CONTRACTOR

A pilot carbon dioxide miscible flood was initiated in the Lansing Kansas City C formation in the Hall Gurney Field, Russell County, Kansas. Continuous carbon dioxide injection began on December 2, 2003. By the end of December 2004, 11.39 MM lb of carbon dioxide were injected into the pilot area. Carbon dioxide injection rates averaged about 242 MCFD. Vent losses were excessive during June as ambient temperatures increased. Installation of smaller plungers in the carbon dioxide injection pump reduced the recycle and vent loss substantially. Carbon dioxide was detected in one production well near the end of May and in the second production well in August. No channeling of carbon dioxide was observed. The GOR has remained within the range of 3000-4000 for most the last six months. Wells in the pilot area produced 100% water at the beginning of the flood. Oil production began in February, increasing to an average of about 2.35 B/D for the six month period between July 1 and December 31. Cumulative oil production was 814 bbls. Neither well has experienced increased oil production rates expected from the arrival of the oil bank generated by carbon dioxide injection.

If yes, how many did you record in 2021?

Safety Training Data
Length of safety portion of new-hire orientation (in minutes): Toolbox Safety meeting frequency: Do you conduct site-specific safety orientations for all employees, including specialty (sub) contractors?
Do you establish/participate in site safety committees at most jobsites?
Do you conduct safety training for employees beyond owner/user-required training?
Do you conduct a daily task specific safety process, aka a Jobsite Safety Analyses ( Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Step 5 Step 6 I have read and understand all qualifying requirements and instructions as outlined in the STEP Instruction Book.
Please select the number repersenting each category question that corresponds to you. Step 1

Total
Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Step 5 Step 6 0 Company Executive Name* Company Executive Email* Date Company Executive Title* Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Step 5 Step 6 Safety Excellence Award

STEP
CONTRACTOR KEY COMPONENTS

CONTRACTOR KEY COMPONENTS OF SAFETY SELF-ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
The Contractor Key Components of an effective world-class safety management system is listed below. Each component contains columns that describe four levels of safety performance. Select the column that BEST describes your company's performance. Remember, each scoring column describes a set of actions/policies that your company currently undertakes. In order to achieve a score, your safety program must contain ALL the listed criteria. Any scores on the STEP application that do not match any of the four available scoring options in each of the Contractor Key Components will automatically be rounded down to the nearest listed score. • A task-specific safety process has been established and is consistently used across the company • The process is reviewed annually by top management • All personnel are trained in using the process • Each task is reviewed separately, and the process is complete when outcomes are explained to the employees and employees confirm understanding of the work hazards and mitigation process.

LEADERSHIP
• Change of conditions require work to be stopped, the process is reviewed and altered to complete the work safely • Whether self-performed or contracted, the company ensures employees are trained and certified for flagging operations.
• The company has a formal distracted and defensive driving policy in place that applies 100% to all employees while driving vehicles and mobile equipment and disciplinary action for any violation of said policy.
• The company has a formal process in place to train and certify company vehicle and mobile equipment operators which include a performance verification and documents those records in personnel files.
• The company has a formal "spotter" program for aiding and directing vehicles or heavy equipment when backing and/or working near other personnel.
• Equipment inspections are conducted and documented per OSHA/manufacturers recommendations • The company has a distracted driving policy in place that addresses no texting while driving company vehicles.
• The company verifies equipment operator's experience at the time of hire but does not have a formal performance verification process in place.
• The hazards associated with vehicle backing is covered during annual training but and includes a performance evaluation (hand-on practical) but it is not documented in the personnel files.
• Formal traffic control plans and/or requirements per the FHWA MUTCD are implemented in some, but not every project.
(Answer only if you are responsible for traffic control).
• Flagging personnel are utilized to control traffic, but there is no formal requirement to ensure they are certified.
• The company does not verify equipment operators experience.
• The hazards associated with vehicle backing is only addressed during the review of a daily work if applicable to the scope of work for the day.
• The company does not have a formal distracted driving policy in place but does encourage employees not to text and drive.
• The Company lacks a defensive driving or phone use policy.
• Vehicle backing risks is not currently addressed by the company.
• Vehicle and mobile equipment inspections are not conducted.
• Planning for work zone traffic control and/or flagging operations is not conducted.