Ekma.
‘The amount of exposure of this block during the
Miocene is difficult to judge. The block probably was
not eroded down to basement during the Miocene;
however, it acted as major barrier for coarse clastic
sediment transport to the west. The block kept most
sands in the Qaa basin and sheltered the South
Belayim Basin from sand input. Only at Belayim field
was the barrier breached and sands deposited in
upper Rudeis strata and later in Kareem strata at
Belayim Marine field, providing additional hydrocar-
bon reservoirs. South of the Gebel Araba block near El
Tor, a high amount of clastics was transported out
into the Morgan Basin during Rudeis and Kareem
deposition (Figures 11, 12). At its eastern flank and
southern end, lithothamnion limestones, probably
deposited at the same time as the upper Rudeis,
Kareem, and Belayim formations, were deposited in a
shallow-marine environment.
Onshore Plateaus
On the African side of the gulf, north of the
Eastern Desert basement, are four major structural
units (Figures 2, 6): Southern Galala Plateau, Wadi
Araba, Northern Galala Plateau, and the Zafarana
Platform.
‘The most striking character of these units are their
cast-northeast-trending boundaries, perpendicular to
the gulf axis. The four units appear to be shifted
toward the east, one in respect to the other. This
apparent right-lateral shifting corresponds with the
east-northeast-trending boundaries, thereby indicat-
ing an important control of the larger overall struc-
ture by an east-northeast trend, perpendicular to the
lysmic trend (Figure 5)
Southern and Northern Galala Plateaus: The
Northern and Southern Galala plateaus are mostly
covered by Eocene limestone, Both plateaus are
slightly tilted to the south as the modern drainage
pattern suggests. Originally, these blocks were flat or
even tilted to the north as an older drainage pattern
proves, Most of the faults visible on the plateaus are
of Gulf of Suez. trend, but have no apparent throw.
Only the faults closer to the gulf show displacements
down to the east
The Northern Galala Plateau is bounded on the
north by a series of faults trending east-west and east-
northeast, which intersect the clysmic trend. The east-
em boundary is the major Ain Sukna fault
Wadi Araba: The Wadi Araba east-northeast~
west-southwest-trending “horst” (Figures 3, 13)
crosses the Miocene clysmic gulf at nearly a right
angle. The Wadi Araba is bounded to the north and.
south by the two Galala escarpments. The base of
the Wadi is Nubian sandstones mainly belonging to
the Carboniferous. The wadi, although strongly
modified by erosion, appears flat and the dips of the
Nubia sandstones are always very gentle. In the
westernmost part, the Nubia shows steep dips and
small folds, which appear related to local faulting.
The southern boundary of the horst is marked by a
fault that separates the Southern Galala Plateau
from the valley. Along this fault, especially close to
the St. Anthony Monastery, near-vertical dips in
Cretaceous sediments south of the fault indicate
drape over the fault, which is downthrown to the
south (Figure 13)
The origin of this cross trend is obvious when
examining the Western Desert structural trends, such
as the North Qattara ridge, the Abu Gharadig basin,
and Bahariya, but it is best expressed in the Kattaniya
horst west of Cairo. These Western Desert structural
features are clearly of Jurassic age, which also is true
for the Wadi Araba (Figure 1).
Wadi Araba, similar to the Kattaniya horst, was a
high block throughout the Jurassic, Cretaceous, and
Neogene that shed sediments to the north and south.
This shedding is best documented south of Gebel
Galala near Thelemet and St, Paul Monastery by the
Eocene limestone conglomerates and reworked shal-
low-water nummulitic sediments in a basinal lime-
stone; these sediments document a paleoslope away
from Wadi Araba. These sediments were slump
masses that accumulated south of the major fault
bounding the Wadi Araba to the south. On top of the
Wadi Araba during the Eocene, a shallow-water
environment must have existed, as the large
‘Nummulites in the slumps prove. In some layers,
Iarge Nummulites are mixed with small Nummulites or
occasionally are sorted (only large species float in a
lime-mud matrix).
Similar slump masses with synsedimentary folds
are present at the base of the Eocene and within the
Sudr Chalk, proving a strong relief during the Late
Cretaceous, also. The Wadi Ataba seemed to act as a
transport barrier for Nubia sediments as well. South
of Wadi Araba, thick Nubia “A” sandstones occur
and are present only in reduced thickness north of it.
Today, the Wadi Araba horst is a geomorphologi-
cal depression. The core of the horst is eroded down
to the Carboniferous Nubia Formation (Figure 13).
The bounding fault south of Wadi Araba is well
defined. Steeply dipping Cretaceous marls andEE o-100m
£2) 100-200m|
[> 200m
ZZ sosenr
Figure 11. Upper Rudeis sand isopach map.
Structure and Stratigraphy of the Gulf of Suez, Egypt o
FEB > 200 m
EZ. sesenr
Figure 12. Kareem sand isopach map.
N
NORTHERN GALALA
GSS WADIARABA
Figure 13. Geological north-south cross section Wadi Araba.
limestones mark the fault at the outcrops near the St.
Anthony Monastery. Vertical displacement today
seems to be 500 m. During geological time, this dis-
placement was possibly greater, but was readjusted
after the Miocene(?). The fault probably has a left-
lateral wrench component of several hundred meters.
Zafarana Platform: The Wadi Araba possesses a
slightly eastward-dipping axis and extends into the
offshore. There, it is called the Zafarana Platform,
Which is relatively well known now as a result of sev-
eral exploration wells. The Zafarana Platform has a
very thin Miocene and post-Miocene cover without
Miocene evaporites; however, nullipore-type lime-
stone/ dolomite facies or sands are present.
‘The pre-Miocene on the Zafarana Platform is gen-
erally not deeply eroded, but we assume deep karst
erosion of Eocene carbonates because this area must
have been exposed for long periods during the
Miocene. Nubia sandstones are generally preserved
and provide an excellent migration path for oil out of
the basin and for freshwater inflow from Wadi Araba.
Nondeposition or erosion took place during the
Miocene. Near the rim of the Zafarana Platform,
thick sands occur in the Rudeis and Kareem forma-
tions as observed in well GS 114-1A (Figure 6)
These sands originated in the Wadi Araba and were
shed from the west to the east and southeast (Figure
11). During the Miocene, the Zafarana Platform
extended farther eastward to the southern continua-
tion of the Ain Sukna fault. After the middle
Miocene, this fault line was set back westward in a
zigzag pattern near well GS 114-1A. The southern
limit of the Zafarana Platform is a N60°E cross fault,
which extends from St. Paul Monastery northeast-
ward near well Thelemet-1. This fault has a dis-
placement of 250-500 m down to the south and, due
to its significant throw, is one of the most visible
cross fauilts on seismic in the Gulf of Suez (Sultan
and Schiitz, 1984), Strong Miocene facies changes
(shales to nullipore limestones /dolomites) accom-
pany this fault line (Figure 14)
In conclusion, the Wadi Araba/Zafarana structure
is a positive feature throughout time, and played a
major role in blocking the southern part of the Gulf of
Suez and the Red Sea from the eastern Mediterranean
during the middle and late Miocene.6 Schiitz
NULLIPORE LIMESTONE
OCCURRENCE IN SUBSURFACE
AND OUTCROPS
Figure 14. Nullipore limestone.
‘Miocene Subbasins
Northern Gulf
Darag Basin: The Darag Basin is a large, south-
west-dipping half-graben that covers the whole
northern part of the Gulf of Suez. The basin is as deep
as the other Gulf of Suez half-grabens, but has an
sy
HURGHADA
independent history and simple structural style. It is
bounded to the southwest by a major fault, the Ain
‘Sukna fault, which has a displacement in the range of
3600 m, The long southwest-dipping flank is broken
by the Sudr-CS 9-1 trend (Figure 15).
Unique to the Darag Basin is the presence of
Jurassic sediments that thicken from several meters inA
ck ZAFARANA
SW, PLATFORM
Figure 15. Geological cross section A-
the southern part near Ras Abu Darag to several hun-
dred meters in the north near well GS 24-1, Ayun
Musa-2, and North Sinai (Figures 5, 6). South of the
Darag Basin, Jurassic marine sediments are absent
and continental sediments are very thin and generally
not well documented.
Coarse clastic material is scarce in the lower
Miocene Rudeis section (Figures 15, 16). The extreme-
ly thin Kareem/Belayim/South Gharib section and
the lack of thick evaporites indicate a time of nonsub-
sidence and low deposition in the middle Miocene
(Figure 15). During this interval, the Darag Basin was
probably cut off from the rest of the Gulf of Suez by
the Zafarana Platform, which acted as a barrier
between the Mediterranean and the Red Sea. A nar-
row strait probably existed during the entire Miocene
between Ras Sudr and Lagia, connecting the
Mediterranean with the Gulf of Suez and the Red Sea
(Mitla Strait, Garfunkel and Bartov, 1977). During
evaporite deposition in the Gulf of Suez and the Red
Sea this marine connection was cut off.
After the Miocene, the Darag Basin subsided again
with high sedimentation rates, but was cut off again
during the Pliocene, as the Pliocene evaporites in the
Darag Basin confirm,
‘Ain Sukna Fault: The Ain Sukna fault is a major,
important, old structural element in the Gulf of Suez.
It is only a part of a much longer fault system, which
cuts through the Gulf of Suez to the southeast along,
the west coast of Sinai near Lagia and farther into the
Sinai basement up into Wadi Feiran (Figures 5, 6)
This fault is probably an older Jurassic fault, but reac-
tivation occurred during the early Miocene, resulting,
in major displacement. The Ain Sukna remained rela-
tively inactive during middle and late Miocene, but
subsided again 2000 m after the Pliocene. An element
important in understanding this fault is the compli-
cated fault system offshore Lagia, where the fault
reverses its throw (Figure 17). The original depocenter
was located northeast of Lagia with Rudeis sediment
having a thickness of 1300 m, whereas southwest of
Lagia (wells GS 101-1, CLB-1) relatively thin Rudeis,
sediments with a thickness of less than 300 m were
laid down. The area southwest of Lagia was part of
the Zafarana Platform during the early Miocene. The
throw of the fault was reversed during the middle
Structure and Stratigraphy of the Gulf of Suez, Egypt 6
DARAG BASIN
Miocene and has continued up to the Holocene,
downdropping sediments to the southwest, with a
displacement of up to 1800 m at base evaporites. This
point near Lagia was a critical point during the mid-
dle Miocene (starting in the Langhian, important dur-
ing Belayim and South Gharib deposition) for the
marine conditions of Gulf of Suez. because it provided
a barrier between the Darag Basin (and Mediter-
ranean Sea) and the southern part of the Gulf of Suez
and the Red Sea so that the large evaporite basins
could develop.
is fault is remarkable for the volcanic dikes ass0-
ciated with it that were penetrated by well Galala-1
and were found in outcrops near Abu Zenima, as well
as hot springs at Ain Sukna on the west coast and at
Hamman Faraun, south of Lagia on the east coast.
Central Gulf
The central Gulf of Suez includes the Issaran-
October and Abu Zenima basins, the West Bakr Basin,
the South Belayim Basin, and the El Qaa basin
(Figures 6, 7). These half-grabens show northeasterly
dips at the pre-Miocene level and the Miocene
sequence developed similarly. The stratigraphy
(Figure 4) is representative for most of the central and.
southern parts of the Gulf of Suez.
The pre-Miocene section is without anomalies as
described in the stratigraphy, except that the Eocene
has a depocenter in this area exceeding a thickness of
300 m (Figure 18),
The Miocene section starts with the generally thin
conglomeratic Nukhul formation with some sand
streaks, but without an anhydrite member. The
Rudeis Formation is generally thick (300-600 m) and
contains nearly no sand except along the margin of
the basin. The Kareem Formation consists of a thin
anhydrite member (Markha Member) and a 60- to
300-m-thick Shagar Shale Member.
‘The Belayim Formation is typical for its four-fold
subdivision: Hamman Faraun Member, Feiran
Member, Sidri Member, and Baba Member.
During Belayim deposition, the Gulf of Suez
remained tectonically relatively quiet and thicknesses
range from 150 to 300 m with very little lateral litho-
logical variations
The South Gharib Formation in the Issaran—
October-Abu Zenima basins is a series of intercala-7” Schiite
OARAG BASIN ABU ZENA BASH ocTOBER WH
woLocene
woLocane post.
Ba zr post.
0
a 7 ‘ZET FM.
oe TAYIBA
oa PLIOCENE
wanoan Be vreen
ruocene | | etasmes —
zon en a
=< soon ee 3 a
ca SEAT coun
sn a Ghar svn FEE cnanwrn | MOP
we ree,
oon ee seve Ft asymm. Fer ectarmra|wocene
AREEM Fu REN A
a re a Town
=| Karcon Fe
-E uren Ea ruoeis ra, |ocene
RUDEIS FM “THEBES FM.” | EOCENE|
= Ee Rudeis Fm.
= / sara |e
w Sooa Fi 7
eS ==! WATULLAFM | 4. 3
wana / /// gi
° J witara | § 8
= teabee Fn /// | Law RAMA G
° = ee / wna: [Loner
rpen . Tea
wows // =//// =
- one. atl Fm.
uae
= an mma |
- je
// / 10. am
4500, = /
‘wus /
270m ru /
EOCENE, ewes ae
TD. 4750m
Figure 16. Type log correlation of Darag Basin, Abu Zenima Basin, October hi;Structure and Stratigraphy of the Gulf of Suez, Egypt n
B wo ZAPARANA
anata pLateorm ‘41
GS SOUTHERN
DARAG BASIN
[oF MIDDLE EOCEN
FAQ areas wm cocene parry on conpLeTELY £2000
BASEMENT
Figure 18, Total Eocene isopach map (after Breman,
1984),
tions of anhydrite, salt, and thin shales with a thick-
ness averaging 300 m.
In the Zeit Formation, the evaporite depositional
environment continues, however, with much less salt
deposition, The topmost salt Jayer (the “first” salt)
contains a potassium salt layer of 1-3 m, which allows
for good log correlation. The Zeit Formation thickness
ranges from 400 to over 600 m.
Issaran-October-Abu Zenima Basins: These three
parallel adjoining basins are located in the broadest
part of the Gulf of Suez and provide the most typical
type of deep basins structurally and sedimentological-
ly in the Gulf of Suez. All three basins are half-
grabens with northeasterly-dipping long flanks
(Figure 6). The crests of the flanks, the October high
and the northern extension of the Amer-Bakr-Gharib
high, are penetrated by many exploration wells and
are geologically and seismically well known. On the
flanks, only limited geological information is avail-
able, and from the deeper parts of the basin only the
‘Abu Zenima Basin possesses two deep exploration
wells, GS 138-1 and C3A-1. The deepest part of the
October Basin is untouched by drilling and, hence,
practically unknown.
The Issaran Basin is bounded to the west by a
fault and to the east by the GG-83 trend. To the
south, the basin terminates in the GG-83 area along a
major cross fault (Figure 6). Only a narrow graben
leads south into the West Bakr basin. To the north,
the basin is limited by the Zafarana Platform. The
Issaran Basin is relatively shallow, with its deepest
part west of the GG-83 area where the top Eocene
reaches 3000 m thick
‘The October Basin is the largest and probably the
deepest of all basins in the Gulf. This basin adjoins the
Issaran Basin to the east, where the 20-km-broad flank
plunges to the east down to more than 5000 m at top
Eocene (or 6000 m at top basement). The October
Basin is bounded to the east by the DD 83-1-October
trend. A structural high at Belayim Marine field forms
the southern limit of the basin; however, during the
Miocene, this crossing high block did not exist in
these proportions. To the north, the basin narrows
and ends south of the Zafarana Platform near GS 114-
1A. The deeper portion of the October Basin is the
least well known because it does not have any deep
wells. A magnetic anomaly is present in the deepest
part, west of Feiran, possibly as a result of the pres
ence of a basalt. The nearest basalt dikes are known.n Schiite
c OCTOBER BASIN
ABU ZENIMA BASIN
wW mmeuener cain caine
p83
Figure 19. Geological cross section C-C’.
from Ras Budran field and outcrops at Aba Zenima.
The low axis west of the October high is offset at sev-
eral points indicating cross elements (Sultan and
Schiitz, 1984),
The Abu Zenima Basin is the eastern deep basin
with northeast-dipping fault blocks. Top Eocene is
located as deep as 4500-5000 m at the eastern limit
near the Abu Zenima fault. Seismic mapping of the
pre-Miocene horizons in the basin north of the Res
Budran high shows right-lateral offset of the pre-
Miocene fault blocks and the Miocene low axis.
‘Agaba-parallel faults delineate and create the north-
east-dipping fault blocks of the Ras Budran field.
October High: The October high trend is similar to
the “B’-trend in the southern part of the Gulf of Suez,
one of the best-known subsurface high trends. The
October high plunges from a depth of 3000 m at the
top of the Eocene near the October field to more than
4000 m north of well DD 83-1 (Figures 3, 6, 19). The
high is bounded to the west by a major clysmic fault,
which is downthrown to the west with a maximum
displacement of 2000 m. Several intermediate fault
blocks, 100-250 m wide, accompany the main fault.
The trend is cut by several major transverse
faults. One major east-west-trending transverse
fault delineates the October trend to the south and
offsets the main fault eastward to the Feiran area.
This offset is not associated with a strike-slip com-
ponent, but probably represents an older (Jurassic?)
structural direction. North of the October field, sev-
eral Gulf of Aqaba-parallel faults cut the high and
are left-laterally offset. The same faults can be
traced into the Ras Budran field. Other N60°E—
trending faults cross the trend and displace the
southern block downward, forming traps for oil
migrating along the trend.
West Bakr Basin: The West Bakr basin is located
between the Western Desert basement outcrops and
the coast (Figure 3). Toward the north, the basin shal-
ows and is bounded by the South Galala mountains.
To the south, the West Bakr continues west of Gebel
Zeit into the Zeit Bay basin. The boundary between
these two basins is defined by the dip change from
northeasterly dips in the West Bakr basin to south-
westerly dips in the Zeit Bay basin. This line passes
from north of Morgan field through Shukheir Bay,
onshore toward Gebel Gharamul (Figure 7).
Structurally, the basin is complex and consists of
narrow horsts and half-grabens with northeast-dip-
ping flanks. Remarkably, this onshore basin is still
actively subsiding, as Sabkha depressions west of
Ras Amer and south of Ras Gharib show. As a base-
ment-bordering basin, it contains large amounts of
coarse clastic material, mainly sand throughout the
Miocene section. In the Rudeis Formation, gross
sand thicknesses in wells west of Ras Gharib field
reach 300 m.
‘Amer-Bakr-Gharib High: A broad, high, horst-
type block, the Amer-Bakr-Gharib high separates the
West Bakr basin from the October and South Belayim
basins and acted as an important barrier for sediment
transport from the west during the Miocene. At its
crest, the top pre-Miocene rises to 600 m near Ras
Gharib (Figures 3, 7), 1000 m near Ras Bakr, and
750-1000 m at Amer field. The high was severely
eroded, exposing Nubia sandstones during the early
Miocene at Ras Gharib and Bakr fields, and it stayed
high throughout the Miocene, Nukhul, Rudeis, and
Kareem formations are very thin and commonly con-
tain limestones. During Belayim deposition, mullipore
carbonates were deposited on the highest parts east of
the Ras Gharib field at Ras Fanar and at Bakr field
Over the high, only anhydrite was laid down during.
Belayim, South Gharib, and Zeit formation deposi-
tion, and strong facies changes occur surrounding the
Amer-Bakr-Gharib high.
EE 82-FF/GG 83 High: The crestal part of the long,
October Basin flank is bounded to the west by a dou-
ble fault system, the faults being separated by approx-
imately 1 km. The western fault is the older fault and
has a displacement down to the west of about 300-600
m (Figures 6, 20). Erosion capped the 1-km-wide
block-tilted fault block at its crest near the western
fault. In one of the FF/GG 83 exploration wells, ero-
sion cut down to the Sudr Chalk.
Unlike the Amer-Bakr-Gharib high, the erosion of
the pre-Miocene on this high trend is less severe. The
eastern fault is younger, has less displacement, andStructure and Stratigraphy of the Gulf of Suez, Egypt 2
OCTOBER BASIN
POST-ZEIT
Ncroser 681972
FELD
E cept
‘ABU RUDEIS
Figure 20. Geological cross section D-D’.
was probably formed when the tilt of the long flank
exceeded a certain amount and the older fault became
too flat to release tension, So, a new set of faults with
a steeper fault hade formed. (This phenomenon can
be observed along many major faults in the Gulf of
Suez as blocks commonly are tilted more than 30° and.
thereby older faults reach fault hades of less than 55°.
When more than 55° is reached, the overburden forces
merge both sides of the fault and a new fault is
formed. Depending on the amount of throw, a wider
or smaller fault block is formed.)
The axis of the EE 82-FF/GG-83 high plunges
from the north near well Thelemet-I to the south to
well FF 83-3. From there, it rises toward the GG-83
area and farther to the HH-82 high, which can be
taken as the southern continuation of this trend.
Associated, and typical for the EE 82-FF/GG-83
high, is a listric fault in the post-Belayim section.
This listric fault was initiated by the deeper fault
system and because of increasing tension with the
widening gulf, the more brittle anhydrites broke and
slid downward on the basal salt layer. This growth
fault masks deeper seismic events and creates a
problem for seismic interpretation.
South Belayim Basin: Originally the October Basin.
extended farther south into the Belayim Basin. The
South Belayim’s western flank is still unbroken; how-
ever, during Kareem deposition, the structure of the
Belayim Marine field was uplifted and now separates
the two basins (Figure 7). This is documented by sig
nificant facies and thickness changes from the Kareem
through the Zeit Formation,
The Belayim marine high bounds the South
Belayim Basin to the north. To the east, the basin is
delimited by the Gebel Abu Durba fault. To the west,
the South Belayim Basin is bounded by the Amer
Bakr-Gharib high. To the south, the basin is open
toward the Morgan Basin and the Gebel Zeit Basin.
However, the prevailing northeasterly dip of the cen-
tral Gulf of Suez changes to southwesterly dips south
of the Ramadan and July fields. The dividing line of
this important dip change runs north of the Morgan
field across the LL 87-1 area toward Shukheir and
Gebel Gharamul, where synsedimentary slump mass-
es in Cretaceous sediments indicate an old tectonic
heritage.
A unique feature of the South Belayim Basin is the
bending of its western flank near the exploration
wells East Bakr M-1 and 2. The northeast-dipping
strata change direction to southerly dips and then
turn back into northeasterly dips south of the wells,
Thus, the flank is offset approximately 2 km. South of
the bend, the flank gradually steepens and is replaced
by a major fault southeast of Ras Fanar.
El Qaa Basin: The Fl Qaa basin is a relatively unex-
plored basin; however, seismic and the few bore holes
indicate a simple half-graben with a long flank rising
up to the Gebel Araba,/Abu Durba and Gebel Nazza-
zat (Figures 7, 21). The pre-Miocene is well known
along the outcrops west and east of the basin. The
Miocene sequence differs from most of the Gulf of
Suez basins by its extremely high sand content due to
its proximity to the Sinai basement uplift. The Gebel
‘Araba high remained a high throughout the Miocene
and trapped sand input from the east, preventing sand
transport farther west. Only near El Tor was sand shed
to the west into the Morgan area (Figures 11, 12) and.
marine ingressions occurred. Another gap, however
much shorter lived, existed near Belayim Bay (Figures
11, 12). Structurally, the basin is well defined by faults
to the cast and southeast.
‘The main fault bounding the basin along the Sinai
basement has a displacement down to the west of
4000-5000 m and is comparable in size to the Gebel
Zeit fault. This large displacement results from the
large uplift of the southern part of Sinai. Toward Ras
Mohamed (Figure 3) the onshore area is underlain by
a shallow basement block, which extends as far west
as the coast.
The basin axis of the Qa basin runs gulf-parallel
close to the Sinai basement, and plunges from east of
Gebel Nazzazat to its deepest part east of El Tor.
There the low turns into a Gulf of Aqaba direction
and joins the Morgan Basin south of El Tor. The break
of direction is due to a major Aqaba-parallel fault that
bounds the basin to the southeast (Figures 3,7).re Sehr
ZEIT BAY BASWN GEBEL ZEIT BASIN EL OMA BASIN
ep wovoene wouocene
8 oy We Post - Zerr FH 10
SB \\\ puocene ==
cxaeru \ moa
usm \ sm
8 Bom (ood Bevavnr\ | \en
88 soe KAREEM FH \ \
ae \\
\ \
vers \\ \
. woes eu. |\ \ /
a aru / ||
28 =
ge f w
Tem cz | / °
EOCENE / °
weoner. sum ff -
:
ror on |
J} won |
Ea EOCENE
z nie
Foran won.
E ES uoner
Ee Sidrimb. ame et —__
— sau. 8
is ccc
\
| veer
¥ ues rf
8 /
3 /
|g EE) towen /
|
uoess Fu,
| 3 fe PP /
Figure 21. Type log correlation of Zeit Bay basin, Gebel Zeit Basin, El Qaa basin.
Southern Gulf
The southern Gulf of Suez comprises the Morgan
Basin, the Gebel Zeit Basin with the “B’-trend, the
Zeit Bay Basin, Gebel Zeit, Esh el Melaha range, and
the Hurghada/Islands area (Figures 3, 7). To the
south, the Miocene basins continue into the Red Sea
The predominant dip of the pre-Miocene fault blocks
in this area is to the southwest. The northern limit of,
the southwesterly dips crosses the gulf from north of
the Morgan field to Shukheir on the west coast and
continues toward Gebel Gharamul (Figure 7). This
structural boundary is probably of Jurassic origin.
Morgan Basin: The Morgan Basin is located
between the Sinai coast and the “B’-trend (Figure 7).
The northern part of the basin may be the only full
graben with two bounding faults in the Gulf of Suez
This graben has been an exceptionally fast subsiding
depocenter east of the Morgan field, which was rapid-
ly filled with sands derived from the El Tor point
source. The bounding faults are the Gebel Araba-El