Ring Energy Prepared for Ring Energy, Inc.

AI governance — an outside view.

We ran the search your next investor, insurer or major customer is going to run. This is what came back.

Motion Consulting Group · a Kelly Services company · July 2026

What is visible from outside

Eight things an outsider looks for.

This measures what is publicly findable, not what exists inside the company. Where something is marked not found, it means a person searching from outside could not locate it — which is exactly the position an investor or insurer is in.

01 AI or automation named in public filings Across the FY2025 10-K, the April 2026 proxy, sustainability reports, careers pages and press releases Not found
02 AI named in 10-K risk factors The risk factor "Risks Relating to Technology and Cybersecurity" is present and detailed — it addresses digital dependence, not AI specifically Not found
03 Cybersecurity governance disclosure — Item 1C NIST-framework based, a named Director of IT & Cybersecurity, a Management Cybersecurity Committee, Audit Committee oversight, third-party assessors Visible — and strong
04 A published technology, data or AI policy Seven governance documents are published; none located that addresses AI or data use Not found
05 Named accountability for AI Cyber accountability is named and specific. The equivalent for AI was not located. Partial
06 AI or data capability visible in hiring Three roles open at time of review — land, lease records and HSE. None technology-specific. Not found
07 Third-party AI exposure acknowledged Vendors, service providers and purchasers are named as digitally dependent in the risk factor; no AI-specific vendor language located Partial
08 Peer disclosure comparison We could not locate a published AI governance policy at any oil and gas company — including Shell, BP, Chevron, ExxonMobil, ConocoPhillips, Equinor, Baker Hughes and SLB. Note: SEC.gov blocked automated access, so peer filings were not read directly. Nobody has one
1Visible
3Partial
4Not found
What it means

You have already built this once.

The most useful finding is not an absence. It is that Ring's cybersecurity governance is genuinely well constructed — NIST-based, a named director with the credentials to hold it, a standing management committee, board oversight through Audit, outside assessors engaged.

That is the same apparatus AI governance requires. The framework simply has not been extended to it yet — and on that point, the sector is wide open. We could not find a published AI governance policy at any oil and gas company, majors included.

What an investor sees

A Russell 3000 constituent since June, with rising institutional visibility, whose filings do not yet address a category their other holdings have started disclosing.

What an insurer sees

Excellent cyber posture, clearly documented. No documented answer yet on AI — increasingly a separate question at renewal.

What a customer's procurement team sees

A vendor with a strong security answer and no AI answer, at a moment when both questions are starting to appear on the same form.

What is happening in your sector

Where operators are finding real returns.

Named operators, measured outcomes. Included because it is useful to you whether or not we ever work together.

What we would do

Small, specific, and yours to keep.

Not a transformation programme. The same shape as the cyber work already in place, extended one category across.

1

An inventory

Where AI is already in use — in your systems, and in your vendors' systems operating on your data. Most companies find more than they expected.

2

A written posture

One document: what is permitted, what requires review, who signs. Modelled on the cybersecurity programme you already run.

3

A board-ready readout

The answer to the question, in the form the Audit Committee already receives cyber reporting.

The unusual part: we searched for a published AI governance policy at every major in this industry and did not find one. A one-page position, adopted now, would put Ring ahead of operators many times its size — not by spending more, but by writing it down first.

Twenty minutes is enough to know whether this is worth anything to you. Richard Taubin · Motion Consulting Group, a Kelly Services company.

Sources — every finding on these slides
  1. Ring Energy, Inc. Form 10-K for fiscal year 2025, filed 4 March 2026 — Item 1 Business, Item 1A Risk Factors, Item 1C Cybersecurity, Item 7 MD&A. Retrieved from Ring Energy's investor-relations filing mirror.
  2. Ring Energy, Inc. DEF 14A proxy statement, 10 April 2026 — director biographies, committee composition, corporate-governance section.
  3. Ring Energy corporate governance documents index — ringenergy.com/investors/corporate-governance/governance-documents
  4. Ring Energy sustainability reports, 2021–2025 editions — ringenergy.com/sustainability
  5. Ring Energy careers page and open postings as at July 2026 — ringenergy.com/careers
  6. Ring Energy press releases, March–July 2026 — ringenergy.com/investors/news-events/press-releases
  7. Russell 3000 index inclusion announced 29 June 2026; Q2 2026 debt paydown and liquidity release, 2 July 2026.
  8. Devon Energy Q1 2026 earnings call, 6 May 2026 — John Raines, EVP Exploration & Production, on artificial-lift optimisation across 850+ Delaware Basin wells.
  9. Chord Energy artificial-lift deployment across 2,500 rod-lift wells — vendor-published case study naming the operator and quoting its Production Optimization Foreman. Vendor-sourced; flagged as such.
  10. Equinor, "Artificial intelligence saved Equinor USD 130 million", 7 January 2026 — first-party press release.
  11. Peer AI-policy search covered Shell, BP, Chevron, ExxonMobil, ConocoPhillips, Equinor, Baker Hughes and SLB. SEC.gov blocked automated retrieval, so peer 10-K text was not read directly — the peer finding is a search result, not a filings audit.

Every observation on these slides describes what is publicly visible. Nothing here characterises Ring Energy's internal practices, which we have not seen and have not attempted to assess.