Future Metals NL — Capital/Financing Update 2021

Jul 6, 2021

==> picture [166 x 842] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text -----

ASX Release
7 July 2021
ASX: FME
Directors
Greg Bandy; Chairman
Justin Tremain, Corporate Director
Allan Mulligan, Technical Director
Aaron Bertolatti, Finance Director
Robert Mosig, Non-Exec Director
Investment Highlights
 100% ownership of the Panton
PGM Project in Western Australia
 Panton JORC Mineral Resource
Estimate (‘MRE’ )
o 14.32Mt @ 5.20g/t PGM &
Gold, plus 0.27% Ni
o 2.4Moz contained PGM’s &
Gold
o Palladium dominant (~50% of
contained ounces) with full
suite of PGMs, gold and base
metals
 Resource outcrops |
Mineralisation from surface
 Granted Mining Leases
 Metallurgical test work of >80%
PGM recoveries to ultra high
grade PGM concentrate (crush,
grind and flotation)
 10,000m step-out drilling
program
Contact Details
Future Metals NL
Level 1, 35 Richardson Street
West Perth, WA, 6005
T: +61 8 9480 0414
E: info@future-metals.com.au
W: https://future-metals.com.au/
@_FutureMetals
----- End of picture text -----

==> picture [182 x 41] intentionally omitted <==

Independent Metallurgical Review Confirms >80% PGM Recovery to High Grade PGM Flotation Concentrate

Highlights

• Highly regarded specialist PGM metallurgical consultant appointed to review historical flotation test work on the Panton PGM Project

• Review confirms metallurgical recoveries for the high-grade Panton PGM mineralisation with 81.4% 3PGM (platinum, palladium and gold) recovery to a low mass pull (2.5%) concentrate grading 271g/t 3PGM

• Commercially attractive PGM concentrate obtained from conventional crush, grind and rougher flotation with appropriate reagent regime

• Potential to further upgrade concentrate to produce a premium, ultrahigh grade PGM concentrate via reagent optimisation and cleaner flotation

• Additional variability test work across the four zones that make up the Panton JORC Mineral Resource and test work to optimise grind size and reagent used to be undertaken over the coming months

• Program of Works approved for a 10,000 metre diamond core stepout drilling program

• Contract secured with contractor Terra Drilling with mobilisation to site expected end of July/early August

• Current consulting geologist, Mr Shane Hibbird, appointed as Exploration Manager

Future Metals NL (‘Future Metals’ or the ‘Company’, ASX: FME) is pleased to provide an update on an independent metallurgical review undertaken on the Panton PGM Project located in Western Australia. The Panton PGM Project has a JORC Resource of 14.32Mt @ 5.20g/t for 2.4Moz PGM and Gold (refer Appendix One).

Future Metals’ Director, Justin Tremain commented: “The ability to produce a commercially attractive, high-grade PGM concentrate with >80% PGM recovery is critical to the commercial success of the Panton PGM Project. The metallurgical review undertaken, by an independent and highly experienced PGM metallurgist, indicates a high-grade, low mass pull concentrate is achievable utilising conventional grinding and flotation, through the utilisation of an appropriate reagent regime.”

==> picture [133 x 31] intentionally omitted <==

The Company recently appointed Dr Evan Kirby of Metallurgical Management Services Pty Ltd (‘MMS’) to undertake a review of historical flotation test work conducted on the Panton ore by previous owners Platinum Australia Ltd (‘Platinum Australia’) and Panoramic Resources Ltd (‘Panoramic’). MMS has extensive experience within the PGM industry and provided metallurgical services to several PGM producers in South Africa and the USA.

A series of test work campaigns was carried out in 2015 by ALS Laboratories on behalf of Panoramic to investigate the potential to produce a high-grade PGM concentrate at a >80% 3PGM recovery.

MMS has concluded:

“The 2015 test work achieved a technical breakthrough and the results demonstrated that high performance flotation on the Panton ore was possible. It was shown that a combination of fine grinding, conditioning with sodium dithionate as a reducing agent, and use of nitrogen gas for flotation were essential to the process.”

Significantly improved flotation results were achieved following the test work campaigns utilising a primary grind of P80 38 micron with sodium dithionite used as a reducing agent, and with a rapid 14 minutes of flotation time. Test 1279 returned the following flotation results:

		PGM Concentrate
Head Grade (3PGE)	Concentrate Mass Pull	Flotation Recovery (3PGE)	Concentrate Grade (3PGE)	Flotation Time
8.22g/t	2.46%	81.4%	271.7g/t	14 min

Table One | Test 1279 Flotation Results

Past Panton Metallurgical Test Work

Platinum Australia completed a feasibility study on the Panton PGM Project in in 2003. The feasibility study was based on a concentrator flowsheet utilising two stages of milling and flotation to recover a low-grade PGM concentrate. This float procedure achieved about 80% 3PGM recovery to a concentrate grade of about 20g/t 3PGM. The “base case” feasibility test work flowsheet involved a P80 primary grind to 170 micron and then rougher flotation for 35 minutes. This was followed by grinding to P80 38 micron and 25 minutes of scavenger flotation. A finer secondary grind to P80 25 micron was shown to achieve improved recovery. Given the float produced only a low-grade concentrate, the resultant concentrate was then to be treated by the ‘Panton Process’ which employed low-temperature calcining followed by hot cyanide leaching and then precipitation and ion exchange to produce separate base metals and PGM concentrates. This downstream processing resulted in additional operating and capital costs along with increased technical risk.

==> picture [40 x 18] intentionally omitted <==

2 | P a g e

==> picture [133 x 31] intentionally omitted <==

The original 2003 feasibility study process design was based on the performance shown below:

		PGM Concentrate
Head Grade (3PGE)	Concentrate Mass Pull	Flotation Recovery (3PGE)	Concentrate Grade (3PGE)	Flotation Time
6.0g/t	24%	87%	21.6g/t	60 min

Table Two | Platinum Australia Feasibility Study Flotation Parameters

Following the acquisition of the Panton PGM Project in 2012, Panoramic undertook additional flotation test work to evaluate the effects of grind, float cell impeller speed, nitrogen flotation, depressants, sulfidisation and use of a strong reducing agent. This work was carried out by ALS Laboratories in 2015.

The 2015 metallurgical program commenced with flotation conditions designed to replicate the Platinum Australia feasibility study flowsheet (being Test 1193), followed by a total of 33 float tests spread over a series of test work campaigns. The initial flotation of Test 1193 returned a 3PGM recovery of 80.3% to a 69.9g/t PGM concentrate. Whilst there was no attempt at optimising flotation conditions, there was a clear progression of learning from the most promising results of each campaign. By the fourth campaign of test work, there was a dramatic improvement in flotation kinetics.

Results of the test run 1279 in the fourth test work campaign are shown Table One. Actual recovery was 81.4% to a concentrate grade of 271.7 g/t 3E in a total flotation time of 14 minutes. There was also a dramatic improvement to flotation kinetics as shown in Figure One.

==> picture [317 x 251] intentionally omitted <==

Figure One | Flotation Kinetics

==> picture [40 x 18] intentionally omitted <==

3 | P a g e

==> picture [133 x 31] intentionally omitted <==

The main reason for the improved flotation performance was the conditioning with reducing agent, sodium dithionate to a redox potential of -400 mV relative to a platinum electrode, followed by nitrogen flotation. The reductive treatment appears to have reversed some surface alteration of the valuable mineral particles rendering them more easily recovered by froth flotation. Subsequent flotation with nitrogen gas has prevented re-alteration and preserved the floatability of the particles.

Forward Program

Whilst the 2015 test work achieved dramatic improvements in the flotation performance, there was no attempt to optimize the flotation response, or to investigate the roles played by the other reagents used (the activator, copper sulfate, plus collectors and promoters).

Additional test work will be required to investigate which other flotation reagents are important and optimise the reagent regime. The work will also include testing for variability throughout the Panton Mineral Resource and understanding how different ore characteristics relate to selectivity. Results will deliver a robust understanding of the process and allow it to be scaled up and implemented in a full-scale processing plant.

The Company will undertake this further metallurgical test work during the second half of calendar 2021 under the supervision of MMS.

New Drilling Program

The Company has secured a contract with experienced drilling contractor Terra Drilling for a 10,000m diamond drilling program. Rig mobilisation is expected to occur early August 2021. The drilling program is designed to test for extensions to the current JORC Mineral Resource and provide samples to undertake the planned metallurgical test work outlined above.

The program will be managed by Mr Shane Hibbird who has accepted the role of Exploration Manager with the company.

This announcement has been approved for release by the Board of Future Metals NL

For further information, please contact:

Justin Tremain Director

Future Metals Ltd

T: +61 8 9480 0414 E: admin@future-metals.com.au

==> picture [40 x 18] intentionally omitted <==

4 | P a g e

==> picture [133 x 31] intentionally omitted <==

Competent Person’s Statement:

The information in this report that relates to Exploration Results is based on, and fairly represents, information compiled by Mr Shane Hibbird, who is a Member of the Australasian Institute of Geoscientists. Mr Hibbird is a consultant of the Company and has sufficient experience which is relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to the activity he is undertaking to qualify as a competent person as defined in the 2012 Edition of the “Australasian Code for reporting of Exploration Results, Exploration Targets, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves” (JORC Code). Mr Hibbird consents to the inclusion in this report of the matters based upon his information in the form and context in which it appears.

References may have been made in this announcement to certain past ASX announcements, including references regarding exploration results. For full details, refer to the referenced ASX announcement on the said date. The Company confirms that it is not aware of any new information or data that materially affects the information included in these earlier market announcements.

The information in this Presentation which relates to Mineral Resources was stated in the Company’s Prospectus dated 18 May 2021. The Company confirms that is not aware of any new information or data that materially affects the information included in the Prospectus relating to Mineral Resources, and that all material assumptions and technical parameters underpinning the Resource Estimate continue to apply and have not materially changed.

The information in this report that relates to Metallurgical Results is based on, and fairly represents, information compiled by Dr Evan Kirby, a Competent Person who is a Member of the Australian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy. Dr Kirby is a full-time employee of Metallurgical Management Services (MMS) a specialist metallurgical consultancy and an independent consultant of the Company. Dr Kirby has sufficient experience which is relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to the activity he is undertaking to qualify as a competent person as defined in the 2012 Edition of the “Australasian Code for reporting of Exploration Results, Exploration Targets, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves” (JORC Code). Dr Kirby consents to the inclusion in this report of the matters based upon his information in the form and context in which it appears.

==> picture [40 x 18] intentionally omitted <==

5 | P a g e

==> picture [133 x 31] intentionally omitted <==

About Panton PGM Project

The 100% owned Panton PGM project is located 60 kilometres north of the town of Halls Creek in the eastern Kimberly region of Western Australia, a tier one mining jurisdiction. The Project is located on three granted mining licences and situated just 1 kilometre off the Great North Highway which accesses the Port of Wyndham (refer Figure Two).

The Project has a JORC Mineral Resource estimate of 14.32Mt @ 4.89g/t PGM, 0.31g/t Au, 0.27% Ni (refer Appendix One).

The Panton mineralisation occurs within a layered, differentiated mafic-ultramafic intrusion referred to as the Panton intrusive which is a 10km long and 3km wide, southwest plunging synclinal intrusion. PGM mineralisation is hosted within two stratiform chromite reefs, the Top and Middle reefs, within the ultramafic sequence.

==> picture [309 x 309] intentionally omitted <==

Figure Two | Panton PGM Project Location

About Platinum Group Metals (PGMs)

PGMs are a group of six precious metals being Platinum (Pt), palladium (Pd), iridium (Ir), osmium (Os), rhodium (Rh), and ruthenium (Ru). Exceptionally rare, they have similar physical and chemical properties and tend to occur, in varying proportions, together in the same geological deposit. The usefulness of PGMs is determined by their unique and specific shared chemical and physical properties.

PGMs have many desirable properties and as such have a wide variety of applications. Most notably, they are used as auto-catalysts (pollution control devices for vehicles), but are also used in jewellery, electronics, hydrogen production / purification and in hydrogen fuel cells. The unique properties of PGMs help convert harmful exhaust pollutant emissions to harmless compounds, improving air quality and thereby enhancing health and wellbeing.

==> picture [40 x 18] intentionally omitted <==

6 | P a g e

==> picture [133 x 31] intentionally omitted <==

Appendix One | Panton JORC (2012) Mineral Resource Estimate

==> picture [382 x 263] intentionally omitted <==

Appendix Two | JORC Code (2012) Edition Table 1

Section 1 Sampling Techniques and Data

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	JORC Code explanation	Commentary	Commentary
Sampling		Nature and quality of sampling (eg cut channels, random chips, or		Samples were bulk material previously sourced through trial
techniques		specific specialised industry standard measurement tools		mining conducted in 2006 by Platinum Australia Ltd.
		appropriate to the minerals under investigation, such as down hole gamma sondes, or handheld XRF instruments, etc). These examples should not be taken as limiting the broad meaning of		Thirteen drums of hand-picked chromite-rich lump material was delivered to ALS Metallurgy in Balcatta, WA. The total gross mass was approximately 3300kg.
		sampling. Include reference to measures taken to ensure sample representivity and the appropriate calibration of any		The contents of each drum were separately crushed to nominally -35mm (jaw crusher CSS 25mm) and blended. Each lot was then quartered using a rotary splitter and ¾ returned
		measurement tools or systems used.		to its drum and returned to storage.
		Aspects of the determination of mineralisation that are Material to the Public Report. In cases where ‘industry standard’ work has		The remaining ¼ of each was then crushed to -3.35 mm, blended and a head sample split out for assay
		been done this would be relatively simple (eg ‘reverse circulation
		drilling was used to obtain 1 m samples from which 3 kg was
		pulverised to produce a 30 g charge for fire assay’). In other cases
		more explanation may be required, such as where there is coarse
		gold that has inherent sampling problems. Unusual commodities
		or mineralisation types (eg submarine nodules) may warrant
		disclosure of detailed information.
Drilling		Drill type (eg core, reverse circulation, open-hole hammer, rotary		Metallurgical results were from a bulk mined sample and not
techniques		air blast, auger, Bangka, sonic, etc) and details (eg core diameter,		drilling.
		triple or standard tube, depth of diamond tails, face-sampling bit
		or other type, whether core is oriented and if so, by what method,
		etc).
Drill sample		Method of recording and assessing core and chip sample		Metallurgical results were from a bulk mined sample and not
recovery		recoveries and results assessed.		drilling.

==> picture [40 x 18] intentionally omitted <==

7 | P a g e

==> picture [133 x 31] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	JORC Code explanation	Commentary	Commentary
		Measures taken to maximise sample recovery and ensure
		representative nature of the samples.
		Whether a relationship exists between sample recovery and grade
		and whether sample bias may have occurred due to preferential
		loss/gain of fine/coarse material.
Logging		Whether core and chip samples have been geologically and		Metallurgical results were from a bulk mined sample and not
		geotechnically logged to a level of detail to support appropriate		drilling.
		Mineral Resource estimation, mining studies and metallurgical
		studies.
		Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative in nature. Core (or
		costean, channel, etc) photography.
		The total length and percentage of the relevant intersections
		logged.
Sub-sampling		If core, whether cut or sawn and whether quarter, half or all core		Metallurgical results were from a bulk mined sample and not
techniques and		taken.		drilling.
sample		If non-core, whether riffled, tube sampled, rotary split, etc and
preparation		whether sampled wet or dry.
		For all sample types, the nature, quality and appropriateness of the
		sample preparation technique.
		Quality control procedures adopted for all sub-sampling stages to
		maximise representivity of samples.
		Measures taken to ensure that the sampling is representative of
		the in-situ material collected, including for instance results for field
		duplicate/second-half sampling.
		Whether sample sizes are appropriate to the grain size of the
		material being sampled.
Quality of assay		The nature, quality and appropriateness of the assaying and		Metallurgical results were from a bulk mined sample and not
data and		laboratory procedures used and whether the technique is		drilling.
laboratory tests		considered partial or total.
		For geophysical tools, spectrometers, handheld XRF instruments,
		etc, the parameters used in determining the analysis including
		instrument make and model, reading times, calibrations factors
		applied and their derivation, etc.
		Nature of quality control procedures adopted (eg standards,
		blanks, duplicates, external laboratory checks) and whether
		acceptable levels of accuracy (ie lack of bias) and precision have
		been established.
Verification of		The verification of significant intersections by either independent		Metallurgical results were from a bulk mined sample and not
sampling and		or alternative company personnel.		drilling.
assaying		The use of twinned holes.		Results of the metallurgical test work have been received by
		Documentation of primary data, data entry procedures, data verification, data storage (physical and electronic) protocols.		the Company’s metallurgical consultant, Mr Evan Kirby of Metallurgical Management Services Pty Ltd.
		Discuss any adjustment to assay data.		The calculated head grade of the sample is 8g/t PGM which is higher than the JORC Resource estimate grade, however this
				is not expected to affect the results, but further metallurgical
				test work is required to confirm this.
Location of		Accuracy and quality of surveys used to locate drill holes (collar		Metallurgical results were from a bulk mined sample and not
data points		and down-hole surveys), trenches, mine workings and other		drilling.
		locations used in Mineral Resource estimation.
		Specification of the grid system used.
		Quality and adequacy of topographic control.

==> picture [40 x 18] intentionally omitted <==

8 | P a g e

==> picture [133 x 31] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	JORC Code explanation	Commentary	Commentary
Data spacing		Data spacing for reporting of Exploration Results.		No exploration results have been reported in this
and		Whether the data spacing and distribution is sufficient to establish		announcement.
distribution		the degree of geological and grade continuity appropriate for the		Bulk samples used for metallurgical test work are restricted to
		Mineral Resource and Ore Reserve estimation procedure(s) and		one area of trial mining and may not be representative all the
		classifications applied.		mineralised zones at Panton.
		Whether sample compositing has been applied.		Given the relatively small range in PGM grades across the
				thirteen drums of material, a composite of all of them was
				made by combining the remaining material from each. This
				sample was identified as Panton Sill master composite.
Orientation of		Whether the orientation of sampling achieves unbiased sampling		Metallurgical results were from a bulk mined sample and not
data in relation		of possible structures and the extent to which this is known,		drilling.
to geological		considering the deposit type.
structure		If the relationship between the drilling orientation and the
		orientation of key mineralised structures is considered to have
		introduced a sampling bias, this should be assessed and reported
		if material.
Sample security		The measures taken to ensure sample security.		Samples collected in the field are brought back to the camp
				and placed in a storage room, bagged and sealed ready for lab
				collection. ALS Laborators in Western Australia
Audits or		The results of any audits or reviews of sampling techniques and		No external audit or review completed.
reviews		data.

Section 2 Reporting of Exploration Results

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	JORC Code explanation	Commentary	Commentary
Mineral tenement		Type, reference name/number, location and ownership		The Panton PGM Project is located on three granted mining
and land tenure		including agreements or material issues with third parties such		licenses M80/103, M80/104 and M80/105 (‘MLs’). The MLs
status		as joint ventures, partnerships, overriding royalties, native title		are held 100% by Panton Sill Pty Ltd which is a 100% owned
		interests, historical sites, wilderness or national park and		subsidiary of Future Metals.
		environmental settings.		The MLs were granted on 17 March 1986 and are currently
		The security of the tenure held at the time of reporting along		valid until 16 March 2028.
		with any known impediments to obtaining a licence to operate		A 0.5% net smelter return royalty is payable to Elemental
		in the area.		Royalties Australia Pty Ltd in respect of any future
				production of chrome, cobalt, copper, gold, iridium,
				palladium, platinum, nickel, rhodium and ruthenium.
				A 2.0% net smelter return royalty is payable to Maverix
				Metals (Australia) Pty Ltd on any PGMs produced from the
				MLs.
				There are no impediments to working in the area.
Exploration done by		Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by other parties.		The Panton deposit was discovered by the Geological
other parties				Survey of Western Australia from surface mapping
				conducted in the early 1960s.
				Pickland Mather and Co. drilled the first hole to test the
				mafic-ultramafic complex in 1970, followed by Minsaco
				Resources which drilled 30 diamond holes between 1976
				and 1987.
				In 1989, Pancontinental Mining Limited and Degussa
				Exploration drilled a further 32 drill holes and defined a
				non-JORC compliant resource.
				Platinum Australia Ltd acquired the project in 2000 and
				conducted the majority of the drilling, comprising 166 holes
				for 34,410 metres, leading to the delineation of a maiden
				JORC Mineral Resource Estimate.

==> picture [40 x 18] intentionally omitted <==

9 | P a g e

==> picture [133 x 31] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	JORC Code explanation	Commentary	Commentary
				Panoramic subsequently purchased the Panton PGM
				Project from Platinum Australia Ltd in May 2012 and
				conducted a wide range of metallurgical test work
				programmes on the Panton ore.
Geology		Deposit type, geological setting and style of mineralisation.		The Panton intrusive is a layered, differentiated mafic to
				ultramafic body that has been intruded into the sediments
				of the Proterozoic Lamboo Complex in the Kimberley
				Region of Western Australia. The Panton intrusive has
				undergone several folding and faulting events that have
				resulted in a south westerly plunging synclinal structure
				some 10km long and 3km wide.
				PGM mineralisation is associated with several thin
				cumulate Chromitite reefs within the ultramafic sequence.
				In all there are three chromite horizons, the Upper group
				Chromitite (situated within the upper gabbroic sequence),
				the Middle group Chromitite (situated in the upper portion
				of the ultramafic cumulate sequence) and the Lower group
				Chromitite (situated toward the base of the ultramafic
				cumulate sequence). The top reef mineralised zone has
				been mapped over approximately 12km.
Drill hole Information		A summary of all information material to the understanding of		No exploration results have been reported in this
		the exploration results including a tabulation of the following		announcement.
		information for all Material drill holes:
		o easting and northing of the drill hole collar
		o elevation or RL (Reduced Level – elevation above sea
		level in metres) of the drill hole collar
		o dip and azimuth of the hole
		o down hole length and interception depth
		o hole length.
		If the exclusion of this information is justified on the basis that
		the information is not Material and this exclusion does not
		detract from the understanding of the report, the Competent
		Person should clearly explain why this is the case.
Data aggregation		In reporting Exploration Results, weighting averaging		No exploration results have been reported in this
methods		techniques, maximum and/or minimum grade truncations (eg		announcement.
		cutting of high grades) and cut-off grades are usually Material
		and should be stated.
		Where aggregate intercepts incorporate short lengths of high
		grade results and longer lengths of low grade results, the
		procedure used for such aggregation should be stated and some
		typical examples of such aggregations should be shown in detail.
		The assumptions used for any reporting of metal equivalent
		values should be clearly stated.
Relationship		These relationships are particularly important in the reporting		No exploration results have been reported in this
between		of Exploration Results.		announcement.
mineralisation widths		If the geometry of the mineralisation with respect to the drill
and intercept lengths		hole angle is known, its nature should be reported.
		If it is not known and only the down hole lengths are reported,
		there should be a clear statement to this effect (eg ‘down hole
		length, true width not known’).
Diagrams		Appropriate maps and sections (with scales) and tabulations of		No exploration results have been reported in this
		intercepts should be included for any significant discovery being		announcement.
		reported. These should include, but not be limited to a plan view
		of drill hole collar locations and appropriate sectional views.
Balanced reporting		Where comprehensive reporting of all Exploration Results is not		No exploration results have been reported in this
		practicable, representative reporting of both low and high		announcement.

==> picture [40 x 18] intentionally omitted <==

10 | P a g e

==> picture [133 x 31] intentionally omitted <==

Criteria	JORC Code explanation	JORC Code explanation	Commentary	Commentary
		grades and/or widths should be practiced to avoid misleading
		reporting of Exploration Results.
Other substantive		Other exploration data, if meaningful and material, should be		No other exploration data is relevant with regards to the
exploration data		reported including (but not limited to): geological observations;		metallurgical test work program
		geophysical survey results; geochemical survey results; bulk
		samples – size and method of treatment; metallurgical test
		results; bulk density, groundwater, geotechnical and rock
		characteristics; potential deleterious or contaminating
		substances.
Further work		The nature and scale of planned further work (eg tests for lateral		Next stage of work will consist of additional mineralogical
		extensions or depth extensions or large-scale step-out drilling).		and metallurgical test work and further resource drilling.
		Diagrams clearly highlighting the areas of possible extensions,
		including the main geological interpretations and future drilling
		areas, provided this information is not commercially sensitive.

==> picture [40 x 18] intentionally omitted <==

11 | P a g e